1142 replies to this topic

[Belorion]

Please do not shift to a maximum group size of 4.

I like playing again, and this will be a huge blow to any player that runs with a group.

[Rayne Vickers]

Triordinant, on 05 September 2015 - 01:23 PM, said:

This is just off the top of my head and I don't know if it'll work, but how about no players with Unit tags allowed in the upcoming 4 vs 4 "scouting" matches?

Gee, thanks, because I play with a unit 1-2 nights a week, I don't get to try the shiny new game goodies. Favoritism-much?

[Void Angel]

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

4 Man only. I only have 3 friends on this bitter Earth and I want you all to be dragged down to my level.

You have made me laugh. Thank you.

[Finring]

I would personally rather see the game mode option removed and group sizes of 4, 8, and 12 over 2-4 man groups only and 1/1/1/1. But that's just this lowly mechwarriors opinion.

Edited by Finring, 05 September 2015 - 09:44 PM.

[Void Angel]

daxiazun, on 03 September 2015 - 02:39 PM, said:

The last time they decided to drop it to a 4 man max, more then half the population left the game.

Citation, or get the frack out.

[Void Angel]

Russ Bullock, on 03 September 2015 - 02:45 PM, said:

No point in reading and responding to your posts or suggestions, because according to you we can't even tie our own shoes. I will focus on those that are more reasonable. Here in this very thread there are others that agree that the solo queue has made the best matches yet in MWO - I guess we know what you think of them.

And this is why he's on my ignore list - I suggest you simply do not feed the troll. =)

[Void Angel]

My question on all of this is, how well will these measures work if PSR hasn't been distributed properly? Frankly, I haven't been playing as much since PSR - because my statistical demographics blasted me back into the "LRM Tier." I was seeing players who were just not able to control their 'mechs well: one Raven pilot walked right past me without seeing me, and ignored repeated laser blasts to his rear torsos. The only thing that kept me from killing him was an accidental torso twist to stare at a threat he saw to his left - he never reacted to anything that wasn't in his field of view.

That un-named Raven pilot is the poster boy for my playing experience, but he's not alone. It wasn't like I felt the matchmaker was driving poor match results, nor am I blaming it for my own performance ("Every Match is a Stomp," et al,) but I was having trouble cooperating with my teammates, since they often weren't reacting as I instinctively expected them to act. This made it much harder for me to avoid overextending myself, or position myself properly; heaven help me if I tried something risky, like an attack from the flank. In short, my PSR has yet to settle out to the equivalent of my old Elo ranking.

If PSR hasn't yet properly placed people according to their skill, it seems to me that any experiment intended to improve match experiences will be incomplete - because it will not have accounted for a confounding variable. PSR statistics are only as accurate as PSR's correlation to real player skill. On the other hand, maybe that's why you're focusing on subjective opinions and player polling rather than hard numbers. :]

---

On the main subject, I'm ambivalent over whether or not to enact 4-man limits - However, what I would like to see is a little more flexibility in either system than 1/1/1/1. Max tonnage will probably encourage too much default restriction, as players gravitate toward set drop compositions that attempt to maximize the allotted tonnage. Instead, I'd try a "pool" of weight classes, with each 'mech taking up 1, 2, 3, or 4 points based on its weight class (light, medium, heavy, assault, respectively.) A lance would have 10 points to spend between them, and the matchmaker would try to find opposing teams with the same number of weight classes as normal.

Such a system would allow players flexibility in creating matches while still preventing 12-man Assault premades like you saw Back in the Day. Each player in a group is worth 2.5 points, up to the max group size and probably rounded down (to avoid everyone dropping in odd-numbered groups to gain an advantage.) Thus, a 12-man would have 40 points, and a 3-man would have 7, while a ten-man jumps up to three.

Of course, there are trade-offs and drawbacks to this plan: this is a game engineering problem, and as my engineer friends tell me, engineering is the science of compromises. For example, you can see that it will no longer be possible to drop with a partner if both of you want to play Assault chassis; a 2-man would only have 5 points, so you'd have to go with one Assault and a Light. You could alleviate this problem by allowing bonus points to small groups (a 2-man might have six points, and a 3-man round up to 8, for example,) or you could simply add a set number of points to all groups This would alleviate the problem of small groups being too restricted, while having a lesser effect on larger groups. Other issues will of course exist, but issues exist with every system. It's simply the nature of the beast. In any case, I think this proposition has the potential to strike a good compromise between weight matching fidelity, ease of matchmaking, and the ease of accommodating groups of varying size.

Edited by Void Angel, 05 September 2015 - 11:51 PM.

[MagResPolarBear]

I'm not a big fan of going back to 4-man groups. Our unit regularly has 3-5 guys playing, and it always used to be really annoying to have to break up the group when the 5th guy joined. I'm not saying we wouldn't cope, but it would be irritating.

I would support tighter controls on chassis types, e.g. 1/1/1/1 for groups up to 4, 2/2/2/2 for 5-8 and 3/3/3/3 for 9 and up.

[Too Much Love]

Suko, on 03 September 2015 - 02:41 PM, said:

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.

I guess, those 5% generate 80% of PGI's income. So better think twice.

[Kjudoon]

I would need to see veeification that almost all money comes from large group members before i bought into that.

[Surn]

Russ,

I have one suggestion that only slightly impacts your question here. In CW, as an alternative to the group queue, make the drop deck selection time one minute longer. So, instead of 30-45 seconds for a group of PUGs to determine a strategy and adjust their drop deck to defend a premade planetary assault... they would get 1:30 or so. Remember, the pugs do not even know which sector they are dropping on until this timer starts.

This will make more CW games competitive and enjoyable by balancing the drop decks relevance per game. Currently premades have up to 10 minutes to work out effective drop decks, which is a massive advantage.

Good luck on this endeavor.

Edited by MechregSurn, 06 September 2015 - 02:12 AM.

[His Holiness Pope Buster]

I'm guessing capping the group at 4 and forcing a 1/1/1/1 drop deck is being done to reduce the effectiveness of groups prior to the steam launch.

Forcing a group to have a light and an assault play together would not be much fun.

Also, please fix hit reg.

Edited by Buster Highman, 06 September 2015 - 05:40 AM.

[Midgie]

Don't have much to say other than I feel putting a limit on group size is a bad idea. I don't think the limit will lower the occurrence of rofl-stomps by much. It's the way the game is made then as one size loses a mech, that loss of firepower puts them at an immediate disadvantage which snowballs.

[Javin]

I like playing in groups of more than four. Please do not limit those that have more than 3 friends.


I would recommend more PVE programming. That way new players can learn the basics of the game before jumping into the queues. Perhaps even have a 4 player cw light where only new players can play (say first 20 games or so). I understand getting crushed makes the game less fun for new players. MWO has a very small player base. Whatever is good to grow the player base helps.

[Mechteric]

Fire for Effect, on 05 September 2015 - 03:35 PM, said:

Quote

So yes, 100% in support of limiting public group queue to 4 players.

we had that and you seem to have forgotten that time...

I have not forgotten, I remember being able to play with just a couple guys and had a good time. Since then, I've only played solo.

But that was before community warfare, and before private matches, which are both great places when you really want to play with large numbers of players.


Of course maybe what I really want is to allow 2 players to be able to group up and play in the solo queue, but assuming that is off the table, I'd take this option.

[Zolaz]

I hate 1/1/1/1 and forced lance compositions. If people want that, make a Solaris game mode. Only in MWO has there been a lance made up of a mech from each weight class.

[TigerOne]

I do not support going back to groups of multiples of 4. If that happens, I don't think I'll play much anymore. Playing with odd numbers of friends is most of what I and my clan do.

I think the problem with the Match Maker is that it makes the assumptions that the PSR system is perfect and all the weight classes are balanced. There's a reason that the light queues are less than 10%. There's also a reason you see so many stomps when there are LRMs involved. Fix those problems, and I doubt the MM has any more issues.

[DevilCrayon]

I'm strongly in favor of any changes that increase group drop quality.

[Gumon Choji]

Have players pick a fav mech from each weight class and let them random drop.

This would be an option players could choose to let the matchmaker drop you really fast. people chose to give up a choice for tangible speed increases in drops. It also encourages ownership in all 4 weight classes.

[AyyLmao228]

> Shift back to a maximum group size of 4 or less.
Maybe 4 groups are too small, maybe 6 is enough, I dont know. But MM surely worked much better with small groups only. I almost forgot about good old times when it was able for small groups to play with fun. But when larger groups were introduced, it was all ruined. Why?
First of all, small groups are being used as a bung to fill up teams made of larger grops. It's not okay when I'm entering match just to realize that me and my group probably will not affect its results. Then, it's VERY HARD to balance large group properely. And it's not about player's PSR tiers only, which can vary from lowest to highest in one premade. The problem is the different level of organization. Fours had about the same level of organization. But when larger groups were added to game, people started to gather premades almost randomly while other players were wrecking them by well organized teams of the same size. Okay, it's their problem, but why should small groups be affected by this?
And, returning to PSR in group matchmaking... Maybe group MM should have it's own PSR system? Maybe units shuold have their PSR too? Just combining gruops in teams by their average size and PSR doesnt work here.

>- Each group needs to be created in a 1/1/1/1 fashion.
No, no, NO, PLEASE, NO. If you want better weight class balance — add C-bills boost for groups following the 1/1/1/1 rule. My friends dont have many mechs of different weight classes and we often do conceptual drops on same mechs. Same weight classes are more convinient for teamplay. My best friend main farm machine is heavy, mine too. So one of us should take less effective mech just to follow this artifical rule? When my friend picks Atlas and I pick Locust, isn't it easier for us just to play separately in solo, huh?

Also, It would be good if you allow for groups of 2 players to be both in solo and group queues. Couple of twos in each team wont affect overall match balance strongly I suppose. Always being a bung for big groups is not cool.

Also, one more suggestion. For solo drops you may add a checkbox for ones who agrees to fill up tens or elevens. There's no much differense between 5-6-1 team and 5-5-2 team.

And yeah, I like Gumon Choji's idea of choosing few mechs at once for MM to decide which one of them will be deployed. But of course without forcing players to chose all classes.

You can seriously improve matchmaking if you'll give people more options like mentioned above in my post. Let players be flexible. Limiting and dividing them more and more strictly will not help the MM to get better.