864 replies to this topic

[a le Roi]

Lukoi Banacek, on 18 June 2018 - 08:56 AM, said:

You might be new here. It's been tried, long ago. Folks complained about groups and soloists being mixed together. Trying something just for the sake of trying, when there is historic evidence in ample measure to show it's not a good idea, isn't a great methodology. What's changed about the game, besides it's gotten smaller, that would lead you to believe that the community would suddenly embrace 2-mans in the queue? What trends are showing it? What thousands of player sample sized poll? Anecdotal and personal opinions aside, what is out there that leads anyone to think things have changed enough to make this worth attempting a second time?

It hasn't been tried and since 4-man groups were last allowed the game has gotten and integrated VoIP for everyone. That alone says how long it's been since groups were allowed in the same queue, and even then it wasn't only 2-man groups.

Lukoi Banacek, on 18 June 2018 - 08:56 AM, said:

I honestly believe adding 2-man's will drive off more players eventually, than it attracts or retains. Letting soloists go into group queue (which hold much less negative impact) is a better idea imo (but that services a different itch admittedly).

You might be right and we who support it wrong, but we won't know before it's tried.

[Johnathan Tanner]

Lukoi Banacek, on 18 June 2018 - 09:26 AM, said:

Just own it and move on.

What hes saying diplomatically is that your a smurf. And not a good one.

[Lukoi Banacek]

a le Roi, on 18 June 2018 - 09:28 AM, said:

It hasn't been tried and since 4-man groups were last allowed the game has gotten and integrated VoIP for everyone. That alone says how long it's been since groups were allowed in the same queue, and even then it wasn't only 2-man groups.




You might be right and we who support it wrong, but we won't know before it's tried.

Trying it for the sake of trying it, when history points to it being a bad idea, in a declining population, isn't a good methodology for keeping a business going. That's essentially a fact. Positive change is valuable, not change for changes sake.

Yes, things have changed, VOIP is available, but I wager if PGI was tracking they'd see it highly underused. What evidence is there that things would be better this time around, that adding 2-mans would attract and retain more players, etc?

So far, no one can show anything positive in that direction, so why do it? Just experimenting for the hell of it to cater to a vocal minority, isn't a healthy way to evolve the game for PGI, especially with a community as touchy about changes as this one has become....conditioned by PGI's missteps imo.

[Lykaon]

Wil McCullough, on 17 June 2018 - 10:28 PM, said:

If that is B.S, what do you call demanding duos be allowed in solo qp because it takes too long for them to get a match in group play?

Pgi gave players like the op the absolute best solution to the problem they keep crying about - solaris duos. Two man drops, fast queue times, fair matchmatcher.

But solaris duos is a ghost town.

Why?

Because playing with a friend, in a fair environment, with quick queues isn't what they really want. They want to group up to mash solo taters in qp because they are sick of getting mashed in a fair group environment.

Complaining that matches take to long to launch for duos is also an excuse.

I play every weekend in small groups. Frequently a duo and rarely up to four players.

It does not take long to get a match at all.Granted we play two servers on a weekend evening/night during a high activity time period but what stops other players from doing the same?

If these players asking to to mix small groups and solo are basing the argument on match launch times why is it I have no issues with the same exact activity? I play small groups I get matches fairly quickly (under 5 minutes with nigh instant pops being not uncommon).

Is it because they do/can not play on prime times? If this is the case then isn't the actual case being made being ...

"I can't fit the game's prime times into my schedule so change the game mechanics to meet my schedule"

Well that's a bit to much to ask don't you think?


"Pgi gave players like the op the absolute best solution to the problem they keep crying about - solaris duos. Two man drops, fast queue times, fair matchmatcher.

But solaris duos is a ghost town."


Here is the thing about this statement. Solaris duos and MWO quick play matches are very very different in how they play and how they are experienced.

I prefer quick play matches or Faction warfare over Solaris because of the added complexity of having larger teams and broader objectives than go kill those two guys before they kill your two guys.

I enjoy finding weaknesses in the team's strategy or deployment and exploiting those weaknesses. In Solaris matches most of the mistakes to be made are done in the mech lab. I doesn't take a genius to back an assault mech into a corner and wait.

It's like this....

"look at all those kids eating ice cream" ..." I want some of that but I want to do it with my friends not a bunch of random kids"...

PGI comes around and gives you and your friend a slice of pie, now pie is good but it isn't ice cream.


"They want to group up to mash solo taters in qp because they are sick of getting mashed in a fair group environment."

This is also B.S. because you are attributing a motive that is unsupported by the facts.

If we did have a combined small group/solo queue that matched groups on a team with an opposing group on the other team and the match maker limited the number of grouped players per team to let's say four.

This would mean that each team that had a group was composed of two thirds solos and the opposing team had an identical group/solo ratio.

And now let's say the match maker counted the grouped players PSR as the highest of the group member"s PSR (ie. a group with a tier one,two tier threes and a single tier two would all be counted as tier one players)

Where is the advantage to the groups? one team has to lose therefore every mixed group/solo team has a group of players losing.

Every small group of four players that wins a match shares that win with EIGHT solo players.


"fair group environment."....this is a loaded statement.

PSR matching DOES NOT occur in group queue. and the only "balancing" mechanic for large groups is limiting total available group tonnage.

If there is a group of eight tier one players piloting their meta build mediums and if some random Tier three wants to drop with their newbie buddy in his trial mech you better pray that the RNG of group queue "match maker" puts them on the same team as the eight player group.

Because the group queue matchmaker does qualify those two newplayers to be opposed by an 8 player group composed of tier one veterans with totally optimized mechs.

Edited by Lykaon, 18 June 2018 - 09:41 AM.

[Haipyng]

Lukoi Banacek, on 18 June 2018 - 08:56 AM, said:

You might be new here. It's been tried, long ago. Folks complained about groups and soloists being mixed together. Trying something just for the sake of trying, when there is historic evidence in ample measure to show it's not a good idea, isn't a great methodology. What's changed about the game, besides it's gotten smaller, that would lead you to believe that the community would suddenly embrace 2-mans in the queue? What trends are showing it? What thousands of player sample sized poll? Anecdotal and personal opinions aside, what is out there that leads anyone to think things have changed enough to make this worth attempting a second time?

I apologize for this, but it has been asked and answered several times. I'll just snip this:

Haipyng, on 18 June 2018 - 04:53 AM, said:

So far all we have heard is (and I am paraphrasing, please feel free to correct me) that 2 mans won't work because we have already tried 4 mans and it didn't work. This has been rebutted with that it was at a time of no in game voice comms (so these 4 mans were on Teamspeak or something else- Teamwork is OP after all). We also had a terrible MM system based in ELO and it was shown to still be broken for quite awhile after 4 mans were removed. I don't think anyone has said a return to four mans in QP is a great idea. I think I could be convinced 3 mans would be a bad idea. I don't think 2 mans are going to have as big of an impact as others think. We already have two mans (or more) sync dropping now in QP. No one is talking about removing the tier system in QP MM, if the highest player in the group is T1, then they are going to be dropped in the tier 1 bucket. The sort of players that could leverage any sort of real affect are the vast minority of players. They are much more likely to influence a team based game by organizing the team, which they can now do with in game comms. They can also do that sync dropping or solo for that matter.

Lukoi Banacek, on 18 June 2018 - 08:56 AM, said:

As to the logical fallacy argument about slippery slopes....that's a comment I see folks make when they don't have a logical retort. It's absolutely reasonable to expect, given this forum's and community's history that if 2-man groups were introduced and found to be at all palatable (again, highly debatable) that some segment would aggressively argue for 3, 4 man groups as we've seen in the past.

Actually the slippery slope argument IS a logical fallacy. I kid you not. Look it up. To say we shouldn't do X because Y and Z will happen is not a valid argument in this case. It plays on fear.

[a le Roi]

Lukoi Banacek, on 18 June 2018 - 09:26 AM, said:

Not saying stats in anyway should invalidate a person's opinion (and I agree, adding small groups to solo queue is a bad idea) but the quoted stats for you are both recent and accurate straight from the Jarl's list.
Season 23 34366 16% 40 0.60 25% 0.33 149 142.9

That's last months information on you, with 40 matches played, the most recent information on Jarl's....presuming you took a long break or have a different account you might be playing. You have clearly got a .60 WLR and .33 KDR there. Nothing made up about it. Just own it and move on.

Besides its complete irrelevance, I have played over a hundred games since then.

But if my stats are the argument that Wil wants to ride, by all means, my WLR isn't up to 1.0 yet.

Surely that proves I must have started this thread because I'm so sick of losing. There could not possibly be any other reason for it, or any other motivation for me to keep playing MWO, besides licking the wounds of my broken ego with the presumed ownage I would instantly get if I were allowed to play a 10th of my games with a friend.

So let's just forget about being able to team up in QP. Because why would you ever want to encourage new players to play with friends, right? Right?

[Lukoi Banacek]

Johnathan Tanner, on 18 June 2018 - 09:29 AM, said:

What hes saying diplomatically is that your a smurf. And not a good one.

No, I'm saying his stats as depicted, were accurate despite his misguided attempt to deflect from them.

[Wil McCullough]

Haipyng, on 18 June 2018 - 09:13 AM, said:

I hope we aren't arguing, but rather discussing the issues.

"arguing" was a wrong choice of words. yes we're discussing the issues.

i view QP as the one thing left in mwo that actually keeps the game afloat. mainly because it's fun, it's casual and it's as fair as it can get. introducing duos into solo QP can tip that balance.

2 pilots who know what they're doing and drop in big alpha assaults can ruin the entire enemy team's day by themselves with coordinated fire. the only reason why it's not an issue now is because it is a rare occurance. duos remove that rarity. if for example, a good player like juju wants to drop with another good player like bear_claw and they group up, they are now going to drop together every time until they disband.

there's going to be more "power duos" like that and QP will become a farm fest.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Haipyng, on 18 June 2018 - 09:36 AM, said:

Actually the slippery slope argument IS a logical fallacy. I kid you not. Look it up. To say we shouldn't do X because Y and Z will happen is not a valid argument in this case. It plays on fear.

I've taken my philosophy and ethics courses in college and for my masters. I'm well aware of where the slippery slope argument falls on the spectrum here. That's not the point at all. In this particular case, it's not invalid to play on the fear that has been demonstrated in the past. If there's evidence that Y and/or Z will happen, then it's not a fear, it's a prediction. Thus, the slippery slope argument is absolutely valid here. Dismissing it because it's characterized in philosophy and ethics circles with strawmen and red herring just shows over simplification.

Again, to your points that allegedly rebut that 2-mans would be bad for solo queue....they are all based on assumptions. Assumption that VOIP mitigates the problems introduced. Assumption that 2 will not have nearly as deleterious effect as 4 did. And so forth.

Your premise (you actually state it above) is that you don't *think* it will not have as negative an impact as 3 or 4 mans, but acknowledge it will have a likely negative effect. And you cannot show anything that demonstrates the pros to bringing in that negative aspect. Again, assumptions.

Assumption that a rash of players will increase in playing the game because now they can play with buddies in a less threatening solo queue and be retained by the experience AND not be offset by the loss of players driven away from the game by this change. Assumption that it will somehow be more enjoyable, for more people and help PGI grow and/or retain its playerbase so it can remain profitable.

So, in the end, we disagree on the opinions based on assumptions. On my end of things, while the conditions are not exactly the same, they are absolutely related and demonstrable and they were not happily enjoyed by the player base that lobbied hard for an end to groups from the "small queue."

While this is a loooong thread, there are but a handful of "pro-2 man" voices on it. Hardly a tidal wave of activity on the issue.

You know, a decent sample size of at least forum visitors was taken regarding the 8v8, 12v12 vote. You could easily do the same thing here if you honestly thought it would give you some indication where people stood on the discussion.

[csebal]

Grimmwold, on 18 June 2018 - 09:18 AM, said:

Can we get a mod in to close this thread?

Or just get rid of people who are insulting others so the discussion can continue (or begin)?

[a le Roi]

Wil McCullough, on 18 June 2018 - 09:39 AM, said:

"arguing" was a wrong choice of words. yes we're discussing the issues.

i view QP as the one thing left in mwo that actually keeps the game afloat. mainly because it's fun, it's casual and it's as fair as it can get. introducing duos into solo QP can tip that balance.

2 pilots who know what they're doing and drop in big alpha assaults can ruin the entire enemy team's day by themselves with coordinated fire. the only reason why it's not an issue now is because it is a rare occurance. duos remove that rarity. if for example, a good player like juju wants to drop with another good player like bear_claw and they group up, they are now going to drop together every time until they disband.

there's going to be more "power duos" like that and QP will become a farm fest.

I would gladly discuss the issues in a civil manner, like you are now doing.

I get your point and you may well be right. My proposal presupposes that the MM can and would be fixed so that any such "power duos" would be balanced against by both a group and a team of an equal tier.

It may of course still not be always balanced, but if MWO was about seeking perfect balance, then VoIP should be disabled by default for everyone in QP, should it not?

Two players actively cooperating through VoIP gives that team an advantage unless the other teams does the same.

More over the example you give about pros teaming up applies to which % of MWO's population? How common would that be in T5 through T3? So much so that it could not be balanced against by a functioning MM?

[Lukoi Banacek]

a le Roi, on 18 June 2018 - 09:36 AM, said:

Besides its complete irrelevance, I have played over a hundred games since then.

Good for you. Given that they aren't given in real time, but instead are listed in concert with MWO's leaderboards, that point in time is an important distinction. That being said, your denial of them being factual (when they were) just throws your credibility completely out of whack. Hence why I advised you just own it and move on.

Again, I don't believe one's statistics necessarily invalidate one's opinion or their right to having one, but it does clearly shape perception and perspective. They provide one more layer of context, that's all.

[Grus]

a le Roi, on 18 June 2018 - 09:36 AM, said:

Besides its complete irrelevance, I have played over a hundred games since then.

But if my stats are the argument that Wil wants to ride, by all means, my WLR isn't up to 1.0 yet.

Surely that proves I must have started this thread because I'm so sick of losing. There could not possibly be any other reason for it, or any other motivation for me to keep playing MWO, besides licking the wounds of my broken ego with the presumed ownage I would instantly get if I were allowed to play a 10th of my games with a friend.

So let's just forget about being able to team up in QP. Because why would you ever want to encourage new players to play with friends, right? Right?

laughing* " over a hundred games! Laughing more* bruh...

[Lukoi Banacek]

Grus, on 18 June 2018 - 09:52 AM, said:

laughing* " over a hundred games! Laughing more* bruh...

why is that funny? I've played 310 since the last list. What's funny about the #?

[csebal]

[REDACTED]

The problem:
- Group Queues are borked. There is no MM to speak of, so a bunch of casual joes can end up playing a well organized group of seasoned veterans. Since neither of the joes signed up to be **** victims, they will just not play GQ.
- Solaris Duos are the next option, but joe and joe will quickly realize, that it is a very different game, where the range of viable builds are vastly different than what can be used in the regular game AND they will also find themselves *****, because the few who keep playing solaris duos have become extremely proficient at it, and poor joe has neither the knowledge nor the practice to really compete on their level.
- Fed up with not being able to play together, they try syncdropping, and it works every now and then, but is unreliable and more hassle than what it is worth, so our casual joes just find themselves moving on to a different game.

The solution:
- The solo queue could be opened up for small groups, with the following criteria (or a similar set)
--> mechs in the group would have to be matched into the game individually, to not overcomplicate the MM and also to encourage diverse group setups. So finding a match with two assaults would be really hard, if everyone else also wants to play assaults, but a single assault and a single heavy would not be harder than two solo players queuing at the same time, given both have equal popularity.
--> the group would be bracketed according to the highest tier player, so if joe1 is tier 3 and joe2 is tier 5, then they would play according to a tier 3 bracket.
--> the number of groups on each side would be limited, but has to be equal
--> the tier difference restriction would never (or only as a last resort) be lifted for groups, regardless other MM restrictions being relaxed to avoid the edge cases where tier 1 players in groups can be matched against tier 4 or 5 players.

The drawbacks:
- in the extreme cases, when at odd hours very good players are bracketed with very weak one, it would be possible that two tier 1 players are matched against two tier 3 players with the rest of the teams also made up of tier 1-3 players. MM can try to compensate for this by allocating more stronger players on the other side to balance.
- wait times for groups could be longer due to the extra restrictions around matching groups.

The advantages:
- overall small group experience starts to exist (currently there is none)
- group play would see less outliers who have no clue about the game and tought it is a good idea to enter GP in two light mechs
- solo play could see more players, as people would be inclined to try and convince their friends to play with them once again.

We are at a point, where if my friend comes to also play MWO, I just tell him to play solo, as I cannot be convinced to play GQ. If small groups would be a thing, I could tell them to come play with me instead of telling them to not bother.

I myself would not mind waiting for the MM to find me a properly matched small group to play against, if that would mean a semblance of a fairly balanced match where I can play with friends. Currently I have no such option at all, so any option would be an improvement really.

To end on a quote:
"Change can be frightening, and the temptation is often to resist it. But change almost always provides opportunities - to learn new things, to rethink tired processes, and to improve the way we work." - Klaus Schwab

Edited by Ibrandul Mike, 12 July 2018 - 04:57 PM.

[Lukoi Banacek]

csebal, on 18 June 2018 - 09:49 AM, said:

Or just get rid of people who are insulting others so the discussion can continue (or begin)?

You say something like this and then imply anyone who disagrees with you is a simpleton in your very next post. Hope we get what you asked for here then. Would clean up the thread nicely.

[Haipyng]

Wil McCullough, on 18 June 2018 - 09:39 AM, said:

"arguing" was a wrong choice of words. yes we're discussing the issues.

i view QP as the one thing left in mwo that actually keeps the game afloat. mainly because it's fun, it's casual and it's as fair as it can get. introducing duos into solo QP can tip that balance.

I agree. I can't deny that it is possible that it would be unbalancing. In looking at all the ideas to help with all the issues we are seeing, including population in GP, it seems like the easiest for PGI to do and easiest to back away from if it goes badly.

I am not married to the idea, but I do favor looking at the options and doing something to make things better, rather than ride the train down the hill to no GP at all, or worse, a purely merged QP/GP experience.

Edited by Haipyng, 18 June 2018 - 11:13 AM.

[a le Roi]

Lukoi Banacek, on 18 June 2018 - 09:51 AM, said:

Good for you. Given that they aren't given in real time, but instead are listed in concert with MWO's leaderboards, that point in time is an important distinction. That being said, your denial of them being factual (when they were) just throws your credibility completely out of whack. Hence why I advised you just own it and move on.

Again, I don't believe one's statistics necessarily invalidate one's opinion or their right to having one, but it does clearly shape perception and perspective. They provide one more layer of context, that's all.

I did say they are either not mine or that they aren't current, because I did not recognize them as my current stats. I never even checked my stats that early on and I was only aware of them (WLR) being in the range of 0.8-0.9. Which isn't to say that it is in any way a significant difference and still only goes to show I'm new and not better than average. To which I wholeheartedly own.

I'm new and I play casually solo or with a friend. And I'm not good. I have no shame in admitting that.

Edited by a le Roi, 18 June 2018 - 10:02 AM.

[csebal]

Lukoi Banacek, on 18 June 2018 - 09:56 AM, said:

You say something like this and then imply anyone who disagrees with you is a simpleton in your very next post. Hope we get what you asked for here then. Would clean up the thread nicely.

Dude, after having my integrity and motives - thus my character - assaulted in over a dozen posts, you really do not want to know what I think of certain people, including the moderators I wrote this morning about this thread. I think I was pretty mild in my wording up there, if I get the cane for it, so be it.. at least *something* happens. I stand by what I wrote. If the cap fits, wear it.. if it doesn't, then its not about you.

[Corduroy Rab]

Late to the party but I routinely drop in a group of 2-3 and haven't had any real issues with wait time or match imbalance.

Group queue is significantly better now than it was a few seasons ago since the tonnage caps were introduced.

I'm nothing special at this game but if there are larger groups on your side just try to follow their lead, sometimes they are vocal on coms - if not just hit caps lock and ask what is up.

If you have a large group against you it can suck but it doesn't in my experience happen too much, and sometimes large groups can be worse than full on pugs.