63 replies to this topic

[Reptilizer]

pyrocomp, on 28 September 2015 - 03:09 AM, said:

That's sad... I can do that only one way - running alone headfirst into the enemy deathball (in any mech), but that rarely happens.

PS: or I can be left alone in a Dire by NASCAR-lovers, which is a same thing, come to think of.

Any kind of assault cept a 400XL BM will be suceptible to NASCAR on caustic.

Or you can be focused down on derp-hill on alpine.
Or be picked apart as a heavy or assault by a light wolfpack without own light/medium support.
Or die the long-range death as a brawler because the team is not pushing.
Or bring LRM and no one locks and you are eaten alive by a single light.
Or follow your ECM-carrier without realizing its going rambo.

A thousand ways to die in the west...
Most of them avoidable by situational awareness of the group you drop with. Which sadly is non-existing down here.

[pyrocomp]

Reptilizer, on 28 September 2015 - 03:20 AM, said:

Any kind of assault cept a 400XL BM will be suceptible to NASCAR on caustic.

Or you can be focused down on derp-hill on alpine.
Or be picked apart as a heavy or assault by a light wolfpack without own light/medium support.
Or die the long-range death as a brawler because the team is not pushing.
Or bring LRM and no one locks and you are eaten alive by a single light.
Or follow your ECM-carrier without realizing its going rambo.

A thousand ways to die in the west...
Most of them avoidable by situational awareness of the group you drop with. Which sadly is non-existing down here.

Well, as you said, keep an eye. My opinion is that at lower tiers people are strugling to learn mech piloting basics (like simply riding a bike is a challenge at first), in higher tiers they learn situational awareness, later tactics and etc. So that's natural. I don't think that in lower tiers people should immediately be top-notch teammates. Plus, my wife's usual comment watching screen during my play is 'Just how do you see anything? What are you shooting at?'. People have troubles simply seeing something on Caustic, no to mention Bog or Colony.

So I can say that PSR is not same of is not reflective of the skill. I'd say (and said it earlier) that match score borders of PSR change should be tier dependend.

[ChewBaka]

I'm going to chip in my 2 cents too.

Considering I'm piloting a Cicada, its obvious I punched way above my weight here but just because my team loses, my PSR doesn't change. 300+ score which is higher than many on the winning side, and it was done in a freaking Cicada.

That's bloody outrageous, if you ask me. I can kind of understand the need to penalize a player for the team loss. For example, I was once in a game where this Assault mech just hid way in the back in Outreach and sniped with ERLL the entire game. Naturally, he was the last to die and the highest scoring but he most definitely doesn't deserve to be rewarded for his selfish play.

But he was piloting an Assault. I'm in a freaking Medium, with less firepower. This should at least have been taken into account.

Here's hoping the upcoming 'Battle Values' adjusts PSR to some point of sanity but somehow I'm not too optimisitic...

[Clownwarlord]

PSR doesn't mean crap. It is a crap-tastic way of stating Win/Lose statistic. When you win even if you do crap it goes up. When you lose and do very well it still goes down. So point proven it is ELO with a fancy new name ... Thanks PGI for the crap-tastic way of rating your players by win/lose like before and having a new crappy match making system to base it off of.

Side note ... your end of match score has nothing to do with your PSR ... it is like 20 points for a win and nothing for a lose in the calculations so if you want to get that 300 match score just do 600 damage because end of match score is based 1 point for every 2 points of damage. There is also minute points for things like a kill and kill assist and other junk so don't count on that and instead get your damage.

As for overall game though still fun to play except that I am getting more 12 - 0 matches because of PSR match maker.

Edited by clownwarlord, 28 September 2015 - 04:32 AM.

[pyrocomp]

clownwarlord, on 28 September 2015 - 04:29 AM, said:

PSR doesn't mean crap. It is a crap-tastic way of stating Win/Lose statistic. When you win even if you do crap it goes up. When you lose and do very well it still goes down. So point proven it is ELO with a fancy new name ... Thanks PGI for the crap-tastic way of rating your players by win/lose like before and having a new crappy match making system to base it off of.

Side note ... your end of match score has nothing to do with your PSR ... it is like 20 points for a win and nothing for a lose in the calculations so if you want to get that 300 match score just do 600 damage because end of match score is based 1 point for every 2 points of damage. There is also minute points for things like a kill and kill assist and other junk so don't count on that and instead get your damage.

As for overall game though still fun to play except that I am getting more 12 - 0 matches because of PSR match maker.

50 for a win, 0 for a loss in match score. And only 0.45 scores for 1 dmg. If you lose well (e.g. 600 dmg), you land above 250 match score and your PSR is unchanged. If you really do crap but your team wins so that your end score is less than 100, you still do not gain PSR. I think that double factoring of a win in a PSR (50 point to match score and overall decision to up or down PSR) is an obversight that shoud be corrected either with removal or reducing of win bonus to matchscore (I don't like this way) or having equal rules of PSR change regardless of the win/loss (better way), or just lower a little (from 250 to 200) the matchscore for 'PSR unchanged' in a loss and rise a little match scores (from 100 to 150) for 'PSR unchanged' in a win (This I prefer over other options).

[PyckenZot]

Very valid points mr. OP!

[Lugh]

Satan n stuff, on 28 September 2015 - 01:50 AM, said:

A 50+ alpha to a CT makes it a hell of a lot easier for someone to kill a mech than several such alphas sprayed all over the mech, your argument is invalid.

Edit: I'd say the damage mechanic can be salvaged, if it were to factor in it's effectiveness. It wouldn't need to be entirely accurate, as long as it rewards damage to the most important sections of a mech the most.

For example:
All sections are valued by (item tonnage/total hitpoints+shield value/item tonnage)*multiplier, each point of damage will be multiplied by that to add to the match score. Match score is awarded per destroyed item or component, to anyone who damaged that component.
The CT will be valued at the total remaining value of the mech at the time it's destroyed.
The first leg to be destroyed has the engine tonnage included in the value, minus whatever engine tonnage would be needed to move at legged speed. The remaining leg will be valued at the total remaining value of the mech, like the CT.
The sidetorsos will be valued like the CT if the engine is an IS XL, in the case of a clan XL the second sidetorso to be destroyed will be valued like the CT. The first sidetorso to be destroyed with a clan XL will have a shield value added, so will both sidetorsos on mechs with a standard engine.
The arms will also have a shield value added.
It's also possible to value remaining ammo and heat sinks ( collectively for each type of item ) based on the value of the weapons that depend on them, so for example 3 tons of AC/5 ammo might be worth a third of an AC/5 if it exists on a mech in that combination.

A system like this will obviously never be perfect, but it will give significantly better rewards for effective damage than for ineffective damage.

There is no such thing as ineffective damage. All damage leads to the defeat of that mech pilot.

A for instance, in a match I played on saturday. I alpha'd in my Arctic Cheetah at an EBJ, and because I was falling hit a leg, which instantly disappeared. The second alpha to the other leg killed him completely. According to the OP's assertion that would be ineffective damage, but it is VERY effective, especially against faster opponents. And in this case it was easier than coring him out.

Another example, you are involved in a peek and poke situation and your opponent continues to not retreat effectively, leaving an arm that has the weapons he's shooting you with exposed, not shooting and removing that arm, is the height of stupidity and is effective damage, but by the OP's assertion would be classed ineffective.

Edited by Lugh, 28 September 2015 - 04:53 AM.

[Lord Auriel]

over the course of many hundreds of battles, or better: thousands ofbattles, the only thing that influences your personal win rate is YOU. So win rate = personal performance, especally if you want to emphasize team play (and not just damage farming).

[bad arcade kitty]

Lord Auriel, on 28 September 2015 - 06:36 AM, said:

over the course of many hundreds of battles, or better: thousands ofbattles, the only thing that influences your personal win rate is YOU. So win rate = personal performance, especally if you want to emphasize team play (and not just damage farming).

except not winrate but a winrate based rating which is adjusted depending on vs whom you win or lose and with whom on your team

[Widowmaker1981]

Lord Auriel, on 28 September 2015 - 06:36 AM, said:

over the course of many hundreds of battles, or better: thousands ofbattles, the only thing that influences your personal win rate is YOU. So win rate = personal performance, especally if you want to emphasize team play (and not just damage farming).

Unless of course you play any significant number of games in the group queue, where you can control the variable 'other players on my team'
PSR works ok for the solo queue, like Elo did. And like Elo, because it is based entirely on Win/Loss it is completely useless for anyone who plays the group queue.
Most players play both group and solo, so the system is FUBAR.

Edited by Widowmaker1981, 28 September 2015 - 06:59 AM.

[0bsidion]

Paigan, on 27 September 2015 - 01:09 PM, said:

1.) "If you want to have low score, do the mission objective."
2.) "Match score punishes accuracy, efficiency and actual contribution but rewards useless damage spaying"

Not sane.

I have to agree with you. It seems like they're kinda on the right track in general, but got derailed when it came to the details. The match scores seem to reward you for spray'n'pray far more than anything else. But dead enemies are enemies that aren't shooting your teammates or you. So shouldn't that be more encouraged?

Maybe it's an experiment to artificially increase TTK and the length of matches. Because doing the objectives will end the match pretty quick, whereas if both teams sit there and spray damage at each other, matches will take quite a bit longer.

That said, I kinda wish I could lock my tier where it is, or at least not go up. I like where I'm at.

[bad arcade kitty]

Widowmaker1981, on 28 September 2015 - 06:58 AM, said:

Unless of course you play any significant number of games in the group queue, where you can control the variable 'other players on my team'
PSR works ok for the solo queue, like Elo did. And like Elo, because it is based entirely on Win/Loss it is completely useless for anyone who plays the group queue.
Most players play both group and solo, so the system is FUBAR.

group queue games shouldn't affect the solo queue rating

[Reptilizer]

Widowmaker1981, on 28 September 2015 - 06:58 AM, said:

Unless of course you play any significant number of games in the group queue, where you can control the variable 'other players on my team'
PSR works ok for the solo queue, like Elo did. And like Elo, because it is based entirely on Win/Loss it is completely useless for anyone who plays the group queue.
Most players play both group and solo, so the system is FUBAR.

The main issue that i have with PSR is that it is actually NOT entirely based on win/loss.
Your own match score has significant impact on how much and if at all you move left or right on the progress bar.
Since in the lower tiers it is much more difficult to organize a group for a secure win than to optimize your match score -> roll with the ~50% win rate down there and care for your score. With a good score you will never go down, just up. Higher score also means more "up" when you win. And score = damage mostly.

[Ghogiel]

Widowmaker1981, on 28 September 2015 - 06:58 AM, said:

Unless of course you play any significant number of games in the group queue, where you can control the variable 'other players on my team'
PSR works ok for the solo queue, like Elo did. And like Elo, because it is based entirely on Win/Loss it is completely useless for anyone who plays the group queue.
Most players play both group and solo, so the system is FUBAR.

that's basically the main issue. PSR sounds like it is mostly working* in the solo queue since loads of players are sitting in other tiers besides tier 1. There is no point what so ever talking about any sort of PSR granularity in weight classes, chassis or any other such ranking until there is a solo only PSR.

I don't actually think most players play group queue though, maybe it's changed but iirc groups are still somewhat the minority.


*working as it is rating a players performance based on his average damage potential and carry ability over a large sample of games,

[Almond Brown]

LordNothing, on 27 September 2015 - 04:00 PM, said:

i dont think anyone gives a crap what their score is. whet everyone does seem to be bothered by is that the game is suddenly much less fun. pri's crappy rng system could do a better job at finding matched opponents.

way i see it personal combat performance and teamwork are two different things and each should be rated separately. combine that with the fact that psr depends on score, and scoring has a lot of issues. there are no rewards for marksmanship. rewards for scouting are dependent on the team using the intel. so whatever issues there are with scoring is being magnified. there should be a relative skill factor on things like cbills and xp (not so much score) so you can still get paid in games where you face stronger opponents.

So if a "reward" was somehow put in for "marksmanship" then you would be OK if a "negative" be put in on the other side of the ledger, for "balance" for all the "misses" that one accumulates... right?

[Lugh]

Reptilizer, on 28 September 2015 - 07:17 AM, said:

The main issue that i have with PSR is that it is actually NOT entirely based on win/loss.
Your own match score has significant impact on how much and if at all you move left or right on the progress bar.
Since in the lower tiers it is much more difficult to organize a group for a secure win than to optimize your match score -> roll with the ~50% win rate down there and care for your score. With a good score you will never go down, just up. Higher score also means more "up" when you win. And score = damage mostly.

Base on the current even Exceptional is 300 match score. I score this level often, but not all the time. In a loss this is mostly a down rating, and rarely an =.

[Idealsuspect]

Paigan, on 27 September 2015 - 01:09 PM, said:

Conclusion:

>>> PGI dont understand their own game

[Ghogiel]

Lugh, on 28 September 2015 - 07:22 AM, said:

Base on the current even Exceptional is 300 match score. I score this level often, but not all the time. In a loss this is mostly a down rating, and rarely an =.

300 match score on a loss is an = not a down

[Reptilizer]

Ghogiel, on 28 September 2015 - 07:24 AM, said:

300 match score on a loss is an = not a down

Actually its 250+, at least it was the case in my games. And you can achieve this quite reliably with the right mech/loadout when only going for score.

[Dimento Graven]

Osteo2001, on 27 September 2015 - 01:56 PM, said:

While all you say is true, point 3 burns me more than anything....

I scan the skies looking for UAV's as if they're up, we're seen. I think that taking out a UAV should be at least 5k c-bills and the formula equivalent gxp as strategically, this is at least as important as taking out a mech (hence the 5k, it's the same as kill most damage dealt).

Taking out enemy UAV's is a HUGE deal, and should be rewarded, ESPECIALLY given that PGI's hit detection makes killing them more difficult than necessary.

Full Disclosure: I like the PSR system, and I have since BEFORE they made rankings visible. I found matches much more interesting and there's a lot less instances of 'derpy' play. Also, I am ranked Tier 1.

I can absolutely tell when I've been dumped into 'any available match' after I've reached the maximum match search time threshold, and I can tell you, sometimes it's very painful. My only issue is how common it is to see this happen. Sit there for what feels like 5+ minutes (never actually timed it) to get into a match where my side has 11 Tier 4's and the other side has mostly higher tier players. It's obvious when it happens, sometimes it makes me laugh... Sometimes... Sometimes I go play Borderlands instead...

I would argue with Paul's contention that if they froze the player base at its current state (no new members) that 'everyone' would 'eventually bubble up' to Tier 1/Tier 2. I've run into PLENTY of Founders who are NOT Tier 1, nor are any where near it. The fact that there's so many long time/high drop rate players who are NOT Tier 1 should indicate that his theory that "everyone" would eventually get ranked higher, nuh uh, that's just silly.