864 replies to this topic

[Judah Malganis]

All I'm reading from this is that small teams get wrecked by the larger and/or more organized teams in GQ and the OP is asking, in turn, to allow small, organized teams to stomp PUG randoms in SQ. It probably will create more problems than it will solve.

[Khobai]

Quote

No, Dood.

It would be near impossible to balance that.

A lance of really good players, that know the maps even in pure darkness, that have played together and know how to terrorize especially unassauming, uncoordinated pug teams.....that would be imba.

How many really good teams are there?

One such group would possibly win the vast majority of QP matches they join.

how is it any better to let those players terrorize group queue?

whether theyre in solo queue or group queue theyre still terrorizing someone. the same exact problem exists either way.

and either way we still need a working matchmaker... unfortunately MWO's low player population makes a functional matchmaker almost impossible. because it cant draw from a large enough pool of players to always match you against someone of equal skill.

so how do you stop those players from stomping everyone else? when a working matchmaker is off the table?

all you can really do without a matchmaker is segregate those players from everyone else who doesnt want to play against them ever.

maybe the answer is a third quickplay bucket for lower tier groups. but again you run into the problem with low player population. more buckets means longer queue times. is that worth it for fairer games? maybe? its hard to say.

Edited by Khobai, 25 June 2018 - 09:51 AM.

[Vesper11]

McGoat, on 25 June 2018 - 08:46 AM, said:

These guys do not understand their own weapons enough to balance them, how could their balance players into actual tiers that sort them into soloQH

That's what good about using individual weighted statistics to balance things - you don't need to know how good some weapon builds are as long as the result (among other things) shows how well the player could use those weapons.

Judah Malganis, on 25 June 2018 - 09:21 AM, said:

All I'm reading from this is that small teams get wrecked by the larger and/or more organized teams in GQ and the OP is asking, in turn, to allow small, organized teams to stomp PUG randoms in SQ. It probably will create more problems than it will solve.

You're late for the boogeyman party, OP post was 30 pages ago.

Khobai, on 25 June 2018 - 09:43 AM, said:

all you can really do without a matchmaker is segregate those players from everyone else who doesnt want to play against them ever.

That won't work, look at GP.

Edited by Vesper11, 25 June 2018 - 09:52 AM.

[Khobai]

Vesper11, on 25 June 2018 - 09:50 AM, said:

That won't work, look at GP.

it might work if there was a third quickplay queue for lower tier groups. so new players dont get thrown up against super death stacks. use the "average" tier of players in a group. groups with an average tier of 3-5 would get put in one queue and groups with an average tier of 1-2 would get put in the other queue.

wait times would be longer for group queue but the game quality would improve.

Edited by Khobai, 25 June 2018 - 09:58 AM.

[Cloves]

Khobai, on 25 June 2018 - 09:43 AM, said:

how is it any better to let those players terrorize group queue?

whether theyre in solo queue or group queue theyre still terrorizing someone. the same exact problem exists either way.

and either way we still need a working matchmaker... unfortunately MWO's low player population makes a functional matchmaker almost impossible. because it cant draw from a large enough pool of players to always match you against someone of equal skill.

so how do you stop those players from stomping everyone else? when a working matchmaker is off the table?

all you can really do without a matchmaker is segregate those players from everyone else who doesnt want to play against them ever.

Yes. And right now, with solo que, they are segregated. They don't play in it often, and when they do, they are scattered across teams to prevent the bad experience you seem to want to allow in that que. Solo que prevents the one sided stomps from being consistently against you. Odds are you will still see them, but you will be on the stomp side as often as the stompee.

[Khobai]

Cloves, on 25 June 2018 - 09:55 AM, said:

Yes. And right now, with solo que, they are segregated.

nope. low tier groups are not segregated from high tier groups. theyre all thrown in the same queue.

if I want to play with a friend whos a brand new player, I get thrown into group play. And new players tend not do well in group queue. Its not a good experience for them.

Cloves, on 25 June 2018 - 09:55 AM, said:

That is true, but if you brought them into a tier 1 game, it would be just as bad, and would open the door for 2 vets on the other side.

its not nearly as bad. because it would still be solo queue. teamwork would be far less common.

playing as a 2 man in SQ with 2 vets on the other team would still be preferable to playing as a 2 man in GQ with 6+ vets on the other team, that are all on comms and working as a team.

the way I see it theres two options:

1) allow 2 mans in SQ, max one group per team, both teams get a group
-or-
2) add a third bucket for lower tier groups so they dont have to play higher tier groups. this also keeps lower tier groups out of solo queue.

I dont see any other way around the problem given that a matchmaker cant be made to work due to the low player pop.

Edited by Khobai, 25 June 2018 - 10:05 AM.

[Cloves]

Khobai, on 25 June 2018 - 09:57 AM, said:

nope.

because if I want to play with a friend whos a brand new player, I get thrown into group play. And new players tend not do well in group queue. Its not a good experience for them.

That is true, but if you brought them into a tier 1 game, it would be just as bad, and would open the door for 2 vets on the other side.

[Cloves]

Khobai, on 25 June 2018 - 09:57 AM, said:

nope. low tier groups are not segregated from high tier groups. theyre all thrown in the same queue.

The segregation is keeping them out of solo que. Where you want to let them in.

[Vesper11]

Cloves, on 25 June 2018 - 10:02 AM, said:

The segregation is keeping them out of solo que.

Yep, called GP, and it's not doing its job/sucks.

[Lukoi Banacek]

Dogstar, on 25 June 2018 - 06:46 AM, said:

I've already made some sensible arguments but the same few players keep repeating their 'it'll destroy QP' adage whilst offering nothing other than personal opinion. I got tired of that and decided to point out how unreasonable they are being.

So no it's not ad hominem, it's frustration at people who are so stubborn that there has to be some underlying personal reason for their opposition - I assume they got gibbed by a 2-man at some point and are now unreasonable

Quite a few of us have zero personal fear of the challenge of adding 2 means, and in fact want access to GQ as soloists. But many of us have also given some pretty solid, logical reasons why it is a bad idea at this point to introduce 2 mans to solo queue and have given the historic on it.

It's fine to disagree with our point of view, but calling it stubborn or unreasonable must because you dont agree with it is a mischaracterization at best, and definitely doesn't need the name calling. Refute the points, no need to attack people for their view. And dont lump those offering up well reasoned arguments with the histrionics of a few. You wouldn't appreciate being generalized like that, so why do you think that's a valid argument when you do it.

Just hurts your credibility frankly.

[Khobai]

[Redacted]

Lukoi Banacek, on 25 June 2018 - 10:10 AM, said:

But many of us have also given some pretty solid, logical reasons why it is a bad idea at this point to introduce 2 mans to solo queue and have given the historic on it.

there is no historic on it because 2 mans have never been in solo queue. only 4 mans and we all agree that was broken.

theyve given their "opinions" on it. but theres no factual evidence whatsoever.

im still not convinced 2 mans cant be made to work in SQ with changes to the matchmaker/tier system that would place 2 mans in a higher tier. And adding more tiers. Because theres too much disparity in tier 1.

or maybe just have a tier system from 5-1 like we have now, but once you hit tier 1 you get an ELO rating. And it uses ELO for tier 1 matchmaking.

Edited by draiocht, 26 June 2018 - 11:47 AM.
exploit/griefing

[Lukoi Banacek]

Khobai, on 25 June 2018 - 09:57 AM, said:

nope. low tier groups are not segregated from high tier groups. theyre all thrown in the same queue.

if I want to play with a friend whos a brand new player, I get thrown into group play. And new players tend not do well in group queue. Its not a good experience for them.



its not nearly as bad. because it would still be solo queue. teamwork would be far less common.

playing as a 2 man in SQ with 2 vets on the other team would still be preferable to playing as a 2 man in GQ with 6+ vets on the other team, that are all on comms and working as a team.

the way I see it theres two options:

1) allow 2 mans in SQ, max one group per team, both teams get a group
-or-
....

Out of curiosity, how do you see the MM dealing with that if player 1 is tier 5 and his mentor/friend is tier 1. Does tier 5 guy get drug up, or does the tier 1 guy get to feast on newbies and smurfs?

[Mystere]

Khobai, on 25 June 2018 - 10:11 AM, said:

im still not convinced 2 mans cant be made to work in SQ with changes to the matchmaker/tier system that would place 2 mans in a higher tier. And adding more tiers. Because theres too much disparity in tier 1.

It's been 5 years and people are still demanding that PGI "fix" matchmaking. What makes you think PGI can "fix" it to once and for all stop the crying?

[Chortles]

Khobai, on 25 June 2018 - 09:57 AM, said:

nope. low tier groups are not segregated from high tier groups. theyre all thrown in the same queue.

if I want to play with a friend whos a brand new player, I get thrown into group play. And new players tend not do well in group queue. Its not a good experience for them.



its not nearly as bad. because it would still be solo queue. teamwork would be far less common.

playing as a 2 man in SQ with 2 vets on the other team would still be preferable to playing as a 2 man in GQ with 6+ vets on the other team, that are all on comms and working as a team.

the way I see it theres two options:

1) allow 2 mans in SQ, max one group per team, both teams get a group
-or-
2) add a third bucket for lower tier groups so they dont have to play higher tier groups. this also keeps lower tier groups out of solo queue.

I dont see any other way around the problem given that a matchmaker cant be made to work due to the low player pop.

And new players who play solo won't have a good new player experience when he has to play against veteran duos.

Of course playing as a two-man against another two-man is more preferable than being a two-man in group queue because you're the duo that will be stomping pugs. Do you think this will be fun for the solo players? That's the entire argument we have been making on why this is a bad idea. The people who supports this are being beaten in group queue so they want to be the one with the stick in solo queue. The supporters never ask themselves how this will affect the players who only drop in solo queue. These players will not play in a group, yet they are forced to play against them. You keep spouting "new player experience", but only for the benefit of your friend and yourself; not the solo players. When solo players want to play solo queue, they expect to play with only solo players. Why is this a hard concept to understand?

[Vesper11]

Chortles, on 25 June 2018 - 10:47 AM, said:

The people who supports this are being beaten in group queue so they want to be the one with the stick in solo queue. The supporters never ask themselves how this will affect the players who only drop in solo queue.

Let me turn it 180: The people who oppose this are loners who have no friends. The opponents never ask themselves how it affects the players who prefer to play games with friends.

I'd rather people stopped portraying others in a way they can easily refute or deny that the current state of GP is anything but bad.

[Cloves]

Vesper11, on 25 June 2018 - 11:19 AM, said:

Let me turn it 180: The people who oppose this are loners who have no friends. The opponents never ask themselves how it affects the players who prefer to play games with friends.

I'd rather people stopped portraying others in a way they can easily refute or deny that the current state of GP is anything but bad.

So your answer is to make the solo que bad? It’s the one popular mode left.

[Cloves]

Khobai, on 25 June 2018 - 10:11 AM, said:

[Redacted]

So you admit to using bannable offenses (sabotaging your own team) because you can't beat up on newbies with your friend? Very nice. This is why we don't want folks like you dictating the experience of the new players.

Edited by draiocht, 26 June 2018 - 11:51 AM.
Quote Clean-Up

[Vesper11]

Cloves, on 25 June 2018 - 11:27 AM, said:

So your answer is to make the solo que bad? It’s the one popular mode left.

So your answer is to make baseless assumptions?
Protip: read again, notice how I **** on GQ, how OP (considered by some stupid) proposition is attractive to players simply because how bad GQ is, consider that current GQ is unfitting for average player play-with-friends (mandatory to every multiplayer game) mode and instead of shooting everything down (it's easy, especially with boogeyman) think how it could be improved instead.

Edited by Vesper11, 25 June 2018 - 11:53 AM.

[KoalaBrownie]

Jon Gotham, on 14 June 2018 - 07:01 AM, said:

Odd question, why do we have a solo mode in a game designed to be a team game?

Because without solo mode you wouldn't have a game at all for want of players.

Getting big teams together isn't just about having friends, it's about co-ordinating times to play. A lot of people, myself included, just play this game whenever there's time. I will never play with another group of people in this or any other game because I have other commitments that take priority over any notion of scheduled gaming time.

[Spheroid]

I reject the premise that it is easier or more important to convert a noob friend or aquaintence into a fan of the franchise than to simply make a new friend with those who survived the washout period.

The social dynamics of videogame friendship are in no way related to physical proximity any longer. Your kid brother or roommate are not better partners than those who naturally congregate into the well established patterns of guild membership in a plethora of games.

Your kid brother with a headset is the no different than someone five hundred miles away. Its the same experience. Mentorship is overrated. Stop trying protect bads. Playing with equals is far more rewarding.

I tried to covert a co-worker to this game several years ago. It was complete waste of time. Those looking to socialize need to join units. There are numerous casual and scrub units. The idea that only tryhards join groups is patently false.

Edited by Spheroid, 25 June 2018 - 12:14 PM.