778 replies to this topic

[Sjorpha]

Galenit, on 18 January 2016 - 10:56 AM, said:

Lets dust out some old opinions about it, maybe you allready heared about them ...

12 players playing together often using the matching mechs and same language, all knowing their tactics against 12 random players with random mechs and often not using the same language is a game changer.

Its like putting the 11 best soccerplayers of the world (one of each national team) together against the german national soccer team.
The first had never trained together, some of them dont use the same language
the second team has trained together, uses the same language and is working with team-tactics tailored to their strengths developed by them over time.
Do you believe that the first win more often then the last?

I dont know if its more sad that you come with this point or if i waste my time on this old and busted argument ...

Yes of course the group wins more often than the pugs because of teamwork, that is not what I'm arguing against.

If the players are anywhere near equal in skill, the group will beat the pug team by a fair margin. Maybe 48-24?

They will not, however, beat the pugs by for example 48-4 like we often do and like happens very very often right now.
They will not crush the pugs so bad that every mech after the first is killed at spawn.
They will not win so big that the majority of those few kills are from dropships and ejects.

For those things to happen, which is what is the "farming" and "stomping" being complained about, the pug teams need to be more than uncoordinated. They need to be really really bad as well.

When we happen on a team of legitimately good pug players we sure as hell beat them because of the coordination, but we don't get to farm them. It's not a complete stomp and everyone gets to have an ok game on both sides. You can't farm good players, pugs or not. Bad players can be farmed, and since the farming is so extremely prevalent there must be a majority of bad or new players in the pug teams right now.

It's very easy to recognize good pugs in CW btw, because a good player dropping as a solo pug gets to carry and rack up very high scores. Pugging is actually the best way to get the really high scores in CW because you don't have to compete and share the damage and kills with good teammates. Solo pugging is where people get their 4000 damage matches and such.

[Sandpit]

Deathswarrior, on 18 January 2016 - 02:19 PM, said:

Not trying to be rude, but it does seem like you think new/solo players are helpless.

odd that you should say that, since every time I use that phrase it's specifically in quotations referring to Bongerbob up there and a few others actively, in this very threat referring to other PUGs and new players in that EXACT form.
Not me
them
Which is why I keep pointing out to people, you should actually read who's posting what and pay attention to the attitude of other players in using terms like that to describe their fellow gamers.

[Bonger Bob]

Lupis Volk, on 18 January 2016 - 05:07 AM, said:

care to name some?

The only thing i've ever seen in MMO's is PVP and PVE splits.

WoW, Rift, SWTOR - all have separate ques for PVP, as do more.

[Deathswarrior]

I'm sorry if I misinterpreted your para-phrasing for someone else's.

I hope you can see how I was confused as most of your post's refer to new cw players as "seals" and lines like

"It's going to be sad watching all those new players get clubbed and have no access to organized help and that's exactly what I see happening."

But again if the point of this Topic was to discuss if this a good idea or not then I agree with you this is a terrible idea. IMO if they are going to split the queues they should be solo(tag or not) and group(tag or not)

My last point
I fully believe CW is for group play, but until we have Solaris or the 4v4 that was talked about or real game types, then small groups and solo players will forever be stuck in PUGlandia where it's always DM and someone is always angry at their team.

Edited by Deathswarrior, 18 January 2016 - 03:54 PM.

[Sandpit]

Bonger Bob, on 18 January 2016 - 03:50 PM, said:

WoW, Rift, SWTOR - all have separate ques for PVP, as do more.

all are RPGs with PvP being the tag along

War Thunder
WoT
***
games like MWO, do not

if you're going to make comparisons, make comparisons within the same genres

Deathswarrior, on 18 January 2016 - 03:52 PM, said:

I'm sorry if I misinterpreted your para-phrasing for someone else's.

I hope you can see how I was confused as most of your post's refer to new cw players as "seals" and lines like

"It's going to be sad watching all those new players get clubbed and have no access to organized help and that's exactly what I see happening."

But again if the point of this Topic was to discuss if this a good idea or not then I agree with you this is a terrible idea. IMO if they are going to split the queues they should be solo(tag or not) and group(tag or not)

My last point
I fully believe CW is for group play, but until we have Solaris or the 4v4 that was talked about or real game types, then small groups and solo players will forever be stuck in PUGlandia where it's always DM and someone is always angry at their team.

a lot of the PUGs and new and solo type players have been having fun with us just from us simply by using faction chat

[Bonger Bob]

Sandpit, on 18 January 2016 - 03:15 PM, said:

odd that you should say that, since every time I use that phrase it's specifically in quotations referring to Bongerbob up there and a few others actively, in this very threat referring to other PUGs and new players in that EXACT form.
Not me
them
Which is why I keep pointing out to people, you should actually read who's posting what and pay attention to the attitude of other players in using terms like that to describe their fellow gamers.

the only time iv'e referenced players of any type negatively, is to try and separate the descriptors for the different types WITHOUT actually tarnishing the entire group or naming individual players. Give identity to the small problem sections of people so that the discussion doesn't get caught up in garbage like "all pugs are wan*er solo's", "all units are seal clubbers", "all new players suck", etc etc etc etc.

take the seal clubbers as an example, I say "some units are engaging in seal clubbing when it suit them", you then use that statement in a reply as "people are saying units are seal clubbers", your actually the one who is turning the terms into blanket references and your shallow self serving motivations as to why are very clear.

Not all players who are new are useless, not all unit players are "all that leetness", not all players are going to be good or skilled to the same level.

but don't refuse to recognize that SOME sections of players are a negative influence on the game, these can be found in ALL sections of the gaming community, from pugs to new players to units. No one broad term can be used to describe any of the broad groups.

I thought you had given up on miss-quoting others comments in a failed attempt to discredit anything they've typed.......but you seem intent on continuing the bile and misdirection in your own failed attempts to discredit anything and anyone opposed to your views. If YOU stop using the blanket references, you might find discussion staying on topic, instead of it continually drifting off in attempts to slur others and portray their opinions negatively.

[Bonger Bob]

Sandpit, on 18 January 2016 - 04:07 PM, said:

all are RPGs with PvP being the tag along

War Thunder
WoT
***
games like MWO, do not

if you're going to make comparisons, make comparisons within the same genres

some would argue it is more akin to an RPG in many aspects, with the fact players accrue exp for use on skills that build up and cap out eventually, and mechs that level up and a campaign alleged to be deep in lore ( lol ).

i was asked about rpg's with PvP that has separate ques, and replied accordingly.

if you want FPS examples with separate ques, look at the entire BF series for one. There was always a server that was dedicated not for teams, in one form or another.

and as far as your comment for PvP being a tag along, there's whole servers dedicated to open PvP for the entire game in many RPG's. There are players who base and play the games solely for PvP, hence the servers that exist.

Many SWTOR / WoW players would argue that PvP is the primary and only purpose they play the games for.

RPG's with dedicated PvP is a great comparison for this, it shows an environment where group play is encouraged and supported heavily by the game client ( guilds etc ) and there are PvP ques where pugs play and separate ques for PvP for the groups. There are regular competitions, leaderboards, etc etc etc. Oh and they have further division of these ques with ELO or similar ratings for the difficulty etc. not a crappy 5 tier exp system that players are afraid of being applied to them.

and guess what, the sky isn't falling there, and people enjoy the game as they prefer, ques wait times are not abhorrently long, and pug ques are not being ravaged by groups ( that have their own que ).

come to think of it, there is one major difference for RPG's over this, RPG game dev's can actually incorporate the lore their game is based on, with depth and detail, without burning it. In some cases, they've even expanded it well beyond what it originally was while not destroying other aspects of the lore as they saw fit.

R.I.P. Death from above, melee, knock downs, different ammo subgroups, etc etc

Edited by Bonger Bob, 18 January 2016 - 04:38 PM.

[N0MAD]

Sjorpha, on 18 January 2016 - 10:21 AM, said:

1. What makes you think that is that almost every time you face a pure pug team, they run around like exactly that: headless chickens.

2. If the "bulk" of solo players were any good there wouldn't be any complaints about getting farmed, and no reason to split the queues because pugs would be able to put up a fight.

But the sad fact is that most pugs most of the time are bad enough to be roflstomped by even the most mediocre of units.

You can't have it both ways. Either most pugs are good enough to put up a decent fight, in which case there is no strong case for splitting the queues, or most pugs are bad, in which case they may need a kiddie pool.

What you can't have, as an adult person, is choose to play in the kiddie pool plus also be respected as a good player.

1. i havnt really found that in solo Q, most and i say most games are pretty good, you have some Rambos, not really run into many newbs to be honest, headless chickens? no cant say i see that very often at all.
2. There is a big difference with been able to and wanting to..

rest of post, again i will debate whether its ability or want, can they play well?, most can, do they want to play? obviously not as seen by the pop.
As far as people wanting respect for abilities in a game?, well a few might seek respect or even attention for playing a game, but i would bet most of us dont game for respect or eppeen, we get that from real life, do not play computer games for it.
I respect my friend, they (husband/wife) have put their kids thru school, own their own home are law abiding, etc. i dont respect a person for spending a lot of time at a computer and have learnt to move a mouse and click, my kids could do that at age 4.

[JaxRiot]

spectralthundr, on 18 January 2016 - 04:58 AM, said:

Wait times already can be lengthy. Splitting the queues is going to add to that when the majority just does pug drops in the solo/group queues outside of CW to begin with.

At any rate it addresses nothing, what's to stop units from going untagged, creating a 12 man group and stomping unorganized pugs who want to treat CW as it's the solo queue? Nothing.

They are drastically reducing the attack lanes in order to reduce ques. So instead of the 10ish or so planets that we see now to attack, there will only be 2 or 3

Plus there are the new Lone wolf and Freelancer roles that allow those people to drop for any faction, any where.

Kind of like a Quick Play that sends them any where. So hopefully those things keep the ques much shorter for everyone.

And also, Russ said specifically that groups will not be able to drop in the Solo que (pug que). When asked if groups could drop in the Pug que he said specifically that they had learned their lesson ages ago with the Public que, and that it was all or nothing when separating groups from solo.

So, no.. Groups will not be able to que in the Solo que, unit tags or not.

Edited by JaxRiot, 18 January 2016 - 07:35 PM.

[N0MAD]

Sandpit, on 18 January 2016 - 04:07 PM, said:

all are RPGs with PvP being the tag along

War Thunder
WoT
***
games like MWO, do not

if you're going to make comparisons, make comparisons within the same genres

Actually, War thunder, WoWs (dont play WoT so wont comment) do split Qs both have PVE and both have seperate Qs for different lvl gamers, they have different buckets for their lvls, one Q button but different buckets for lvls, WT in particular has 4 game types if you can call it that, PvE, Arcade, realistic and full sim.

Edited by N0MAD, 18 January 2016 - 07:54 PM.

[-Vompo-]

Sandpit, on 18 January 2016 - 01:28 PM, said:

based on what has been said thus far, this has nothing to do with groups, simply tags and unit affiliation. Can still group up in CW, just can't wear tags.

If that is the case it does nothing to prevent groups stomping pugs. So why even bother making it hard for units to find games?
As a FRR player (Yeah I have a Kurita tag now but it's there against my will) we drop in mixed groups all the time and the coordination is just as good and if we so wish we could create a group out of the best guys from different units.

I guess the thinking behind this whole thing was preventing units from destroying other groups and pugs because we all know that all units contantly train together and that is where their strenght comes and not from simply communicating with each other during matches.

edit... So the groups will have their separate queue... Interesting to see how this works out.

Edited by VompoVompatti, 18 January 2016 - 09:47 PM.

[PocketYoda]

Gas Guzzler, on 14 January 2016 - 01:01 PM, said:

Maybe they will be encouraged to leave the kiddie pool then?

Nope they will just quit... en mass.

[Bleary]

MischiefSC, on 14 January 2016 - 05:16 PM, said:

I don't get why pgi works so hard to make systems that will make people not care about the game.

Because boy, the player population sure does care about CW right now.

[Sandpit]

N0MAD, on 18 January 2016 - 07:46 PM, said:

Actually, War thunder, WoWs (dont play WoT so wont comment) do split Qs both have PVE and both have seperate Qs for different lvl gamers, they have different buckets for their lvls, one Q button but different buckets for lvls, WT in particular has 4 game types if you can call it that, PvE, Arcade, realistic and full sim.

tes
just like we have quickplay and faction play
just like those other games split their queues.

[Bleary]

Prof RJ Gumby, on 15 January 2016 - 03:34 AM, said:

Competitive units cannot be FORCED into fighting each other. It is impossible, stop asking PGI to do this. No can't do. Even if disguised as "Q division". Nope. Never. People will sooner leave the game than play in a way they don't want to.

You understand this is also true of solo players, yes? To wit:

Triordinant, on 15 January 2016 - 03:58 AM, said:

Sounds like a business decision. If a game mode is consistently used by only 5% to 10% of your playerbase it's not worth spending precious time and money on it. You either have to shut it down (and possibly restart it in the future) or find a way to get more new players to stay in it.

Most players would rather leave CW (or MWO) than play in the current CW queue. So either PGI makes it more solo-friendly, or they stop funnelling development into a part of the game only a tiny percentage of players use and leave the mode to rot. Those are the only real choices.

[Sandpit]

Bleary, on 18 January 2016 - 11:18 PM, said:

Most players would rather leave CW.

let's not stop with false or made up statistical references
we don't know what "most" of anything in the MWO population is. We can make some educated guesses and have our own opinions, but let's not make our points of opinion based on "majority" and such

EDIT:
As to the other portion, that again is assuming you have statistical data that shows a direct correlation between low CW population and the queue system not being segregated and forgets about all kinds of other factors that play into that.

Edited by Sandpit, 19 January 2016 - 12:19 AM.

[Bleary]

I also want to clarify something:

There's an unspoken (or outright stated) assumption in these discussions that players should naturally transition from new/solo to experienced/in a group. Solo players are frequently conflated with noobs or (more optimistically) players who can be trained up and recruited into a unit. Here's the deal: MWO doesn't have much depth. It's a quickmatch game. There's little sense trying to group up on TS when you're only going to be on for a couple of drops. Most players are solo because they choose to be. Most established players are solo. Very good money that most founders are solo. They don't want to be taken under your wing, they're not there to learn from you. They simply don't want to play MWO the same way you do.

I have sympathy for the units who say "they can stay in the public queue then". But MWO's population is too small to support a unit-only gameplay mode. And we've had more than enough time to prove that solo players will not swim in team queues. So: 1. solo players have be able to play CW. And 2. they have to have the option to avoid teams when they do it.

Maybe the proposal will fail to do that. Given the track record of past changes, all worries are warranted. But what we have right now definitely fails. As would any opinion or counter-suggestion that involves solos dropping with teams.

[N0MAD]

Sandpit, on 18 January 2016 - 10:44 PM, said:

tes
just like we have quickplay and faction play
just like those other games split their queues.

Well no not really,WT arcade/realistic/Sim all have very different flight models/difficulty levels for a start.
Then within those game types if you want to call them, you will be Qd with pilots of similar rank, several rank buckets effectively different Qs.
WoWs, you have arcade but play in different Lvl buckets, effectively different Qs, then in the competitive ranked Qs you have to reach a certain lvl, 5 i think, to get in that Q, as you lvl in Ranked you are promoted to the next Rank, lvl 7+.
Both employ a progression system for their buckets, shielding the newbs i guess.
Yes there are sharks, but there is a system to make it non viable, as in no useful XP for using lower tier vehicles and much reduced rewards.
Very very diff than what we have here.
I find it far more competitive, im constantly playing people of my experience/skill/tech level.

[Bleary]

Sandpit, on 19 January 2016 - 12:18 AM, said:

let's not stop with false or made up statistical references we don't know what "most" of anything in the MWO population is. We can make some educated guesses and have our own opinions, but let's not make our points of opinion based on "majority" and such EDIT: As to the other portion, that again is assuming you have statistical data that shows a direct correlation between low CW population and the queue system not being segregated and forgets about all kinds of other factors that play into that.

Well, two options here: either the various people who've directly said they no longer play CW because they don't enjoy lopsided stomps are representative, or some other combination of factors makes the mode so unfun that 90% of the player base (except, curiously, most of the established teams) collectively decided to forego the lure of new maps and faction rewards.

In the latter case, the causes are likely too entrenched and the correct answer is to scrap CW entirely.

[Sjorpha]

N0MAD, on 18 January 2016 - 07:23 PM, said:

1. i havnt really found that in solo Q, most and i say most games are pretty good, you have some Rambos, not really run into many newbs to be honest, headless chickens? no cant say i see that very often at all.
2. There is a big difference with been able to and wanting to..

rest of post, again i will debate whether its ability or want, can they play well?, most can, do they want to play? obviously not as seen by the pop.
As far as people wanting respect for abilities in a game?, well a few might seek respect or even attention for playing a game, but i would bet most of us dont game for respect or eppeen, we get that from real life, do not play computer games for it.
I respect my friend, they (husband/wife) have put their kids thru school, own their own home are law abiding, etc. i dont respect a person for spending a lot of time at a computer and have learnt to move a mouse and click, my kids could do that at age 4.

Wow, a double strawman.

1. We are specifically talking about pug teams in CW, not solo Q which has a matchmaker and absolutely nothing to do with the topic.

2. I said "respected as a good player", I'm not talking about being respected as a person or whatnot. You can read it as "acknowledged" or "considered" a good player if that's easier to understand. I'm not saying that it's a good or bad thing to be good or bad at the game. All I'm saying is that you are what you are and no amount of talk will make anyone believe you are good at something you're bad at, whether you consider that something important or not isn't relevant in the slightest.

Is there a difference between being able to or wanting to? Well that's a free will debate at it's core, can you choose what to want? I've never seen any evidence for free will so I consider it a magical/religious belief, until proven otherwise I'll assume you are only ever able to do what you are actually doing.

But aside from philosophy, I'd actually argue that most people pugging in CW are trying to play well with what they have, or at least not playing bad on purpose. They are just bad at the game, either because they are new and can't play yet or for some other reason. Some may have a dimension of intentional handicaps like roleplaying stock builds or whatnot, but I think they generally do their best with those builds in the actual match. Of course there are the ragequitters who suicide the moment they see a 12 man on the other side, those would qualify as not wanting to play well I guess, but it's actually not that common and most people play the match out even while being stomped.

The basic claim I was debunking here was the one that the "bulk" of CW solo pugs are good players who play the game well. That is evidently not the case. Now I'm not saying that to insult anyone or to put personal value on being good at the game, but it's a fact that most solo puggers in CW play the game very badly. If that doesn't apply to you then it doesn't, good for you, but my unit is not consistently winning 48-6 against pug teams for no reason.

I want it to end, it's no fun. So I hope the queue split works. I'm not convinced it will and it might break the ****, but I sure as hell hope it works.

Edited by Sjorpha, 19 January 2016 - 01:48 AM.