75 replies to this topic

[DohItAgain]

I definitely wouldn't mind some sort of Grouping PSR/ELO like League of Legends has, separate from Solo.

[Kuritaclan]

DohItAgain, on 02 February 2016 - 10:20 AM, said:

I definitely wouldn't mind some sort of Grouping PSR/ELO like League of Legends has, separate from Solo.

I don't know - why not?

[MrMadguy]

Finally, I have screenshots of ~175MS game. This screenshots explain, why 175MS stabilization level - is way too low and unfair. Do you believe, that every non 100% Tier1 player in this game is expected to play only such matches on average?


And this is the BEST average match, you may have without advancing:

Edited by MrMadguy, 03 February 2016 - 02:05 AM.

[wanderer]

A good PSR system would make getting a gain require increasingly higher match scores with higher tier ranks, and also increase the minimum needed to avoid losing rating, AND add increasingly large PSR losses as the minimum to avoid a loss increases.

It a T3 needs 100 match score, a T2 150 and a T1 200 to not lose PSR, then the T1 should lose X amount for a 199 match score, X+Y for 150-101, and X+Y+Z for under 100.

As it stands, it's an exp bar. Nothing more.

[MischiefSC]

If it were not a team game that would make sense.

As it's a team game win/loss is critical.

Anyone who doesn't understand they are on a 12man team every drop is the reason for their own failure.

[Ted Wayz]

Or just create a leaderboard for each variant of each chassis and have a true skill rating based on what you pilot. That way bads couldn't hide on teams.

[MrMadguy]

Finally I have screenshots of ~325MS match. It was really hard to obtain them. Good matches are extremely rare for me - may be one of 30 is good. Don't look at rewards: 1) It's victory - on loss it would be about 100K CB 2) We have double XP weekend now, so real amount of XP earned - is about 1K.
So tell me. Don't you think, that we deserve to have average match like this?

Edited by MrMadguy, 05 February 2016 - 11:06 AM.

[MrMadguy]

I know, that Assault and Conquest modes will be changed soon, but currently all arguments about rewarding team work are wrong. I have just realized it. When you play cap rush at Assault and win/lose with 0dmg done - yeah, it's "victory" and it's "teamwork", but it neither fun, nor rewarding. And it feels wrong, that my rating, that represents my skill, depends on who will play stupid NASCAR rush better.

[MadcatX]

Hotthedd, on 02 February 2016 - 05:27 AM, said:

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.

What's the more important factor that determines the outcome of a match, a person's personal skill (one can only carry so far), or one team actually using teamwork. Ideally you'd want everyone to use teamwork but that is obviously not the case, teamwork is OP, will cause more wins then losses and thus not an accurate depiction of your personal skill per say.

I thought the most common chassis\loadouts were already reflected by your tier, with more meta the higher you went (or at least that's how you would think it would be anyways).

[PyckenZot]

The real simple fix?

Just remove the high weight of the value of damage in the equation,...

[MrMadguy]

I don't care, what rating system PGI will implement. All I want - is this rating to be more personal skill-dependent, instead of being way too W/L-dependent, which doesn't mean anything in pug matches. Or at least more reward-dependent, so at least rewards will be granted fairly. And as now match rewards are proportional to match score, then easiest fix to make PSR fair - is to make it match score-dependent.

[H I A S]

Quote

instead of being way too W/L-dependent, which doesn't mean anything in pug matches.

That's just wrong.

[Andi Nagasia]

sorry MrMadGuy but all your system does is Raise the Match Score Bar for Everyone,
and remove Win/Loss from the Equation, which this may help it doesnt Address the Main Problems with PSR,

1) we need More Rewarded Actions,
such as (Focusing Fire), (AMS Cover), (ECM cover), (Rewards to Commanders Commanding) ect,
(if your not going to reward People for Bringing AMS than no one will bring AMS)

2) all Actions need to be Rewarded the same,
Scouting, Flanking, and Taging and Narcing should be as Important as Damage,
(If High Alphas and Damage is Most Rewarding, thats what Everyone will always Play)

Please See my Topic on rewards that need to be Added,
(Rewards That Really Need To Be Added!)

[Brain Cancer]

PSR should be pretty hard to gain in T1 even on a win. And easiest to lose in T1 too.

T2 shouldn't be as hard as T3. T3 should be a little harder than it is now. T4 should be like now, and T5 a little easier.

[Navid A1]

You want to Fix PSR?

There are a few ways of doing this. First, how about introducing PSR per chassis (or even variant)
Look here:
https://mwomercs.com...stats?type=mech
Its not that they don't have the data available. They have an extensive record for every single mech variant you have played.
They just don't use it! (typical PGI)

If you want to go further, Introducing a new BV (or call it PGI value, or whatever) as a multiplier for PSR is the way to go.

Example:
Effective PSR = Raw chassis PSR * (mech value mult. + weight class mult.)

where:
mech value is based on the mech load out (JJs, ECM, MASC, Weapons based on their stats and accuracy per pilot...)
mech value can be a final number between 0.1 and 0.7

And wight class multiplier can be like:
Weight class mult = 0.4 - 0.5 - 0.6 - 0.7 for L/M/H/A.

This way good pilots are not forced to carry in a mist lynx. But are forced to carry even more when they want to constantly rock their KDK-3 cheese.





I know the chance of hell freezing is more than a good MM... because it takes time and effort... and yet we are begging for simple XML edits that takes 1 second to do.
And I know i wasted my time typing this.

Edited by Navid A1, 13 July 2016 - 12:58 PM.

[Spleenslitta]

I will remain neutral but i will say this -

Idealsuspect, on 02 February 2016 - 03:27 AM, said:

And for end this : PGI will not read this thread

- PGI won't look at this thread. They don't show themselves in the Feature Suggestion part of the forum and they will not show up here either.
Currently the only way to actually get word to them is through Twitter.
When the dev's are not present on their own forums except to give announcements something is criticaly wrong.

I know that they better spend time developing the game rather than reading the forums since there is more progress that way...but to use Twitter to communicate with the players is most definitivly a mistake.
If Russ has the time to say something on Twitter why don't he say it here instead?

Anyone talking to Russ on Twitter do me a favor please....ask him why he chose to communicate with the MWO community through Twitter.

Edited by Spleenslitta, 13 July 2016 - 02:15 PM.