Jump to content

8V8 Quick Play Forever!


47 replies to this topic

#41 MadRover

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 568 posts

Posted 26 August 2017 - 12:32 PM

View PostAlcom Isst, on 26 August 2017 - 12:22 PM, said:

8v8 would increase the impact of individual new players but decrease the average number of them per-team, a trade-off that makes that issue pretty much near-negligible.


and keeps the same crap that goes on in QP matches exactly the same or much much worse. They need to fix the tier system like I probably said a thousand times by now, by having your tier rank be affected by your personal W-L, KDR, and average overall damage. 8v8 does not solve this issue because all it will do is make both teams smaller at the expense of overall quality. Also, getting a quick play game doesn't take long at all, which means we are fixing what again? A problem that doesn't exist? Like always it would seem?

If 8v8 were to be applied to faction considering it is no where near as popular, then sure, I will be behind the idea for FW. Since we're talking about QP that doesn't have a queue problem, we're solving nothing or very little.

#42 Alcom Isst

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Professional
  • The Professional
  • 935 posts
  • LocationElo Heaven

Posted 26 August 2017 - 12:50 PM

View PostMadRover, on 26 August 2017 - 12:32 PM, said:

which means we are fixing what again?


Software performance and individual player impact.

#43 MadRover

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 568 posts

Posted 26 August 2017 - 02:32 PM

View PostAlcom Isst, on 26 August 2017 - 12:50 PM, said:


Software performance and individual player impact.


No we're not. The matchmaker only takes the type of mech into account. The tier system does an extremely poor job at doing what it was designed to do with all the stomps that occur. 8v8 will only work in FW because of how unpopular it is, not in QP where teams are being formed in a timely manner. On top of that individual pilot skill is not taken into account. 8v8 will not fix the quality of the matches. Fixing how the teams are actually formed will.

Edited by MadRover, 26 August 2017 - 02:32 PM.


#44 B0oN

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,870 posts

Posted 26 August 2017 - 02:38 PM

Batallion vs. Batallion, every else is just kindergarden .

#45 Connor Davion

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 115 posts
  • LocationSouth Carolina

Posted 26 August 2017 - 04:09 PM

View PostThe Shortbus, on 26 August 2017 - 02:38 PM, said:

Batallion vs. Batallion, every else is just kindergarden .


Many seem content to regress into small sizes I would love some huge maps and 36v36 sounds awesome! Never gonna happen though unfortunately...

#46 Alcom Isst

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Professional
  • The Professional
  • 935 posts
  • LocationElo Heaven

Posted 26 August 2017 - 08:50 PM

View PostMadRover, on 26 August 2017 - 02:32 PM, said:

No we're not. The matchmaker only takes the type of mech into account. The tier system does an extremely poor job at doing what it was designed to do with all the stomps that occur. 8v8 will only work in FW because of how unpopular it is, not in QP where teams are being formed in a timely manner. On top of that individual pilot skill is not taken into account. 8v8 will not fix the quality of the matches. Fixing how the teams are actually formed will.


K.

I'm not wanting 8v8 to fix the match maker. Honestly I feel the matchmaker is unsolvable regardless of team size. The lack of any recovery or respawn mechanics means that every match is going be a super-snowball, so the game is super sensitive to slight differences in team skill. On top of that, there's many weird variables such as skill points and loadouts that severely raise and lower a player's ability to perform, and add inaccuracies to the matchmaker. Both the snow-ball and performance inaccuracies make a competent match-maker pretty much never happening.

But here's what 8v8 will do.
  • It will increase the software performance.
  • It will make my damage, kills, decisions, and calls have a larger impact on each match. I hate the feeling of my presence and actions not having a major impact on the battle that I'm in. That has nothing to do with match-making.


#47 B0oN

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,870 posts

Posted 26 August 2017 - 10:45 PM

View PostConnor Davion, on 26 August 2017 - 04:09 PM, said:


Many seem content to regress into small sizes I would love some huge maps and 36v36 sounds awesome! Never gonna happen though unfortunately...


A man´s still allowed to dream despite reality ^^

#48 MadRover

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 568 posts

Posted 28 August 2017 - 05:57 AM

View PostAlcom Isst, on 26 August 2017 - 08:50 PM, said:


K.

I'm not wanting 8v8 to fix the match maker. Honestly I feel the matchmaker is unsolvable regardless of team size. The lack of any recovery or respawn mechanics means that every match is going be a super-snowball, so the game is super sensitive to slight differences in team skill. On top of that, there's many weird variables such as skill points and loadouts that severely raise and lower a player's ability to perform, and add inaccuracies to the matchmaker. Both the snow-ball and performance inaccuracies make a competent match-maker pretty much never happening.

But here's what 8v8 will do.
  • It will increase the software performance.
  • It will make my damage, kills, decisions, and calls have a larger impact on each match. I hate the feeling of my presence and actions not having a major impact on the battle that I'm in. That has nothing to do with match-making.


Then form a team and play comp mode. Leave QP as a place to chill and have fun killing mechs (or be amused by your teammates) and stop trying to kill the fun for us casuals. Not everything has to be competitive. Most of us are here to just enjoy the game not enter try hard mode. There's plenty of other games that are filled with nothing but tryhards.





4 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 4 guests, 0 anonymous users