56 replies to this topic

[Seamus Z Harper]

Never understood why people thought 1v1s established skill in any way, particularly in this game. Unless both pilots are in the same mech with the same loadout and modules. Also, in combat there is an element of surprise and tactical positioning, along with teamwork. In 1v1s it turns into who can dish out the most dps without overheating and leg the other, at least in this game.

Edited by Seamus Z Harper, 24 July 2016 - 10:26 AM.

[Kirkland Langue]

To establish skill?

Are you planning on having a round robin tournament, with every MWO player forced to participate and battle 1v1 against every other MWO player, before they can drop into a game - that way the matchmaker knows the skill level of each player and can create balanced teams?

Sounds like a great idea to me.

[Product9]

Aresye, on 24 July 2016 - 10:17 AM, said:

The only skills that translate from 1v1 fights into the team environment of 12v12 are torso twisting and aim.

Teamwork, game sense, and positioning are all equally important, if not MORE important, and your idea would end up ranking players without taking any of those into consideration.

Also heat management, prioritization of components, maneuvering, and map layout (though I would expect a mode like this to have smaller, more targeted maps). These are individual skills that do contribute to the overall competence of a team.

I think the problem with PSR as it is currently implemented is it tries to gauge individual skill by measuring group performance, which is a flawed premise because of all the variables that are introduced by mech choice and the team dynamics that happen in a match. Individual skill has to be measured at the individual level, and the only way to do that is evaluate a player based on a set of circumstances that don't change, or at least don't change very much.

By pitting human players in identical mechs against one another, you can actually conclude with some degree of certainty which of them is more skilled. There are of course other mitigating factors, such as hardware performance and individual circumstances (one of them might have influenza and be delirious), but it still represents something that is leaps and bounds more reliable than what we currently have.

Seamus Z Harper, on 24 July 2016 - 10:22 AM, said:

Unless both pilots are in the same mech with the same loadout and modules

That is the entire point. The players that are facing each other have to have identical mechs or it defeats the purpose of trying to evaluate individual skill as a separate quantity.

Kirkland Langue, on 24 July 2016 - 10:32 AM, said:

To establish skill?

Are you planning on having a round robin tournament, with every MWO player forced to participate and battle 1v1 against every other MWO player, before they can drop into a game - that way the matchmaker knows the skill level of each player and can create balanced teams?

Sounds like a great idea to me.

This is a good point to discuss. I don't know how base level would play into this. If you start someone at a low base level and let them remain there until they take advantage of the arena mode, then they will be matched with low level players and will gain an advantage with experience. Can't have experienced pilots matched with fresh ones.

On the other hand, starting them high would mean that players that really can't compete at a high level would ensure a consistently really bad experience, and there is no guarantee they will ever go into arena mode either because they may not have the inclination or understanding, keeping them stuck at a high level when they shouldn't be.

I guess the best option would be to start everyone at Tier 3 and if they take advantage of the 1v1 arena, great, and if not, well, the impact will be minimum.

Edited by Product9, 24 July 2016 - 01:05 PM.

[Product9]

Deathlike, on 24 July 2016 - 10:10 AM, said:

Like, 1v1 is only a general demonstration of raw shooting ability. It doesn't really show too much about the pilot's intelligence.. outside of showing how people go about engagements.

Like I said, there are other skills that it can measure (heat management, maneuvering, etc). Also, I agree raw skill doesn't necessarily incorporate all aspects of what makes a pilot a useful asset to the team, but the problem is that many of those assets are intangible quantities that are impossible (or very difficult) to measure.

How do you measure someone's ability to make the correct tactical decisions? Or their positioning and timing? How can you award them bonuses and establish their place in a matchmaker rating system based on those qualities?

Without some kind of very advanced machine learning system, you simply can't. The best you could hope is to evaluate it with human observers, but that's not practical for a number of reasons.

I know my idea isn't a perfect solution (which I pointed out in the original post), but I'm trying to narrow PSR (or whatever it would be called) down to things that a ) can actually be measured and applied, and b ) are useful to a team.

Edited by Product9, 24 July 2016 - 01:14 PM.

[C E Dwyer]

Ice6, on 24 July 2016 - 08:42 AM, said:

We can't even get a chat lobby in the game...you know, so you can build relationships.

you want relationships go visit a dating site

[Kirkland Langue]

PSR doesn't matter until you have a large enough playerbase for it to matter.

I remember, very clearly, back in Closed Beta telling people to QUIT worrying about balance and matchmaking so much and to focus upon the core aspects of gameplay. People are stupid, so of course they just continued to focus upon balance and matchmaking.

Guess what? 4 years later and people are STILL focusing upon balance and matchmaking. Guess what? Without core gameplay developed, neither matchmaking or balance matter very much.

The things that Russ needs to be focused upon are things that would bring the MW universe to life:
1. Single Player Campaign.
2. Single Player Campaign.
3. Single Player Campaign.
4. Integrate the Quick Matches into the Community Warfare system so that every fight has an impact upon the "universe".
5. Improve the AI (developed in the Single Player Campaigns) - and use them as team fillers so that matches launch quicker.
6. Add Solaris where players can dual - with winners getting House/Clan standing depending upon who they are representing when they fight.
7. Revisit the Dev Diaries from CB - and implement some of the ideas: like high ranking faction standing allows players to choose planets for invasion.

[RestosIII]

I still think the best way to determine who is truly skilled is by declaring zellbrigen to another pilot in quick play matches. That determines how honorable and skilled in combat. It also causes a lot of very, very fast deaths due to teams not understanding what zellbrigen is and murdering the hell out of both sides.

[Stone Wall]

We even had pilots who were known to be leggers. And the general population of MW3 thought leggers to be less skilled. So you had to fight honorably, sometimes even letting the other mech off the ground after a gyro overload, and with skill.

[Product9]

Kirkland Langue, on 24 July 2016 - 01:23 PM, said:

PSR doesn't matter until you have a large enough playerbase for it to matter.

I remember, very clearly, back in Closed Beta telling people to QUIT worrying about balance and matchmaking so much and to focus upon the core aspects of gameplay. People are stupid, so of course they just continued to focus upon balance and matchmaking.

Guess what? 4 years later and people are STILL focusing upon balance and matchmaking. Guess what? Without core gameplay developed, neither matchmaking or balance matter very much.

The things that Russ needs to be focused upon are things that would bring the MW universe to life:
1. Single Player Campaign.
2. Single Player Campaign.
3. Single Player Campaign.
4. Integrate the Quick Matches into the Community Warfare system so that every fight has an impact upon the "universe".
5. Improve the AI (developed in the Single Player Campaigns) - and use them as team fillers so that matches launch quicker.
6. Add Solaris where players can dual - with winners getting House/Clan standing depending upon who they are representing when they fight.
7. Revisit the Dev Diaries from CB - and implement some of the ideas: like high ranking faction standing allows players to choose planets for invasion.

You make some good points, but they are unfortunately irrelevant to this discussion so I won't comment on them any further.

My aim was to provide a solution to the shortcomings of the PSR system, not to question the game's philosophy in its entirety. To be fair, yes, improving the core (or heart and soul, if you will) of the game would fix a ton of problems and that's totally worth of discussion, but I'm not interested in that right now. Those points have been, and will continue to be, discussed in other threads.

This thread is (supposed to be) about how to measure a player's skill objectively. PSR doesn't measure individual skill, and because of that a player's PSR rating is largely dependent on the teams he drops with, most of that being random. I want to develop ideas that can effectively, predictably, and, most of all, practically measure a player's individual skill for use in matchmaking.

If you don't don't want to talk about this subject, then please move along. I'm not saying this to be rude, but because I want to keep this discussion on point, and let it fade away (so I don't have to keep checking it) when there is nothing more for anyone to practically contribute.

I understand my idea might not be right for MWO, but it may end up being useful elsewhere. Or maybe it will lead to an idea that is practical for this game. The point is to discuss it, find the holes in it, and then use those findings to refine it to the point of being useful.

[Johnny Z]

1v1 with 22 spectators? Not sure how that would work but it would make 1 v 1 more fun.

[Product9]

RestosIII, on 24 July 2016 - 01:34 PM, said:

I still think the best way to determine who is truly skilled is by declaring zellbrigen to another pilot in quick play matches. That determines how honorable and skilled in combat. It also causes a lot of very, very fast deaths due to teams not understanding what zellbrigen is and murdering the hell out of both sides.

Maybe we should develop a Pilot Honor Rating (PHR) to match people not by skill, but by integrity.

... wait times in the higher honor tiers would be hours or maybe even days.

[Mystere]

Product9, on 24 July 2016 - 02:43 PM, said:

This thread is (supposed to be) about how to measure a player's skill objectively ...

Wins, you count only the wins. I'd rather be grouped up with a known winner than someone who deals a whole lot of damage but still manages to lose more than win.

At worst, the former is a very lucky mascot.

Edited by Mystere, 24 July 2016 - 02:54 PM.

[ghoost dragoon]

Please, don't mind the Clan Wolf logo. Just look at my call sign. FYI XO I luv being this power (Romans 13). Until, uses tell me to repent. GRRR! Anyhow, yes, i am a real power with ghost and dragon powers. It actually led me to mechwarrior online. XO And i am in a tribe (tribe of sidewalk). I am the Tattle Tale (story telling at best). So, with dat said, i am for an arena based combat option. I will say this, whatever u use for winning/losing, the player should have the option to participate, not determined by someone else or a computer. Freewill rights, dat God grants to all. And most importantly, HONOUR is what should be considered above anything for all.

Personally, i like that Highlander comment. I need a laugh. And bets on the side are fun too. Those are always fun. Yes, i am sure there won't be a betting system through Microsoft, so, please don't comment on the betting. I do miss the MW3 options that aren't available to anyone at any time. Unfortunately, people haven't considered HONOUR. And yes, someone will make use of what you post here. The world is in a constant trying to rebalance itself at same time its going bad. I suggest you choose wisely, what you want to do. My video game will have many tings'. As far as respect. I spit on your dishonourable lifestyle to the grave. Remember me forever. XOXOXOXO


,Caiesper

And i want to see elementals used in an arena setting...

[Aresye]

Product9, on 24 July 2016 - 12:30 PM, said:

Also heat management, prioritization of components, maneuvering, and map layout (though I would expect a mode like this to have smaller, more targeted maps). These are individual skills that do contribute to the overall competence of a team.

Those are all still mechanical skills that...while they help somewhat, don't really transfer into the team based atmosphere of MWO.

While fighting 1v1 you have no score to keep track of, you have no enemy team movement you need to keep track of, you have no teammates you need to keep track of, you have no "assaults in charlie lance" to base your game plan around, you have no focus fire prioritization, you have no artillery/air strike cooldown to watch, you never have to worry about more than 1 mech targeting you at once, etc...

Using MRBC divisions as an example, I'd be willing to bet that pretty much any player on every Div A and Div B comp team can all shoot, maneuver, manage heat, peek, and run the meta exactly the same. So what is it that makes a single SJR or EmP player that much more dangerous in solo queue than say, a single NS player?

The answer is basically everything I listed above that you DON'T get in 1v1 duels, and (for the most part) you could lump them all into the single term: "Game Sense"

When I play solo queue, I don't need a team full of players with amazing 1v1 skill. I need players that play as a TEAM, who can all read the game, keep track of enemy movement, utilize proper focus fire, prioritize threats, move with the team, and pay attention to the state of the objectives (if applicable).

You could be the most amazing 1v1 pilot in this entire game and have the highest PSR because of that, but if you get caught off on your own trying to solo 3 players at once when the entire enemy team deathballs into you, causing us to be a man down less than a minute into the game, you're useless to the team.

Playing as a team is far more important than being able to shoot well, and I feel too many players severely underestimate just how much teamwork plays a key role in match outcome.

[Product9]

Aresye, on 24 July 2016 - 03:41 PM, said:

Those are all still mechanical skills that...while they help somewhat, don't really transfer into the team based atmosphere of MWO.

While fighting 1v1 you have no score to keep track of, you have no enemy team movement you need to keep track of, you have no teammates you need to keep track of, you have no "assaults in charlie lance" to base your game plan around, you have no focus fire prioritization, you have no artillery/air strike cooldown to watch, you never have to worry about more than 1 mech targeting you at once, etc...

Using MRBC divisions as an example, I'd be willing to bet that pretty much any player on every Div A and Div B comp team can all shoot, maneuver, manage heat, peek, and run the meta exactly the same. So what is it that makes a single SJR or EmP player that much more dangerous in solo queue than say, a single NS player?

The answer is basically everything I listed above that you DON'T get in 1v1 duels, and (for the most part) you could lump them all into the single term: "Game Sense"

When I play solo queue, I don't need a team full of players with amazing 1v1 skill. I need players that play as a TEAM, who can all read the game, keep track of enemy movement, utilize proper focus fire, prioritize threats, move with the team, and pay attention to the state of the objectives (if applicable).

You could be the most amazing 1v1 pilot in this entire game and have the highest PSR because of that, but if you get caught off on your own trying to solo 3 players at once when the entire enemy team deathballs into you, causing us to be a man down less than a minute into the game, you're useless to the team.

Playing as a team is far more important than being able to shoot well, and I feel too many players severely underestimate just how much teamwork plays a key role in match outcome.

Yes, I know all of that. But let me ask you this - how do you measure that?

Having an answer without an implementation doesn't amount to much I'm afraid. My idea is about practical, real measurements, which is of course not going to be perfect, but it might be better than what we have.

If you could figure out a way to measure all the qualities you listed, I'd be more than happy to hear about it.

Edited by Product9, 24 July 2016 - 06:02 PM.

[ghoost dragoon]

Product9, on 24 July 2016 - 03:48 PM, said:

Yes, I know all of that. But let me ask you this - how do you measure that?

Having an answer without an implementation doesn't amount to much I'm afraid. My idea is about practical, real measurements, which is of course not going to be perfect, but it might be better than what we have.

If you could figure out a way to measure all the qualities you listed, I'd be more than happy to hear about it.

If we are all made with a body, soul and a spirit, Most calculations are done with the physical. The soul can be accessed as well. The spirit part is where powers like myself come in. Also, shamans can do summin' too... It creates quite a show. I let the programmers calculate and i do my part. There is an absoluteness like math. And there is interpretations. My design simpler, so, for the math part, good luck.

[Product9]

Mystere, on 24 July 2016 - 02:53 PM, said:

Wins, you count only the wins. I'd rather be grouped up with a known winner than someone who deals a whole lot of damage but still manages to lose more than win.

Isn't that how the Elo system worked?

ghoost dragoon, on 24 July 2016 - 03:05 PM, said:

Please, don't mind the Clan Wolf logo. Just look at my call sign. FYI XO I luv being this power (Romans 13). Until, uses tell me to repent. GRRR! Anyhow, yes, i am a real power with ghost and dragon powers. It actually led me to mechwarrior online. XO And i am in a tribe (tribe of sidewalk). I am the Tattle Tale (story telling at best). So, with dat said, i am for an arena based combat option. I will say this, whatever u use for winning/losing, the player should have the option to participate, not determined by someone else or a computer. Freewill rights, dat God grants to all. And most importantly, HONOUR is what should be considered above anything for all.

Personally, i like that Highlander comment. I need a laugh. And bets on the side are fun too. Those are always fun. Yes, i am sure there won't be a betting system through Microsoft, so, please don't comment on the betting. I do miss the MW3 options that aren't available to anyone at any time. Unfortunately, people haven't considered HONOUR. And yes, someone will make use of what you post here. The world is in a constant trying to rebalance itself at same time its going bad. I suggest you choose wisely, what you want to do. My video game will have many tings'. As far as respect. I spit on your dishonourable lifestyle to the grave. Remember me forever. XOXOXOXO


,Caiesper

And i want to see elementals used in an arena setting...

So, I think what you're saying is that a person should have the ability to directly affect their ranking, rather than rely on the outcome of a team match. I agree?

[Mystere]

Product9, on 24 July 2016 - 04:00 PM, said:

Isn't that how the Elo system worked?

I don't know how the calculations behind Elo actually worked.

[ghoost dragoon]

Product9, on 24 July 2016 - 04:00 PM, said:

Isn't that how the Elo system worked?



So, I think what you're saying is that a person should have the ability to directly affect their ranking, rather than rely on the outcome of a team match. I agree?

No.

[ghoost dragoon]

U R on to it though!