163 replies to this topic

[Suko]

I know this is just going to generate a whole bunch of salt and anger from some, but I have to throw it out there.

When the suggestion comes up to let two man groups participate in the quick play queue, there are opinions that fly from all angles. Some say it will destroy it, others say it will give new players a chance to play with a friend without getting stomped in group queue.

Personally, I would like to see two mans have the option of playing in the quick play queue. I would like to see PGI add this option for a one month patch cycle. Let's test it for a month and see what happens. Even if two-man groups do sway the outcome of a quick play match, it can't be so bad that it would ruin quick play for the single month it would be testing.

My suspicion is that if you have a two-man team on each side that there will be literally no difference in the quality of a quick play match. However, the benefits of allowing 2-man's to play in an environment not as hostile as the group queue is an incredibly good thing for new players.

Tldr= Let two man groups play in the quick play queue for one month and let's get some data and see what the result is. If it is positive, let's keep it. If it is not, let's get rid of it.

Edited by Suko, 04 October 2016 - 08:16 AM.

[Rofl]

There'd have to be some sort of limiting factor to give solo players an incentive, whether it be a strict tonnage limit (150-180 ton max limit, tweak as needed), or even a minimum tonnage... or something... to dissuade certain specialized groups like 2 kodiak bros making QP their new trouncing grounds.

Alternatively there could be an outside factor, like +5% XP and C-Bills for playing solo vs in a 2-man minigroup.

[Carlieth]

I would love an option like this. I have a friend in England whom I play with a lot and because we tend to end up vs huge groups and our side has 2's and 3's we get roflstomped. Really disheartening to not be able to have a decent game with my friend.

SO for me this would be a yes vote. It would no destroy QP at all. as 2 people in a team....... cannot really co-ordinate anything special. Please PGI add this to QP. would be a lot of fun for most I feel. new players could have their friend whom invited them assist.

[Davers]

Suko, on 04 October 2016 - 08:15 AM, said:

I know this is just going to generate a whole bunch of salt and anger from some, but I have to throw it out there.

When the suggestion comes up to let two man groups participate in the quick play queue, there are opinions that fly from all angles. Some say it will destroy it, others say it will give new players a chance to play with a friend without getting stomped in group queue.

Personally, I would like to see two mans have the option of playing in the quick play queue. I would like to see PGI add this option for a one month patch cycle. Let's test it for a month and see what happens. Even if two-man groups do sway the outcome of a quick play match, it can't be so bad that it would ruin quick play for the single month it would be testing.

My suspicion is that if you have a two-man team on each side that there will be literally no difference in the quality of a quick play match. However, the benefits of allowing 2-man's to play in an environment not as hostile as the group queue is an incredibly good thing for new players.

Tldr= Let two man groups play in the quick play queue for one month and let's get some data and see what the result is. If it is positive, let's keep it. If it is not, let's get rid of it.

We have already done it and seen the results. 2 man groups win more often than solo players. The only real question is how does everyone feel about that.

[El Bandito]

I vote no. It is gonna be exploited heavily, especially during events and tourneys.

[Rofl]

El Bandito, on 04 October 2016 - 08:34 AM, said:

I vote no. It is gonna be exploited heavily, especially during events and tourneys.

What if matches that you queued up in a 2 man minigroup did not count for QP events and tourneys?

[Morggo]

Heavy exploitation will result and will disrupt puglandia is my expectation.

I know in Group Q, as an example, me and a groupmate will team up his assault and my heavy and we often create havoc and hell as we romp around together. I can only imagine what we'd do without the opfor's Group coordination.

Possibly IF you did some strick tonnage limit, maybe like 120 tons... would mean a light and assault team, couple mediums, etc... something to keep things in check but even still... I know me and the same groupmate can manage hell in our two Pirates Bane...

All said, as much as I'd love to be able to run a two man with another groupmate.... I just see bad things coming to Solo Q.. (which is why, you know, it's called Solo.....)

[-Teiwaz-]

This might work under these conditions, one member of the two-man must be a trainee <100 games for example and the other the trainer >500 games and there must be one two-man on each team. I would like to think that the trainer is not there to farm the beginners and is there to help their trainee learn. The 'team' will have to wait for a second 'team' to be available to the other team but that is the price that will have to be paid for teams to be in the solo Q.

[Ultimax]

Davers, on 04 October 2016 - 08:32 AM, said:

We have already done it and seen the results. 2 man groups win more often than solo players. The only real question is how does everyone feel about that.

2 man drops on Team A should always face an equal number of 2 man drops on Team B.

El Bandito, on 04 October 2016 - 08:34 AM, said:

I vote no. It is gonna be exploited heavily, especially during events and tourneys.

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

[Davers]

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

2 man drops on Team A should always face an equal number of 2 man drops on Team B.






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

We did that, and even allowed teams as high as 4 players, and 2 man teams still won more than solo players. As for the larger sized teams, PGI said the more players added increased their winning percentage exponentially.

So we KNOW that playing in a group of ANY size in a predominantly "solo" que is an advantage. There is no question or debate here. The only question is how does people feel about it.

[Ultimax]

Davers, on 04 October 2016 - 09:10 AM, said:

We did that, and even allowed teams as high as 4 players, and 2 man teams still won more than solo players. As for the larger sized teams, PGI said the more players added increased their winning percentage exponentially.

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.

Edited by Ultimax, 04 October 2016 - 09:17 AM.

[Wintersdark]

Davers, on 04 October 2016 - 09:10 AM, said:

We did that, and even allowed teams as high as 4 players, and 2 man teams still won more than solo players. As for the larger sized teams, PGI said the more players added increased their winning percentage exponentially.

So we KNOW that playing in a group of ANY size in a predominantly "solo" que is an advantage. There is no question or debate here. The only question is how does people feel about it.

And we had attempted group matching. It didn't always work very well.

* Team A has a 4 man group, Team B has 2 2 man groups. Sadness ensues.
* Team A has a 2 man group, Team B ALSO has a 2 man group. Team B denies having a group; Team B freaks the *@#$ out and cries on the forums.
* Team A has a 2 man group, Team B does not (only one group queued). Team B freaks the *(@% out on the forums.

Etc.

They tried all sorts of arrangements, and eventually pulled groups wholly out of the solo queue, because you never get past people crying about The Unfairness Of It All, justified or not.

Note that group matching WAS a thing for a while, and it still didn't quell the wailing. PGI gave up on it, presumably because the b***hing was too annoying.

Edited by Wintersdark, 04 October 2016 - 09:16 AM.

[Idealsuspect]

Suko, on 04 October 2016 - 08:15 AM, said:

I know this is just going to generate a whole bunch of salt and anger from some, but I have to throw it out there.

When the suggestion comes up to let two man groups participate in the quick play queue, there are opinions that fly from all angles. Some say it will destroy it, others say it will give new players a chance to play with a friend without getting stomped in group queue.

You already can ... in GROUPS QUEUE QP.


Yea it could give chance to some really few legit 2' to allow a friend of a player test the game without be stomped but in other hands it will create lots 2' of experimented players which will only farm SOLO queue ( even me )

Considerer that PGI need 6 months for gather obvious infos/feedback and 6 months more for rollback to previous state you will broke the solo queue for longs months and yours legit 2' will be stomped by many non-legit 2' i mean the farmers.



You want show the game to a friend ? Build some private lobbies..
Nothing else than private lobby will be fair anyway.

[Kael Posavatz]

PGI tried allowing small groups in the PUG queue back in Beta. Well...more like they did it because they didn't have a choice. It was widely loathed and there was much relief when it was done away with.

With all the other stuff on their plate I can't see them revisiting this.

[Idealsuspect]

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

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..

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

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

Edited by Idealsuspect, 04 October 2016 - 09:20 AM.

[Ultimax]

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 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.

[Felbombling]

I think it would be great for new player training, but for certain it would have to be matched, pair for pair, Team A and Team B. As others have already stated, weight restrictions must apply, also, if only to cement the feeling of balance. It is a dangerous road to go down, though, as history in this game has taught us that grouped players on comms can prove quite potent.

[Ghogiel]

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.

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.

Edited by Ghogiel, 04 October 2016 - 09:34 AM.

[Lyoto Machida]

I used to be against it but with the way the population seems now, it might not be a bad idea. Give some sort of tonnage modifier like 150 tons max for the 2 man or something to even it out (or maybe less).

[Koniving]

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.