37 replies to this topic

[DaMuchi]

I don't really mind how games flow right now but a lot of people do. Till the point some wants to give better players a handicap. The underlying problem is that mwo just doesn't have enough players to fill a 24 player game with similar skilled players, reducing it to 16 player games would make it much easier. What do you guys think?

[Khobai]

8v8 would certainly fix a lot of the issues in quickplay

I think FW should stay 12v12 though

[Brain Cancer]

QP, given the smaller pools needs to have a game size valve before it shoves less experienced players into the T1-2 wood chipper.

If the MM can't get enough people of the correct tier, it should retry as a 8v8. If it can't get an 8v8, it retries as a 4v4. If it can't get a 4v4, it opens the tier valve by one wider and retries 12v12, then 8v8, 4v4.

[Mystere]

DaMuchi, on 04 August 2017 - 06:16 AM, said:

I don't really mind how games flow right now but a lot of people do. Till the point some wants to give better players a handicap. The underlying problem is that mwo just doesn't have enough players to fill a 24 player game with similar skilled players, reducing it to 16 player games would make it much easier. What do you guys think?

Ahem! I don't think you explained how moving from 16 vs. 16 to 8 vs. 8 would actually improve balance.

[ocular tb]

I'd be okay with it I think. 12v12 can be okay but I think sometimes 8v8 would be more enjoyable.

[LordBraxton]

I don't know about balance, but I have wanted 8v8 back for years because I could actually carry a game.

Hell, I want a 4v4 mode that doesn't require me to **** with FP

[sycocys]

The only way 8v8 would work is if the game stuck strictly to the tier rating, otherwise moderately better players would completely run matches.

[Athom83]

[LordBraxton]

sycocys, on 04 August 2017 - 10:37 AM, said:

The only way 8v8 would work is if the game stuck strictly to the tier rating, otherwise moderately better players would completely run matches.

Tiers dont matter, and how is that a bad thing? You are literally saying, "But then skill would matter more!" like it's a bad thing?

[Dracol]

LordBraxton, on 04 August 2017 - 10:39 AM, said:

Tiers dont matter, and how is that a bad thing? You are literally saying, "But then skill would matter more!" like it's a bad thing?

Let me see if I can restate sycocys statement.

For 8v8 to solve the issue th OP proposed it would (not enough popukation to fill 24 player slots) it would need to strickly match players by teirs. If the relaxing of tiers remains (ie. Instead of endless waiting for a match of all teir 1 players, MM relaxes after a time to mix players of differant teirs), then the problem of mixing tiers will be even more pronounced than it is now. 1 highly skilled player has more influence in a mixed teir match if there are only 8 enemies to face.

[DaMuchi]

Players habe reported longer queue times when they reach tier 1. That means to say that the game does take tiers into account, of course this is only useful if the tier system is accurate but that's another topic. Even if the matchmaker cannot get enough players of a certain tier, it would try to get players from nearby tiers. So a match would be more easily filled with players of similar skill creating an environment where both skilled and not-so-skilled players to enjoy. This would also reduce queue times since it is easier to find players to get the game going.

The only downside that I see from reducing the number of players is that battles won't be as epic.

My intention isn't to allow ease people to carry the game but to remove the need to carry the game in the first place. After all, a potato would throw the game as hard as a skillful one would carry, whether in 12v12 or 8v8

[Coolant]

don't like the idea at all. MW4:Mercs had 12v12 in most servers. Other games there are literally hundreds of enemies on the battlefield. MWO needs to keep up.

[QuantumButler]

Further proof that 12 v 12 was the biggest mistake pgi ever made.

[Tarl Cabot]

But atm Tiers mean Juliet Sierra since PSR is designed to most players up, some slower than others, in a non-zero PSR setting. I think people liked PSR when it was first introduced because it used the Player's Elo numbers. I started out at a high T3. Others were high T1 players. Now I am a maxed out T1 player.. (chuckles) Checking out the stats of real T1 players, I do not even come close.

That is the fraking issue. MM is working but it is working with trash numbers. It is now no better than Elo which the calculations were based on when team was expected to win and which one would lose based on Elo numbers, and a expected losing team who bet the odds had a higher return while the team which was expectd to win lost was hit harder on point lost.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 04 August 2017 - 02:20 PM.

[Lukoi Banacek]

DaMuchi, on 04 August 2017 - 06:16 AM, said:

I don't really mind how games flow right now but a lot of people do. Till the point some wants to give better players a handicap. The underlying problem is that mwo just doesn't have enough players to fill a 24 player game with similar skilled players, reducing it to 16 player games would make it much easier. What do you guys think?

By this logic knock it down to 4v4 or heck, even 1v1.

I vote no. I like bigger battles personally, and dont believe for a minute that 8-0 stomps would occur any less than the 12-0 that occur periodically.

Btw 12v12 isnt the problem. It is a PSR that is nothing more than an experience bar. With so many players just grinding their way to tier 1, no matter how bad their skills, builds or playstyle, now there isnt a decent enough spread between the t5 and t1.....the latter is over represented and not properly so. The MM is swarming with improperly tiered players and the remaining new players and casuals arent numerous enough to be properly placed, which drives off said NP and casuals, increasing the problematic deafh spiral that already negatively affects MM.

Edited by Lukoi Banacek, 04 August 2017 - 02:28 PM.

[Brain Cancer]

Quote

Further proof that 12 v 12 was the biggest mistake pgi ever made
It's just a very big magnifying glass for many of PGI's greatest screw-ups.

The real killer of 12v12 was not having an actual tiering system, instead having a crude mockery of one that gradually mashed everyone into the same matches and stomped newer players until they left or developed Stockholm Syndrome (or rarely, got gud)

Paul built it to sacrifice newbies to the goldmen and whales who buy Mechpacks, but eventually, the virgins run out.

[DAYLEET]

Fixing buckets or changing drop rules dont fix the game. We know this for a fact thanks to the removal of game mode choice, removal or weight distribution, the now dead valve releasing of tiering.

As more people join the game(according to steam chart) my dropping time increases, the people in my match are all kind of crazies and i can only expect it to get worse with time. Play with bucket again and you buy yourself what? less drop time for a limited time with matchmaking getting incrementally worse because more people leave the game again?

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Mystere, on 04 August 2017 - 10:09 AM, said:

Ahem! I don't think you explained how moving from 16 vs. 16 to 8 vs. 8 would actually improve balance.

Less players on the field = less angles you can realistically cover to spot a push = shorter average range of a match

It's why 4v4 comp can be extremely brawly but 8v8 isn't always.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 04 August 2017 - 03:09 PM.

[Cy Mitchell]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 04 August 2017 - 03:08 PM, said:

Less players on the field = less angles you can realistically cover to spot a push = shorter average range of a match

It's why 4v4 comp can be extremely brawly but 8v8 isn't always.

It is much easier to keep 4 players together on a battlefield than it is 12 or even 8. When two teams of 4 players finally spot each other it is often at fairly short range and therefore brawl range.

I really do not think going back to 8v8 is going to be the fix all that some say it will be. I see people say it is the answer to longer TTK and matchmaker and wait times and balance and competitive games. I doubt it. I watch a lot of comp matches. They are 8v8 and once the first shot is fired they seldom last for more that a minute and a half to three minutes. Some would say that comp players are the best shots so people die faster. But comp players are presumably the best at rolling damage also and playing defensively and yet the matches still end rapidly unless it becomes a cap fest.
Others say that TTK will be longer because you will not have 12 people focus firing one. But I have never had 12 people focusing on me. At most maybe 3 or 4 will be targeting the same Mech because 12 players spread out a lot more than 8.

I am not against 8v8. I just do not think a switch to that is going to really provide the benefits some claim it will.

[LordBraxton]

QuantumButler, on 04 August 2017 - 02:12 PM, said:

Further proof that 12 v 12 was the biggest mistake pgi ever made.

this