Jump to content

Match Maker Be Like...


48 replies to this topic

#41 Curccu

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Liquid Metal
  • Liquid Metal
  • 4,623 posts

Posted 18 October 2023 - 11:43 AM

View PostVieterihiiri, on 18 October 2023 - 09:28 AM, said:


Well, you can also drive the solo players away and then it will be a group queue again. Or as you argue, no queue.

Nothing have changed significantly past two Years (player numbers) ~20% drop.

I know I don't play much nowadays, some comp (MWOWC and it's done for this Year), some FP and few evenings of quickplay a month...
But I do know for sure that I would play zero games a Year without my friends in this game aka in a group, no matter which game mode. I have played this game 95+% in a group since closed beta and I have no need or want to change that.
I have played this game as long as I have purely because there are people playing this game with me that I call friends.

#42 Tarl Cabot

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Tai-sho
  • Tai-sho
  • 7,824 posts
  • LocationImperial City, Luthien - Draconis Combine

Posted 18 October 2023 - 06:17 PM

View PostVieterihiiri, on 17 October 2023 - 01:19 PM, said:

Kick the groups out of the solo queue, should fix the issue of one team melting into 0 - 4 in three minutes…


(chuckles) It would only slightly change things but not by much. One team melting the other was happening before the merge into the Soup queue.

What I would prefer to be done is to drop the max group size from 4 to 3. Then remove the min/max tonnage, changing it so that a group could only allow 1 mech per weight class. That would not stop one team from being melted but could potentially help reduce/prevent 3-4 man running the same mech, good or bad. And for the weaker groups, could put more armor on the field. It would simply change up the appearances. Then PGI could change up the teams back to where each team, overall, have matching weight class. Not sure how that would work with the current population but at least the group being set to 1 mech/weight class could change up the dynamics a little, for both sides.

#43 pbiggz

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 4,830 posts
  • LocationOutreach

Posted 19 October 2023 - 10:34 AM

View PostTarl Cabot, on 18 October 2023 - 06:17 PM, said:


(chuckles) It would only slightly change things but not by much. One team melting the other was happening before the merge into the Soup queue.

What I would prefer to be done is to drop the max group size from 4 to 3. Then remove the min/max tonnage, changing it so that a group could only allow 1 mech per weight class. That would not stop one team from being melted but could potentially help reduce/prevent 3-4 man running the same mech, good or bad. And for the weaker groups, could put more armor on the field. It would simply change up the appearances. Then PGI could change up the teams back to where each team, overall, have matching weight class. Not sure how that would work with the current population but at least the group being set to 1 mech/weight class could change up the dynamics a little, for both sides.


The same could be achieved simply by reducing the tonnage available for a 4 man group. Then players would surely complain that a group pushed their total tonnage down and got them stomped.

There is a difference between real critiques and complaints, and bad faith gripes meant to attack people for playing the game "wrong" in the eyes of certain people. Real critiques can lead to positive changes. Bad faith gripes will simply get up and move; and there is always a dedicated contingent of players on this forum determined to find ways to select their own opposition, rather than ever adapt to the reality of the game. Losing is never a question of skill, its always the result of someone else doing something they view as illegitimate, and when you ask them what it is, they'll always come up with the latest boogeyman; groups, snipers, clans, IS, competitive players, groups again, and so on. This is a distraction, and not really indicative of any of the real challenges the game faces.

The source of the stomp pain is, as myself and many others have also said, two fold;

first, the game does not present your actual performance in a meaningful way, it only really shows match score, and damage on a per player basis, and kills on a team basis. If the game presented total team damage dealt, especially in relation to the total armor of each team, you would have a much better idea of performance, because even a 12-2 stomp might look pretty close if the team that didnt lose any mechs ended the match with every mech at 30% integrity, it just means the losers didnt turn those into kills. I dont have proof, and wont pretend i do, but I expect many a stomp is actually much closer in reality, but the game makes it seem like a clean sweep.

second, this game has no respawns, despite gamemodes being designed with respawns clearly in mind, and without respawns, every mistake compounds a team's disadvantage, and an opponent's advantage. Took a wrong turn and got wiped? well now your team is one down and the enemy might have an idea of where your team is. That could turn into the next kill, and into the next, with each loss on your team compounding into the next, like floors of a collapsing building pancaking into each other. respawns, or dropdecks, or whatever similar system, brings the actual match objective into focus, rather than letting every game mode be skirmish, or skirmish with extra steps, and it allows teams the chance to come back from mistakes and misplays, meaning you may well not know who the winner is, until the match timer actually hits zero (a match timer that i might remind the people here, can be set to whatever value you want. Nobody wants overlong quickplay games, so setting the timer to 10 minutes seems reasonable to me).

One of these is a pretty simple UI/presentation problem, the other is dramatically more structural. Given the townhall confirming what has long been suspected by some, and known by many, i doubt either of them will be addressed. This game has had a wildly long run all things considered, and is actually in a quite healthy place given the circumstances, but without a major investment, one it will not be getting, i doubt it will ever reach its highs again.

Edited by pbiggz, 19 October 2023 - 10:38 AM.


#44 pbiggz

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 4,830 posts
  • LocationOutreach

Posted 19 October 2023 - 07:31 PM

View Postthe check engine light, on 19 October 2023 - 11:56 AM, said:

...I think what messes with me are the people lining up to jump into a potential MWO2 after everything that transpired with MWO, and no apparent sign from PGI higher ups that critical, damning mistakes were made repeatedly and they understand exactly what went wrong, meaning it is entirely possible they would just make them again.

The deliberate calls for comparison with other players combined with the difficulty of gleaning from a postmatch board exactly what went right or wrong seems purposefully crafted to drive players towards a state of apathy or towards shelling out for whatever they think will give an edge (hello Moonwalker, prenerf Scattershot, Scaleshot, Gausszilla, Stone Crusher, Stone Rhino and especially Koloss). It's not necessarily P2W but I think it very much wants players to come to that conclusion.


Freemium was the choice model of the early 20-teens games industry. It has not aged well, and I think peoples general hesitance to accept PGI's sales model, even when, as far as freemium goes, they aren't very bad, just reflects that people dont really like freemium games anymore.

A game like MWO would never get funding today.

#45 VeeOt Dragon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 1,297 posts
  • LocationHell, otherwise known as Ohio

Posted 22 October 2023 - 11:36 PM

as for MWO's free-to-play model goes it was honestly one of the better ones out there from a Free player perspective up until the started with the whole "Legendary mech" crap. there really were not now pay-to-win options oh thee was pay to get it early but thats not bad (even if mech packs are WAY overpriced for real cash). its one of the things i always sort of liked about MWO especially when they started doing more regular events hat give MC (for new players that aren't sure if they want to spend real cash on the game this is a must have since it lets them get some mech bays)

#46 pbiggz

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 4,830 posts
  • LocationOutreach

Posted 23 October 2023 - 12:04 PM

View PostVeeOt Dragon, on 22 October 2023 - 11:36 PM, said:

as for MWO's free-to-play model goes it was honestly one of the better ones out there from a Free player perspective up until the started with the whole "Legendary mech" crap. there really were not now pay-to-win options oh thee was pay to get it early but thats not bad (even if mech packs are WAY overpriced for real cash). its one of the things i always sort of liked about MWO especially when they started doing more regular events hat give MC (for new players that aren't sure if they want to spend real cash on the game this is a must have since it lets them get some mech bays)


Legendary mechs are flashy, but hardly more than that.

People are still making threads about blue lasers and I have yet to see PGI put those behind a paywall. When they do, then you can talk about pay to win.

#47 SolCrusher

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 626 posts
  • LocationEast Coast

Posted 23 October 2023 - 04:22 PM

View PostIhlrath, on 13 September 2023 - 01:46 PM, said:

On the opposing team: 12 professional assassin murderhobos looking to destroy your day, your family, and your dog too.

On your team: You, 3 tomato cans, a blind duck, 2 afkers, and six sentient potatoes.


(I know they can't fix it, but this is just hilarious at times)


That was my problem last night, I'm approaching T3 and last night it felt like MM decided I must carry the team. it was painful I had to rotate through all my Atlases landing on my founder which pulled out a few wins finally.

#48 pbiggz

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Overlord
  • Overlord
  • 4,830 posts
  • LocationOutreach

Posted 23 October 2023 - 07:29 PM

View Postthe check engine light, on 23 October 2023 - 04:24 PM, said:

Freemium was never good, and now it's not even close to viable (FINALLY) nor should it be or ever have been. No einmal ist keinmal, no "it's not AS bad". It is, was, always will be a bad model.


Well a freemium game would never get funding today, that's for sure. If you pitched MWO as it was pitched in 2009 to microsoft/investors today you'd get laughed out of the building. There's a lot of good reasons Russ is very cool on the idea of an MWO2. I doubt he thinks it could ever happen.

#49 Invert3148

    Rookie

  • Survivor
  • 4 posts

Posted 23 October 2023 - 07:32 PM

View PostRondoe, on 13 September 2023 - 10:46 PM, said:

The other day me and 2 others in my lance are slogging along together in formation. All 3 of us are assaults.

Enemies in front of us, 3 to be exact. Not assaults.

I engage, expecting my lancemates to also engage.

Long story short. I get destroyed, while I see on my radar that the my 2 other assault lance mates are running with their tails tucked between their legs. They didn't even fire a shot from what I could tell. Btw they were a Madcat deathstrike and a Bloodasp of some sort. I was in a Maurader IIC Scorch.

HAHA, A match I had yesterday consisted of me getting blocked after trying to reverse back into cover by a jumping medium mech. Repeatedly told them to get a better position a few METERS away and they didn't listen lmao, got a face full of racs. (They flew into the air after I died, got shot down by guass)

Edited by Davex1555, 23 October 2023 - 07:33 PM.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users