Jump to content

Combining Group And Solo Queues - 4 Week Test


1591 replies to this topic

#61 Brain Cancer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 3,846 posts

Posted 27 April 2020 - 01:49 PM

View Postcougurt, on 27 April 2020 - 01:01 PM, said:

i think you're in for a very rude awakening.


That is, the other 7 solos won't listen to you, and the lance group REALLY won't listen to you.

#62 Horseman

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2019 Top 8 Qualifier
  • CS 2019 Top 8 Qualifier
  • 3,091 posts
  • LocationPoland

Posted 27 April 2020 - 01:49 PM

View PostPhoenixFire55, on 27 April 2020 - 01:07 PM, said:

Ok, reading a bit in here and another topic about the same in general I actually approve of this move. If it'll make all the whiny soloist terribads who failed to learn how to play in 8 years quit the game, it'll be the best thing we've had since closed beta.
Savage.

View Postavenger cannon, on 27 April 2020 - 01:12 PM, said:

Most of the negative replies seem to think Solo Que is currently good or something,
(...)
I'd say currently half the battles, if not 2/3s, are just completely one sided stomps on either side.

No, what we think is that merging SQ with GQ will make it drastically worse and lopsided matches way more common unless the matchmaking is completely reworked. The basic matchmaking criteria in use (tier, ie PSR accumulation) is a bad metric because of the consistent upwards bias in the PSR system. Someone who is an utterly shite player but played a ton of matches will eventually float up to T1 as long as his presence on a team doesn't lower their odds of winning by more than 40% or so.

... and that means people in the bottom 38% of the playerbase make it to Tier 1.

#63 Louis Brofist

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 619 posts

Posted 27 April 2020 - 01:53 PM

This will be bad. We have been there, it didn't work even when we had a bigger player base and the game was doing well and not hanging by a thread, it won't work now.

"4 weeks"

You will never roll it back will you? Even if it becomes glaringly obvious. You are trying to mercy kill it aren't you?

It was fun, one of the best free to play MMOs around. Also very fair to free players, I never took personally any of PGIs antics, it was all a good show. I'm 39, used to be a huge gamer, this is the last game I play, I'm actually happy that its all slowly wrapping up, sitting in front of the computer is a time waster and not good for my posture, eyesight and overall health.

When I played Mechwarrior 4 around the year 2000 I always secretly wished there was a proper online version of MW where I get to customize mechs and fight other people on a bigger scale. Then MWO happened.

Great game. Thank you!

#64 Dee Eight

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The People's Hero
  • The People
  • 6,271 posts

Posted 27 April 2020 - 01:54 PM

View PostBud Crue, on 27 April 2020 - 12:27 PM, said:

I can't articulate just how big of a horror this is going to be for the vast majority of the causal players that happen to log into play during this mess. You want to drive the population down quickly? This is the way to do it.


Not to mention the fact that over 90% of the players DON'T read the forums anyway, follow the facebook, have email notifications enabled. So this is going to be a particularly nasty surprise to them.

#65 Dee Eight

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The People's Hero
  • The People
  • 6,271 posts

Posted 27 April 2020 - 01:59 PM

View PostSaltedGround, on 27 April 2020 - 12:55 PM, said:

sorry guys, but i will believe things are "better" when i don't drop and find one team with 8 assaults and one team with all mediums. this has been happening for years now and you still have done almost nothing to fix it.


I assume you mean in group queue... solo queue always balances teams by weight classes... if team one get 8 assaults, team two got 8 assaults also (might not be the same quality of assaults mind you). Group queue rewards smaller groups with more tonnage per group... as I said on page 1... six 2-person groups as one team are allowed 1200 tons whereas a 12 person group together as the other team got less tonnage to play with.

#66 Remover of Obstacles

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Fire
  • Fire
  • 482 posts

Posted 27 April 2020 - 02:12 PM

View PostPaul Inouye, on 27 April 2020 - 10:23 AM, said:

What we expect:
- Matches will become more competitive.



I would like to know why PGI expects this.

And what metric they are using to measure this.

Edited by Remover of Obstacles, 27 April 2020 - 02:18 PM.


#67 NeroWolfeCub

    Member

  • Pip
  • Knight Errant
  • 10 posts

Posted 27 April 2020 - 02:14 PM

A **** move PGI, matchmaker doesn't get it right very often and now your adding groups of potential uber elites to it.Keep solo queue solo.

#68 PhoenixFire55

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 5,721 posts
  • LocationSt.Petersburg / Outreach

Posted 27 April 2020 - 02:14 PM

Oh btw ... The thing is, you all know people have been sync-dropping relatively a lot since "maintenance mode" announcement when group queue died. You could see 3, 4, 5 guys with the same unit tag happen to be on the same team in solo queue quite a few times if you played. And it does absolutely nothing to the dynamic of the solo queue matches they are in. Like literally nothing. They are just as disorganized as the rest of the bunch. And the people who actually can influence the game are more than capable of doing it on their own, i.e. solo. And they do. So in reality all this change does is gives baddies a perfect excuse as to why they have once again failed at everything.

But hey, don't let me rain on your Imma-gonna-quit-nao parade. Keep calm and don't let the door hit you on the exit plz.

#69 VonBruinwald

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Undisputed
  • The Undisputed
  • 2,483 posts
  • LocationRandis IV

Posted 27 April 2020 - 02:15 PM

On the otherside:

Jarl's list will now become worthless with try-hards going 4-man to farm pugs.

#70 Nearly Dead

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • 257 posts

Posted 27 April 2020 - 02:16 PM

Going to be in interesting day in game tomorrow, kind of looking forward to a change.

I will once again urge PGI to revamp the player rating/ranking system to eliminate promotion by seniority. Make it some sensible measurement taken from the most recent 100 games. Either damage per ton per match, or team score. But people need to not move up because they were in the bottom 1/4 of a winning team.

#71 Brain Cancer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 3,846 posts

Posted 27 April 2020 - 02:19 PM

View PostRemover of Obstacles, on 27 April 2020 - 02:12 PM, said:



I would like to know why PGI expects this.


Instead of 12 randoms flailing about, there will be 4 organized people (in theory) and eight randoms flailing about while the 4 use the eight as disposable fodder to attempt to farm the other guys, whilst the same thing goes on with the other team.

Competition.

#72 NeroWolfeCub

    Member

  • Pip
  • Knight Errant
  • 10 posts

Posted 27 April 2020 - 02:19 PM

Revert NOW

#73 cougurt

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 526 posts

Posted 27 April 2020 - 02:21 PM

View PostVonBruinwald, on 27 April 2020 - 02:15 PM, said:

On the otherside:

Jarl's list will now become worthless with try-hards going 4-man to farm pugs.

nah, it will still be perfectly adequate for potato confirmation purposes, which was its only real use anyway.

#74 Brain Cancer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 3,846 posts

Posted 27 April 2020 - 02:22 PM

View PostNearly Dead, on 27 April 2020 - 02:16 PM, said:

Going to be in interesting day in game tomorrow, kind of looking forward to a change.

I will once again urge PGI to revamp the player rating/ranking system to eliminate promotion by seniority. Make it some sensible measurement taken from the most recent 100 games. Either damage per ton per match, or team score. But people need to not move up because they were in the bottom 1/4 of a winning team.


The purpose of the matchmaker system has never been ranking or separating players by skill, other than the brief period before T3 is reached and the fodder has ripened enough to be repeatedly harvested.

There is no skill involved in PSR, it is mathematically designed to promote a player regardless of anything save deliberately failing at the game. It is only a briefly closed gate before you end up in the shark tank.

#75 scorch12

    Rookie

  • Ace Of Spades
  • 1 posts
  • LocationMinnesota

Posted 27 April 2020 - 02:29 PM

thank you thank you thank you thank you

#76 Clint Steel

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 559 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationMichigan

Posted 27 April 2020 - 02:42 PM

Unless every player has a unique PSR for every chassis, there are always going to be issues with it.

I can play pretty well in a heavy, but put me in a light and I'm half as good. Should I never play lights? And even then, I can play my Raven 3L pretty well, but I am utterly incompetent playing the Hugin.

#77 Brauer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2019 Top 8 Qualifier
  • CS 2019 Top 8 Qualifier
  • 597 posts

Posted 27 April 2020 - 02:47 PM

View PostClint Steel, on 27 April 2020 - 02:42 PM, said:

Unless every player has a unique PSR for every chassis, there are always going to be issues with it.

I can play pretty well in a heavy, but put me in a light and I'm half as good. Should I never play lights? And even then, I can play my Raven 3L pretty well, but I am utterly incompetent playing the Hugin.


The current PSR basically means nothing. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

#78 Clint Steel

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 559 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • LocationMichigan

Posted 27 April 2020 - 02:52 PM

View PostBrauer, on 27 April 2020 - 02:47 PM, said:

The current PSR basically means nothing. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good.


Not quite sure I know what you mean, but I do acknowledge that there are several flaws with the way PSR is calculated, aside from my criticism.

#79 HammerMaster

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 2,369 posts
  • LocationNew Hampshire, USA

Posted 27 April 2020 - 02:56 PM

Will NOT end well.
Posted Image

Also.
You never revisited fixing PSR which people on EVERY side of EVERY argument told you to do.
Zero sum. More granulation. Then you have a leg to stand on with PSR.

Edited by HammerMaster, 27 April 2020 - 03:07 PM.


#80 mrvain

    Rookie

  • The 1 Percent
  • 6 posts

Posted 27 April 2020 - 02:59 PM

I am a relatively new player (old account but only started playing it 6 months ago) so while I haven't experienced the unbalanced nature of adding group to the Solo queue, this is something that must happen if you want people to continue to play this game. I have tried to introduce the 3 teenage boys in the family to the game and while they enjoy it, they only play infrequently. One of the big reasons for this is that they can't play together. Our real world experience is that we have NEVER had a group match start when we have been waiting in the queue (being in Australia might not help this). Add to this the fact that you might end up adding newbie players who want to play with their friends to match against organised Veteran groups. This won't encourage most of them to stick around.

It all comes down to properly ranking the players. I do well in Tier 4, average in Tier 3 and I am a potato in Tier 2 and I am still creeping up slowly. If you could properly rank players, you could give groups a bump up in ranking to account for the impact their improved co-ordination might have. I can tell you now, if you and me and mine to a Tier 2 game as a group, our impact will not be game breaking Posted Image Posted Image





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users