285 replies to this topic

[MechPorn]

It is a matter of the larger units spoiling the game for their own ends. You point to PGI failing the community and I point at large units failing the community. You had/have an opportunity to create a viable experience for the community and choose repeatedly to not to do so.

Your unit is to large to make a viable experience in such a small community of players. You repeatedly ask how you are are exploiting the game asking for screenshoots and like crap. All you need to do is look at the size of -MS- and their recruitment guild as well. Your group (the biggest one) has repeatedly choosen to be in the same clan/IS house as the other big guilds. Your inability to see how this affects the game as a whole is astounding to say the least. As one of the largest guilds in the game you should be setting examples not throwing torches on the fire.

But alas, you cannot understand this and have not sense the first community warfare drop. I doubt you will be able to understand it now as well.

Edited by MechPorn, 22 May 2016 - 11:18 AM.

[ccrider]

Ms is not this giant boogie man, ruining FP like people are trying to portray them; on a non-event weekend, I've at most run into 1 full 12 man and a partial of MS and my unit actively hunts for top units to fight. We have 118 members but our average number on at one time is 8 players. At that rate, being 3 times our size, MS would hVe 24 on at a time? That's a far cry from this tidal wave of MS zerglings swamping the queue and absorbing everything in sight.

[Helsbane]

MechPorn, on 22 May 2016 - 08:18 AM, said:

It is a matter of the larger units spoiling the game for their own ends. You point to PGI failing the community and I point at large units failing the community. You had/have an opportunity to create a viable experience for the community and cboose repeatedly to not to do so. Your unit is to large to make a viable experience in such a small community of players. You repeatedly ask how you are are exploiting the game asking for screenshoots and like crap. All you need to do is look at the size of -MS- and their recruitment guild as well. Your group (the biggest one) has repeatedly choosen to be in the same clan/IS house as the other big guilds. Your inability to see how this affects the game as a whole is astounding to say the least. As one of the largest guilds in the game you should be setting examples not throwing torches on the fire. But alas, you cannot understand this and have not sense the first community warfare drop. I doubt you will be able to understand it now as well.

So, if I'm reading this correctly, it's on us to make the game better for you. Did I read this correctly? We're to take a game that we have zero control over development wise, and make it a better experience for Mechporn & Co. Right?

[KinLuu]

Helsbane, on 22 May 2016 - 08:56 AM, said:

So, if I'm reading this correctly, it's on us to make the game better for you. Did I read this correctly? We're to take a game that we have zero control over development wise, and make it a better experience for Mechporn & Co. Right?

No, his argument is that you are making their experience worse. And he wants you to stop doing that.

It is a clash of interests.

[Randy Poffo]

KinLuu, on 22 May 2016 - 09:15 AM, said:

No, his argument is that you are making their experience worse. And he wants you to stop doing that.

It is a clash of interests.

The funny thing is that it's sort of not even a clash of interests. That is, the current situation makes things worse for Mercstar as well. The primary difference here is that large units have enough players that they can change the dynamic if they want to, while smaller units just have to sort of live with it as it is.

[VaudeVillain]

I'd like to see something like Merc units have generic contracts and also allow Loyalist units to offer contracts and payment either be something like 80% generic contract amounts plus additional money paid by the unit so the Merc unit represents the Loyalits unit or letting the Merc unit put their tag on the planet and receive the MC. The Merc unit would be limited to contracts for the faction and its allies. And maybe have something like 1 day, 1 week, 2 week contracts.

For Lone Wolves, there would be daily generic contracts offered for each faction with daily change of payout bonuses. The Lone Wolf could change the faction they support for each match. Merc and Loyalist units would be able to offer contracts as well that pay so much additional C-Bills per match, but they pick the planet.

[MischiefSC]

Adamski, on 21 May 2016 - 11:34 PM, said:

I guess I'm not getting the idea across then:
Solo Queue: Solo players, limited to 2 players from the same unit
Group Queue: Groups of 2-10, and 12

The players that always drop solo and never work with the team, are no longer in the Group queue, and facing premades.
Premade groups no longer have to face skittles to stomp, and instead can look forward to decent battles

I didn't say that 2 man groups would be excluded from the group queue, just that more than 2 players from the same unit cannot drop solo in the solo queue, this is to prevent sync dropping.

And the "Rambo Queue" as you call it, would have been sustaining, if PGI hadn't double split it into Loyalist Rambos and Freelancer Rambos, while simultaneously excluding solo players from casual units that don't join premades.

And stop saying that everyone is excluded from the group queue unless they build a premade. All they have to do is group with 1 other person, either through Faction Chat, LFG Tool, Unit Chat, or out of game Chat / Grouping systems. Even my unit is frequently able to do that, and we only have 10 active players total, and we are spread across all the timezones.

The LFG Tool works great, when players have a reason to use it, remember the last Tukayyid battle where all the 12 mans kept jumping to the front of the queue because any time a single player left the queue, it would reshuffle all of the other solo players to the back of the line? The Solo players learned to use the LFG Tool really quick, and it was very well populated during that event.

Again, most the people pugging in FW have unit tags. They didn't have the time or inclination to build a group first, still wanted to play and almost certainly wanted to play with other group-minded players and not the generally agreed upon nightmare of a bunch of 'i do what I want' rambo players.

Your system offers absolutely nothing to benefit unit players. Nothing. All it does is force me to wait until I get a group built before I can play FW or be consigned to a matchmaker-less QP environment to try and artificially inflate solo queue populations.

The solo queue would have worked as designed if people had gone to the attack queue. Players would rather make a solo unit and play with unit players in the unit queue than elect of their own volition to get in the attack queue and draw Freelancers. If unit players had really wanted to play in that environment they could have dropped tags and done so. Nobody did, the opposite happened.

I get that grouping up is no big deal in NA primetime in FRR. Tell you what, why don't you make an alt and go play at 4AM in Wolf and then don't play FW unless you group up.

The only outcome of your system, the only outcome at all, is less populous times go bone dry empty and the exact same people who were in solo queue before will be in it this time refusing to get in the same attack lanes to build drops and a ton of us, everyone who actually wants to play with teamwork in a team game, all the people who've joined units for a reason but happen to be playing at a time or a situation where we don't want to spend 30 minutes trying to get grouped up before we play FW... all of us would pretty much just leave because playing in solo queue is literally 10x worse than even the worst QP experience.

[MechPorn]

Helsbane, on 22 May 2016 - 08:56 AM, said:

So, if I'm reading this correctly, it's on us to make the game better for you. Did I read this correctly? We're to take a game that we have zero control over development wise, and make it a better experience for Mechporn & Co. Right?

I knew you would not get it. It is not about me, or you. It is about the community as a whole and the responsibility of the units to not unbalance the game for selfish reasons.

I know you will not care in the slightest, as long as your team remains the one of the dominate guilds in MWO. There is no reason for you to change or to improve the game and the community as whole. It's human nature to be greedy and not look past that for any reason.

As a group of 300+ members it is not your responsibility to police the faction warfare, but it is up to you to not unbalance it for the whole community.

I know you have no control over what is being developed and never explained that you had even the slightest input into that. What I was saying that it is up to the large guilds to not unbalance the game.

[MischiefSC]

Helsbane, on 22 May 2016 - 08:56 AM, said:

So, if I'm reading this correctly, it's on us to make the game better for you. Did I read this correctly? We're to take a game that we have zero control over development wise, and make it a better experience for Mechporn & Co. Right?

You guys keep losing the context of this. You're on the wrong side of some very specific pieces of human nature.

Analogy -

There's a tax loophole where if you get enough people to build a dummy corporation and claim social networking is part of their business you can get hundreds and hundreds of people to only pay a fraction of the taxes they normally would for doing all the things they normally do. Going out, driving around, going to the movies. In fact if you live in the same apartment complex and you're crafty about it you can pretty much write off your living expenses.

So say in a town of 2,000 people there's 1,500 people who pay 35% of their income in state and local taxes and 500 people who play about 5%. There's a revenue shortfall to meet all the towns desired obligations so they're talking about having to raise taxes which, again, isn't going to bug that 500 people who really don't pay any. That 500 has more money, indeed they effectively make 30% more money than everyone else doing the same job.

So the rest of the town hates them. Sure you could argue that the problem is the tax law loophole. That 500 people actually hustles quite a bit to fully exploit the flaws in the system to the most benefit and it benefits them considerably - even if it functionally punishes everyone else. They ask why everyone else doesn't exploit the system they do, seemingly oblivious to the fact that if everyone did that there would be no way to support any of the social services, roads, etc. that everyone needs. Everything falls apart if everyone is exploiting flaws in the system.

That's you guys. MS functions by playing FW like it's QP, hopping around and absolutely ******* the map for everyone else, ignoring all the factions and stuff, attempts at politics and just dunking to flip dots on the map and get matches wherever they can. Why? Because that's the incredibly badly designed game that PGI made, realized they seem to lack the competency to fix and have pretty much decided to abandon.

You guys however are the ones benefiting from it because you're playing to how broken it is. You're a group of units who've banded together to inflate numbers and specialize in the rush and dunk, only play attack queue to maximize the number of pug/skittle teams you play against.

Look, I like MS. Played there a couple weeks, had a lot of fun, like a lot of the people I played with there. Have a ton of positive things to say about MS. You're the badguys in a lot of ways though from the perspective from anyone who wants FW to be what PGI originally promised and not the steaming, vile pile of **** that they've given us. I get that a lot of MS players would really be happiest if FW was just maps and modes for QP or there was just one queue; IS vs Clan or the like. You're not obligated to really care how anyone else feels about the game or what they want out of it. However understand that most people in FW don't agree and wanted it to be something more and have regularly worked to try and make it something more and MS tends to stomp on that in passing while going LoL, Skittles!

How do you expect people to respond?

[MechPorn]

Mischief gets it.

[Randy Poffo]

MischiefSC, on 22 May 2016 - 10:49 AM, said:

The solo queue would have worked as designed if people had gone to the attack queue. Players would rather make a solo unit and play with unit players in the unit queue than elect of their own volition to get in the attack queue and draw Freelancers. If unit players had really wanted to play in that environment they could have dropped tags and done so. Nobody did, the opposite happened.

I've tried to give you the benefit of the doubt on this on multiple occasions, but you keep repeating this distorted claim.

The only way to "get in the attack queue" under their solo queue system was to lock yourself into a faction as a solo loyalist - with retributive penalties for ever changing - and there are plenty of reasons why people would not have wanted to do that. Some people just aesthetically don't think of themselves as loyalist, some were worried about the C-bills, and others just wanted to see what the solo queue was like without making a commitment so that they could join a unit if they liked it.

Perhaps more people would have gone solo loyalist in time once they figured out what was going on - because it was far from transparent to the average player exactly what was happening with the queues. Nor was it clear whether the problem was going to be a long-term issue or whether some of the people who were just testing the waters would naturally shift to solo loyalists; I for one was willing to wait and see. But Russ announced it was going away within what, two or three days after it started? At that point even if some freelancers could have gone solo loyalist to get the queues going more frequently it wouldn't matter at all, the solo queue was going away no matter what you did.

Stop trying to blame this on the solo queue players. It was a viable system that could have worked out, as you said, but it was never given a real chance and that's not the fault of the players.

[MischiefSC]

Randy Poffo, on 22 May 2016 - 11:08 AM, said:

I've tried to give you the benefit of the doubt on this on multiple occasions, but you keep repeating this distorted claim.

The only way to "get in the attack queue" under their solo queue system was to lock yourself into a faction as a solo loyalist - with retributive penalties for ever changing - and there are plenty of reasons why people would not have wanted to do that. Some people just aesthetically don't think of themselves as loyalist, some were worried about the C-bills, and others just wanted to see what the solo queue was like without making a commitment so that they could join a unit if they liked it.

Perhaps more people would have gone solo loyalist in time once they figured out what was going on - because it was far from transparent to the average player exactly what was happening with the queues. Nor was it clear whether the problem was going to be a long-term issue or whether some of the people who were just testing the waters would naturally shift to solo loyalists; I for one was willing to wait and see. But Russ announced it was going away within what, two or three days after it started? At that point even if some freelancers could have gone solo loyalist to get the queues going more frequently it wouldn't matter at all, the solo queue was going away no matter what you did.

Stop trying to blame this on the solo queue players. It was a viable system that could have worked out, as you said, but it was never given a real chance and that's not the fault of the players.

Except belonging to factions is the whole point of FW. You're proving my point; you didn't want to play FW, you wanted FW maps/modes in a QP environment.

What you're going over is exactly why the queues were split - there's a big gulf in the mentality of approach and why someone plays between a unit member and a solo player. That's okay, FW though is designed for the teamwork mentality. You can solo in it - I pug most of the time in FW when I play, I just work to plug in with whatever units I drop with. A lot of us do. However I understand the teamwork nature of the game and I took the time to learn how it worked. You don't play FW for quick matches that's for sure.

Russ got rid of it because nobody was in it. After a few days the population of solo players wasn't enough to sustain the servers it was taking up. Could it have improved if given more time? Possibly. I agree it went away too quickly and complained about that at the time, however solo players were never a significant part of FWs population. Most the 'solo' players have always been unit members pugging, long before the queue split. The hope was that the promise of a solo queue would draw more people from QP to FW. That didn't happen in the speed PGI wanted and so they scrapped it. The problems with FW were never 'units stomping pugs'. That was always a byproduct of having split attack/defend queues anyway. It's the more endemic flaws that would need a bit more effort to fix and 'a bit more effort' is one of those development skills PGI has never been able to develop.

[Breidr]

As a solo loyalist, the mode is crap. I came back to see what's changed, and I can say I'm off again. Stop trying to sell me 'mech packs for an arena shooter and give me a decent game.

[Randy Poffo]

MischiefSC, on 22 May 2016 - 11:21 AM, said:

Except belonging to factions is the whole point of FW. You're proving my point; you didn't want to play FW, you wanted FW maps/modes in a QP environment.

What you're going over is exactly why the queues were split - there's a big gulf in the mentality of approach and why someone plays between a unit member and a solo player. That's okay, FW though is designed for the teamwork mentality. You can solo in it - I pug most of the time in FW when I play, I just work to plug in with whatever units I drop with. A lot of us do. However I understand the teamwork nature of the game and I took the time to learn how it worked. You don't play FW for quick matches that's for sure.

Russ got rid of it because nobody was in it. After a few days the population of solo players wasn't enough to sustain the servers it was taking up. Could it have improved if given more time? Possibly. I agree it went away too quickly and complained about that at the time, however solo players were never a significant part of FWs population. Most the 'solo' players have always been unit members pugging, long before the queue split. The hope was that the promise of a solo queue would draw more people from QP to FW. That didn't happen in the speed PGI wanted and so they scrapped it. The problems with FW were never 'units stomping pugs'. That was always a byproduct of having split attack/defend queues anyway. It's the more endemic flaws that would need a bit more effort to fix and 'a bit more effort' is one of those development skills PGI has never been able to develop.

You don't have any idea how many solo players there were, and neither does PGI, because neither you nor they have any way to count how many Freelancers were sitting there wanting to join but unable to.

The point you seem to be pushing here is that nobody should have been Freelancers, that a Freelance style of play is counter to the spirit of FW, etc. OK, if that's the case, don't include it. By including it, PGI effectively told players "this is a way to play, with its own advantages and disadvantages" - but it turned out it was not really a way to play at all. If PGI really didn't want freelancers it would have been vastly better to not include the option, and then we would have actually gotten to see how many solo players there were that wanted to try out FW. But that manifestly did *not* happen, and blindly repeating Russ on this point just shows that you're not really willing to think about root causes.

Also, don't tell me what my "mentality" is or what I want, especially if you're just going to wildly speculate. What I wanted was to get a sense of the new system to decide whether it was viable and fun, or whether it was the same crap as before. I actually did want to find a unit if it looked like the mode was going to survive, but what I won't do is join a unit *first* to try it out, decide it's crap, and then bail on them. It is because I want the mode to be viable and fun - for unit players as well - that I want the experience of solo players to improve, because that's the only way you're ever going to get the population to increase. If solo players do not see the mode as fun and viable, their response is not going to be to go find a unit to join, their response is going to be to go play other games that *are* fun and viable. And you can say "good riddance" to them, but in the meantime FW pop will shrivel up and die, so have fun with that.

[Danjo San]

It's all in the numbers. If Mercstar only had 30-50 Players in their Unit I doubt anyone would complain about them. Don't hear anyone breaking water over smaller mercenary Units hopping factions... It's the numbers.
If you compare it to other teamsports out there in real life, like say american football, what do you have?
11 Players on the field, 45 in the team on gameday, 53max.
Seems legit...
Now how would the NFL be interesting if say there still were only 11 Players on the field, but you had 300 on the bench, or roster? Or put it this way, suddenly there are 2-3 Broncos Teams at the same time...

"The first Denver Broncos just beat the Patriots while at the same time the second Denver Broncos are facing the Panthers, the third Denver Broncos are out on the field but no other NFL Team has been willing to accept the call at this point... my Name is Danjo, reporting live for ESPN, back to you Tom"
Would make NFL not quite as instersting and my guess the superbowl would not be that big of a deal... There is a reason my leagues cap their teams player size. And PGI should do the same!

[Armando]

Danjo San, on 22 May 2016 - 05:21 AM, said:

lol... like you really have 300 "friends" spanning 5 countries Worldwide that play with you all the time...
And to be fair, I have been kicking inactives out on a regular basis.
So uhmm no, My Team is active, they are online when I am online.
And btw. My Unit has friends in other Units whom we drop with together on a regular basis. Active Players in a Team and Friends do not have to be the same thing. Heck we even share our Teamspeak Server with a befriended Unit... We hold events together, we drop together, we fight each other ...
So no, I don't get your point as what I suggested works clearly for me

We have not been introduced....

Hello, my name is Armando (some call me the "Cookie Warrior"). It is nice to meet you.

My friends list was over 1000 pilots last count (and that was a LONG time ago), I have friend that I play with, regularly, that span..

Canada
North America
England
Germany
Australia
Austria
Greece
New Zealand (help me unit....who am I missing here, because I know it is more than one)

Now that we have been introduced let me tell you a little more about myself..

I play a 'team only' (as in there is no option to play alone) as a team. I have spent years building my network up, and thousands of real dollars to PGI in the process.

If you see me in a game, on the other team, you are very, Very, VERY likely going to lose (Personal Win/Loss Ratio of 7.73, good for 24th best win rate in the top 1000 on the KMD Leader Board as of 05-22-16 @ 03:38pm CDT) as a result of those years of preparation (building up a network of friends, so my friends are ALWAYS online...24 hours a day, 7 days a week; being able to load out the mech that is needed when it is needed; etc).

That said, and just so we are clear.....you DO think you that PGI should force you pick 2 unit mates and say goodbye to the other 27 is still a good idea right? Would that make the game more fun for you...not being able to play with friends who are online because you for forced to split between factions?

"what I suggested works clearly for me"

Ahhhh....Now I see it, never mind, carry on.

______________________________________

Back to the topic at hand:

I think the easiest way to get more people to participate more often would be give the community enough Faction Warfare content to last a full cycle. Every attack and defense is won or lost in the first 2-3 hours leaving the rest of the cycle to chose between attacking a planet that is at 100% or Defending a planet that is at 0%.

If PGI wants to cut down on 50+ minute waits, give us something to do in the game. One attack lane per cycle isn't cutting it.

Edited by Armando, 22 May 2016 - 02:11 PM.

[Danjo San]

Armando, on 22 May 2016 - 01:54 PM, said:

We have not been introduced....

Hello, my name is Armando (some call me the "Cookie Warrior"). It is nice to meet you.

My friends list was over 1000 pilots last count (and that was a LONG time ago), I have friend that I play with, regularly, that span..

Canada
North America
England
Germany
Australia
Austria
Greece
New Zealand (help me unit....who am I missing here, because I know it is more than one)

Now that we have been introduced let me tell you a little more about myself..

I play a 'team only' (as in there is no option to play alone) as a team. I have spent years building my network up, and thousands of real dollars to PGI in the process.

If you see me in a game, on the other team, you are very, Very, VERY likely going to lose (Personal Win/Loss Ratio of 7.73, good for 24th best win rate in the top 1000 on the KMD Leader Board as of 05-22-16 @ 03:38pm CDT) as a result of those years of preparation (building up a network of friends, so my friends are ALWAYS online...24 hours a day, 7 days a week; being able to load out the mech that is needed when it is needed; etc).

That said, and just so we are clear.....you DO think you should that PGI making you pick 2 unit mates and say goodbye to the other 27 is still a good idea right? Would that make the game more fun for you...not being able to play with friends who are online because you for forced to split between factions?

"what I suggested works clearly for me"

Ahhhh....Now I see it, never mind, carry on.

______________________________________

Back to the topic at hand:

I think the easiest way to get more people to participate more often would be give the community enough Faction Warfare content to last a full cycle. Every attack and defense is won or lost in the first 2-3 hours leaving the rest of the cycle to chose between attacking a planet that is at 100% or Defending a planet that is at 0%.

If PGI wants to cut down on 50+ minute waits, give us something to do in the game. One attack lane per cycle isn't cutting it.

Oh my god, nice to meet an excellsior player like you, never would have thought someone with a personal win loss ratio that high would ever consider talking to a common player like myself. What a honor, i feel so blessed right now. That said, my friends list is very VERY long as well and I also have friends all over I play with and I respect. That doesnt cut to the point though. A Unit should be a Team, correct? Its a Team vs Team game, correct? Other team centered games cap teamsize for a reason. Thats why there are Drafts in major league sports. Thats why Football Teams have a cap. Thats why baseball teams have a cap. Thats why soccer teams have a cap etc.
So yes, it is a good idea to choose your teammates. Trying to ask me to choose 2 out of my 30 members there is a void request. I am below the cap of a common football roster and will hold it that way.

[Armando]

Danjo San, on 22 May 2016 - 02:20 PM, said:

Oh my god, nice to meet an excellsior player like you, never would have thought someone with a personal win loss ratio that high would ever consider talking to a common player like myself. What a honor, i feel so blessed right now. That said, my friends list is very VERY long as well and I also have friends all over I play with and I respect. That doesnt cut to the point though. A Unit should be a Team, correct? Its a Team vs Team game, correct? Other team centered games cap teamsize for a reason. Thats why there are Drafts in major league sports. Thats why Football Teams have a cap. Thats why baseball teams have a cap. Thats why soccer teams have a cap etc.
So yes, it is a good idea to choose your teammates. Trying to ask me to choose 2 out of my 30 members there is a void request. I am below the cap of a common football roster and will hold it that way.

Don't get it twisted, I'm just a Tier 2 scrub....all I got going for me are my shiny mechs, and my unit, take away that and I am just like any other "solo" noob in the game.

2 doesn't get you to 12....so you should be excluded from units over 12 members breaking up like a senator's son from the draft. As long as it doesn't affect you, who should care...Right?

What about [edited because a great team of guys who are in it for the fun shouldn't be 'called out' directly] is sporting a .62 W/L Ratio and a .49 K/D Ratio, a real Faction Warfare PowerHouse, with 485 members. Can they keep their friends, or is it just units that win more matches than they lose that need to be forced to split up.

While there might be more [-MS-] pilots dropping at any given time, [KCom] only has 32 members and wins a much greater overall % (7.95 W/L Ratio) than [-MS-] (2.97 W/L Ratio), then there is [EVIL] with only 25 members at 6.10 W/L Ratio....they kick your butts even more than [-MS-], should they be forced to split too?

Edited by Armando, 22 May 2016 - 02:52 PM.

[N0MAD]

MischiefSC, on 22 May 2016 - 11:21 AM, said:

Russ got rid of it because nobody was in it. After a few days the population of solo players wasn't enough to sustain the servers it was taking up.

With the way Solo Q rewards were set up did you think anyone was going to play it?, Russ didnt.
They deliberately set that q to be a failure so it wouldnt split the small bucket of players even further, they wanted/knew it would fail with its implementation.
You really couldnt see that?.

[MischiefSC]

N0MAD, on 22 May 2016 - 02:27 PM, said:

With the way Solo Q rewards were set up did you think anyone was going to play it?, Russ didnt.
They deliberately set that q to be a failure so it wouldnt split the small bucket of players even further, they wanted/knew it would fail with its implementation.
You really couldnt see that?.

I would say Freelancer was a stupid idea, stupidly implemented. Again, better option was and is all the FW content in QP to play. Matchmaker involved, problem solved. That was too much work apparently so they tried to re-create the concept in Freelancers. However there were not enough solo loyalists to start them off and given that the dip in population in the Unit only queue was barely noticeable and the leaderboards showed at most 500 Freelancers before it got shut down it just wasn't enough people.

@Randy Poffo;

Yes actually PGI knew how many Freelancers were in queue waiting to drop. They have the numbers on player population after all. It was also available on the leaderboards, which showed total populations. Soloists and Freelancers were always a small piece of the population. I know that your response is 'yes but actually there were tons of players in single player units' you could actually count those up too - there were less than a hundred single player units on the leaderboard.

You can argue that the system PGI created was bad. No argument there; however the system is bad for units, soloists and everyone. That's not some glaring deficiency unique to how the solo queue was set up.

FW never appealed to that many solo players. Apparently the hope was giving them a separate queue would draw more, it didn't. FW would need a lot fixed before that would be the case and actually fixing the game to be good has never been a PGI priority.