116 replies to this topic

[Tarl Cabot]

Raubwurst, on 13 January 2017 - 04:05 PM, said:

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 14 January 2017 - 10:08 PM.

[Navid A1]

Tarl Cabot, on 14 January 2017 - 10:07 PM, said:

[color=#959595][/color]
[color=#959595][/color]
[color=#959595][/color]
[color=#959595][/color]
[color=#959595][/color]
[color=#959595][/color]

Misleading info is misleading...
Its unclear.

- it does not tell us if those 5K matches were since January 2015 or not.
- You can have 12000+ matches, 10+ KDR, and 100+ W/L and still be T5 if you did not play since January 2015
- You did not provide the average number of matches of players in T5 and T4 pool
- I can start making tons of alt-accounts, play 3 matches in them and leave them forever... increasing the number of T5 players and skewing your "data".
- How many of those T5-4 accounts are active?
-etc...


Playing with data is one of the easiest things to do.

[Tarl Cabot]

Navid A1, on 14 January 2017 - 10:22 PM, said:

Misleading info is misleading...
Its unclear.

- it does not tell us if those 5K matches were since January 2015 or not.
- You can have 12000+ matches, 10+ KDR, and 100+ W/L and still be T5 if you did not play since January 2015
- You did not provide the average number of matches of players in T5 and T4 pool
- I can start making tons of alt-accounts, play 3 matches in them and leave them forever... increasing the number of T5 players and skewing your "data".
- How many of those T5-4 accounts are active?
-etc...


Playing with data is one of the easiest things to do.

Simply noting what was twitted. I do not disagree there, nor I do not have faith PGI will provide enough filters to show relevant data for today, this week/month. Means nothing if 2000 of those T5 players have not dropped even once in the last month, like the score board that used to show #1 players with only 1 or 2 games played.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 14 January 2017 - 10:31 PM.

[DJ Sikosis]

There's a number of factors in play when T1s are rolling T5s ... they have better mechs, they actually have modules and mech/pilot skills that T5s simply don't have. Ping also plays a major factor in whether you're going to lose or not. And I haven't even mentioned tactics yet ...

[The Unstoppable Puggernaut]

They need to double the Ttiers, split people up nicer into them and re-work the brackets of who plays with who. Or if lazy split the T1 bracket to have T0 as well.

There's no way I should be in T1. I've seen some nasty (well nice) players and they need a bumpty to be in top tier. If I end up having to game with them then no problemos but some of the people I've been viewing are using just the keyboard to aim. They need to be moved to safety for their own sake of enjoyment and others.

[Sjorpha]

So Russ says he expects more players at the ends of the spectrum?

That would mean something is seriously wrong with the system, a healthy tier distribution would place most players in the center, it should be a bell curve with the worst and best players in tier 1 and 5 and they should also be the fewest in number.

[Antares102]

The Unstoppable Puggernaut, on 15 January 2017 - 04:25 AM, said:

They need to double the Ttiers, split people up nicer into them and re-work the brackets of who plays with who. Or if lazy split the T1 bracket to have T0 as well.

They also need to make the Tier rating gain/loss dependent on individual performance ONLY and not if the team won or lost.
On the one hand nobody should gain Tier rating if he won but only did 10 damage in an assault because he totally focked up. Something like that should be PUNISHED and not REWARDED.
On the other hand somebody with 8 kills and >1000 damage should GAIN a lot of Tier rating even if he lost.

This way there will be (almost) no difference between solo Q and group Q and a bad player cannot be carried to Tier 1 by constantly dropping with an otherwise good 11-man group.

Edited by Antares102, 15 January 2017 - 09:26 AM.

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

They could make PSR zero-sum, you know, like it should have been from the start. At the end of match, 12 go up and 12 go down.

Navid A1, on 14 January 2017 - 10:22 PM, said:

Playing with data is one of the easiest things to do.

Lies, damned lies, and statistics.

Edited by Saint Scarlett Johan, 15 January 2017 - 10:57 AM.

[JaxRiot]

Tarl Cabot, on 14 January 2017 - 10:07 PM, said:

This is confusing to me..

People with 5000 matches that are T5? Is that even possible? Are these active players or players that havnt played a match in two years?

And how is it a Fallacy that everyone will reach T1? It has already been proven that PSR has an upward trend many times. All a person had to do is play enough and they will be towed kicking and screaming all the way to T1.

Which by the way, makes the claim there there are people with 5000 matches that are still T5 even more unbelievable. Its just not possible with the way the current PSR system works.

And also, how is it that T3s would be the Rarest? If PSR was working as intended, then T3's should be by far the most abundant with T1's and T5s being the exception.

None of this seems correct to me

[MacClearly]

DJ Sikosis, on 15 January 2017 - 03:53 AM, said:

There's a number of factors in play when T1s are rolling T5s ... they have better mechs, they actually have modules and mech/pilot skills that T5s simply don't have. Ping also plays a major factor in whether you're going to lose or not. And I haven't even mentioned tactics yet ...

While certainly tier 1 players are more likely to be fully equipped, tier five isn't just flooded with olive green trial mechs. Remember a new player has to be a very bad new player to be in tier 5.  Tier 5 has lots of fully decked out Kodiaks running around. A lot of them even sporting meta builds. Tier 5 isn't about being new, that's tier 4. Tier 5 has got a lot of players who have been playing a long time while missing some fundamental skills.

Edited by MacClearly, 15 January 2017 - 11:29 AM.

[Cy Mitchell]

Navid A1, on 14 January 2017 - 10:22 PM, said:

Misleading info is misleading...
Its unclear.

- it does not tell us if those 5K matches were since January 2015 or not.
- You can have 12000+ matches, 10+ KDR, and 100+ W/L and still be T5 if you did not play since January 2015
- You did not provide the average number of matches of players in T5 and T4 pool
- I can start making tons of alt-accounts, play 3 matches in them and leave them forever... increasing the number of T5 players and skewing your "data".
- How many of those T5-4 accounts are active?
-etc...


Playing with data is one of the easiest things to do.

In addition to your points, most of the brand new players that start the game are in Tier 5. That is where they play as they decide if the game is fun for them or not. Many find it too hard, too boring, not BT enough, Not FPS enough, not MMO enough etc, and quit before ever transitioning into Tier 4 or 3. Almost everyone who plays much and stays with the game for a significant amount of time transitions through Tier 4 and Tier 3 fairly rapidly and ends up as a Tier 1 or 2. It does not surprise me at all that the Tiers are heavily weighed at either end with the lowest population at the center.

Sadly, it should be just the opposite. T5 should be for beginners and really casual players. T1 should be for the elite of the elite and include the top 5% of the game population. T4-T2 should contain the bulk of the players and be for the those who are improving and climbing the ladder rapidly or for the relatively serious players who play fairly often but do not put forth the effort to become the best of the best.

Edited by Rampage, 15 January 2017 - 12:02 PM.

[MacClearly]

Antares102, on 15 January 2017 - 09:24 AM, said:

They also need to make the Tier rating gain/loss dependent on individual performance ONLY and not if the team won or lost.
On the one hand nobody should gain Tier rating if he won but only did 10 damage in an assault because he totally focked up. Something like that should be PUNISHED and not REWARDED.
On the other hand somebody with 8 kills and >1000 damage should GAIN a lot of Tier rating even if he lost.

This way there will be (almost) no difference between solo Q and group Q and a bad player cannot be carried to Tier 1 by constantly dropping with an otherwise good 11-man group.

Do you not think that having gains tied to wins is done to encourage team work? I already make steady gains while treating quick play as a place to practice and level mechs for FW and drops with my unit. I have made those steady gains as well with a poor wlr. Tying it completely to individual performance would certainly have serious consequences.

[Too Much Love]

Tina, what about LOSING STREAKS - tens of defeats in a row, when your team is vaporized in 3 minutes?

Can you explain this kind of things, please?

I've been playing for 4 years already and, honestly, the matchmaking is more or less the same. There is no big differences between matchmaking, only waiting time.

It's always been the same: strong team against weak. Close matches are rare, like 10 or 20% at best.

[Leone]

@OP, Haven't seen any issues with Solo or group queue matchmaking, so seems to be working.

~Leone.

[RussianWolf]

MacClearly, on 15 January 2017 - 11:28 AM, said:

While certainly tier 1 players are more likely to be fully equipped, tier five isn't just flooded with olive green trial mechs. Remember a new player has to be a very bad new player to be in tier 5. Tier 5 has lots of fully decked out Kodiaks running around. A lot of them even sporting meta builds. Tier 5 isn't about being new, that's tier 4. Tier 5 has got a lot of players who have been playing a long time while missing some fundamental skills.

Well a T5 match could have players up to T2 apparently, so who knows.

[Navid A1]

Saint Scarlett Johan, on 15 January 2017 - 10:51 AM, said:

They could make PSR zero-sum, you know, like it should have been from the start. At the end of match, 12 go up and 12 go down.



Lies, damned lies, and statistics.

I think we first need to make a tutorial thread on what zero-sum is.
Not for us... But for PGI.
Last time PGI was asked about zero-sum, they seemed to not know what it is.


I believe, the first step they can take is to use/hire someone that can analyze data and its acquisition method properly.

The second step would be to change their mindset of "the community is a bunch of st*pids who don't know how to make a game, so anything they say is st*pid gibberish".

Edited by Navid A1, 15 January 2017 - 03:32 PM.

[Willard Phule]

Separating the Tiers does not play into PGI's gaming philosophy of "The better you are, the more you carry." That's been a founding principle since day one.

There's a reason they don't provide much in the way of training or explaining the game to new players, they expect everyone else to teach them. Either that or they don't know how.

[HGAK47]

Tina Benoit, on 13 January 2017 - 04:17 PM, said:

Heya,

We've been hearing a couple complaints here and there about high tiers getting matched up with or against low tiers players and wanted to let you guys know what's up.

We do currently have it set that Tier 1 players and Tier 4 players can get matched together, however we've just recently reduced it (due to reports), so that it now takes 4.5 minutes before that will happen.
We've basically done this so that you won't be stuck waiting for a match for too long but you should be getting much nicer matches now compared to last couple days.

Let us know if the Matchmaker is feeling better!

This would explain why I started to notice a bit longer wait times, I havent noticed anything else bad yet so I guess its working ok? Time till tell but thanks for the heads up.

[MacClearly]

RussianWolf, on 15 January 2017 - 03:07 PM, said:

Well a T5 match could have players up to T2 apparently, so who knows.

Could at off peak hours but he says on average the matches have only a one tier spread.

[justcallme A S H]

DJ Sikosis, on 15 January 2017 - 03:53 AM, said:

There's a number of factors in play when T1s are rolling T5s ... they have better mechs, they actually have modules and mech/pilot skills that T5s simply don't have. Ping also plays a major factor in whether you're going to lose or not. And I haven't even mentioned tactics yet ...

Sorry, again that is not an accurate statement.

Plenty of players T5/T4 have fully kitted out mechs. I made a alt-account for a laugh. After 5 games I was in T3. So it's got nothing to do with modules, skills or otherwise.

Also the usual excuses of "ping" or "hit reg" do not really play a factor either. I play between 220-350ms depending on how my connection feels on any given day. Matches like the below are not a "one off", they are regular for me these days. 12 months ago, my first FP matches, I did like 200/300dmg, but since then I've learnt.






Once you take all the excuses aside it simply comes down to this:


They are just not as good at the game as others.

It's not a rude statement, it's just pure fact without emotion put in it. Tiers should reflect that.
I don't even believe I'm a T1 player if the Tier system worked properly (when comparing myself to MWO C/Ship finalists level etc).

Edited by justcallme A S H, 15 January 2017 - 05:48 PM.