26 replies to this topic

[Nightbird]

There are many ways to get players back directly, without doing X while hoping for Y.

For example, analyze each team for it's average win loss ratio, if the teams are very different skill wise, give the stronger team a dyamic cbill adjustment for deck tonnage, for example 250 tons: -50% cbill penalty -> 200 tons 0% cbill penalty ->150 tons 25% cbill bonus. Give the weaker team a flat cbill bonus: +25% cbills.

Then people will come back because they know if the teams aren't fair, they'll get a tonnage and cbill handicap against stronger teams.

If you want reaction X, make adjustments directly related to X.

Edited by Nightbird, 23 October 2018 - 06:51 AM.

[Eisenhorne]

Nightbird, on 23 October 2018 - 06:50 AM, said:

There are many ways to get players back directly, without doing X while hoping for Y.

For example, analyze each team for it's average win loss ratio, if the teams are very different skill wise, give the stronger team a dyamic cbill adjustment for deck tonnage, for example 250 tons: -50% cbill penalty -> 200 tons 0% cbill penalty ->150 tons 25% cbill bonus. Give the weaker team a flat cbill bonus: +25% cbills.

Then people will come back because they know if the teams aren't fair, they'll get a tonnage and cbill handicap against stronger teams.

If you want reaction X, make adjustments directly related to X.

This would be awesome, and I know I've posted similar thoughts before. I'd also like it if while in the 1 minute countdown after an opponent was found, it gives you a relative "enemy strength" idea so you can raise or lower your tonnage to best make use of this system to get the maximum bonus. Like, if I'm dropping against a 12 man of KCOM my deck will be very different then if dropping vs 12 random puggles who don't stand a chance. I wouldn't mind handicapping myself if I know I'm not going to have to fight an actual team.

Too bad PGI has pretty much outright said this isn't going to happen.

[McGoat]

No one who has keys is listening.
whistles

[MischiefSC]

Nightbird, on 23 October 2018 - 06:50 AM, said:

There are many ways to get players back directly, without doing X while hoping for Y.

For example, analyze each team for it's average win loss ratio, if the teams are very different skill wise, give the stronger team a dyamic cbill adjustment for deck tonnage, for example 250 tons: -50% cbill penalty -> 200 tons 0% cbill penalty ->150 tons 25% cbill bonus. Give the weaker team a flat cbill bonus: +25% cbills.

Then people will come back because they know if the teams aren't fair, they'll get a tonnage and cbill handicap against stronger teams.

If you want reaction X, make adjustments directly related to X.

Essentially the same idea I've put forward - just you can't do the tonnage adjustment. Not everyone has 50+ mechs in their mech bay. So a 10man of EVIL/BCMC drops with 2 newbies and gets a tonnage penalty - the newbies only have 4-6 mechs and can't adjust, now what?

It also means you're extending lobby time. Currently the wait time all happens BEFORE both teams are established. Are you saying everyone needs mechs to account for a big tonnage variance built and ready to put in and we need to extend the time in lobby before drop on every match to give time to adjust their decks? You'd need to be able to adjust up or down for brawl, range, fast deck, etc.

I chewed on the dynamic tonnage option but in the end it'll cost a lot of time per match and the results are certain to be inconsistent. If everyone on both teams doesn't already have the mechs setup and ready to go for every situation to adjust up and down tonnage then the tonnage adjustment provides inconsistent and unreliable results.

In the end I think a dynamic payout is better. If the 'down' team is given escalating rewards for even moderate success and exceptional rewards for great success than the impetus is to play harder to win and maybe even think just once about some teamwork.

The best game mechanics are those that teach the players to be good at the game and motivate them to be good at the game.

[Nightbird]

I created a new thread for that idea, want to avoid creating a tangent here:
https://mwomercs.com...n-in-one-month/

[MischiefSC]

Yep. The idea is good.

Though, to be clear, the idea doesn't bring anyone back - it just motivates cannibalization of QP. However as someone who likes FP more than QP I can get behind the idea.

[50 50]

Nightbird, on 21 October 2018 - 07:14 AM, said:

Yes. It's the view that as long as most matches are one sided stomps, the FP population will never grow.

I like the incentive idea with the handicap.

EDIT: Btw. I had always thought it might work the other way around at the end of the match where if an Elite team had faced off against a random assortment of players, that perhaps looking at the number of groups on both sides, the average tier (or some other measure) that it would modify the payout. More that the pug team might get a larger payout should they happen to get a win over a team with large groups.
So not so much a handicap, but a reward for winning against the odds. Have to take into consideration that there could be teams comprised on large inexperienced groups dropping so it's not just pug vs premade, it also takes into account the average player tier or perhaps the total tier of the players. You can have a team comprised of experienced and skilled players dish out a whuppin' to a premade.

The primary suggestion in this thread is about how we could have all the factions fighting each other again and through making the match maker more flexible by using the modular grouping based on lances, there is the option for more variety in every drop.
One would hope that a group of pugs from a single faction would end up only making a single lance and either face off against a similar opponent due to the greater diversity in the drops, while a unit who can field a large number of players in a single faction would also find themselves facing off against a similar opponent.
If 1 in 7 matches happens to be an organised group vs a disorganised one.... that is not as bad, particularly if you can get into another drop quickly and have that chance of a completely different opponent.
All in the one queue as well.

It is also important to try and look at ways to reduce the wait times. Allowing smaller teams to form and fight it out could do that.
Hopefully with the update to show number of queued players we might get a better idea of what is going on in the mode, but that would still mean gathering enough players on each side to get the matches to happen.
If the single Clan vs IS front remains, then there is still the problem of needing exactly 12 Clan and 12 IS players online. There is no flexibility to still get games if it was 8 Clan and 8 IS or 4 Clan and 12 IS etc.
IF the factions were divided into their individual entities, then we need to allow for more combinations and having players divided up according to those factions.

Therefore, need to limit groups to a maximum of 4.
4 because it's a lance. (Alpha, Bravo, Charlie)
4 because we use the Leopard dropships.
4 because it's an even number.
4 because it scales easily to and from 8 and 12 player teams.

The two incentives I am pushing for here are:

• Allow players to get matches faster.
  
• Use this to bring back the faction identity

Edited by 50 50, 17 December 2018 - 06:51 PM.