864 replies to this topic

[Vesper11]

Luminis, on 21 June 2018 - 09:55 PM, said:

Ever considered that such a change might drive more people off than the fistful of guys begging for it are gonna bring in?

Ever considered how damn ******** are 12 man stacks when syndropped in GQ? Yet it's still there, nothing is done, GQ is deder than ded with nogames during off NA hours. All there is is a solo game with solo mech wanking, what is called GQ is a ****** mode that doesn't do its job for an average player, let alone a newbie who knows nothing about the game, how are they supposed to enjoy the game? Most people enjoy playing games with friends way more than alone, but no, not in MWO. And people wonder why the game has low population.

I'll just quote

fat4eyes, on 21 June 2018 - 12:46 AM, said:

I don't think that implementing a mixed solo/restricted group queue is going to be that hard. I remember when groups of up to four were allowed in solo queue (well before tiers were implemented). Solo queue is most likely implemented as a special case of group queue (with the max group size set to one), so allowing 2-mans in solo could just be as simple as setting the max group size to 2.

The main reason that I believe 2-mans won't be so unbalancing is that the group size is sufficiently small that sheer random selection has a decent chance of evening out the teams' probability of winning. Even in the worst case of a 2-man of top 1% players being on the opposing team, there's a good chance that your team will get at least 1 top 1% player which should give you a decent chance of victory. As long as the MM can ensure that the 2-man teams are spread relatively evenly between the 2 teams to even out the coordination advantages (ie a team of all solos should never go up against a team of 6 2-mans), sheer randomness should be enough to even out the teams' win probabilities.

The benefits of 2-mans also extend beyond bringing new players up to scratch. It's a lot easier to retain 2 players that enjoy playing the game together, than it is to retain 2 solo players. Being able to consistently play with someone you know brings a measure of enjoyment that is beyond what sheer game mechanics can offer to both of them separately.

[Besh]

Vesper11, on 21 June 2018 - 10:34 PM, said:

Ever considered how damn ******** are 12 man stacks when syndropped in GQ? Yet it's still there, nothing is done, GQ is deder than ded with nogames during off NA hours. All there is is a solo game with solo mech wanking, what is called GQ is a ****** mode that doesn't do its job for an average player, let alone a newbie who knows nothing about the game, how are they supposed to enjoy the game? Most people enjoy playing games with friends way more than alone, but no, not in MWO. And people wonder why the game has low population.

I'll just quote

I am not entirely sure what you mean with "12 mans stacks when syncdropped"...do you mean a 12 Men Group ? Those do not need to syncdrop . Or are you talking about a Gruop of 12 who break up into 2, 3 Groups and then syncdrop these ?

[S O L A I S]

Gwahlur, on 21 June 2018 - 09:47 PM, said:

Are you really talking about low population while shooting down a suggestion for getting new people into the game?

Did you read the article I directed you towards? Are you really so thick that you can't comprehend how it would increase wait times and the effects trying to match up groups of two in the mix? Do you really not understand that this suggestion in no way guarantees an influx of new players especially since it would likely mean a lot more waiting instead of playing?

Doesn't matter as this is not an issue that is even going to be considered. Especially since a good deal of the population already considers groups and teamwork to be a great Satan. So keep on arguing and blowing in the wind, it is all very amusing especially considering all of what you are ignoring to not have a real point.

So the issue is dead in the water, no matter how many times it is brought up. Again there needs to be a permanent thread pinned for such issues that are past being dealt with and explained to people already....

[Wil McCullough]

S O L A I S, on 21 June 2018 - 11:53 PM, said:

So the issue is dead in the water, no matter how many times it is brought up. Again there needs to be a permanent thread pinned for such issues that are past being dealt with and explained to people already....

this thread in a nutshell:

OP enters.

OP: group queue wait times too long for duos. solution: have duos in quickplay.

*flaming starts*

another "supporter" enters.

"supporter" A: group queue elitists stomp my noob friend when i duo with him. solution: have duos in quickplay but with a matchmaker. too bad this screws over your wait times OP, but idgaf

*more flaming*

another "supporter" enters.

"supporter" B: group queue sucks and you all suck. solution: have duos in quickplay but screw all of you, none of you are allowed to bring friends in, including you Supporter A. only noobs are allowed to bring noobs in but only for a tiiiiiiiiny window of time. also just for good measure, screw your wait times too OP, but idgaf.

bloody hell, i swear melania trump put more thought into her choice of jacket than these "supporters" are putting into their ideas.

Edited by Wil McCullough, 22 June 2018 - 04:40 AM.

[Johnathan Tanner]

Wil McCullough, on 22 June 2018 - 04:10 AM, said:

this thread in a nutshell:

OP enters.

OP: group queue wait times too long for duos. solution: have duos in quickplay.

*flaming starts*

another "supporter" enters.

"supporter" A: group queue elitists stomp my noob friend when i duo with him. solution: have duos in quickplay but with a matchmaker. too bad this screws over your wait times, OP but idgaf

*more flaming*

another "supporter" enters.

"supporter" B: group queue sucks and you all suck. solution: have duos in quickplay but screw all of you, none of you are allowed to bring friends in, including you Supporter A. only noobs are allowed to bring noobs in but only for a tiiiiiiiiny window of time. also just for good measure, screw your wait times too, OP, idgaf.

bloody hell, i swear melania trump put more thought into her choice of jacket than these "supporters" are putting into their ideas.

And with that summery, Can we now let this poor wretched thread finally die.

[HGAK47]

It wouldnt be a solo queue if you allowed 2+ man groups though would it?

[Aidan Crenshaw]

[Luminis]

Vesper11, on 21 June 2018 - 10:34 PM, said:

Ever considered how damn ******** are 12 man stacks when syndropped in GQ?

And because y'all don't wanna get stomped in QG, you propose to **** SQ over.

Good. *******. Job.

And ffs, at least be honest with yourselves. New players my ***, this thinly veiled QQ about getting stomped in GQ is getting boring.

Edited by Luminis, 22 June 2018 - 06:15 AM.

[Dogstar]

As a supporter of this idea (in general not the specific and stupid implementations proposed) I never get stomped in GQ because I never play GQ because it sucks even worse than QP.

However there is really no sensible reason not to allow small groups in QP within reason.

Whining about how 'top players' will dominate if they're allowed to group up is utter BS, top players dominate regardless.

Getting new players interested trumps anything anyone can object about.

[Weeny Machine]

Mixing groups, regardless of their size, with PuGs was a bad idea in the past...WoW, Warhammer etc the PuG without the groups was always rolled.

Therefore leave QP alone. If you want organized play do FP or group queue. If there are no matches going, then please do not force groups on the ones who don't want them because else people would actually play the group modes

Edited by Bush Hopper, 22 June 2018 - 06:33 AM.

[Mystere]

Johnathan Tanner, on 22 June 2018 - 04:16 AM, said:

And with that summery, Can we now let this poor wretched thread finally die.

Aidan Crenshaw, on 22 June 2018 - 04:54 AM, said:

Have you already reported this thread? No? What are you waiting for?

[Besh]

Dogstar, on 22 June 2018 - 06:29 AM, said:

As a supporter of this idea (in general not the specific and stupid implementations proposed) I never get stomped in GQ because I never play GQ because it sucks even worse than QP.

However there is really no sensible reason not to allow small groups in QP within reason.

Whining about how 'top players' will dominate if they're allowed to group up is utter BS, top players dominate regardless.

Getting new players interested trumps anything anyone can object about.

No it does not, if the proposal on how to "get new Players in" is very likely to drive away a lot of existing Players . Apart from that, a LOT of sensible reasons have been given, over and over again, in this very Thread . I guess its just pretty convenient to ignore all of that and saying "...there is really no sensible reason..."

[Vesper11]

Bush Hopper, on 22 June 2018 - 06:32 AM, said:

Mixing groups, regardless of their size, with PuGs was a bad idea in the past...WoW, ded Warhammer etc the PuG without the groups was always rolled.

Therefore leave QP alone. If you want organized play do FP or group queue. If there are no matches going, then please do not force groups on the ones who don't want them because else people would actually play the group modes

Just !#$%ing wow, regardless of size? So much higher MM rating for groups in games with working MM a bad idea now? Guess all those successful games are just a scam and how things go in MWO is how it should be.

And please understand that people do not want to play "organized", (you can't really call 2 people playing togather in team of 12 organized) what is much more important to vast majority of players is that you get to play with friend(s), some (aka coop) games even exist for sole reason of being able to play with friends and dull when alone, this is The important part.

Besh, on 22 June 2018 - 07:42 AM, said:

No it does not, if the proposal on how to "get new Players in" is very likely to drive away a lot of existing Players . Apart from that, a LOT of sensible reasons have been given, over and over again, in this very Thread . I guess its just pretty convenient to ignore all of that and saying "...there is really no sensible reason..."

Yea, a lot of sensible reasons were given in favor of duos too.

[Weeny Machine]

Vesper11, on 22 June 2018 - 10:15 AM, said:

Just !#$%ing wow, regardless of size? So much higher MM rating for groups in games with working MM a bad idea now? Guess all those successful games are just a scam and how things go in MWO is how it should be.

And please understand that people do not want to play "organized", (you can't really call 2 people playing togather in team of 12 organized) what is much more important to vast majority of players is that you get to play with friend(s), some (aka coop) games even exist for sole reason of being able to play with friends and dull when alone, this is The important part.



Yea, a lot of sensible reasons were given in favor of duos too.

I think you fail to grasp that even a 2-men group can easily trigger a snowball effect. They kill 1 then 2...and suddenly the other team collapses.

As for MM...just look at the state of QP. Don't try to fool anyone that the MM would help to balance anything.


Edit: We already have enough rolls in QP. Even if there were just a slight increase, a lot of people would for sure blame all rolls on the 2-men groups and bloody hell break loose. Quite a number of players would call it quits for sure

Edited by Bush Hopper, 22 June 2018 - 11:28 AM.

[Vesper11]

Bush Hopper, on 22 June 2018 - 11:15 AM, said:

I think you fail to grasp that even a 2-men group can easily trigger a snowball effect. They kill 1 then 2...and suddenly the other team collapses.

As for MM...just look at the state of QP. Don't try to fool anyone that the MM would help to balance anything.

Edit: We already have enough rolls in QP. Even if there were just a slight increase, a lot of people would for sure blame all rolls on the 2-men groups and bloody hell break loose. Quite a number of players would call it quits for sure

What we have in MWO is not what people usually call MM, it's an excuse for one. The game already has snowballing mostly caused by people not knowing basic tactics. But the game doesn't have enjoyable "casually play with friend(s)" mode and even in GQ people with same level of coordination as average QP player aren't rare so you can't say that it will create more problems than benefits. In worst case PGI can always remove it if it's that bad.
But really, I'd like a working MM first but PGI doesn't seem very interested in it.

[Besh]

Vesper11, on 22 June 2018 - 11:46 AM, said:

What we have in MWO is not what people usually call MM, it's an excuse for one. The game already has snowballing mostly caused by people not knowing basic tactics. But the game doesn't have enjoyable "casually play with friend(s)" mode and even in GQ people with same level of coordination as average QP player aren't rare so you can't say that it will create more problems than benefits. In worst case PGI can always remove it if it's that bad.
But really, I'd like a working MM first but PGI doesn't seem very interested in it.

SO round and round we go again....here goes:

The Game DOES have a "casual" playing with friends Mode, it is called GroupQ . The arguments of opening SoloQ up for "casual" 2Men groups are BS in their entirety. One of the reasons being, there is almost no way to ensure that it will only be "casuals" using that feature .

Edited by Besh, 22 June 2018 - 11:56 AM.

[Vesper11]

Besh, on 22 June 2018 - 11:52 AM, said:

SO round and round we go again....here goes:

The Game DOES have a "casual" playing with friends Mode, it is called GroupQ . The arguments of opening SoloQ up for "casual" 2Men groups are BS in their entirety. One of the reasons being, there is almost no way to ensure that it will only be "casuals" using that feature .

GQ, "casual", lololol, no. I won't explain again why. What you call BS are reasonable arguments, if you fail to see reason then okay. And where have I mentioned casuals only? Semi-casual groups are good for all kinds of players, it's just being able to play with friends is one of more important requirements of an online game for average(that usually means casual) player.

Edited by Vesper11, 22 June 2018 - 01:48 PM.

[Spheroid]

Just drop as a two man in FP. There for whatever reason have been more pugs the last month. The odds of a stomp are less currently. If you are lucky a competent ten man will carry you to an easy half a million for little work.

Edited by Spheroid, 22 June 2018 - 02:07 PM.

[Tatula]

Spheroid, on 22 June 2018 - 02:07 PM, said:

Just drop as a two man in FP. There for whatever reason have been more pugs the last month. The odds of a stomp are less currently. If you are lucky a competent ten man will carry you to an easy half a million for little work.

Sure... drop in FP with a trial mech deck against teams with at least semi-optimized mechs. That sounds like fun. And making c-bills is not really the goal here. Getting carried by a 10-man is not very conducive to learning.

[Spheroid]

@Aloha: I told the reality. I drop the mode every single day. My experience is extensive. Do you FP?