36 replies to this topic

[Blue Pheonix]

Hi all,

Over the past year or so, I have played quite a bit of games both in PUGs and in CW (mostly in PUGS). While it is still true only one team out of two can win (we either have to win or lose) and there are still games that are poorly played and communicated, I can say that ever since the "leaderboard" was added, the quality of competition and play overall has improved. This is a very good thing. Thanks PGI!

Here are some things I would like to see be added to the "Leaderboard"

1. Minimum of 50 games played in a particular weight class for a player to show up on the leaderboard in that particular weight class.
I see some people sitting at the top of the leaderboard with a great match score but they only played one (or a few) games. Anything less then 50 could be a couple of really good runs/streaks with a good team with handful of bad games mixed in. About 50 is a good estimate of talent and effort. If the leaderboard is empty for a few months, so be it.

2. Display tier level next to players name with rankings
Those in a lower tier (1-2) face more skilled players. It would be harder to stand out in these tiers. Higher tiers (3-5) could have a skilled player who re-created a new account (for whatever reason). One reason could be to farm match scores and to be posted on the leaderboards permanently.

3. Divide the rankings up based on tier level
A really good player could have deleted his account (for whatever reason) only to later make a new one and absolutely dominate at the higher tiers (3-5). He would then play better (according to his stats) then those at lower more competitive tiers (1-2).

4. Divide the rankings by both Solo PUG and group PUG.
If the player pairs up with just one (or more) person(s), then it is group play. A lot (probably most) just drop randomly. If you team up and drop with at least one other person, chances are you are on teamspeak and/or better coordinated than PUG players who dropped randomly. Chances are, with a partner and the inherent coordination with this person, you will usually deal more damage and take less damage so your match score will be higher because of the better coordination. We all know how PUGs "Love" to work together. Partnering up gives a significant advantage. While its harder to score a bigger number with a 6 - 12 man group (each players usually spreads damage more equally), most usually drop in 2-3 man groups so you can still get that "big score". With PUG groups of 2 (or more), your score wouldn't count towards the leaderboard but the "group PUG" section" as the leaderboard is a metric of pilot skill, not team skill. Maybe make two tabs. The default tab would be the individual leaders and the second tab would be the "team" tab when the player plays with at least one other person.

5. Show the mech most used by pilot in their respective weight class
I have a feeling a lot of the assaults in the higher positions now are using Kodiaks which are basically cash only right now (pay to win). They are arguably the best mech (at least assault mech) in the game right now until the inevitable nerf that will come when a mech goes up for CBills (instead of cash only). I also have a feeling that a lot of the light pilots in the front of the pack are locusts since their resizing and their incredible speed and agility quirks. If you play either of these two classes of mechs but not either the Kodiak or locust, I have a feeling all of our positions will increase once these two mechs get the inevitable nerf. Lets watch and see if I am right.

6. Do not have any of the whole chassis "cash only" mechs stats show up on the leaderboard.
Only mech chassis that have some chassis available for C-bills should show up on leaderboard. New "cash only" chassis mechs generally are overpowered (power creep) and stay that way for a few months until they are nerfed when at least some chassis are available for CBills. An example of this is the Kodiak, which all chassis are available only with real cash. When the Kokiak becomes available for CBills, then it can show up on the leaderboard. I don't have an issue with "cash only" mechs showing up on the leaderboard if the rest of the chassis is available for C-bills. An example of this would be the Jenner Oxide. If you allow "cash only" chassis to show up on the leaderboard you are separating people into two groups (those who spend actual money on the game and those who do not) and due to the fact of "cash only mechs" usually (not always) being more powerful then their counterparts (until they get nerfed when they go up for C-bills later), you are essentially creating a "pay to win" game/environment in regards to ranking match scores (leaderboard).

7. Show average lance position
This would be a single whole number and three decimal places after - so like 1.234 - I sometimes question PGI matchmaking algorithms and this would be nice to see if a person doesn't have as high of a match score but they are carrying their weight (and the weight of the team) fairly often.

8. Show average team position
This would be a single whole number and three decimal places after - so like 1.234 - I sometimes question PGI matchmaking algorithms and this would be nice to see if a person doesn't have as high of a match score but they are carrying their weight (and the weight of the team) fairly often.

9. Show "average match score" of each teammate in their respective weight class next to their name on the loading screen before each match.
I have a feeling average match score is the metric that is used to pair teams together. At least it should be. I also have feeling that the higher "average match score" a player gets, the lower "average match score" his teammates will have and this higher "average match score" player will be expected to carry more often. Maybe it is all completely random pairing of teams. Listing match scores of each team mate next to their names on the loading screen of each match will help us to see if it is fair and balanced or just complete random chaos in player pairing and match making. The listed match score should be reflective of the players average match score depending on the weight of the mech the pilot is currently piloting for the match. If he is piloting a heavy, his average match score of piloting heavies (not lights, mediums assaults etc.) should be listed. Same goes for every weight class depending on what the pilot is piloting for the match.

10. Use average match score of a players specific weight class in pairing teams together
After a reasonable amount of games are played (idea #1) by a player in the weight class they choose for the PUG match, use the match score in pairing players together for a PUG match. Right now it appears that player pairing on PUG teams is fairly random. The goal is to get the sum of the players match scores on one team to be as close to the players combined match score on the opposing team.

An example would be like this (I'll keep the numbers low to make it easier to calculate).
Team one has 12 players with an overall match score sum of 120 (each players average match score is 10 even).

Team 2 has an overall match score of 120 also (three players have a match score of 12, three have a match score of 11, 3 have a match score of 9 and 3 have a match score of 8).

While pairing up players on a team based on their respective match scores may cause us to wait a little longer for a match, the quality and closeness of the match should be much better. It should make a much closer, more fun game experience. I believe that for most of us, its reasonable quality over quantity.

I will update this thread as I come up with more ideas.

What would you like to see?

Edited by Blue Pheonix, 10 July 2016 - 08:25 AM.

[El Bandito]

Blue Pheonix, on 27 June 2016 - 06:01 PM, said:

4. Divide the rankings by both Solo PUG and group PUG.
If the player pairs up with just one (or more) person(s) then it is group play. A lot (probably most) just drop randomly. If you team up and drop with at least one other person, chances are you are on teamspeak and/or better coordinated that PUG players who dropped randomly. Chances are your match score will be higher because of the better coordination. While its harder to score a bigger number with a 6 - 12 man group (each players usually spreads damage more equally), most usually drop in 2-4 man groups so you can still get that "big score".

What would you like to see?

This one at least, I agree, as it makes the competition more fair. Let's see if people can still get 20:1 WLR if they play in Solo-Q, as opposed to grouping with a highly competent team all the time.

Blue Pheonix, on 27 June 2016 - 06:01 PM, said:

1. Minimum of 100 games played for a player to show up on the leaderboard.
I see some people sitting at the top of the leaderboard with a great match score but they only played one game. Anything less then 100 could be a couple of really good runs/streaks with a good team. About 100 is a good estimate of talent and effort. If the leaderboard is empty for a few months, so be it.

This too. Giving small grind for the player to reach the leaderboard = more playing population for MWO.

Edited by El Bandito, 27 June 2016 - 06:43 PM.

[TLBFestus]

Displaying your Tier is an option in this game, so that would have to be voluntary.

As such, suggestion #3 would not work either.

Unless.....if you wanted to be on the leader boards, you would have to agree to having your tier publicly displayed.

[Blue Pheonix]

Why wouldn't one want to be on the leaderboards or have their tier displayed?

[Wintersdark]

El Bandito, on 27 June 2016 - 06:41 PM, said:

This one at least, I agree, as it makes the competition more fair. Let's see if people can still get 20:1 WLR if they play in Solo-Q, as opposed to grouping with a highly competent team all the time.

This. Avoiding group vs. solo politics, the two experiences are wholly different and should be tracked separately.

Quote

This too. Giving small grind for the player to reach the leaderboard = more playing population for MWO.

Anything really to filter out guys who had a couple unicorn matches and nothing else.

At least 50 matches, if not 100. Make sure the sample size is representative.



An extension on this: count only the last 100 matches, a a players early matches don't drag them down, AND so they have to continue performing. This would be less popular though because getting to higher tiers would haul down your ranking.

Blue Pheonix, on 27 June 2016 - 06:57 PM, said:

Why wouldn't one want to be on the leaderboards or have their tier displayed?

you need to ask? Really?

[Malachy Karrde]

I didn't know there were any leader boards and I could care less about them to be honest.

[Chuck Jager]

Min games would be great. I started a new account a while back and I got more 800-1000+ games in the first 30 games than I had gotten in the previous 2 years. I had to stop running some trial mechs (King Crab and Stormcrow) to slow the tier climb down.

[adamts01]

This whole leaderboard thing can **** off. It just leads to poor teamplay and decisions that benefit one's self and not the team. Have more tournaments, have some 1v1s, give out little gold stars these guys can put next to their name, play a little song every time one of them is in your match.... I don't really care, just don't degrade what little cooperation we have in this game. I've seen more camping and cowardice from these tryhards since this crap started.

[Blue Pheonix]

Adam,

I do agree that there needs to be more reward to pilots who practice/perform actions that benefit team play vs. solely focusing on damage. While the team who does the most damage is usually the team who wins (so doing damage is very important - maybe the most important), its not the only component in a team win. All roles and performing "role type actions" are important for a team win.I think more points should be awarded to the pilots "match score" for each person who performs these actions then is awarded now. What is awarded now for each individual action is too low. Awarding more points towards these individual actions would lead to higher match score.

As I said in my earlier post, the competition and level of play has improved since "leaderboard"/player rankings are now public. This is a really good thing. In general, people aren't just "half butting it now" because they know where they stand and where others stand and they can't just blame it being on bad teams. All players get put on bad teams from time to time. The simple fact is that others (who have played a reasonable number of games) are ahead of them so there must be something those other players ahead of them are doing that they are not. More people would perform more of these actions in PUG matches if they were rewarded more in doing so. Each player doing more of these types of team actions will result in better, more close and competitive matches.

Actions like "scouting", "lance in formation", "hit and run" etc. need more match points awarded toward each individual action then just damage. Here are the actions I am talking about (scroll down): http://mwomercs.com/...tch-notes-13345

I think more individual "team actions" need to be added as well. Things like:

Lights: An action called "harass", where a light flanks, does some damage and then bugs out without dying or losing a weapon/component

An action called "back shot" where a light does damage on a mechs back - too often I see lights trying to trade firepower head on with bigger more powerful mechs. Or, they cowardly stay with the group all of the time, not doing any scouting/harassing, capturing actions only to let everyone else go in front of them while they poke and try and get their cheap shots in to get "more damage". While this poking from the back of the group technique may effectively work with some mediums and heavies with decent firepower, lights rarely have the firepower to really meaningfully help their team in this regard and would do better for their team doing light/scout type roles.

An action called "stealth" where a light goes to a location and holds a target lock without being spotted. The longer he holds the lock without being spotted the more points he earns.

An action called "target lock held" for when a mech hold a target lock for at least 10 seconds

Mediums: An action called "medium assist" where the mech stays with a group of heavies or lights and supports their firepower by scoring damage without wondering off on their own.

"Target lock held" would apply to medium as well

Heavies: An action called "Aggro", where a heavy sees a lighter class mech being targeted but is able to draw the attention of the enemy mech on them instead.

Assualts: "Aggro" action as well.

Edited by Blue Pheonix, 28 June 2016 - 11:45 AM.

[Roadkill]

Blue Pheonix, on 27 June 2016 - 06:57 PM, said:

Why wouldn't one want to be on the leaderboards or have their tier displayed?

Irony, thy name is Blue Pheonix.

Edited by Roadkill, 28 June 2016 - 12:50 PM.

[Blue Pheonix]

I don't get the irony.

[Roadkill]

Blue Pheonix, on 28 June 2016 - 12:53 PM, said:

I don't get the irony.

Your tier isn't displayed.

[Aiden Skye]

Blue Pheonix, on 27 June 2016 - 06:01 PM, said:

6. Do not have "cash only" mechs stats show up on the leaderboard. Only mechs available for C-bills should show up on leaderboard. New "cash only" mechs generally are overpowered (power creep) and stay that way for a few months until they are nerfed when they are available for CBills.

There are a lot of mechs that are not available for cbills that won't appear on the leaderboard. My invasion mechs for example. And hero mechs?

I would like to see an opt out function.

[Roadkill]

W A R K H A N, on 28 June 2016 - 01:08 PM, said:

I would like to see an opt out function.

Won't need one if some of these guys get their way - just don't play the 60-100 match minimum number of games per month that people are tossing around.

[Blue Pheonix]

Oh, I don't know how to enable showing my tier. For anyone who wants to know, tier 2 almost tier 1. Grinding is a pain.

[Roadkill]

Blue Pheonix, on 28 June 2016 - 01:13 PM, said:

Oh, I don't know how to enable showing my tier. For anyone who wants to know, tier 2 almost tier 1. Grinding is a pain.

There's a check box on your profile page on the right side across from your userid.

[Triordinant]

Blue Pheonix, on 28 June 2016 - 01:13 PM, said:

Oh, I don't know how to enable showing my tier. For anyone who wants to know, tier 2 almost tier 1. Grinding is a pain.

Click "Profile" along the top of the MWO web page. When you see your account details there's a checkbox on the upper right that says: "Publicly Display Tier".

[White Bear 84]

Not fussed with the new leaderboard - its not split by group/pug and its not split by chassis and/or weight class. Like comparing apples to handbags.

At most, the only relative reasonable measure is the match score.. ..anyone can get carried by team to get high W/L, or sneak in to get lots of kills. Even then the match score is not necessarily the best measure.

[Kubernetes]

White Bear 84, on 28 June 2016 - 04:41 PM, said:

Not fussed with the new leaderboard - its not split by group/pug and its not split by chassis and/or weight class. Like comparing apples to handbags.

Well, actually you can look at splits by weight class.

Quote

At most, the only relative reasonable measure is the match score.. ..anyone can get carried by team to get high W/L, or sneak in to get lots of kills. Even then the match score is not necessarily the best measure.

And actually you can sort it by match score, or kills, or W/L, or K/D (and a few other stats). You sure weren't joking when you said you hadn't fussed with it. The only thing lacking right now is a solo/group split and the ability to filter out those with fewer than 100 matches (or whatever figure one might choose).

Regarding "the only relative reasonable measure," they're all just stats. There is no "best measure." And once people play enough matches, the stats become more true to a player's actual level and less subject to such distortions as "carried by his team" or "stole some kills." After a few thousand matches the stats don't lie.

[Lily from animove]

Blue Pheonix, on 28 June 2016 - 01:13 PM, said:

Oh, I don't know how to enable showing my tier. For anyone who wants to know, tier 2 almost tier 1. Grinding is a pain.

and thats why the tiers don't matter and should not be shown, medicore gameplay makes tiwer one, just grind enough, good gamplay doesn't makes Tier 1 if you don't grind like a b*tch. as long as PSR doesn't have a proper rating it's nonsense indicator.