864 replies to this topic

[Mystere]

csebal, on 18 June 2018 - 09:53 AM, said:

Okay.. TL/DR, so let me lay it out so that even the simplest of simpletons can understand.

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.

If as you say "Group Queues are borked", then I think the most logical course of action is to actually fix them.

Your proposed solution -- changing the solo queue matchmaker to include duos -- just creates potentially more problems while not actually doing anything to fix the original one. In other words, you're telling people to fix something by "fixing" something else entirely.

csebal, on 18 June 2018 - 09:53 AM, said:

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

Given that your solution above completely skirts the original problem, the quote is totally irrelevant.

“TACKLE the ROOT CAUSE not the EFFECT.” ― Haresh Sippy

Haipyng, on 18 June 2018 - 11:25 AM, said:

That is sort of the problem with MWO. We have never gotten whole solutions to problems. We always get band-aids or no fix to glaring issues and after awhile that is all we are expecting to get. If we could get a truly fixed GP MM, great. They haven't delivered on that yet, not even attempted it, nor is it on the roadmap.

Heck, the "solution" of allowing 2s in the solo queue is even worse than a band-aid!

a le Roi, on 18 June 2018 - 12:00 PM, said:

There wouldn't be an issue for me if not for the fact that Group Queue waiting times also get very long at times. Partly probably because, as others have pointed out, the GQ isn't tier-balanced and therefore it's extremely unwelcoming to many new and casual players. So the queue is depopulated from casual players and is therefore full of high-tier folks in large groups, and is therefore depopulated from casual players, ad infinitum.

If the problem is the group queue then ******* fix the group queue.

A good place to start is to allow solos into the queue.

Edited by Mystere, 18 June 2018 - 01:05 PM.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Haipyng, on 18 June 2018 - 12:13 PM, said:

I asked because a search turned up a thread from Paul at the end of last month on Solo MM adjustments and one from Russ in Sept of 2015. There is plenty of discussion from everyone else on it. I call that being pretty silent and I'm not being disingenuous to say it, merely my take on it. I don't follow outside news sources like NGNG or this outreach site, so if they have been mentioning it there I don't know about it. You seemed to have known better. (shrug)

No worries. Let me dial back my comment to say this.....PGI acknowledges challenges with the MM/PSR in keeping wait times down and pairing appropriate competition. They don't necessarily agree with large bodies of the population that dislike PSR being essentially an experience bar and are mum on that subject.

My suspicion is that rightly or wrongly, they think the experience bar and tiering up is somehow a needed factor in the player's enjoyment of the game. Me personally, I think it's coddling and doesn't actually help the game in the long term, but I'm not the dev, so what do I know.

[Haipyng]

Lukoi Banacek, on 18 June 2018 - 12:22 PM, said:

No worries. Let me dial back my comment to say this.....PGI acknowledges challenges with the MM/PSR in keeping wait times down and pairing appropriate competition. They don't necessarily agree with large bodies of the population that dislike PSR being essentially an experience bar and are mum on that subject.

My suspicion is that rightly or wrongly, they think the experience bar and tiering up is somehow a needed factor in the player's enjoyment of the game. Me personally, I think it's coddling and doesn't actually help the game in the long term, but I'm not the dev, so what do I know.

Okay I got you. This all currently just applies to QP MM and while I understand the consternation of it being like an Exp bar, I would think the GP MM to be a more pressing issue given that is where the most reduction in population is happening and where we could make it more friendly for very small groups. Just my take, I'm probably biased.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Haipyng, on 18 June 2018 - 12:33 PM, said:

Okay I got you. This all currently just applies to QP MM and while I understand the consternation of it being like an Exp bar, I would think the GP MM to be a more pressing issue given that is where the most reduction in population is happening and where we could make it more friendly for very small groups. Just my take, I'm probably biased.

I don't believe it does apply to just QP tho. It absolutely feeds into the GP MM issue. If our "rating" is an experience bar, then eventually it no longer distinguishes between skill levels or group vs solo play etc. Almost everyone eventually makes it into tier 1, which isn't helpful. This is further compounded in GP MM, where the MM places less weight on the tiers/ratings, partially due to low rating and imo, partially because with so many people ranked tier 1, what's even the value at this point.

You can have average to below average stats and make it to tier 1 eventually. Does that progression somehow to appeal to some people? Maybe so, but it doesn't lead to quality match making.

Then there are the people who've gotten to the upper levels within tier 1 that are truly playing at a different level, whether that's due to coordination, teamwork, min maxing, hand-eye, reflexes, etc that really aren't at the same level as the guys who just grind their way into tier 1.

Then there are those that are a cut above the rest by an even wider margin in the rarified air of the elite. I'm in the top 1% of the Jarl's list apparently. But let me tell you the difference between myself and the guys in the upper half % is like a whole additional tier.

So inside of tier 1, there's like 10+ levels of skill....not nuanced differences, not subtle, splitting hairs type differences. Major differences between the level of skill, all encapsulated in the feel good layer of tier 1. That wide dispersal of talent, seriousness, casualness, sobriety (you see what I'm getting at with all of these factors) all considered "tier 1" is problematic in QP.

It's exacerbated in GQ and FP (the latter of which has zero MM apparently).

If you fix at least how individuals are rank ordered, that's one less variable that's confused in the MM and leads to better matches both in QP and GQ.

Edited by Lukoi Banacek, 18 June 2018 - 12:45 PM.

[Mystere]

Haipyng said:

When has PGI added 2s and 3s to the queue before?

When? When PGI added 2s and 3s at the same time they allowed 4-mans, that's when.

Did you think only solos and 4-mans were playing, and that 2s and 3s were extremely rare as to not matter?

Aloha, on 18 June 2018 - 11:06 AM, said:

Wow! 17 pages and still going. Seems to have enough opinions on this subject to warrant a vote. Someone put it up. Let 2-man into QP or not (not 3 or more. Just 2.).

Why 2 and not 3? And if 3, why not 4? ...

[Astrocanis]

So it basically comes down to either "No way! Stomps will be every game, " or "I can't bring new players into the game because I can't coach them or play with them without them being subject to annihilation every game."

Given that at least 75% of games NOW are stomps, I don't think it would make much difference, particularly if they made it subject to a maximum tonnage of say 135 for duo drops.

For sure, I can't bring anyone into the game without them quitting under a week later. Either play alone totally clueless in QP and get stomped or play in GQ with them, STILL clueless, and get stomped. I submit that, unlike most of the forum warriors here, most people won't stand for constantly losing games before they quit.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Astrocanis, on 18 June 2018 - 12:58 PM, said:

So it basically comes down to either "No way! Stomps will be every game, " or "I can't bring new players into the game because I can't coach them or play with them without them being subject to annihilation every game."

Given that at least 75% of games NOW are stomps, I don't think it would make much difference, particularly if they made it subject to a maximum tonnage of say 135 for duo drops.

For sure, I can't bring anyone into the game without them quitting under a week later. Either play alone totally clueless in QP and get stomped or play in GQ with them, STILL clueless, and get stomped. I submit that, unlike most of the forum warriors here, most people won't stand for constantly losing games before they quit.

no, actually it comes down to fundamentally addressing two things - PSR/MM and the NPE. Neither of which means necessarily adding groups of any size to solo queue.

Where are ya getting 75% are stomps? Your personal experience? You actually keep tabs on that sort of thing or is it conjecture to make a point? Since I'm not sure what constitutes a "stomp" (another fun thread in it's own right, multiple times on this forum), I'd argue that PGI is the only one that has the metrics to make this assessment.

Most of us cannot be bothered to keep track of performance stats, and those few of us that do are probably just going to get argued down as "anecdotal" or "small sample" sized in the greater scheme of things sadly.

Which is why I've always pushed PGI to be more transparent with the stats about this game (like so many other games are) because it would help manage expectations among the community.

p.s. if taking them into group queue with you makes them subject to annihilation every game (unlikely, but your mileage may vary), then that might mean that MM needs tweaking....not that solo queue should suddenly allow groups of some size.

Edited by Lukoi Banacek, 18 June 2018 - 01:22 PM.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Haipyng, on 18 June 2018 - 12:13 PM, said:

I don't follow outside news sources like NGNG or this outreach site, so if they have been mentioning it there I don't know about it. You seemed to have known better. (shrug)

Unfortunately, this brings up a great point in that PGI struggles to unify their communications efforts. Things happen via Outreach HPG on reddit, on these forums, twitch.tv, NGNG, on various twitter accounts for devs etc....it's very haphazard and rarely does anyone from PGI come in behind and unify the periodic messages across all of the various platforms.

I've got no issue with using all of the social media ya want as a business, but someone should tie it in and periodically plunk it down on the one, centralized, official medium to offer up game development information (which I argue is a link on the in-game splash page that brings you to the MWO website for news).

[Tatula]

Mystere, on 18 June 2018 - 12:56 PM, said:

Why 2 and not 3? And if 3, why not 4? ...

Because 2 will be less likely to impact the match (yeah, yeah, yeah, I'm not including those god level players). I can argue that having a disconnect or AFK will influence a match's outcome in the QP queue, and we get that ALL THE TIME already. So having a couple of guys on comms is no big deal. If those few top level comp guys want to farm the QP queue, they can do that already by sync dropping, or just play solo if they're that good. I fail to see the point be being so afraid of few good players using alt accounts to troll the QP queue that we give up the chance for recruiting new players. That's kinda like giving in to terrorists.

Having a duo in QP will allow someone to hold a new player by the hand through some games and give them a less painful learning experience. If they have more than one friend, have them wait their turn. One at a time. Want to play in a group of 3 or 4, go play in the Group Queue.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Aloha, on 18 June 2018 - 01:32 PM, said:

Having a duo in QP will allow someone to hold a new player by the hand through some games and *might* give them a less painful learning experience.

Fixed it for you. What it will definitely do however, is bring reams of experienced, proficient players into the queue (sometimes god-tier, more often not as there are so few of them), and they will definitely negatively impact things for soloists if the original "small queue" is any indication. As negatively as four mans? No, but definitely an impact. So, is the juice worth the squeeze for that?

Or would it better instead to work on PSR/MM (which the community consensus is fairly strong on), which in turn feeds GQ MM, which would allow for NPE's to go into group queue and experience exactly what you're looking for...a hand holding experience.

Btw, TONS of games don't do any sort of hand holding in this regard and have relatively challenging skill curves and don't implode from a lack of New player retention, so I'd argue the lack of a 2-man casual mode isn't the problem in MWO. It's the matchmaking being hobbled by a PSR system.

[Astrocanis]

Lukoi Banacek, on 18 June 2018 - 01:21 PM, said:

no, actually it comes down to fundamentally addressing two things - PSR/MM and the NPE. Neither of which means necessarily adding groups of any size to solo queue.

Where are ya getting 75% are stomps? Your personal experience? You actually keep tabs on that sort of thing or is it conjecture to make a point? Since I'm not sure what constitutes a "stomp" (another fun thread in it's own right, multiple times on this forum), I'd argue that PGI is the only one that has the metrics to make this assessment.

Most of us cannot be bothered to keep track of performance stats, and those few of us that do are probably just going to get argued down as "anecdotal" or "small sample" sized in the greater scheme of things sadly.

Which is why I've always pushed PGI to be more transparent with the stats about this game (like so many other games are) because it would help manage expectations among the community.

p.s. if taking them into group queue with you makes them subject to annihilation every game (unlikely, but your mileage may vary), then that might mean that MM needs tweaking....not that solo queue should suddenly allow groups of some size.

Good grief. Lawyer me a little more, why don't you. Stomps are more frequent than they "should" be, which I'm sure you're close to saying is my fault. When one team loses two mechs at the outset, more often than not the other team wins.

Purely subjective. I don't like guacamole. Purely subjective. Am I wrong?

I am going to argue for allowing 2 man groups to the public queue for one and only one reason: after two consecutive attempts at balancing groups, it has gotten worse, not better. I have no confidence in PGI (or, realistically, ANYONE)'s ability to balance with all the variables extant in this game.

And selfishly, I would like to bring friends into the game without them quitting because they stand little to no chance of learning it. Getting stomped into the mud multiple times in a row is not an especially good way to teach people to play. With a two man group, there's at least a CHANCE that someone will learn something.

Argue against it however you will. But asking for a better MM or PSR/Tier rating is, IMO, pissing into the wind.

[Tatula]

Lukoi Banacek, on 18 June 2018 - 01:40 PM, said:

Fixed it for you. What it will definitely do however, is bring reams of experienced, proficient players into the queue (sometimes god-tier, more often not as there are so few of them), and they will definitely negatively impact things for soloists if the original "small queue" is any indication. As negatively as four mans? No, but definitely an impact. So, is the juice worth the squeeze for that? Or would it better instead to work on PSR/MM (which the community consensus is fairly strong on), which in turn feeds GQ MM, which would allow for NPE's to go into group queue and experience exactly what you're looking for...a hand holding experience. Btw, TONS of games don't do any sort of hand holding in this regard and have relatively challenging skill curves and don't implode from a lack of New player retention, so I'd argue the lack of a 2-man casual mode isn't the problem in MWO. It's the matchmaking being hobbled by a PSR system.

"Reams of experienced, proficient players"? Well, the point of having the duo is to have ONE experience, proficient player to hold the hand of the new player. If you're so afraid of a few bad apples ruining your fun in the QP queue, I guess we can limit the duo by tier, where one of the players MUST be tier 4 or 5. But seriously, I play QP about 99% of the time and the players use the in-game VOIP. How is that a big deal if two of them can communicate more privately? If you look at the forum posts, what is the biggest complaint of the experienced, proficient players? It is them having to play with "potatoes" because the population is so low that the MM can't give them all Tier 1-3 players. Why would these same experienced, proficient players purposely make an alt account so they can go play with the "potatoes"?

[Lukoi Banacek]

Aloha, on 18 June 2018 - 02:10 PM, said:

"Reams of experienced, proficient players"? Well, the point of having the duo is to have ONE experience, proficient player to hold the hand of the new player. If you're so afraid of a few bad apples ruining your fun in the QP queue, I guess we can limit the duo by tier, where one of the players MUST be tier 4 or 5. But seriously, I play QP about 99% of the time and the players use the in-game VOIP. How is that a big deal if two of them can communicate more privately? If you look at the forum posts, what is the biggest complaint of the experienced, proficient players? It is them having to play with "potatoes" because the population is so low that the MM can't give them all Tier 1-3 players. Why would these same experienced, proficient players purposely make an alt account so they can go play with the "potatoes"?

I'm not worried in the slightest about my personal experience. I'm worried about casuals being driven away from the game because they dislike having groups or pairs introduced into their remaining casual bastion. The less players there are the less likely the game survives. It's a game I enjoy, I'd like it to do well.

I didn't say anything about tier 1 guys making alts to troll the potatoes. You apparently don't understand how the MM works right now to begin with, or you would realize that's not what will happen. If your buddy is tier 4-5 and you, the helpful sort happens to be tier 1 -- where do you go? The MM isn't set up for that. So inevitably to avoid the cries of soloists in tier 4-5 complaining about tier 1's being matched with them, the only other option for this very niche scenario is to match your friend up tiers, or average your tiers out (making the duo, tier 3 so the result is the same).

So either tier 1 guys end up playing down because they partner with tier 4-5 guys (not preferable for the pure casuals we all want to protect) or you end up bringing your bud into the grinder of tier 1, defeating the entire purpose of hand holding your buddy so he can learn the game. It's lose-lose and will still irritate those that are adamant about their not being groups in solo queue.

Edited by Lukoi Banacek, 18 June 2018 - 02:28 PM.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Astrocanis, on 18 June 2018 - 02:09 PM, said:

Good grief. Lawyer me a little more, why don't you. Stomps are more frequent than they "should" be, which I'm sure you're close to saying is my fault. When one team loses two mechs at the outset, more often than not the other team wins.

Purely subjective. I don't like guacamole. Purely subjective. Am I wrong?

I am going to argue for allowing 2 man groups to the public queue for one and only one reason: after two consecutive attempts at balancing groups, it has gotten worse, not better. I have no confidence in PGI (or, realistically, ANYONE)'s ability to balance with all the variables extant in this game.

And selfishly, I would like to bring friends into the game without them quitting because they stand little to no chance of learning it. Getting stomped into the mud multiple times in a row is not an especially good way to teach people to play. With a two man group, there's at least a CHANCE that someone will learn something.

Argue against it however you will. But asking for a better MM or PSR/Tier rating is, IMO, pissing into the wind.

I'm not rules-lawyering in the slightest. I asked because I wanted to know how you came to that comment. As to the rest, sure, it's ALL opinions at this point. I'm not arguing your opinion isn't valid or your feelings aren't valid.

But if your premise is only based on that, it's a pretty weak argument. At least what I'm saying has historic precedent backing it up (some known numbers vice your feelings on the subject) and logic that follows the model we have today. If you add groups to soloists, you will likely alienate a much larger contingent of players than gain/retain at this point in the game.

Adding pairs to solo queue is just as much pissing in the wind as anything else around here especially if it's change with no defensible metrics driving the change to begin with and still doesn't get to the root cause of the problem which is PSR/MM.

But if treating a symptom vice treating the disease seems like the right idea to you, go for it.

In the end, until there's a groundswell of support for the idea, this too is just getting your legs wet with urine. Look how long the 8v8/12v12 had to socialize and marinate before PGI actually decided to bring that up for a sensing session/vote.

Edited by Lukoi Banacek, 18 June 2018 - 02:31 PM.

[Besh]

I am truly wondering what it is that makes people think a totally fresh, unexperienced and not used to MW:O mechanics Player will NOT get stomped to death a gaziliion times over even IF 2Men were allowed into SoloQP, just because their more experienced friend happens to be in the same Team with them .

I mean, the whole premise is "I want to bring my friend so we can play the Game without getting stomped all the time..." . Truly, what makes you believe that wont happen IF youd be allowed to drop into Solo with 2 people `? DO you really think a newish Player will have it somewhat "easier" for his first however many Games it takes to get used to piloting, Heat, Maps, basic concepts like FocusFire, dont block etc. just because you are there, too ?

New Players WILL get killed, quick and dirty, a lot of times. At least most of them . More so if they have no prior experience whatsoever with MW type Games . It wont magically change by being with a more experienced friend .

Edited by Besh, 18 June 2018 - 02:35 PM.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Besh, on 18 June 2018 - 02:33 PM, said:

I am truly wondering what it is that makes people think a totally fresh, unexperienced and not used to MW:O mechanics Player will NOT get stomped to death a gaziliion times over even IF 2Men were allowed into SoloQP, just because their more experienced friend happens to be in the same Team with them .

I mean, the whole premise is "I want to bring my friend so we can play the Game without getting stomped all the time..." . Truly, what makes you believe that wont happen IF youd be allowed to drop into Solo with 2 people `? DO you really think a newish Player will have it somewhat "easier" for his first however many Games it takes to get used to piloting, Heat, Maps, basic concepts like FocusFire, dont block etc. just because you are there, too ?

New Players WILL get killed, quick and dirty, a lot of times. At least most of them . More so if they have no prior experience whatsoever with MW type Games . It wont magically change by being with a more experienced friend .

Interestingly enough, if you want to teach your buddy the fundamentals that doesn't require stomps....there's also lobbies. Not sure why folks don't take their buds there and get them introduced before throwing them to the main force. There's no single player game here for people learn the very basics from and the opening tutorials are extremely short and basic. Part of the NPE that's lacking really.

[Besh]

Lukoi Banacek, on 18 June 2018 - 02:48 PM, said:

Interestingly enough, if you want to teach your buddy the fundamentals that doesn't require stomps....there's also lobbies. Not sure why folks don't take their buds there and get them introduced before throwing them to the main force. There's no single player game here for people learn the very basics from and the opening tutorials are extremely short and basic. Part of the NPE that's lacking really.

Yep, that is what I was going to get at with my above post . Instead of trying to change how people are matched up, take the time and effort to actually teach your new player friend the basics in a private Lobby . They are even free now !

Duels, even 2v2 in private Lobbies can be a LOT of fun, and a LOT can be taught in those Lobbies which is actually really helpfull for actual Matches . But from the last 18 pages, I gathered that is ALSO not what the people advocating 2Men in SoloQ are wanting to do .

If I get it right, they want to play casual, and/or with a totally new Player/Friend in a kindof saveish environment....and I simply do not understand what makes them believe they will find that in SoloQ . I mean, the way MM is setup right now ( if it actually, and still is...), people in T5 will get matched up with up to T3...and well, I have a feeling there are quite some capable T3 Pilots playing who will snack a new Player any hr. of the night without much effort.....experienced friend by his side or not .

p.s.: Horde Mode....but I guess that would lead a LOT of Players out of the PvP Qs .

Edited by Besh, 18 June 2018 - 02:59 PM.

[Tatula]

Personally, I don't think introducing duos into the QP queue is such a big deal. I'm a casual player and I don't think a duo on the opposite team will ruin my match (as long as there's also a duo on my team), any more than having a disconnect or an AFK (sometimes more than one) on my team. What having a duo will do for me personally, is to allow me to bring a friend into the same match with me and tell him to follow me so we can see approximately the same things so I can point things out to him.

The OP's request is for pairs or small groups to be allowed in QP, for which I would say OK to (for pairs only) if that will help him bring more players into the game. But let's think outside the box. What if instead of allowing duos into a QP match, PGI gives us what I would call a coaching mode. It's just a variation of spectating, which we already have. The difference is a player NOT in the match can spectate a player (through invitation only) and have VOIP enabled between the two. This will allow the coach to see exactly what the player sees, and can focus on teaching the player and not worrying about fighting or moving.

[Grus]

a le Roi, on 18 June 2018 - 11:37 AM, said:

While you may be right about the rest, getting my *** handed over to me is not what bothers me. I'd prefer playing FP over QP even though it involves a lot tougher opponents - if only the wait times weren't so massive.

GQ wait times are tolerable sometimes and I do enjoy playing it despite its impact on my stats (which I don't care about). Its attractiveness suffers when the wait time goes past 5 minutes and well into the 10+ minute territory. That's when being able to play QP with a friend would be most valuable.

If you're not worried about getting your butt kicked for a while just take your friend, group up, and do Solaris 2 man two man fights. You're not going to get a 2 man in solo que... for obvious reasons..

[Besh]

Aloha, on 18 June 2018 - 03:26 PM, said:

Personally, I don't think introducing duos into the QP queue is such a big deal. I'm a casual player and I don't think a duo on the opposite team will ruin my match (as long as there's also a duo on my team), any more than having a disconnect or an AFK (sometimes more than one) on my team. What having a duo will do for me personally, is to allow me to bring a friend into the same match with me and tell him to follow me so we can see approximately the same things so I can point things out to him.

The OP's request is for pairs or small groups to be allowed in QP, for which I would say OK to (for pairs only) if that will help him bring more players into the game. But let's think outside the box. What if instead of allowing duos into a QP match, PGI gives us what I would call a coaching mode. It's just a variation of spectating, which we already have. The difference is a player NOT in the match can spectate a player (through invitation only) and have VOIP enabled between the two. This will allow the coach to see exactly what the player sees, and can focus on teaching the player and not worrying about fighting or moving.

You CAN bring a friend into the same Match....in GroupQ . Plus, that coaching mode also does already exist, in the form of spectating a Player after you have died .

Really, I do not understand why people do not want to teach their friends basics in Private Lobbies, or play Solaris with them .

Edited by Besh, 18 June 2018 - 03:44 PM.