1579 replies to this topic

[Anomalocaris]

DAEDALOS513, on 11 May 2020 - 07:30 AM, said:

Then you're discrediting all the criticism's coming from the so called 'undercooked' that hate the change too.. so the only opinions that matter are the 1% (and yours ofcourse)..?

[Redacted]
What I'm saying is that a lot of people aren't big contributors to a match, were regularly losing more than they were winning, and thought that some pretty crap players were really good (like that guy who's name resembled a desert bush rolling across the horizon....). To them the biggest change is they play more with friends. That's fine, but as they get better, they're going to realize that they don't matter when there's a good group in the match. They may not feel like they matter much now because of their skill level, but most will improve over time. If we had actually put together a better matchmaker, they'd actually feel like they matter more of the time, which to me is a good way to keep players in the game.

[Brauer]

Horseman, on 11 May 2020 - 08:56 AM, said:

What do you propose?
That they play worse on purpose?
That they don't play with their friends?
That they stop playing?
Reality check: PGI took away the group queue and threw casuals and solos to the groups in the merged queue as bloody cannon fodder. You want to complain at someone, complain at PGI.
You can play Solaris - a new season should be going up in just over a week, you get rewards for every division you completed 25 matches in (counting 1v1 and 2v2 queues as separate divisions). The end of season rewards can easily net you a few hundred thousand GXP every three months.

Just wanted to add this is a PVP game. You cannot, imo, blame players for doing what they can to maximize their chances of winning (outside of hacks or exploits of course). Folks who are upset about top players forming groups and stomping the queue need to complain to PGI for deleting the solo queue and in effect incentivizing top players to group up with their other high performing friends and rofl-stomping the queue.

[Meo Z Magraken]

I mean I just got rolled 12-1, I could say the enemy team had a powerhouse group and that's why they won. Or I could note not one on my team said anything and there was zero focus fire or plan and my 381 damage was best on the team and realize the enemy team didn't need a powerhouse group to stomp us.

I guess my mental hangup is that before this I was stomped and was the stomper on a reasonably regular basis and noted the signs a team would likely get stomped. I am aware it's no longer solo however the signs I'm about to get stomped are pretty much the same, no banter before game, no plan discussion, no comms of any kind, random mechs chasing Fleas and Locusts. The enemy team isn't doing anything that makes my eyes widen, there is no master strategy at work just the basic fundamentals, working together, focus fire, armor sharing.

Again there are flaws, messed up lances, having 1/3rd of the team working together regardless of skill is a plus. But World of tanks has the same platoon issue and sure someone earlier brought up that World of Tanks tiers the Tanks and bad players can avoid being farmed by playing lower tiers. As a veteran of some ungodly number of WoT games I can say that is ********. Plenty of seal clubbing platoons exist at any given moment in WoT and if I'm grinding say a tier 5 tank 2 of my friends are more than happy to come with in their favorite tier 5 clubber. Sure the fractions are different, it's 1/5th in Tanks vs. 1/3rd here so maybe you gotta make the groups smaller.

But the idea of groups having to wait as long as they did, and using the ever common way to bringing new players in (ie playing with a friend that already plays the game) aren't really compatible. And without new blood the game stagnates and dies.

[Nearly Dead]

I started playing early this morning (US EST) and had a good time. Team chat was in use in about 1/3 the games. Lots of close games. Around noon the game abruptly changed. No more team chat. Constant stomping or being stomped. Almost no close games, and the games were much faster paced, very aggressive games dominated by a few fast, hard hitting lights and mediums that moved into our team early in the game and cut everyone up with focused attacks. My take is that at around 4:00 PM in Europe, groups started dropping with their own team comms and simply mopping up. From my cockpit window I am not certain how our stomps were won but I can say that the games were fairly short. I am certain of what I saw when we lost and it was very consistent in terms of playstyle.

[DAEDALOS513]

FRAGTAST1C, on 11 May 2020 - 09:03 AM, said:

Actually, the people criticising this change aren't the "undercooked" 'cause they're making sense. In fact, they're making more sense than the developers of this game. So, the only opinions that matter are those that are objective and not subjective.

As much sense as they are making sense it doesn't matter.. It's not about just making sense but about also being realistic.. providing suggestions within the realm of pgi's ability to act on them.. this is something alot of you have to understand.. stop making suggestions through rose coloured glasses..

As much as I would love to see a new psr rating system, it's doubtful we'll see this unless there is a resurgence in player base.. (you 'stompers' are going against this goal.. if you're so confident in your skills, drop non-meta every now and then)..

For now, the new ability to group with friends was a great first step.. the second step I believe is to drop max group size to 3, and the third step would be to slowly release the classic maps., maybe one a month.. (this will build interest in the game over time).

All these suggestions are realistic and doable.. can you guys provide some more?

Edited by DAEDALOS513, 11 May 2020 - 02:49 PM.

[Meo Z Magraken]

DAEDALOS513, on 11 May 2020 - 10:12 AM, said:

As much sense as they are making sense it doesn't matter.. It's not about making sense but about being realistic and providing suggestions within the realm of pgi's ability to enact them.. this is something alot of you have to understand.. stop making suggestions through rose coloured glasses..

As much as I would love to see a new psr rating system, it's doubtful we'll see this unless there is a resurgence in playerbase.. (you 'stompers' are going against this goal btw).. for now, the new ability to group with friends was a great first step.. the second step I believe is to drop max group size to 3, and the third step would be to slowly release the classic maps., maybe one a month.. (this will build interest in the game over time).

All these suggestions are realistic and doable.. can you guys provide some more?

I like these suggestions really. Though you might have to go as low as pairs really. The only real inspiration I can offer is to do similar to World of Tanks as far as groups are concerned. Make them small enough that you can grab a partner but you still need other team members to lift some weight.

I'm not really sure how the tonnage and Pilot skill is being divided up right now. That would be something I wouldn't mind seeing changed (even if the q becomes slightly longer) as I just came out of a game with 5 Assaults on one team and 2 on the other....the overall tonnage might have been closer but kinda doubt it.

[DAEDALOS513]

Meo Z Magraken, on 11 May 2020 - 08:52 AM, said:

And the groups que has created new players. I can say this because I have brought over around 10 people from World of Tanks on my own which I couldn't before.

Bless your heart.. now it's up to PGI to hang onto all the new blood.. keep the events/sales comin boys! Maybe make nodes more affordable for tier 5-3..?

Edited by DAEDALOS513, 11 May 2020 - 10:26 AM.

[Meo Z Magraken]

DAEDALOS513, on 11 May 2020 - 10:19 AM, said:

Bless your heart.. now it's up to PGI to hang onto all the new blood.. keep the events/sales comin boys! Maybe make nodes more affordable for tier 5-3..?

Honestly my newbies are pretty happy for the most part. So I really could not say what's needed. Now if the groups go back to before though I could see them getting angry, and to be clear we are not stomping all that often lol, probably about 50/50

[DAEDALOS513]

Meo Z Magraken, on 11 May 2020 - 10:18 AM, said:

I like these suggestions really. Though you might have to go as low as pairs really. The only real inspiration I can offer is to do similar to World of Tanks as far as groups are concerned. Make them small enough that you can grab a partner but you still need other team members to lift some weight.

I'm not really sure how the tonnage and Pilot skill is being divided up right now. That would be something I wouldn't mind seeing changed (even if the q becomes slightly longer) as I just came out of a game with 5 Assaults on one team and 2 on the other....the overall tonnage might have been closer but kinda doubt it.

You could be right but personally I like taking baby steps when it comes to tweaking.. taking group size down to 2 would be a bit drastic and I feel like it would kill much of the fun of dropping with friends or using lance tactics.. let's do the three, compare metrics with 4man groups and go from there..

I don't believe there is a skill rating or weight sorting being used at the moment to create match ups.. on the bright side.. more tonnage doesn't always mean victory, it's more about player skill..

[Meo Z Magraken]

DAEDALOS513, on 11 May 2020 - 10:31 AM, said:

You could be right but personally I like taking baby steps when it comes to tweaking.. taking group size down to 2 would be a bit drastic and I feel like it would kill much of the fun of dropping with friends or using lance tactics.. let's do the three, compare metrics with 4man groups and go from there..

I don't believe there is a skill rating or weight sorting being used at the moment to create match ups.. on the bright side.. more tonnage doesn't always mean victory, it's more about player skill..

True I don't think I most the last game cause they had bigger mechs or anything. But the lack of skill and tonnage restrictions would be something to long term iron out.

And like I said, I can understand the resistance to groups but I've also seen a player base that I know an alarming number of players on my team in any given game suggesting a serious lack of new faces. And since groups became a thing I can get friends from other games to hop over to Mechs, play some games and come back for more. Something that was very hard in the past. So the groups are a good thing even if the implementation needs some fine tuning.

[Meo Z Magraken]

Anomalocaris, on 11 May 2020 - 10:41 AM, said:

Bzzzt. I said "a lot of". RTFM. And judging by the tier of those players, they were undercooked. You don't stay in the low tiers for long in this game - unless your skill curve is building very slowly or you tank. Easy conclusion, but you're just white knighting for PGI because you _want_ a mixed queue. That's your right, but it doesn't mean you get to ignore the data which says its bad for competitiveness, exactly the opposite of what Paul promised.

Yeah I could see the objection to the competitiveness statement. I don't really see where the logic on that thought strand is, just speaking to the other positives.

[Vorpal Puppy]

After another week of playing, I am seeing both the good and bad of the merging of queues.

First, I like the opportunity to see top-tier players in game more often. I have no problem getting my butt kicked - which happens a lot - because I feel like I am learning some stuff. I also like seeing the different play styles of groups of top-tier players. Because of real-life family issues, I don't do Faction Play - can rarely commit to queue time + 30 minute matches, nor did I ever participate much in group queue because of this, so this part has been positive to me.

The negative is it feels like it has really limited the types of mechs I can play. Prior to the queue merge, in QP I was just as often playing seriously as I was just screwing around with mechs & builds. Taking that kitchen-sink build just for giggles is now a recipe for being useless and dead very quickly. Been having to play a lot of Veagle pop-tart builds (ERPPCs or ATMs) or Gauss/Heavy Gauss assault builds to have the opportunity to be effective. The long duration burn time of most lasers, or the face time of RACs just get me cored out very quickly by folks who can actually aim.

I still don't like the huge weight disparity you see between teams, and really don't like it when I'm in a 100 ton assault mech and get thrown in Alpha lance with a 3-man running lights to balance lance weight, but that is a much smaller factor than relative team skill level and our lack of a good match maker.

Absent any real development on a match maker by PGI, for me I'd like to have both the best of both worlds going forward. Either revert this change and do what has been suggested by letting solos opt-in to group queue when they want, or make it to where the queues are merged on certain days of the week, and separate on others.

[Tranderas]

Magic Pain Glove, on 11 May 2020 - 04:22 AM, said:

They might as well add Long Tom back to faction play . And we'll say . "Yay , we'r happy , they are changing something and working on the game!" .

To be honest i would be happy with that for that exact reason. I didn't hate long toms in theory, but rather how they were put into practice.

Your criticism of my (lack of) time in 8v8 is valid but I wonder if that spike was sustainable given that it did not run very long. The same critique of the current queue could be made as well- we simply don't know. Lumping everyone into a single queue will necessarily lead to overall faster matches both for groups and solos, however. And I'd further note on this point that watching Twitch streams and seeing how slow it was to queue solo during that span was enough to convince me that 8v8 group wasn't the answer despite my personal bias against reducing team size due to excessively large maps such as Polar.

MPG, let's be frank here: You're in the top .005% of players who have ever played this game. Your matches are always going to be stompy regardless of other factors because of your presence alone. People have seen you destroy a torso with a pulse laser and hit the other torso with the next pulse, you're so precise. I would argue that your personal experience in the queue, especially with another group of 1%ers, isn't representative of the queue as a whole. My lack of play is as problematic to my view of the game as your extreme skill is to yours when it comes to trying to define "match quality."

[FRAGTAST1C]

DAEDALOS513, on 11 May 2020 - 10:12 AM, said:

*Blah blah*

All these suggestions are realistic and doable.. can you guys provide some more?

1. Is it not realistic to make sure that the tonnage isn't lopsided in a match?

2. Is it not realistic to expect the spawn points to not be nonsensical?

3. Is it not realistic to expect weekend groups to NOT be treated as though they're on par with comp groups?

4. Is it not realistic to expect groups to be split evenly between both teams?

5. Is it not realistic to expect PGI's 3 spanners to not conjure whatever number that they want?

6. Is it not realistic to expect some semblance of a working match-maker in a game?

7. Is it not realistic to expect to new players to not be put in matches that have comp groups, especially against said groups?

Those aren't realistic at all according to you but...

DAEDALOS513, on 11 May 2020 - 10:19 AM, said:

Maybe make nodes more affordable for tier 5-3..?

... you expect them to do that? Really?

[Z Paradox]

ok, I guess MW5 didn't make money (unfinished game) and they want to get more ppl to MWO with group update to get more money to invest in MW5, as usual they dont listen/read what players suggest/want/need and just make new problems with fixing what is not broken.

and for 350 games I had ~20-30 with no stomp (like 12 - 5+) so I dont get that 5% more stomp rate?

make this group optional, fix MM and tiers, fix hit reg, fix heatbug, fix invisible walls, FIX SOMETHING THAT NEEDS FIXING...

[redacted]

[mod] removed moderation discussion. Please keep the rest of the discussion civil [/mod]

Edited by GM Patience, 12 May 2020 - 11:06 AM.

[Blackhorse11Cav]

So glad you are doing this. My friends I have FINALLY been able to play together and it has made a world, a WORLD of difference. I hope the changes become permanent, as you just made this game 100% better for playing with mates.

[Horseman]

DAEDALOS513, on 11 May 2020 - 10:12 AM, said:

As much sense as they are making sense it doesn't matter.. It's not about just making sense but about also being realistic.. providing suggestions within the realm of pgi's ability to act on them.. this is something alot of you have to understand.. stop making suggestions through rose coloured glasses..

As much as I would love to see a new psr rating system, it's doubtful we'll see this unless there is a resurgence in player base.. (you 'stompers' are going against this goal.. if you're so confident in your skills, drop non-meta every now and then)..

Rebalancing PSR around the pilot's contribution to victory (or carrying hard despite a loss) and either a PSR reset or a "seeding period" that multiplies changes are probably THE easiest things PGI can do. And it is my belief that they can do much better than that.

Until PSR is fixed, Paul's efforts to improve the quality of matchmaking are going to be dragged down by the simplest fact of life (and software development): garbage in, garbage out.

Edited by Horseman, 12 May 2020 - 03:53 AM.

[w4ldO]

Horseman, on 12 May 2020 - 03:52 AM, said:

Rebalancing PSR around the pilot's contribution to victory (or carrying hard despite a loss) and either a PSR reset or a "seeding period" that multiplies changes are probably THE easiest things PGI can do. And it is my belief that they can do much better than that.

this might be a very dirty fix. but a fix atlast while they think about something more sophisticated:

• add up all psr change for the winning side
  
• add up all psr change for the losing side
  
• calculate (losing side total) / (winning side total) = psr ratio
  
• apply psr ratio to the psr rating changes for the winning side pilots
  
• in a case of a draw just = everybody, because **** draws

someone with a math degree pls tell me how stupid this idea is

[wasder undapants]

I still think the type of mech you run, the decisions you make before even dropping into a match and then the map that gets selected still has a huge effect on the outcome. I don't see too many players not able to actually pilot their mech dropping with me, and their aim etc also seems to be OK. Most do some kind of torso twisting and can manage heat OK. So I think a big factor is decision making, communication and also running more 'meta' mech builds. Surely more of us could have some basic communication in the game or at least listen to the more experienced players who do communicate. I think dropping with Hades MW (for those of you who recognise the name) is a good example. Sure he is high percentile, but he also communicates every single drop, fairly forcefully but not in a mean way, and he is very encouraging. I don't think I have ever lost dropping with him because he gets the team to coordinate and basically teaches as he goes in terms of positioning and tactics. That goes a long way even with mixed skill groups.

[DAEDALOS513]

Horseman, on 12 May 2020 - 03:52 AM, said:

Rebalancing PSR around the pilot's contribution to victory (or carrying hard despite a loss) and either a PSR reset or a "seeding period" that multiplies changes are probably THE easiest things PGI can do. And it is my belief that they can do much better than that.

Until PSR is fixed, Paul's efforts to improve the quality of matchmaking are going to be dragged down by the simplest fact of life (and software development): garbage in, garbage out.

Sounds good.. any theory why they haven't broached the subject over the years?