Jump to content

Group Queue Update 2020


297 replies to this topic

#41 IanDresarie

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 83 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 21 April 2020 - 02:59 AM

I agree with the reasoning and like the idea.
I highly disagree with all the negativity in the comments.
I don't think the worst-case (team 1 has a single 4 man, team 2 just solos) would make too much of a difference. Let's be real, there are more than enough very one-sided games already. Also, if you Sync-Drop as it is right now, you can easily get a coordinated 4 or even 6 man team in solo queue. We've done so plenty times and as I said earlier, the effect is barely there. we were stomped just as often as we achieved a decisive victory.

If I have to chose between a dead group queue and the ability to play with at least three of my friends reliably rather than just SyncDropping, I'll obviously chose the latter one.

#42 Alreech

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Little Helper
  • Little Helper
  • 1,521 posts

Posted 21 April 2020 - 03:07 AM

View PostRyan Grey, on 20 April 2020 - 11:33 PM, said:

but a 24 vs 24 should be possible, right !?

And a SOLARIS 24+ FFA arena stomp.
Those would fix some major issues with the game.

The major issue with this MWO is that most players go solo.
And that's not only in Solo Quickplay the case.

MWO has the tools for coordinated gameplay like Lances:
A Ingame 4 Player group with a leader who can give out orders to that Lance.
Most players don't use this tool.
In Solo they don't use this tool because they don't know the other players in that lance, and after the match the lance members are disbanded.
In Group play not all players of your Lance are in your group, and most of the Groups use teamspeak or Discord to coordinate instead of using the Lance Commands.

Increasing the match size to 12 vs. 12 players won't change that - it justs make the uncoordinated mess bigger.

To make 12 vs 12 work PGI needs to enforce the use of the Lance Tools.
That means IMHO: no Solo Players, Group size = Lance size.
Maybe even a dedicated commander with specator mode and & consumables: 12+1 vs 12:1
Only after that works a increase of player numbers per match is sensible.
Otherwise it will be a big deathmatch without respawns and teamwork...

#43 Larsh

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 272 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationYinz all going to EnP at PGH n'at?

Posted 21 April 2020 - 03:12 AM

I think this is a decent move on MWO's part really. This allows group and solo queue to be brought together, without the group stomps that we used to [redacted] about in past years.

Edited by GM Patience, 21 April 2020 - 08:40 AM.


#44 justcallme A S H

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2019 Referee
  • CS 2019 Referee
  • 7,606 posts
  • LocationMelbourne, AU

Posted 21 April 2020 - 03:15 AM

View PostIanDresarie, on 21 April 2020 - 02:59 AM, said:

I don't think the worst-case (team 1 has a single 4 man, team 2 just solos) would make too much of a difference. Let's be real, there are more than enough very one-sided games already.


It makes a massive difference. I have dropped enough GroupQ in a 2/4 man over the years. Even one player in SoloQ can have a massive impact on a match outcome. Great players don't have such high WLRs because of "not much" impact.

The one sided games will get a lot worse with Groups in SoloQ. I have no doubt of that at all.

#45 Floyd Foster

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 166 posts

Posted 21 April 2020 - 03:49 AM

Combining group and solo q would be the final nail in MWOs coffin. A group of 4 good players with coordinated mechs and loadouts would wipe the floor with the average T1pug 9 out of 10 times. Even 2 good players on coms would win 7-8 out of 10 matches against a T1pug. The casuals would leave and that's it.

Edited by Floyd Foster, 21 April 2020 - 03:55 AM.


#46 East Indy

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 1,065 posts
  • LocationPacifica Training School, waiting for BakPhar shares to rise

Posted 21 April 2020 - 04:02 AM

PGI: Is there any way to design in a switch to turn this on and off at will?

Start slow. Pick a day or two and make those Mixed Queue days. Whatever happens, you can control it.

#47 MechTech Dragoon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 297 posts

Posted 21 April 2020 - 04:07 AM

8v8 has been great, the only issue, as it was in the past, is the match time to que time.
Que times are often longer or just as long as the match itself. We just need solos to be let in to fill gaps.
Frankly, its also more fun and works better with the game design and balance overall. You can actually have mech roles. Tanky assaults dont get turned into swiss cheese the moment they walk into a firing line in an 8v8, they can actually tank...for example.

Let qp/gp be 8v8 and leave faction 12v12.
Let groups up to 6 into que. The other side (should) be balanced by being higher tonnage.
If you limit things to 4 man groups, its creating too much of a gap to the next game mode group size.
This will cause group drop sync dropping. Creating what you are attempting to avoid, but uncontrolled.

If you let solos in to group que 8v8, you will effectively (most of the time) eliminate the need for them to be let in....
A better guarantee of group drops with less wait time causes more groups to drop. Which in turn eliminates the need for solos.

But without solos, you wont eliminate the need, and therefore cause less groups to drop due to wait times.
Its a player interaction and behaviour problem, it always has been. Which is why other games don't separate things. You create your own death spiral through causality loop.


Also your previous 12v12 wait numbers aren't accurate to recent data. Not even close.

Edited by MechTech Dragoon, 21 April 2020 - 04:14 AM.


#48 Tarl Cabot

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Tai-sho
  • Tai-sho
  • 7,015 posts
  • LocationImperial City, Luthien - Draconis Combine

Posted 21 April 2020 - 04:17 AM

View PostMechTech Dragoon, on 21 April 2020 - 04:07 AM, said:

---

Also your previous 12v12 wait numbers aren't accurate to recent data. Not even close.


This. Unless he comes back and notes that this also included those groups who readied up, never found a match and left... but I am definitely not holding my breath on that one.

#49 Larsh

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 272 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationYinz all going to EnP at PGH n'at?

Posted 21 April 2020 - 04:45 AM

With a small player base, its probably best to toss out the idea of PSR.

It sucks for many, but we need to realize if we even want to play this game, we need to place aside ideas of K/D ratio, and WLR.

Honestly, if people were playing with stats in mind this whole time, then it's their loss. At this point, play the game, get a beer, get a vodka, play the game, get another beer, and have a good time.

As a casual scrub my Discord and I will still play.

And hell, if the causals do leave, like everyone keeps saying will happen, then voila you'll have your expert top tier gaming experience that you all complain you never have due to casuals never listening to commands and what not.

Edited by Larsh, 21 April 2020 - 04:46 AM.


#50 Ratybor

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 50 posts

Posted 21 April 2020 - 04:52 AM

View Postjustcallme A S H, on 21 April 2020 - 03:15 AM, said:

The one sided games will get a lot worse with Groups in SoloQ. I have no doubt of that at all.


It can't get worse. 2/3 of matches are already stomps 12-3/3-12 with the last 1/3 being barely equal.
Worst case - this will stay the same BUT you will be able to play with your friend.

Edited by Ratybor, 21 April 2020 - 04:54 AM.


#51 Larsh

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 272 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationYinz all going to EnP at PGH n'at?

Posted 21 April 2020 - 04:55 AM

View PostRatybor, on 21 April 2020 - 04:52 AM, said:


It can't get worse. 2/3 of matches are already stomps 12-3/3-12 with the last 1/3 being barely equal.
Worst case - this will stay the same BUT you will be able to play with your friend.

This all the way.

#52 Brauer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 832 posts

Posted 21 April 2020 - 04:58 AM

View PostRatybor, on 21 April 2020 - 04:52 AM, said:


It can't get worse. 2/3 of matches are already stomps 12-3/3-12 with the last 1/3 being barely equal.
Worst case - this will stay the same but you will be able to play with your friend.


I mean judging by GroupQ it can get worse. I dropped with 1 to 3 other players the first night GroupQ went to 8v8 and was active again. We didn't lose a single time. Even when we dropped as a two man and the rest of our group essentially suicided into the enemy we carried the match. That was against other groups including a full 8 man that we dropped against multiple times. If you translate that to SoloQ it follows that we'd be able to accomplish much the same thing while farming more damage unless we ran into a group of very high level players.

If GroupQ and SoloQ are merged you're going to see high level groups farming everyone else and the experience for solo players and for casual and lower performing players is going to suffer.

Edit: originally said "2-4 other players" but I really meant as a 2 or 4 man.

Edited by Brauer, 21 April 2020 - 06:41 AM.


#53 -Verti-

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 77 posts
  • LocationBrown Sea Buccaneer

Posted 21 April 2020 - 04:59 AM

If you do go ahead and do this, it might pay to remove that tooltip from the loading screen.

You know, the one that reads something like "No force on the battlefield can stand up to a well coordinated unit and their services are sought throughout the Inner Sphere."

Your own in game tooltips point to this being a silly idea.

#54 BlaizerP

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Fighter
  • The Fighter
  • 494 posts

Posted 21 April 2020 - 05:13 AM

View PostRatybor, on 21 April 2020 - 04:52 AM, said:


It can't get worse. 2/3 of matches are already stomps 12-3/3-12 with the last 1/3 being barely equal.
Worst case - this will stay the same BUT you will be able to play with your friend.

Of course it can get worse. You'r estimating 33% of solo matches are contested, based on what we saw this weekend with group action that number is perhaps 10% or less.

#55 Alreech

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Little Helper
  • Little Helper
  • 1,521 posts

Posted 21 April 2020 - 05:16 AM

View PostPaul Inouye, on 20 April 2020 - 03:06 PM, said:

A Review Meeting
1) Combining Solo and Group queue.

In the image above, there is a ton of wasted match potential in the pictured situation. Those 2 and 8-man groups are going to sit there starved waiting for a match to kick off and there are no further groups in queue. Until a lot more groups show up that queue is going nowhere. Even if groups start showing up, they will need to be in a configuration that works. For example, that 8-man group is going to sit there until two 2-man groups show up or a 4-man group shows up. No other group size configuration is going to help them get a match.

Sorry, but that "8 players have to wait problem" is nothing new.
And it doesn't only apply to 8 player groups, but also to 9 & 10 player groups.


Frankly:
The best solution would to use a fixed group size of 4 players in any game mode except Solaris.
1. Bigger groups than 4 players in 12 vs 12 matches don't have much benefit for the matchmaking: 5, 7, 8, 9 & 10 player groups have to wait for a fitting "uneven (3 or 5 player)" or "small (2 & 4 players)" group.
2.The Lance structure of MWO is set up for 4 Players. Smaller groups or bigger groups than 4 players kill coordination because parts of the Lance are not part of the group.
3. Two ways of filling up a player group to 4 players are at the moment in MWO: LFG and Group size limit for Scouting. Both could maybe adopted for all modes.
4. Groups of 4 players could allow on the long term to set up matches of different size: 4 vs 4, 8 vs 8, 12 vs 12, depending of the number of groups in the matchmaker.

Quote

2) Max group size of 4
The reasoning behind reducing the maximum group size down from 8 is because of the overall effect a large co-ordinated group has on a match. If there was only one 8-man group in the queue and the game kicks off with all other positions on both teams with solo players, the 8-man group has a significant impact on the outcome of this match.

If the team breakdown was one 8-man group on one side an all other positions filled with 2-man groups, that impact would only be slightly mitigated.

However, looking at a queue that has, at the biggest, 4-man groups, the match maker could easily fill matches and very quickly no matter if the group size is 2, 3 or 4. If solos are used to fill vacant slots, this can be done again in seconds.

A very good 4-man group could have a heavy influence on a match, but it is no where near the impact of an 8 or 12-man group.

This effect of a 4 & 8 player group on match making and gameplay applies to any game mode except S7, not only Solo and not only Quick Play.

Quote

3) Group team balancing
The match maker will put groups on opposing teams as much as possible. If there's only 1 group in queue, there's only so much the match maker can do. However, if there are two groups in queue (no matter what the size... and another reason why 4-man max makes a lot more sense) it will put one group on team 1, and the other group on team 2.

If all groups are always 4 players the size doesn't matter even less.
And if all groups have the same size the matchmaker doesn't have to deal with incompatible groups.

Quote

An Alternative
We have another option available too an this is very minimal in terms of development cost:

Leave it as it currently is.
- 8v8 Group Queue
- Max group size 8
- New UI requirement to hard-code prevent 7-man groups from being created
- New XP/CBill/Reward payout re-balance

IMHO
- Max group size should be 4, not more not less: to avoid splitted lances and to avoid incompatible groups sizes
- 4 Player Groups in 12 vs 12 "Solo Quickplay" with one group per side.
- Group Quickplay could 8 vs 8, Faction Play 12 vs 12 with 4 player group size or get rid of Group Quickplay...
- 4 vs 4 UI for groups ist AFIAK in the game (Group Screen for Scouting)
- Max/Min group size of 4 prevents 7-man groups pretty well (also other problematic group sizes like 8, 9, 10, 11)...
- Filling up groups to 4 can be done either by the LFG or by the system that is used for Scouting
- CBill/XP/Matchscore Reward: give out rewards for succesfull Lance commanders, like for capturing a Controllpoint after the order was set.

Short term improvments:
Two smaller drop decks for faction play outside the siege maps:
- 165 - 155 Tonnage, 3 Mechs
Pros:
- faster matches on non-siege maps, less mechs & less tonnage = less stomps on smaller maps
- PGI can sell additional drops decks for MCs
Cons:
?

Middle term improvments
- Variable match size variable depending of the number of groups in matchmaking. 4 vs 4, 8 vs 8, 12 vs 12.

Middle term improvements:
Change VOIP:
Instead of creating a 12 player team channel after the match is set up and move the players to that channel:
Create a 4 player sub-channel (Lance Channel) after creating a group, move sub channel to team channel after matchmaking.
Group Leader = Sub Channel Admin
Talking in Lance Channel doesn't need a key, talking to other Sub Channel Admins (other Lance Leaders) does

Pros:
- VOIP can be used during, but also after and before the match to coordinate the group
- only the 4 players of the Lance speak in the Lance Channel = less confusion
- Lance Leaders can "push to talk" to each other without confusing the other 6 or 9 players
- no need for external VOIP solutions like Teamspeak or discord

Cons:
possible abuse as "free to talk VOIP Solution without playing", solution: muting the group after 10 minutes without match

Long term reevaluation of the numbers of queues:
Solo Quickplay still needed if more Solo Players use LFG or Solaris?
Group Quickplay still needed if more Groups play Faction Play?

Very long time improvement:
Add a 13. player to 12 vs 12 matches what can act as commander:
Instead of selecting a Mech he is selecting a HQ with 4 consumable slots.
HQ is not present on the map, it's just a dummy to get access to Commander mode.
- Spectator with battlegrid access & consumables but no Mech.
- Can use VOIP to talk to Lance Leaders, but not to Lance Members
- Commander is able to use his consumables via Battlegrid or as Spectator.

Commander queue should be separate to the 12 vs 12 queue, and the commanders should only added if both sides get one.
If that works, maybe think about increasing match size to 16 vs. 16, 20 vs 20 or 24 vs 24 ;-)

#56 justcallme A S H

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2019 Referee
  • CS 2019 Referee
  • 7,606 posts
  • LocationMelbourne, AU

Posted 21 April 2020 - 05:17 AM

View PostRatybor, on 21 April 2020 - 04:52 AM, said:


It can't get worse. 2/3 of matches are already stomps 12-3/3-12 with the last 1/3 being barely equal.
Worst case - this will stay the same BUT you will be able to play with your friend.


Absolutely it will get worse. Every time I have played GroupQ I have barely lost, for HOURS on end. Maybe 1 loss every 20-30 games.

In QP maybe 3-4 games in every 10. The difference is massive.

so no it will not stay the same, not by a long shot. You better be prepared to be part of the 2-3/12 scoreline all night long. I would say most are not based on how salty the Queue has been the past couple of months... People are sick of losing. Increasing it isn't going increase their enjoyment now is it?

#57 Ratybor

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 50 posts

Posted 21 April 2020 - 05:31 AM

I might be exaggerating with the 1/3 splits but what I meant was that matches I play end up 12-3 about as often as 12-3. And there are also some matches that are barely equal. That's in SoloQ.
I don's see why this should change to worse for me after merging SoloQ with small groups. Sometimes MM will drop you with a top-skilled group (hello, 12-3), sometimes the other team will have them (welcome to 3-12), sometimes the teams will be more or less equal. In the long run I see the outcome basically the same (but with a buddy which is what I want. That's nonsense - not being able to play a MMO with a friend).

View Postjustcallme A S H, on 21 April 2020 - 05:17 AM, said:


Every time I have played GroupQ...

I haven't played GQ for ages. Can't wait 10+ minutes to play a match, that's BS.

Edited by Ratybor, 21 April 2020 - 05:41 AM.


#58 w4ldO

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 248 posts

Posted 21 April 2020 - 05:43 AM

View PostPaul Inouye, on 20 April 2020 - 03:06 PM, said:

Many people over the years have suggested the inclusion to allow solo players to opt-in to the group queue. This is not something we feel worth pursuing as the data shows that wouldn’t make a significant impact on the speed of match making and it also requires we make an assumption on player behavior to opt-in to group queue and for that player behavior to be consistent long term. If players were to stop opting-in, we'd be back at square one.


wait a second

i thought it is GQ that needs help to form matches and not SQ
so why not make it easier for the GQ MM to form matches?

atleast try it out?


edit: thinking about it. your proposed change should severely hurt GQ queue times and SQ game experience

Edited by w4ldO, 21 April 2020 - 05:48 AM.


#59 AcidBuu

    Rookie

  • The Hungry
  • The Hungry
  • 5 posts

Posted 21 April 2020 - 06:23 AM

I actively stopped playing the game because I would never found a match going into queue as a group.

#60 Galahad2030

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The King
  • The King
  • 152 posts

Posted 21 April 2020 - 06:33 AM

i feel combining queues and a 4 player max group with tonnage restrictions is a perfect solution.

The most common reason I see posted for people leaving or frustrated with MWO is that they can't play together with their buddies. This solves a big gap in community building, which was the inability to play with friends and make online friends within MWO.

For players that outcry about game balance of a coordinated 4-player group in solo queue, this is a much better solution than no group play at all. Group play is a key defining mechanic of online multiplayer gaming, especially co-op or team group play. We need it more than worrying about top 10% of players C-bill farming, which they are doing successfully regardless of solo, group or faction queue.

Remember this can always be changed again if the population or the balance becomes an issue. Tonnage restrictions for 2,3,4 player groups should help with the balance.

Regarding Sync drops. Sync drops are a game mechanic that only exists with low population. As the player count increases that will be less and less possible.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users