Jump to content

Psr Update And Hold On Patch.


717 replies to this topic

#681 OneTeamPlayer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 399 posts

Posted 16 June 2020 - 06:05 AM

View PostXiphias, on 16 June 2020 - 05:20 AM, said:

I think PGI needs to seed the new tier system based on the historic data that they have. Otherwise people will quit as you say and it will also take a long time to have enough matches to properly seed players (match quality will go down) causing more people to quit.


I personally have been playing all manner of wild builds i never try out (lrms for one), off brand mechs (ice ferret, anyone?) , and dumb experimental builds precisely because we were told that PSR would be completely reset and we'd start from a level playing field.

I also just updated my computer so now i'm getting stable framerates for the first time in my entire playing career.

If PGI used historical data after saying "we're resetting PSR, go hog wild" I would definitely not be returning.

I get what you're saying, but i would counter that while talking in-game i almost never heard anyone complain about the reset, most people were actually excited to have a reason to try to play extra competitively again. Current tiering is an XP bar but a reset and a new system is a reason to put in 110% each match instead of just dropping while half watching netflix in the background.

The Win/Loss system was exciting because it directly incentivized people to work together, brush off their mic, and use ingame coordination tools in a way that hasn't been seen since 3/3/3/3.

Taking away the "fresh competition" sheen would honestly kill interest in the game for a lot of people, in my humble opinion.

If that's the direction they were heading i hope the release the info ASAP so players can vote with their feet instead of wasting time leveling mechs and practicing for a change that's not going to come.

#682 OneTeamPlayer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 399 posts

Posted 16 June 2020 - 06:10 AM

View PostC E Dwyer, on 16 June 2020 - 04:27 AM, said:

snip


Did elites actually ask for Resize? I thought that idea came from PGI down, not the community up.

I was under the impression that the resize and engine desync were universally agreed to be detrimental ideas, as well as the de-quirkening leading to a stagnant roster of the same 15ish mechs in a game with hundreds of variants.

#683 Scout Derek

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Infernal
  • The Infernal
  • 8,015 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Twitch: Link
  • LocationSomewhere where you'll probably never go to

Posted 16 June 2020 - 10:36 AM

View PostOneTeamPlayer, on 16 June 2020 - 06:10 AM, said:


Did elites actually ask for Resize? I thought that idea came from PGI down, not the community up.

I was under the impression that the resize and engine desync were universally agreed to be detrimental ideas, as well as the de-quirkening leading to a stagnant roster of the same 15ish mechs in a game with hundreds of variants.


Everyone was asking for a resize of a few mechs, but not the entire collection. Same with engine desync. Guy is making up stuff to sound like he knows what he's talking about.

#684 Cluster Fox

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 104 posts
  • LocationStuck on a rock in Grim Plexus

Posted 16 June 2020 - 10:56 AM

View PostXiphias, on 15 June 2020 - 12:53 PM, said:

Posted Image


This is the best illustration if seen so far of what happens over multiple matches. Great job.
With MS based PSR, the orange is bound to happen sooner or later, including Jay Z's suggestion (and my initial ones).

A PSR based on a rolling average of MS and WLR, is the best system IMHO. Tiers would represent percentile of players.

Calculation would go like this:

It needs two variables from the player stats. Call it PSR1 (avgMS) and PSR2 (avgWLR)
Say we use a 100 matches rolling average:

PSR1 = PSR1 * 0.99 + 0.01 * [End of game MatchScore]
Game won:
PSR2 = PSR2 * 0.99 + 0.01
Game lost:
PSR2 = PSR2 * 0.99

Nothing has to be done after this for end of game.

Match makers uses:
PSR = PSR1 * PSR2

Simple, effective.

#685 spannerturner

    Member

  • PipPip
  • The Spear
  • The Spear
  • 48 posts

Posted 16 June 2020 - 12:29 PM

View PostBistrorider, on 16 June 2020 - 03:21 AM, said:

Well, I'm gonna crawl from my hole again. Still think that the matchscore and psr should be merged into simple points system. Since I'm no math man my head hurts when trying to bite on matchmaker.

Also I think we missed something very important. As far as I understand there is gonna be reset in tier system. Like we all gonna start from the scratch - back to tier 5. Question is how it will affect the WHOLE community? Some may say: "Well, I worked hard to reach tier 3 or 2. Now they gonna reset it. I don't wanna play anymore". Risky, risky. Then the PGI may say: "Well, we did what you wanted, and now we are left with 100 players so it's the end of the story". Risky, risky. Trap?


And that's why the reset needs to place everyone in the middle tier to start. This way, good and bad players can move in their respective directions. Otherwise, if everyone starts out in Tier 5, players who have no PSR movement (ie "average" players) will stay in the same tier as the bad players, since there will be no place for the bad players to move to... In essence, you'll end up with a pool of bad to average players stuck in the same tier while the above average and better players start moving up. This pool won't help the MM at all.

To put it into even plainer language, if your PSR system rewards both + and - PSR, then you need to allow for both + and - based PSR movement within the Tier system from the start.

Edited to address Cadets: I believe "Cadets" should still start out in Tier 5. It should be assumed that they are new players that have not developed skills yet, and should be able to advance as their skills in the game improve. For those that start "alt accounts"... Well, they should have no problem moving out of Tier 5 then since they already have familiarity with the game and should have some skill.

Edited by spannerturner, 17 June 2020 - 03:25 AM.


#686 Capt Deadpool

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 305 posts

Posted 16 June 2020 - 03:59 PM

View Postspannerturner, on 16 June 2020 - 12:29 PM, said:


And that's why the reset needs to place everyone in the middle tier to start. This way, good and bad players can move in their respective directions.


My first thought, though maybe I am wrong, is that this idea might be more painful than cadets/Tier 5's could bear and they might get disheartened and quit before they reach their appropriate tier...

While it is commonly accepted that a large number of Tier 1 players are not skilled (because XP bar), there is still a very noticeable difference between bad Tier 1 players and Tier 5 players. The Tier 1's, based on their hours of playing, understand how the game works. A large number of cadets and Tier 5's don't even know the minimap exists, have zero map knowledge and get lost easily, and don't even know when they are being shot. They just want to play some smashy robots for a few minutes without being insta-farmed before going back to some screaming kids or their 12-hr a day job....

#687 Mahavishna

    Member

  • PipPip
  • The God of Death
  • The God of Death
  • 22 posts

Posted 16 June 2020 - 05:44 PM

I think weight class has to be weighted too... also I disagree with Kamikazi on the bottom 10-12... you could play well.. contribute... but someone has to be last in damage and match score. Not fair to penalize for that.

#688 MrrVlad

    Rookie

  • Liquid Metal
  • 3 posts

Posted 16 June 2020 - 07:58 PM

I'm a new player here, and this post is based on my experience with WOWs, WOT.
I would caution against heavily balancing the teams around player skill:
Let's assume you have a perfect skill measure. Considerring a small player base, T1 and T2-T5 would be matched together, so a T1 player's team will be balanced with alot of lower-tier players. This setup is bad for both - T1 will have to consider all teammates as meatshields, and whenever a teammate encounters an opponent, it's likely the opponent will be more experienced, and encounter will end quickly. Most importantly, alot of matches will be like this for T1, which would reduce "fun".

Also a proper "balancing" has to happen on both Tier and mech class at the same time - both teams should have similar amounts of mechs per class and per tier of players, while trying to reduce the tier spread when possible. It's also will be useful to have protected matchmaking for new players.

As for match score, I would think it can be a good measure, if rebalanced to give more weight to "support" events and to reduce lrm/splash weapon damage influence. And it's important to reward top contributors on loosing team. maybe not with positive change, but with "no change", balancing it with "no change" for lowest player on winning team.

#689 BeCause

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 32 posts

Posted 16 June 2020 - 07:58 PM

Detach win/loss from PSR.

#690 Bistrorider

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Howl
  • The Howl
  • 273 posts

Posted 16 June 2020 - 11:40 PM

View PostC E Dwyer, on 16 June 2020 - 04:27 AM, said:

Some may well leave, others might return.
Having been away for months, possible never to return ( Crusader would change this btw)
I think I can be objective.


First of all, I think putting all players in tier 3 at the beginning of the reset is a good idea. Even those who right now are tier 4 or 5. It's a safe solution in case of losing some players who may be angry, when they lose their progress.

Thank you for the explanation. I hope that some changes in psr and matchmaker will help. But maybe situation will be the same due to, let's say, nature of MWO and randomness of quick play games? But there is something wrong with the tier system itself. My example: I started playing in june 2019. After long brake from playing any multi game and any computer game in general. Getting out from tier 5 was kinda hard. It was a grind for mc's, mechs and I had to learn many thinks, sometimes this learning was very painful Posted Image I moved through tier 4 very fast, had some good builds and fun playing them. Tier 3 for me is a most fu..ked up place to be, because you can play with all players from t-5 to t-1. So going out of tier 3 took me some time. Now I'm stucked in tier 2, and at least I see some difference in matches and players I'm facing. And tier 2 becomes really hard for me, but also I had more fun, because of more mc's more mechs, more ideas for builds. I see tiers as some kind of leagues, like in a sport. That's why I wanted to go up, but I stopped bother about it when I reached tier 2, started to play more factions or played private matches.

Right it's already too long. I'm getting to the point.

Somehow around August 2019 I showed MWO to my friend. So I already knew this or that and obviously played a lot better that in my first match ever. He created an account I took trial Atlas and did some good blast in one or two matches, been drunk Posted Image I'm looking at the tier belt and I'm tier 4. I'm like how? (Don't remember the score and I can't find my friend account on Jarl. Maybe beacuse he didin't play later?). There were some talks here about how fast you can go out from tier 5. So you can go up really fast and I think it shouldn't be that way. I don't know the numbers behind the tier progress bar, but maybe those numbers should be much higher? Like going up or going down should really took a player decent amount of time? Not like, I'm playing few months and I can be tier 1 or almost tier 1.

EDIT. Maybe solution that tier 5 plays only with tier 5 and so on would change something, but the playerbase is to low for that imo. And it also gonna be boooring

Edited by Bistrorider, 16 June 2020 - 11:53 PM.


#691 Stone Wall

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 1,863 posts
  • LocationSouth Carolina, USA

Posted 17 June 2020 - 02:40 AM

Doesn't help your discussion on adjusting the PSR but....

The PSR was a bad idea to put into a MechWarrior game. MechWarrior has always had a high learning curve. You learn by getting your *** beat and by doing what that guy did to other people. Having players compete in echo chambers of skill is not good for the health of your game, as you see the state it is in today.

#692 Sjorpha

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 4,472 posts
  • LocationSweden

Posted 17 June 2020 - 05:10 AM

View PostZerex, on 15 June 2020 - 11:07 PM, said:

On Incursion and assault base rushing to win the game to boost your PSR, in other words you might see a huge in games being won or lost with not a single mech dying, and in some cases, not even a point of damage being done.


If base rushing is objectively a good strategy for winning, then that's by definition the correct way to play the mode. If you want to make people not play for the objectives the way to do that is to change the game modes so that it's no longer an effective way of winning.

A win is a win, a loss is a loss. Playing for the win is how people should play the game, introducing perverse incentives to make players not play for the win is a terrible idea.

If the winning strategies are cheesy or uninteresting or whatever you thing you dislike, you can argue for changes the game modes to that the winning strategies become interesting.

No matter what, being good at winning is what it means to be good at the game. There is no other metric.

Edited by Sjorpha, 17 June 2020 - 05:12 AM.


#693 Sjorpha

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 4,472 posts
  • LocationSweden

Posted 17 June 2020 - 05:15 AM

View PostXiphias, on 15 June 2020 - 12:53 PM, said:

Posted Image
You can see that the W/L system arrives at a good steady state with clearly defined tiers. Including the MS in the calculation causes the system to diverge and ends up putting things back to where they are right now. How long that takes will depend on the values used and the playerbase, but that's the eventual result.


This is great.

PGI please pay attention to this above simulation and do simulations for whatever models you're considering.

We want a distribution along the lines of the blue one, we don't want a distribution like the red one.

#694 Sergeant Destroy

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 201 posts

Posted 17 June 2020 - 08:51 AM

So is this **** gonna happen anytime soon or what?

#695 spannerturner

    Member

  • PipPip
  • The Spear
  • The Spear
  • 48 posts

Posted 17 June 2020 - 10:19 AM

New thread on the topic was started:

https://mwomercs.com...edback-round-1/

#696 Munkeyed

    Member

  • Pip
  • Bridesmaid
  • 17 posts
  • LocationUS

Posted 17 June 2020 - 09:48 PM

Would make it more directly competitive... HUZZAH!
should still have a slight penalty/bonus for win/loss, just too keep it a "team sport"

#697 Exhall

    Rookie

  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 5 posts

Posted 18 June 2020 - 05:24 AM

PGI essentially said "We can't fix this, you do it". And when it all falls down over semantics they can say "Well, we tried". With player numbers so small everyone will be playing everyone else anyway so it won't make any difference.

#698 Tin Roof Rusted

    Member

  • PipPip
  • Philanthropist
  • Philanthropist
  • 24 posts

Posted 18 June 2020 - 01:42 PM

Not sure if this is the place to suggest this but here goes.

A while ago I had a email conversation with someone there about Pilot score after a match.

For example, you could run around kicking butt, kill 10 on other team, loose the game due to score or whatever, and your Pilot Rating will be = or go DOWN Solely because your team lost the match!

I mean really? If you kicked butt that match, team lost, you shouldn't be penalized just because your team lost the match!


Another suggestion I had was the loading screens when exiting a game. IMO, a great deal of time in this game is devoted to skills on a new mech.
So when the game is over, why can't the game put you back on the last screen you were in before the match launched?

Instead, the match ends, you are back on Home, then have to click to Mechlab, then have to click to skills.
Why not just put us back in the screen we were in when we clicked Quick Play?

#699 Xiphias

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Littlest Helper
  • Littlest Helper
  • 862 posts

Posted 18 June 2020 - 04:46 PM

View PostBarely Good, on 18 June 2020 - 01:42 PM, said:

Not sure if this is the place to suggest this but here goes.

A while ago I had a email conversation with someone there about Pilot score after a match.

For example, you could run around kicking butt, kill 10 on other team, loose the game due to score or whatever, and your Pilot Rating will be = or go DOWN Solely because your team lost the match!

I mean really? If you kicked butt that match, team lost, you shouldn't be penalized just because your team lost the match!

That's perfectly fine though. I know it doesn't seem fair to go down on a great match, but as long as the movement on average is in the correct direction the individual matches don't matter. A player that is consistently putting up good results (10 kills) will win more often than not so they will go up. A player that isn't contributing might go up (undeserved) some matches, but will end up losing more often than they win.

Individual match results don't matter, only the average of the match results. If you balance the MM around individual matches by letting players on the losing team move up (and winners move down) you will cause the system to diverge over time and split most players into either T1 or T5. That's not a good system in the long run.

#700 Akillius II

    Member

  • Pip
  • 12 posts

Posted 18 June 2020 - 06:01 PM

If PSR change works then Devs gonna know it from all the haters yelling about being up against equals. And number of steam rolls will go down while number of close matches should go up. Therefore their precious win/loss ratios will be (correctly) a thing of the past as the number of matches won/lost vs equals should over time become 50/50 equal.
But from many of the comments I can see a lot just don't get it, and that's caused by way too many Years of a bad faux "PSR".

I vote Core 1A as it does not favor a reverse flow to tier 5, and it does not favor the old ways.
+ Match scores already account for win/loss.
+ One "bad" or good match doesn't equal a whole hill of beans after a few dozen matches if PSR is formulated correctly.
If there was say 500 points per tier then it'll take several matches to change tiers, so a few bad/good matches won't change it.
+ Core 1B and 2B are not zero sum and both act like the current PSR just in reverse down to tier 5.
+ A real PSR would not require monthly/quarterly resets/adjustments/etc which (as others pointed out) 1B/2B/2C would.
+ 1A favors the floating middle and players float or sink depending on skill, as it should be.

Caveats:
- Mechs that move 0 distance for entire match get No match score.
- Mechs that overheat and explode within first 2 minutes of match starting get Negative match score.
- Mechs that go out of bounds and die within first 2 minutes of match starting get Negative match score.
- Players that severely damage or kill "friendlies" within first 45 seconds of match starting get Negative match score.
To avoid exploiting PSR to drop tiers, these players PSR for that match should be flagged to stay Unchanged.





3 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users