65 replies to this topic

[adamts01]

I know it's a topic that's talked about all the time, but we have a huge patch coming up with a lot of good stuff and this was mentioned nowhere. Even Flamers got some attention. PSR is a huge can of worms, but Tiers should be simple. This is someone else's idea, I don't know who first suggested it.

Just go off percentages of the total population. Tier 1 is the best 20% of players, tier 4 is the next 20% and so on. Everyone fights their own tier. If there aren't enough players to fill 5 tiers, just make 4 tiers, or 3. Right now matches only go 3 ways anyway. Tier 1-3, 2-4 or 3-5.

I feel this is more important than weapon balance, mech balance, IS vs Clan... everyone has equal access to run the OP build if they like. If you're not matched with and against equal teammates and opponents the game is just frustrating.

[Screech]

If you are filling by percentages you will never run out of people to fill the tiers unless there are only 4 people.

[Monkey Lover]

I know lots of people who play all the time and are in the same tier they started off with. It seems to be working to help some of the lower skilled players.


Russ did say i think during the townhall but maybe tweeter they're going to adjust the Tier system.

[Lyoto Machida]

Tiers should be a rolling status based on percentile anyways...otherwise, everyone will be in Tier 1 eventually.

[Felicitatem Parco]

Tiers are meant to separate seasoned players from new players. They are not meant for fine discrimination or for epeen stroking.

The wait times would be much longer without the current 3-tier-wide windows; if you have to play in your own Tier, then your pool of match making options gets cut to 1/3 size, so imagine tripled wait times.

[Mystere]

Back to Elo then?

[adamts01]

Screech, on 04 February 2016 - 01:51 PM, said:

If you are filling by percentages you will never run out of people to fill the tiers unless there are only 4 people.

Sorry if I wasn't clear. Pretend there are 10,000 total players. 2,000 would be tier 1, 2,000 would be tier 2, and so on. If a tier 2 player was better than average, he would swap places with a tier 1 player who is worse than average. If there aren't enough players to split the population 5 ways and still get matches, then it could just be split 4 ways, or 3 ways.

Monkey Lover, on 04 February 2016 - 01:51 PM, said:

I know lots of people who play all the time and are in the same tier they started off with. It seems to be working to help some of the lower skilled players.

Russ did say i think during the townhall but maybe tweeter they're going to adjust the Tier system.

I know plenty of people hit a wall at tier 3 or 2, but tier 3s still go up against tier 1s and tier 5s. This would eliminate that. Even if there were only 3 tiers, I think it would be a massive improvement.

I think our current PSR system is decent enough, but MM isn't tight enough.

Prosperity Park, on 04 February 2016 - 02:01 PM, said:

Tiers are meant to separate seasoned players from new players. They are not meant for fine discrimination or for epeen stroking.

The wait times would be much longer without the current 3-tier-wide windows; if you have to play in your own Tier, then your pool of match making options gets cut to 1/3 size, so imagine tripled wait times.

I'm only concerned about quality of matches. I drop with a lot of comp players and I know I'm nowhere near good enough to brag. If wait time would be too long for 5 tiers, just make it 3 tiers.

[Lyoto Machida]

Prosperity Park, on 04 February 2016 - 02:01 PM, said:

Tiers are meant to separate seasoned players from new players. They are not meant for fine discrimination or for epeen stroking.

The wait times would be much longer without the current 3-tier-wide windows; if you have to play in your own Tier, then your pool of match making options gets cut to 1/3 size, so imagine tripled wait times.

He's not saying to get rid of tiers...he's referring to changing the way the players are distributed among them. If a player with 50 games under his belt happens to be a prodigy and playing at the same level as the top tier guys in the game, there's no reason he shouldn't be tier 1 with that few games. Otherwise, he'd have to grind for months and seal club the entire way up to tier 1.

[adamts01]

Mystere, on 04 February 2016 - 02:02 PM, said:

Back to Elo then?

I thought Elo always tried to balance wins/losses. It would place 6 scrubs alongside 6 vets and call that good. If you won that match, you'd get scrubbier teammates and better opponents till you lost.... I think segregation is important. That way scrubs can have fun killing scrubs and vets can have decent teammates and fight decent opponents. I don't see that with what we have. I can't comment much on elo because I really sucked back then and MWO is the only online game I've ever played.

[Mystere]

adamts01, on 04 February 2016 - 02:08 PM, said:

I thought Elo always tried to balance wins/losses. It would place 6 scrubs alongside 6 vets and call that good. If you won that match, you'd get scrubbier teammates and better opponents till you lost.... I think segregation is important. That way scrubs can have fun killing scrubs and vets can have decent teammates and fight decent opponents. I don't see that with what we have. I can't comment much on elo because I really sucked back then and MWO is the only online game I've ever played.

I meant fill tiers using the Elo rating via some distribution method.

[5LeafClover]

Monkey Lover, on 04 February 2016 - 01:51 PM, said:

I know lots of people who play all the time and are in the same tier they started off with. It seems to be working to help some of the lower skilled players.


Russ did say i think during the townhall but maybe tweeter they're going to adjust the Tier system.

I certainly seem to have plateau'd, so it seems to be working better than I first gave it credit for. I'd still prefer some kind of percentile based system, such as the OP suggests. It would be more transparent, though I can imagine it could be tricky working out what 100% means in real terms. e.g. how do you accurately calculate the active player base. You'd want to filter out players that have given up on MWO, but not those taking a couple of months break.

For me I find the PSR to typically give something like 1 big win, 2 small losses. At my equilibrium point, this means I'm normally losing, which doesn't feel great. A shift to a more neutral adjustment pattern (Less XP bar-ish) would lead to a more balanced win rate at equilibrium. Who knows, that might just pacify a portion of the rage quitters.

[Accused]

When will they implement Tier 0? My win/loss - k:d:r isn't changing.

[adamts01]

Accused, on 04 February 2016 - 02:21 PM, said:

When will they implement Tier 0? My win/loss - k:d:r isn't changing.

As in better than tier 1?

5LeafClover, on 04 February 2016 - 02:17 PM, said:

I certainly seem to have plateau'd, so it seems to be working better than I first gave it credit for. I'd still prefer some kind of percentile based system, such as the OP suggests. It would be more transparent, though I can imagine it could be tricky working out what 100% means in real terms. e.g. how do you accurately calculate the active player base. You'd want to filter out players that have given up on MWO, but not those taking a couple of months break.

For me I find the PSR to typically give something like 1 big win, 2 small losses. At my equilibrium point, this means I'm normally losing, which doesn't feel great. A shift to a more neutral adjustment pattern (Less XP bar-ish) would lead to a more balanced win rate at equilibrium. Who knows, that might just pacify a portion of the rage quitters.

Out of curiosity, do you find yourself in an equal amount of games with tier 5s as you do with tier 1s?

As it is, you're stuck going up against sharks the rest of you days in MWO. So it's either "get good" and bring meta or be happy being the low man on the totem pole. That sucks.

[Alistair Winter]

Do pure Tier 1 matches ever happen? Any Tier 1 players who can confirm or deny?

Not that you can ever be 100% certain as long as tiers are invisible in-game, of course. Gotta protect those epeens from low blows.

[adamts01]

Alistair Winter, on 04 February 2016 - 02:30 PM, said:

Do pure Tier 1 matches ever happen? Any Tier 1 players who can confirm or deny?

Not that you can ever be 100% certain as long as tiers are invisible in-game, of course. Gotta protect those epeens from low blows.

I'd guess maybe half the team during NA prime-time on a Saturday. In my timezone, I'd estimate 1-3 per team at best.

[Nightmare1]

Mystere, on 04 February 2016 - 02:02 PM, said:

Back to Elo then?

Please no. I never want to return to that nightmare.

[5LeafClover]

adamts01, on 04 February 2016 - 02:28 PM, said:

As in better than tier 1?


Out of curiosity, do you find yourself in an equal amount of games with tier 5s as you do with tier 1s?

As it is, you're stuck going up against sharks the rest of you days in MWO. So it's either "get good" and bring meta or be happy being the low man on the totem pole. That sucks.

Quite possibly, but I haven't figured out how you can tell others Tiers in game?

I'd quickly become bored if I decided to play LargeLasersOnline, so I'm plenty happy enough being mediocre for now, besides all this PSR business is more or less meaningless when I'm playing with my unit... erm... I mean my SNB pals.

[Monkey Lover]

Alistair Winter, on 04 February 2016 - 02:30 PM, said:

Do pure Tier 1 matches ever happen? Any Tier 1 players who can confirm or deny?

Not that you can ever be 100% certain as long as tiers are invisible in-game, of course. Gotta protect those epeens from low blows.

My understanding is you drop down to tier2 levels at 1 minute and tier3 after 2. I can say i often have to wait more than 3-4 minute.

Edited by Monkey Lover, 04 February 2016 - 04:03 PM.

[Tier 1 Smurf]

n the last town hall, right after all the ban wave stuff, Russ was talking about how he can see what were the last 30 matches to kick off, see the tier and average deviation. It seemed to me there were far fewer T1 matches going on than T3 and 4. He ever said there was a T3 vs T4 happening iirc. So I imagine T1s being rarer have the worst end of the MM.

[SQW]

adamts01, on 04 February 2016 - 01:48 PM, said:

I know it's a topic that's talked about all the time, but we have a huge patch coming up with a lot of good stuff and this was mentioned nowhere. Even Flamers got some attention. PSR is a huge can of worms, but Tiers should be simple. This is someone else's idea, I don't know who first suggested it.

Just go off percentages of the total population. Tier 1 is the best 20% of players, tier 4 is the next 20% and so on. Everyone fights their own tier. If there aren't enough players to fill 5 tiers, just make 4 tiers, or 3. Right now matches only go 3 ways anyway. Tier 1-3, 2-4 or 3-5.

I feel this is more important than weapon balance, mech balance, IS vs Clan... everyone has equal access to run the OP build if they like. If you're not matched with and against equal teammates and opponents the game is just frustrating.

Seriously?

And just how will you rate the players as GOOD? K/D rate? DMG per game? Time logged in? Number of mastered mechs? Mix of everything? Your method automatically assumes player skill is a knowable quantity which if that is so, PGI's Tier system would work far better than what you are proposing. Also, if Tier 1 will only ever have 20% of total population, who on earth would want to advance to a rank where you have to queue for 15min?

And if you know how percentages work, dropping 5 tiers to 4 tiers wouldn't make a difference. lol

Go back to the drawing board OP.

Edited by SQW, 04 February 2016 - 04:16 PM.