490 replies to this topic

[Paul Muaddib]

The changes to the PSR values make no sense in relation to individual player skill. Getting a good match score on the winning team is exponentially easier that getting a good match score on the losing team. So the wet piece of paper on the winning team who barely does anything is considered a "better" player than the guy still kicking some butt despite his team being bad. The logic escapes me...

[General Solo]

pvt Hudsoff, on 05 June 2020 - 12:03 AM, said:

yeah..but you missed a thing. there are not enough players in MWO to separate T1 guys.

If the player pool is that small you cannot afford to separate T1 from others, all valves are open.
But you can make PSR more accurately reflect player skill then allocate skill to both teams.

Seriously these guys don't have a clue and are going to make matters worse.
Upward Bias is still their and now you get extra punishment when trying to carry a losing side.

Edited by OZHomerOZ, 05 June 2020 - 12:12 AM.

[D V Devnull]

So... It's gonna be Tuesday, June 9th, 2020 when it happens? I'm betting on some additional changes becoming needed in short order, sadly.

~D. V. "tracking this 'Upcoming PSR Changes' thread in the meantime" Devnull

[Brom96]

So, if I read all above right, unless I get 400 or more points, not damage done but points, my rating will drop due to lost matches until I hit the rock bottom no matter if I actually contribute to the match or not? What incentive would I have to continue playing?

I had my share of losses where few of us would do 400+ damage while the rest of the team got wiped within 2 minutes and we would get into the same basket as them.

[RRAMIREZ]

To be honest, so many post blaming potato teammate from preventing "good performers" from climbing the ladder if WL is prevalent in a team game gives me a strange feeling, and don't put me in a hopefull mood for games to come nexts weeks.
I can anderstand concerns about balance, about frustration to loose when you did your part, but "team fate" should be a thing in a 12v12

Thaeliaris, on 04 June 2020 - 11:59 PM, said:

Also, some folks seem to be complaining like their life depended on this PSR change/reset. While I understand some concerns, it's still supposed to be the solo queue - the more casual queue to play.

I hope all these complainers are, at least, practicing 1v1 solaris.
Just to know if their personnal skill is that good, or if they just use teammates as distration /meatshield /lock providers (and blame them if they don't keep lock even if spotted by the other team) to rise their match score.

ps:
Okay I may be a bit upset.

Edited by RRAMIREZ, 05 June 2020 - 12:37 AM.

[Aidan Crenshaw]

Brom96, on 05 June 2020 - 12:21 AM, said:

So, if I read all above right, unless I get 400 or more points, not damage done but points, my rating will drop due to lost matches until I hit the rock bottom no matter if I actually contribute to the match or not? What incentive would I have to continue playing?

I had my share of losses where few of us would do 400+ damage while the rest of the team got wiped within 2 minutes and we would get into the same basket as them.

Wrong. Your rating will rise at the same time on wins if you don't regularly score <100 points of matchscore. Thus, your rating should stabilise at your actual PSR, a w/l rate of ~1 and an avg MS of ~250.

[Brom96]

I consider it a logical question. Why? Because I rarely seen the situation when lost match was saved by a single player. I am average player at best, but this month I have seen a lot of lost matches where teams behaved strange. Groups going all alone ignoring the rest of the team, assaults capping on conquest maps, teams hunkering behind the cover, waiting to be stormed by enemy and taken down (these increased compared to April, for instance)...

In all these situations, we had few players who did exceptionally high damage, killed enemies, etc. They were not able to repair the damage done by other players in the team, so they will go down with the rest of us. As I understand this system will reward or punish individuals based on teams performance. Team, again, they have no control of.

[Kroete]

Paul Inouye, on 03 June 2020 - 12:09 PM, said:

New PSR values:
Player LOSES:
Match Score: 0-100 goes down in PSR by -5
Match Score: 101-250 goes down in PSR by -3
Match Score: 251-400 goes down in PSR by -1
Match Score: 401+ does not move.

Player WINS:
Match Score: 0-100 does not move.
Match Score: 101-250 goes up in PSR by +1
Match Score: 251-400 goes up in PSR by +3
Match Score: 401+ goes up in PSR by +5

Average matchscore is around 240, means this numbers will give a downtrend.
If even players play against each other they will also mostly have around 240ms,
because less lower skill players to inflate numbers, giving mostly -3/+1 on you psr.

But thats from the numbers i found,
maybe pgi can give us some real numbers:
Average matchscore and average matchscore for winnung/losing team would help.

Edited by Kroete, 05 June 2020 - 12:56 AM.

[RRAMIREZ]

Extracted from a discussion about F line push on frozen city assault, elsewhere on the web:

Quote

As for the F-line push, normally people start crossing late and the enemy is already in a superior position. Another problem is that people stop on the slope (F6 or G6) to trade or, out of fear when the team takes too much damage. Thankfully this team didn't suffer from these.

I've been in games where the enemy were already 2-0 up when we took the top but once friendly team took the top and started moving in, we won. As people said, teamwork OP but people must know that some strats result in casualties but FOR THE GREATER GOOD!

Should the 2 casualties (with surely low match score) be punished for taking part in a winning team strategy?

edit:
There's always counter exemple when you consider ONE match.
Compare what is globally intensized by rewarding match score or WL.

my 2 cts for today.

Edited by RRAMIREZ, 05 June 2020 - 01:01 AM.

[Horseman]

Ryan Grey, on 04 June 2020 - 10:44 PM, said:

If you Guys are so addicted to performance and **** GO ******* PLAY COMPETETIVE
and leave quickplay alone for us casual players who play this game for fun !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Tier reset ? how can you even consider this ?

Do you understand that the big freaking point of the PSR changes and tier reset is to separate the casuals from tryhards so that neither side has to suffer as much of the others' presence in their matches?

Quote

I didn´t play this game from nearly the beginning enduring all the ******** before, investing so much time and money to now have my only pride "Tier" stripped from me ?

Tier is not an achievement and has nothing to do with pride. You have invested time and money in this game to have fun . The tier system as it exists has been putting you up against overpowered opposition for a long time.

Quote

And how can you even state that the majority of players is fine with this ?

Because that's what the majority of those who responded to the proposal have stated.

Quote

I never heard of this project before today,.. and i am playing MWO each ******* day.

That's on you - it's been in the news pop-up that opens whenever you log in for almost two weeks now. https://mwomercs.com...al-discoveries/

Quote

All this just because you allowed those ******* competitive players again to join the casual quickplay matchmaking in teams.

Actually, the main opposition to the queue merge came from competitives.
Casuals were the ones screaming in favour of it, they got exactly what they asked for - and if they refused to understand that it wasn't going to be what they wished for, that's on them. Now they get to continue screaming - while on fire...

Quote

Sorry but this is not ok.
I am not ok with this project and i don´t want this !!! period

This change will, at least after the initial seeding, ensure that you're treated more fairly by the matchmaker and either matched entirely with other players on the same level or on teams that face roughly equal opponents
If you are against it, you are speaking out in favour of terrible matchmaking and continuing stomps.
So what is worth more to you? Getting more fun and enjoyable matches in the future or holding on to a pointless ego award that has been achieved by 2/3rd of the playerbase ?

[Horseman]

Reverend Flashback, on 04 June 2020 - 11:54 PM, said:

You won't get balanced matches ever in a game like this because you can't control how people build their mechs.
The builds don't need to be necessarily bad but probably just not suited for the situation.
Most common thing is one team getting lots of lrm mechs on polar or solaris.
There are also quite a few mechs which I'd call gimmicky and not top notch but still very fun.

If you want true balance everyone needs to agree to play one type of mech.
Most likely a decently quick brawler because that's imo the quickplay meta and the reason why most stomps happen.
One team getting more speedy close range mechs and forming a nice murderball or winning the nascar.

This is not even touching the skill point issue because everyone has to skill up mechs.
Does a 0 point mech perform like one with 91 points invested?
Not even close.

So how does a skill tier matter?

How well you build and play your mechs both matter in your overall performance. The general rule of thumb is that players more invested in understanding the game will tend towards more efficient mech builds, while casuals will do whatever and suffer for their mistakes.

[LordNothing]

good to see this happening, but it might be in too little too late territory. if the game had this system in place when it launched, i have a feeling it would have a significantly larger population now.

its nice that pgi is admitting that psr was just a noob protection feature. i always figured that was the case. you could still have this if you create a t6. its not a real tier as that it doesnt indicate the skill of the pilot and as far as the mm is concerned its the same as t5. you can only become t6 when you start a new account. and as soon as you get enough psr to get out of it or you get all your cadet bonuses you can never go back no matter how bad you play.

[Vellron2005]

"Tier 1 will still have to play matches with Tier 3 no matter what PSR system is in place."

I fail to see why then, if the above stated is true, do we need these changes? Nothing good will come out of it.

In fact, it seems to me that the ONLY thing that will come out of it that big group [Redacted] will be flung around in people's faces.

This change also effectively kills the drive to "carry" since if you do 1000 damage with 5 kills, and the rest of your team does 200 or less, you still suck and gain nothing.

I don't care about tiers, but this just seems pointless..

[Aidan Crenshaw]

Consider this: Right now there are players that fail to break 200 MS on their average game regularly and there are players that regularly exceed 400 MS. Both can be in T1 and the matchmaker can not possibly differentiate between both.
With the changes in effect, the matchmaker can differentiate - given some time seeding - and evenly distribute players, even of different skill ratings, across opposing teams to build matches.

[Gagis]

This seems reasonable. Winning or losing is the one truly reliable metric we can have. A PSR system really does not need to focus on the nuances of how and why any individual game was won or lost as long as there are enough matches played for an individual players contribution to be seen in their average wins and losses over time.

EDIT:
Why are people so focused on PSR shifts of individual matches when the only thing that really matters is the overall statistics over a larger number of matches?

Really doesn't matter if the system is blind to you trying to carry a lost game or having been carried to a won game.

Edited by Gagis, 05 June 2020 - 02:21 AM.

[w4ldO]

calling it zero sum when the sum isn't zero

Piranha Goofing Increases

[VonBruinwald]

Paul Inouye, on 03 June 2020 - 12:09 PM, said:

[color=orange]Regarding Stomp Numbers: [/color]

But first, let's look at some numbers. We mentioned stomp stats that are matches that end with a score of 12-4 or worse for the losing side. While this metric isn't perfect, it does give us a good baseline for comparison purposes.

...

1123 Stomps out of 3755 matches in an average 24hr period resulting in a 29.91% stomp rate.

Post queue merge, our sample set gave us this:
935 Stomps out of 2751 matches in an averages 24hr period resulting in a 33.99% stomp rate.

This was the 5% increase we saw.

Thank you for explaining the numbers Mason. You gave us your criteria for a stomp and gave us the numbers that allowed you to arrive at that decision. Whilst the outcome isn't perfect it does explain where you're coming from and that helps players understand what you're doing much more than an arbitrary "5%". I dare say you read my other post regarding:

VonBruinwald, on 31 May 2020 - 09:53 AM, said:

The problems with this are the abysmal sample sizes, I would like to assume Paul used more and these were just illustrative; the complete lack of preceding date for what we had prior to the merge; and no sense of scale for what the true PSR system is based on (what are the PSR thresholds for tiers and maximum PSR value?).

I'm actually surprised you definition of a stomp aligns with mine. I was expecting you to use a harsher criteria for PR reasons.

Out of curiosity are you able to pull the data for games that finish between 12-4 and 12-8? I would expect a much larger increase, in games that finish within that range.


-----


Regarding the PSR reset:

Whilst I do echo the sentiment of not receiving an increase when performing well on a losing team, I understand why you have took the decision. To put it yourself.

Paul Inouye, on 03 June 2020 - 12:09 PM, said:

The new numbers make team work critical if players want to climb in tiers. As you can see, the win is the biggest component of moving up or down in PSR. To win, you have to be a team player.

It alleviates a lot of the farming mechanics players could abuse to move up:
Whilst it doesn't stop players using them, a player who plays to farm MS is now dependant on the rest of the team carrying him for it to translate to an increase. Unfortunately it doesn't do much for the losing team, they'll still be punished more than the guy who leached of their efforts; an unavoidable situation because of the way MS works.

Just be prepared for a lot of flak from "good" players who don't play as part of the team.

It does translate to PSR into more complicated W:L record, but for a team game, it's acceptable.

-----


Overall, good decisions, and thank you again for explaining where you're coming from.

[Marshal Jim Duncan]

The only thing that kept me playing over the few years was the knowledge that 'if I don't suck I can at least distance myself from those who do'.

With a PSR that is entirely team-win based, a good player will never be able to get out of the hole unless everyone on the other side sucks worse then they do. Some of us actually have a job that's not related to grinding out a PSR 'suck-hole'.

The only way you could get that high of a match score to drag yourself out of the 'suck-hole' is if the other side just stands there and lets you shoot them. Or cheat.

If there is reasonable amount of team-playing on either or both sides the average match scores seem to fall in the range where ppl will still lower their PSR even though they tried to play a gee gee.

Just because you got a match score of 149 doesn't mean you didn't work with your team.

Someone has to loose the ******* match, but that doesn't mean all the players on the loosing side suck.

[Aidan Crenshaw]

Marshal Jim Duncan, on 05 June 2020 - 02:46 AM, said:

Someone has to loose the ******* match, but that doesn't mean all the players on the loosing side suck.

Of course not. Given enough matches so you end up in a PSR environment that fits your actual skill, for every loss you will have a win and the PSR-change will zero-out.

[VonBruinwald]

Marshal Jim Duncan, on 05 June 2020 - 02:46 AM, said:

With a PSR that is entirely team-win based, a good player will never be able to get out of the hole unless everyone on the other side sucks worse then they do. Some of us actually have a job that's not related to grinding out a PSR 'suck-hole'.

Someone has to loose the ******* match, but that doesn't mean all the players on the loosing side suck.

I share this concern, if you're continuously placed on "bad" teams you're never going to increase in tiers and may even be dragged down out of the tier you belong; of course, the inverse could also occur. Realistically, we all have winning and losing streaks but with enough games under our belts those runs shouldn't have any real impact.

It's only the inital seeding matches where we're likely to see a a significant amount of deviation in tier placement and skill. After that comes the climb, or fall.

Try to remember, PSR is a match making feature, not a reward system, it's not about being good or bad, it's about being placed against equally competent players (unless you're into ePeens).