163 replies to this topic

[Idealsuspect]

Ultimax, on 04 October 2016 - 09:25 AM, said:

I mean the number of 2 mans per team, not their perfect skill level - which is pretty irrelevant in the solo queue anyway when I'm constantly being dumped into matches with people who can't even tie their shoes.

Yea same and it will be worst if this bad MM have to balance 2' + solo people.

[Davers]

Ultimax, on 04 October 2016 - 09:15 AM, said:

1) The thread is about 2 mans, not 4.


2) The statement that "2 man teams won more than solos" is a statement without any value in this context.

How will "2 mans" win more when there are equivalent "2 mans" on the opposite team?
That is a paradoxical statement as the 2 mans on each side effectively cancel each other out..


It has nothing to do with feeling, it has to do with using flawed logic to support an argument.

To my knowledge we have never had a system with 2 man drops allowed in a solo-only queue that demanded an even number of 2 mans on each team.

No, we had groups of 2-4 players with premades on both sides. 2 man groups won 7% more matches, despite there being the potential of larger premades on the other team.

Now you might say that 7% doesn't matter to you, and that's fine. But you can't claim that there is no advantage or that grouped players won't earn more than solo players.

Its up to the solo players to decide if it's fair
, not for players who are complaining about having to fight larger groups and wanting easier matches.

[Ultimax]

Ghogiel, on 04 October 2016 - 09:34 AM, said:

Yeah and now imagine being able to always to remove a potential potato for a serious player every game. While the other side usually gets lumped with a 2 man of potatoes that are supposed to carry them. The effect of tiers not being very good at balancing skill and the fact that 1%ers will always be teamed together (who are by definition a tiny fraction of the player base) will likely be matched against potatoes or people in the 10%er bracket since the MM cannot distingish between them.

If 1%ers are a tiny fraction of the populace, than what you describe will (by that definition) only happen a fraction of the time in the solo queue.

I'd also like some improved match making, but yeah I'm a realist and not willing to argue that PGI will ever get that on their agenda.

[Lyoto Machida]

Davers, on 04 October 2016 - 09:37 AM, said:

No, we had groups of 2-4 players with premades on both sides. 2 man groups won 7% more matches, despite there being the potential of larger premades on the other team.

Now you might say that 7% doesn't matter to you, and that's fine. But you can't claim that there is no advantage or that grouped players won't earn more than solo players.

Its up to the solo players to decide if it's fair
, not for players who are complaining about having to fight larger groups and wanting easier matches.

In this proposed iteration, it should be the same number of 2 mans on each side (maybe 1 or 2 max per team) and give matchmaking priority somehow to solo players queueing up. Throw in a tonnage cap on the 2 man and try it out.

PGI should do this as an event weekend and gather data. Hell, even give a cbill bonus to any solo player that kills someone in a 2 man.

[Davers]

Lyoto Machida, on 04 October 2016 - 09:42 AM, said:

In this proposed iteration, it should be the same number of 2 mans on each side (maybe 1 or 2 max per team) and give matchmaking priority somehow to solo players queueing up. Throw in a tonnage cap on the 2 man and try it out.

PGI should do this as an event weekend and gather data. Hell, even give a cbill bonus to any solo player that kills someone in a 2 man.

Its not that I am against the idea, I am against the idea that being in a 2 man premade doesn't give any advantages over solo players.

[Widowmaker1981]

Id actually be ok with that idea on the basis there was a low tonnage limit.. 120 tons max. 2 man groups can be pretty hard work in the group queue, and it would be harder to abuse it with 60 ton average weight (chosen so 100 tonner is possible for one player)

However you would also have to limit it to 2 groups per team tops, and that would make it harder on the matchmaker = won't happen.

[Bobzilla]

This would just be shifting more players into QP, which is the most populated mode. That reason alone it's a bad idea. Perhaps a change to group que would solve the problem better.

[Ghogiel]

Ultimax, on 04 October 2016 - 09:41 AM, said:

If 1%ers are a tiny fraction of the populace, than what you describe will (by that definition) only happen a fraction of the time in the solo queue.

I'd also like some improved match making, but yeah I'm a realist and not willing to argue that PGI will ever get that on their agenda.

The effect goes through probably most of the playerbase.

It's not just a problem that only affects the players being matched against 1%ers getting screwed most of the time. It's down to how like skilled players play together, it also certainly goes for 5%ers and 10%ers, who will also see an increase in thier
QP W/L due to simply being grouped and how the MM cannot tell the difference.

Edited by Ghogiel, 04 October 2016 - 09:54 AM.

[Revis Volek]

So then solo queue just becomes the 2 man queue.

And we get a whine thread from people who "just wanna play casual by themselves" and Russ has a heart attack because too many buckets.

[Ultimax]

Ghogiel, on 04 October 2016 - 09:53 AM, said:

The effect goes through probably most of the playerbase.

It's not just a problem that only affects the players being matched against 1%ers getting screwed most of the time. It's down to how like skilled players play together, it also certainly goes for 5%ers and 10%ers, who will also see an increase in thier
QP W/L due to simply being grouped and how the MM cannot tell the difference.

How is that any different from the situation 2 mans face in the group queue?

Ultimately the question is, why are "solo" players effectively a protected class in what is fundamentally a team game?

Why are they more important than people who want to play as a 2-man? (Just to note, I tend to play in 4+ almost exclusively)


It's not like the solo queue environment has improved from the solo only queue, in fact the opposite.

It is a degenerate form of the game, most matches are a train wreck of bad habits and bad play.

Edited by Ultimax, 04 October 2016 - 10:07 AM.

[Ghogiel]

Ultimax, on 04 October 2016 - 10:06 AM, said:

How is that any different from the situation 2 mans face in the group queue?

Ultimately the question is, why are "solo" players effectively a protected class in what is fundamentally a team game?

Why are they more important than people who want to play as a 2-man? (Just to note, I tend to play in 4+ almost exclusively)

Because more players play solo than group queue. They are the defacto audience of the game. group queue players, and in particular 2mans is extremely niche and doing anything that would degrade the main bulk of the player bases enjoyment (percieved) of the game is stupid.

Quote

It's not like the solo queue environment has improved from the solo only queue, in fact the opposite.

It is a degenerate form of the game, most matches are a train wreck of bad habits and bad play.

So what? 2 mans farming the potatoes harder won't change that much either, especially when 2mans can already play in the leet arena of golden master race group play.

Edited by Ghogiel, 04 October 2016 - 10:13 AM.

[jss78]

I'm on the fence about this.

My basic feeling is that there's a huge amount of demand for an easy way to play as a two-man. All those situations where you want to play with that brother, friend, or roommate of yours. Possibly more demand than for all other group sizes combined.

But in MWO it's incredibly difficult, because the only way is to play against bigger groups in group queue. IMO this is one of the major reasons why MWO is so hard to get into, and a big loss for the game.

Yet, I'm sure even two-mans affect match results. I play World of Warships mainly in two or three mans, and unless the opfor has a good group also, we do tend to win.

So I dunno. Personally I'd accept a slight match-making imbalance, to enable two casuals to join QP together.

Could the MM algorithm be made to force the two-man to wait until there's a two-man for the opfor as well? That should help.

[El Bandito]

Ultimax, on 04 October 2016 - 08:50 AM, said:

How is it going to be exploited if both teams have have 2 mans on it?

Cause MM can't tell the difference between two EmP premade and two scrub premade. The difference between their level of teamwork and match contribution is gonna be day and night.

Edited by El Bandito, 04 October 2016 - 10:29 AM.

[Monkey Lover]

Idealsuspect, on 04 October 2016 - 09:20 AM, said:

There won't be "equivalent "2 mans" on the opposite team"

It's MWO, playerbase is tiny, PSR is stupid and Tiers are worthless.

I'm not sure if they're worthless last night during Mariks Monday madness event when we solo sync dropped I only played with 3- 4 tier 1 players out of about 25. Never once did I load in with low tier players.

Only issue I see is some low tier players should be much higher they just don't play often enough.

[Requiemking]

Koniving, on 04 October 2016 - 09:35 AM, said:

It would make Centurion + Trebuchet combinations a lot easier. Many of the "under performing" mechs in MWO are actually supposed to operate in pairs. So yeah, there's that.

Not just that pair. Spotter/ Missileboat combos, such as MLX-A + MDD, become easier to pull off, because the spotter can effectively coordinate with his artillery cannon.

[RussianWolf]

I'd stop playing. period.

I'm already taking a break.

[Morggo]

Not to sound like a harda$$, but I do tend to agree "that's what group Q is for".
When the wife started playing, we had a very frustrating imbalance of tier 3 and tier 5.. and there were times she wanted to throw in the towel because "I'll just never play as well as you" and such. BUT, instead we started playing in private matches. Practiced her twisting and shielding. Ran scenarios for her to skill up/nerfed my loadouts, etc until eventually we've gotten to where she's better in some mechs than I am and vice versa. We ironically had a blast making up training scenarios in private matches making it more fun.

Did that with a couple mates too. There are ways to introduce friends to the game and help them acclimate other than outright changing the makeup of the entire solo queue is my point I guess.

*more shrugs*

[Koniving]

Morggo, on 04 October 2016 - 10:36 AM, said:

Not to sound like a harda$$, but I do tend to agree "that's what group Q is for".

Perhaps then a small groups queue, large groups queue and a solo queue?

It really sucks to be a two man group due to the lack of skill balancing.

[Mystere]

This is weak sauce. I say combine the solo and group queues and have only one.

Oh! People do not have the stomach for it? Well then, I say allow solo players to drop in the group queue. I can't believe I'm the only one daring or crazy enough (take your pick ) to want to do so.

Edited by Mystere, 04 October 2016 - 10:49 AM.

[Wintersdark]

Ultimax, on 04 October 2016 - 10:06 AM, said:

How is that any different from the situation 2 mans face in the group queue?

Ultimately the question is, why are "solo" players effectively a protected class in what is fundamentally a team game?

Why are they more important than people who want to play as a 2-man? (Just to note, I tend to play in 4+ almost exclusively)

It's not like the solo queue environment has improved from the solo only queue, in fact the opposite.

It is a degenerate form of the game, most matches are a train wreck of bad habits and bad play.

Except that the massive majority of players are solo players, the solo queue is the largest pay off the game by a huge margin. So, they must be considered first and foremost.

And while you may not agree, most of the solo folks prefer the solo queue being solely solo. That's been abundantly clear all along.

Mystere, on 04 October 2016 - 10:49 AM, said:

This is weak sauce. I say combine the solo and group queues.

Oh! People do not have the stomach for it? Well then, I say allow solo players to drop in the group queue. I can't believe I'm the only one daring or crazy enough (take your pick ) to want to do so.

Combining the group and solo queues would sink them.

They ABSOLUTELY should allow solos to opt into the group queue, though. I'd personally live there; and that would really help the group queue matchmaker.

Koniving, on 04 October 2016 - 10:38 AM, said:

Perhaps then a small groups queue, large groups queue and a solo queue?

It really sucks to be a two man group due to the lack of skill balancing.

Impossible, sir. You have to have small groups and large groups in the same queue. Remember, teams of 12. How else do you match a 9 man team, in 12v12? Have to have a 3 man.