366 replies to this topic

[Suko]

Lukoi Banacek, on 03 January 2017 - 02:45 PM, said:

It definitely demonstrates you haven't read half of the discussion you're arguing with.

As QSK noted, it will definitely result in ardent solo players complaining about tag-teams beating up on them in solo queue.

There is no arbitrary # (2, 3, 4 etc) that will be acceptable to all players of this game. It will always be "unfair" to someone in their opinion. Thus a solo queue and a "take your *** into your own hands" queue. For the latter, there are ways for the casual player to increase the size of their group.

That you additionally note it takes coordination or you "get ******," that's pretty ironic considering this is a team game...even in solo queue.

The one hanging chad in this, is the new player. And since the MM no longer keeps them safe in T5 from large groups in the group queue, something involving fixing the overall NPE is in order (and has been since beta frankly).

2 people, even tier 1 gods, only have so much impact in a team of 12. Perhaps you assume there's multiple 2-mans per each side? No. I'm sure everyone assumes and hopes for a single 2-man team on EACH side of a match. Maximum. If there are two Kodiak OP bros, then so be it. 2 of them + 10 pugs is not as potent a force multiplier as a 10-man team is in Group Queue.

[1453 R]

Lukoi Banacek, on 03 January 2017 - 02:51 PM, said:

So what you really want is some kind of co-op mode so you can have your vision of the MWO experience, vice the actual game.

It's also unconstructive to demand that the game bend to your whim, when the modes are pretty clearly established and you know what to expect when you click launch.

You want to be able to run with a small group of friends. You can. IF you face a larger premade than your own, you get a tonnage advantage per capita. If you under-ton, that's your choice to take a sub-optimal option. If you choose to run **** builds, that's your choice to take a sub-optimal option. If you guys decide to leave the main group and run off to "tactically flank" the enemy and die in a position where the rest of your team cannot support you, that's your choice to take a sub-optimal option.

Capping the group queue is not going to help you when you make those kinds of decisions.

You can run any mech you want, no one is stopping you. You can completely ignore VOIP (I don't use it either). You can do whatever you want really. But that's not the game's fault you aren't getting the experience you want and if you think capping the group queue will give it to you, you're mistaken.

A'ight, a'ight.

To be honest? I don't really want any of that.

When I run a smaller, faster 'Mech, which is my strong preference as opposed to the 30kph fatbros the rest of MWO feels are the Ultimate Supahweapons, I run it as an outrider/pursuer. I know better (most of the time) than to run off and be a prat, and Maker predominantly pilots assault 'Mechs kitted as either distance fire support/snipers or as door-opening hammers. We know better than to faff off away from the main body (when there is a main body), and we're usually some of the most active folks on in-game voice comms, believe it or not.

Here's the thing - those social issues I mentioned are real for a hugely higher than you think percentage of this, and every other, game's population. You want to know what I really want, more'n anything? I'll give it to you in two easy-to-digest chunks.

1.) I want the Big Group Bros to admit that duo queueing sucks rocks. Small groups are severely curtailed in this game, with the single bone of "hey, you can bring ALL da fatbros!" offered as a paltry, insufficient peace offering - especially in a game where mobility is often as required as simple mass of metal and asking all your light and medium pilots to be fatbros instead could end up handicapping you as much as anything else. The current situation is better than tight group caps. As I've stated earlier, that does not mean it's good. The issue is that the 8+ guys, the Big Units who rely on devouring smaller teams, aren't willing to admit there's an issue in the first place. That burns, especially when common sense dictates that the old Russ statistics about duo and trio drops being the typical norm in group queue would still hold.

We get that you guys enjoy your clubbing. We'd mostly like you to acknowledge that maybe it's not cool to continually be clubbed, that simply overtonning your drop every single game is a piss-poor answer that's not actually an answer at all, and perhaps we should be looking at ways to make duo and trio dropping less utterly awful for everyone involved, most especially new players who will be getting their first experience of MWO from the barrels of EmP's PPCs.

2.) I want Twiafu to shut his f***ing mouth, and for all the other folks who think it's "super easy and totally fun and all kinds of other fluffy rainbow good things!" to try and find large groups to play with to follow suit. it is not easy. it is not fun. It is torture for a lot of folks, and when they put themselves out there anyways to try and get that one good game, or maybe find the one group in all of MWO that won't take a gigantic steaming sh!t on them simply for being them, getting shot down and ripped up the way this cesspit community is so damned good at hurts like hell.

When the Shieldwall told me to piss off after specifically inviting me to apply to them, I quit MWO for four months. I considered avoiding the game altogether, and the forums to boot. While I'm sure that would've given some people oodles of joy, and while I'm even more ironclad certain that I'm about to get a veritable flood of "thicken up, sissy!" comments, I'm going to say that there's not a lot of people you can do that to who'll stick around. Asking people to stick their necks out there like that, to risk that kind of abuse every single game, is simply cruel.

It may baffle you that other folks have such a hard time with something you find so simple. Rest assured, it baffles us that you find it so simple to just go right on out there and whip up a large group of people in seconds.

I don't care about group cap limits. They're gone, we're not getting them back, end of story. What would be nice is a little frogblathering compassion, and perhaps a discussion of possible ways to fix the duo/trio issue for those folks who'd like to not get obliterated by eight-drops or bigger every third match they hit if they don't exclusively load up on f***ing assault 'Mechs every game.

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

I feel like people are over thinking this shjt....

[Lukoi Banacek]

Suko, on 03 January 2017 - 03:09 PM, said:

2 people, even tier 1 gods, only have so much impact in a team of 12. Perhaps you assume there's multiple 2-mans per each side? No. I'm sure everyone assumes and hopes for a single 2-man team on EACH side of a match. Maximum. If there are two Kodiak OP bros, then so be it. 2 of them + 10 pugs is not as potent a force multiplier as a 10-man team is in Group Queue.

Since said program does not exist, we don't know how they'd implement it. Secondly, while I agree, a 2 man shouldn't have such an impact, people would still very likely complain loud and proud that it shouldn't be introduced to solo queue as they just want to be able to jump in and play solo casually without the distraction of such duos. There is no pleasing everyone in this game. It will be unfair to someone, so you don't introduce it to solo queue. Problem averted.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

1453 R, on 03 January 2017 - 03:16 PM, said:

I don't care about group cap limits. They're gone, we're not getting them back, end of story. What would be nice is a little frogblathering compassion, and perhaps a discussion of possible ways to fix the duo/trio issue for those folks who'd like to not get obliterated by eight-drops or bigger every third match they hit if they don't exclusively load up on f***ing assault 'Mechs every game.

The problem is how to do you counter the coordination of the larger groups without either relying on tonnage for balance or screwing queue times for those larger groups? WIthout a larger population, there really isn't a good answer to this question. Someone is getting screwed one way or the other.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 03 January 2017 - 03:22 PM.

[Lukoi Banacek]

1453 R, on 03 January 2017 - 03:16 PM, said:

I don't care about group cap limits. They're gone, we're not getting them back, end of story. What would be nice is a little frogblathering compassion, and perhaps a discussion of possible ways to fix the duo/trio issue for those folks who'd like to not get obliterated by eight-drops or bigger every third match they hit if they don't exclusively load up on f***ing assault 'Mechs every game.

I run light mechs with friends. It's a conscious decision to knowingly take less tonnage into queue. It's a choice.

As to the massive issue of 2-3 mans (which, when I run in a 2-3 man, I don't seem to have such a problem, but oh well) facing larger teams...options are out there, you just don't want to use them by your own admittance. Social issues, casual playstyle etc it's all a choice you're making and I get why you make it.

The next option is to allow you into the solo queue...this will upset a large # of soloists who don't want to deal with small teams ganging up on them, even if it's only one team per side. Perceptions of inequity, tonnage disparities (we got a pair of Vindicators, they got a pair of Kodiaks!) etc are unmanageable for PGI given the size of our population.

What's the next option? A third queue for solo/small groups? Difficult to imagine that working again due to the size of the game population, as it will stretch queue times for all three queues as the population cross-levels. And then there is the issue of what size (2, 3, 4?) is fair for this game. Opinions will vary, teeth will nash etc.

Since you're not talking about the NPE anymore, but the small groups out there who are apparently suffering unduly at the hands of rampant 8-12 mans, what is the option here that doesn't screw something up in the system?

[Suko]

1453 R, on 03 January 2017 - 03:16 PM, said:

I don't care about group cap limits. They're gone, we're not getting them back, end of story. What would be nice is a little frogblathering compassion, and perhaps a discussion of possible ways to fix the duo/trio issue for those folks who'd like to not get obliterated by eight-drops or bigger every third match they hit if they don't exclusively load up on f***ing assault 'Mechs every game.

+1

Pretty much this. I'm sick of the Big Groups acting like there's no problem. Yes there is, but they're not stuck up to their necks in it like the other 95% of the playerbase. On the plus side, this ratio of "The Haves vs Have Nots" fits nicely into most of the socio-economic breakdowns we see in the world today.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Suko, on 03 January 2017 - 03:51 PM, said:

Pretty much this. I'm sick of the Big Groups acting like there's no problem. Yes there is, but they're not stuck up to their necks in it like the other 95% of the playerbase. On the plus side, this ratio of "The Haves vs Have Nots" fits nicely into most of the socio-economic breakdowns we see in the world today.

There is a large assumption on your part here: that big groups only ever play in big groups, which is not actually the case.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Suko, on 03 January 2017 - 03:51 PM, said:

+1

Pretty much this. I'm sick of the Big Groups acting like there's no problem. Yes there is, but they're not stuck up to their necks in it like the other 95% of the playerbase. On the plus side, this ratio of "The Haves vs Have Nots" fits nicely into most of the socio-economic breakdowns we see in the world today.

What group of people do you think falls into this Big Group boogieman?

I play small group routinely, as does a good chunk of my unit. We're not a particularly big unit either. Do we qualify?

I routinely see small groups from the top teams in this game (SJR, Emp and their friends, untagged aces who run together, etc).

Who is the boogie man group beating people down in the group queue that's the root cause of this issue you think 95% of the population is suffering through so often (citation needed btw)? And if it's only 5% of the population running these large groups, doesn't that mean you're only facing them like 1 in 10 times or something?

Edited by Lukoi Banacek, 03 January 2017 - 03:57 PM.

[Suko]

Sure, a rich person can slum it for the weekend, too. The difference is that they can choose not to deal with the BS if they get tired of it.

I'm not shy and don't mind (and do) speak out on the in-game VOIP, but I am NOT going to bother with herding 10 pugs into a coordinated team just so I don't get seal-clubbed. I maybe play 4 games a night due to time limitations and...



Groups can (and should) go play FW. I honestly don't see why they NEED any group larger than 6 in the group queue. If you have more than 6 you should be in FW.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Suko, on 03 January 2017 - 03:56 PM, said:

Sure, a rich person can slum it for the weekend, too. The difference is that they can choose not to deal with the BS if they get tired of it.

I'm not shy and don't mind (and do) speak out on the in-game VOIP, but I am NOT going to bother with herding 10 pugs into a coordinated team just so I don't get seal-clubbed. I maybe play 4 games a night due to time limitations and...



Groups can (and should) go play FW. I honestly don't see why they NEED any group larger than 6 in the group queue. If you have more than 6 you should be in FW.

Why? Maybe they only have time for four drops too and just want some QP matches? Maybe they don't like respawn mode? Maybe they tire of bashing skittles in FP and hope to find one of these 5% groups loitering in QP?

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Suko, on 03 January 2017 - 03:56 PM, said:

Sure, a rich person can slum it for the weekend, too. The difference is that they can choose not to deal with the BS if they get tired of it.

Again, who says they are slumming it just for a weekend, who says they aren't normally a small group that occasionally gets a 12-man one day or two out of the week for a couple of hours and somehow contributes to this boogeyman?

Suko, on 03 January 2017 - 03:56 PM, said:

Groups can (and should) go play FW.

Lol, you know what is funny, I've heard people in FW say that large groups should go play group queue. The problem here isn't about NPE specifically, it is about people getting trashed by something and trying to figure out a way to stop that from happening (the thing that tiers were supposed to help with), but the sad truth is this will never be a fixable problem until the population grows. Even adding a ranked mode wouldn't fix this because not everyone that has a big group wants to play ranked either.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 03 January 2017 - 04:03 PM.

[1453 R]

Lukoi Banacek, on 03 January 2017 - 03:34 PM, said:

I run light mechs with friends. It's a conscious decision to knowingly take less tonnage into queue. It's a choice.

As to the massive issue of 2-3 mans (which, when I run in a 2-3 man, I don't seem to have such a problem, but oh well) facing larger teams...options are out there, you just don't want to use them by your own admittance. Social issues, casual playstyle etc it's all a choice you're making and I get why you make it.

The next option is to allow you into the solo queue...this will upset a large # of soloists who don't want to deal with small teams ganging up on them, even if it's only one team per side. Perceptions of inequity, tonnage disparities (we got a pair of Vindicators, they got a pair of Kodiaks!) etc are unmanageable for PGI given the size of our population.

What's the next option? A third queue for solo/small groups? Difficult to imagine that working again due to the size of the game population, as it will stretch queue times for all three queues as the population cross-levels. And then there is the issue of what size (2, 3, 4?) is fair for this game. Opinions will vary, teeth will nash etc.

Since you're not talking about the NPE anymore, but the small groups out there who are apparently suffering unduly at the hands of rampant 8-12 mans, what is the option here that doesn't screw something up in the system?

Option 1.) Mingle the bottm end of both queues. Allow particularly hardcore solos to toggle queuing up for the group queue, and permit duos, and only duos, to drop in the solo Puglandia queue if matchmaking fails to find enough solos quick enough/dependant on PSR or whatever Piranha decides is an appropriate gating mechanism.

Yes, solo grognards will rage, and I get that any gating mechanism can be gamed. But this mixes up the buckets enough that group queue wait times should be significantly decreased, and duos will face less in the way of all-consuming Hell Squads formed by all the mil-spec guys cruising around looking for fresh seals to club. This is mostly what I favor. It's a decrease in wait times for both queues, and permits those solos who might want to build up some resistance to group queue's tomfuggery to do so whilst allowing duo drops for new players or duo buddies to perhaps not get fed to the hamburger machine quite so frequently.

Option 2.) prioritize small-group stacks in group matchmaking. Emphasize groups of two or three dropping primarily with other groups of two or three against a team composed of enemy groups of two or three, as much as the jigsaw puzzle allows. In essence, mix a small group queue into the regular group queue - you're pulled into a match against marauding 8-man kill squads only when the game absolutely needs someone to soak up a loss against said kill squad. Elsewise the MM system favors pitting collectives of duos/trios against each other, adding in larger groups only as necessity dictates.

Yes, this would potentially increase large-group wait time, and is not a flawless solution. But with an overall improved small-grouping experience in group queue, you might actually end up with more players in said queue enjoying their pseudo-small-group queue games in between getting farmed by EmP kill squads. Who knows.

EDIT:: also presumably large kill squads will be on voice comms and can spend more time bullsh!tting and hanging out between matches anyways, so are not quite as badly affected by wait times. Though they will argue this, and I can see why. Nevertheless, if your giant kill squad is the exception, you may have to wind up treated like an exception rather than the ironclad seal-mugging rule.

Option 3.) Fix Commodity Warfare so the megagroups can have their exclusive playground the way they demanded. You folks fought long and hard to ensure that CW was set up as exclusively for large units, at the specific expense of solos and small groups, as you could. Only fair that you make use of the mode specifically intended for you and relieve some pressure on the quick play queues you profess to be mostly for schlubs and scrubs.

Any of those work? I can figure out some more if you like.

Edited by 1453 R, 03 January 2017 - 04:08 PM.

[MischiefSC]

Lukoi Banacek, on 03 January 2017 - 02:51 PM, said:

So what you really want is some kind of co-op mode so you can have your vision of the MWO experience, vice the actual game.

It's also unconstructive to demand that the game bend to your whim, when the modes are pretty clearly established and you know what to expect when you click launch.

You want to be able to run with a small group of friends. You can. IF you face a larger premade than your own, you get a tonnage advantage per capita. If you under-ton, that's your choice to take a sub-optimal option. If you choose to run **** builds, that's your choice to take a sub-optimal option. If you guys decide to leave the main group and run off to "tactically flank" the enemy and die in a position where the rest of your team cannot support you, that's your choice to take a sub-optimal option.

Capping the group queue is not going to help you when you make those kinds of decisions.

You can run any mech you want, no one is stopping you. You can completely ignore VOIP (I don't use it either). You can do whatever you want really. But that's not the game's fault you aren't getting the experience you want and if you think capping the group queue will give it to you, you're mistaken.

All this.

There was a guy in FP forum arguing that because bad players are the majority and they're bad because they don't want to make the effort to git gud....

We need to gimp or lock out the good players and make the game cater more towards the terribads.

Did half the human race come in to 2017 saying "**** it, I'm not going to put any effort into anything but I'm going to demand rewards, respect and accolades they people who actually put the effort in get".

Who the flying monkey F * * * goes into a team game and rages because the other team actually worked to play as a team and put thought into what they brought and so..... won? Do these numbn*ts out-maneuver another team by sheer luck and then apologize saying "Oh s***, sorry man, I tried harder than you so I won. TOTALY UNFAIR!"

Tired, hung over and hungry I played FW a while yesterday and was pretty bad. Barely broke 1K consistently and I'm pretty sure I tanked my KDR MTD. However *that was because I showed up and sucked*. I know own what bad decisions I made and I own them. I don't demand that the game bend rebalance or changed so I can play poorly or derp around and still win.

That's absurd.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

1453 R, on 03 January 2017 - 04:03 PM, said:

Option 1.) Mingle the bottm end of both queues. Allow particularly hardcore solos to toggle queuing up for the group queue, and permit duos, and only duos, to drop in the solo Puglandia queue if matchmaking fails to find enough solos quick enough/dependant on PSR or whatever Piranha decides is an appropriate gating mechanism.

Yes, solo grognards will rage, and I get that any gating mechanism can be gamed. But this mixes up the buckets enough that group queue wait times should be significantly decreased, and duos will face less in the way of all-consuming Hell Squads formed by all the mil-spec guys cruising around looking for fresh seals to club. This is mostly what I favor. It's a decrease in wait times for both queues, and permits those solos who might want to build up some resistance to group queue's tomfuggery to do so whilst allowing duo drops for new players or duo buddies to perhaps not get fed to the hamburger machine quite so frequently.

Sounds like a lot of variables MM has to manage when the floodgates already open for the already existing variables. You have to have a high population to support high numbers of variables. If you expect solos or players like me to go into group queue willingly, you are out of your mind as I'd rather face solo queue mindlessness over going into group queue by myself. This will ultimately just be allowing pairs of players into solo queue and will cause solo queue to erupt in rage worse than these small groups complaining.

1453 R, on 03 January 2017 - 04:03 PM, said:

Option 2.) prioritize small-group stacks in group matchmaking. Emphasize groups of two or three dropping primarily with other groups of two or three against a team composed of enemy groups of two or three, as much as the jigsaw puzzle allows. In essence, mix a small group queue into the regular group queue - you're pulled into a match against marauding 8-man kill squads only when the game absolutely needs someone to soak up a loss against said kill squad. Elsewise the MM system favors pitting collectives of duos/trios against each other, adding in larger groups only as necessity dictates.

Yes, this would potentially increase large-group wait time, and is not a flawless solution. But with an overall improved small-grouping experience in group queue, you might actually end up with more players in said queue enjoying their pseudo-small-group queue games in between getting farmed by EmP kill squads. Who knows.

Won't work because guess what happens when the queue times for those EmP kill squads when they can get games fast enough? They shrink small enough to allow them to get faster queue times and people will still complain on these forums about getting stomped a four man of EmP running 3 KDK-3s and a heavy.

1453 R, on 03 January 2017 - 04:03 PM, said:

Option 3.) Fix Commodity Warfare so the megagroups can have their exclusive playground the way they demanded. You folks fought long and hard to ensure that CW was set up as exclusively for large units, at the specific expense of solos and small groups, as you could. Only fair that you make use of the mode specifically intended for you and relieve some pressure on the quick play queues you profess to be mostly for schlubs and scrubs.

Any of those work? I can figure out some more if you like.

Fixing FW would require a lot of development time, not to mention that still means crappy queue times because smaller groups will be needed as filler for those that can't get a full 12 and the problem of the fact it is respawn vs no respawn.

[1453 R]

MischiefSC, on 03 January 2017 - 04:04 PM, said:

All this.

There was a guy in FP forum arguing that because bad players are the majority and they're bad because they don't want to make the effort to git gud....

We need to gimp or lock out the good players and make the game cater more towards the terribads.

Did half the human race come in to 2017 saying "**** it, I'm not going to put any effort into anything but I'm going to demand rewards, respect and accolades they people who actually put the effort in get".

Who the flying monkey F * * * goes into a team game and rages because the other team actually worked to play as a team and put thought into what they brought and so..... won? Do these numbn*ts out-maneuver another team by sheer luck and then apologize saying "Oh s***, sorry man, I tried harder than you so I won. TOTALY UNFAIR!"

Tired, hung over and hungry I played FW a while yesterday and was pretty bad. Barely broke 1K consistently and I'm pretty sure I tanked my KDR MTD. However *that was because I showed up and sucked*. I know own what bad decisions I made and I own them. I don't demand that the game bend rebalance or changed so I can play poorly or derp around and still win.

That's absurd.

According to this train of logic, there should never be any group smaller than 12 in the group queue.

You're stating that nobody ever has an excuse to drop in less than the most hardcore, bleeding-edge Ultracomp-y company combat team they can assemble, because if you don't put maximum possible effort into something you don't deserve to enjoy that something, and if you want to screw around and do anything but fight to the very tippiest-top edge of your Sirlin-worshipping capabilities, you should drop exclusively in the solo queue where the rest of the derps, drabs, and dumbf***s hang out, chillax and fail to care.

Is that really how the game should be?

[Xoxim SC]

I wish the game went back to 8v8, it was fun then. 12v12 is not fun.

[Deathlike]

I've always thought there needed to be an intermediate queue - one between groups and solo (2-4 man queue) that would fill the void. I think there's enough smaller groups that form up more than bigger groups, but there's a possibility of eating the potential matchups for bigger groups (5+) that need these people. Big groups are NOT the norm generally speaking.

It's either that or an unranked queue (so people can screw around). This options would require bonuses (XP+Cbills) to the ranked queues, but enough for people to not give a damn about winning... given how some are more casual.

Either way, the NPE is screwed over because there's a lack of intermediate growth (it's deep end in the group queue, unicorns in the solo queue) and not much in between.

We're still lacking in for a solo player to "volunteer themselves" into the group queue in the first place.

Edited by Deathlike, 03 January 2017 - 04:20 PM.

[Lukoi Banacek]

1453 R, on 03 January 2017 - 04:03 PM, said:

Option 1.) Mingle the bottm end of both queues. Allow particularly hardcore solos to toggle queuing up for the group queue, and permit duos, and only duos, to drop in the solo Puglandia queue if matchmaking fails to find enough solos quick enough/dependant on PSR or whatever Piranha decides is an appropriate gating mechanism.

Yes, solo grognards will rage, and I get that any gating mechanism can be gamed. But this mixes up the buckets enough that group queue wait times should be significantly decreased, and duos will face less in the way of all-consuming Hell Squads formed by all the mil-spec guys cruising around looking for fresh seals to club. This is mostly what I favor. It's a decrease in wait times for both queues, and permits those solos who might want to build up some resistance to group queue's tomfuggery to do so whilst allowing duo drops for new players or duo buddies to perhaps not get fed to the hamburger machine quite so frequently.

Option 2.) prioritize small-group stacks in group matchmaking. Emphasize groups of two or three dropping primarily with other groups of two or three against a team composed of enemy groups of two or three, as much as the jigsaw puzzle allows. In essence, mix a small group queue into the regular group queue - you're pulled into a match against marauding 8-man kill squads only when the game absolutely needs someone to soak up a loss against said kill squad. Elsewise the MM system favors pitting collectives of duos/trios against each other, adding in larger groups only as necessity dictates.

Yes, this would potentially increase large-group wait time, and is not a flawless solution. But with an overall improved small-grouping experience in group queue, you might actually end up with more players in said queue enjoying their pseudo-small-group queue games in between getting farmed by EmP kill squads. Who knows.

EDIT:: also presumably large kill squads will be on voice comms and can spend more time bullsh!tting and hanging out between matches anyways, so are not quite as badly affected by wait times. Though they will argue this, and I can see why. Nevertheless, if your giant kill squad is the exception, you may have to wind up treated like an exception rather than the ironclad seal-mugging rule.

Option 3.) Fix Commodity Warfare so the megagroups can have their exclusive playground the way they demanded. You folks fought long and hard to ensure that CW was set up as exclusively for large units, at the specific expense of solos and small groups, as you could. Only fair that you make use of the mode specifically intended for you and relieve some pressure on the quick play queues you profess to be mostly for schlubs and scrubs.

Any of those work? I can figure out some more if you like.

See, you're saying things that have been said before (nothing wrong with that) but doesn't do a better job at fixing the problem that we're facing.

Your option 1 makes YOU happy (and players like you who wanna suit up with a buddy or two), but not the soloists. Why should they suffer to make duos/trio's happy? According to Russ's often quoted but quite old statistics SOLO players made up the majority of the playing population, followed by small groups, followed by large, more organized groups. So this idea, while I agree it has merit, disenfranchises the largest alleged population of this game. Cannot do that.

Your option 2 is a great idea that's been brought up before, but at the expense of wait times, something that KILLED FP as we know it and would likely further alienate a large portion of the player base, potentially driving away more players. Guys get frustrated losing, but simply waiting isn't an enjoyable alternative either. I think prioritizing or MM'ing heavier based on group size is a good idea, but if it's going to increase wait times, it's gonna probably not wash out.

Your option 3 is based entirely on a false premise so it's a non-starter to begin with. Who is this "YOU" and who are these megagroups you keep pointing at when you quote something in reply to me?

I NEVER lobbied for FP to be the home of only group play, nor did my small to moderately sized unit.

Oh and btw, folks LIKE QP. Why should they not be allowed to play the mode they've had for multiple years to accommodate some niche demographic? Some folks don't like respawn mode. Some folks don't have time to play alot and just want to hop in, sometimes with a group, sometimes not.

Frankly, I think it's hysterical that you think there was some kind "Large Unit Lives Matter" conspiracy going on that wanted only large groups to inhabit FP. A simple trawling through forums will show that to be untrue. You might be confusing people wanting it to be the endgame "unforgiving" content that in many ways it turned out to be, but ALOT of those same people who advocated for that also begged PGI for hard gateways to prevent casuals, newbies and the under-privileged/underequipped as Suko might say, from being allowed to join the mode. they wanted a tough mode, that mattered on some lore/strategic/map icon level but didn't bring in newbies until they'd proven they were ready. That's not the same as only wanting large groups in the queue by any means.

[Andi Nagasia]

Suko, on 03 January 2017 - 03:09 PM, said:

2 people, even tier 1 gods, only have so much impact in a team of 12. Perhaps you assume there's multiple 2-mans per each side? No. I'm sure everyone assumes and hopes for a single 2-man team on EACH side of a match. Maximum. If there are two Kodiak OP bros, then so be it. 2 of them + 10 pugs is not as potent a force multiplier as a 10-man team is in Group Queue.

its less Tier, and more Communication that make teams win, even some simple communication can lead to victory,
yes a 12 man has advantages, but the smaller groups have more tonnage, this is an advantage,
you say your willing to Voip but not herd Pugs, well if your in group there are already less Pugs,

everyone fears being the first, even if its a (So everyone whats the Plan) over Voip,
it shows everyone that someones willing to talk, which also means someone is willing to listen,
this can decide games, Silence rarely carries a team to victory, but it can often seal ones defeat,

For the want of a nail the shoe was lost,
For the want of a shoe the horse was lost,
For the want of a horse the rider was lost,
For the want of a rider the battle was lost,
For the want of a battle the kingdom was lost,
And all for the want of a horseshoe-nail
(Benjamin Franklin)

Voip is the Nail, Talk the worse thing that could happen is no one talks,
well if no one talks then your already there, so it can only be a benefit,
talk lead your teams to Victory, Call out what you see,

even seeing a light trying to sneak behind, that info can decide a game at times,
Edit- Spelling,

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 03 January 2017 - 04:23 PM.