1142 replies to this topic

[Thumper3]

AUSSIETROOPER4, on 11 September 2015 - 02:07 AM, said:

I find it is fairly easy to beat 12 man players outside of their group. But that even when it is not obvious, even without clan tags they fill their group to a 12 for some reason so that they can walk over the opposition.

We all know teamwork is OP, nothing new there. Also nothing new as to why, knowing this, people still choose NOT to play as a team and then complain when they are beaten by those that do.

AUSSIETROOPER4, on 11 September 2015 - 02:07 AM, said:

When the switch came it was fun for a while until the 12 mans learnt every map backwards... this is why procedurally generated maps would make things so much better when facing the wrote learners who fight by repetition.

LMAO

Damn those people who learn the game, develop strategies and tactics and fight to win. How dare they!! There's absolutely no way ANYONE can study the maps and learn the areas and figure out advantageous battle plans. I mean there is NO PLACE at all where any regular person can go and see map layouts and pictures.......nope.......not a single place.......

/sarcasm

Procedural based maps would only worsen your tears as there would still need to be "tiles" that are static and only those would be randomly placed. Adding to that, due to the nature and type of game and maps, these 'random' placements would still have to follow certain restrictions (can't very well have a tile with a road running through it be bordered by a tile with a lake and a sheer cliff wall can you), which means your "random" would really only be maybe a dozen different layouts. It would be no hard feat to learn the tiles and to be able to quickly figure out a basic strategy for the layout.

So, in short, those that spend time learning how to fight as a team effectively will be minorly inconvenienced, where as those who refuse to take any effort to learn how to play will be hopelessly lost in every battle......and back here complaining about how teams are just too good and they need to be penalized.

Seriously, this game's biggest weakness is that it has such a schizophrenic and chaotic population that seems hell bent on warring with themselves.

If this game had a big enough population the solution would be easy; split the game into PvP and PvE modes, let the people who can't be bothered to interact with 11 other pilots go shoot AI.

[Naduk]

i do not want to go back to groups of 4
so here is my proposal

we remove the game mode selection in favor of map selection
we make server selection a soft selection that carries a heavy weight
so it will try its hardest to keep you on your selected servers but no promises

You select your team and hit launch
your PSR is totalled and matched the same as now
once the teams are locked they are given a choice of maps to pick from and 10 seconds to vote
each players vote is added to the pool for that map and match type
this is displayed visually and players can get a feel for where they may end up
after the votes are complete or time runs out the MM rolls a dice and selects a map accordingly
This map and game mode is then played out
Russ’s proposed tonnage limits from the latest town hall would really shine here
So at the end of the day the MM only needs to worry about group size and PSR with a blowout valve for server selection, everything else should just fall into place

i have done a mock up of how this might look

note the drastically reduced selectors, even if servers stay hardlocked this is still so much friendlier to the MM


not much to change here


once a match has been found a random selection of maps and game modes is presented to the players, this provides doors to add future game modes at will and have as many as desired and even though the map is still selected by RNG the player have the chance to try and sway it to their favor


after you make your vote, you can see the other votes grow the chunks of pie chart
even if you do not click anything the game will pick a map and launch in 10 seconds


the chevron spins around the circle and gives players a visual representation to show the selection process, the chevron stops and locks into the selected map


boom game in launched

[Tornero]

Many great Ideas...or just have a tab tor the type of match you want as well...i.e 12v12 (select this if you have a 12 man ready, or 4v4 when you have just a small company...then let the MM pair these groups up accordingly with a simple Weight class # that matches closely to the other group and boom you have a match per desire.....or just do Lobby drops with open invites.

[Rayne Vickers]

Welp, looks like Russ has made his decision for now (as per the Town Hall last night) Group Queue stays as it is (for now dot dot dot) and tonnage limits per side go into place. He wants to try that before doing anything more drastic I'm disappointed, but not particularly surprised, we'll see how this plays out.

[Jacob Side]

Why disappointed? Is it because Russ didn't do something about the non-existing 12 man boogeyman?
70% of matches are 3-4 groups per side. Russ said last night that the large 8-12 man is very rare.

[Rayne Vickers]

I've made my point clear why I'm disappointed, I must have bad luck then. But I'll deal, same as I always do.

[V3nturis]

I'd like to have an opinion on the matter, but I only solo Que now. All the friends I started playing this have quit for the most part. :/

[Jon Gotham]

Kjudoon, on 10 September 2015 - 04:38 PM, said:

Yes kamiko i have enjoyed dropping with you too but we do have a fundamental disagreement on this.

On the otherhand that is why i am backing away from mwo slowly and now the forums too. I spend most of my gaming time in dcuo playing PvE with friends but mostly solo and none of these types of problems plague us, particularly forced socialization even in 8 man pug raids. Got a few nice videos up of some games there on my youtube feed.

linky plz:)
Aye I called it a day a few weeks ago, I'd had enough of the playerbase here. They are self sabotaging both in the way you describe and what I mention too sadly. Never seen so many people so anti teamwork/group and so aggressive towards anyone that "tries."
Found the swtor community to be so much nicer, there are 4-5 names on this forum that I'll never forget and dread seeing them on any new game I play. Because their coming will herald the war on social play
Though I think swtor even will bite the bullet come october as the new expansion is Knights of the Solo Empire so it seems...I don't play online games with other players in them to play on my own, I have some lovely single player games for that purpose.
I just wish those that force the solo only style would at least recognize the damage they cause to social gaming because they do sadly, wether they want to see it or not.
Anyway linky me the YT stuff and best of luck to you in the future o7

[Lazor Sharp]

V3nturis,

than come back and play with the Lone Wolves, still some of us around......

[Euphoric1RW]

What a bunch of whiny babies, why go back to 4 man groups? that is absurd! "Boo-hoo, I don't want to face any really good groups cuz I want to win all the time, and not ever improve my skillz". I like being able to drop with 5 to 12 man matches, too bad for you if you only have three other friends, most of us have hundreds in this game.

Please quit caving in to these whiners, it really is ruining the game.

[XphR]

Please no four man cap, ever again.

[PPO Kuro]

I don't like any of the 'choices' PGI gives us. If I'm playing with a total of 3 people I just don't want to be put against a 10 man unit. I'm ok with 3 separate units though.

Now I know that there are some big units out there so when launching maybe it just looks like it’s pre-made 10 unit, but PGI should at least implement a feature where you can see who launched with who (This is the case in War Thunder).

[Fast Eddie]

From my experience the match maker seems broken atm. Since the introduction of PSR most matches seem to be one sided and it's rare to get battles which are close. I exclusively PuG so this may have something to do with it?

[God Particle]

I think we need another balance tool besides just matching 12 players to 12 players. Is there some law against having 8 v 12 or 12 v 15? I would love to play some less skilled or un-grouped players with a numerical advantage with my group of 4-12, etc. Why the arbitrary 12 v 12 obsession?

[G SE7EN7]

Get rid of solo queue and fold it back into groups, if you need to limit group size give it a go. Basically any thing has got to be better then current system. Wait times are long and teams are never close to being even, maybe 1 in 50 matches ill see an epic close one.

[Apnu]

I think PGI should reconsider what the PUG queue is and what CW is and in the process of that, ditch as many buckets as possible.

I think the game is best served if the player is immersed in it and really feels like they are a member of some faction fighting towards a goal.

As it stands right now, we don't have any goals in the game, really, besides changing colors on a map in CW that only has one game mode and a slight variation on that game mode.

Yes I know the 4v4 missions are coming, that doesn't change my point.

I think CW would do better to include Assault and Conquest games to help change shards on a planet. Planet attackers and defenders should either have a voting system to choose the game mode (Assault, Conquest, Invasion/Counter Attack) or the matches should go into some order. Say Assault, to establish a beach head, then a round of Conquest to acquire resources, then Invasion and Counter Attack. Then start the cycle again.

The idea is: chain together what maps and modes we have into a coherent goal for the game.

Why work so hard creating new modes and maps to fill out CW, when there's plenty of material in the PUG maps and modes that can be modded easily for CW use.

But that doesn't mean ditching the PUG games, be they solo or group. For those matches, give them Skirmish and Skirmish alone.

If a player wants to knock about with a few pals or grind out MXP or c-bills, that's the place to do it.

Keep the buckets simple. If PUGging (solo or group), one game mode, rotating maps. Simple and be done with it. Simple is also fast.

Dump everything else into CW. Give space in CW for both the casuals and the competitive, for the solos/small groups and the premades.

Mechwarrior and Battletech endure today not because we've got big stompy robots, but we have a compelling universe of conflict and factions and the IS map is the best story telling asset the property possesses. Players, of all types and skills, should be driven towards the map and have a role to play in it.

This notion that CW is the exclusive realm of teams has to stop. It divides the community and causes a lot of friction with the players.

There was a lot of things wrong and incomplete with MPBT:3025, I'm not going to discuss that here, but the focus on the IS map was genius. I could group up in my faction if I wanted, I could solo if I wanted. But all the games were centered on finding and fighting in and about the IS map. We really felt like we were part of something larger than ourselves. That aspect of MPBT:3025 was great.

[flador]

It seems like the overwhelming majority of players are in 2-4 man groups when they play together, so it makes sense to favor them, however using the 1-1-1-1 formula is a tough trade. I like to run twin builds with my friends, (usually there's just two of us) and would really like to be able to do stuff like that as a two-man, however for improved queue times and balanced games I would gladly give it up!

[WarHippy]

WarHippy, on 04 September 2015 - 06:59 AM, said:

As someone who mostly plays solo I would like the option to drop in group queue to help smooth things out in the group queue; while I also sometimes drop in smaller groups under no circumstance do I want to see larger groups removed again as that was a disaster.

My personal thoughts on improving the queue time in group queue is to give up on the concept of matching mech classes at all. Stop trying to have 3/3/3/3 in the group queue, and let people play what they want in the way that best fits their strategy. Groups should have an easier time with dealing with setups that contain large amounts of a particular weight class. If a group wants to bring all lights or all assaults because that best fulfills their strategy then that should be allowed. The entire concept of 3/3/3/3 is repugnant to me, as is taking away our choice of game mode.

"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." -Russ


1)Yes, do this, I have wanted this option since you guys separated the groups from the solos.
2)NO, HELL NO, and ******* HELL NO! I repeat NO!
3)How about no restriction on what you bring. As I said above the groups should have an easier time dealing with unbalanced weight class combos. Do not take away my ability to play with friends, do not take away our options, and do not force us into a situation where we have to argue about who gets to bring what they enjoy to play so that someone else can bring what they enjoy to play. Let us all bring what we want period.

Quoting myself for reiteration.

[Tarl Cabot]

I posted this in another thread but thought it be more appropriate here and to add the following:

PGI should stop looking at the overall group wait time. It should be broken up in levels, as well as the variables. What is the wait time for 12-man/10-man/8/7/6/5/4/3/2? And during what sections of the day? Lets be serious, type of drops will be different between the heaviest of the day verses the lightest part of the day.

Does the group drop queue have a percentage of mech type being used like the solo queue? If it does not, should it not have said indicator or would it really matter? What about the percentage of group sizes? 12-10/ 9-8 / 7-6 / 5-4 /3-2 or 12-9 / 8-5 / 4-2?

Quote

But I would ask, what happens in those drops where everyone in that drop had formed up prior to the drop but are of different units and factions? CW will not allow that, nor does it allow a player to switch from Clan to IS mechs, nor back to the other without switching faction, not for the next drop. Nor does it allow said player group up and drop with someone else on the opposing major faction.

I am a member of the DCMS, but even those who are permanently attached to a House, a faction, need to step back and look at the overall ramifications of any MAJOR changes such as a drop from max 12 to max 4 in the current atmosphere.

With that said, does the system PGI uses have the capabilities to extend the search criteria in the current setting of the normal queue? That is, the larger the group dropping the longer it looks for larger units to drop with before opening up the search criteria? A 12-man drops and it looks for another 12, then a 10, 8, 6?

[PFC Carsten]

Feedback: Matchmaking is getting worse and worse since that PSR moniker has been announced. Rather rule than exception are 12-3/2/1/0 results and vice versa.

This is not fun.