65 replies to this topic

[LordNothing]

i dont think the match maker can be fixed. 21000ish (jarls) players seems a lot until you start the divide down.

first divide that up into the 24 players required to make a non-solaris match. then you only have about 875ish sets of players.

not everyone plays at the same time. people on average are only playing 66 games per season (jarls), roughly 2 a day which take about 30 minutes. so lets divide up the day into 48 30-minute slots.

so that means on average you have at most 18 sets of players at any given time. that is not enough people for good match making. thats not including the maybe 2-4 sets that are playing faction play, and a hand full of players in solaris. only at peak times do the match maker function with any modicum of success. the fact that it does anything amazes me.

things change if you drop down to 8v8. not much, as you then only have 27ish sets of players before some drift off to fp and solaris. double that with 4v4. though the game gets boring with small player counts. look how boring 1v1 can be. im with meep on this one, match making is a pipe dream that eats resources. forget about it and work on something else.

Edited by LordNothing, 27 February 2022 - 12:04 AM.

[Meep Meep]

^This man gets the reality of the situation.

[Mr Nice Mech]

No one is playing Solaris, at least not enough to sway the matchmaker. Please don't try to factor that into the equation.

[LordNothing]

Mr Nice Mech, on 27 February 2022 - 12:17 AM, said:

No one is playing Solaris, at least not enough to sway the matchmaker. Please don't try to factor that into the equation.

im sure a few do, not many, not even enough to fill a qp match. it would have been a rounding error. i didnt include it. i didnt even include fp. id need more information about that population. my 2-4 sets of players is based on my experiences in the lobby simulator. theres the 2 teams that are playing, the 1 team on one side and the 3 other teams on the other side (and 2 of those dont even get to play). the take away is that even if you assume everyone plays qp only, the numbers are still terrible.

Edited by LordNothing, 27 February 2022 - 02:05 AM.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

So the 4 men +couldron are probably the basic team that somehow keeps MWO running, and the Flexteam the people (from MW5) that Enad Global7 might make available if they don't need them for their own projects like LoTR (so rather very rarely)

Quote

So, is a MWO 2 planned?

EG7 stopped MW5 because despite good sales on the consoles it didn't reach its unrealistic Goals and is now using the teams for its own projects, so what are the chances that EG 7 shows any interest in MWO 2? Russ Bullock has also become completely invisible since the sale and is probably retired.

from the 4 Years Maintance mode in the "Hold it to life with a Minimale Crew Mode"

either you manage to keep the game running with the few people and generate success or the studio ceases to exist

Edited by MW Waldorf Statler, 27 February 2022 - 03:50 AM.

[ThreeStooges]

I think the worst part of this lame decaying corpse of a road rap isn't the complete lack of any real content. It's people thinking a new skin and c-bill/xp buff on already old existing mechs is " new content." That (p) on the IS Jenner-F made me lol hard. I don't even use the F(c) which I loving-ly named (c)rap.

Yet nothing about a "rescale" yet again. Maybe in another six years. Now to read more lights op threads for fun.

[w0qj]

In the official discussion thread on MWO 2022 Roadmap:
https://mwomercs.com...ap/page__st__40

"c) Map Re-scaling, and not Mech Re-scaling.
One forum poster (not me) proposed a brilliant idea of enlarging maps 1.5x to 2x of current size, so that even Assaults can hide behind rocks. Individual mech hitboxes will still be bad (I'm looking at you, Mauler, Awesome, etc.)
But at least MWO does not have to rework/rescale each and every mech chassis and all its variants.
And at least MWO does not have to rework the Bolt-On, with this Map Re-scaling."

ThreeStooges, on 27 February 2022 - 04:08 PM, said:

...Yet nothing about a "rescale" yet again. ...

[Extra Guac]

LordNothing, on 26 February 2022 - 11:57 PM, said:

i dont think the match maker can be fixed. 21000ish (jarls) players seems a lot until you start the divide down.

first divide that up into the 24 players required to make a non-solaris match. then you only have about 875ish sets of players.

not everyone plays at the same time. people on average are only playing 66 games per season (jarls), roughly 2 a day which take about 30 minutes. so lets divide up the day into 48 30-minute slots.

so that means on average you have at most 18 sets of players at any given time. that is not enough people for good match making. thats not including the maybe 2-4 sets that are playing faction play, and a hand full of players in solaris. only at peak times do the match maker function with any modicum of success. the fact that it does anything amazes me.

things change if you drop down to 8v8. not much, as you then only have 27ish sets of players before some drift off to fp and solaris. double that with 4v4. though the game gets boring with small player counts. look how boring 1v1 can be. im with meep on this one, match making is a pipe dream that eats resources. forget about it and work on something else.

Match making shouldn't be that hard. Let's say you have 24 players in the queue. First, start dividing up them between the 2 teams strictly by ELO ranking:

Team 1 gets these players:
#1
#24
#4
#22
#6
#20
#8
#18

Team 2 gets:
#2
#3
#23
#5
#21
#7
#19
#9
#17

Now there is just #10-16 remaining, the middle-ranked players. These players are more interchangeable, so you can divide them up by tonnage rather than by ELO, to balance the tonnage of the 2 teams. Now you have 2 equal-skill, equal-tonnage teams. Easy.

Edit: This might give Team 1 a very slight advantage, but you get the idea. If that was the case, you could give team 1 the #5 player and move #4 to Team 2. It could be tweaked, and the overall approach would work.

Edited by Extra Guac, 27 February 2022 - 06:30 PM.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

ThreeStooges, on 27 February 2022 - 04:08 PM, said:

I think the worst part of this lame decaying corpse of a road rap isn't the complete lack of any real content. It's people thinking a new skin and c-bill/xp buff on already old existing mechs is " new content." That (p) on the IS Jenner-F made me lol hard. I don't even use the F(c) which I loving-ly named (c)rap.

Yet nothing about a "rescale" yet again. Maybe in another six years. Now to read more lights op threads for fun.

Unfortunately, you can scale the map size in the engine, but not simply with the objects on it, which then have to be adjusted individually, from the tree to the building and every texture layer so that the grass texture is not in the city area and the objects not laying under the Terrainmesh or flowing over it.
The only way is make each single Objet and his Hitmesh bigger and create with this scaled bigger Assets a New Map.

Edited by MW Waldorf Statler, 28 February 2022 - 01:48 AM.

[w0qj]

Regarding your valid points that Map Rescaling is more involved than what meets the eye (individual map objects need to resize, texture mesh readjusted, possible texture mesh DPI needs to be finer, etc. etc.):

But Map Rescaling entails less manpower than Mech Rescaling, hence Map Rescaling is a more realistic proposal!

Map Rescaling: Yes
Yes, agree with your above comments on Map Rescaling.
But recent MWO staff team now has a track record of rolling out a fair number of revised maps & new maps now!
So I would imagine Map Rescaling is a lot of work, but still achievable.
Especially with some sort of crowd-funding campaign for MWO maps!

Mech Rescaling: No
MWO had very briefly mentioned possible Mech Rescaling in end-2020, and mentioned this just once.
MWO had never mentioned Mech Rescaling after that.
In fact, in 2021 MWO (or NGNG/Sean Lang, cannot remember which one) mentioned that the entire system of Bolt-On would rework, IF Mech Rescaling is to be done." And Bolt-On being brought offline would reduce MC income for MWO. (I myself bought more Bolt-On in the past few months).
As much as I personally would love to see mech rescaling, think it's realistic to say that Mech Rescaling might be a very loooonng time in come, if ever.

Conclusion: Map Rescaling entails less manpower than Mech Rescaling, hence Map Rescaling is a more realistic proposal!

w0qj, on 27 February 2022 - 04:23 PM, said:

In the official discussion thread on MWO 2022 Roadmap:
https://mwomercs.com...ap/page__st__40

"c) Map Re-scaling, and not Mech Re-scaling.
One forum poster (not me) proposed a brilliant idea of enlarging maps 1.5x to 2x of current size, so that even Assaults can hide behind rocks. Individual mech hitboxes will still be bad (I'm looking at you, Mauler, Awesome, etc.)
But at least MWO does not have to rework/rescale each and every mech chassis and all its variants.
And at least MWO does not have to rework the Bolt-On, with this Map Re-scaling."

MW Waldorf Statler, on 28 February 2022 - 12:45 AM, said:

Unfortunately, you can scale the map size in the engine, but not simply with the objects on it, which then have to be adjusted individually, from the tree to the building and every texture layer so that the grass texture is not in the city area and the objects not laying under the Terrainmesh or flowing over it.
The only way is make each single Objet and his Hitmesh bigger and create with this scaled bigger Assets a New Map.

Edited by w0qj, 28 February 2022 - 02:16 AM.

[Bamboozle Gold]

Map rescaling seems like such a bad fix to the issue. It doesn't change the relative sizes of the mechs, and it makes the walk to the fights even longer.

So rescale isn't happening, that's fine. Let's just give even more survivability to the mechs that would need to be scaled smaller.

[ScrapIron Prime]

Atlas… the height of a four story buildi… er, uh… three, three story building. Darned expansion of the universe.

[Weeny Machine]

w0qj, on 28 February 2022 - 02:14 AM, said:

But Map Rescaling entails less manpower than Mech Rescaling, hence Map Rescaling is a more realistic proposal!

Not if you use some of the old mech files pre-rescale for the mechs which ended up with really terrible results (35t mechs, Grashoppers which is huge and so on)

[ScrapIron Prime]

Weeny Machine, on 28 February 2022 - 05:50 AM, said:

Not if you use some of the old mech files pre-rescale for the mechs which ended up with really terrible results (35t mechs, Grashoppers which is huge and so on)

Yeah, but those pre-date bolt-ons, so you'd have to manually adjust all of those.

Honestly its a really short-sighted problem. Scaling should be a formula, a ratio, not something you have to hard code bone by bone. Either someone made a really bad decision early on or CryEngine is even worse than I thought. Or both, I guess.

[Curccu]

Weeny Machine, on 28 February 2022 - 05:50 AM, said:

Not if you use some of the old mech files pre-rescale for the mechs which ended up with really terrible results (35t mechs, Grashoppers which is huge and so on)

Hopper is isn't wide just tall and with high mounts so it doesn't really matter IMO... very strong mech, I'd say 2nd best IS heavy overall.

[ThreeStooges]

Map re-scale? Lazy no fix to a problem that isn't. Every one will just lemming to the quickest point of contact just like every other qp map unless it happens to be conquest mode. In which case it will probably be a race for theta like normal. I might just re-skill one of my rvns to make use of that +100 sensor range quirk that it has/had with a bap and maybe a tc1 or tc2. i'd give a larger map a week's time before the lemming grid is found.

Just like alpine in skirmish mode the vast majority of the map will go unused. But there will be a k-l spot.

[w0qj]

How about this?

1a. Map Rescaling, and mobility/speed/sensor/range tweaks for all mechs in the same proportion such that all mechs takes the same amount of time to travel from point A to point B, for both before and after Map Rescale? Weapon velocity needs tweaking too.
(Yes, this would take yet another round of Cauldron-style tweaks to make this happen)

1b. But this mobility/speed tweak must not exceed MWO server's capacity to handle Lights, say, going at 250 kph?
And What happens to server lag, if more and more player/mechs zips around the map at 100 kph on average?
Talking about NASCAR !

2. My Mauler and Awesome mechs would be crying over this
> So rescale isn't happening...just give even more survivability to the mechs that would need to be scaled smaller.

Bamboozle Gold, on 28 February 2022 - 02:44 AM, said:

Map rescaling seems like such a bad fix to the issue. It doesn't change the relative sizes of the mechs, and it makes the walk to the fights even longer.

So rescale isn't happening, that's fine. Let's just give even more survivability to the mechs that would need to be scaled smaller.

Edited by w0qj, 28 February 2022 - 06:42 PM.

[TheArisen]

One thing that is undefined is how they say they're working on things but that the schedule has to be flexible. So hypothetically there are things in the works but they don't want to get burned for not delivering on schedule because they have no control over resources. Personally I'd rather they just say "These are the things we're working on but due to the fluidity of when we have the Flex team we can't give definitive finish dates" And they have those things with like a progress bar or something lol.

[MW Waldorf Statler]

Map rescaling does not work because if you scale existing maps in the Cry 3 SDK tool larger, larger empty terrain is generated around the existing one. So you have to redesign this and the existing terrain etc., and also rescale all assets .Completely unrealistic that the existing team can do this in a short period of time.

In addition, I see problems with the terrain when scaling itself, which is why there will be no IK for legs and feet, because the collision query between feet and terrain goes haywire.

if you could increase the size of the map in the entire mesh, there would also be problems with the heights of mountains and slopes because the climb system could no longer cope with them.

Animations would also have to be revised, since the real distances also increase with the larger buildings and an in-game meter is now longer by a factor, which the mech still has to cover at a certain speed in a specified time, so either increase the walking speed what to would result in a funny cartoon effect, or new running animations for all mechs

Quote

[Today, 11:11 AM
One thing that is undefined is how they say they're working on things but that the schedule has to be flexible. So hypothetically there are things in the works but they don't want to get burned for not delivering on schedule because they have no control over resources.

Yes Russ says she had an idea for a new IP a long time ago and that was before EG 7 took control of pGI and MW5 ended up using the talented teams for their own IPs like LoTR so I would assume that here are not PGI projects , but are meant by EG 7

Edited by MW Waldorf Statler, 01 March 2022 - 04:22 AM.

[TheArisen]

So if you look carefully at the roadmap you can see a new chassis is in line. Check out the preview image.