1142 replies to this topic

[StalaggtIKE]

Allowing people to play with their friends is the most important thing. Take that away and you may as well stop calling it a multiplayer game. We already had guys to quit because they got tired of being the odd man out.

Edited by StalaggtIKE, 03 September 2015 - 02:21 PM.

[Lunaya]

While I am fine with Maximum group size 4, even if it kills my ability to play with all my friends at once, I am not okay with 1/1/1/1 for a for man group. Some groups form going in with dedicated roles. Want to play 3 medium skirmishers, not anymore with 1/1/1/1, Heavy Fire Support group or Brawl Assault group, that ideas are dead. I'll probably just go back to playing Solo que if I am going to be pigeon holed into playing in such an absurd fashion.

It may make finding matches faster but I deal with 2-3 minute waits all the time, want to know how I handle it? I get up from my computer, maybe do a bit of cleaning or stretching.

[SpiralFace]

Group Queue needs the changes. But PLEASE don't force 1/1/1/1. This format is simply NOT FUN to play around with because of the huge disparity in synergy it brings.

I would prefer keeping 3/3/3/3 but add an additional 60 ton average restriction to the launcher as an alternative and just remove the "weight matching" aspect of the match maker whole sale. You enforce 3/3/3/3 plus 60 ton average BEFORE you are allowed to enter the MM system, and are there for only grouped based on group size and skill rating.

This STILL allows players to drop 1/1/1/1 if they wish, but with a 60 ton average, you can still construct some decent team synergy where you drop without resorting to spamming heavies and assaults.

Sure this might mean that you see more mediums in the queue, but when it comes to the game balance, the issue isn't medium spam, its people maxing out on Assaults and Heavies before ANY other weight class is filled.

This kind of system still allows you to remove the entire wight matching factor from MM, while still allowing people to tailor their teams however they wish to drop rather then strong arming them into a 1/1/1/1 situation that is simply not fun to play with when every single one of your team members has to be off doing different things.

Group queue needs to change, but I would rather see something like this that maximizes on player choice and enjoyment rather then keeping with the very ridged 1/1/1/1 system.

[Shredhead]

Evan20k, on 03 September 2015 - 01:52 PM, said:

Whenever I try and play with a group of 2-3 friends, we just pray we don't run into a 228/EMP 12-man stompball. Normally I like playing against better players than myself; it gives me room to improve and see what I did wrong but that isn't the case here. The power disparity of a 12 man unit versus scattered pugs isn't something that can be quantified and counterbalanced with tonnage offsets or anything of the sort. I'm all in favor of dropping the group queue to a cap of 4 to allow it to be playable for people who aren't in a 12-man murderball and have no interest in being part of one.

Yeah, because there are so many 228 groups with more than 4 players in it...

[hideyourkids]

4 man groups and 1/1/1/1 are the such terrible ideas. Instead of catering to solo players PGI needs to ENCOURAGE people to play in a group in a TEAM game. If they hate the concept of 12 mans just make the game 8v8 (which is superior anyways) Introduce LFG global chat. Introduce ranked and unranked queue. Limit unranked to 4 person groups. Idk why there is such hate for people who actually want to play in a group and coordinate. It doesnt make any sense. If people want to play alone just introduce solaris. 12 mans can't just be restricted to cw and private lobbies. Join a unit, make some friends, introduce LFG chat. Don't throw all the big units under the bus because people are anti social.

[S C A R]

Let me say this once and for all. People can't have all that they want, especially in a low player based game like this one. Some sacrifices have to be made in order to improve the quality of the game. In this instance it is clearly quality of a match vs waiting time. I was playing against Proton and Emp in CW today. The reason they played CW is because they couldn't get a game in a normal queue for 30 mins. I believe people have to stop complaining and make some hard choices.

Group queues:

1 - any number of players up to 4;
2 - 8 players only;
3 - 12 players only.

If a team has only 7 players they will have to find one more person to make it a group of 8 and so on.

Mech classes:

1 - 2/2 or 3/1
2 - 2/2/2/2
3 - 3/3/3/3

That's it. Full stop.

PGI, you need to create an option for top teams to fight only top team (like a Grand master league in SC2). Let's say top 2% or 5% will receive Tier 0. Create a group drops that will only available for Tier 0 players (if they want to fight only Tier 0 players). They will still be able to play against other players if they decide so but at least they will be able to enjoy a long awaited competition.

Conclusion.

PGI, peoples opinions are important but sometimes you have make so tough choices. People are never going to be happy with everything. Large groups are important for people and you shouldn't take them away completely. However, you have to put some kind of restrictions (like the ones I suggested or similar) to improve the quality of game play.

[Chimperator]

4 player groups are good for more intresting/close games but at the moment the queue times are the problem... 10 min searchtime is a no go!
I guess takeing away the possibility to choose game modes would be a good improvement, there is anyway no need to choose because they all similar / its all skirmish

@ the 4men group option:
People will stop playing or whining alot.. like always, the real problem I see here with this option... where people can play as a full 12 then?
Nobody wants to play (specialy the higher skilled players) farming simulator Community Warfare!

[Mogney]

Limiting group sizes is an idea that failed before, but I think some chassis restrictions could make the MM be fairly dumb and still reasonably balanced. Here is an idea that I spent all of five minutes, one, a few guys spending a few hours could make it MUCH better I am sure. This should be enough to get the concept across.

The basic idea is that any given group size has a set of restriction, this combined with a few rules on what groups can be put together should lead to matches that are all fairly well balanced in terms of weight classes and make the MM not have to be nearly so smart.

Groups Size and Chassis Restriction
2 one medium or light, and one heavy or assault
3 1/1/1/0
4 1/1/1/1
5 1/1/1/1 (any one weight class other than assault can be 2)
6 1/2/2/1
7 2/2/2/1
8 2/2/2/2
9 2/2/2/2 (any one weight class other than assault can be 3)
10 2/3/3/2
12 3/3/3/3



Example Group Permutations
2-10 : BEST 3/3/3/3 WORST: 2/4/4/2
3-9 : BEST 3/4/3/2 WORST: 3/3/4/2
4-8 : ONLY OPTION 3/3/3/3
5-7: BEST 3/4/3/2 WORST:3/3/4/2
6-6: ONLY 2/4/4/2
2-3-4-3: BEST: 4/3/3/2 WORST: 3/4/3/2*
4-4-2-2: BEST: 3/3/3/3 WORST: 2/4/3/3*
6-2-4: BEST: 3/3/3/3 WORST: 2/4/4/2
7-3-2: BEST: 3/4/3/2 WORST: 4/3/3/2
3-3-3-3: * NOT ALLOWED

*Add in a HARD safety check that every 12 man grouping must have at least 2 of each weight class, never allow a team with more than 3 assaults. That only eliminates a few combiation choice groupings and makes for more fair matches.

[Big Tin Man]

I haven't been on much in the last couple weeks, not enough to comment on my current feelings on MM, but I do feel quite strongly about this:

Quote

[color=#00FFFF]- Shift back to a maximum group size of 4 or less.[/color]
[color=#00FFFF]- Each group needs to be created in a 1/1/1/1 fashion.

[/color]

Please Russ, no. I'd be ok with groups of 8 and 2/2/2/2, or even groups of six with 2/2/2/2. Getting that fifth friend on and either playing solo or splitting your group into a 2 and a 3 is just about the most un-social thing you can do, and there's quite a few units out there struggling to keep numbers up. We don't need to hurt that further, we need to encourage groups and large units to keep the game alive. We're your whales. With an 8-man as a limit, breaking that down into two groups remains social and fun.

A better proposal that would likely help MM out:

Would implementing a scalable 1/1/1/1 v. 2/2/2/2 v. 3/3/3/3 limit based upon group size be a possible compromise for MM? It would work to keep the mech weights balanced on each side (as opposed to everyone running 0/0/3/3) I'd be quite happy settling for that, just don't limit the number of friends I can have in a group. Would this be an easy change on the back end? It would have the same effect of breaking the groups into a size 4 limit with 1/1/1/1, but we wouldn't have to break up our large groups. There would still be the issue of a 9 man needing a 3 man, but at least the mech weight balance would be easier. It could be an improvement, but I don't know where the larger roadblock is.

[xCico]

Go back to 4 only and 12 only, best matches were there, best balance was there, just bring it back!

[BattleBunny]

I've been playing a bit last few hours and the searchtime is definatly improved. Longest search I had in 3 hours of gameplay was 2 minutes and 3 seconds. Thats amazing.

Match quality varied a lot. Other then one RRB group we met 4 times, I havent seen many of the same faces. I liked that too. No longer waiting 5+ minutes to see the same faces over and over again.

I say stick with the current matchmaking system. finding games quikly is what I want, no more spinning wheel. After the recent searchtimes in the group queue I care less about the quality of the matches. I just want to shoot things and have a beer, not wait forever.

Group sizes limited to 4 would be disappointing for me. I enjoy playing multiplayer games with my friends and I enjoy groups of all sizes. Some days small, other days large.

[Milocinia]

I can't really comment on the group queue as I don't play there.

As things stand at the moment, the solo queue is pretty decent all things considered.

[FluffehBunneh]

If you have to help the matchmaker so badly, make it so we have to build groups like this :

- Group of 4 Players + 1 / 1 / 1 / 1 Rule
- Group of 8 Players + 2 / 2 / 2 / 2 Rule
- Group of 12 Players + 3 / 3 / 3 / 3 Rule

Since the introduction of the "Looking for Group" feature, there's no way anyone can pretend finding 3 other players is hard...

[Chimperator]

xCico, on 03 September 2015 - 02:27 PM, said:

Go back to 4 only and 12 only, best matches were there, best balance was there, just bring it back!

Exact !

[JohnnyWayne]

I've been waiting for that, but a lot of units won't be able to PUGstomp anymore and will their ass get handed to them.

[Solahma]

4-man groups
1/1/1/1

worth trying something radical like this. Basically what i've been suggesting, but with one distinct difference: THE LACK OF A SEPARATE QUEUE for such restrictions.

Add a second group queue! Remove PSR balance completely from the queue we have now, and add a "solaris" or "competitive" queue with the restrictions for 4-man, 1/1/1/1, and no game-mode selection. Basically have two group queues that have FAR LESS MM issues and let the players decide.

http://imgur.com/a/Afx1B

Edited by Solahma, 03 September 2015 - 02:40 PM.

[Homeless Bill]

Just do it. Community Warfare is where big groups should be pushed towards, and although as a mode it's not up to snuff quite yet, that's what the aim should be. Group Queue should be focused on making quick, competitive matches instead of catering to every option players want.

[That Token Canadian Guy]

Ok so what PGI is saying is , they wish to lose MORE of the population then they already have! The last time they decided to drop it to a 4 man max, more then half the population left the game.
Fact is , if the elo system is working correctly, the guys complaining about units have to realize that group que is for teams. Yes some teams are better then others , but get over it. Being in a group is op in a team based game ? . How dare they work together for victory when it should be a cluster [Redacted] instead , because that makes it fair!!!!!
It is the same cry babies complaining about big units. Hate to break it to you , those units provide most of the cash flow into this game due to the competitive nature of these units. Not just reffering to the Tier 1 units. Im reffering to even the Tier 2-3-4 units, who will be PISSED if they can not roll together. SWOL is a great example. They are out to have fun !!! if you take their fun away, they may leave. Thats at min 500 people who probably actaully support the game. The peopl who mainly ***** about fairness are the people who DO NOT CONTRIBUTE . PGI has done this [Redacted] before , listening to the people ***** on the forums, who do not buy nothing! Meanwhile the MAJORITY dont bother posting because they are HAPPY with said current game content. It took a long time after they messed up beta for me to be happy with the game play. Lost an entire unit because they took out 8 mans.......140 people stopped playing in my unit at the time they pulled this crap the first time. All because whiney unskilled players complained it was too hard. So instead of getting better, they expected ([Redacted]......) to be handed skill on a platter! PGI please stop , Think , and realize most of the forum posts are from crap players who want life easier!



SAY NO TO THIS ! THERE SHOULD BE A POLL

Edited by GM Patience, 02 October 2015 - 11:05 AM.
language

[Shredhead]

JohnnyWayne, on 03 September 2015 - 02:33 PM, said:

I've been waiting for that, but a lot of units won't be able to PUGstomp anymore and will their ass get handed to them.

And back again with silly accusations... Boohoo groups are the boogeyman!

xCico, on 03 September 2015 - 02:27 PM, said:

Go back to 4 only and 12 only, best matches were there, best balance was there, just bring it back!

Which matches? Nobody played in group queue back then because you couldn't find any! [Redacted].

[Suko]

Does anyone remember that quote (by Russ on the town hall I think?) where they state that less than 30% of MWO players are in groups and of that, less than 5% of THOSE are in groups larger than 4? It was something like that. We're literally talking about the quality of game for thousands of people vs the quality for an extremely small minority of the game population. I don't care how badly it might suck for those "large groups", they have to realize that their "happiness" (aka PUG stomping) is ruining it for many, MANY more people.

Edited by Suko, 03 September 2015 - 02:42 PM.