65 replies to this topic

[w0qj]

5 Assaults vs ZERO (0) Assaults!!

Already sent this email/feedback/complaint to technical@mwomercs.com

Our QP game summary as below URL:
http://www.dropbox.c...12115932130.png

I suspect that MWO QP match-maker prioritized a 4-man Team vs a 3-man Team, and all else did not matter to the match-maker. Which needs to be improved.

To be fair, this is by far the worst match-making game I've seen, ever.
Usually it's 4 Assaults vs 1 Assault for "bad" MWO QP match-making game.

================
Dear MWO Technical Support, technical@mwomercs.com

Re: Bug Report: Match Maker for MechWarrior Online

0. MechWarrior Online Quick Play game date June 2nd 2021, Match ID#270112115932130

1. Please address this very serious flaw in MWO Quick Play matchmaker program decision making, details as below. This game was the most lop-sided EVER!
Please address this.

2. Our game opponent side had FIVE (5) Assaults, and against our side had FIVE (5) Lights!
All else being equal for Heavy/Medium mechs.

Opponent side:
5 Assault**
5 Heavy
2 Medium
0 Light** (ie: NO Light mechs)

Our side:
0 Assault** (ie: NO Assault mechs)
5 Heavy
2 Medium
5 Light**


3. Details of our Opponent's side (please refer to our attached ScreenShot):
Assault: DWF-W, BLR-3M, HGN-733, KGB-000B, DWF-UW
Heavy: SNS-Prime, SNS-C, EBJ-B, MAD-BH2, CPLT-K2
Medium: ACW-1, NVA-S
Light: None/Nil

4. Details of our own side (please refer to our attached ScreenShot):
Assault: None/Nil
Heavy: MDD-Prime, TBR-C, WHM-6D, MDD-RV, WHM-BW
Medium: TBT-7M, HBK-4G
Light: PIR-2, FLE-7, RVN-3L, ACH-E, PIR-A


Conclusion: Please address this very serious flaw in MWO Quick Play matchmaker program decision making; this game was the most lop-sided EVER!
Please address this.

B.rgds / w0qj
2-June-2021
User: w0qj

Edited by w0qj, 02 June 2021 - 08:02 PM.

[My Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ]

This isn't the result of the MM doing a poor job of creating teams, this is entirely on the group on your side not making effective use of their tonnage while the enemy group did. Yes there would have still been a tonnage disparity but not to the same level as the screenshot and it would have been within previous possible tonnage disparity.

[w0qj]

Err... please help to speak in plain English...
Je ne comprends pas! Merci beaucoup!

Monke-, on 02 June 2021 - 08:17 PM, said:

This isn't the result of the MM doing a poor job of creating teams, this is entirely on the group on your side not making effective use of their tonnage while the enemy group did. Yes there would have still been a tonnage disparity but not to the same level as the screenshot and it would have been within previous possible tonnage disparity.

[Leone]

I'm honestly surprised the lights didn't overwhelm the heavy team. Good job sticking together and defending your backs.

~Leone.

[martian]

w0qj, on 02 June 2021 - 07:52 PM, said:

Already sent this email/feedback/complaint to technical@mwomercs.com
...
5 Assaults vs ZERO (0) Assaults!!

To be fair, this is by far the worst match-making game I've seen, ever.

Usually it's 4 Assaults vs 1 Assault for "bad" MWO QP match-making game.

Do not bother with sending e-mails. The only thing, that you achieved, is that you got some PGI staffer a good laughter.

The only effective thing, that you can do as a customer, is "voting with your walltet".

And that brings me to the second point: You badge shows that you gave PGI your money (and quite recently, I might add), thus rewarding them for throwing you in such lopsided matches.

Blame yourself.

[My Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ]

w0qj, on 02 June 2021 - 08:22 PM, said:

Err... please help to speak in plain English...
Je ne comprends pas! Merci beaucoup!

The group on your side were dumbasses and dropped light, while the 3 man and 2 man groups on the enemy team used their tonnage well.

The 4 man on the losing side used 125t, the 3+2 man on the winning side used 400t.

[Heavy Money]

w0qj, on 02 June 2021 - 08:22 PM, said:

Err... please help to speak in plain English...
Je ne comprends pas! Merci beaucoup!

Seems pretty clear to me, and he's correct. Your team had a 4 man that brought 3 lights and a heavy. They could have brought 3 assaults and a light or medium. Then the teams would have been pretty much balanced.

It would be nice if the matchmaker took groups into account better, sure. But at the end of the day, this is still the result of those player's choices. Its not a bug or something.

[w0qj]

Thanks for everyone's replies!

This raises more questions than it answers. (Guess I truly do not understand MWO Match-Making).
Shouldn't MWO QP Match-Maker at least assign 1-2 of these "individual" Assault mechs to the other side, which has no Assault mechs at all? These two (2) individual Assault players who were not part of any Team.
(specifically: Opponent Team's: BLR-3M, DWF-UW which were not part of any Team).


Opponent Team: Total 910 tons for 12 players: (5 Assault; 5 Heavy; 2 Medium; "no" Light mechs)
Opponent (FH70) Team: 210 tons for 3 players (1 Assault, 1 Heavy, 1 Medium)
Opponent (RORU) Team: 190 tons for 2 players (2 Assault)

vs:
Our Team: Total 560 tons for 12 players: ("no" Assault; 5 Heavy; 2 Medium; 5 Light mechs)
Our (RIGS) Team: 125 tons for 4 players (1 Medium, 3 Light)

==>Even if MWO QP Match-Maker somehow "thinks" Opponent (FH70) Team [210 tons] is somehow "comparable" to Our (RIGS) Team [125 tons]: shouldn't MWO QP Match-Maker at least assign 1-2 of these "individual" Assault mechs to the other side, which has no Assault mechs at all? These two (2) individual Assault players who were not part of any Team.
(specifically: Opponent Team's: BLR-3M, DWF-UW which were not part of any Team)?

This specific case's MWO QP Match-Maker decision making makes no sense to me,
no matter how I slice and dice the Team/tonnage data.

======================================
Details:

Opponent Team
(FH70): 3 members, total 210 tons (100t+70t+40t), and
(RORU): 2 members, total 190 tons (90t+100t)
Remaining 7 individual players: total 510 tons (2 Assault; 4 Heavy; 1 Medium)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Opponent Team Total Tonnage: 910 tons (5 Assault; 5 Heavy; 2 Medium; "no" Light mechs)
========================================================================

Our Team
(RIGS): 4 members, total 125 tons (20t+50t+20t+35t)
Remaining 8 individual players: total 435 tons
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Our Team Total Tonnage: 560 tons ("no" Assault; 5 Heavy; 2 Medium; 5 Light mechs)
====================================================================


- - - - - - - - - - - - -
Disclaimer: I'm here to (try) understand the MWO Match-Making decison-making. Nothing personal here by mentioning other Unit names!

Edited by w0qj, 02 June 2021 - 10:08 PM.

[InvictusLee]

That should have been a win by a lightmech wolfpack.

[Gagis]

The matchmaker is purely skill rating based and does not have a tonnage component at all at the moment. This is because it apparently is built on top of the old group queue matchmaker in which tonnage was taken into account by limiting the total tonnage each group is able to bring.

[Heavy Money]

w0qj, on 02 June 2021 - 09:52 PM, said:

Thanks for everyone's replies!

This raises more questions than it answers. (Guess I truly do not understand MWO Match-Making).
Shouldn't MWO QP Match-Maker at least assign 1-2 of these "individual" Assault mechs to the other side, which has no Assault mechs at all? These two (2) individual Assault players who were not part of any Team.
(specifically: Opponent Team's: BLR-3M, DWF-UW which were not part of any Team).


Opponent Team: Total 910 tons for 12 players: (5 Assault; 5 Heavy; 2 Medium; "no" Light mechs)
Opponent (FH70) Team: 210 tons for 3 players (1 Assault, 1 Heavy, 1 Medium)
Opponent (RORU) Team: 190 tons for 2 players (2 Assault)

vs:
Our Team: Total 560 tons for 12 players: ("no" Assault; 5 Heavy; 2 Medium; 5 Light mechs)
Our (RIGS) Team: 125 tons for 4 players (1 Medium, 3 Light)

==>Even if MWO QP Match-Maker somehow "thinks" Opponent (FH70) Team [210 tons] is somehow "comparable" to Our (RIGS) Team [125 tons]: shouldn't MWO QP Match-Maker at least assign 1-2 of these "individual" Assault mechs to the other side, which has no Assault mechs at all? These two (2) individual Assault players who were not part of any Team.
(specifically: Opponent Team's: BLR-3M, DWF-UW which were not part of any Team)?

This specific case's MWO QP Match-Maker decision making makes no sense to me,
no matter how I slice and dice the Team/tonnage data.

======================================
Details:

Opponent Team
(FH70): 3 members, total 210 tons (100t+70t+40t), and
(RORU): 2 members, total 190 tons (90t+100t)
Remaining 7 individual players: total 510 tons (2 Assault; 4 Heavy; 1 Medium)
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Opponent Team Total Tonnage: 910 tons (5 Assault; 5 Heavy; 2 Medium; "no" Light mechs)
========================================================================

Our Team
(RIGS): 4 members, total 125 tons (20t+50t+20t+35t)
Remaining 8 individual players: total 435 tons
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Our Team Total Tonnage: 560 tons ("no" Assault; 5 Heavy; 2 Medium; 5 Light mechs)
====================================================================


- - - - - - - - - - - - -
Disclaimer: I'm here to (try) understand the MWO Match-Making decison-making. Nothing personal here by mentioning other Unit names!

Yeah those are good questions!

I once had a match that was 8 Assault Mechs and 4 heavies vs 2 heavies, 6 lights, and 4 mediums. So the matchmaker can certainly screw things up, and has some problem balancing weight.

[Brom96]

Not unusual. I see it once per day.

[Tarl Cabot]

Monke-, on 02 June 2021 - 08:42 PM, said:

The group on your side were dumbasses and dropped light, while the 3 man and 2 man groups on the enemy team used their tonnage well.

The 4 man on the losing side used 125t, the 3+2 man on the winning side used 400t.

This. And PGI should review and reconfigure groups to allow only one mech/weight class, setup 3-man same as 4-man (and potentially remove 4-man completely) with only allow 2 groups of 2-man, and change the MM from Group-type queue to Solo-type queue, as in matching up weight classes instead of using tonnage. There would be a tonnage difference but no weight class discrepancy.

[Bud Crue]

w0qj, on 02 June 2021 - 09:52 PM, said:

Thanks for everyone's replies!

-Tonnage comparison of the teams-

Tonnage is not the issue with the match maker it’s the distribution of skilled players on the teams. I’m too lazy to do the Jarl’s List break down, but I suspect that the performance % of the players on each team in this case is probably pretty close here on average. It is those occasions when the MM puts a preponderance of high % players all on one team, while building the other of Cadets and middling % players on the other, that I take issue with the MM. I too will whine about a tonnage disparity after being on the losing end of a stomp, especially when my team has multiple players that just didn’t perform well, but honestly I find that the tonnage disparity is largely irrelevant most of the time.

[Captain Caveman DE]

Gagis, on 02 June 2021 - 10:18 PM, said:

The matchmaker is purely skill rating based ...

You wish.

I WISH!

[ScrapIron Prime]

Not the worst ever, by the way. Just ask Baradul...

TEN Assault Mechs on one Side

[Nightbird]

Your match didn't end in a stomp anyways? Tonnage doesn't really mean as much as you think it does.



Here's a match I just saw with the winning team was 200 tons lighter than the losing team and yet won decisively. Even if you made the tonnage gap 400 tones, it would still be a fair match-up with these teams.

[1453 R]

1.) Groups should not be penalized for playing the 'Mechs they want, instead of maxing out their tonnage. If a bunch of buddies want to drop in a light-medium wolfpack and leave eighty tons of their allotment in the hangar? Coolio. They can do exactly that.

2.) Tonnage means less than you think it does. It's not the size of your giant metal murder robit that counts - it's how you handle it. Badly piloted assault 'Mechs are free kills and wastes of several dozen tons - and more fatbros are piloted badly than not, at least down here in the low-tier mosh pit.

3.) Map selection - and whether you were lucky enough to get a team with more builds suited to the map you're playing on than the enemy - is vastly, vastly more influential on your win rate than sheer tonnage. A "zero assault" team with a NARC light and multiple 40+ tube mobile LRM mediums and heavies that drops on Polar Highlands will win that fight eight drops out of ten no matter how many fatties the other side has. Teams with multiple dual-Goose Fattie McPudge 'snipers' that drop on close-combat maps like Solaris lose to "zero assault" teams stuffed with mobile medium and heavy brawlers.

4.) Stop blaming the matchmaker for your own suck. This game is vastly more complicated than a typical shooter, its average player skill is drastically lower than a typical shooter, and also there are so many other, better things for Piranha to do with its time than try to fix the god damned matchmaker for the seven hundredth time. Just...stop. Play the hand you're dealt, and if you lose? Roll up a new hand and try again.

Edited by 1453 R, 03 June 2021 - 08:33 AM.

[East Indy]

Nightbird, on 03 June 2021 - 08:17 AM, said:

Here's a match I just saw with the winning team was 200 tons lighter than the losing team and yet won decisively. Even if you made the tonnage gap 400 tones, it would still be a fair match-up with these teams.

"Weight matters less when 3 of the game's best players are matched against a team with a guy who was ranked literally the lowest percentile last month" is not the strongest argument

1453 R, on 03 June 2021 - 08:33 AM, said:

1.) Groups should not be penalized for playing the 'Mechs they want, instead of maxing out their tonnage. If a bunch of buddies want to drop in a light-medium wolfpack and leave eighty tons of their allotment in the hangar? Coolio. They can do exactly that.

Why are they entitled to that?

[1453 R]

Same reason solos aren't all required to drop in hundred tonners - it's what those players want to do.

I suck in fat 'Mechs. To be fair, I suck in general, but I'm at my absolute worst when I'm in Mecktor McLargeHuge trying to rely on an overabundance of firepower instead of mobility. Ergo I rarely play assault 'Mechs. They're not fun, they're not good, and I'm wasting tonnage when I do. Most of my friends are in more or less the same bucket - Marauders and Timber Wolves are about the limit of what most of us really like to pilot. We have one guy who just picked up the game recently and is rapidly turning into a more-or-less dedicated light 'Mech pilot, with a very strong preference for the most agile, maneuverable 'Mechs possible - his first personally-owned robit was his Flea, in which he regularly scores 500+ damage. I'm not gonna tell that guy "Whoops, sorry, nah - we got eighty tons left. You gotta park the Flea you really enjoy and do super well in and drive this Annihilator, instead."