53 replies to this topic

[DaZur]

Johnny Z, on 28 June 2016 - 05:10 PM, said:

This is a gloating troll topic.

More like bittervet bait...

[wanderer]

Tam Wolfcry, on 28 June 2016 - 04:29 PM, said:

The state of the game is horrid. When basic principles like matching are so uneven, please tell me what the point is of playing? This game is what? two years old now? It isn't fun.

There is no actual skill matching, because Tier is an exp bar and nothing else, and the game puts players on teams while trying to make sure there's the same number of each Tier and weight class. That's it.

Someone who plays at barely competent levels all day will get to T1 without a problem, even losing on a regular basis as win >> loss in terms of PSR change. They'll certainly get to T3+, and T2 or T1 is just enough games played. More and more people moving up do so not from an increase in skill, but simply by getting enough participation ribbons.

And they'll never leave.

[Death Proof]

Airwind, on 28 June 2016 - 08:13 PM, said:

even with PSR, imho it will still result in these complaints popping up. i can be good in my mastered Atlas, but then i decide to use a brand new Stalker. PSR dont mean **** then. or maybe i want to try out scouting with lights. or do something new entirely. even with PSR i can be one shot in a light. PSR dont help much in a game like this with so much variables.

this game is not chess.

I agree. Ultimately, I'd love to see a Battle Value system in place that rates each mech variant and its current loadout, as well as the player's PSR with that particular variant./chassis.

Then get rid of "tiers" and then match as closely as possible according to the player's current Battle Value with the mech they are launching with.

"Tiers" could be reintroduced or recalculated by overall PSR simply as a means to give a general idea of the player's PSR.

Edited by Death Proof, 28 June 2016 - 08:50 PM.

[PhoenixFire55]

Tam Wolfcry, on 28 June 2016 - 04:29 PM, said:

Clearly you don't take ECM into account still, even though it has a huge impact on gameplay. I am still part of matches where one side has no ECM at all vs a side with multiple ECM mechs.

This makes me smile.
With my usual "Ah never mind he has lurmz without Tag" smile.

[Spetulhu]

Even if the MM system managed perfect matches you'd have expert pilots leveling a new account upsetting the final scores. Sure, that veteran might not have his mastered and fully tricked out mechs but he already knows the maps and tactics well enough.

And ofc, as mentioned, cumulative damage and sticking together. Once you lose a mech all the others will take more damage and go down faster. Did a match today in an assault where the assault lance just rolled together and lit up everything that got in it's sights. A lone mech, a couple, then a few more loners. Ofc they lost - they came at us one at a time like Steven Segal DVD bad guys! Even the simplest plan - like us sticking together without saying anything - beats running around trying to be a hero on your own. And in a random battle you can never know before the start if someone is going to run off after some master plan of his, dying alone and leaving you one guy short immediately.

[TheLuc]

only variable that should count to go up tiers is solo kills, that would shake thing up.

[Tatula]

I think there is some weird algorithm in the MM that favors one side over the other. I've seen in the solo queue sometimes there will be 4 or 5 Kodiaks on one team, and the other team will have a Kodiak, an Atlas, a Stalker, a couple of Maulers. Something like that. Not necessarily unfair or uneven. Just kinda weird that MM doesn't split the mechs according to tonnage and sometimes favor putting the same chassis all on one team. Anyone else notice this?

[Torric]

MauttyKoray, on 28 June 2016 - 08:39 PM, said:

I wonder if having separate MM ranking for group and solo queue would make a difference.

That would have been one of the prerequisites needed to make something like PSR work, yes.

But we're talking about PGI here. They have proven many times they do not know very well what to do and they often do not know at all how to do it.

[Mystere]

TheLuc, on 30 June 2016 - 05:20 AM, said:

only variable that should count to go up tiers is solo kills, that would shake thing up.

Nope. I prefer wins to be the only criteria.

[Oatbag03]

Matchmaking is specifically coded to make OP lose. PGI did it on purpose because they hate you and the other 'chosen ones' who will always lose because of their teammates. You don't know this, but when we get in a game with you there is actually a prompt - it comes right up on the screen in bold red letters: Let Tam Wolfcry die quickly and also make sure you lose. At the same time, the other team (I heard this from a legit source) is granted higher overall team tonnage, more OP FoTM mechs, ECM, higher tier players, and at least one experienced drop caller.


Or maybe there could be a different reason, I dunno.

[Metus regem]

Mystere, on 28 June 2016 - 05:02 PM, said:

Of all the problems MWO has, you just had to choose this particular "problem" to whine about.

Well then, please go ahead and show us all a mathematically sound equation that can perfectly create perfectly matched teams, taking into consideration player skill, Mechs, weapons/equipment loadout, and player population at time of drop.





ECM? Balance ECM?

What about gauss rifles? Lasers? UACs? Locusts?

Locusts are balanced, they are annoying to hit, but if you hit them, well you get this:

[wanderer]

Quote

This makes me smile.
With my usual "Ah never mind he has lurmz without Tag" smile.

Considering how much the average PUG depends on being able to see those lovely red spots to position, it's not even a matter of LRMs. It's a matter of enough ECM turning a game into blind man's bluff and reducing a team to randomly reacting to fire from whatever direction.

[Revis Volek]

I Zeratul I, on 28 June 2016 - 05:28 PM, said:

I know a lot of people drop in pug queue, 20 games later they'll have 5 wins and 15 losses with almost all of those losses being 12-1 stomp games where their team got obliterated.

The next day the same thing will happen.

And the next day.

And the next day.

It took me about a week to go from tier 4 to tier 3.

Then it took me 3-4 weeks to go from tier 3 to tier 2.

About 2 months ago I was tier 4. Worked my way up the ladder.

Then for whatever reason the MM decided to give me an unusually high number of losing games where I consistently score in the top 3 highest damage for my team, usually. And for some strange reason a lot of my team mates dont manage to break 100 damage.

It does somewhat render the game unplayable.

But no problem. I'll be gone for a few weeks, maybe months. Hopefully I'll come back and things will be better.

Until then I can post on the forums and if anyone at PGI gets irritated, maybe they'll realize if they fix the MM I won't have to post here anymore. :T

I'm closing in on 1000 more wins then losses.


So mileage may vary i guess.

[Ex Atlas Overlord]

Lemming of the BDA, on 28 June 2016 - 06:49 PM, said:

In any loosing streak YOU are the only common denominator.

In any auto accident tires are a common denominator.

Let's examine how tires contribute to every single accident.

"Logic"

Edited by Ex Atlas Overlord, 30 June 2016 - 06:55 PM.

[Ted Wayz]

Lose 27 in a row then come talk. Match maker is match maker is bad.

Eventually learned to log off then log on when MM is being a ****. Always seems to work.

[Ex Atlas Overlord]

Ted Wayz, on 30 June 2016 - 07:04 PM, said:

Lose 27 in a row then come talk. Match maker is match maker is bad.

Eventually learned to log off then log on when MM is being a ****. Always seems to work.

This doesn't bother me so much.... I mean I've accepted PGI refuses to create a balanced game.

What bothers me is when I'm in a game that I know my team actually does have a chance to win... and they **** around camping or running away to save their KDR

[Aleksandr Sergeyevich Kerensky]

I think the problem is, people dont understand how much of an advantage it is to have a 1 mech lead in kills. They blame 0-12 losses on Match Maker, when really, the match was decided the moment that first mech bit the dust.

A little Snowball can lead to a land slide victory!

[InspectorG]

Tam Wolfcry, on 28 June 2016 - 04:29 PM, said:

WTF?

Honestly, no b*tching until you hit a 20-loss streak.

MWO for Solo drops, is a zero-sum match where the first team to gain a @3 mech advantage has a high chance to snowball and roll the other team.

ECM hasnt been a balance issue for some time.

1 lonely assault? No big deal. Ill take a decent locust pilot over an average Assault pilot any day. The bread and butter is in the heavy class.

PSR/Tier system is basically an experience bar. There are many T1 pilots who suck but play enough matches(at a 50% win rate) to level up to T1.

TheLuc, on 30 June 2016 - 05:20 AM, said:

only variable that should count to go up tiers is solo kills, that would shake thing up.

That makes no sense.

[Navid A1]

There are many problems with MM at the moment.

The number 1 problem is that the player population is dangerously low... to the point where one should fear if MWO can go on till the end of the year or not.
That prevents any detailed match making system to work, without requiring the player to wait an hour for a game.

Second problem is that the PSR system is an XP bar. It has NOTHING to do with player skill, in any way!

Then there is the lack of a Battle Value (or something similar) system. In the current system, a mist lynx is equal to an oxide.
A Gargoyle is equal to a KDK-3.
A Dragon is equal to a Timber or Ebon.
That is Pure BS!

Lastly there is a lack of weight class specific PSR. Which does not create more matchmaking bucket and makes perfect sense (can be mathematically proved to have no effect on wait times, while giving better matches)
Right now a high PSR player in a Mist Lynx contributes to the team overall PSR the same way he does in a KDK-3. THAT IS BBBBBSSSSS!
Each chassis must have a certain weight towards overall team PSR.

Derek, for the love of god, if you know someone at PGI please let them know that weight class specific PSR has no effect on MM performance regarding wait times. Even chassis specific PSR gives better matches that what we have now.

Edited by Navid A1, 30 June 2016 - 07:29 PM.

[adamts01]

Death Proof, on 28 June 2016 - 05:36 PM, said:

This game's matchmaker needs a complete overhaul. PSR was a step in the right direction...but it's far too biased on your team's performance. Also, it needs to not be an xp bar...that is, players should not be "advancing" in PSR...they should quickly hit their tier and stay there. Only rarely, through noticeable improvement in skill should a player advance in PSR.
.......... And the 11 other dumbasses on your team.

I don't think you understand what we mean by common variable. Teams switch dumbasses every round, if you're having chronic losing streaks then you're one of them. But I do agree, the tier system is a mess. Everyone quickly makes tier 3, and tier's 1, 2 and 3 all play in the same matches, so there's zero point of it unless you're fresh off the boat.

Mystere, on 30 June 2016 - 09:35 AM, said:

Nope. I prefer wins to be the only criteria.

**** yeah, they're all that matters. I don't care if someone's Atlas LRM boat does 1k damage every single match if he can't secure a win. Or if you get 100 damage as a Locust but you manage to tie up half the enemy team and let your team steamroll what's left. It's all about the win.




OP: There's just simply no way to balance equipment in this game. There aren't enough players to get all tier 1s in a match, you can't even get a match with only 1s and 2s. I don't feel tht ECM is that important, if you do, then you should probably be the one to always bring it.