1142 replies to this topic

[Asaru]

Russ Bullock, on 03 September 2015 - 03:43 PM, said:

As you can see I am willing to try and keep the any group size thing around a while longer if we make a few other changes.

1) possibly allow solo's to opt in - so long as it doesn't pull to many solo queue should still perform well.
2) game mode selection likely needs to be random or the voting we once had. In other words all three available - this becomes even more important and would actually encourage us to add a 4th mode.
3) This one is your home work : reduce the jig saw pieces by allowing more restrictions in group creation - something better than the 3 of any weight class we have now - atm too many groups of 2, 3 and 4 ALL contain 3 heavies and so on. Go with 2 max until you slip into groups 9+?

Stepping away for the time being.

This sounds like some good ideas and I support trying all of the above.

[Thrillhouse_]

Your stats are not representative.

I played in a 2 man last night. Between 8:30-9:40 pm UTC+9:30 we got 2 games.
This is representative of the experience since PSR.
Our unit had a 4 man queue for 64 mins and post updates on this very forum...

This issue is driving away players, you need to take it seriously

[Mogney]

Maybe the ability to drop solo in the group queue coukd be a perk of being psr tier 1 or 2.

[Pjwned]

Russ Bullock, on 03 September 2015 - 03:43 PM, said:

3) This one is your home work : reduce the jig saw pieces by allowing more restrictions in group creation - something better than the 3 of any weight class we have now - atm too many groups of 2, 3 and 4 ALL contain 3 heavies and so on. Go with 2 max until you slip into groups 9+?

Why is this such a problem in the group queue? Just let people play whatever mechs they want in the group queue without restricting them, and the people who don't like it can either deal with it and adapt (usually by picking a different weight class) or they can just do something else while the rest have fun with matches that aren't as bland and don't take as long to form.

It would solve at least a few problems to just not restrict weight class composition, but I guess the question is "how important is it that weight classes are represented at least somewhat evenly in the group queue?" If you ask me, the answer is "it's not important because this isn't the uncoordinated solo queue."

Edited by Pjwned, 03 September 2015 - 04:04 PM.

[Kodyn]

From yet another large unit guy's perspective-

I'm loving solo queue right now. Some of the best, most exciting, and well-matched drops I've ever had. Wait times aren't bad(I play mostly lights and assaults, so I may have an advantage there..), and while stomps exist, I usually can still make CBills and have a decent run, even on the receiving end. More often than not, however, the matches are very close to the end.

As far as group, I haven't seen bad wait times yet, though I know some with higher PSR have had their issues. Just last night my group of 6-10(varied through the night) was consistently getting almost insta-pop queues. The matches weren't poorly mismatched, more often than not, and had mostly good games. There's always a few groups that when we face, we know we're going to be head-shotted with prejudice by insane focus fire, but that is what it is.

My personal vote? Leave solo queue alone, as it's been gorgeous, and go with the group queue set up as it is now. Restricting group sizes and builds will be a negative change for enough people that I think it would hurt the game, whereas in this case, the status quo is working, and no one's jumping ship.

(I still think that if people really want to shorten times, they need to get over modes, and allow the forced random modes, but I know I'm on an island in that regard.)

[Triordinant]

Russ Bullock, on 03 September 2015 - 03:43 PM, said:

1) possibly allow solo's to opt in - so long as it doesn't pull to many solo queue should still perform well.

Make it an option only for Tier 1 players (possibly Tier 2). I'm guessing most soloists and groups would be happy with that.

[Gyrok]

I logged in to post my thoughts here.

I would be against limiting groups to 4 man only; however, I could live with it...as long as the groups also went back to unlimited constraints. 4 of the same weight class should absolutely be allowed if the larger group options are taken away.

Having said that, I currently am fine with group queue as it is...

[Buehgler]

First off does anyone know what "Average Skill Diff between teams" actually means? Clearly having it be more than twice as large for the group queue is a bad thing, but it is difficult to know how bad this factor is when there are no units for this number.

From my experience, the solo queue is working reasonably well at them moment. Search times seem fine and the match quality I am seeing is clearly improved since the switch to PSR. I finally got to do an evening of group drops earlier this week, and I must say that the wait times were quite problematic and match quality seemed basically random, a few good games, but lots of really one sided matches. And weight balance/limits were just bad -- more than a few games with 5 or 6 assaults per side.

If the weight class matching is really an issue, then I would support Jman's proposal

Jman5, on 03 September 2015 - 01:59 PM, said:

With regards to chassis limits, what about a dynamic limit.

• Group size 2-4: 1/1/1/1
  
• Group size 5-8: 2/2/2/2
  
• Group size 9-12: 3/3/3/3

This would help alleviate the mech mismatching.

I think this would significantly help the MM without imposing the inevitably bad blood producing limit of 4 man groups max with 1/1/1/1 distribution.

[XX Sulla XX]

Not a fan of the 1/1/1/1 idea.

[Big Tin Man]

Russ Bullock, on 03 September 2015 - 03:11 PM, said:

I will think on it again - MAYBE if it pulls just a very few it might be okay. I do not want to effect the quality of the solo queue.

Set the release valve to pull from opted in solo players after the group is 3+ minutes (or one standard deviation above the last hour's average wait time, if it can be programmed as such) into a search? I have to imagine that would be a very low number of people during peaks. Maybe also keep it restricted to pulling tier 1 and 2 solo players at first (who presumably know how to handle it and be fine), and then loosen to other tiers who may just be trying to get a match as fast a possible.

Another idea: Completely take away mode selection from groups and offer a vote between two choices for each match (i.e. Mode A on Map Z or Mode B on Map Y. Maybe even throw a third choice for random.) Voting could act as the ready button. I'm not sure if this would work with the map loading as the game is currently built though.

I know I would run opted into the group queue while playing solo if I had the option. It would offer different groups a chance to recruit pugs as well, which is good for the game and good for CW.


[Good to see you here in the forums Russ. Don't let the troll bring you down, lots of constructive feedback here, even if it is overrun by passion]

[Gyrok]

Triordinant, on 03 September 2015 - 04:08 PM, said:

Make it an option only for Tier 1 players (possibly Tier 2). I'm guessing most soloists and groups would be happy with that.

Honestly, I would prefer even to T3 players being able to opt-in...by the time they get out of T4 they should at least have their head screwed on well enough to opt into the group queue and be productive.

[Deadfire]

This game in it's current form isn't enough to hold me to playing it, but at least I can play with many players that make the game despite it's faults playable. Take that away and there's not really anything left to enjoy.

Making groups go no larger than 4 will cause more population issues than it fixes.

[jay35]

Russ Bullock, on 03 September 2015 - 03:43 PM, said:

As you can see I am willing to try and keep the any group size thing around a while longer if we make a few other changes.

1) possibly allow solo's to opt in - so long as it doesn't pull to many solo queue should still perform well.

Good. As someone else suggested, restrict it by Tier or number of matches so only skilled players can do this.That alleviates the concern about siphoning too many from solo queue.

Quote

2) game mode selection likely needs to be random or the voting we once had. In other words all three available - this becomes even more important and would actually encourage us to add a 4th mode.

Giving up control of game mode for group queue is fine for now, however, whenever we have really diverse game modes one day with distinct roles and specific functions, we'll need a way to select an appropriate mech for the game mode we're being placed in.

So long as players have a way to bring a relevant mech to whatever mode is presented, we can improve matchmaking without sacrificing the quality of the gameplay dynamics unique to each game mode nor reducing the mechlab to a pointless endeavor if we were to have to start building to a least-common denominator that can half-way work in every mode rather than building mechs to a specific role or function unique to a particular game mode.

Quote

3) This one is your home work : reduce the jig saw pieces by allowing more restrictions in group creation - something better than the 3 of any weight class we have now - atm too many groups of 2, 3 and 4 ALL contain 3 heavies and so on. Go with 2 max until you slip into groups 9+?

While I can appreciate the issue we already have which is an overabundance of heavies and assaults, there are gameplay reasons why people gravitate toward those chassis. Address those through balance and incentives to play lighter chassis (use the carrot instead of the stick) and this will resolve itself naturally rather than through beating groups over the head with more restrictions.

Item #3 also becomes unnecessary, since we will have improved matchmaking significantly by your first and second changes, allowing skilled solo players to opt into the group queue and removing game mode selection which unifies everyone into a giant queue instead of several smaller ones.

Also, any sort of further restriction on what a player can play or bring in group queue is counterproductive to getting more people to play in group queue. 3/3/3/3 is enough of a restriction to deal with, tbh.

[MuonNeutrino]

Russ Bullock, on 03 September 2015 - 03:43 PM, said:

As you can see I am willing to try and keep the any group size thing around a while longer if we make a few other changes.

1) possibly allow solo's to opt in - so long as it doesn't pull to many solo queue should still perform well.
2) game mode selection likely needs to be random or the voting we once had. In other words all three available - this becomes even more important and would actually encourage us to add a 4th mode.
3) This one is your home work : reduce the jig saw pieces by allowing more restrictions in group creation - something better than the 3 of any weight class we have now - atm too many groups of 2, 3 and 4 ALL contain 3 heavies and so on. Go with 2 max until you slip into groups 9+?

Stepping away for the time being.

I like this, it seems like a good compromise. I would go with the '1/1/1/1 for 2-4, 2/2/2/2 for 5-8, 3/3/3/3 for 9-12' option, or else the suggestion a few pages back to have 3/3/3/3 plus a weight limit that works out to a 60-65 ton max per player.

Just, please, if you do end up removing game mode choice, *please* only do it for group queue and leave the option intact for solo queue. (I'm pretty sure this is what you were suggesting, I just want to make sure to mention it.) Solo queue is already matching well enough that removing game mode selection would be a net negative there, IMO - too much downside given that there's already little room for improvement.

[Dirk Le Daring]

Russ Bullock, on 03 September 2015 - 03:43 PM, said:

As you can see I am willing to try and keep the any group size thing around a while longer if we make a few other changes.

1) possibly allow solo's to opt in - so long as it doesn't pull to many solo queue should still perform well.

Would restricting this option to a tier level, or number of games played help ? I doubt new players will have a good time in the group queue, but some may well want to test the water.. I know that I would on occasion drop solo into the group queue as opposed to joining a group through the LFG function.

Russ Bullock, on 03 September 2015 - 03:43 PM, said:

2) game mode selection likely needs to be random or the voting we once had. In other words all three available - this becomes even more important and would actually encourage us to add a 4th mode.

I think that a group should be able to play the cards dealt, so random game modes are good in my book. I do like not knowing what the game mode is. It challenges players to build and bring versatile mechs, and encourages players to be flexible in their gameplay. A fourth game mode would be great as well.

Russ Bullock, on 03 September 2015 - 03:43 PM, said:

3) This one is your home work : reduce the jig saw pieces by allowing more restrictions in group creation - something better than the 3 of any weight class we have now - atm too many groups of 2, 3 and 4 ALL contain 3 heavies and so on. Go with 2 max until you slip into groups 9+?

Is this along the lines you were thinking ? (I may be waaaay off the mark on this part)

1/1/1/1 up to four players

2/2/2/2 five to eight players

3/3/3/3 nine or more players

If so, it sounds ok to me. It will still allow for odd sized groups, which is good for friends. This is where the solo players could possibly fill the gaps.

[JudgeDeathCZ]

What about you differ PSR in solo,group,solo CW and group CW?Is that so hard to code?

[GoKuXo]

You need to change numbers and weight for skill.

The highest priority on the matchmaking, should be the PSR ( personaly i dont care if one team have more heavys or assalt or 9man+3man vs 6 2man group)... when you end in match with half the people doing 50 damage and other half with 400+ damage, the matchmaking is bad.

And be more clear with the number in the skill... 150 or 400 is what? same tier, one tier, two or more tier diference, transparency please.

tier 1 againt tier 3, tier 2 against tier 4 or tier 3 againts tier 5, always will be a massacre if you wanna have the same group numbers and weight class, you need to match the skill of the player.

[TheCaptainJZ]

I'd hate for all the effort into making the group queue, well, a GROUP queue to go to waste. I understand we have CW, but why not back down max group size to 6, 7, or 8? And/or allow solos to join? What group sizes does the MM have the most trouble matching?

[AlphaStruck]

NO. Once again telling players to shut up and do as your told is WRONG. You dont tell your customers to play the game in a boring or irritating way because you wont listen to us.

Think about it... forcing 1/1/1/1 is just flat out admitting your game is in a horrible unbalanced state and your going to do nothing about it. Fix the balancing of the game as we have told you how and people will CHOOSE to play with different classes and mechs because they will have reason to. If the different classes and mechs were even close to being useful,you wouldnt have to shove the non metatroll crap down our throats.

We also dont want to stomp people... stop thinking and saying this. Its stupid, we want a balanced fun game. The problem is every slot we dont fill our selves is a slot you can use to screw us over with the MM, turning the win/lose into a RNG system no matter how well you do.

You do this and you might as well take it to its natural end and remove group queue and all team/unit/clan function of the game. Thats the only way your saying group queue is fixable.

Give your customers balanced and functional options in your product and you dont have to "fix" anything.

I assume this will also force 1 clan mech per group??? With only 4 mechs in your group running extreme metatroll in each class is going to be more important than ever to survive.

Edited by AlphaStruck, 03 September 2015 - 04:23 PM.

[Nightmare1]

I like everything that was said about the solo queue.

I dislike the notion of reducing the max group size to four people. That really defeats the purpose of even forming groups as well as joining Units or having a TS server. Why bother if the max number of buddies you can drop with is three?

To be honest, I really don't think that our wait times are all that long or unreasonable. I've played a bunch of other games that had substantially longer wait times for both PvP and PvE content. MWO might not give you instant matching, but you won't have to wait for more than about five minutes with the group queue. I don't think that's bad at all.

Edit: If the group queue is neutered down to a max of four people, why even bother having a group queue? Just put groups and solos back together with a max of one group per team.

Edited by Nightmare1, 03 September 2015 - 04:24 PM.