76 replies to this topic

[Sandpit]

Lily from animove, on 03 March 2016 - 09:30 AM, said:

But scoring has it's part in this bad judgement, because actualyl the game is not able to identify how much of an individual players performance added to a win. Make a capture win and you have a lousy score. While in fact those people capturing were the ones repsosible for the win.

That's where a weighted system using a traditional curve comes in and would do that based on match score.

If I get a match score of 350
and the next highest match score on my team is 100

I did everything I could to help the team overall, regardless of match outcome in terms of win or loss

[Lily from animove]

Sandpit, on 03 March 2016 - 09:42 AM, said:

That's where a weighted system using a traditional curve comes in and would do that based on match score.

If I get a match score of 350
and the next highest match score on my team is 100

I did everything I could to help the team overall, regardless of match outcome in terms of win or loss

yes taking the other gamers into account is alos needed, iif everoyne averages out at the same score the match was equal and fine. then the people with lower PSR's shoudl get ups, the ones with highers probably downs. And the ones in the middle should stay.

if some gyus stand out (positively and negatively) this should also be reflected in adjustment. It is a RATING at all, and to rate it needs to compare my performance with the others. .

[Mystere]

Mister Blastman, on 03 March 2016 - 09:37 AM, said:

If there is a system it can be gamed. Humans are resourceful creatures.

Well, I'd rather players game a system based on winning rather than one based on damage. At worst, the hanger-on with a propensity for winning is a very lucky mascot, while John James Rambo at worst causes the team's loss through selfishness.

Edited by Mystere, 03 March 2016 - 09:55 AM.

[Mister Blastman]

L A V A, on 03 March 2016 - 09:39 AM, said:

Oh come on.

Certainly you realize that many folks, especially high tiered ones, do everything they can to avoid damage.

If they have even a whiff of a possible loss coming, they will hide in the back and spend the whole game doing whatever it takes to stay alive so that they can accumulate enough damage that the resulting loss will not effect their PSR.

You think folks get to Tier 1 by sacrifice their robot's health in Pug games?

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or serious...

I maxed out my Tier 1 bar by leading every charge, soaking damage and smashing robots. I'm usually the first one to the front line, the first to see an enemy and the first to get hit.

And the top players that I know of do the same exact thing.

Edited by Mister Blastman, 03 March 2016 - 09:52 AM.

[Mister Blastman]

Mystere, on 03 March 2016 - 09:50 AM, said:

Well, I'd rather players game a system based on winning rather than one based on damage. As worst, the hanger-on with a propensity for winning is a mascot, while John James Rambo at worst causes the team's loss through selfishness.

Well winning and damage go hand in hand. To maintain 1.3 - 1.5+ win/loss ratio (200 - 500+ drops) you've got to score upwards of 500 damage a drop in the solo queue.

Players who chronically do less than 150 damage are a disservice to the team.

[Sandpit]

Lily from animove, on 03 March 2016 - 09:45 AM, said:

yes taking the other gamers into account is alos needed, iif everoyne averages out at the same score the match was equal and fine. then the people with lower PSR's shoudl get ups, the ones with highers probably downs. And the ones in the middle should stay.

if some gyus stand out (positively and negatively) this should also be reflected in adjustment. It is a RATING at all, and to rate it needs to compare my performance with the others. .

Agreed

It's a personal rating score and as much as people, myself included, push that this is a team based game, this score is still an individual score to reflect that one player's skill rating in order to help match them up with others in a similar skill level.

That's the entire point of the system. It's not about who's "better", it's about helping the MM find that individual games that they won't get blown out in or blow out the other team commonly.

The match score, to me, is a good reflection of how you performed on your team as a whole because it doesn't exclusively rely on damage or win/loss

You get bonuses for being in your lance.
You get bonuses for most damage deal
You get bonuses for assists
You get bonuses for UAV
You get bonuses for scouting
You get bonuses for capping
You get bonuses for savior kills
You get bonuses for AMS (well they're working on this one anyhow)


Point being, match score takes into consideration a lot of different factors. Personally I'd like to see the whole formula reworked in regards to match score so that a lot of those things I listed above are weighted a little more heavily in the match score and cbills earned

[L A V A]

Lily from animove, on 03 March 2016 - 09:42 AM, said:

avoiding damage, YES but not hiding. because hiding is when you miss the opportuntaties to get in better positions or doing damage. Good gameplay even in pug relies on aggressive gameplay with a good portion of risk. (And seismic)

I would hardly characterize high tier players gameplay when they think they MIGHT lose as aggressive. I would characterize it as totally selfish.

Left flank under heavy pressure... these folks aren't going to rush over there and help. They are going to move to a position where they can deal damage knowing that no one is going to be shooting at them. They will sit there quite happily racking up damage and watching as their team gets crushed.

And they are rewarded for this behavior...

I see this ALL THE TIME in pug games. You don't?

[Sandpit]

Mister Blastman, on 03 March 2016 - 09:54 AM, said:

Players who chronically do less than 150 damage are a disservice to the team.

That's not entirely true either.

A light scout mech may not break that damage threshhold.
Damage is not the only or main indicator of how well you supported your team. There's a lot of stuff that you can't quantify.

That light mech that only did 150 damage, but tied up 3 heavies for 5 minutes of the match.
That light mech only did 50 damage but that's because he was running at 140/kph making the enemy team chase the squirrel

[Mister Blastman]

Sandpit, on 03 March 2016 - 10:06 AM, said:

That's not entirely true either.

A light scout mech may not break that damage threshhold.
Damage is not the only or main indicator of how well you supported your team. There's a lot of stuff that you can't quantify.

That light mech that only did 150 damage, but tied up 3 heavies for 5 minutes of the match.
That light mech only did 50 damage but that's because he was running at 140/kph making the enemy team chase the squirrel

So I went back through my recent game history (I screenshot every drop I see a score screen on which is most) and more often than not, the sub 100s and sub 150s were players in assault and heavy 'mechs with a slightly lesser amount in mediums. Light 'mechs do show up sometimes with sub 100 but they are rare compared with the assaults and heavies.

Those assault and heavy pilots who frequently do less than 100 damage are failures and need to be sequestered.

Note I said frequently. I did 48 damage in my HGN last night one drop due to being impatient and teammates hiding behind rocks. We all have those games. But to do it four or five games in a row takes talent.

[Sandpit]

Mister Blastman, on 03 March 2016 - 10:18 AM, said:

So I went back through my recent game history (I screenshot every drop I see a score screen on which is most) and more often than not, the sub 100s and sub 150s were players in assault and heavy 'mechs with a slightly lesser amount in mediums. Light 'mechs do show up sometimes with sub 100 but they are rare compared with the assaults and heavies.

what does that have to do with my statement though?

[Mister Blastman]

Sandpit, on 03 March 2016 - 10:26 AM, said:

what does that have to do with my statement though?

Only that I think it is rare a useful light 'mech that harasses does less than 150 damage. Most of the best light 'mech players I see in games often do 350+.

If you aren't doing your armor's total point value in damage you aren't pulling your weight (rare circumstances aside where the light 'mech does run the whole time while the derps chase the squirrel).

The cutoff average damage useful threshold is 500 pts. That's really the benchmark to strive for. Assaults aren't going to realistically average 600+ damage a drop, not even a Wubshee (though the best pilots might and do get close).

Edited by Mister Blastman, 03 March 2016 - 10:31 AM.

[Sandpit]

Mister Blastman, on 03 March 2016 - 10:29 AM, said:

Only that I think it is rare a useful light 'mech that harasses does less than 150 damage. Most of the best light 'mech players I see in games often do 350+.

I never said anything about harassing, that's my point.

The examples I gave were to show how a light mech can be extremely useful, lead directly to a team win, and do under 150 damage

[Mister Blastman]

Sandpit, on 03 March 2016 - 10:40 AM, said:

I never said anything about harassing, that's my point.

The examples I gave were to show how a light mech can be extremely useful, lead directly to a team win, and do under 150 damage

They can.

But I think more often than not they'll do more than 150 damage while being useful.

[Sandpit]

Mister Blastman, on 03 March 2016 - 10:42 AM, said:

They can.

But I think more often than not they'll do more than 150 damage while being useful.

That's the entire point though and exactly why you can't base it entirely, or (at least in my opinion) real heavily on damage.


A system like this will never work, at least not well, if it's based on a select few metrics. The more metrics that you can include and give a more equal weighting to, the more accurate it is going to be.

That's for any system like this, video game or otherwise. When you start placing more weight and/or heavy emphasis on one or two metrics, you're biasing the entire system to those metrics and they become the entire basis of what's "important".

[Mister Blastman]

Sandpit, on 03 March 2016 - 10:49 AM, said:

That's the entire point though and exactly why you can't base it entirely, or (at least in my opinion) real heavily on damage.


A system like this will never work, at least not well, if it's based on a select few metrics. The more metrics that you can include and give a more equal weighting to, the more accurate it is going to be.

That's for any system like this, video game or otherwise. When you start placing more weight and/or heavy emphasis on one or two metrics, you're biasing the entire system to those metrics and they become the entire basis of what's "important".

Sure, I can agree with that.

I only talk about damage as a way to measure worth for penalties, not advancement. If a player is doing less than 100 or 150 three to five drops in a row, stick 'em in a penalty box where they play with other users who are underperforming, too.

But I think the metrics to raise the skill bar need to be complicated as you say--and based on a moving bell-curve average of whoever is in that tier so it isn't a fixed target.

It is harder to game the system when the target is constantly moving due to true player performance.

[Haakon Magnusson]

PEEFsmash, on 02 March 2016 - 11:06 AM, said:

Actually, the -only- thing that should count is wins and losses. You are the only constant factor in your games. The way you win doesn't have to be through damage. The damage role is not for every mech. If you do your part, whatever your part is and no matter how intangible thru stats (like spotting a push on seismic and calling it out, directing friendlies to cap or counter-cap, holding locks, etc), if you are pulling a high winrate, the factor in the long term must be you. The only factor that should matter is your impact on winning the game, which can only be measured by whether you win or not.

Largely I agree, you are the constant on matches. Even if you somehow manage low damage and pointwise performance, you can be the rabbit that pulls silly enemies to chase giving allies opportunity to wipe them.

But seems the unwashed matches do not agree that you are the constant giving wins (which is obviously reflected by w/l)

[Sandpit]

Mister Blastman, on 03 March 2016 - 10:53 AM, said:

Sure, I can agree with that.

I only talk about damage as a way to measure worth for penalties, not advancement. If a player is doing less than 100 or 150 three to five drops in a row, stick 'em in a penalty box where they play with other users who are underperforming, too.

But I think the metrics to raise the skill bar need to be complicated as you say--and based on a moving bell-curve average of whoever is in that tier so it isn't a fixed target.

It is harder to game the system when the target is constantly moving due to true player performance.

I just think you get a more accurate depiction of an individual's PSR when it's compared to the entire team and based on some sort of sliding scale from there in regards to how much you gain or lose in PSR for that match