Jump to content

Add 8V8 And 4V4 To Qp


33 replies to this topic

#1 Scyther

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,271 posts
  • LocationOntario, Canada

Posted 22 February 2018 - 04:47 PM

Issues of tiering, good/bad MM, gameplay/map variety, and new player friendliness crop up endlessly. These issues are persistent, negatively affect the game, and contribute to the steady loss of players.

So here's a notion re-organizing the current QP system that is within PGI's capabilities, as it does not involve engine or mechanics changes, simply a re-shuffling of existing game modes and some MM algorithm tweaking.

What if we opened up the QP matchmaking system, such that when there is a larger population in the queue, it makes 12v12 matches as now. When there is a lower population, or when 24 'good match' players can't be paired up, it creates an 8v8 match and uses some of the smaller current maps, as well as bringing back the older Forest Colony, Frozen City, River City etc maps. (Slightly tweaked to remove obvious flaws)

In some circumstances, MM could build a 4v4 match from the available players. Either when the queue has low player count, or when there is a group that would fit a 4v4 that has been waiting a while for a match. (I suspect this would mostly occur in the lower tiers, 4 and 5.)

Domination, Assault, and Skirmish would be suitable modes for 4v4, on the smaller/older maps. It might be that PGI could come up with another mode that works well for the reduced player count. I don't think the current Scouting mode would work well for QP 4v4 as the mechs/builds/tactics are more specialized.

Either 8v8 or 4v4 could also be used to pull out mech classes that are over-saturated in the regular queue. Half the mechs queued are heavies? Fine, pull out an 8v8 that is 6 heavies and 2 meds per side. Got 10 tier 5's waiting in queue that the current MM would throw into a tier 3 match? Make a 4v4.

The MM would first try to make a 12v12 under certain constraints. If these were not met, it would drop to an 8v8 or 4v4 to make 'best use' of the available population. Map voting would not occur until after the players were placed in a match, so only appropriate maps would be shown.

Smaller maps would be easier/cheaper to make. Newer players would be less likely to be overwhelmed by the complexity of a 12v12 battle, focused fire, and the possibility that higher ranked players would be in their match. Veteran players would see more variety, more maps, and some changes to game play.

It would be less necessary to push players up tiers to separate the 'new' players from the 'veteran' players, so it becomes possible to tweak the up/down PSR values to more accurately reflect good/bad performance.

This could be implemented incrementally, with an 8v8 mode and a couple maps made available first to see how it works out, more maps and 4v4 modes to be added over time.

Edited by MadBadger, 22 February 2018 - 04:52 PM.


#2 Water Bear

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Liquid Metal
  • Liquid Metal
  • 1,137 posts

Posted 22 February 2018 - 04:50 PM

I think it's a nice idea, but I doubt they have the player base to support even that level of fine-graining.

Reducing the player count would make it far more possible for individual displays of skill to swing a match.

#3 Brain Cancer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 3,851 posts

Posted 22 February 2018 - 04:53 PM

8v8 is what the game started with.

It should have never left QP. 12v12 would have been fine as the "faction play" thing, along with Scouting for the 4v4 types.

16 players are more likely to "fit" in the matchmaker than 24 anyhow.

#4 Yosharian

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 1,656 posts

Posted 22 February 2018 - 05:03 PM

This would work well if it weren't for the fact that the matchmaker still has to balance mech weights.

Balancing one 4v4 match and one 8v8 match isn't simpler than one 12v12 due to mech weights

#5 JohnnyWayne

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 1,629 posts

Posted 22 February 2018 - 05:46 PM

Not sure what you are talking about but as far as I remember there is no such thing as weight balance anymore. At least in group queue. Groups get their weight limitations set and whatever they don't use their loss.No elo around, just tier matching.

#6 justcallme A S H

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2020 Referee
  • CS 2020 Referee
  • 8,987 posts
  • LocationMelbourne, AU

Posted 22 February 2018 - 06:26 PM

The Oceanic community out this forward to PGI over 12 months ago as games take 5-10mins on average just to get a match. We finally received a response recently saying it won't happen recently.


So... Yeah. Not gonna happen.

Edited by justcallme A S H, 22 February 2018 - 08:56 PM.


#7 BumbleBee

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 527 posts

Posted 22 February 2018 - 07:58 PM

I'd rather play 8v8 on the current maps. More room to manoeuvre and less eyes to spot any sneakiness makes for a much more fun game.

PGI did say a while back that they were considering bringing it back, although I can't remember if it was just for the Solo Queue, or also included the Group Queue. It can't come back fast enough IMO

#8 El Bandito

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 26,736 posts
  • LocationStill doing ungodly amount of damage, but with more accuracy.

Posted 22 February 2018 - 08:22 PM

View PostBrain Cancer, on 22 February 2018 - 04:53 PM, said:

8v8 is what the game started with.

It should have never left QP. 12v12 would have been fine as the "faction play" thing, along with Scouting for the 4v4 types.

16 players are more likely to "fit" in the matchmaker than 24 anyhow.


Posted Image

#9 Asym

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Nova Captain
  • 2,186 posts

Posted 22 February 2018 - 08:27 PM

Why? The entire MM system is broken and with NO ONE PLAYING anymore, what's the point????
Why waste any programming hours to change anything????

Naw: if it ani't broke don't fix itl and, let's just hope there is something left after Solaris to pick-up.....

#10 Brain Cancer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 3,851 posts

Posted 22 February 2018 - 09:28 PM

View PostAsym, on 22 February 2018 - 08:27 PM, said:

Why? The entire MM system is broken and with NO ONE PLAYING anymore, what's the point????
Why waste any programming hours to change anything????

Naw: if it ani't broke don't fix itl and, let's just hope there is something left after Solaris to pick-up.....


Because it really doesn't take any effort to change. All you have to do is change the "I'm full" from 12 to 8 in the QP queue.

And you're done. Changing team size is trivial, even for PGI.

#11 dario03

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Galaxy Commander
  • 3,622 posts

Posted 22 February 2018 - 10:14 PM

I was hoping we would get this back when there was talk of 8v8 coming back. Would be helpful at low pop times, and would change the game up a bit. I think this plus letting solo players op into group queue, and letting players select all modes to search (invasion, scouting, quick play), could all help get matches faster. Also let us pick a light, medium, heavy, and assault for qp and just put us in whichever mech is needed to get a match.

#12 Nema Nabojiv

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,783 posts
  • LocationUA

Posted 23 February 2018 - 01:39 AM

8v8 - yes please. I would love to have occasional 8v8 games alongside usual 12v12

4v4 in QP - no. If anyone finds that interesting you have scouting for that.

#13 Mystere

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 22,783 posts
  • LocationClassified

Posted 23 February 2018 - 05:04 AM

I'd rather go the Full Monty and have Clans drop in X stars, binaries, and trinaries while IS drop in Y lances, companies, and battalions while at the same time tailoring Clan vs. IS, Clan vs. Clan, and IS vs. IS drop formations to specific maps and game modes.

Or in other words, moving backwards will do nothing much beyond trying to keep the game alive, while moving forward -- and doing it well -- just might actually expand the player base by making the game better.

#14 HGAK47

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 971 posts

Posted 23 February 2018 - 05:32 AM

In QP i see it as 1v12 anyway. Been having a blast in the pirates bane again

#15 Siegegun

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hungry
  • The Hungry
  • 424 posts

Posted 23 February 2018 - 05:51 AM

Too many buckets OP, especially with 1v1, 2v2 solaris coming online.

That said, in regards to QP going 8v8... Not everyone is the vocal minority that thinks this is a good idea. I think it is a terrible idea that will make this game much worse. I would seriously consider not playing this game anymore if that goes through.

But that's just my opinion.

#16 Asym

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Nova Captain
  • 2,186 posts

Posted 23 February 2018 - 07:09 AM

View PostBrain Cancer, on 22 February 2018 - 09:28 PM, said:

Because it really doesn't take any effort to change. All you have to do is change the "I'm full" from 12 to 8 in the QP queue.

And you're done. Changing team size is trivial, even for PGI.

Nothing is trivial. Any code change that changes sample sizes isn't trivial because it's tied to MM and everything else.... Finding the "whom" and then fixing each map's sample rates and then testing each map to insure there are no bugs isn't a small undertaking. Any code change costs a lot of money...... It would make the game more "efficient" because there is a lot less math going on in the engine but, MM is still the issue.

Anyway, Solaris is around the corner and I'd bet PGI will do nothing until Solaris succeeds or fails.

#17 Mystere

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 22,783 posts
  • LocationClassified

Posted 23 February 2018 - 07:43 AM

View PostSiegegun, on 23 February 2018 - 05:51 AM, said:

Too many buckets OP, especially with 1v1, 2v2 solaris coming online.


If it's solo QP, it can be just automatic and as such requires no additional buckets.

However, I still like my idea above better. Posted Image


View PostSiegegun, on 23 February 2018 - 05:51 AM, said:

That said, in regards to QP going 8v8... Not everyone is the vocal minority that thinks this is a good idea. I think it is a terrible idea that will make this game much worse.


Hallelujah!

View PostAsym, on 23 February 2018 - 07:09 AM, said:

Nothing is trivial. Any code change that changes sample sizes isn't trivial because it's tied to MM and everything else.... Finding the "whom" and then fixing each map's sample rates and then testing each map to insure there are no bugs isn't a small undertaking. Any code change costs a lot of money...... It would make the game more "efficient" because there is a lot less math going on in the engine but, MM is still the issue.

Anyway, Solaris is around the corner and I'd bet PGI will do nothing until Solaris succeeds or fails.


Then drop the current MM, or modify it such that it's always T1-T3 and T4-T5 in drops, thus simplifying PGI's apparent goal of isolating new players from experienced ones with the tier/PSR system.

#18 TWIAFU

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Pest
  • The Pest
  • 4,011 posts
  • LocationBell's Brewery, MI

Posted 23 February 2018 - 11:17 AM

View PostNema Nabojiv, on 23 February 2018 - 01:39 AM, said:

8v8 - yes please. I would love to have occasional 8v8 games alongside usual 12v12

4v4 in QP - no. If anyone finds that interesting you have scouting for that.


Put 4v4, 8v8, and 12v12 FREE FOR ALL into Solaris where it belongs.

#19 Brain Cancer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 3,851 posts

Posted 23 February 2018 - 12:22 PM

View PostAsym, on 23 February 2018 - 07:09 AM, said:

Nothing is trivial. Any code change that changes sample sizes isn't trivial because it's tied to MM and everything else.... Finding the "whom" and then fixing each map's sample rates and then testing each map to insure there are no bugs isn't a small undertaking. Any code change costs a lot of money...... It would make the game more "efficient" because there is a lot less math going on in the engine but, MM is still the issue.

Anyway, Solaris is around the corner and I'd bet PGI will do nothing until Solaris succeeds or fails.



No, really. It's trivial. In fact, much of it's still likely in PGI's servers as legacy code, because it's such a tangled spaghetti mess they remove as little as possible to avoid killing the game.

We had 8v8 before. Changing the queue to take 8 players instead of 12 is something so simple, an intern could probably manage it with minimal oversight.

#20 Scyther

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,271 posts
  • LocationOntario, Canada

Posted 23 February 2018 - 05:12 PM

A couple thoughts:

-It's not 'too many buckets' since everyone will still be in the same QP queue just by clicking QP. It is only the size of the match which will change based on MM selection criteria. QP is still one bucket.

-For those who strongly dislike any of the modes, there could be a checkbox for 8v8 and 4v4 to disable those. I would leave 12v12 'non-opt-out' otherwise people would start specializing mechs to the maps and playstyles of the smaller matches.

-While I like some ideas better as well, I am trying to stick to using things MWO already has in place. PGI seems to have made it clear they will not be making any significant changes to game mechanics or base code.

-As for the Solaris Free For All notion, I might actually play that, but not sure what a 'XvX' Free for All is? Isn't free for all every man for himself? If PGI was creative, I would love to see 2v2v2v2, 4v4v4v4 or 6v6v6v6 Solaris fights, but I doubt anything that wild and crazy will happen.

I did enjoy the old MW4 Solaris battles where some of the NPCs would offer to band with you (or each other) in impromptu alliances.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users