64 replies to this topic

[Sorbic]

woo! More maps. Especially happy some of the old removed maps are being put back in!

[Tesunie]

KodiakGW, on 18 March 2019 - 06:38 PM, said:

So, no changes to Solaris before the next season starts.

I guess you can't please everyone...

OZHomerOZ, on 18 March 2019 - 08:24 PM, said:

Match maker did work for about a year or so pretty good.

But then the upward bias creeped in creating the T1 problem you mentioned.

Why?

Due to the fact at their are two (2) possible conditions to lose PSR.
And six (6) possible conditions to increase PSR for the current quick play MM as I under stand it..

As this image shows:


Making the PSR condtitions for winning games the same as currently for losing games IMO fix the problem in a minimal effort but effective way.

Thought I would mention it as Paul maybe reading.

Looking at your image (which was removed to conserve space), it's basically what I've been saying for some time now. Though, looking at it, I believe 200-250 area should be a no change zone, as that is considered the average match score for a match. It appears as though you don't get a "no change" until close to a 300 match score, which is a little high to just remain even. But the basic premise of the image is exactly what we need. Have it based of "Player Skill", not "Player W/L Ratio".

[Average Pilot]

Several good comments about match score and its relationship to PSR. First, and perhaps it's on here somewhere that I can't find, I'd be interested to know how a given match score is calculated and how that moves the needle on PSR unless that's all some sort of secret sauce recipe or something. What has always bothered me about PSR is its name. Because the element of winning or losing a match appears to be in the calculation for match score (from which I assume PSR is derived), "pilot skill rating" seems like the wrong term. Pilot skill should rate the pilot, not the team.

Perhaps it could be called Team Success Rating or something? Have separate Team Success Rating (TSR) and Pilot Skill Rating values for players? Perhaps using a PSR without a team play component and basing the assignment of tier levels on that, you'd have T1 QP matches with teams composed of pilots with high PSR's and so on down the range of tiers. Individual pilots would be better matched performance-wise to their peers in a given tier.

Or... perhaps tier assignment could be based on a combination of PSR and TSR values so that the T1 cohort would have pilots of demonstrated individual success and match victories. Perhaps you could incorporate success by kills versus success by objective, the latter giving more TSR "points."

I dunno... I'm sure this conversation has already happened at some point. I just think the current PSR system and how it operates and its terminology is broken in its current form.

Edited by Average Pilot, 19 March 2019 - 10:22 AM.

[General Solo]

Rakia Time, on 18 March 2019 - 11:57 PM, said:

so with the system you are proposing i will be losing PSR every match....i agree, i belong in tier 10 xD

Me Myself, should probably should be border line T1/T2 but not T1 maxed out

[General Solo]

Simulacrum, on 19 March 2019 - 01:26 AM, said:

Thank you for the information.
Next time I would appreciate it if you give us that information earlier.



There are so many responsible factors for high Match Scores, depending on your comrades-in-arms, about commands and if ppl listen to them or not, thata change in this raise/drop list, like here, would never solve any problem.

If the Match score would favor the correct playing of the game mode I would appriciate it.
For example If you conquer 5 bases and do no damage you get a pretty low MS even if your team wins the whole match by it. Ppl who did nothing for these points but play "conquer-flavoured Skirmish" get their points.
Same for domination. If you join the beacon as fast as possible and your team mates circle around it because .. well you know just because .. and you get killed early you get nothing.

Currently the game modes in QP could be re-named:

• Skirmish
  
• Skirmish with fancy bases to conquer or not
  
• Skirmish with a funny yellow circle and a timer
  
• Skirmish with a base somwhere
  
• Skirmish with a huge base and collectables

Well Im not really talking about match scores here.

Im just alerting people to the fact that at present their are two ways to drop PSR and six ways to increase PSR.

And that I believe that this is the core reason for match makers upward bias, and also that the fix is easy.

Match score is another can of worms.

[General Solo]

Average Pilot, on 19 March 2019 - 10:18 AM, said:

Perhaps it could be called Team Success Rating or something? Have separate Team Success Rating (TSR) and Pilot Skill Rating values for players?

Would not win rate (Win/Loss) demonstrate team Success. In my opinion it does.

Team win = Team Success

My issue is yes a pilot does impact a pilot/teams win rate.
However the team impacts a teams win rate even more than a pilot, wouldn't you say.

Thus we mush be careful how Win rate is used when calculating PSR, to much emphasis on Win Rate allows a player to get carried and be rewarded for it.

[Laser Kiwi]

OZHomerOZ, on 19 March 2019 - 10:19 AM, said:

Me Myself, should probably should be border line T1/T2 but not T1 maxed out

I don't know about that, lets assume 5 tiers based off match-score if we referred to the Jarl's list resource we would see that you and I regardless of our perceived limitations are both over 80% (percentile) on the list and therefore would be firmly in Tier 1, and maybe anyone like me in that 80-90 would spend a great deal of time getting blasted into the 70-80 range where i could happily drop down.

There is a problem with match score of course, some guys 'earn' it, some guys boat lrms and snipe using others as their meat shields, sometimes you can score a match score of 250 with 5 kills, maybe cause you secured kills or maybe because when you have a good day and core guys out efficiently you don't damage them enough to get a good score, however the Very top of the match score the dudes (esses) up their are genuinely good so there is some merit in match score.

[Laser Kiwi]

Additionally, some time zones just don't work for many players, the match maker will be absolutely pointless in Oceanic prime time when its a variety of scrambled clanners vs one particular group, heck sometimes we change sides just to even out the numbers.

The interesting thing for me is its one thing being a loyalist, but i like the faction mode, part of me would like 4 mech decks to be a normal part of play, its not like we really care about "taking planets", at least until there were some RPG elements or planet matching terrain features etc. (which is by no means on this horizon).

Edited by Laser Kiwi, 19 March 2019 - 10:52 AM.

[C E Dwyer]

Better a month, than a mash up

[Tesunie]

Laser Kiwi, on 19 March 2019 - 10:46 AM, said:

I don't know about that, lets assume 5 tiers based off match-score if we referred to the Jarl's list resource we would see that you and I regardless of our perceived limitations are both over 80% (percentile) on the list and therefore would be firmly in Tier 1,

I'll make mention that I'm also maxed out T1 PSR bar... and I know my game play has been sliding back (in part for several reasons, one of which is playing with a group of "new to the game" T5 players in GP). I have never considered myself a T1 player. I think I'm more upper T3 to T2 player... So I'm kinda feeling like OZHomerOZ as well personally. I mean, I seem to do alright in my T1 matches in QP... but then again I see people standing still, on hills, rushing the enemy solo, etc in my solo play...

[Disinterest]

07

Stability 1st

[FrontlineAssembly]

Why do I have a feeling that it will be pushed back even further?? Or even with the delay for testing still be full of bugs?? Could it be the PGI track record on these things?? yep...thats what it is.
Im glad Paul communicated about this to us. But to be honest just do what you said and fix faction. And a QP map although nice isnt making up for the delay.
Been down this road before with PGI promises.

[Tesunie]

FrontlineAssembly, on 19 March 2019 - 11:25 AM, said:

Been down this road before with PGI promises.

Q: How long ago was this road you've been on? Because at one point those promises where paved by IGP. Look at what happened to MW:Tactics for a small preview of what IGP probably did to MW:O in it's earlier years. (Hint: MW:T was not a PGI product, went on for some time with meaningless update patches that did nothing but make it look like work was being done to the game, and then suddenly without any notice "went offline".)

[justcallme A S H]

Just a reminder here as a LOT of people seem hungup on PSR... PSR means nothing here.

Please take the time and watch the MM Video Paul put time into making. It's pretty clear what's happening and if created as the video says, it will be the best you can ask for.

Perfect? No. Better? Yes. NOTE: Nothing will be perfect so aiming for that is flawed, fix the majority which is what this will do.

BenMillard, on 19 March 2019 - 01:19 AM, said:

You don't get any Match Score change for drop calling. Yet we all know that can turn the tide of a match - for better or worse! Match Score isn't the final metric for player performance so a system which exclusively used that, without recognising the overall result, would not reflect the true value of each player in the context of a team game.

The current system favours winning - whatever you did, you helped your team more than it hurt your team.

If it's turning the tide of battle. You're winning / killing and performing better... I fail to see how that isn't being reflected in match score.

Either way match score is the only tangible metric the game has to use. You're trying to say that judging performance based on someones microphone? Name one game that does that as a performance metric

Edited by justcallme A S H, 19 March 2019 - 12:13 PM.

[Tesunie]

justcallme A S H, on 19 March 2019 - 12:10 PM, said:

Name one game that does that as a performance metric

Rock Band?

Edit: PS: I will also mention, some of us are just discussing PSR and how it's in the game. Not necessarily the FP MM system that's incoming.

Edited by Tesunie, 19 March 2019 - 12:23 PM.

[Looming Dementia]

Skippynibbles, on 18 March 2019 - 06:19 PM, said:

A Solaris City Map on Fire could be fun

How about just burning Solaris City to the ground and writing it off as a loss?

[ShooteyMcShooterson]

I love the new/old and reworked maps.

[ScorpioMech]

Regarding "Solaris City on Fire":

I don't know if this is even remotely possible (but, thinking about it, it should actually be, because there are variable heat zones in some other maps...), but how about the outskirts of the city being "only a little bit on fire" here and there, more on fire the closer you get to the middle - and the center of Solaris City being totally ablaze (with a noticeable heat spike due to temperature, limited visibility due to fire and smoke). So you could (!) fight in the center (and would have to in domination mode), but at a cost - while fighting outside the center would be more "comfortable" regarding heat and visibility...

Just an idea...

[BenMillard]

justcallme A S H, on 19 March 2019 - 12:10 PM, said:

If it's turning the tide of battle. You're winning / killing and performing better... I fail to see how that isn't being reflected in match score.

Drop calls can turn the tide but aren't reflected in match score. The very first example I gave.

justcallme A S H, on 19 March 2019 - 12:10 PM, said:

Either way match score is the only tangible metric the game has to use.

Win/loss ratio is another. Indeed, this appears to be the decisive metric even in the current system.

Match Score itself is made of many other metrics that are tracked. Many actions that could be tracked and included with the score are not used. The weightings of metrics within the score could be rebalanced. There are seemingly endless metrics that could be used and ways in which to use them.

justcallme A S H, on 19 March 2019 - 12:10 PM, said:

You're trying to say that judging performance based on someones microphone? Name one game that does that as a performance metric

On the contrary. I said the game doesn't judge performance based on someone's microphone. Furthermore, I made no suggestion that it should.

Edited by BenMillard, 20 March 2019 - 09:43 AM.

[tee5]

Problem with the Matchmaker I see:

We have come to the point were we have 24 vs 12 or 12 vs 9.
Not the sophisticatestest Matchmaker can do anything there. Not enough population.

Too little, too late.