75 replies to this topic

[MrMadguy]

Just for reference. You may compare matches with different Match Scores and make your conclusion about what variant of PSR MS thresholds is fair and what isn't.
1) Current stabilization level - target average Match Score, every player is expected to have, when his PSR rating stabilizes:


3) Average match score, i.e. stabilization level, we should have:

Edited by MrMadguy, 11 February 2016 - 04:40 AM.

[Kuritaclan]

Öhm nopp. With this model you will rise no matter what into the max tier - This is madness - If you wanna separate players, so they most likely play with even skilled players.It is just another arbitrary barrier a bit higher what it is now. Anyway not usefull to collect players with even skill in a tier to match them by tier.

Edited by Kuritaclan, 02 February 2016 - 11:47 AM.

[Mead]

lol

[kesmai]

Lol. You show complete understanding. As a reward you are gifted 5 locusts that you mUst level after the proposed change is made. Exclusively that means

[Kuritaclan]

A good PSR Tier System would be in my understanding somewhat like this:

Edit: see post #18

Edited by Kuritaclan, 02 February 2016 - 07:18 AM.

[Mead]

lolol

[Idealsuspect]

MrMadguy, on 02 February 2016 - 02:39 AM, said:

Its of course better than PGI system ( i guess every vet players was thinking same thing day one of PSR implementation ) but i am not sure use only matchscore is good ...
Sometime you can kill someone ( with kill most damage and solo kill ) without put more than 100 damage and some lrms guys can put 600 damage on a guy before get the kill .... The lrms guy will have better matchscore than the pinpoint guy but who is the best effective pilot ?

Second : It's common, in QP, that nobody in both team have more than 500 matchscore does it mean nobody deserve large PSR rise?.
And it depend weight class of mech a bit too ... more easy to have better matchscore in a heavy than in a light for example.

Maybe 4 differents PSR one per weight class... like old MM and one tier for bind them all becose playerbase is ( and will be forever ) too small.

And for end this : PGI will not read this thread

Edited by Idealsuspect, 02 February 2016 - 03:42 AM.

[Mead]

"You won, thanks for capping, *** you!"

If you nards want to punish people for a low score that right now only takes damage under consideration, then you need to put up some ideas for reworking the other rewards for doing things that aren't facemashing.

[MrMadguy]

Kuritaclan, on 02 February 2016 - 03:12 AM, said:

A good PSR Tier System would be in my understanding somewhat like this:

Having larger thresholds for higher Tiers - is completely wrong. Again, it will be unfair, cuz stabilization level for less skilled players will be lower, then for more skilled. And the intention of any matchmaking system - to put all players into equal conditions. System should adjust player's rating, till some target performance/match score/rewarding won't be achieved. This target have to be SAME FOR ALL PLAYERS.

[H I A S]

Fix PSR? Bring back Elo.

[Wolfways]

PSR matters?

[Kuritaclan]

MrMadguy, on 02 February 2016 - 03:30 AM, said:

Kuritaclan, on 02 February 2016 - 03:12 AM, said:

A good PSR Tier System would be in my understanding somewhat like this:

Having larger thresholds for higher Tiers - is completely wrong. Again, it will be unfair, cuz stabilization level for less skilled players will be lower, then for more skilled. And the intention of any matchmaking system - to put all players into equal conditions. System should adjust player's rating, till some target performance/match score/rewarding won't be achieved. This target have to be SAME FOR ALL PLAYERS.

It is not unfair - if you are good you rise in tier untill that point comes your matchscore is averaging in between your wins and losses - so you stay on that tier. The only problem this model has is matching "really high tier" players in a good time without waiting times into equilibrium.

I put up my last 100 matches (what i have screenshots of) to have a realistic matchscore spread. As you can see with the same skill you will rise if you start the game - and with a ceratain avg score you will mostlikely end in a tier you won't go much more up like with this matchscore there are only slight gains left in T7

Mead, on 02 February 2016 - 03:29 AM, said:

"You won, thanks for capping, *** you!"

If you nards want to punish people for a low score that right now only takes damage under consideration, then you need to put up some ideas for reworking the other rewards for doing things that aren't facemashing.

Matchscore does not only takes damage into consideration - it is plain and simple not true. Damage makes a good portion of it, but there are more things that ad up. However certain gamemodes like conquest or assault with a base cap will be more ignored - since if you win by base cap but make no damage you maybe don't even make enough matchscore to hold your tier. That are the problematic points and or what Idealsupsect wrote.

Edited by Kuritaclan, 02 February 2016 - 07:19 AM.

[Hotthedd]

So the OP's suggestion would take winning or losing out of the equation, and (under the current scoring system) make damage the most important factor in determining PSR.

Eventually the tiers would only reflect which chassis you play more than anything else.

[NextGame]

exisitng system is ok if you consider that you cannot capture every nuance of gameplay. Plus even if you could, I'm not sure that I could credit PGI with being able to understand what is good gameplay and what isn't.

The flawed system we have is about as good as you are going to get.

[Kuritaclan]

NextGame, on 02 February 2016 - 05:36 AM, said:

exisitng system is ok if you consider that you cannot capture every nuance of gameplay. Plus even if you could, I'm not sure that I could credit PGI with being able to understand what is good gameplay and what isn't.

The flawed system we have is about as good as you are going to get.

The current system will get nearly everybody who can play the game over time into the highest tier. Thats the problem of the current system. Okay some are that bad, that they stay in lower tiers. But everybody who is decent will slowly or faster get into max tier. And that is not the way a system should work that has the goal to match up player of a certain skill within a reasonable time.

[kesmai]

On my alt I needed 78 drops from tier 3 to tier 2. I am not a pro or good player. It can be done in less drops.. Point is there are players that are tier 3 since last september. You can see them in game and on the forum. The pure "xp bar" is not true.

Edited by kesmai, 02 February 2016 - 06:49 AM.

[MrMadguy]

Kuritaclan, on 02 February 2016 - 04:44 AM, said:

It is not unfair - if you are good you rise in tier untill that point comes your matchscore is averaging in between your wins and losses - so you stay on that tier. The only problem this model has is matching "really high tier" players in a good time without waiting times into equilibrium.

I put up my last 100 matches (what i have screenshots of) to have a realistic matchscore spread. As you can see with the same skill you will rise if you start the game - and with a ceratain avg score you will mostlikely end in a tier you won't go much more up like with this matchscore there are only slight gains left in T7

Do you realize, that your Tiers have different stabilization avg Match Score levels? Do you understand, that stabilization level - is avg Match Score, you are allowed to have without further advancement? Different stabilization levels - players will be allowed to have different avg Match Scores in different Tiers. Tier, you will settle in - depends on your skill. Is it fair, that players with different skill levels will be allowed to have different avg Match Scores? I don't think so.

Edited by MrMadguy, 02 February 2016 - 06:59 AM.

[Lugh]

Kuritaclan, on 02 February 2016 - 03:12 AM, said:

A good PSR Tier System would be in my understanding somewhat like this:

Please correct chart Loose to Lose or Loss.

Loose applies to ties, shoelaces, rope knots and people of questionable morals.

Thanks.

P.s. MrMadguy your chart leads to even more LRM madness. We don't need that, it's bad enough now.

[Screech]

Do not need a PSR based on the mech you picked.

[Mystere]

You want to reduce winning as a major part of PSR? Do tell then how we should rate people who vanguard, TAG, spot, NARC, bait, and distract in lieu of killing to help their team win? Should we make their PSR drop to the floor?

How do you accurately measure someone playing vanguard? What accurate method do you use to detect someone baiting, distracting, or delaying the enemy?

Isn't it much simpler to just use winning as an approximation?

Edited by Mystere, 02 February 2016 - 07:24 AM.