864 replies to this topic

[Cloves]

Haipyng, on 03 July 2018 - 08:26 AM, said:

As worried as people seem to be about balance in QP, it seems doubtful that solos of a meaningful quantity would want to drop in GP and enjoy the ultimate randomness of the GP MM. That said it's an idea that you would think would be easy to implement with no appreciable downside as long as solos can opt out of joining GP, so why not?

it can’t hurt anybody and can help the Oceania plays that have que issues in QP que

[Nightbird]

Solos opting into group queue is fine. No to groups in solo queue .

[MischiefSC]

Haipyng, on 03 July 2018 - 08:26 AM, said:

As worried as people seem to be about balance in QP, it seems doubtful that solos of a meaningful quantity would want to drop in GP and enjoy the ultimate randomness of the GP MM. That said it's an idea that you would think would be easy to implement with no appreciable downside as long as solos can opt out of joining GP, so why not?

Actually a ton of us have been asking to get to opt into GQ since the creation of group vs solo queue many years ago. I think you would be shocked at how many of us would go pug in GQ. The thing that some people are objecting to about GQ (there's all these people like, in teams, doing that teamwork thing and it makes being a derp SO HARD) is exactly what we're looking for.

Honestly it might solve a lot - Solo queue would pretty much be where all the solo yolo rambos can go to be terribad, LRMs will be considered totally OP and twisting is just like HAX. GQ will functionally just be where people go for teamwork gameplay in a game that is, amazingly, based entirely around 2 teams of 12 fighting each other and over objectives.

I think you'd be surprised at how many would do it. I know a lot of people who would play more often if they could do that.

[Mystere]

Haipyng, on 03 July 2018 - 08:26 AM, said:

As worried as people seem to be about balance in QP, it seems doubtful that solos of a meaningful quantity would want to drop in GP and enjoy the ultimate randomness of the GP MM. That said it's an idea that you would think would be easy to implement with no appreciable downside as long as solos can opt out of joining GP, so why not?

Well, if solos like me thrived in CW, I see no reason why it will not be the same in the group queue.

[Tarl Cabot]

Nightbird, on 03 July 2018 - 08:52 AM, said:

Solos opting into group queue is fine. No to groups in solo queue .

I would also believe that PGI would need to limit the number of non-group players per side, ie max of 3-4.

[Grus]

Nightbird, on 03 July 2018 - 08:52 AM, said:

Solos opting into group queue is fine. No to groups in solo queue .

I second.

[Vesper11]

Grus, on 03 July 2018 - 02:49 PM, said:

I second.

I object. (I could use upboat another comment but why do that when I can make useless posts!)

[S O L A I S]

Dogstar, on 01 July 2018 - 10:45 PM, said:

You know I put plenty of reason explaining why, almost all of the time, adding duos would not have an impact, but you are choosing to ignore it because either you're incapable of understanding or just can't refute it.

You've undermined and undervalued your opinion with this repeated lack of attention, so as far as I'm concerned you're not worth debating with any more.

New player experience could be vastly improved by adding duos to the _quick play_ queue. The code changes required are relatively small thus would be inexpensive and the 'downside' of 'top player duos rampaging through matches' is so unlikely to affect anyone that it might as well not exist.

No you have only put forward what you think and what you want. No evidence suggests it would increase population and a thread explaining issues mm has by lead developer you ignore. You also fail to understand the impact two players can have in the chaos that is solo queue. You have also decided it would improve npe which again is only a feeling that you have.

[MTier Slayed Up]

[S O L A I S]

Lykaon, on 02 July 2018 - 12:18 AM, said:

I believe you are failing to take into account how uncommon a top 1% player is or even a top 5%.

Maybe we need to clearify what this top 1-5% means.

Is it the top 1% of all players that are currently playing regularly or even semi regularly ( as in currently placed in the top 1-5% on the leader boards on this forums)

Or is it top 1-5% of players that are currently online when the match maker fills it's match. (this is a significant difference over the top 1-5% of all players listed on the leader boards)

Or lastly is it the top 1-5% of players currently in the match being played. (As in the two best players of the 24 currently playing are on the same team and grouped together)


Of these three possible definitions the last holds the most sway as being an impactful variable.

Otherwise the first two definitions would be small sample groups that are likely to equalize as their percentages dictate Ie. 1% of all matches include 1% top quality players therefore 99% of matches do not include top 1% players.

Seems silly to put so much concern on something that will not occur 99% of the time.


The last definition I outlined however could potentially become an issue. But even then this would mean the two best players in the matchmaker bucket must be grouped together first.

And this may be rare enough that it isn't a significant factor in the vast majority of matches. And a similar effect can already happen within the framework of the current match maker.

Since we can fairly assume that top 1-5% placed players will be tier one the match maker concentrates this pool of players already by having the criteria set as it is now (2 steps of tier difference in a given match). The match maker currently only matches tier for tier so a genuinely top 1-5% skill level tier one is valued the same as a tier one player who got there by Lurm-spamming their way up the ranks.

The match maker just grabs X number of tier ones from the bucket and places them on teams. Since the tier rank is the only criteria used a tier one lurm spud would be the same value as the hypothetical EMP player in your post.

Blue team gets a LURM spud Red team gets top 1% EMP dude. And since this does currently happen one could assume it is also possible for Blue team to get 2 X Lurm Spuds and Red team to get 2 X genuine top 1-5% skill level players since the current match maker will green light this as "Balanced" since all 4 players have the same value (tier one)

So since we can assume this issue does already occur since it can occur we need to consider the possible complications of players selecting to make this occur. How frequently would 2 top 1=5% players be grouped together and drop in solo queue and of what percentage does this result in a victory for their teams (certainly not 100% but high) and finally what percentage of total matches does the top 1-5% 2 player group even occur at all.


And one last thing to contemplate.

If there is only one 2 player group per team per match wouldn't this mean that 10 players on every team that includes a group are solo players?

And if 10 players on a team are not the top 1-5% skill level grouped players and that team wins doesn't this mean that every victory achieved by the top 1-5% skill level group also grants a win to 10 solos.


So if this hypothetical top 1-5% group wins 100 matches they would have beaten 200 grouped players and 1000 solo players.

Conversely this would mean they would have also shared a victory with 1000 solo players.

Since solo players who win equal solo players who lost wouldn't this logicly mean the top 1-5% skill level groups only negatively impact grouped players since there is no pairity in shared victories with grouped players.

Mathematicly the total number of solo players losing equals the total number of solo players winning.This would mean that since it is highly unlikely that any given solo player would consistantly be placed only opposing these hypothetical top skill level players the existance of these players in a shared queue would mathematicly equalize to NULL values for solo players win/loss ratios.

And you fail to take into consideration a whole ton of other variables.

Like how often to those top players play. When do they play. The likelihood of top players who all know each other for the most part grouping up.

You also disregard the impact of the games a duo of the top 1-5% would have for the people in those games. These guys signing on for few hours during prime time winning 100% of their matches would not be good for the people drawing the short end of the stick. Already possible to be matched up against the same people over and over in quick play as it is with current population.

You also ignore the impact of placing further variables for matchmaker which has recently undergone some changes to accommodate issues and concerns from the community as it is.

[Johnathan Tanner]

DrtyDshSoap, on 03 July 2018 - 04:38 PM, said:

[Mystere]

DrtyDshSoap, on 03 July 2018 - 04:38 PM, said:

Short of an EMP?

[Grus]

DrtyDshSoap, on 03 July 2018 - 04:38 PM, said:

Just need EVIL to start posting and mods will kill it.

[Mr Steinbrenner]

Why do all the people with bad records have like 20k posts and are commenting on things they have no idea about? Guys that clearly havent played QP for ages acting like they have the right to dictate its direction because they bought golden mechs 4 years ago.

[Grus]

Mr Steinbrenner, on 03 July 2018 - 06:23 PM, said:

Why do all the people with bad records have like 20k posts and are commenting on things they have no idea about? Guys that clearly havent played QP for ages acting like they have the right to dictate its direction because they bought golden mechs 4 years ago.

Because changes to mech's for QP effects FW..

[Wil McCullough]

DrtyDshSoap, on 03 July 2018 - 04:38 PM, said:

Implementing the change would kill it.

It would also kill mwo but who cares as well as i get to smurf and farm potatoes and salt as the game shuts down.

I'm close to actually just supporting this lunatic idea just so that its proponents can see its retardacy in effect and suffer more stomps as retired players like me come back just to unleash the farmage.

[Vesper11]

Mr Steinbrenner, on 03 July 2018 - 06:23 PM, said:

Why do all the people with bad records have like 20k posts and are commenting on things they have no idea about? Guys that clearly havent played QP for ages acting like they have the right to dictate its direction because they bought golden mechs 4 years ago.

Because they are very territorial.

[Dogstar]

S O L A I S, on 03 July 2018 - 04:44 PM, said:

And you fail to take into consideration a whole ton of other variables.

Like how often to those top players play. When do they play. The likelihood of top players who all know each other for the most part grouping up.

You also disregard the impact of the games a duo of the top 1-5% would have for the people in those games. These guys signing on for few hours during prime time winning 100% of their matches would not be good for the people drawing the short end of the stick. Already possible to be matched up against the same people over and over in quick play as it is with current population.

You also ignore the impact of placing further variables for matchmaker which has recently undergone some changes to accommodate issues and concerns from the community as it is.

The person who's really doing some top level ignoring is _you_

I've coverted the points you raise already and so has at least one other person no more than a page or two back.

TLDR? Top players grouping up have almost no effect on the overwhelming majority of matches

[Vxheous]

Dogstar, on 04 July 2018 - 09:18 AM, said:

The person who's really doing some top level ignoring is _you_

I've coverted the points you raise already and so has at least one other person no more than a page or two back.

TLDR? Top players grouping up have almost no effect on the overwhelming majority of matches

Do you remember that match a few weeks ago where I carried that match you were in (I think you had some sort of AC2 mech)? That match ended with 7 deaths on our team, but if I had another member of EmP with me, that game would've probably ended 12-1 to at worst 12-3. Top players grouping up will win/snowball the overwhelming majority of matches they are in.

[Mystere]

Mr Steinbrenner, on 03 July 2018 - 06:23 PM, said:

Why do all the people with bad records have like 20k posts and are commenting on things they have no idea about? Guys that clearly havent played QP for ages acting like they have the right to dictate its direction because they bought golden mechs 4 years ago.

• I rarely drop 10 times a month these days because I am bored of both QP and CW.
  
• Solaris got old (and patience-draining) really quickly.
  
• Events are not that enticing given I have many of the trinkets being given away anyway.
  
• I got Richer Than Blake a long long time ago.
  
• I have better games to use my current setup on, which consists of:
  
  • Thrustmaster HOTAS Warthog
    
  • Thrustmaster T.Flight Rudder Pedals
    
  • Apple iPad
    
  • Apple IPad Mini
    
  • Logitech G13
    
  • Logitech K750 Solar Keyboard
    
  • Logitech Mx Ergo Trackball
    
  • all of the above mounted on or around an RSeat Assetto Corsa Special Edition.
• I miss my Thrustmaster Ferrari steering wheel. I should not have given it away, especially because it did not have much MWO playtime on it.
  
• The new RSeat S1 looks really tempting.
  
• The new Thrustmaster Pendular Rudder looks even more tempting.
  
• I missed out on buying a golden mech becaue PGI made it too complicated for people who already had the first Clan packs.
  
• I am dying to drop in the group queue as a solo, because why not?
  
• In spite of 1-9, I still have some passion left for the game.
  
• Last but not least, are you jelly? Because you sound like it.

Do you have any more questions?

Wil McCullough, on 03 July 2018 - 07:23 PM, said:

I'm close to actually just supporting this lunatic idea just so that its proponents can see its retardacy in effect and suffer more stomps as retired players like me come back just to unleash the farmage.

Yes, it is tempting indeed.