864 replies to this topic

[Nightbird]

With so many people saying it's a bad idea, PGI will never consider it.

[Grus]

Nightbird, on 28 June 2018 - 06:36 AM, said:

With so many people saying it's a bad idea, PGI will never consider it.

Depends on how loud the snowflakes are..

[GBxGhostRyder]

a le Roi, on 14 June 2018 - 06:33 AM, said:

Currently, if you're in a group of 2-4 people, like you would be if you're just playing quick play with a couple of friends, the wait times can be insanely long.

10-15 minutes for a match that lasts a few minutes is not viable in the long run, as it discourages playing with friends vs. playing solo.

Meanwhile, that group of 2-4 in a random quick play match would not be terribly unbalancing. A solo player with a mic and charisma can cause far more lopsided results in quick play than a small band of merry friends that don't communicate with the rest of the team.

So, in short, enabling those 2-4 person groups to play in the same queue as solo players would
1) Shorten wait times for all
2) Make quick play matches no less balanced
3) Increase the game's attractiveness, which would eventually help with the player base

Please consider making that change, for your sake and for the sake of all of us non-unit players.

How about just plain NOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

How about PGI fix the QP group queues to play 2v2-4v4-6v6-8v8-12v12 with a check box option then anyone can play in small or large groups?.
play 2v2 [ ]?
play 4v4 [ ]?
play 6v6 [ ]?
play 8v8 [ ]?
play 12v12 [ ] ?

Making the UI have check box options to play any size group is so Fing easy for PGI to do we had this one before.

Plus PGI really needs to redo FP for solo non organized grouping 12v12 solo players then have the organized group queues for more experienced players plus better rewards.

Edited by GBxGhostRyder, 28 June 2018 - 06:52 AM.

[Ghogiel]

MischiefSC, on 27 June 2018 - 12:23 PM, said:

We know from statistics PGI has provided that 2mans are the majority of groups.

That sounds wrong. At least in GQ. People often disband if they can't find a 3 or 4th because it's for some reason very hard to get drop in 2 mans. I disbanded a 2 man just yesterday because we couldn't get a match (about that was about 10pm GMT!)

I can't remember what the math is, but I don't think 2 mans should be the worst number of players to get matches in GQ, but they are. By a lot. Everyone who regularly plays group will confirm 2mans suck for queue times

[Mystere]

Grus, on 28 June 2018 - 06:40 AM, said:

Depends on how loud the snowflakes are..

Considering they were loud enough to kick teams out into a separate queue, I think they're still loud enough.

[Vesper11]

Grus, on 28 June 2018 - 06:40 AM, said:

Depends on how loud the snowflakes are..

Supporting snowflakes or opposing snowflakes?

[Nightbird]

Vesper11, on 28 June 2018 - 07:23 AM, said:

Supporting snowflakes or opposing snowflakes?

According to Jarl's list, only the supporters are.

[Gas Guzzler]

Nightbird, on 14 June 2018 - 06:38 AM, said:

A 2 man can swing a pug game without much effort

A 1-man can swing a pug game without much effort, let alone 2 man

[Lykaon]

MischiefSC, on 27 June 2018 - 12:23 PM, said:

All of which is dancing around the same theme again and again and again. Winning is more fun than losing. If you're not winning in a 2man in GQ, don't want to get in a bigger group, don't want to get better, don't want to have to try harder or improve to win more like everyone else in the entire game has, then there's the hope of changing the game so you can win more by playing against less able/organized opponents while you don't have to take the steps everyone else in the game has to improve.

This statement to me is alarmingly familiar to me yet oddly enough opposing my argument that I made with it years ago.

Way back when the queue got seperated I made the exact same point about why the "snowflake" puggies were jumping the gun on demanding the game be made easier for them by not having them have to face organized groups.

There was nothing fundamentally different between the people playing in groups and people refusing to organize other than the players winning more often were organizing.

To me this seemed fair. The players putting more effort forward by organizing won more as a result of their efforts.After all MWo is a team based game and logicly the side with more teamwork should win.

The only fundamental difference was the vocal puggies that pushed for the queue seperation didn't want to take the steps to become better players.They just wanted the bar lowered so they could easily step across it.

Instead of asking for intergrated tools to improve their chances by allowing a team of solo players to be on equal footing the "snowflakes" demanded the removal of the challenging element (organized players)

Instead of asking for VOIP to match the grouped players third party comms they wanted groups kicked.

Instead of asking for Lobbies to organize and plan before a match to select complimentry mech builds like groups field they wanted groups kicked

Instead of asking for PSR/Elo/battle value based match maker to place players with similar skilled players they got groups kicked.

Instead of requesting "Looking For Group" utilities so they to can form groups easily they got groups kicked.

Instead of improving their game and learning how to do what those players that were winning more were doing they just had those winners kicked.


I honestly believe that we could have had a well balanced mixed queue if PGI worked on giving the players the means to compete instead of just kicking and subsiquently neglecting the groups/units from a queue.

Where PGI should have fostered a culture of organized team play as the "norm" with intergrated tools to allow solo players easy transition into that organized game play we got a culture of "make it easy" with PGI saying "sure no prob" rather than delivering the game as advertised we got a watered down arcade mode.

So is it at all suprising that we have in this thread small groups asking to "make it easy" to accomplish what they wish to do ?

[Weeny Machine]

[MischiefSC]

Zibmo, on 27 June 2018 - 01:24 PM, said:

Not a fallacy at all. You clearly stated that people want two man teams in public queue, "That's what you want...to make it easier for 2 mans..." You clearly know why people want 2 man teams in solo queue. "Easier for 2 mans" is double speak. I want to be able to bring my friends into the game and give them a chance to learn it before they are annihilated.

As stated earlier in the thread, public queue is every man for himself. That's a hell of a deep pool to toss someone into, particularly given the learning curve in this game. I have heard that's what private games are for. If I could gather 22 other people to play with so that my friends could learn the game adequately, which cannot be accomplished with a 1v1 instance (peek and poke, for example - knowing when to push and when not to for another) then I would accept that and move on. But my friends, who I would really like to be able to play with, uninstalled the game before their cadet bonuses maxed out.

The NPE in this game is, for lack of a better word, execrable.

Your friends coming into the game are protected in solo queue by being in T5; they don't play against T1s and T2s and anyone who says it's not a way less challenging environment has never made an alt account.

You want to group up and help them they can play in the training area and you can make a private lobby. You want to teach them complex team strats and behaviors (which is disingenuous at best; that takes a long time to even be ready for, they need the basics of building a mech, heat management, situational/map awareness, twisting damage, good targeting and a variety of other skills first) then you need to get with an actually large enough team to help teach that.

You can absolutely play with them in GQ. I've taken new-ish players into GQ many, many times in 3-4mans. Yeah, you're at a disadvantage but they are always going to be at a disadvantage until they learn and there's no better way to learn than playing against people who know how to do what they need to learn to do.

If people are unwilling to play against people who are better when they are still new and learning then this is never going to be a good game for them anyway.

The NPE needs coop vs AI. PGI has said that's not going to happen in MWO but will be in MW5. Trying to put 2mans in solo queue under the illusion (and it's still an illusion) that it won't play out the same hurts everyone and helps no one.

Lykaon, on 28 June 2018 - 08:20 AM, said:

This statement to me is alarmingly familiar to me yet oddly enough opposing my argument that I made with it years ago.

Way back when the queue got seperated I made the exact same point about why the "snowflake" puggies were jumping the gun on demanding the game be made easier for them by not having them have to face organized groups.

There was nothing fundamentally different between the people playing in groups and people refusing to organize other than the players winning more often were organizing.

To me this seemed fair. The players putting more effort forward by organizing won more as a result of their efforts.After all MWo is a team based game and logicly the side with more teamwork should win.

The only fundamental difference was the vocal puggies that pushed for the queue seperation didn't want to take the steps to become better players.They just wanted the bar lowered so they could easily step across it.

Instead of asking for intergrated tools to improve their chances by allowing a team of solo players to be on equal footing the "snowflakes" demanded the removal of the challenging element (organized players)

Instead of asking for VOIP to match the grouped players third party comms they wanted groups kicked.

Instead of asking for Lobbies to organize and plan before a match to select complimentry mech builds like groups field they wanted groups kicked

Instead of asking for PSR/Elo/battle value based match maker to place players with similar skilled players they got groups kicked.

Instead of requesting "Looking For Group" utilities so they to can form groups easily they got groups kicked.

Instead of improving their game and learning how to do what those players that were winning more were doing they just had those winners kicked.


I honestly believe that we could have had a well balanced mixed queue if PGI worked on giving the players the means to compete instead of just kicking and subsiquently neglecting the groups/units from a queue.

Where PGI should have fostered a culture of organized team play as the "norm" with intergrated tools to allow solo players easy transition into that organized game play we got a culture of "make it easy" with PGI saying "sure no prob" rather than delivering the game as advertised we got a watered down arcade mode.

So is it at all suprising that we have in this thread small groups asking to "make it easy" to accomplish what they wish to do ?

So by your logic just make it 1 queue again. No tonnage limits, no matchmaker.

Except that's not what anyone is asking for.

[Wil McCullough]

Lykaon, on 28 June 2018 - 08:20 AM, said:

Snip

There'a a difference. I view it kinda like asking for separate leagues for high school and college level football teams. What people here are asking for is that "me and my freshman friend get smashed in college football so i want to be able to play with him in the high school league".

It's not all that accurate a comparison, but that's kinda how entitled some people are coming off.

[Tetatae Squawkins]

Anyone who disagrees with me is a toxic snowflake. -The Internet

[S O L A I S]

Aloha, on 27 June 2018 - 04:39 PM, said:

Hopefully, the fact that this thread has 35 pages and that the topic has been brought up over and over will get the attention of PGI and maybe some kind of a solution can be provided.

There is a solution. The solution is no.

[Dogstar]

The solution is for PGI to change who they are listening to, because frankly the information they are getting at the moment is quite poor.

[Chortles]

Dogstar, on 29 June 2018 - 02:27 AM, said:

The solution is for PGI to change who they are listening to, because frankly the information they are getting at the moment is quite poor.

PGI should listen to solo players in regards to changes to solo queue; not people who want to group with a friend in solo queue.

[Nightbird]

The dictionary works too.. solo =/= 2

[Humpday]

I'll also side with the NO group.
I don't want to be going up against a coordinated pair of D4 or EmP...

Are you kidding me? Proton, Bows3r, bear_cl4w and nova- already destroy 1/4 to 3/4s of a team solo.
You don't want any combination of those dudes teaming up in SoloQ. And thats just an example, there are plenty of name less players that are very good but don't' have the prestige of the aforementioned, you don't' wanna go up against them either, especially if they are rocking PIRs or anything Heavy Gauss.

What they need to do is create a bucket for 2-6 man squads in Group. And restrict 12 mans all together. Reserve 12mans for CW/FP. The reason why group had died out is due to full 12 man squads crushing people. Lets be real here, the player base is too small to cater to 12 mans. Not to mention getting all those people together at one time, is fairly difficult in the first place unless you are a child without a career and kids to worry about.(or somehow found a group that is somehow able to sidestep IRL stuff and consistently jump on at the same time everyday).

Restrict groups to a lance +, and just let everyone drop, if the same unit goes up against each other(QP GroupQ, not FP), so be it.

Edited by Humpday, 29 June 2018 - 07:45 AM.

[Astrocanis]

MischiefSC, on 28 June 2018 - 11:12 AM, said:

Your friends coming into the game are protected in solo queue by being in T5; they don't play against T1s and T2s and anyone who says it's not a way less challenging environment has never made an alt account.

You want to group up and help them they can play in the training area and you can make a private lobby. You want to teach them complex team strats and behaviors (which is disingenuous at best; that takes a long time to even be ready for, they need the basics of building a mech, heat management, situational/map awareness, twisting damage, good targeting and a variety of other skills first) then you need to get with an actually large enough team to help teach that.

You can absolutely play with them in GQ. I've taken new-ish players into GQ many, many times in 3-4mans. Yeah, you're at a disadvantage but they are always going to be at a disadvantage until they learn and there's no better way to learn than playing against people who know how to do what they need to learn to do.

If people are unwilling to play against people who are better when they are still new and learning then this is never going to be a good game for them anyway.

The NPE needs coop vs AI. PGI has said that's not going to happen in MWO but will be in MW5. Trying to put 2mans in solo queue under the illusion (and it's still an illusion) that it won't play out the same hurts everyone and helps no one.

Your post is well thought out, succinct, and, in my experience, wrong. Why do I say that? Because of the 10 people I have brought into the game, NOT ONE OF THEM STAYED.

While, AI would be a good idea for new players, we still don't have group tools, persistent chat (you can chat in game if you can type and drive at the same time lol) and in the "lobby" chat prevents you from being able to do pretty much anything else. There is no group finder. There is no "General" Chat. And, to make it worse, they added little blinking annoying icons at the bottom of the mechlab to tell you to "stop what you're doing and watch chat."

The in-game tools for this game are horrendous. The NPE is horrendous. The only people who stick around (in my experience - an attempt to fend of all of the "Not ME" idiocy) are people who are BT fans. That's a vanishingly small pool of players.

[Dogstar]

Humpday, on 29 June 2018 - 07:40 AM, said:

I'll also side with the NO group.
I don't want to be going up against a coordinated pair of D4 or EmP...

You do realise that your chance of getting matched up with a pair of top players is miniscule don't you? Even with the tiny number of active players. Secondly the difference between the effect on the match of a solo top player compared to a pair is also so miniscule that it would make almost no difference to the outcome - you are going to lose 9/10 either way.

That argument is a piss poor one compared to the argument that allowing duos would benefit new players.