133 replies to this topic

[Tarl Cabot]

MischiefSC, on 02 December 2017 - 10:56 PM, said:

One of the worst things that happened in FW was the One Bukkit. Not because of queues or the like but the loss of long time well entrenched loyalist units who quit over it.

snip...

Should add more info into that... the previous CW/FW/FP iterations allowed for not just Clan-vs-IS but also Clan-vs-Clan (rare!!!) and IS-vs-IS. Tis mostly those IS-vs-IS units that bailed since they did not want to be forced to fight the Clans.

But then many were already heading out due to Long Tom issue. Anything after that was simply the nail into that coffin.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 03 December 2017 - 06:20 AM.

[MischiefSC]

Wolfways, on 02 December 2017 - 11:21 PM, said:

Yeah but pugs leave the game or have to be satisfied with QP (not sure how that could satisfy anyone).

To be blunt....

so?

If bad units quit playing comp queue because they always lose to good units and refuse to actually learn to get good enough to win by their own merits does that mean comp queue needs to nerf good players? Maybe just have MWOWC split the prize pool among everyone and give everyone who plays the award prizes?

We have QP. We had a thriving group queue but it was considered not 'pug + 1 friendly' enough, so steep tonnage limits were put in to make it so. Result?

Long waits most the time for group queue because far fewer people play it. Amazingly the casual 'pug + 1' players still get stomped and will always get stomped, even against other 2 player groups of people who are just better at the game. Trying to nerf skill and teamwork in the hopes of helping people who make poor choices in the mech bay and in the match is a guaranteed failure. A FW pug queue would still have the same people who lose now losing there.

What people who play poorly want is to make the same mistakes that ensure their failure now suddenly work. That's never ever ever going to happen. They want to do exactly what they're doing now but just win more matches anyway. Nothing you do to this game will make that happen. There's already people pugging and doing well. In spite of all the tear streaked faces over Scouting as Clans I did a ton of pugging in it both in and after the event and won almost 80% of my matches. About 76% over about 60 matches. Why? Brought good mechs, helped my team coordinate, made good choices and tried to play well.

I'm not even that good. A bit over average. There's no magic. There's no secret tricks. We regularly have matches vs pug and small team + pug teams in FW that are tough and hard fought and don't involve us anywhere near their DZ. Why? The players and pugs make good choices, bring good decks and play well.

If people are going to quit because winning as much as literally average people do is too much work for them.... well, that's going to happen regardless. Trying to lower 'average' until everyone is a winner doesn't actually work in a PvP environment.

[Deathlike]

Dakota1000, on 02 December 2017 - 09:53 PM, said:

Solaris is coming up in spring of 2018 for solo players to play in in series of 1v1s and maybe 2v2s with a partner, that should give you something to do other than quickplay drops once it comes in.

The problem is some players in certain builds will think it'll just work. I'd love to see it, but then again, I already know the outcome (bad/casual players complaining about getting roflstomped in a 1v1 or 2v2).

[Helsbane]

Kudos to the guys offering up TS and Disc info to help the wayward soloists around here. We've done the same quite a few times with mixed results. Some stick around, others don't. The problem the OP describes is based around the 'don't want to' aspect, which is completely self inflicted. The solutions are there, but he and others like him would rather post about how unfair things are instead. In short, that particular horse will drown before it takes a drink of water, because it doesn't want to drink any.

Edited by Helsbane, 03 December 2017 - 11:27 AM.

[Tarl Cabot]

Deathlike, on 03 December 2017 - 09:57 AM, said:

The problem is some players in certain builds will think it'll just work. I'd love to see it, but then again, I already know the outcome (bad/casual players complaining about getting roflstomped in a 1v1 or 2v2).

(chuckles) Hai. And this is something they can setup now via Private Matches but they have to work at getting it set it up, primarily outside the game (unless unit/friend list) while not getting CBills for it. I believe for many Solaris meant FFA (free for all) in various configurations and/or the ability to set stipulations.

I can see why PGI setup the Competition section to assist in managing their Sport thingy they have a hard-on for. I guess Solaris could be considered further breakdown of that idea...

And if PGI ever releases an update for Solaris for FFA for different sizes, there will be those who will attempt to feed off the frenzy, those who now sit in back using their teams as meatshields.

Now if we had a more fully functioning chat lobby arrangement/bars, I am thinking along the lines of what we had with MPBT Solaris, the Private Lobbies may be used even more. But any type of lobby setting that is easily navigated, from a common area to faction/merc then to unit generated.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 03 December 2017 - 11:44 AM.

[Wolfways]

MischiefSC, on 03 December 2017 - 09:46 AM, said:

To be blunt....

so?

Some people just can't get better for whatever reason (maybe due to health/medical issues or even just having a bad pc) and I find it quite insulting to tell someone they shouldn't play a game they enjoy because of that.
It's a game and it's supposed to be playable by everyone...for fun.
Having said that, you can't expect people to have fun if they are constantly put against players who are good. Not having a MM putting players with others who play at around the same level means more people quit and the game slowly dies.
It's not about nerfing good players. It's about letting others enjoy the game.

Also, units keep saying they don't like farming pugs. If there was a good MM then they would never have to.

[TWIAFU]

Wolfways, on 03 December 2017 - 01:27 PM, said:

Also, units keep saying they don't like farming pugs. If there was a good MM then they would never have to.

If there were no solo pugs then it would be, like it is now, 12man v 12man first, then 12man v skirmish second. No pugs means no chance for pugs to loose to 12man or skirmish group. Pugs would have to join a group and that would keep with the warning and design intent, i like it.

[Wolfways]

TWIAFU, on 03 December 2017 - 01:40 PM, said:

If there were no solo pugs then it would be, like it is now, 12man v 12man first, then 12man v skirmish second. No pugs means no chance for pugs to loose to 12man or skirmish group. Pugs would have to join a group and that would keep with the warning and design intent, i like it.

Pugs will always join FW if allowed to. FW is supposed to be the main game. Not allowing pugs to play the game is the same as telling them to uninstall, which is obviously not good for the game.

[GutterBoy5]

sure being in a unit obviously is best, but if your to lazy to do that create a group in LFG & actually communicate with each other using voip. if your to lazy to do that then stay in QP.
the means of working together are there so use it, even if you dont win them all it will surely increase you chances & improve your enjoyment.

[The Basilisk]

buryingbeetle, on 01 December 2017 - 04:26 PM, said:

I understand the idea of "Faction Play" being for serious players. However I think that scout mode should be for pugs. When I play a scout mission and I see a major team vs pugs... I think its a little unfair at the least.

If you want Invasion mode to be serious... fine. But don't limit people who just want some fun to only quickdrops.

No you do not understand...not one little thingy.
Faction play was never intended to be played by singleplayers.
Actually there shouldn't even be any groups below 4 players.

Factionplay was made for Units and dedicated highend Groups to play each other.
For this there where certain rewards in FP...like mechbays...mc and c-bills.

This made the ppl unable or unwanting to sozialize and get a group angry.
They jammered and whined and clawed at pgi 'till they alowed micro... "groups"... and singleplayers to fill up groups for FP.

Naturely the larger units and groups playing together on a regular basis where still considderably better and the "I want something for nothing" faction still howled to high heaven because they where naturely completely unable to acheave any of the rewards in short order or at all.

FP's development was stalled somewhat out of this reason...instead scouting was introduced as means to drop for smal groups and get some faction or merc points.

And now someone is jammering to ban those from the gamemode who are the very reason for its existance.

Well....if you want to play SOLO PUG go play the effin SOLO PUG only QUEUE that was introduced only for SOLO PUGS.

[Wolfways]

GutterBoy5, on 03 December 2017 - 02:35 PM, said:

but if your to lazy to do that

What a moronic thing to say. There are reasons people don't play in groups you know.

The Basilisk, on 03 December 2017 - 02:55 PM, said:

Well....if you want to play SOLO PUG go play the effin SOLO PUG only QUEUE that was introduced only for SOLO PUGS.

There is a solo queue in FW? Great, where is it?!

[Telemachus -Salt Wife Salt Life-]

I didn't read this entire thread, just OP.

No.

There is quickplay if you don't like grouping up with people. Just like quickplay in every other game.

Edited by Telemachus -Salt Wife Salt Life-, 03 December 2017 - 03:19 PM.

[MischiefSC]

Wolfways, on 03 December 2017 - 01:27 PM, said:

Some people just can't get better for whatever reason (maybe due to health/medical issues or even just having a bad pc) and I find it quite insulting to tell someone they shouldn't play a game they enjoy because of that.
It's a game and it's supposed to be playable by everyone...for fun.
Having said that, you can't expect people to have fun if they are constantly put against players who are good. Not having a MM putting players with others who play at around the same level means more people quit and the game slowly dies.
It's not about nerfing good players. It's about letting others enjoy the game.

Also, units keep saying they don't like farming pugs. If there was a good MM then they would never have to.

They can play the game, they can play and have fun.

However they're not going to beat better players and saying the game needs to somehow help them win against better players though isn't reasonable.

A mm wouldn't change that. It doesn't magically create players; it just puts the players available in matches. The same people losing now will lose then. That won't change.

Win/loss is zero sum. Only so many players, half of them lose every match. The below average players are still going to get stomped by the average players and it only takes a couple of decent people on a team to turn it into a pug roll. Haven't you played QP?

[Tarl Cabot]

(chuckles) if there were no pugs, FP would be a ghost town in the same way as the original 12vs12 group queue setup....

But I am also not disagreeing that what PGI has put into it does not make it easy for pugs to "group" up before going into FP, to discuss stuff.. heck, to simply discuss FP without having to come to the forums.

[Wolfways]

MischiefSC, on 03 December 2017 - 03:31 PM, said:

They can play the game, they can play and have fun.

However they're not going to beat better players and saying the game needs to somehow help them win against better players though isn't reasonable.

A mm wouldn't change that. It doesn't magically create players; it just puts the players available in matches. The same people losing now will lose then. That won't change.

Win/loss is zero sum. Only so many players, half of them lose every match. The below average players are still going to get stomped by the average players and it only takes a couple of decent people on a team to turn it into a pug roll. Haven't you played QP?

If the MM put players together who are at about the same ability level then it would change the outcome. Nobody (as far as I know) is asking for a system that makes them win against better players, just one that gives them more than the almost zero chance of winning against a full premade unit group.
Comms in a team does not make a player better. It just gives them a better chance of their team winning.

Imo if pgi had put different buckets in from the start and had a decent MM based on the skill of the pilot in the mechs they were using at the time then there would be more players still playing.

[MischiefSC]

Wolfways, on 03 December 2017 - 04:02 PM, said:

If the MM put players together who are at about the same ability level then it would change the outcome. Nobody (as far as I know) is asking for a system that makes them win against better players, just one that gives them more than the almost zero chance of winning against a full premade unit group.
Comms in a team does not make a player better. It just gives them a better chance of their team winning.

Imo if pgi had put different buckets in from the start and had a decent MM based on the skill of the pilot in the mechs they were using at the time then there would be more players still playing.

The problem is the nature of skill curve. Those bad players, the 'I DO WUT I WANT' guys, they are inherently force divisive. They reduce the functionality of their team as a team. They are literally so bad they reduce the performance of their teams ability to win the match by more than just any issues with their aim or piloting skill. Conversely even a mediocre player who plays to his team, communicates and coordinates is a force multiplier. This is why you get so many rolls in QP right now - It only takes a couple of mediocre players willing to communicate and coordinate to absolutely *destroy* a team that doesn't do so or has just a couple of the 'I DO WUT I WANT' guys on it.

So they'll lose just as consistently, just the people beating them won't all have the same tag. The pugs who complain about getting stomped? The camp in their own DZ when they see a team guys? They'll always lose because they're so far down the performance chain that you can't fill 24 people who are that bad at a time. However 2 or 3 on a team will crush their teams odds of success.

It's why decent players can pug with a 2 or 3 win/loss in QP and these guys are sub 1.0. Because there's not enough of the dedicated terribads to fill their own teams. In a narrow population like FW that's even more the case.

Case in point - the other night there was about 2 or 3 Clan teams and 1 IS team playing in FW. Total. That IS team? They're going to play against everyone, MM or not. The Clan team? They're all going to play that IS team while cycling through ghost drops.

If there's only 3 teams on IS side and 3 on Clan side, 36 to 40 people or so on each side, there is no relevant matchmaker. It'll fill and drop matches with the people it can find and those bads will get destroyed just as much.

[ANOM O MECH]

LOL




NO

[KHAN ATTAKHAN]

More talk of eliminating players from here or there or let's just not let them play.
SHUT UP ALREADY AND LET EVERYBODY PLAY WHAT THEY WANT, WHY DON'T YOU LEAVE, GO JOIN THE COMP GROUPS AND STAY THERE........

[Wolfways]

MischiefSC, on 03 December 2017 - 04:50 PM, said:

The problem is the nature of skill curve. Those bad players, the 'I DO WUT I WANT' guys, they are inherently force divisive. They reduce the functionality of their team as a team. They are literally so bad they reduce the performance of their teams ability to win the match by more than just any issues with their aim or piloting skill. Conversely even a mediocre player who plays to his team, communicates and coordinates is a force multiplier. This is why you get so many rolls in QP right now - It only takes a couple of mediocre players willing to communicate and coordinate to absolutely *destroy* a team that doesn't do so or has just a couple of the 'I DO WUT I WANT' guys on it.

So they'll lose just as consistently, just the people beating them won't all have the same tag. The pugs who complain about getting stomped? The camp in their own DZ when they see a team guys? They'll always lose because they're so far down the performance chain that you can't fill 24 people who are that bad at a time. However 2 or 3 on a team will crush their teams odds of success.

It's why decent players can pug with a 2 or 3 win/loss in QP and these guys are sub 1.0. Because there's not enough of the dedicated terribads to fill their own teams. In a narrow population like FW that's even more the case.

Case in point - the other night there was about 2 or 3 Clan teams and 1 IS team playing in FW. Total. That IS team? They're going to play against everyone, MM or not. The Clan team? They're all going to play that IS team while cycling through ghost drops.

If there's only 3 teams on IS side and 3 on Clan side, 36 to 40 people or so on each side, there is no relevant matchmaker. It'll fill and drop matches with the people it can find and those bads will get destroyed just as much.

So you're saying that a MM can't work because there aren't enough players. So MWO is a failed and dead game?
Wait...why am I even asking that?

Russ seems to think it's a terrific success though...

[MischiefSC]

Wolfways, on 03 December 2017 - 06:33 PM, said:

So you're saying that a MM can't work because there aren't enough players. So MWO is a failed and dead game?
Wait...why am I even asking that?

Russ seems to think it's a terrific success though...

Sorta, in the same way it fails in QP already and doesn't even exist in group queue.

We had the population for the first 2.5 phases of phases 1-3. The real question is, why did those unit players leave? The answer isn't 'because grouping up is OP'. They were all grouped up. We all grouped up together all the time.

It was the lack of depth and purpose.