59 replies to this topic

[XXXAngry AngelXXX]

Khobai, on 09 July 2020 - 12:07 AM, said:

The problem with trying to balance tonnage is that it will slow down matchmaking even more

Naw bro, you're thinking of this all wrong. It wont slow it down at all...not even a little bit.

You appear to be operating on the premise that to balance tonnage, you have to balance classes. This is simply not true. I play in the West Coast time zone...group queue times are usually pretty good...A minute, and i have a match.

If we were trying to balance CLASSES, then yes, this would be a PITA. But we want to balance TONNAGE. So you take 24 players who have queued up, add the tonnage of their combined mechs, then divide by 2. This gives you the target weight for each team. Then set up an algorithm to fill one of the teams to within say....10% of that weight with 12 players, and whoever is left is on the other team.

Done.

It wont matter how big or small anything that we drive is, because all it does is change the self-adjusting average. Very simple.

So lets say A lance is 4 lights weighing in at 120tons, B lance ends up at 1 med and 3 heavies for 250 tons, and C lance is say, 390 tons...total weight is now 760 tons for that team...if the error factor was even as high as 5%, that means the other team: and therefore the matchmaker, could weight in somewhere between 722 and 798 tons...that's actually pretty friggin close, and a damn sight more balanced than having one team with 7 assaults and the other team is all lights

Edited by XXXAngry AngelXXX, 10 July 2020 - 11:00 PM.

[Jman5]

Anomalocaris, on 10 July 2020 - 02:11 PM, said:

You're vastly understating the problem. People like choice. The more you restrict their choices and tell them they "have" to do things, the less they'll play your game. I haven't played since April because the queue merge degraded the game experience so badly. Plenty more like me too. Lots of guys are giving up post PSR change because they're getting stomped even more (and no, it won't get better as they reach their proper tier - population size guarantees it). Force people to have to play mechs they don't want to play, and more will leave. One of the keys to growing the population is to increase choice, not limit it.

And yet the world keeps turning when players aren't given complete freedom on which maps they play. A ranked choice mech selection system would be vastly less restrictive than that. Instead of telling people to pick the 1 mech you want to play, it would ask you to pick the 4 mechs you want to play in ranked order. MM will then try to give you your first choice. In fact, for group drops, you could actually remove tonnage restrictions entirely and let people bring whatever. The Matchmaker would then make mech adjustments if necessary.

Not sure why you care so much what PGI does with matchmaker at this point. Sounds like you checked out of the game for other reasons. Counterpoint to your argument though, I was away for nearly 5 months and came back because of the matchmaker changes.

[Anomalocaris]

Jman5, on 11 July 2020 - 03:55 AM, said:

And yet the world keeps turning when players aren't given complete freedom on which maps they play. A ranked choice mech selection system would be vastly less restrictive than that. Instead of telling people to pick the 1 mech you want to play, it would ask you to pick the 4 mechs you want to play in ranked order. MM will then try to give you your first choice. In fact, for group drops, you could actually remove tonnage restrictions entirely and let people bring whatever. The Matchmaker would then make mech adjustments if necessary.

Not sure why you care so much what PGI does with matchmaker at this point. Sounds like you checked out of the game for other reasons. Counterpoint to your argument though, I was away for nearly 5 months and came back because of the matchmaker changes.

Does it really matter? That's a non-sequitur and off-topic. What matters is whether or not what I say makes sense.

You propose a solution to a problem, but your solution simply replaces one problem with another. Want to rank in a new mech? Better hope the matchmaker lets you play it. Want to play an assault for an event challenge? Better hope the MM lets you use it. Just plain love playing jumpy, fast mediums? Cross those fingers!

As I said, choice is better. Take away choice and more people leave. They are already leaving in droves after the WuFlu lockdown boosted numbers (I say its the merge queue issues), and the shockwaves of the PSR reset are only beginning to impact players numbers. Because PGI screwed up the implementation, its going to get worse. And that's an easy prediction to verify.

[East Indy]

Horseman, on 08 July 2020 - 02:33 PM, said:

It actually doesn't.

Is faction play gone? The point is that more highly organized groups still have drop customization options if quick play adds some restrictions.

Jman5, on 11 July 2020 - 03:55 AM, said:

And yet the world keeps turning when players aren't given complete freedom on which maps they play. A ranked choice mech selection system would be vastly less restrictive than that. Instead of telling people to pick the 1 mech you want to play, it would ask you to pick the 4 mechs you want to play in ranked order. MM will then try to give you your first choice. In fact, for group drops, you could actually remove tonnage restrictions entirely and let people bring whatever. The Matchmaker would then make mech adjustments if necessary.

Since gamers are big babies, I'd just say make it opt-in. Otherwise, a class-priority selection would be great.

[Brauer]

Anomalocaris, on 11 July 2020 - 06:59 AM, said:

Does it really matter? That's a non-sequitur and off-topic. What matters is whether or not what I say makes sense.

You propose a solution to a problem, but your solution simply replaces one problem with another. Want to rank in a new mech? Better hope the matchmaker lets you play it. Want to play an assault for an event challenge? Better hope the MM lets you use it. Just plain love playing jumpy, fast mediums? Cross those fingers!

As I said, choice is better. Take away choice and more people leave. They are already leaving in droves after the WuFlu lockdown boosted numbers (I say its the merge queue issues), and the shockwaves of the PSR reset are only beginning to impact players numbers. Because PGI screwed up the implementation, its going to get worse. And that's an easy prediction to verify.

Not to mention Jman's idea makes the new player experience even worse. Have only one customized mech and want to skill it? Or have only one skilled mech and want to grind cbills? Better hope you don't get stuck in a trial or something else.

[Hiten Bongz]

Brauer, on 11 July 2020 - 08:47 AM, said:

Not to mention Jman's idea makes the new player experience even worse. Have only one customized mech and want to skill it? Or have only one skilled mech and want to grind cbills? Better hope you don't get stuck in a trial or something else.

Anomalocaris, on 11 July 2020 - 06:59 AM, said:

Want to rank in a new mech? Better hope the matchmaker lets you play it. Want to play an assault for an event challenge? Better hope the MM lets you use it. Just plain love playing jumpy, fast mediums? Cross those fingers!

Potential solution: Game lets you choose up to four mechs to queue with, but you can still just select one if you wish - the result of which could just mean a bit longer queue time to drop you into a match.

Does that make sense or am I an idiot?

If the vast majority of players only selected one-mech queues then perhaps there could be a restriction that the game only lets you choose a one-mech queue every other game or something? So it could go 4-1-4-1...idk, just spitballing here.

edit: perhaps groups should still be required to pick multiple mechs

Edited by Hiten Bongz, 11 July 2020 - 01:03 PM.

[letir]

Why are there need to balance tonnage?

Bad players won't get better from forced tonnage. Just today i have seen KGC build with 2 LBX-2 and 2 Rotary AC-2. What exactly this player bring to the team with his fat 100t 'Mech?

What exactly the purpose of these brackets? To force players pick unfamiliar/undergunned/unranked/trial 'Mechs just for the sake of neat tonnage rows?

[Horseman]

East Indy, on 11 July 2020 - 07:30 AM, said:

Is faction play gone? The point is that more highly organized groups still have drop customization options if quick play adds some restrictions

And Faction Play still mixes groups with solos, so hey, maybe your next great idea will be to restrict deck tonnage for grouped players too?
Fact is, you used the imagined existence of Group Play queue as your entire justification for adding pointless restrictions to hamstring coordination between members of the group.
Fact is, Group Play no longer exists and has not since the queue merge - a merge which was frequently demanded and vocally supported by casuals who barely play the freaking game. They have effectively destroyed the only PUG-free mode in the name of allowing their derpy two- and three-mans into solo queue. Now there is no groups-only mode left except for Solaris 2v2s, which basically nobody plays.

Do you not realize that this malarkey is aiming for eliminating any room for grouped play and supplanting it with solo pugs? And that things have already been going in that direction for years? Seriously, what's the point of supporting it?

[VonBruinwald]

Horseman, on 11 July 2020 - 01:32 PM, said:

They have effectively destroyed the only PUG-free mode in the name of allowing their derpy two- and three-mans into solo queue. Now there is no groups-only mode left except for Solaris 2v2s, which basically nobody plays.

Ahem, private lobby. Where else do you think the competitive players are getting the practice in for Comp Queue.... oh wait, that's another mode inaccessible to pugs.

Or are you proposing that a hypothetical CS 2020 will have pugs dropping? If so, then I'm seriously considering to partake....

[VonBruinwald]

Hiten Bongz, on 11 July 2020 - 12:33 PM, said:

Potential solution: Game lets you choose up to four mechs to queue with, but you can still just select one if you wish - the result of which could just mean a bit longer queue time to drop you into a match.

Does that make sense or am I an idiot?

I've been an advocate of the quickplay dropdeck for years.

[East Indy]

Horseman, on 11 July 2020 - 01:32 PM, said:

And Faction Play still mixes groups with solos, so hey, maybe your next great idea will be to restrict deck tonnage for grouped players too?

Nah, FP/CW has groups letting solos into their drawing room; whereas Mixed, philosophically, has solos hosting groups. And FP's respawns pull from per-player tonnage-limit decks so everyone can max out. No reason to.

I personally don't have strong feelings about it. Like heavy Alpha Lance, there's an exciting element of unpredictability and potential for fresh gameplay. That said, objectively the current system can be viewed as a problem, and solutions are fun to shoot the breeze about. No better way to use a forum!

[Monkey Lover]

letir, on 11 July 2020 - 01:15 PM, said:

Why are there need to balance tonnage?

Bad players won't get better from forced tonnage. Just today i have seen KGC build with 2 LBX-2 and 2 Rotary AC-2. What exactly this player bring to the team with his fat 100t 'Mech?

What exactly the purpose of these brackets? To force players pick unfamiliar/undergunned/unranked/trial 'Mechs just for the sake of neat tonnage rows?

Not always about bad players when you have 8+ assaults on a team once they get moving you can't really stop them. Match below from tonight I can't really say anyone did bad. We focused as much as we could even the new guy in mist lynx did over 100. Yesterday we had a similar match but this time we had the 9 assaults we just ran over them.

Sure weight isn't the end all but it would be nice to have some balance.

(side note alpha is 4 man using max tonnage )

Edited by Monkey Lover, 12 July 2020 - 10:13 PM.

[martian]

Monkey Lover, on 12 July 2020 - 10:10 PM, said:

Sure weight isn't the end all but it would be nice to have some balance.

I am afraid that there is no change in sight.

[Remover of Obstacles]

Yah, had a few rough tonnage imbalanced matches lately.

930 tons vs 555 tons. Even with 375 less tons, we put up more damage. Still lost 3-12.

Another match was 855 tons (3985 damage done) vs 605 tons (4445 damage). Being only down 250 tons made the match closer. Lost 7-12.

Hopefully things are leveling out now that more pilots will have gotten a significant number (100+?) of games in since reset.

[V O L T R O N]

Tommy Atkins, on 04 July 2020 - 12:28 PM, said:

Has anyone else noticed that since the change combining Group Queue and Solo Queue into a single Quick Play Queue the weight balance is right out the window?

I keep dropping in games where one side will have two assault mechs and the other will have five or six. I think the most egregious example I've personally seen was one on one side and five on the other. I know Baradul has posted a YouTube video where one side boasted ten assault mechs.

I think combining the two queues hasn't been too bad... but a consistent lack of balance is a serious problem. And before people jump on me with "well, it's not impossible to beat a heavier team" I know that. I also know that one team having more than half-again the weight is a huge uphill obstacle and the average quick play team of randos simply isn't going to be able to overcome it.

It's very little fun going into a match and being stomped flat by sheer weight of metal.

When your screen loads its best to understand the layout of your team so you can form a strat. Just because you are lighter doesnt mean you will lose. Most of the time it does, but it also means you can kill mechs before they can regroup. If you recognize your light. Tell your phatties and communicate in voip that your team is light and you need to play fast.

[martian]

Remover of Obstacles, on 14 July 2020 - 06:22 PM, said:

Yah, had a few rough tonnage imbalanced matches lately.

930 tons vs 555 tons. Even with 375 less tons, we put up more damage. Still lost 3-12.

Another match was 855 tons (3985 damage done) vs 605 tons (4445 damage). Being only down 250 tons made the match closer. Lost 7-12.

Russ Bullock and Paul Inoye want it this way.

Remover of Obstacles, on 14 July 2020 - 06:22 PM, said:

Hopefully things are leveling out now that more pilots will have gotten a significant number (100+?) of games in since reset.

I am not quite sure. Because of the low number of MWO players the inter-Tier valves will be probably open most of the time.

Plus, please note that Cadets are starting in Tier 3, so even Tier 1 players will have either to fight them or carry them.

[Zirconium Kaze]

Tommy Atkins, on 04 July 2020 - 12:28 PM, said:

Has anyone else noticed that since the change combining Group Queue and Solo Queue into a single Quick Play Queue the weight balance is right out the window?

I keep dropping in games where one side will have two assault mechs and the other will have five or six. I think the most egregious example I've personally seen was one on one side and five on the other. I know Baradul has posted a YouTube video where one side boasted ten assault mechs.

I think combining the two queues hasn't been too bad... but a consistent lack of balance is a serious problem. And before people jump on me with "well, it's not impossible to beat a heavier team" I know that. I also know that one team having more than half-again the weight is a huge uphill obstacle and the average quick play team of randos simply isn't going to be able to overcome it.

It's very little fun going into a match and being stomped flat by sheer weight of metal.

Faster and lighter team compositions literally have the ability to reposition in a circle around the enemy team in a fashionable amount of time. Taking pop shots from a distance and running in and out of cover after every shot will eventually cause them to string away from the main pack where you can wolf pack them with numbers.

[MadDach5und]

I know a lot of people grumble about bad matches in Quick play, and for the most part I just roll my eyes and keep going -- but I was part of a very lopsided drubbing tonight - and upon screen capping the results, realized it was probably one of the worst mismatches I've ever come across...

Two group drops on one team - one a three-pack, the other, two - outweighing my team by 150 tons - but the REAL kicker - a WHOLE lance of Cadets?!? The alignment fairies were REALLY out to lunch on this one...

https://ibb.co/Js4KvXm

Edited by MadDach5und, 15 September 2021 - 08:20 PM.

[Aidan Crenshaw]

Group of four, whatcha gonna do, and heavily underweight at that.

[pbiggz]