111 replies to this topic

[UnofficialOperator]

Really shouldn't be in T1 matches. Its crap all the way around.

[Juodas Varnas]

You talking about yourself?

[Revis Volek]

must be

[Mechteric]

Also you can't have negative ratios, only below or above the mystical 1.0 but always at or above 0.0

Edited by CapperDeluxe, 03 December 2017 - 07:51 AM.

[LordNothing]

ive said a million times that the bubble up mechanic should die in a fire. it just gives everyone a bad experience. do that and then people will have good matches for that narrow band durring the na phase where the matchmaker actually has enough players to function.

[Asym]

Booooooooooooooooooooo...... I resemble this concept.

"Help! Help! I'm being repressed! Violence inherent in the system!" (monty python - search for the Holy Grail)

[Xavori]

We need to get rid of tiers entirely...

And W/L is a meaningless stat in the current game, and in a well balanced matchmaking game, W/L for everyone is ~1 once the game gets their ranking to match their actual skill level.

[CFC Conky]

Asym, on 03 December 2017 - 08:10 AM, said:

Booooooooooooooooooooo...... I resemble this concept.

"Help! Help! I'm being repressed! Violence inherent in the system!" (monty python - search for the Holy Grail)

Life of Brian actually Asym .

Good hunting,
CFC Conky

Edited by CFC Conky, 03 December 2017 - 08:26 AM.

[Bulletsponge0]

CFC Conky, on 03 December 2017 - 08:26 AM, said:

Life of Brian actually Asym .

Good hunting,
CFC Conky

No, he was correct, its Holy Grail

[Pariah Devalis]

Xavori, on 03 December 2017 - 08:12 AM, said:

We need to get rid of tiers entirely...

And W/L is a meaningless stat in the current game, and in a well balanced matchmaking game, W/L for everyone is ~1 once the game gets their ranking to match their actual skill level.

If that is the case, that just further strengthens that the tier system we have is bunk, considering at T1 I still have an average 1.84 W/L across all game modes.

Tiers are not a problem in and of themselves. It was, however, handled horribly. A zero-sum system would make tiers worthwhile, in that if someone goes up the bar, someone else must go down. This creates natural striation of skill based on actual performance, as opposed to a glorified XP bar that, unless you're just awful, will inevitably lead to you being T1.

However, even that can be gamed so long as we have one primary tier. If we had a solo queue tier and a group queue tier, much of the artificial tier-gain could be sidestepped. You might be able to ride your team's coattails in group queue all the way to T1 or 2, but a crap player would end up with a tier that is actually appropriate to them in solo queue.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 03 December 2017 - 09:13 AM.

[N0ni]

Asym, on 03 December 2017 - 08:10 AM, said:

"Help! Help! I'm being repressed! Violence inherent in the system!" (monty python - search for the Holy Grail)

"Listen. Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony."

[ScrapIron Prime]

Imagine that... people playing a game because they like it, not because they'll ever make the leader board.

[Pariah Devalis]

ScrapIron Prime, on 03 December 2017 - 09:18 AM, said:

Imagine that... people playing a game because they like it, not because they'll ever make the leader board.

Hard to enjoy the game when a large portion of those you are paired up with or against can't hit an Awesome, if they were piloting it. A close fight is a fun fight. Either wiping out the enemy team lopsidedly, or having to tryhard to generate any sort of win game in game out because 2/3 of your allies sure as heck can't fight worth a damn, is not fun.

[ScrapIron Prime]

Pariah Devalis, on 03 December 2017 - 09:43 AM, said:

Hard to enjoy the game when a large portion of those you are paired up with or against can't hit an Awesome, if they were piloting it. A close fight is a fun fight. Either wiping out the enemy team lopsidedly, or having to tryhard to generate any sort of win game in game out because 2/3 of your allies sure as heck can't fight worth a damn, is not fun.

Well you COULD always join some kind of group... then you'd at least have a team of people who all want to coordinate to some extent. There's only so much solo dropping one can take.

[Bishop Steiner]

Bulletsponge0, on 03 December 2017 - 08:57 AM, said:

No, he was correct, its Holy Grail

Only part he was off on is it isn't "search. Just "Monty Python and the Holy Grail".

Pariah Devalis, on 03 December 2017 - 09:43 AM, said:

Hard to enjoy the game when a large portion of those you are paired up with or against can't hit an Awesome, if they were piloting it. A close fight is a fun fight. Either wiping out the enemy team lopsidedly, or having to tryhard to generate any sort of win game in game out because 2/3 of your allies sure as heck can't fight worth a damn, is not fun.

Eh, so let's go do some 3025 Stock Mech duels for science and piss on all this

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 03 December 2017 - 09:49 AM.

[Magnus Santini]

I hope OP isn't talking about me. But I sure don't belong in matches with T1s.

[stealthraccoon]

I think the Monty Python portions of this thread are far more relevant to stompy robots.

[Mechrophilia]

IMO, our rank system should represent how that pilot performs in that mech.
So basically, "MWO Super Alt" would have a different rank in a HBR-F than in a DRG-1N.

[ANOM O MECH]

Pariah Devalis, on 03 December 2017 - 09:10 AM, said:

If that is the case, that just further strengthens that the tier system we have is bunk, considering at T1 I still have an average 1.84 W/L across all game modes.

Tiers are not a problem in and of themselves. It was, however, handled horribly. A zero-sum system would make tiers worthwhile, in that if someone goes up the bar, someone else must go down. This creates natural striation of skill based on actual performance, as opposed to a glorified XP bar that, unless you're just awful, will inevitably lead to you being T1.

However, even that can be gamed so long as we have one primary tier. If we had a solo queue tier and a group queue tier, much of the artificial tier-gain could be sidestepped. You might be able to ride your team's coattails in group queue all the way to T1 or 2, but a crap player would end up with a tier that is actually appropriate to them in solo queue.

Math, understanding things, and playing this game are not things this guy does very well....

[Tarogato]

CapperDeluxe, on 03 December 2017 - 07:50 AM, said:

Also you can't have negative ratios, only below or above the mystical 1.0 but always at or above 0.0

I've used this before. Negative WLR just means you have more losses than wins... you're in the red. The great thing about language, is that you can communicate effectively while being technically incorrect. As long as people understand what you meant... it's all good.

(until it's perpetuated to the point of being commonplace and changing the language and the evolution is in fact a regression... )

ScrapIron Prime, on 03 December 2017 - 09:18 AM, said:

Imagine that... people playing a game because they like it, not because they'll ever make the leader board.

They can play it all the want, as long as they are segregated and properly protected from the tryhard pool.

As it is, the matchmaking system is doing a pisspoor job at that. But I think part of the problem is that there just aren't enough good players to make one whole pool of good players, so the low skill victims are forced to seep in just to build matches.