1142 replies to this topic

[BladeXXL]

Uuuups I did it again...

The max. 4 players system failed some time ago - so why do you want to bring ist back?
Being 5 ppl in TS channel forced us to split into 2 groups .... it was boring and broke social releations!

PLEASE DON'T!!!

The current system may not be perfect, so try to change some little thing and watch the result.

Why you are always so radically? You go the same way if you try to balance:
Assault mode to easy to capture? Ok ... lets put 8 defend towers.
Nobody caps anymore because towers are to strong? Ok .... lets remove them again!
Why not just put 3 of them just around the cap zone - if just for radar purposes!???

SSRM to strong ... let's nerf the damege and make them spread over the whole mech!
Oh... now they are uselesss... ok lets buff the damage to heaven ... oh... now a light falls to peaces by meeting a splatcat in seconds... ping-pong...

You miss the point so often I stopped to count - sorry! :-)

so again:
PLEASE DON'T!
Take some ideas posted in this thread and try it for a month or two.

[Maver0ick]

I would say no to limiting group size to 4 and yes to any other setting change.

[thatrobotguy]

Please don't limit the group sizes to 4, just about the only thing keeping me here atm is the ability to drop with large number of mah friends, and just about the entire SR is burnt out on CW (has been since tukayyid basically) so that basically leaves the group queue as the only thing to do

[Triordinant]

Gyrok, on 03 September 2015 - 04:10 PM, said:

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.

LOL, tell that to the tryhards who want ONLY ultracompetitive players in metacheese 'mechs with all module slots filled on their team.

[Flying Fox 333]

No issues with going 4 man groups or 1 of each weight class. You probably should run an event to gather data on whether one approach or both works best.

[Big Tin Man]

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 <3 this post.

1. Allow solo's to opt into group queue after 100 matches, and tier 1, 2, or 3 player only. Anyone else is just going to have a bad time. Also keeps solo troll accounts out.

2. I think if you presented taking away game mode choices in group queue with the incentive of offering more, exclusive to group queue game modes, you'd find a much warmer reception to the idea. Personally I like it. It would also encourage more balanced builds on mechs.

3. I think for groups size 2-8 2/2/2/2 would still cause problems. How about allowing more lights and mediums in something like this:

2-4-----2/2/1/1
5-7-----3/3/2/1
8-10----3/3/3/2
11-12------3/3/3/3

It gives a little wiggle room for groups to play together without being stuck as before, and works to eliminate the "THEY HAD HOW MANY ASSAULTS?" on the final scoreboard.

Edited by Big Tin Man, 03 September 2015 - 04:47 PM.

[Catho Sharn]

I really think the 4-man limit per group is a bad idea, and I'm saying that as someone who drops in the group queue as a 2-man. I don't think it solves the basic puzzle problem, and it annoys a significant portion of the player base. I also really like the challenge presented by facing a 6 or 8 or 12 man force.

I think giving solos the choice of opting into group play is a good idea. It seems like it wouldn't be that hard to limit their participation in each match by doing, say 60 seconds of pure group MM, then adding solos to fill holes.

[Sigilum Sanctum]

Russ I feel like this is something you should sit on for the time being. Maybe even wait to see how Phase 3 fleshes out community warfare before making such radical decisions on group queue.

[EmperorMyrf]

Triordinant, on 03 September 2015 - 04:35 PM, said:

LOL, tell that to the tryhards who want ONLY ultracompetitive players in metacheese 'mechs with all module slots filled on their team.

if they choose to be elitist about their team composition then it's on them to choose their team

[TorinZ]

I like the idea of allowing a solo player to opt-in to group queue. I know I will opt-in if I had the choice. And I also would not have a problem with removing the game mode selections as "hard" selection. I think in the long run that would be the best idea as I think we would all like to see some more game modes and I believe Russ has stated that more mode choices will add problems for MM later. So I say go ahead and remove those as hard choices, and I might even go as far as saying remove those mode choices period. If they are not hard choices, it may just be easier to remove it to not confuse new players that come in during the Steam release. I do not believe limiting group sizes would be a good choice for the community.

[Kamikaze Viking]

Russ Bullock, on 03 September 2015 - 03:28 PM, said:

Just a thought that is just a MAYBE atm.

What if we kept all group sizes, allowed a few solo players.

Then we make game mode random in group queue. If we could do that and limit group queue creation at least some what more, if not 1/1/1/1 than perhaps 2's as some have suggested.

Yes perhaps removing all odd sized groups would help - although the group size of 3 would be tough to get rid of.

Oh I like this!!! Yes YES

I'd expect that many of those who do not like certain modes are mostly Solo Players. Most group Queue players i know dont care what mode they play.

Not so sure on the even group sizes. its never cool to have to tell someone they cant join the group.

But allowing Solo players to Opt-in to the group queue is my preferred solution.
As to your concerns, I would use this option only when needed so as to not remove too many players from the solo queue, and prefer to only use 1 solo player per group queue team. then loosen restrictions using valves only of the time to find a match blows out.

[Kellon Black]

As many others, I would prefer to have no restrictions on what I can choose and decide not to choose in my gameselection. I want to decide what 'mech I want to play, and when, and in which gamemode on whichever server i select.

But I also know that this is what causes all of the problems; People only selecting one or two gamemodes on one or two servers. Even when we are told that we are causing the problems ourselves, some still whine on about the poor quality of MM. And some would rather wait than select more gamemodes/servers, not only "ruining" the game for themselves, but also for others in the same queue.

I think we need a refreshing kick in the behind with some new options. Group size should be four max, and with 1/1/1/1. But I would also prefer that these seperate lances drops together as small units, so that if the lance is overrun by the enemy early in the game, it will atleast be another 1/1/1/1 lance that comes charging!
Gamemode should be chosen by the server on random, or as a part of players suggestions, whichever is easier to get a good balanced match quickly.

Lets look back at these hardlocked options once the game has launched on Steam. Maybe there will be players enough for the queues to grow enough for the MM to be able to give good matches with more player-selected options.

TL;DR I suggest group sizes of 4, 1/1/1/1, and let the server choose the gamemode at random or based on player suggestions.

[Spectre195]

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.

If the majority of people start swapping over to the group que wouldn't that be an indicator that your playerbase would prefer a united que? I think following what your players want is the way to go as a developer. As long as the solo que doesn't go to taking a ridiculously long time to get a game I don't see the problem. Also this could serve to allow for the ques to turn into ranked (mix) and unranked (solo) ques.

[TheCaptainJZ]

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.

Here's an idea, though not a quick one.

What if the group queue had a lobby? And a team tonnage min/max? No 1/1/1/1 or 3/3/3/3.

[AdamBaines]

PhoenixFire55, on 03 September 2015 - 01:52 PM, said:

Oooook ...



BS.

Quality of the average match in solo queue is still p!ss poor. You still see one team with 2-3 guys doing all the work carrying 9 scrubs who barely know how to walk, while another team has 10-12 "average" players and proceeds to steamroll the former. Is that what you understand as a "quality balanced match"?



90% of people I've started playing this game with about 3 years ago left the game forever because you did exactly that once before already. NOBODY wants to choose which friends they want to play with and which friends they'll have to pass on. And NOBODY wants to be told he can't play his favorite mech simply because your stupid MM can't balance a match. You do that again, your already low population will become non-existant.

Honestly however, I don't even know why I bother replying at all. You never read your own official forum anyway. Over the span of 2.5 years since the "phase.1" of matchmaker came out there have been hundreds of suggestions on how to make it work properly, all of which were totally ignored.

I dont think I can find anything in this statement that I agree with....

[Sable]

I have more than 3 other people i play with and i like getting the band together to play. Even before i joined a unit there was the constant issue of not being able to play with all my friends because of the 4 man size limit.

[AdamBaines]

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.

Now this is interesting.......interesting indeed.

[Big Bertha 00]

Allow top 2 tier solo drop pugs to be put into group queue to fill the gaps.

[One Medic Army]

Well, if you want fast matchmaking and balanced matches, then player choice is sacrificed.

If you want maximum choice and matching speed, balanced matching doesn't happen.

If you want maximum choice and balanced matches, prepare to wait.

Everyone has different priorities, and of course the guys who regularly stomp around in 12s feel that being able to 12-man with fast wait times is important. Meanwhile the guys usually going around in 2-4man groups think that shafting the big groups for better and faster matching is a great idea.

At the end of the day, someone's going to be unhappy. All we can hope is it's the smallest (not necessarily quietest) group.

On a personal note, if they put a max group size of 4 in the group queue, I might actually grab a couple of friends and play in it. The reason we stay out is the terrible match balance that comes with putting 2-mans and 12-mans in the same matches.

[edit] My ideal would be sticking 2-3 (maybe 2-4) man groups into the solo queue, and having the group queue only be for large groups (4, 6, 8, 12)

Edited by One Medic Army, 03 September 2015 - 05:01 PM.

[Ihasa]

Oh hell no, no friggin 4-mans again. And restricted to 1/1/1/1 at that? Even worse! Anything but 4-mans, anything at all. The high-tier solo opt in, the map voting, the unrestricted mode choice, all of it, any of it other than 4-man. I endured the first 4-man wasteland, another would drive me from the game. I can't believe they can't see their own data on how dead this game was during the dark ages of 4-man.

Edited by Ihasa, 03 September 2015 - 05:00 PM.