831 replies to this topic

[GBxGhostRyder]

Paul Inouye, on 11 June 2018 - 12:30 PM, said:

Gonna throw a wrench in here to see what you guys think of this. Kinda related...

Dropping support for groups of 3,5,6,7,9,10,11. All of the groups of that size COMBINED make up less than 0.01% of games being launched. This would mean the MM would only be dealing with groups of 2,4,8 and 12 which would speed things up drastically. While this is something not really slated for implementation... I'd like to know if anyone has some thoughts on this.

OMG your trolling us right? Why in gods name would you ever set up a MM to group odd numbers? you had it right long ago when you had check box options players could use.

You should have made it like this long ago a check box system to match up
2v2
4v4
6v6
8v8
12v12
When a player checked what option they wanted to play 2v2-12v12 the MM just matched them up together you could have even gone farther and matched players up using another check box system option system to match up players by classes or to make it real fun you could have made a option to drop 2v2-12v12 using this format.
3 assaults-3 heavy's-3 mediums-3 lights =12v12
2 assaults-2 heavy's-2 mediums-2 lights =8v8
1 assault - 1 heavy's- 2 mediums-1 light =6v6
1 assault - 1 heavy - 1 medium - 1 light 4v4

ETC. There could be a lot of mm drop combinations to consider for maximum fun game play.

To be honest after 5 years of watching this game go down hill on development because of bad ideas like the way Solaris 7 was conceived I'm surprised the game is still alive at all just my point of view.

[MechaBattler]

3000 votes. But not unanimous. Shame. I think 8v8 would be a benefit to QP.

[Spare Parts Bin]

12vs12 and 8vs8 all have their place. I think depth of the que should have a say.

[Brain Cancer]

GBxGhostRyder, on 11 June 2018 - 01:22 PM, said:

OMG your trolling us right? Why in gods name would you ever set up a MM to group odd numbers? you had it right long ago when you had check box options players could use.

Because people didn't want to stop playing group because one player dropped, leaving them at an odd number. That being said, 2/4/8/12 is a helluva lot easier to fit the puzzle pieces together in group queue, because you can't fill in a single-person crack in a team if it's an odd number that ends up 11 people.

[Mikayshen]

Paul Inouye, on 11 June 2018 - 12:30 PM, said:

*snip snip*
I'd like to know if anyone has some thoughts on this.

As someone who usually only plays groups of 2 or 4, I'm totally fine with this. Then again I think that QP Solo and QP Group queues should be combined into just a QP option and you just limit group size to 2, 3 or 4.

[Heketon]

Paul Inouye, on 11 June 2018 - 12:30 PM, said:

[...] I'd like to know if anyone has some thoughts on this.

The groups I'm in tend to experience an attrition rate as the night progresses. One or two drop out here, etc. Most times we have five players in the group. So please don't. I don't think we should be confined to a template.

[Agent of Change]

As a player who routinely plays in groups up to four we often have 3 players.

I can get that odd number can be weird and I can understand getting rid of groups 5 or larger with odd numbered members but 3 people happens very very often for a lot of people. a 4 man loses a guy and now one of the three has to be kicked from the group for people to play together? To be blunt that's not exactly user friendly and i don't believe it to be a good idea.

Why 3 and not 5,7,9,11? well 3 is the only odd numbers group size that cannot split into 2 smaller groups. 5 can split to a 2 and a 3 so that would be less of a problem... in fact any odd numbered group would be able to break into a 3 + a valid even numbered group. In addition as anyone with basic math skills can attest it's teh only odd number sized group in that list that 12 is divisible by so it can be used to completely fill a group or require only 2, 3 man teams to allow for even numbered teams to back fill. (I could make a case for 5 to be kept as well as it's the only other odd sized group that can be combined with a 3 or 5 to make a even numbered backfillable team).


SO if you did limit the allowed teams, keep support for three man groups... or allow \up to a lance sized team on each side of the solo queue to allow for people with 2 friends to play together rather than institute an anti-community solution.

Edited by Agent of Change, 12 June 2018 - 08:57 AM.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Paul Inouye, on 11 June 2018 - 12:30 PM, said:

Gonna throw a wrench in here to see what you guys think of this. Kinda related...

Dropping support for groups of 3,5,6,7,9,10,11. All of the groups of that size COMBINED make up less than 0.01% of games being launched. This would mean the MM would only be dealing with groups of 2,4,8 and 12 which would speed things up drastically. While this is something not really slated for implementation... I'd like to know if anyone has some thoughts on this.

Conversely, you could allow soloists to voluntarily enter the group queue for awhile and see if that helps with your "odd numbers" problem.

It's tough enough getting folks into groups as it is without making it so there is a hiccup every time folks drop in or out of an even #'d group Paul.

[Liveish]

Paul Inouye, on 11 June 2018 - 12:30 PM, said:

Gonna throw a wrench in here to see what you guys think of this. Kinda related...

Dropping support for groups of 3,5,6,7,9,10,11. All of the groups of that size COMBINED make up less than 0.01% of games being launched. This would mean the MM would only be dealing with groups of 2,4,8 and 12 which would speed things up drastically. While this is something not really slated for implementation... I'd like to know if anyone has some thoughts on this.

Paul, Russ said he can flick a switch and turn it into to 8v8 ( with bad UI)

Maybe best to ran a 4 day weekend with 8v8 and then have a new poll to see if people liked it or not. Give away 20% more Cbills to get people to play.

Lukoi Banacek, on 11 June 2018 - 07:57 PM, said:

Conversely, you could allow soloists to voluntarily enter the group queue for awhile and see if that helps with your "odd numbers" problem.

Russ did say he was looking into this, as it would help out the AP area a **** load

https://mwomercs.com...o-join-group-q/

So that is good news - ( his post was on twitter)

Edited by live1991, 11 June 2018 - 08:10 PM.

[Imperius]

Paul Inouye, on 11 June 2018 - 12:30 PM, said:

Gonna throw a wrench in here to see what you guys think of this. Kinda related...

Dropping support for groups of 3,5,6,7,9,10,11. All of the groups of that size COMBINED make up less than 0.01% of games being launched. This would mean the MM would only be dealing with groups of 2,4,8 and 12 which would speed things up drastically. While this is something not really slated for implementation... I'd like to know if anyone has some thoughts on this.

Since I’m part of the 0.01% of someone who already quit because of the engine desync, too heavy gauss er-ppc heat nerf, and ammo per ton taking 5 years to actually be finally addressed but still not 100% correctly. My opinion is why not shave off another 0.01%? How many 0.01% need to be “micro-removed” until you relize you alienated a large percent?

8v8 now being cast aside. Another 5 year request I wanted reverted since we went to 12v12 as what was supposed to be a trial run that ended up micro-gutting much of the game.

TL;DR do whatever it won’t effect me because I’ve already quit MWO. MW5 is all I’ve got to look forward to.

live1991, on 11 June 2018 - 08:09 PM, said:

Paul, Russ said he can flick a switch and turn it into to 8v8 ( with bad UI)

Maybe best to ran a 4 day weekend with 8v8 and then have a new poll to see if people liked it or not. Give away 20% more Cbills to get people to play.




Russ did say he was looking into this, as it would help out the AP area a **** load

https://mwomercs.com...o-join-group-q/

So that is good news - ( his post was on twitter)

Asked for that a long time ago. Since group queue is where I’ve always played I can only play if my friend is willing to be subjected to MWO.

[Prototelis]

Paul Inouye, on 11 June 2018 - 12:30 PM, said:

Gonna throw a wrench in here to see what you guys think of this. Kinda related...

Dropping support for groups of 3,5,6,7,9,10,11. All of the groups of that size COMBINED make up less than 0.01% of games being launched. This would mean the MM would only be dealing with groups of 2,4,8 and 12 which would speed things up drastically. While this is something not really slated for implementation... I'd like to know if anyone has some thoughts on this.

Would that be because you can't launch a group of 11 in GQ?

[NocturnalBeast]

Get out and vote for 8v8! The game will be better and will run better on crap computers! Most of the people voting against it were PROBABLY not around when it was 8v8!

Edited by Ed Steele, 12 June 2018 - 02:38 PM.

[NILAOS]

Paul Inouye, on 11 June 2018 - 12:30 PM, said:

Dropping support for groups of 3,5,6,7,9,10,11..... This would mean the MM would only be dealing with groups of 2,4,8 and 12 which would speed things up drastically.

I'd like to suggest a somewhat hybrid option here, cutting back the support for groups larger than a lance (4) that don't form a multiple of 4 in the group play queue only - CW matchmaking is fine as is for groups. For groups smaller than a lance, i.e. 2 or 3 people, I'd suggest instead merging them into the normal QP queue rather that outright removing support for them. This will simplify matchmaking for large groups that can fit the standard size and are likely to be more coordinated, and make matchmaking dramatically faster for small groups, who just want to have a few drops for fun. Groups of intermediate sizes (5-7) will be able to break up into smaller groups of 2-3 players and participate in the QP system by using the 'count-in' method.

For reference, the Wargaming.net games, for instance, use groups of up to 3 in QP-equivalent teams of 12-15 people, and in my experience sync drops end up playing against each other as often as for - and sometimes even prioritise their friends as targets. This can also improve the speed of matchmaking in QP, by filling out teams effectively.

[Ensaine]

And... this will die on the vine.....

[DeathlyEyes]

Yes, Too many mechs focusing fire reduces the TTK. Mistakes are punished much more severely when you poke out and are standing in front of a firing line of 12 mechs. Honestly QP should be 5v5.

[Johnathan Tanner]

Ed Steele, on 11 June 2018 - 11:53 PM, said:

Get out and vote for 8v8! The game will be better and will run better on crap computers! Most of the people voting against it were not around when it was 8v8!

Get out and vote for 12v12! Its more fun with less lol stomps and if your garbo pc cant take it, Build a better machine! I was around for 8v8 and it was lame as ****!

[Obsidian Hand]

I support the idea of going back to 8 vs 8 mainly on the grounds of better feel for each mech class. Honestly, ever since quick play went 12 vs 12, assaults and heavies have had less of an impact in the game, since dropping with 12 fast lights and mediums can pretty much outclass an opposing team composed of a "balanced" mixed team of 12.

Back when the game was still 4 vs 4, each class had much of an impact, like mediums and heavy pilots being more reluctant to face off solo against an assault, or an assault thinking twice about engaging a light, or a light pilot being able to test his or her skill by seeing how well he or she can engage in a frantic brawl with an assault. Each weight class really had an impact back then.

In contrast, in a 12 vs 12, just a single lance of 4 lights can have the combined firepower of a single assault and ALSO be maneuverable enough to avoid damage from the assault and even its surrounding teammates via swarm tactics, then systematically move on to the next single target, making an assault less viable in these circumstances.

Going back to 8 vs 8 quick play would be a good compromise between getting the feel back for each weight class in a single match while still having more players with which to make the game more prolonged and engaging. After all, in the BattleTech universe, mechs are supposed to be rare, powerful machines of war that are deployed sparingly. Save the 12 vs 12 for "epic" battles, such as faction play.

[DAEDALOS513]

oK lET's coMPromisE.. How bOUt 10v10?

[Alloh]

I really like the idea of diversity, but...
Why it must be 8x8 INSTEAD OF 12x12? Why not have BOTH MODES in QP?

So, when queues are short, create 8x8 matches. When there are 2 groups of 8, or 4 groups of 4, create a 8x8 match. Otherwise, create 12x12 matches.


But i still crave to see ASYMETRIC teams in FP... 10 Clanners Vs 12 IS ... or 4x5 in scout, of course compensating the weigth limits for each side!

[Imperius]

Johnathan Tanner, on 12 June 2018 - 05:47 AM, said:

Get out and vote for 12v12! Its more fun with less lol stomps and if your garbo pc cant take it, Build a better machine! I was around for 8v8 and it was lame as ****!

You obviously understand nothing about the current state of the engine. My graphics card alone is probably more than your PC. Lol stops don’t happen if you get gud and don’t need to be carried.