26 replies to this topic

[Wintersdark]

MarsThunder, on 11 March 2016 - 10:36 AM, said:

My suggestion: let the matchmaker to construct drops with less skills spread. It could increase wait time though.

Availability is the issue, sir.

It's not that the Matchmaker simply decides to have a lot of skill spread because HAHAHAHA LOL LOOK AT THE TERRIBLE MATCHES!

The number one goal is to get the best matches possible, within a reasonable time frame. There has to be a limit: a great many players have constrained gaming time, and pushing several minute waits detracts enormously from how many matches they can play (or if they can play at all!)

So there's not a lot of flexibility there.

But the significant factor is simply player counts. There's a lot of players, but this is a hard nut to crack. I've done the math before in another post, but in short:

Consider - of the current online players, how many are:
1) Actively searching for a match? You probably spend no more than 1 minute in 10 searching, and that's if you're banging off match after match after match, not playing in the mechlab, getting snacks, watching tv, chatting, etc. That's at best only 10% of the online players searching, but I know I spend far less time searching for matches and lots more time dicking around in the mech lab.
2) In the relevant queue? If you're in CW, or in the Group Queue, you're not helping in the solo queue. Lets assume 80% of players are in the solo queue.
3) At the correct tier? 20% per tier.

We're already at 10%*80%*20%=1.6% of the concurrent playerbase assuming every single player is banging off match after match. And we haven't talked about weight class yet.

Finally, tiers. Tiers are more an experience bar than overall skill assessment, and indeed actually measuring player skill is extraordinarily difficult. So, it's really hard for the MM to know actually how skilled a given player is. And from there, is he on the ball? I know I have some matches where I'm really in the right head space, and I'm an extremely dangerous player. And on the other hand, I have lots (and lots, and lots) of matches where I'm also parenting, so I'm paying way less attention to the game, and am vastly more likely to make stupid choices. Or, just matches where I'm derping off and playing stupid builds and such as opposed to busting out my best mechs and playing hard. There's simply no way for the MM to know.

What it boils down to is this: Matchmaking is about the best it can be given the constraints on it right now.

[ice trey]

Durant Carlyle, on 11 March 2016 - 05:07 PM, said:

Just remember that the new game isn't MechWarrior -- it's basically MechCommander III. It's a totally different genre, not a replacement. Controlling a lance from on high is cool and all, but it's a totally different experience than fighting from the cockpit.

I'm looking forward to the new game too (Backer #1,858 for $450), but it won't ever replace MechWarrior.

I'm on the same page as you, don't worry.

However, as a life-long Mechwarrior fan, I've played single player campaigns. During those days, online play was... an option... but only people rich enough to have the fabled "Cable Internet" could viably play. Instead, I was raised playing single player games. Emphasis on setting was important, even if the game was little more than an arcade game. Titles like the original Half Life, Descent, Dark Forces, and so many more had single player campaigns that really drew you in, and made you feel like you were really taking part in the universe set out in front of you. That was part of what I loved about the Mechwarrior series of games. You were drawn into these alien worlds, often with insurmountable odds, all building up to a climax. Mechwarrior 2 Mercenaries did an even better job, putting diary logs between each mission to give you a better understanding of just what was happening. Whether it was being trained by a mechwarrior you weren't 100% sure wasn't a psychopath, or taking a contract where Drac Mechwarriors you're fighting for walk into a city and mow down protesters with machine guns and flamers... Where the manual warned you that, while your mech could be customized, there was a risk that you couldn't repair it anymore (So I never did, and learned to appreciate 'mechs for their stock configs, even though I would later find out that it was never programmed into the game to act that way). Mechwarrior 3 did a good job of branching the story together so that there was a single, overarching objective that you worked your way towards, bit by bit, and Mechwarrior 4 did a good job of making your lancemates go from being stats and a voice to being real, believable (if badly acted) people who you cared about if they died in a fight.

And then for ten years, there was nothing. Mektek had mekpacks that (Luckily) were able to spice up the MW4Mercs single player campaign through some workarounds, but after a half hour of playing Multiplayer, I would quickly regret it. Bland mission modes, 90% turning off ammo and heat, and nothing but assault-mech jumpsniping being viable. Again, Living Legends. NEW MAPS! BETTER GRAPHICS! they said... but where was the single player campaign I wanted? The thing to draw me into the setting? None. By that point, games had gone from being singleplayer games with a tacked on multiplayer campaign to nothing but multiplayer. AI was too big and too scary for anyone to even bother trying to attempt to tackle, and everyone was so spoiled by the multi-million Triple A single player games that anything less meant your game "Sucks".

So here I am. not because it's the best option, but because it's the only option. Studios won't make the single player campaign. Modding Communities won't do single player campaigns anymore. I can't program.

So yeah, HBS Battletech isn't Mechwarrior, but as far as I'm concerned, neither is this.

[Azurhoden]

Hmmm, um, well, since I haven't seen it mentioned anywhere else, and unless I am terribly mistaken, the PSR (the Tier ranking system used by the MatchMaker), is not in fact a merrit based system, that is to say, it is slanted toward progress.
The PSR works on how many matches you've been in and not really on how good or bad a pilot you are in any given match. Oh those numbers are still assessed, but unless you are doing alot of team damage under a team penatly system that hasn't even been introduces into the game yet, then any winning match will undo 2 to 3 losing matches every time.

So the argument about never getting tier 1's mixed up with tier 5's is a little misleading, as people that may be tier 5 players are getting advanced into tier 4 - 3 regardless of wether they are actually learning to become better pilots. You see I've tried porposefully keeping my matches low yeild to see if I could go back down the PSR to tier 4 or 5, and in order to be able to accomplish that you have to do some extraordinary things, some of which violate PGI's concept of how a player should behave (not that PGI gets any say in how I behave to begin with but, whatever).

More importantly, the matchmaking system can only pull from those players online at the time. So the big problem is a dwindling player base (the very reason why they had to implement that broke-@$$, bull s-h-i-t, voting system). More players would make things like that idiotic voting system obsolete. But because MWO has appeal with a player base that is almost its own cult following, there are those who will be loyal no matter how badly PGI S-H-I-T-s on the title. In addition, PGI sees the C-o-D kiddys and they are determined to find a way to get in on some of that sweet LCD money. Would you walk away from a fool and his money? Nope, and neither will PGI.

But if they would just make the game playable and fun, instead of caving to the LCD kids, or implementing things that will obviously piss off the player base, to the point where PGI has to penalize the players to make them interact with PGI's terrible excuse for a game, they'd be making money hand over fist like Blizzard does.

But the game isn't fun anymore, and doesn't inspire players to want to play, so much so that this incarnation of MechWarrior has joined the Call-of-Duty moron crowd. Grab yur self a BIG GUN and go a-shootin. But if you have any hope of group mechanics or team strategy, you should go play something else, because you wont find that here.

Even in unit play, this game is more about who can jump the other guy first, or whose got the best ranged meta, and not about anything even remotely resembling strategy. But PGI is a company out to make money, so sidle up to the trough everyone, cuz PGI will feed any pig that grunts to their tune, and boy, howdy, there sure are alot of them.

So I guess what I'm saying is "Don't bother blaming PGI for the expansive population of Lowest Common Denominator players. Stupid is as stupid does.

Live and Learn or You don't Live long

[ImperialKnight]

I like how OP is complaining about the ONLY thing stopping his face getting stomped even harder by Tier 1 players. Russ already said before the bracket for matchmaker is +/- 2.

Meaning Tier 5 players will only ever meet Tier 3 players at best.

If OP just wants a mode that he can QQ around shooting stuff without getting hit, that's called "Training Grounds"

[Krivvan]

Bud Crue, on 11 March 2016 - 06:17 AM, said:

I think that activity (I can't call it a game) would be boring as heck.

At that point, if there isn't something like a story to go with it, it's essentially a toy.

But yeah, OP, have you maybe considered that those competitive players are playing for, well, fun? Are you saying we don't play in sports leagues for fun? Or chess clubs for fun? Or any number of hobbies that are games against other people?

If you don't like competition, that's alright. It just means this isn't the game for you, and neither is any PvP game really. They may add some small co-op stuff against AI in the future, but it's never going to be the focus of the game.

Asking for the game to no longer be competitive is like complaining that players who play chess are trying to win instead of "going outside and getting a real life." Or that players trying to win a game of football/soccer aren't "going outside and getting a real life" instead.

Edited by Krivvan, 12 March 2016 - 03:24 AM.

[Tarogato]

Anybody who complains about or even uses the word "tryhard" must simply have an aversion to winning. Which makes no sense to me, because they still complain when they lose.

[Bad Pun]

@ OP, I simply must agree with the dissenting opinion. I personally like that there's some sort of rating system going on and I would prefer it to be improved.

As it is, it's more of a case of working with what we have. MWO has a relatively small player base, which IMO is due to a low profile to the game. If there was a bit more advertisements for MWO I think it would grow quite a bit and allow for maybe ten tiers of players.

I would suggest trying to get more players into MWO rather than object to a working model of what would improve with a larger sample size of players.