490 replies to this topic

[Horseman]

Big-G, on 05 July 2020 - 04:13 AM, said:

I for one find this new setup too much of a punishment for the few players that try their best, but just can't carry a weak or poorly willed and managed team...

Bull. If you're reasonably capable, your score will reflect it and you will be able to increase - or at least break even - on most losses.

Edited by Horseman, 05 July 2020 - 09:54 AM.

[Big-G]

Horseman, on 05 July 2020 - 09:53 AM, said:

Bull. If you're reasonably capable, your score will reflect it and you will be able to increase - or at least break even - on most losses.

LOL... reasonably capable would also be determined by the quality of the whole team. As you can't face all 12 during a furball alone and succeed. If team mates can't coordinate and keep cover for each other, then you could be the best and still be killed instantly if you were in a bad situation at the time.

If only we could always get mostly these great situations, but alas... reality is a different story.

[Guffrus]

Just what this toxic community needs; validation for sociopathic behaviour.

[Big-G]

I'm sorry my opinion is so unsavory to some...

[Peace2U]

Holy Cr@p.
There is a lot of passion in this thread.
And amazingly, a lot of thought went into some of the feedback/suggestions.
Inevitably, there is a little bit of salt and individuals who want something changed that would benefit themselves, but in general, this is an interesting and open conversation.

Now I'm going to say something that will probably get me shot.
After reviewing this thread, It seems to me that most of the trouble seems to be revolving around two subjects:
Skilled group drops, and individuals who do not contribute to the team win.

The wildcard players issue, I'm afraid cannot be corrected.
I feel that no matter the penalty or benefit you offer, certain players will simply not care because they want to do their own thing.

The skilled group drops issue could be addressed, perhaps, by allowing skilled group drops to only get matches against other skilled groups??? (I'm ducking my head now - - -)
I realize that the player count has dropped and this may result in some longer wait times for groups, but at least it will reduce the blow outs when a pug team faces off against a skilled, well communicating group, and the groups themselves will have better competition.
And speaking about communication, It is my experience that players who use 3rd party comm's are oblivious to players using in game comm's.
They either don't realize, or don't care about letting the rest of the team know the battle or defensive plans, which in turn can easily be the root cause of a loss.
Is there any way MWO can port 3rd party comm's that are permitted to be used in game so all teammates can benefit from strategies?

OK, folks. My shirt is off and my back is turned. Don't miss with the whips. (hearing Stewie's voice say 'cool wh-h-hip' in my head)
Peace

[Horseman]

Big-G, on 05 July 2020 - 02:17 PM, said:

LOL... reasonably capable would also be determined by the quality of the whole team.

Not really.

Quote

As you can't face all 12 during a furball alone and succeed.

Which you aren't supposed to do in the first place. Putting yourself in a position where you're outgunned by multiple mechs over is a beginner mistake.

Quote

If team mates can't coordinate and keep cover for each other, then you could be the best and still be killed instantly if you were in a bad situation at the time.

A good player will think ahead to avoid getting in that situation in the first place. By the time they go down, most of the time they'll have already made a substantial impact on the match in their team's favor.

[Big-G]

Agree to disagree mostly...

[That Token Canadian Guy]

The match score is too easy to get to Tier 1 , should be a wider gap in the score system to include equal. I seen it once. Every loss i went up . Granted I pulled my weight , But 250 + granted me a boost? Maybe 350 + for a match score should be the start. Least going from Tier 2-1. What I am saying is , It is still too easy and the players able to get to tier 1 will start saying there is clearly a skill gap in Tier 1. The reset was cool , but the problem still isn't solved. Example is today , many players do ok and still go up. Many comp players will say the same , way too easy .

Second note , 5 min wait for 90% chance of a Nascar match . We all know what those are .I am Tier 1 . If I am still going to get people under Tier 2 , because of population issues , just fast roll it like before . There is no difference in match play. More matches the better . The wait wouldn't be bad if everyone in that match was my Tier.

[Blackjack Jonesy]

Although a worthy effort has been made to fix what many have seen as a flaw, another was built in with the new change. I have not seen any where mentioning total damage one causes to the opposing players. Example I had over 1000 points of damage, we lost the match, and I received no credit other than not dropping in PSR. It is frustrating that that individual performance is not heavily factored in, at a minimum as a bonus to allow ones PSR to move 1 point upward. It is Pilot Skill Level....not team.

[Aidan Crenshaw]

With a 1000 damage your matchscore should've been high enough to actually rise in PSR even on a loss; unless you did loads of team damage and / or teamkills.
Take a look at this nice explanation video that Brios put up:

[Nesutizale]

General Vulcan, on 16 July 2020 - 07:56 PM, said:

The match score is too easy to get to Tier 1 , should be a wider gap in the score system to include equal. I seen it once. Every loss i went up . Granted I pulled my weight , But 250 + granted me a boost? Maybe 350 + for a match score should be the start. Least going from Tier 2-1. What I am saying is , It is still too easy and the players able to get to tier 1 will start saying there is clearly a skill gap in Tier 1. The reset was cool , but the problem still isn't solved. Example is today , many players do ok and still go up. Many comp players will say the same , way too easy .

Second note , 5 min wait for 90% chance of a Nascar match . We all know what those are .I am Tier 1 . If I am still going to get people under Tier 2 , because of population issues , just fast roll it like before . There is no difference in match play. More matches the better . The wait wouldn't be bad if everyone in that match was my Tier.

Are you talking about the boost you get from winning a game?
I don't know why people insisted on it beeing there but hey.

System seams to work for me. Recorded all my matches since the reset. So far I have a PSR change of zero with very slightly more wins then losses (4 more matches won then lost out of 50 total) and average matchscore of 243.
That beeing said, I am a for fun player. Pick the mech of the day, jump into some matches and go off again.

Matches have been all over the place from total stomps to well coordinated fun games. Currently the game is quite fun for me. Have some good players I face, have some stupids and everything in between in a well balanced manner.
Even win and losses are so that I win one match, loose one to just win the next...as said with the very slight trend towards winning.

Personaly I think we need at least another month to sort people out before we can judge the system and match quality.

[OneTeamPlayer]

Blackjack Jonesy, on 20 July 2020 - 02:07 AM, said:

Although a worthy effort has been made to fix what many have seen as a flaw, another was built in with the new change. I have not seen any where mentioning total damage one causes to the opposing players. Example I had over 1000 points of damage, we lost the match, and I received no credit other than not dropping in PSR. It is frustrating that that individual performance is not heavily factored in, at a minimum as a bonus to allow ones PSR to move 1 point upward. It is Pilot Skill Level....not team.

The only way one makes 1K damage and drops in rank is if a significant portion of that damage was team damage.

Team damage absolutely craters matchscore (as it should) so an poorly placed arty strike can cost an entire match worth of damage to the enemy team.

[Blackjack Jonesy]

Before you dismiss this please read.

1. PSR is pilot skill and should have nothing to do with wins and losses. You should not be penalized for the failure of the team.
2. Many complain about the low participation rate which can be attributed too a few points of view (my prospective):
a. Poor performance of lower skilled players.
b. Unforgiving higher skilled players who seek to chastise the skills of newer players thus resulting in bad experience for lower skilled players.
c. Higher skilled players being penalized for losing after they have had great matches.
d. Slow movement in PSR.
3. Real world. Military units are composed of members of all skill levels and it is invaluable. This allows lower skill members to learn off higher skilled members, thus increasing their contribution to the team.
4. Ideally in a match I would hope the following:
a. 5%-10% tier 1
b. 5%-10% tier 2
c. 15%-20% tier 3
d. 25%-30% tier 4
3. 30%> tier 5
This allows for multiple skill levels to balance and give the more effective mech pilots a chance to lead the group using their knowledge and skills to guide the battle.
5. Adding wins and losses as part of the PSR only frustrates those who have no choice on who they are teamed up with.
6. If you want closer more fierce fighting to the end, talent must be spread across the spectrum.

I would rather have great mech duels and fierce fighting that results in narrow victories more
than one sided stomps that only demoralize opponents resulting in them leaving the game.

OneTeamPlayer, on 20 July 2020 - 06:25 AM, said:

The only way one makes 1K damage and drops in rank is if a significant portion of that damage was team damage.

Team damage absolutely craters matchscore (as it should) so an poorly placed arty strike can cost an entire match worth of damage to the enemy team.

Miss spoke, sorry. Although my PSR did not change, it is frustrating to have accumulated over 1000 points damage to the ENEMY and not receive any credit.

[OneTeamPlayer]

If PSR were based on W/L (it isn't) players would be extremely incentivized to work as a team leading to more interesting matches at higher ranks.

Instead PSR is linked to individual performance heavily (I had terrible losses most of my way to T1 and arrived at a 0.86 win ratio) so T1 is populated by people who best game the system individually with zero regard to skill in the area of teamwork leading the the worst matches I've seen in my time playing MWO from the "best" players.

[John Bronco]

Blackjack Jonesy, on 21 July 2020 - 04:07 AM, said:

1. PSR is pilot skill and should have nothing to do with wins and losses. You should not be penalized for the failure of the team.

This awful emotional argument has been beaten to death a hundred times. Given enough games played your W/L shows your contribution to the team and thus skill. If you perform well you will win more games than you lose regardless of what happens in the losses. You are your W/L.

[Horseman]

Blackjack Jonesy, on 21 July 2020 - 04:07 AM, said:

1. PSR is pilot skill and should have nothing to do with wins and losses. You should not be penalized for the failure of the team.

So instead you should be promoted for engaging in degenerate tactics that farm score but lose matches?

[My Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ]

Blackjack Jonesy, on 21 July 2020 - 04:07 AM, said:

4. Ideally in a match I would hope the following:
a. 5%-10% tier 1
b. 5%-10% tier 2
c. 15%-20% tier 3
d. 25%-30% tier 4
3. 30%> tier 5

Yes lets force the good players to carry the worst. I love the idea of logging in knowing that I would have to run something good so I can carry my team, **** being able to just chill and play right?

[OneTeamPlayer]

Hawker Siddeley, on 21 July 2020 - 05:12 AM, said:

Yes lets force the good players to carry the worst. I love the idea of logging in knowing that I would have to run something good so I can carry my team, **** being able to just chill and play right?

In a match I'd like to see 100% of the same tier.

I would also like to see matchmaker be a dynamic function that only allows 20% of the playerbase into any tier, which is to say that if you're 20.01% you drop a tier no matter what the PSR is.

5 equal tiers is 5 varying levels of play all of whom should have the ability to create matches on a consistent basis and dip within 1 tier in extreme off times.

Such a solution would require math though so it would have to be farmed out to the unpaid non-credited interns in the community.

[My Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ]

OneTeamPlayer, on 21 July 2020 - 05:25 AM, said:

In a match I'd like to see 100% of the same tier.

That is pratically impossible because the playerbase is so small.

[OneTeamPlayer]

Hawker Siddeley, on 21 July 2020 - 05:45 AM, said:

That is pratically impossible because the playerbase is so small.

The playerbase isn't too small for same tier matches if 20% is dropped into each bucket, however i think there's the lack of technical ability to make such a scheme happen so its a moot point anyway.

The other benefit of having dynamic tiering would have been that we would never have had this problem with tier creation (only 100 matches to get it right guys! Guys? Where did everyone go?) as the moment people played their first match they could be sorted into 1 of 5 tiers and anyone who hadn't played a match could be left off the charts.