98 replies to this topic

[Vxheous]

Galenit, on 31 May 2016 - 12:18 AM, said:

How?

I had a stroke (1,5 years ago) and still have some problems,
i use mostly a narc raven (sometimes some older mechs with older builds, no meta),
i am old and play mostly stoned,
i play only for fun and relaxing, competition is for the rl where it pays my bills,
my rig needs an upgrade,
and my psr is going up.

Telling my matchmates to play bad is no option, and if they win, my psr goes up, even when i only do 58 damage and some narcing. I find no way to lower psr without violating the rules.

So tell me how i can go down in psr and play again where the fun is and meta is a myth?

Should i say sorry for crashing your dream of being a l33t-badass-gamer?

Eventually you will plateau in that you will gain as much PSR as you will lose PSR due to gaining nothing on a win (especially doing 58 damage)

Edited by Vxheous Kerensky, 31 May 2016 - 12:56 AM.

[meteorol]

Alan Davion, on 30 May 2016 - 04:13 PM, said:

It also slows right the F*** down if you got screwed over in the switch from ELO to PSR like I did.

I got placed literally at the bottom of Tier 5 when the game switched from ELO to PSR and it's flipping ridiculous trying to claw my way out of there.

The switch from ELO to PSR should have necessitated a stat wipe and then let the chips fall where they may.

Now if I'd ended up in Tier 5 after a stat wipe, that'd be one thing and I could probably accept it, but just getting dumped there immediately is the highest form of BS I've seen from PGI and MWO.

You didn't get screwed over with the switch from ELO to PSR. It's not like they placed everyone randomly. Prior to switching from ELO to PSR, they gathered data for 8 months, using the PSR formular.

From the PSR-patch patchnotes (18-Aug-2015):

Quote

New players are automatically seeded into the mid-to-high range of Tier 4.
All current players will be seeded into whichever Skill Tier best aligns with the historical data already present in their account. The historica data pool used for generating your Tier placement goes back until January 2015.

If you got placed at the bottom of T5 on PSRs release, you simply played absolutely terrible during those 8 months. Sorry.

Edited by meteorol, 31 May 2016 - 01:01 AM.

[Vxheous]

Alan Davion, on 30 May 2016 - 04:13 PM, said:

It also slows right the F*** down if you got screwed over in the switch from ELO to PSR like I did.

I got placed literally at the bottom of Tier 5 when the game switched from ELO to PSR and it's flipping ridiculous trying to claw my way out of there.

The switch from ELO to PSR should have necessitated a stat wipe and then let the chips fall where they may.

Now if I'd ended up in Tier 5 after a stat wipe, that'd be one thing and I could probably accept it, but just getting dumped there immediately is the highest form of BS I've seen from PGI and MWO.

I think I dropped against you once in CW awhile back, and you managed all of 300 damage across 4 mechs. That's pretty Tier 4/5 type of performance in regards to quickplay.

[Galenit]

Vxheous Kerensky, on 31 May 2016 - 12:55 AM, said:

Eventually you will plateau in that you will gain as much PSR as you will lose PSR due to gaining nothing on a win (especially doing 58 damage)

It will plateau, but only if i will be that bad every match and if iam able to bring my w/l down to 1.0.

58 in a win is enough for the green up-arrow, it only slows down the gain against doing better (less gain in psr).
And there are more possibilities to climb in psr then in going down ...

Edited by Galenit, 31 May 2016 - 01:26 AM.

[Vxheous]

Galenit, on 31 May 2016 - 01:25 AM, said:

It will plateau, but only if i will be that bad every match and if iam able to bring my w/l down to 1.0.

58 in a win is enough for the green up-arrow, it only slows down the gain against doing better (less gain in psr).
And there are more possibilities to climb in psr then in going down ...

It will plateau, at some point, 58 damage in a win will net you a = sign. I get = sign when I do like 100 damage in a win nowadays (my XP bar is maxed)

[Aeon Veritas]

Well, maybe it's time for a new system...
Even trough, what ever they come up with it will be tanked down...

What I could imagine is a far more dynamic system which utilizes the formula of the Leaderbord Events.

Quote

•Score Formula:
(Solo Kill x 30) + (Kill Most Damage x 20) + (Killing Blow x 10) + ( Kill Assist x 10) + (Win × 10) + (Loss × 5) + (Survive × 10) + (Dead × 5) + ((Damage done - Team Damage) ÷ 15)

Or maybe a tweaked version of it, but I thik this goes in the right direction.
The best 10 matches over the course of 7 days will be counted toward the Global Leaderboard.
This Global Leaderboard is used to determine your Tier.
The Tiers could either be evenly or unevenly distributed across the active playerbase.
Like all Tiers represent 20% of the active players or T1 = 10%, T2 = 15%, T3 = 20%, T4 = 25%, T5 = 30%.
Then again the Tier is actually just for the bragging rights, the MM would use your actual score on the Leaderboard and create matches with players that have a score of +/- 500 from your score (range to be discussed, dynamic increasing if not enough players after a certain amount of time).
If a player has no matches in the last 7 days the Global Leaderboard Score is archived and the player is moved to the new "Inactive Tier".
In case of the returning of that player the MM uses the archived score for the first 10 matches.
(first match the archived score is used, second match the score of the first match + archived score x 0.9 and so on...)

Well, I think this still got many flaws, but maybe it's worth a shot...

[meteorol]

Aeon Veritas, on 31 May 2016 - 01:37 AM, said:

Well, maybe it's time for a new system...
Even trough, what ever they come up with it will be tanked down...

What I could imagine is a far more dynamic system which utilizes the formula of the Leaderbord Events.

Or maybe a tweaked version of it, but I thik this goes in the right direction.
The best 10 matches over the course of 7 days will be counted toward the Global Leaderboard.
This Global Leaderboard is used to determine your Tier.
The Tiers could either be evenly or unevenly distributed across the active playerbase.
Like all Tiers represent 20% of the active players or T1 = 10%, T2 = 15%, T3 = 20%, T4 = 25%, T5 = 30%.
Then again the Tier is actually just for the bragging rights, the MM would use your actual score on the Leaderboard and create matches with players that have a score of +/- 500 from your score (range to be discussed, dynamic increasing if not enough players after a certain amount of time).
If a player has no matches in the last 7 days the Global Leaderboard Score is archived and the player is moved to the new "Inactive Tier".
In case of the returning of that player the MM uses the archived score for the first 10 matches.
(first match the archived score is used, second match the score of the first match + archived score x 0.9 and so on...)

Well, I think this still got many flaws, but maybe it's worth a shot...

Wouldn't actually work, because you can play like 20 matches and get lucky with said formula, boosting you to a way higher tier than you actually should be. A small samplesize is always vulnerable to errors.

Take the current leaderboard event as an example. I made it to place 19 on the Spirit Bear without even trying. I played like... dunno, maybe 25 games for the event, got blessed with bad enemy team on 10 of them, made it into the top 20. If you use only 10 good games to tier people, we will see heavy fluctuation based on winning streaks and luck. MM needs to be about consistend performance, not peak performance.

[PhoenixFire55]

Well, this turned out to be a quality entertainment topic after all ... I literally had a best laugh for quite some time reading how a guy complains how he got unfairly seeded in T5 and how hard is to "claw his way out of there". Hilarious. Simply hilarious.

Sigh. I guess I gotta be somewhat happy about the current MM after all. At least I don't have to deal with those kind of players in my matches.

Also, just in case someone misunderstands the entire "exp bar" thingy ... it is "exp bar" only if you are average or above average. If you are bad, you still don't go upwards.

Now the funniest thing is ... if we look through the topic and see who agrees with the "exp bar" concept and who claims that "oh it isn't so" we can have a very good estimate of their "true" tier placement.

[Aeon Veritas]

meteorol, on 31 May 2016 - 02:15 AM, said:

Wouldn't actually work, because you can play like 20 matches and get lucky with said formula, boosting you to a way higher tier than you actually should be. A small samplesize is always vulnerable to errors.

Take the current leaderboard event as an example. I made it to place 19 on the Spirit Bear without even trying. I played like... dunno, maybe 25 games for the event, got blessed with bad enemy team on 10 of them, made it into the top 20. If you use only 10 good games to tier people, we will see heavy fluctuation based on winning streaks and luck. MM needs to be about consistend performance, not peak performance.

Yeah, ture. This is a big flaw. Maybe ist better to use an average score then a cumulative.
Further, either the sample size should be increased (whats the average number of matches played in 7 days?) or we just plain use all of the matches played in 7 days...

Another thing which comes to my mind is the question how it will be processed by the database.
First of I have no idea how to code. But I imagine the scores would be listed in a table with the date and the time the match ended.
When the match ends the previous average-score of the player is archived, then the new match-score is added and the old match-scores are checked and deleted if older then 7 days. After this the new average-score is calculated.
In case of less than 20 matches in the last 7 days, the previous average-score is counted in with an proportionally factor.
(e.g. the player only had 8 matches in the last 7 days, the scores of those 8 matches are counted together + 12 times the previous average-score / 20.)
In case of more than 20 matches in the last 7 days, all the match-scores are counted together and divided by the number of matches.

I think this could eliminate your concerns, right?

[MazeRunner]

Alan Davion, on 30 May 2016 - 04:13 PM, said:

I got placed literally at the bottom of Tier 5 when the game switched from ELO to PSR and it's flipping ridiculous trying to claw my way out of there.

The switch from ELO to PSR should have necessitated a stat wipe and then let the chips fall where they may.

Now if I'd ended up in Tier 5 after a stat wipe, that'd be one thing and I could probably accept it, but just getting dumped there immediately is the highest form of BS I've seen from PGI and MWO.

I got dropped to the bottom of Tier 5 as well. So out of idle curiosity, I switched back and forth from various popular "meta" builds to personal preference builds. One month later, was Tier 4. Two more months after that, Tier 3 where I was content to kick back and refocus on my game (to various levels of success heheh).

Almost Tier 2, but been having a rough time getting to used to some new additions to my hangar that Im skilling up so taken a bit of a hit.

[Alan Davion]

Vxheous Kerensky, on 31 May 2016 - 01:05 AM, said:

I think I dropped against you once in CW awhile back, and you managed all of 300 damage across 4 mechs. That's pretty Tier 4/5 type of performance in regards to quickplay.

How long is a while? I haven't touched CW in a flipping year at least, if not a little longer, so if I did that poorly, it's because, A. I didn't have "THE META L33TN3$$" as far as mechs, and B. I was probably dropping as a solo, with other solos against you and your full goon squad and got absolutely obliterated.

[Alan Davion]

ilKhan_OrHan, on 30 May 2016 - 11:14 PM, said:

They say you get to tier 3 fast if you are one of the better players. The problem here lies with you.

Yeah if you play the game like it's a god-damned job maybe you can rise quicker. I can't play the game all day everyday. F*** I can barely play the game for 2 hours anymore it's so F***ing boring.

meteorol, on 31 May 2016 - 01:00 AM, said:

You didn't get screwed over with the switch from ELO to PSR. It's not like they placed everyone randomly. Prior to switching from ELO to PSR, they gathered data for 8 months, using the PSR formular.

If you got placed at the bottom of T5 on PSRs release, you simply played absolutely terrible during those 8 months. Sorry.

So, what you're saying is...

A. Because I wasn't here at the inception of the game in order to learn all the ins and outs of said game,
B. I had to learn how to play against people that already had probably at least a couple dozen mechs fully mastered and kitted out to suit the meta, and,
C. I hadn't joined a Unit yet...

You don't think I got screwed over... Yeah, keep smoking there pal.

I never, ever f***ing said that I just got randomly thrown into the bottom of Tier 5, I know full f***ing well I got placed there because of the data they collected before hand, what I'm saying is that is the dumbest thing PGI has done to date, you don't let data from one matchmaking algorithm determine where you land in the next matchmaking algorithm, that's just stupid.

If you're changing matchmaking algorithms, you WIPE the stats out, start everyone on even footing, and then let the chips fall.

But then, as I type this, I realize this is PGI we're talking about, doing stupid shite every day is their flipping MO at this point, expecting them to be smart about this game is just as f***ing idiotic.

[Novakaine]

The tier/psr is a sham anyway all it does is assuage certain individuals ego's
When tiers 1 thru 4 swim in the same pond well you get the picture.

[Meathook]

Alan Davion, on 31 May 2016 - 05:51 AM, said:

Yeah if you play the game like it's a god-damned job maybe you can rise quicker. I can't play the game all day everyday. F*** I can barely play the game for 2 hours anymore it's so F***ing boring.



So, what you're saying is...

A. Because I wasn't here at the inception of the game in order to learn all the ins and outs of said game,
B. I had to learn how to play against people that already had probably at least a couple dozen mechs fully mastered and kitted out to suit the meta, and,
C. I hadn't joined a Unit yet...

You don't think I got screwed over... Yeah, keep smoking there pal.

I never, ever f***ing said that I just got randomly thrown into the bottom of Tier 5, I know full f***ing well I got placed there because of the data they collected before hand, what I'm saying is that is the dumbest thing PGI has done to date, you don't let data from one matchmaking algorithm determine where you land in the next matchmaking algorithm, that's just stupid.

If you're changing matchmaking algorithms, you WIPE the stats out, start everyone on even footing, and then let the chips fall.

But then, as I type this, I realize this is PGI we're talking about, doing stupid shite every day is their flipping MO at this point, expecting them to be smart about this game is just as f***ing idiotic.

Yes, the tier system screwed you over. It looked at your name and thought "Well, this guy, he's gonna get it now, he will never see the sunlight again harharharhar". It's not because you perform poorly most of your games. That just can't be, right?

Edited by Meathook, 31 May 2016 - 06:25 AM.

[Ghogiel]

Vxheous Kerensky, on 31 May 2016 - 01:32 AM, said:

It will plateau, at some point, 58 damage in a win will net you a = sign. I get = sign when I do like 100 damage in a win nowadays (my XP bar is maxed)

iirc 58 dmg is a minus in PSR. assuming you don't all that many other bonuses to boost your match score too much.
If you break 100dmg iirc that's an =.

[Escef]

Vxheous Kerensky, on 31 May 2016 - 01:05 AM, said:

I think I dropped against you once in CW awhile back, and you managed all of 300 damage across 4 mechs. That's pretty Tier 4/5 type of performance in regards to quickplay.

No, it's not. The majority of tier 4/5 players can at least crack 100 damage in a match unless something goes painfully wrong.

Even good players have bad matches, but not even being able to crack 500 damage in a CW is really bad. Either he managed to consistently be in the wrong place at teh wrong time, or he was utterly unprepared for what CW is.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

Alan Davion, on 30 May 2016 - 12:01 PM, said:

If CW/FW were actually "WORTH" playing, instead of being nothing but a glorified MOBA clone with Mech skins, maybe people would play it more. Until PGI gets that fact through their iron-thick skulls, CW/FW will continue to be a ghost town with only the most hardcore people playing the same matches against the same people.

Even if the entire population of people that have MWO installed got on CW right now I don't think it would change the fact that the game mode is slower than flipping molasses in January.

If CW/FW were more like Planetside 2 somehow, then maybe it would be more worth it to the player base to play it.

MOBA Clone? I don't see any mobs. Sure there's an objective, but clearly you never played the "mission" multiplayer mode in Mechwarrior 4 either... Or are you complaining about "attack lanes" which also existed long before any MOBA ever came around, or have you forgotten the objective modes in games such as Unreal Tournament, or the attack lanes in Quake 3 that focused you towards specific powerup's?

I love this argument of yours, because it's soo lacking. In fact, I can get more money out of playing FW than pug's any day, sure it FEELS like it takes longer to get that money, but at the end of the day, I walk away with my c-bill purse feeling much fuller than ANY day I spent just pugging.

So I've really got to wonder, are you REALLY concerned about the earnings, or is your true problem with wait times, which is remedied by actually queuing for the mode.

[MazeRunner]

Any system that provides an arbitrary definition of perceived skill is going to fail at making everybody happy. Particularly in the never grumpy, always understanding and tolerant land of PGI Forums.

I don't recall if Russ said it verbatim, but I understood this PSR system to be more geared to new players who really dont know what they're doing. A few good matches and lucky games might raise one up quick, but it's either going to decrease consistently to drop you back down, or and this does seem to be the case from what I've seen: a player is going to get better (or if you prefer: adapt or die). And yes, any Tier will have players with good/bad/strange days and players who are more than a little favored by fortune. Which is a polite way of saying some pilots who aren't so experienced still make it up there in Tier, heheh.

Of major changes, I think no bonus for PSR at all during any period is a major start. Yes, it means a little more grinding for alternate accounts, but if you're already experienced, it won't take long. (Although you may feel a little bad for chewing on less experienced players, I certainly did. But now I get my just desserts lol).

Next, a hard cap separation, T1 can only get team-mates/opponents from T2/3.
If the forum Tier sigs are an indication (and Im using it very, very loosely as a guide), then a T1-3 would still provide lots of matches and challenge. There could probably be (if there isn't already) a simple filter to match Tier for Tier just to keep population levels even by using the progress bar as a simple filter

From there it's difficult to say. Failing that, the madman in me suggests scrapping any rank altogether and let the battlefield consistently sort things out

[RussianWolf]

meteorol, on 31 May 2016 - 01:00 AM, said:

You didn't get screwed over with the switch from ELO to PSR. It's not like they placed everyone randomly. Prior to switching from ELO to PSR, they gathered data for 8 months, using the PSR formular.

From the PSR-patch patchnotes (18-Aug-2015):


If you got placed at the bottom of T5 on PSRs release, you simply played absolutely terrible during those 8 months. Sorry.

yep... and I was leveling Urbies at that time..... STOCK Urbies. I'm only now crawling up to mid Tier 3.

[RussianWolf]

meteorol, on 31 May 2016 - 02:15 AM, said:

Wouldn't actually work, because you can play like 20 matches and get lucky with said formula, boosting you to a way higher tier than you actually should be. A small samplesize is always vulnerable to errors.

Take the current leaderboard event as an example. I made it to place 19 on the Spirit Bear without even trying. I played like... dunno, maybe 25 games for the event, got blessed with bad enemy team on 10 of them, made it into the top 20. If you use only 10 good games to tier people, we will see heavy fluctuation based on winning streaks and luck. MM needs to be about consistend performance, not peak performance.

agreed. Needs to be an average of all games.

You need to be able to move, one day you may have an epiphany and stop charging the enemy for example and your scores go from sub-100 to 300+ on average. You deserve to increase in tier when that happens.

An average of all games takes out the outliers when you have the occasional great or lousy game. I've had games when I did 0 damage. (Headshot on the first peek) and games where I've done 1200 damage, but those aren't the norm for me. When they become part of an average of 1000 or 2000 games, they make much less of an impact.

If they want to make it a bit more dynamic, make it the average of the last 1000? games. Then the rating would follow your development a bit more.