357 replies to this topic

[Nightbird]

Daurock, on 31 August 2018 - 01:09 PM, said:

I'm assuming this means that a 2/3 man will never "jump" a 7 man or larger, when it comes to finding a team fight. (And, that the MM always works from the top down, finding all the available 12 mans, 11, 10s, and so forth down to the 7s before going to that prioritized small group.)

Yep, that would be the purpose of this.

[Lawrence Elsa]

I saw the video in regards to the mock-up for how Faction Play's que will be organized, and I wanted to ask about SSR.
Is SSR the same as PSR, the faction leaderboard ranking, unit leaderboard ranking, or is it an entirely new system?

[slide]

Thanks Paul.

That works pretty much how I envisioned it.

[Marius Evander]

Video is definately better than what we currently have.

Lawrence Elsa, on 31 August 2018 - 03:35 PM, said:

I saw the video in regards to the mock-up for how Faction Play's que will be organized, and I wanted to ask about SSR.
Is SSR the same as PSR, the faction leaderboard ranking, unit leaderboard ranking, or is it an entirely new system?

Its the Solaris 1v1 matching system, not the QP experience bar system.

Really wish Mercs could be the "fill either side" solo queue faction, while loyalists are the groups.

[Davegt27]

Paul I am not sure that will work

the next round of tears would be 12man super unit against 12man potato team

you need a another category to help define a 12man team/group


the additional category could be null at first and then you could experiment with different terms

for example a player would be defined as P,x
x could be null, or ssr or fire power or whatever term you want

all the P's are added up and all the X's are added up and that will form a team
teams would then be matched up based on more the just player numbers

this would give you the ability to fine tune things with out a major rewrite

hope this makes sense

[Nightbird]

Davegt27, on 31 August 2018 - 11:29 PM, said:

Paul I am not sure that will work

the next round of tears would be 12man super unit against 12man potato team

you need a another category to help define a 12man team/group

I agree, I think a better sorting method is, add a stat for all players which is W/L only for past 10 games. To make the math simple, let's say 10 points for a player = 10 wins in a row, 0 points for 5 wins 5 losses, and -10 points for 10 losses.

If one 12 man has 120 points in total and another 12 man has -60 points in total, matching them together is bad for MWO. Instead, the MM should put together one team from each side with the highest number of points in each team, and make them fight each other. If those happen to be 12-mans, because their teamwork is good, then it performs the same as the proposed model. If a 4 man plus solo pugs get a higher score than a 12-man, then this model will outperform the proposed model.

The MM can alternate between putting together teams with the highest points first within a cycle, and for the next cycle put together teams with the lowest points together, this alternation will naturally keep the queue from getting excessive without any priority spots needed.

Edited by Nightbird, 01 September 2018 - 01:35 AM.

[Peter2k]

Davegt27, on 31 August 2018 - 11:29 PM, said:

Paul I am not sure that will work

the next round of tears would be 12man super unit against 12man potato team

you need a another category to help define a 12man team/group


the additional category could be null at first and then you could experiment with different terms

for example a player would be defined as P,x
x could be null, or ssr or fire power or whatever term you want

all the P's are added up and all the X's are added up and that will form a team
teams would then be matched up based on more the just player numbers

this would give you the ability to fine tune things with out a major rewrite

hope this makes sense

I keep on wondering why people do not realize that not only group size, but skill is considered too
If there are only 2 12 man's in que then too bad for potato 12 man

But if there are more they should be matched according to SSR as well
At least that is what o gathered from the podcast and so on

What matters are 2 things with this
Population and what actually goes into SSR in the first place


edit:
We have been telling solos to get better and to team up
Maybe potato 12 man should get better or split up then

there are only so many variables you can play around with, with the pop we probably have

Edited by Peter2k, 01 September 2018 - 04:04 AM.

[Cato Zilks]

Nightbird, on 01 September 2018 - 01:34 AM, said:

I agree, I think a better sorting method is, add a stat for all players which is W/L only for past 10 games. To make the math simple, let's say 10 points for a player = 10 wins in a row, 0 points for 5 wins 5 losses, and -10 points for 10 losses.

If one 12 man has 120 points in total and another 12 man has -60 points in total, matching them together is bad for MWO. Instead, the MM should put together one team from each side with the highest number of points in each team, and make them fight each other. If those happen to be 12-mans, because their teamwork is good, then it performs the same as the proposed model. If a 4 man plus solo pugs get a higher score than a 12-man, then this model will outperform the proposed model.

The MM can alternate between putting together teams with the highest points first within a cycle, and for the next cycle put together teams with the lowest points together, this alternation will naturally keep the queue from getting excessive without any priority spots needed.

This is an improvement over the base suggestion. I think I would still like to see a caveat in the code to avoid pitting the same large groups against each other in back to back matches. It gives people on mid-tier teams a reason not to quit after a match against a really tough team (they likely wont get them again).

[Tier5ForLife]

BumbaCLot, on 30 August 2018 - 08:57 AM, said:

So you are just joining the party? Seems like your ideas are on par / worse than those asking for a pve mode.
I'm very new (maybe 100 matches played) and half of my deaths playing with a unit are from turrets / dropships / overheating. Asking for hidden turrets be placed to attack units with a high WLR doesn't make the game better, it's just going to ruin role warfare even more (light scout is mysteriously rear cored, etc..)

That's not going to affect my unit as much as me trying to learn while a member of it.

If you play long enough, you hopefully will learn where the turrets are. (they are always in the same place) And try to learn from others how to stay away from the Dropship guns.

Best of luck!

Edited by LikeUntoBuddha, 01 September 2018 - 07:03 AM.

[Cy Mitchell]

I like the idea and concept behind the new matchmaking system. The problem that I see is the human element and the lack of control that is wielded over it. By that I mean that the player base has the ability to break the system and therefore will probably do so.

For example, when two factions face off, the Merc units have the ability to choose which side they want to play on. If all the powerful Merc units decide they want to be on the same side then the matchmaking system cannot make competitive games.

This Pandora's Box was opened years ago when Mercs were allowed to move freely between Clan and IS factions. If the whole game had been centered around Merc units only and the factions (IS or IS/Clan) only existed to dole out contracts with limits on how many Merc units could be employed per side then the problem could have been avoided. Unfortunately that ship has sailed.

At this point, I do not know how you can prevent the players from breaking the MM system if they choose to do so by stacking sides.

Edited by Rampage, 01 September 2018 - 07:29 PM.

[vonJerg]

Q: what is SSR?

If it is Solaris Solo Ranking then we have a problem: noob who never played before will have 1500 SSR, and a FP regular with +1000 fp games who gives a damn about Solaris has the same rating. And they will continue to play against each other in FP, as SSR will stay the same, regardless that FP regular will keep on wipeing the floor with the new guy over and over again.

Therefor I like an idea about using some kind of FP games based ranking, be it w/l, kdr or something more comlex but based on fp games played.

[Tarl Cabot]

SSR - Siege Skill Ranking? They should change it though so coders dont frak thing up between it and Solaris Skill Ranking. FSR for Faction Skill Ranking?

[Tier5ForLife]

OK, I watched the video and found it interesting.

There is an X-factor that can't be changed, however. Although 12 mans should have one of these so hopefully it will equal out.

Yes, having players that know FW or that play a lot together is important.

But IMO, the X-factor is a skilled drop caller. Having a good to great drop caller is golden. Having none at all is pure misery.


I've been in groups that basically stay the same with a great drop caller and it is a win, a win, a win, a win, he leaves, a loss, a loss, everyone quits.

Edited by LikeUntoBuddha, 01 September 2018 - 02:24 PM.

[TheCaptainJZ]

LikeUntoBuddha, on 01 September 2018 - 11:34 AM, said:

OK, I watched the video and found it interesting.

There is an X-factor that can't be changed, however. Although 12 mans should have one of these so hopefully it will equal out.

Yes, having players that know FW or that play a lot together is important.

But IMO, the X-factor is a skilled drop caller. A good to great one is golden. having done at all is misery.

I've been in groups that basically stay the same with a great drop caller and it is a win, a win, a win, a win, he leaves, a loss, a loss, everyone quits.

Sounds like you need a MechCommander role.

[Tier5ForLife]

I do not want any responsibly anymore in my life. That is for you young guys.

I buried a 29-year-old pair of boots along with my last dog ever 2 weeks ago.

This is the first shooter game I've ever played. And I'll be 58 this year but I feel 68, lol.

And I have a Madden game in 39 minutes.

[Horseman]

TheCaptainJZ, on 01 September 2018 - 12:04 PM, said:

Sounds like you need a MechCommander role.

I'm sure we can count on Mr Harrison.

[Weagles]

Much of the concerns center around 12 man being OP and not getting matched by skill/ability/win/loss whatever scoring metric.

Think on this solution.

Only allow a max of 4 in any faction group drop then let the match maker combine groups up to 12 member teams.

How it would work.....
Each individual has a ranking score. Lots of ways to calculate this and I don't really have a favorite so will just refer to it as score.

STEP 1
Group forms, members ready up, and the group leader hits the launch button:
backend -
sums the individual scores and divides the total by the number of individuals in the group to get weighted avg or group avg score.

On Screen -
individuals see the queue with the groups in order by the group avg score on both sides. In order from best to worst.


STEP 2
One minute before matchmaker kicks off Call to Arms is issued. Attract more solo pilots into the queue quickly.

STEP 3
Queue is pulled into Match Maker

STEP 4
MATCHMAKER

• Both sides follow the same 12 team formation rules forming or failing together on each attempt.
  
• Two consecutive failed attempts ends match making and the remaining pilots of both sides are returned to the queue.
  
• Attempts are numbered in the order they were made.
  
• Odd numbered attempts use the pull logic of top avg score down, while even numbered attempts use lowest avg score up.
  
• Groups are pulled into the team and a running total of the team member count is kept.
  
• If the next group member count would put the team over 12 it is skipped by this attempt.
  
• The attempt keeps going through the remaining groups adding them if they fit within 12.
  
• The team forms if it hits 12 but it requires the other side to also form a team of 12 for the attempt to succeed.
  
• If the attempt succeeds in forming two teams the match kicks off, the groups in the teams are removed from their respective match maker list, and the next attempt kicks off using the remaining groups.

The results are teams that are not optimized by the players (no 12 mans ) and are as closely matched as the pool of available groups that were in queue could make.


Would like 2 minutes in the planning screen to change decks and sort out who is calling and what the strategy will be for the drop. Knowing who your opponent is would also be useful in forming the plans and decks. The scouting gained intel on opponents mechs would only be available on the ground not in the planning screen.

Edited by Weagles, 02 September 2018 - 05:50 PM.

[Monkey Lover]

It would be really nice to put some type of check for large ssr imbalance. A 12man with 1200 ssr doesn't get put up to fight a 12man with a 2200.

A 10man with 2200 and a 2man with the same would be much more likely to make a better match.

What i see happening is the same thing that happen in group Q .Mix teams no longer group up.

[Grus]

Battlefield based tonnage restriction (e.g. only 4 assaults at a time)

Im assuming thats each side not total.

[Grus]

Rampage, on 01 September 2018 - 08:55 AM, said:

I like the idea and concept behind the new matchmaking system. The problem that I see is the human element and the lack of control that is wielded over it. By that I mean that the player base has the ability to break the system and therefore will probably do so.

For example, when two factions face off, the Merc units have the ability to choose which side they want to play on. If all the powerful Merc units decide they want to be on the same side then the matchmaking system cannot make competitive games.

This Pandora's Box was opened years ago when Mercs were allowed to move freely between Clan and IS factions. If the whole game had been centered around Merc units only and the factions (IS or IS/Clan) only existed to dole out contracts with limits on how many Merc units could be employed per side then the problem could have been avoided. Unfortunately that ship has sailed.

At this point, I do not know how you can prevent the players from breaking the MM system if they choose to do so by stacking sides.

Only way you can is if you limit population on either side.