127 replies to this topic

[MrMadguy]

pbiggz, on 28 December 2021 - 01:20 PM, said:

The words were in your mouth. You put them there. Any time you aren't scoring 1000 damage a match you act like you're being punished by the matchmaker. You presented 400 damage matches and acted like you were being forced to the bottom of the barrel when evidently you're actually ok, you just expect everyone to die in two hits, and if they don't, or if they move to fast for you to shoot, its not because of anything you did or didn't do, its because the game is wrong and people are cheating in overpowered mechs.

That is your entire thesis. Your entire outlook on the game. No objective balance, just a constantly expanding list of personal grievances, expanded each time you unilaterally decide the game isn't treating you personally well. You are evidently fundamentally incapable of self-reflection. There is no personal effort to improve your own play. In your twisted view when you run into players who outplay you, it isn't because you have alot to learn, its because being better than you is the same as cheating. If the matchmaker matches you with someone better than you, then in that same twisted view, it might as well be matching you with the sweatiest complords it can find, to you there is no difference.

None of what I have said is putting words in your mouth. Everything I've said is based on things you have admitted or declared or demanded. If you don't like it when people tell you you're a liar, an easy way to fix that problem is to stop lying. If you don't like it when people are telling you you're wrong, an easy way to fix that is to stop, listen, and learn instead of doubling down on the same hot soupy crock of ******** you keep trying to spoon into everyone else's mouths.

No, it's your words. Please prove it and quote my post, where I say, that I want every match to be 1000+ dmg.

May be I'm not clear enough about my problem. You just don't see whole picture. Matchmaking had been ok for some time since implementation of new PSR system. I'm average player and I belong to mid Tier 3. Problems started just recently. May be 1-2 months ago. Matchmaking became even worse, than it had been back in old times of old biased PSR. Matches in Tier 3 are currently <100dmg, dying early, constant deathball stomps and I have to do my best and play my best 'Mechs and best builds to try to pull at least some meaningful score. Imagine, how my average or bad builds would perform. This pushed me back to Tier 4 pretty fast. And now I hang between Tiers. Because I'm too good for Tier 4. Overall matches are good there, but I can pull decent scores in my best 'Mechs/builds, that allows me to eventually advance to Tier 3.

And it's WRONG. What you don't understand - is that Tier 3 isn't isolated Tier, where I would play with Tier 3 guys only, so advancing to there would mean playing with completely different players. In Tier 4 I play with guys from Tier 2, 3, 4 and 5. Only difference in Tier 3 - is adding Tier 1 to this pool. It's still the same guys from Tier 3 and 4, who are players with nearest PSRs. I still should be playing with THEM, till I won't get better PSR by myself.

Edited by MrMadguy, 28 December 2021 - 10:07 PM.

[martian]

KaptinOrk, on 28 December 2021 - 05:27 PM, said:

I feel like I'm kinda stuck in limbo between T4 and T3. I can do well in a T4 game in an AC/2 Blackjack BJ-1 or a weird Shadowhawk and the matchmaker thinks I'm worthy of T3, but once I'm in T3, I'm getting shredded by PPFLD meta builds left and right, so I get booted back down to T4 to repeat the cycle. I have no interest in playing the meta tryhard game, I just want to screw around with dumb 'mechs and casual players, is there a tier for me?

Well, you have three possible ways how to deal with the situation:
a) do nothing or
b ) go to the forums and cry how the system is unfair or
c) accept that PGI will not change the game to suit your personal needs and tastes, and adjust your game play, 'Mechs or both accordingly.

Going with a) means that you will continue to move between T3 and T4.

Going with b ) means that you will cycle between T3 and T4 as well.

Going with c) means that you will have to do some mental and gameplay adjustments:

• in T3 you can meet more competent opposition, some T1 players included, so you will have to play more cautiously. Some of your habits from T5 and T4 may no longer be viable.
  
• modify your 'Mech builds. Just that Shadow Hawk of yours: The first thing that caught my eye was that pair of Small lasers. If you are engaging enemy 'Mechs on 300-400 metres with your Ultracannon and MRMs, then those small lasers are unused and pointless. And if you have some enemy 'Mech in the point-blank range, those small lasers are not going to help much. Not even a light 'Mech with a decent pilot is going to be deterred by them, no matter if they worked in T5 or T4. Remove them and use that saved ton for something else - something what would be more useful in T3 games.

[ScrapIron Prime]

MrMadguy, on 28 December 2021 - 10:06 PM, said:

And it's WRONG. What you don't understand - is that Tier 3 isn't isolated Tier, where I would play with Tier 3 guys only, so advancing to there would mean playing with completely different players. In Tier 4 I play with guys from Tier 2, 3, 4 and 5. Only difference in Tier 3 - is adding Tier 1 to this pool. It's still the same guys from Tier 3 and 4, who are players with nearest PSRs. I still should be playing with THEM, till I won't get better PSR by myself.

So the issue is that you’re getting slaughtered any time you’re matched against Excellent players, no matter whether Excellent players are on your side too. But you CAN hang with Pretty Darn Good players. Is that an accurate summation?

If so, you would seem to have two solutions. Either you figure out what about your gameplay results in your rapid demise when facing Excellent players and change it… or… you get a couple thousand friends to start playing the game so the matchmaker swells with folks that are easier to battle.

[MrMadguy]

ScrapIron Prime, on 29 December 2021 - 01:31 AM, said:

So the issue is that you’re getting slaughtered any time you’re matched against Excellent players, no matter whether Excellent players are on your side too. But you CAN hang with Pretty Darn Good players. Is that an accurate summation?

If so, you would seem to have two solutions. Either you figure out what about your gameplay results in your rapid demise when facing Excellent players and change it… or… you get a couple thousand friends to start playing the game so the matchmaker swells with folks that are easier to battle.

Git gut isn't valid argument in MM-based game. There are no bad players in MM-based game - only bad matchmaker. Because learning to play vs arbitrary players - isn't any different, than not having MM at all and playing vs random players. I won't explain, why it's wrong and why nobody would want to play such game. It's as wrong, as playing against professional sportsmen. It's unfair. There is no chance to win. So it's pointless to even try.

Edited by MrMadguy, 29 December 2021 - 02:41 AM.

[martian]

MrMadguy, on 29 December 2021 - 02:36 AM, said:

Git gut isn't valid argument in MM-based game. There are no bad players in MM-based game - only bad matchmaker.

This is not so simple.There are the times of the day when the number of currently active players is low. If you wish to avoid some excessively long waiting, you must accept that players from different Tiers will intermingle in one game, so the matchmaker can create a game within some reasonable timespan.

No matter how good or bad the matchmaker is, it can still work just with the players that are available.

MrMadguy, on 29 December 2021 - 02:36 AM, said:

Because learning to play vs arbitrary players - isn't any different, than not having MM at all and playing vs random players. I won't explain, why it's wrong and why nobody would want to play such game.

In Tier 3 games you do not play against random players. You play mostly against other Tier 3 players (because they are the largest part of the players pool) with some occassional T5, T4, T2 and T1 thrown in.

MrMadguy, on 29 December 2021 - 02:36 AM, said:

It's as wrong, as playing against professional sportsmen. It's unfair. There is no chance to win. So it's pointless to even try.

See above. In Tier 3 you do not play against professional sportsmen. You still play mostly against players of the similar skill level.

And note that some random T1 player does not have to be on the enemy team - the matchmaker can put him on your side.

[Ignatius Audene]

Tiers are a very wide range. If the gates open and u got some tier 1 in your matches mm makes no difference between a bowser or a nor.al t1 like me. What u are asking for is basically elo mm and this mean 30+ minutes of wait times for t1 (was there before). And that was with higher playerbase. So the biggest thing mm does is to prevent t5 get slaughtered by t1. The rest is only nuances if u play out of na or eu prime.

[pbiggz]

MrMadguy, on 28 December 2021 - 10:06 PM, said:

No, it's your words. Please prove it and quote my post, where I say, that I want every match to be 1000+ dmg.

Ok lets dance.

MrMadguy, on 06 December 2021 - 11:24 PM, said:

That's, how Tier 4 matches should look like for Tier 3 player in case of proper matchmaking:

Here is you demanding 1000 damage matches.

MrMadguy, on 24 December 2021 - 08:41 AM, said:

Why you do this way in Tier 4

but at exact moment, when you step into Tier 3, game becomes literally unplayable.

Sometimes balance was bad in the past. Thx God for new PSR system, that we are able to drop to Tier 4 at some moment and not to suffer from it forever. But it has never been so bad. Difference between Tier 4 and Tier 3 just can't be so big. So what? Is Tier 3 just subsidiary of Tier 1 now? Can we do something about it? I've got sick of twitching between two tiers.

And here is you not-so-directly demanding 1000 damage matches, suggesting that the 400+ damage match you got at tier 3 (a loss, but a good performance for you) was a bad match.

MrMadguy, on 28 December 2021 - 10:06 PM, said:

May be I'm not clear enough about my problem. You just don't see whole picture. Matchmaking had been ok for some time since implementation of new PSR system. I'm average player and I belong to mid Tier 3. Problems started just recently. May be 1-2 months ago. Matchmaking became even worse, than it had been back in old times of old biased PSR. Matches in Tier 3 are currently <100dmg, dying early, constant deathball stomps and I have to do my best and play my best 'Mechs and best builds to try to pull at least some meaningful score. Imagine, how my average or bad builds would perform. This pushed me back to Tier 4 pretty fast. And now I hang between Tiers. Because I'm too good for Tier 4. Overall matches are good there, but I can pull decent scores in my best 'Mechs/builds, that allows me to eventually advance to Tier 3.

Except that the examples of tier 3 matches YOU POST aren't that bad. Getting 400+ damage in a match is good performance.

MrMadguy, on 28 December 2021 - 10:06 PM, said:

And it's WRONG. What you don't understand - is that Tier 3 isn't isolated Tier, where I would play with Tier 3 guys only, so advancing to there would mean playing with completely different players.

I'm fully aware of how the tiers work. You can stop talking down to me.

MrMadguy, on 28 December 2021 - 10:06 PM, said:

In Tier 4 I play with guys from Tier 2, 3, 4 and 5. Only difference in Tier 3 - is adding Tier 1 to this pool. It's still the same guys from Tier 3 and 4, who are players with nearest PSRs. I still should be playing with THEM, till I won't get better PSR by myself.

The population isn't big enough to leave all the tier 1s out. The fact that all tier 1s are viewed as the same, no matter what, is a drawback of the matchmaker, one that we probably wont be able to fix, but even having a single tier 1 in a match with you, isn't you being personally victimized, so stop acting like PGI has a notice up on their wall saying "MRMADGUY ISN'T ALLOWED TO WIN EVER".

If this list of your own words isn't proof enough of your own argument, the one you deny having made while still making it in the same breath, It wont be hard for me to find more of your own posts, unless you pull a Khobai and start retroactively editing/deleting posts.

Edited by pbiggz, 29 December 2021 - 06:03 AM.

[Der Geisterbaer]

pbiggz said:

[snip a lot of true stuff]

But ... but ... ~idea~ ... you're only making logically correct inferences by implication but you have failed to show where he explicitly said so ~nods eagerly as if that will make it more convincing~

[pbiggz]

Der Geisterbaer, on 29 December 2021 - 06:45 AM, said:

But ... but ... ~idea~ ... you're only making logically correct inferences by implication but you have failed to show where he explicitly said so ~nods eagerly as if that will make it more convincing~

MrMadguy, on 06 December 2021 - 11:24 PM, said:

That's, how Tier 4 matches should look like for Tier 3 player in case of proper matchmaking:

[ScrapIron Prime]

MrMadguy, on 29 December 2021 - 02:36 AM, said:

Git gut isn't valid argument in MM-based game. There are no bad players in MM-based game - only bad matchmaker. Because learning to play vs arbitrary players - isn't any different, than not having MM at all and playing vs random players. I won't explain, why it's wrong and why nobody would want to play such game. It's as wrong, as playing against professional sportsmen. It's unfair. There is no chance to win. So it's pointless to even try.

Not at all. I’m not saying “git gud”, I’m saying that you GOT GOOD and became ready for the next level up of play, but didn’t like it because it wasn’t as easy as the lower skilled pool you had been playing in. The matchmaker was working exactly as intended.

If this is your major beef, go play a single player game!

[Der Geisterbaer]

@pbiggz

Those quotes still only represent logically sound inferences by implication but he can still insist that you failed to prove that he explicitly wrote "I want every match to be 1000+ dmg" (in those exact words!). ~this time the nod is in all seriousness~

Note to self: Don't make such attempts at humerous comments when you don't actually disagree with someone.

[pbiggz]

Der Geisterbaer, on 29 December 2021 - 07:40 AM, said:

@pbiggz

Those quotes still only represent logically sound inferences by implication but he can still insist that you failed to prove that he explicitly wrote "I want every match to be 1000+ dmg" (in those exact words!). ~this time the nod is in all seriousness~

Note to self: Don't make such attempts at humerous comments when you don't actually disagree with someone.

Oh no i get what you're saying. There's just enough wiggle room for buddy to move the goal posts and pretend he didn't.

Edited by pbiggz, 29 December 2021 - 07:49 AM.

[martian]

ScrapIron Prime, on 29 December 2021 - 07:19 AM, said:

If this is your major beef, go play a single player game!

I think that he could try MechWarrior 5: Mercenaries.

It is currently on sale:

[ScrapIron Prime]

And I bought it on that sale! Dumped Epic Games in the process. (Yes, that means I paid for it twice, but steam has a better modding community and Epic Games is totally sus.)

[martian]

ScrapIron Prime, on 29 December 2021 - 08:18 AM, said:

And I bought it on that sale! Dumped Epic Games in the process. (Yes, that means I paid for it twice, but steam has a better modding community and Epic Games is totally sus.)

What does "sus" mean?

[dubstep albatross]

martian, on 29 December 2021 - 03:13 AM, said:

In Tier 3 games you do not play against random players. You play mostly against other Tier 3 players (because they are the largest part of the players pool) with some occassional T5, T4, T2 and T1 thrown in.

Do we have actual published and current data from PGI to understand the distribution of players among each of the tiers? From what I know of the current PSR system, combined with what I have seen from the data, I would imagine that the distribution is mixed. Three things, I believe, shape the distribution of players among the tiers.

First, the PSR system itself tends to promote a resistance to movement when you are in the "appropriate" tier. If you are in the appropriate tier, one would have games, on average, with small PSR changes. One essentially stalls in the "appropriate" tier. The system is not designed to spread out the population evenly amongst the tier buckets. It would have to be fairly arbitrary and randomized to do that. The PSR system may feel arbitrary to some ("my performance seemed good, but angry red down arrow :sadface:"), but it is not.

The second thing is that new accounts start near the top of tier 5. Tier 5 is where the pipeline is filled. We all know intuitively that MWO has a retention issue especially amongst new players, so it seems logical that many players who abandon MWO do so while in tier 5 or, maybe, in the bottom of tier 4 after playing a small amount.

But what about players that have been around a long time? There is no assurance that one will move up in tiers based off of the age of the account and/or the amount of seat time for the player. Look at some of the posters here in the forums, the ones who choose to display their tier. You can clearly see that some of them have accounts that go back to the beginning and are in lower tiers. It takes effort to move up in tiers.

The third thing is that the number of players who are skilled enough, consistent enough, and play enough to reach tier 1 are less than the other tiers by virtue of the required investment and the resistance to moving up built into the PSR system. This is a funnel effect. I would expect this to be true of all ranking systems that actually function as ranking systems.

I will concede one point, however. One can "game" PSR with multiple AMS and sandpapering-damage weapons (LRM, RACs). The contributions to match score from UAV are overstated. This gaming of PSR becomes less effective the more one's tier increases. By tier 3, LRMs are rare, people know how to counter them, and less people fit them. AMS and missiles, in general, become less of a contributing factor for match score by then. These PSR gaming methods also take time within the game and higher tier games tend to be shorter/faster.

Thus, I would think that the distribution of players, relative to tier, is bottom heavy. You would naturally have more players in tier 5, and maybe in 4. You would naturally have the fewest in tier 1. There is no reason to believe that the distribution is uniform across the tiers.

I have multiple accounts, initially motivated by having to lock into IS or Clan in FW a few years ago. I did this mainly to cut down on wait times. I can (and have) switched back and forth between a tier 3 and tier 4 account, during the same gaming session (for example while doing loot bag events on accounts in parallel), and have ended up dropping with many of the same players (and groups) back to back. This is consistent. When I play optimized mechs that I have lots of seat time in, I am a tier 3 player and do not shift much in that tier. When I play less than optimal mechs/builds (or when trying something completely new for me), I am solidly a tier 4 player.

Bottom line, there is a lot of observed player overlap for me between tier 3 and tier 4 accounts. The population is low enough that I think most games are fairly mixed in tiers, and I play during USTZ primetime on the NA server. That is not even taking into account the mix of tiers that can happen with groups. I can only imagine this effect is increased by other time zones with lower population.

[pbiggz]

martian, on 29 December 2021 - 08:30 AM, said:

What does "sus" mean?

suspect

[martian]

dubstep albatross, on 29 December 2021 - 08:42 AM, said:

Do we have actual published and current data from PGI to understand the distribution of players among each of the tiers?

The last year the Lead Designer Paul Inouye promised us the discussion regarding Tiers, matchmaker, etc.

He has not visited the forums ever since ...

[HGAK47]

People always talk about tiers like they are the be all and end all. I certainly agree that its noticeable the increase of skill level, situational awareness and aim / mech piloting ability as you rise up through the tiers.

I really think people overlook a critical factor however and that is team composition. This is truly random. Some matches you might have a very light 12 man, very few if any assaults and lots of lights and fast mediums. Sometimes this works great and you can rush the enemy before they know what hit them, othertimes the fast mechs get shredded by competant opposition before they can really do anything. This goes for all sorts of builds, you might have a lot of snipers or maybe a dakka heavy squad. All weapons in the game have differeing playstyles and things they are good and bad at. Tier alone cannot be the only factor as nobody knows what mechs and builds people will bring to a given game. Hence why some games are very close and others are 1-12 stomps.

Also how do you know if people are in good mechs but having an off day? Maybe the top 1% are consistant regardless and this is what makes them so good. I know I for one have days where I could hit a pixel at 1000 meters and other days where I cant hit the broad side of a barn at 200m! Thats just me but im sure im not alone.

[pbiggz]

HGAK47, on 29 December 2021 - 08:53 AM, said:

People always talk about tiers like they are the be all and end all. I certainly agree that its noticeable the increase of skill level, situational awareness and aim / mech piloting ability as you rise up through the tiers.

I really think people overlook a critical factor however and that is team composition. This is truly random. Some matches you might have a very light 12 man, very few if any assaults and lots of lights and fast mediums. Sometimes this works great and you can rush the enemy before they know what hit them, othertimes the fast mechs get shredded by competant opposition before they can really do anything. This goes for all sorts of builds, you might have a lot of snipers or maybe a dakka heavy squad. All weapons in the game have differeing playstyles and things they are good and bad at. Tier alone cannot be the only factor as nobody knows what mechs and builds people will bring to a given game. Hence why some games are very close and others are 1-12 stomps.

Also how do you know if people are in good mechs but having an off day? Maybe the top 1% are consistant regardless and this is what makes them so good. I know I for one have days where I could hit a pixel at 1000 meters and other days where I cant hit the broad side of a barn at 200m! Thats just me but im sure im not alone.

Far as I know, the match maker makes best effort to match total PSR on both sides. It weights that far above weight class. Because of the limited population, weight matching is usually the first parameter out the window.

Is it ideal? No. Is it a reality you have to deal with when a game barely hits 1000 concurrent players at eastern prime time? Yes.

When it comes to 1-12 stomps, there are two other factors also at work, lack of respawns and lack of accurate reporting. I will explain both.

Lack of respawns means that for everyone one death a team suffers, the opposing team gains a stacking advantage. An 8-12 match in a game with no respawns is statistically an outrageously close match. Most end with a wider gulf between teams. Wanna know why people play so close to the chest in this game? Because if you die, your gameplay gets cut short, and there's a non-zero chance that your death will be the start of the avalanche that leads to your team getting stomped. Essentially, tiny mistakes can be, and often are, ultra-punishing. That's true at tier 5 just as much as it is at tier 1. MrMadGuy is conveniently leaving out all the times he's likely been on the winning end of stomps in tier 4, only because he doesn't like to be on the losing end of them, ever, and thinks those only happen to him once he hits tier 3, and that lying about it might get people to agitate hard enough to change the game for his own personal benefit.

Lack of accurate reporting means that the game isn't presenting as complete a summary of performance as it could. What I would personally like to see is a bar indicating a team's total armour. There's a non-zero number of games that looks like 12-0 stomps, but where the team that got 0 kills, ended up chewing through 80-90% of the 12 kill team's total armour. Just because they didnt get kills, doesn't mean they didn't perform well across the board. You need the kills to win but damage is still an excellent indicator of performance and the way end of match stats are presented now, it sometimes minimizes that performance, making close matches seem like complete clownshows. A 1-12 match where the winning team gets 12 kills but lost 99% of its armour would be just as statistically unlikely as an 11-12 match, essentially, a near draw, but the game doesn't present that in a meaningful way.