186 replies to this topic

[ScrapIron Prime]

Besides, T1 players grouped up with T4 and T5 players doesn’t happen very often at all. It’s a rare case that solves itself, because those hypothetical low tier team players are effectively power-leveled up to T3 or T2 and the issue disappears.

Mostly this seems to be people attributing any loss to the presence of a group on the other team, whether or not the group had a major effect on the game or not. And yes, sometimes they do, but most often as goes the team so goes the group.

[pattonesque]

you know I was in a game with OP where his team started losing, he died, and he started complaining about groups. but my team ended up losing instead and the group on my team didn't contribute all that much. he disconnected once this was apparent.

a select few groups have very high win-rates and that can be frustrating to play against. but the solution to that is to play better yourself and not immediately give up once you notice a group on the other team.

[GoodTry]

Who plays with who is not the biggest problem. The problem is making two even sides with the same number of skilled players on each side.

[RAM]

Removing groups from Quick Play was what killed the game in the first place.


RAM
ELH

[ScrapIron Prime]

RAM, on 03 January 2022 - 08:19 AM, said:

Removing groups from Quick Play was what killed the game in the first place.

Losing the group queue was purely a population thing. We don’t have enough active players to support two separate queues any more.

[RickySpanish]

I win a disproportionately huge number of games when grouped with one other player. Trying to coordinate 3 or 4 players to focus the same target and bring complimentary builds is harder than two players bringing long range lasers or dakka and quickly creating an early kill advantage. Groups definitely and undeniably offer players an advantage, if grouped players genuinely organize themselves then they will absolutely win the majority of their games. Anyone disputing that is just being intellectually dishonest. However, MOST groups don't actually organize themselves beyond having a chat while shooting stuff, so the odds of a group swinging a match are somewhat lower. The potential though, is there in a way that is simply not for solo players.

[ScrapIron Prime]

Yup, Teamwork is definitely OP.
But if you take away the ability for friends to play together, you will DEFINITELY see a drop in population.

[Captain Caveman DE]

yes, groups "distort" the matchup. ofc they do;
but
it goes both ways (4 actually);
yes, you can drop against a good group of 4, but you can also drop with em.
yes, can also drop with a bad group of 4, but you can also enjoy slapping them around.

and yes:
being in a group doesn't mean they're good, just means they're in a group and that's it.
it is 'inclined' to work better as 4people who aren't on comms, but srsly:
groups follow the usual mwo-demographic, so for every t1-group you see, there's a few t2-3 and lots of t4-5 groups
who'll single-handedly sink their own ship - you just gotta wait for them to do it practically.

so while I'd agree that a group can and will 'distort' a match somewhat, the issue here is with the matchmaker, not the group.
MM should balance out the group, either by throwing 8 terribads at a decent group of 4, or throwing better players in with a terribad group of 4. so the issue is once again in PGIs coding court, and not at the playerbase imo.


'playing with friends' should be a cornerstone of every multiplayer-game, and it should NOT be their task to "balance themselves", that's what the developer is there for.
'not abusing' the group-option otoh is also a matter of 'honour', to a degree, and everybody can and should draw whatever 'fun' they have out of it.
for me personally, I'd rather have a good and close match, than a 'slapping around some puggles, L.O.L.' - but hey, to each their own

[GARION26]

RickySpanish, on 03 January 2022 - 08:40 AM, said:

I win a disproportionately huge number of games when grouped with one other player. Trying to coordinate 3 or 4 players to focus the same target and bring complimentary builds is harder than two players bringing long range lasers or dakka and quickly creating an early kill advantage. Groups definitely and undeniably offer players an advantage, if grouped players genuinely organize themselves then they will absolutely win the majority of their games. Anyone disputing that is just being intellectually dishonest. However, MOST groups don't actually organize themselves beyond having a chat while shooting stuff, so the odds of a group swinging a match are somewhat lower. The potential though, is there in a way that is simply not for solo players.

You realize the first criteria for matchmaker post introduction of groups is to make sure the players on both teams have about the same number of players in groups.

Groups can't 'win the majority if their games' if the matchmaker (assuming sufficient population) first matchmaking criteria is having a group on both sides. One of them wins one of them loses. By definition groups can win 50% on average. Individual groups just like individual players can be off that 50% win rate but just being in a group isn't going to push all group players north of 50% win rate.


A well coordinated group is going to do better teamed up then apart. But a group of unskilled players is possibly going to lose more then they would have as singles. Take the best two players in the match and put them on one team -they'll do better. Take the worst 2 players in a match and put them together and they'll do worse.

I play with my 11 year old son in a group - (my favorite games of MWO) but we lose as a group more then I would on my own because he's worse then even my tier4/5 level of play. I've got the least experienced player in the match on my team.

[Hobbles v]

Live with it.

There isn't enough people left to run a group Queue and forcing everyone to drop solo in QP will just lead to a further bleeding of people.

The most important thing to multiplayer games retaining players is being able to play with friends. Playing with friends is the only reason old games stick around.

Edited by Hobbles v, 03 January 2022 - 10:02 AM.

[Hobbles v]

Verilligo, on 02 January 2022 - 05:59 PM, said:

The complaint is an accurate one. Now 90% of the time, it doesn't actually work that way, people group up and they're just as terrible in a group as they are individually. But this thread has started out mentioning specifically skilled players grouping up and demolishing people. And that does happen. Like watch any of the recent gameplay footage on D A T A's Youtube channel, he'll group up with one more JGx player and they'll hang off in the rear or otherwise doing something completely different from the rest of the team and absolutely clean house. Now D A T A alone is a terror of a player, anyone that's seen him in action can attest to that. But there have also been games on said channel where, if he did not have the backup he had, he would have lost the match.

It's not just him, of course, he's just one of the more visible and talented people in the game. And I'm sure there's a whole host of matches that he didn't upload that went completely pear-shaped. But this is what happens when you allow 99.8 percentile players to mix with 75 percentile or worse players. The chance of it happening? Is 10% at worst. The remaining 90% of the time you'll have normal matches unless you manage to accidentally sync your queue. But the 10% of the time where it happens feels memorably terrible.

Separating solo and group queue out again is not a good option, either, for all the reasons everyone puts forward. But the game's matchmaking is simply inadequate at properly matching players of equal skill with each other. I just don't see how you go about improving it with the current size of the playerbase and without impacting the time it takes for the top players to even get a fight at all.

Well D A T A and Jgx quite openly use their teams as fodder to buffer them. They dont play qp to win, they play to farm.

They are Excellent pilots in thier own right but among the absolute worst teammates to have outside of a comp environment.

[pattonesque]

Hobbles v, on 03 January 2022 - 10:05 AM, said:

Well D A T A and Jgx quite openly use their teams as fodder to buffer them. They dont play qp to win, they play to farm.

They are Excellent pilots in thier own right but among the absolute worst teammates to have outside of a comp environment.

they win all the time though?

[RickySpanish]

GARION26, on 03 January 2022 - 09:27 AM, said:

You realize the first criteria for matchmaker post introduction of groups is to make sure the players on both teams have about the same number of players in groups.

Groups can't 'win the majority if their games' if the matchmaker (assuming sufficient population) first matchmaking criteria is having a group on both sides. One of them wins one of them loses. By definition groups can win 50% on average. Individual groups just like individual players can be off that 50% win rate but just being in a group isn't going to push all group players north of 50% win rate.


A well coordinated group is going to do better teamed up then apart. But a group of unskilled players is possibly going to lose more then they would have as singles. Take the best two players in the match and put them on one team -they'll do better. Take the worst 2 players in a match and put them together and they'll do worse.

I play with my 11 year old son in a group - (my favorite games of MWO) but we lose as a group more then I would on my own because he's worse then even my tier4/5 level of play. I've got the least experienced player in the match on my team.

I said that groups who organize themselves win most of their games, I also said that most groups do not organize themselves. I didn't word what I meant very well and of course your point is correct. What I meant was, an organized group of even average players will beat most opponents. The key word though is organized - most groups act as little more than solo players who happen to be on the same team each game.

[pattonesque]

most groups are just dudes chatting amongst themselves and occasionally left-clicking

[GARION26]

RickySpanish, on 03 January 2022 - 10:50 AM, said:

I said that groups who organize themselves win most of their games, I also said that most groups do not organize themselves. I didn't word what I meant very well and of course your point is correct. What I meant was, an organized group of even average players will beat most opponents. The key word though is organized - most groups act as little more than solo players who happen to be on the same team each game.

Got it we're on the same page most groups don't effect game results much. Some groups are organized they will. Similarly some teams have a great drop caller and enough folks interested and fluent in the same language to organize on the fly and play coherently - that's a major force multiplier.
I think in higher tiers you are more likely to get organized groups on both sides of the matchup but that's a wash in terms of WLD ratios.

[RAM]

ScrapIron Prime, on 03 January 2022 - 08:38 AM, said:

Losing the group queue was purely a population thing. We don’t have enough active players to support two separate queues any more.

Laugh, no.

Originally there was ONE queue (and one queue only). Removing groups and forming the separating QP & Group queues was what lead to the first exodus from which MWO has never recovered. You cannot be a team based shooter without teams...


RAM
ELH

[pbiggz]

RAM, on 03 January 2022 - 05:18 PM, said:

Laugh, no.

Originally there was ONE queue (and one queue only). Removing groups and forming the separating QP & Group queues was what lead to the first exodus from which MWO has never recovered. You cannot be a team based shooter without teams...


RAM
ELH

Are you not understanding what he said? Because you're talking like you disagree with him, and then kind of agreeing with him.

We had a consolidated queue for a long time, then it got split off because people whined, but we had enough population to take the hit and faction play to cushion things even further, then the population dropped off, faction play disappeared, and the queues *had* to be consolidated again.

Pretty much everyone here who is honest agrees that discouraging/banning group play in a team based multiplayer game is a bizarre and self-defeating thing to do.

[PocketYoda]

pattonesque, on 03 January 2022 - 07:24 AM, said:

you know I was in a game with OP where his team started losing, he died, and he started complaining about groups. but my team ended up losing instead and the group on my team didn't contribute all that much. he disconnected once this was apparent.

a select few groups have very high win-rates and that can be frustrating to play against. but the solution to that is to play better yourself and not immediately give up once you notice a group on the other team.

Groups ruin teams more than it doesn't.. That team got real lucky that day..

RAM, on 03 January 2022 - 05:18 PM, said:

Laugh, no.

Originally there was ONE queue (and one queue only). Removing groups and forming the separating QP & Group queues was what lead to the first exodus from which MWO has never recovered. You cannot be a team based shooter without teams...


RAM
ELH

Thats why you have teamed quick play and solo quick play the fact people left was because of the bias matchmaker and the fact griefers couldn't do what they loved..

pbiggz, on 03 January 2022 - 05:59 PM, said:

Are you not understanding what he said? Because you're talking like you disagree with him, and then kind of agreeing with him.

We had a consolidated queue for a long time, then it got split off because people whined, but we had enough population to take the hit and faction play to cushion things even further, then the population dropped off, faction play disappeared, and the queues *had* to be consolidated again.

Pretty much everyone here who is honest agrees that discouraging/banning group play in a team based multiplayer game is a bizarre and self-defeating thing to do.

This game the way its designed is not your typical multiplayer, there are very little in game ways to socialise outside of a match, there are no real benefits to teaming up as a faction.. Faction war is a mess which leaves quickplay.. quickplay does better matches as a 12 on 12 solo play. so teaming up breaks the tonnage and flow of the matches because the games mechanics do not work..

Its why i normally would not advocate removing groups in other multiplayers but here where everything is so busted team wise it makes sense..

Edited by Nomad Tech, 03 January 2022 - 06:21 PM.

[Tarl Cabot]

RAM, on 03 January 2022 - 05:18 PM, said:

Laugh, no.

Originally there was ONE queue (and one queue only). Removing groups and forming the separating QP & Group queues was what lead to the first exodus from which MWO has never recovered. You cannot be a team based shooter without teams...

RAM
ELH

Just to add, the game early on eventually had the ability to create groups and it was the Quick Play Queue, 8vs8 and a 1-1-1-1. Then the split which was initially supposed to have been 5-12man groups in the Group queue, keeping 4-man in the original Quick Play but PGI could not get the coding right and 12-man were dropping into Quick Play, which is where some of the whining came from.

Do not disagree with you there pbiggs. PGI approach to several different aspects of the game were not following a script but more like a dart board across the room. And the lack of CW/FP updates and the extended run of the Long-Tom buried that queue.

Also part of the issue back then was the lack of in-game VOIP. PGI had not added in-game VOIP til Feb 2015, 3 months after Faction Play (aka Community Warfare) went live.. so organized groups utilized external VOIP, in-game chat sucked as it still does today.. there wasnt even the command/combat wheel imagine trying to direct cats with the in-game chat window... Of course most of the time back then Clans hadnt been released yet. June 2014?? is when they started rolling out for those who purchased the Clan packs.

Even though I complain, this is really the only Mech action I like. HBS and MW5 touches only a few spots, but they do not come close to MWO, even with its failings. But with those failings, I rarely spend RL funds on this game anymore.

[pbiggz]

Nomad Tech, on 03 January 2022 - 06:11 PM, said:

Thats why you have teamed quick play and solo quick play the fact people left was because of the bias matchmaker and the fact griefers couldn't do what they loved..

Please point to the griefers, because I have yet to meet them. The game had a massive content drought. 3 of the 4 queues dried up virtually completely. The most popular team based queue, faction play, was deliberately destroyed when PGI made a multitude of exceptionally depressing changes to it. Every weapon was nerfed to wet noodle status so that the only viable strat was brainless medium pulse brawling on slow mechs, since, nothing did enough damage for you to care. The developers declared the game was in "maintenance mode".

Nomad Tech, on 03 January 2022 - 06:11 PM, said:

This game the way its designed is not your typical multiplayer, there are very little in game ways to socialise outside of a match, there are no real benefits to teaming up as a faction..

This game actually had an extraordinary community filled with groups, teams, companies, and the like. Fewer today, but still, the mechwarrior community is weird. Cagey but invested at the same time.

Nomad Tech, on 03 January 2022 - 06:11 PM, said:

Faction war is a mess which leaves quickplay.. quickplay does better matches as a 12 on 12 solo play. so teaming up breaks the tonnage and flow of the matches because the games mechanics do not work..

Its why i normally would not advocate removing groups in other multiplayers but here where everything is so busted team wise it makes sense..

This is an interesting claim because its alot of words to basically say "I dont think it works" without actually giving a solid reason it doesn't.

Here. I'll do it for you. This game has less than 1000 concurrent users at peak hours, so any match maker, group segregated or not, is going to sometimes have trouble forming matches, especially for extremely high and low PSR players.

Despite this, removing groups from quick play still isn't a solution. It's a soft ban for the game's most active users (and frankly there aren't that many of them) just to placate a small but vocal group intent on externalizing all defeats so they can think of themselves as good players, and yes, I'm talking about you because everyone here knows your game.

In other words you don't like losing ever, and you're advocating for the game's fragile population to be splintered and thrown to the wind, just so you don't ever lose. Pardon me for thinking that's a **** tradeoff.