864 replies to this topic

[LowSubmarino]

arcana75, on 14 June 2018 - 08:26 AM, said:

3) A small group of pilots working strongly together is often the SINGLE deciding factor in quickplay for which side wins. In fully random solo QP,

He's right you know.

If that would be really good players, like emp players, they'd carve such a tyranically evil bloody path through the unassuming potato armies that tens of thousands and even hundreds of thousands of terrorized screams of pure misery and despair would completly annihilate this forum in such a way that the forum would implode and seize to exist and could never be brought back no matter if you tried with all the very best hackers, programmers and tech-experts in the entire universe.

The cataclysmic power of this evil notion could even distort reality itself and open the ports of hell.

Edited by LowSubmarino, 24 June 2018 - 01:03 AM.

[Reno Blade]

As long as the MatchMaker will add the same amount of teams with same skill level on both sides, it could work with sizes of 1-3.

I think a good matchmaking could be if there are at least 50% PUGs in each team and both sides have similar PUG skills and similar TEAM skills.

Otherwise, I would like to see some crazy stuff like asymetrical battles, or tons of AI tanks added, but thats for another time and place.

[Dogstar]

As far as I can tell the only objection is that 'top players' will abuse small groups in QP to seal club?

Has anyone actually asked them if that would be any different than them playing solo in QP? Because frankly the difference between one top player and two in the other team is meaningless, a single genuinely good player will carry at least 70% of the time anyway.

So does it really, genuinely make a difference? Or are all the people crying out against it actually afraid that average players will do better in small groups and thus defeat the above average players? Because thats not going to happen either.

Improving new player experience so they can team up with friends and not get stomped in group queue far outweighs any concern about 'top player seal clubbing'.

[Cloves]

Reno Blade, on 24 June 2018 - 03:28 AM, said:

As long as the MatchMaker will add the same amount of teams with same skill level on both sides, it could work with sizes of 1-3.

I think a good matchmaking could be if there are at least 50% PUGs in each team and both sides have similar PUG skills and similar TEAM skills.

Otherwise, I would like to see some crazy stuff like asymetrical battles, or tons of AI tanks added, but thats for another time and place.

Problem is the matchmaker we have cannot tell the difference between a player with a 2/1 w/l and a 1/2 w/l player and absolutely cannot measure “team” skills.

[Chortles]

Vesper11, on 24 June 2018 - 12:05 AM, said:

Most people, like 95% at least don't even visit forums, guess who those are.

Solo only players who probably expects solo queue to be solo queue.

[Sam Slade]

no

[Chortles]

Dogstar, on 24 June 2018 - 07:50 AM, said:

As far as I can tell the only objection is that 'top players' will abuse small groups in QP to seal club?

Has anyone actually asked them if that would be any different than them playing solo in QP? Because frankly the difference between one top player and two in the other team is meaningless, a single genuinely good player will carry at least 70% of the time anyway.

So does it really, genuinely make a difference? Or are all the people crying out against it actually afraid that average players will do better in small groups and thus defeat the above average players? Because thats not going to happen either.

Improving new player experience so they can team up with friends and not get stomped in group queue far outweighs any concern about 'top player seal clubbing'.

A top player doing solos in group queue isn't a problem because the group players should be communicating with each other to balance it out. A top duo team in solo queue is a problem, however, because they will have superior individual performance while likely syncing their strategy together against people who are likely silent.

This will not improve new player experience at all. Not all new players do groups for their first games. You're killing the experience of new solo players for the enjoyment of your friend.

[MischiefSC]

Dogstar, on 24 June 2018 - 07:50 AM, said:

As far as I can tell the only objection is that 'top players' will abuse small groups in QP to seal club?

Has anyone actually asked them if that would be any different than them playing solo in QP? Because frankly the difference between one top player and two in the other team is meaningless, a single genuinely good player will carry at least 70% of the time anyway.

So does it really, genuinely make a difference? Or are all the people crying out against it actually afraid that average players will do better in small groups and thus defeat the above average players? Because thats not going to happen either.

Improving new player experience so they can team up with friends and not get stomped in group queue far outweighs any concern about 'top player seal clubbing'.

The people getting stomped in 2mans in GQ will get stomped in 2mans in QP, because the game will have to (because it applies to everyone else) increase the relative value of 2mans, so they'll play against better players. Since they're getting smashed in GQ because they don't pick good mechs or coordinate they will still get smashed in QP for the same reason.

SO for everyone else, the other 90% of the population that plays solo queue and isn't terrible at the game, they get their own impact on matches diluted and they have to play against teams who actually know how teamwork works and will be smashing pugs. This isn't spexulation. We see it in GQ, FW and we saw it when we had mixed groups and pugs before. It's not just the top 1% - there's hundreds, maybe a thousand players good enough that they can leverage teamwork vs pugs.

SO it fixes nothing for the bads and makes it worse for everyone else.

[Khobai]

Vxheous, on 23 June 2018 - 06:10 PM, said:

I beat 6-8 mans all the time with a 2-4 man, to the point where these 6-8man's disband and sync drop solo queue, or log out for the night. Anecdotal evidence is anecdotal evidence, it doesn't prove anything.

End of the day, good players beat bad players. Most "large groups" in GP are average players at best, which utilize easy teamwork strats to win (crab rushes, nova rushes, 3+ piranha + couple assault rushes). There's maybe 2-3 large groups that are exceptional, like when 228 BW get finished with their private lobby practice and drop 2-3 matches as an 8 man in group queue b4 half of them log out for the night. Rest of these groups can be beat with focused fire from smaller groups with higher tonnage.

like anything, theres bad 6-8 man groups too

but a 6-8 man group comprised of entirely good players will virtually never lose to 2-3 mans

the win rate is certainly not anywhere near the 50% it should be if GQ had a functioning matchmaker.


and yes good players beat bad players. its PGIs responsibility to make sure their matchmaker balances out the good players and bad players on each team. but group queue has no functional matchmaker. that is the whole problem. it doesnt even try to match up groups of similar sizes or create teams of similar average skill.

unfortunately matchmakers only work if they have large player population to draw from and MWOs player population is ever dwindling. So I cant see adding a matchmaker to GQ as a viable solution. Which is why I think adding 2 mans to solo queue is the better option (with the aforementioned restrictions).

Group queue cant really be fixed. But 2 mans can at least be spared from having to play in group queue.

Cloves, on 24 June 2018 - 08:05 AM, said:

Problem is the matchmaker we have cannot tell the difference between a player with a 2/1 w/l and a 1/2 w/l player and absolutely cannot measure “team” skills.

well it could calculate the average tier of a group. then put a similar sized group of the same average tier on the other team.

but with MWOs low population that would significantly increase queue times in GQ. even with a release valve.

I dont believe group queue can be fixed due to the low pop issues. Group queue, like faction play, is a lost cause unless the game gets a huge influx of new players.

MischiefSC, on 24 June 2018 - 08:36 AM, said:

The people getting stomped in 2mans in GQ will get stomped in 2mans in QP,

possibly. but they will have more fun getting stomped. it wont be nearly as one sided.

GQ is simply not fun for 2 mans. And lets not forget that a game should be fun first and foremost.

there is no reason the game should be miserable for 2 mans.

Edited by Khobai, 24 June 2018 - 09:00 AM.

[MischiefSC]

Quote

possibly. but they will have more fun getting stomped. it wont be nearly as one sided.

GQ is simply not fun for 2 mans. And lets not forget that a game should be fun first and foremost.
there is no reason the game should be miserable for 2 mans.

The stomps are the same. 12-0s happen in QP all the time.

GQ is fun for 2mans, that's about the only GQ I play. I win less than I do in QP, but that's because even 3 sentences in voip in QP is enough coordination to swing a lot of matches. Call a couple targets, point out who's in the open.

You're saying that the 90% of players in QP should have less fun so that the tiny percent of terribad 2mans might potentially sometimes have a bit more. Maybe.

Lol no.

[Vesper11]

Chortles, on 24 June 2018 - 08:24 AM, said:

Solo only players who probably expects solo queue to be solo queue.

Bzzzt. It's the casual players, those who rather than visit the game forum and do useless stuff such as providing feedback to dev that doesn't bother with MM, simply quit the game because it lacks features they need, and it does.

Chortles, on 24 June 2018 - 08:31 AM, said:

A top player doing solos in group queue isn't a problem because the group players should be communicating with each other to balance it out. A top duo team in solo queue is a problem, however, because they will have superior individual performance while likely syncing their strategy together against people who are likely silent.

This will not improve new player experience at all. Not all new players do groups for their first games. You're killing the experience of new solo players for the enjoyment of your friend.

Communication? Wut? By that logic all the GP plays (that have numerous duos) shouldn't be silent and people coordinate and communicate (and listen to others) but that's not what I've seen.
And those poor new diehard solo players, while they don't have friends at least they have QP where no friends are allowed.

MischiefSC, on 24 June 2018 - 09:21 AM, said:

GQ is fun for 2mans,

Hahahahahahahahahahaha(ctrl+c ctrl+v a few more times for intended effect)

[MischiefSC]

Vesper11, on 24 June 2018 - 09:50 AM, said:

Bzzzt. It's the casual players, those who rather than visit the game forum and do useless stuff such as providing feedback to dev that doesn't bother with MM, simply quit the game because it lacks features they need, and it does.

Communication? Wut? By that logic all the GP plays (that have numerous duos) shouldn't be silent and people coordinate and communicate (and listen to others) but that's not what I've seen.
And those poor new diehard solo players, while they don't have friends at least they have QP where no friends are allowed.


Hahahahahahahahahahaha(ctrl+c ctrl+v a few more times for intended effect)

Who do you think is filling GQ? Most teams are 2-4mans. Most of your losses in GQ are to 2-4mans. Look at who's doing most the damage - if it's an 8 +2+2 the two 2mans probably did a crap ton of the damage. The best scoring matches you'll get in GQ are as a 2man in assaults dropping with a 8-10man... they're mostly mediums, you'll have a ton of firepower. Just use voip.

[Spheroid]

People advocating increased participation in GP need to address the tonnage issue. Two casual friends will heavily disadvantage their team if they leave tonnage on the table.

Maybe a player and his friend just want to screw around in Firerstarters. The game is practically a loss already. The odds of a symmetrically bad duo on the other side are nil.

That is why I hate GP, the in differences in combat potential are vastly greater than either FP or QP. I feel like I can't bring my choice of mech because it would be disadvantageous not to bring your best mech. Worse yet if I am playing with friends who are mech poor, they can't go up or down to accommodate my choice of mech. I feel like I am wearing a straight jacket while in GP.

If you slotted duos into QP the composition could be compatible with the 3,3,3,3 rule.

Edited by Spheroid, 24 June 2018 - 10:48 AM.

[Vesper11]

MischiefSC, on 24 June 2018 - 10:13 AM, said:

Who do you think is filling GQ? Most teams are 2-4mans. Most of your losses in GQ are to 2-4mans. Look at who's doing most the damage - if it's an 8 +2+2 the two 2mans probably did a crap ton of the damage. The best scoring matches you'll get in GQ are as a 2man in assaults dropping with a 8-10man... they're mostly mediums, you'll have a ton of firepower. Just use voip.

Who do I think filling GQ? No one, spending like 10 minutes to find a game = dead.
Most of guaranteed losses are against 8-12 teams (and I have to remind again about syncdrop too), it's guaranteed losses that matter because it's waiting time PLUS game time wasted on complete ********.
And so you say I'm forced to play assaults when I play GQ.

And all of that is missing the point. GQ. IS. NOT. FUN. Wins, losses, who cares, I want to play a game where I have a fair chance at victory, GQ isn't that, QP is, even with all stupidity that comes from no-MM.

Edited by Vesper11, 24 June 2018 - 10:34 AM.

[Spheroid]

@Vesper: Long wait times are not necessarily from lack of players though. An extremely limited number of combinations are possible to reach twelve when you cannot break up premades into smaller elements.

Its as much a function of combination math as it is player population. There is a similar deadzone in FP where your premade is both to large to combine with other premades and too small to fill the gap with pugs.

Edited by Spheroid, 24 June 2018 - 10:40 AM.

[Vesper11]

Spheroid, on 24 June 2018 - 10:39 AM, said:

@Vesper: Long wait times are not necessarily from lack of players though. An extremely limited number of combinations are possible to reach twelve when you cannot break up premades into smaller elements.

Its as much a function of combination math as it is player population. There is a similar deadzone in FP where your premade is both to large to combine with other premades and too small to fill the gap with pugs.

While it's true there's ONE EASY SOLUTION THAT WILL DRIVE YOU NUTS (or another similar tabloid headline), which is to limit GQ to 4 players, less syncdrops, less stomps, faster matches and possibly even some resemblance of (tonnage) balance from no-MM! (plus some freaking reasoning as I find it hard to believe that people have so many friends playing the same niche game at the same time after work)

[MischiefSC]

Fastest solution would be taking solo players to fill in GQ matches. All the same arguments for 2mans in QP apply for why that would be fine -

Except wait times are not and have never been the real issue, the problem is people who lose a lot wanting the game changed to let them group up vs pugs in the belief this will let them win more.

Nobody here is fooled.

[Chortles]

Vesper11, on 24 June 2018 - 10:45 AM, said:

While it's true there's ONE EASY SOLUTION THAT WILL DRIVE YOU NUTS (or another similar tabloid headline), which is to limit GQ to 4 players, less syncdrops, less stomps, faster matches and possibly even some resemblance of (tonnage) balance from no-MM! (plus some freaking reasoning as I find it hard to believe that people have so many friends playing the same niche game at the same time after work)

Then you will get people who complains that they can't do a three-man group and will go on the forums demanding to play in solo queues instead.

[Tetatae Squawkins]

QP is fine the way it is now. Let's not break the only game mode people actually play just so a handful of guys can feel good about themselves.

[Dogstar]

MischiefSC, on 24 June 2018 - 10:54 AM, said:

Except wait times are not and have never been the real issue, the problem is people who lose a lot wanting the game changed to let them group up vs pugs in the belief this will let them win more.

Nobody here is fooled.

You keep saying the same wrong thing over and over, it's just your opinion, not a fact or even an assumption - nobody is fooled

Edited by Dogstar, 24 June 2018 - 11:22 AM.