127 replies to this topic

[TheCaptainJZ]

Breaktime, on 08 January 2024 - 10:41 AM, said:

I'm personally cool with the idea, but it might be a little tricky to program the matchmaker I think. It has to account for tonnage/weight class, player tier/PSR, and maybe some other variables and decide how best to divide that in half. Does it attempt to divide based on PSR? Tonnage? A combination of the two? Deciding where to draw those lines is the tricky part.

[SolCrusher]

Large groups in the solo queue. I'm pretty sure we've been there done that and it wasn't fun. I think I have the shirt .....

[Breaktime]

KingCobra, on 08 January 2024 - 11:22 AM, said:

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is my question to you and all the others in MWO that want to shove more organized team play into Solo Quick Play is.
(WHY DONT YOU ALL GO PLAY FACTION PLAY)?

And of course, you will all come back with (it takes to long to get a match). and (we get. Killed to fast by bigger, better teams) and (we can't win unless we farm solo/casual players) and the excuses list goes on and on and on.

I don't really view having the matchmaker putting us on different teams shoving organization into quick play. I'm not sure how taking us and splitting us up in a way we couldn't plan for because we won't know how it's done is more organized than just sync dropping as lances.

I've never tried faction play, I don't know what it is, but I think I disagree that it is in fact the mode we want because playing against each other is desired. Team and organized are really a way to describe us, and I some of our players are noobs that maybe wouldn't meet the faction mode barrier to entry.

The idea is 8+ private match. But people show up or not whenever they can, and at 5-7 it is awkward. In counterstrike a group of a very large size can jump in a server and play. Not everyone will be on the same team, and it works. Really well actually, I've done it a lot. Being put on the other team is also a desirable feature, not a concession; as it is also fun to shoot your friends. MWO doesn't really have this kind of thing.

Your concerns about what we'd say. Just so we are clear, as a group we are bad and live at the bottom of the ladder. We mostly lose and kinda don't care. We just kind of want to play quick play mode together at the same time, not as a team.

[crazytimes]

Breaktime, on 10 January 2024 - 07:44 PM, said:

Just so we are clear, as a group we are bad and live at the bottom of the ladder. We mostly lose and kinda don't care. We just kind of want to play quick play mode together at the same time, not as a team.

Yeah and you wonder why large groups at either end of the spectrum aren't good for the game and aren't allowed?

[KingCobra]

Breaktime, on 10 January 2024 - 07:44 PM, said:

I don't really view having the matchmaker putting us on different teams shoving organization into quick play. I'm not sure how taking us and splitting us up in a way we couldn't plan for because we won't know how it's done is more organized than just sync dropping as lances.

I've never tried faction play, I don't know what it is, but I think I disagree that it is in fact the mode we want because playing against each other is desired. Team and organized are really a way to describe us, and I some of our players are noobs that maybe wouldn't meet the faction mode barrier to entry.

The idea is 8+ private match. But people show up or not whenever they can, and at 5-7 it is awkward. In counterstrike a group of a very large size can jump in a server and play. Not everyone will be on the same team, and it works. Really well actually, I've done it a lot. Being put on the other team is also a desirable feature, not a concession; as it is also fun to shoot your friends. MWO doesn't really have this kind of thing.

Your concerns about what we'd say. Just so we are clear, as a group we are bad and live at the bottom of the ladder. We mostly lose and kinda don't care. We just kind of want to play quick play mode together at the same time, not as a team.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The thing is I do understand how you feel as a group when MWO WAS YOUNG year 1-3 my group from MechWarrior2-4 was 300 strong we played all the game modes as single player to faction to 8v8 4v4 scouting is was fun because those playing in team groups made it fun for everyone in the game by balancing out the battles with specific players that were not so dominating in battles to make it funnier for all players but still using higher skilled players against more competitive teams as well..

Then in year 3 a lot of players left MWO because of disputes with the original Devs about 500,000 players and the Teams left left forgot honor and fun in games and stacked the teams where it just doing farming runs for CBills and events and seal clubbing players 24/7 in MWO.

That started the decaling of fun team play in MWO why does this matter to you and your team and friends? Because these same groups are now starting to break down Solo Quick Play into the same thing Farming players and lower skilled teams to achieve their same objectives which will be the certain death of MWO as more players leave the game as there is no real balance or fun left in game play.

P.S Solo Quick Play needs to be restored back to its original no teams allowed in game play it was more fun as far as team groups they need to have PGI fix and restore Faction play so these meta groups cannot redestroy the game mode for all the players in MWO to have fun again in playing Faction Play or put all the Team grops into a 8v8 game mode that MWO has but does not use.

Edited by KingCobra, 15 January 2024 - 08:16 AM.

[pbiggz]

KingCobra, on 15 January 2024 - 08:06 AM, said:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The thing is I do understand how you feel as a group when MWO WAS YOUNG year 1-3 my group from MechWarrior2-4 was 300 strong we played all the game modes as single player to faction to 8v8 4v4 scouting is was fun because those playing in team groups made it fun for everyone in the game by balancing out the battles with specific players that were not so dominating in battles to make it funnier for all players but still using higher skilled players against more competitive teams as well..

Then in year 3 a lot of players left MWO because of disputes with the original Devs about 500,000 players and the Teams left left forgot honor and fun in games and stacked the teams where it just doing farming runs for CBills and events and seal clubbing players 24/7 in MWO.

That started the decaling of fun team play in MWO why does this matter to you and your team and friends? Because these same groups are now starting to break down Solo Quick Play into the same thing Farming players and lower skilled teams to achieve their same objectives which will be the certain death of MWO as more players leave the game as there is no real balance or fun left in game play.

P.S Solo Quick Play needs to be restored back to its original no teams allowed in game play it was more fun as far as team groups they need to have PGI fix and restore Faction play so these meta groups cannot redestroy the game mode for all the players in MWO to have fun again in playing Faction Play or put all the Team grops into a 8v8 game mode that MWO has but does not use.

We cant do solo quick play anymore. We don't have the numbers. I think thats something people aren't really grasping here.

[KingCobra]

pbiggz, on 15 January 2024 - 08:58 AM, said:

We cant do solo quick play anymore. We don't have the numbers. I think that's something people aren't really grasping here.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe so but I do believe MWO could get better and retain a lot more players if the PGI staff would listen to reason and not go along with the groups that have nothing left to do but finally kill MWO off. And I do believe that 2 ques would be better for the player base ether solo quick play and faction fixed for team play or solo quick play and an 8v8 team only match system that is already to be activated by PGI staff.

There are enough players left to do this, but it is up to PGI/ESG to fix the game and try to make it prosper and thrive or keep letting it die a slow death. Plus, what does PGI think if MWO dies they will all start playing Mechwarrior5? I doubt even 10% would make the transition to MW5 as a singleplayer game its good but not great it takes to many mods to work right plus even with co-op it will also linger on for a few years.

They could clone MW5 into a new MWO2 but it would still have the same problems MWO has since day 360 flaws that have never been fixed and who knows how long the game would be playable with hardly any player base or revenue stream and no advertising . OWE WELL CARRY ON.

Edited by KingCobra, 15 January 2024 - 12:55 PM.

[Duke Falcon]

Not sure large groups would be healthy for QP. I understand the OP's wish for a "let's play together something mature" <Sorry, immature, my bad!> but(t)... Not good, just believe me! MM is a piece of sh!t (cake) already and groups could p!ss in the middle of it's blonde-brain...
Trully, for larger groups either private lobby or FP.
On the other hand a group of 3xT1 + T4 results very funny games. I love those but I also understand the 4-men ceiling for QP. Basicly, the whole engine need to be rewritten for a better MM before we may talk larger groups. Or introduce something like EQ for such 4+ men groups if they not wish private lobby or FP.

Oh, at the end I were quite civilised this time... Something went utterly wrong! But(t)...

[pbiggz]

KingCobra, on 15 January 2024 - 12:54 PM, said:

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Maybe so but I do believe MWO could get better and retain a lot more players if the PGI staff would listen to reason and not go along with the groups that have nothing left to do but finally kill MWO off.

Groups arent killing the game.

KingCobra, on 15 January 2024 - 12:54 PM, said:

And I do believe that 2 ques would be better for the player base ether solo quick play and faction fixed for team play or solo quick play and an 8v8 team only match system that is already to be activated by PGI staff.

This is your opinion. It is also frankly counter to most information we have out there. Queues work better with more people in them, not less. We have very few players left. A stable number, but a small one. Tweaking the matchmaker is extremely risky. Splitting it is dangerous.

KingCobra, on 15 January 2024 - 12:54 PM, said:

There are enough players left to do this, but it is up to PGI/ESG to fix the game and try to make it prosper and thrive or keep letting it die a slow death.

We know roughly how many players log in daily. It is a small number. You can say "we have enough players to split the queues", that doesn't make it true.

[TheCaptainJZ]

KingCobra, on 15 January 2024 - 12:54 PM, said:

There are enough players left to do this, but it is up to PGI/ESG to fix the game and try to make it prosper and thrive or keep letting it die a slow death. Plus, what does PGI think if MWO dies they will all start playing Mechwarrior5? I doubt even 10% would make the transition to MW5 as a singleplayer game its good but not great it takes to many mods to work right plus even with co-op it will also linger on for a few years.

PGI/EG7 are not going to "fix" this game because there's no money in it. There were points in MWO's history where Russ was thinking "this might be the thing that makes the game take off" but it never happened (paraphrasing from his discussion with Sean Lang last year). Small boosts, but nothing substantial. As a company, PGI have moved on to MW5 and now they've moved on to MW5: Clans. From a business perspective, it makes total sense. You put out a game, then start working on the next one. And a single-player title is much simpler and less resource hungry than maintaining a live multiplayer game like this. You don't have to do the microtransactions. You don't have to do events. You don't have to do constant balancing. You don't have a player base screaming at you all the time for decisions you made. MW5 was successful so doing MW5: Clans should be just as successful if not more. I would honestly be surprised if we ever see a MWO2. There's the argument that PGI should have found a way to broaden the appear of Battletech to more players, but I don't think PGI is capable of doing that. And they're not the owners of the IP so it's not like it's their job to really do that anyway. The problem is they're fighting over a group of players who have a tremendous amount of options of how they're going to spend their free time, and only a small number of people choose MWO. And most people don't play the same video game for over a decade either. Again, so many choices out there.

[Breaktime]

crazytimes, on 10 January 2024 - 08:52 PM, said:

Yeah and you wonder why large groups at either end of the spectrum aren't good for the game and aren't allowed?

I feel like this, and frankly most replies, are engaging disingenuously. It doesn't matter what I say, you will dismiss it as if I either said something else or if the reasons are self evident.

Like groups. People say 'groups are bad' for 'the game'. This is odd thing to say given that a number of players refuse to play alone. Like, I'm new here and don't know a lot about the community, but I already know a lot of players that won't play alone. So in terms of server population and longevity, surely the opposite is true. Groups are an essential part of the ecosystem.

I also want to reiterate that when I ask for larger groups, 'group' doesn't mean team. The matchmaker would split up the group. It'd be a bit like a sync drop except the matchmaker gets all the agency and decides how distribute each player between sides instead of just choosing between groups, so it's closer to having each person individually sync drop. So far no one has really explained why this would be bad except vague suggestion players could 'exploit it' with examples being stuff that is supposedly already possible with arranged groups of 4. You couldn't even reliably set up some LRM boats this way because your spotters might get put on the other team.

[Besh]

pbiggz, on 15 January 2024 - 08:58 AM, said:

We cant do solo quick play anymore. We don't have the numbers. I think thats something people aren't really grasping here.

People keep drumming about playernumbers, while this is not the only factor . Average number of Games per Season is also constantly dropping . Atmo, avg. of 3 Games/day is being played/Season ( which I guess for many players translates into not playing most days and having a few longer playing Sessions each Season ) .

An inGame survey asking about player behaviour and reasons would help with Data and understanding .

[pbiggz]

Besh, on 18 January 2024 - 12:43 AM, said:

People keep drumming about playernumbers, while this is not the only factor .

And? That doesnt make the population any less of a concern. Subdividing an already small queue is extremely risky.

Besh, on 18 January 2024 - 12:43 AM, said:

Average number of Games per Season is also constantly dropping . Atmo, avg. of 3 Games/day is being played/Season ( which I guess for many players translates into not playing most days and having a few longer playing Sessions each Season ) .

Are these numbers from jarls list? Do they change anything about the risk commensurate with subdividing the queue, and is there clear causation between the single queue and the decline you're pointing to?

Besh, on 18 January 2024 - 12:43 AM, said:

An inGame survey asking about player behaviour and reasons would help with Data and understanding .

No it wouldn't. There isnt any information pertinent to this that PGI can't get out of its own numbers, and players of this game very often do not understand what they want/why they are dissatisfied.

It's the game designer's responsibility to sus out what players actually need, and what they need is not necessarily what they say they want, and it is the designer's responsibility to know the difference and protect the players from that; from themselves if necessary.

[Magic Pain Glove]

12 Players groups should be allowed in QP. I am in full support , I suggest we try this for 2 months . After all its what the SOUP enthusiasts wanted 3 years ago , just expanded a lil bit. I was convinced by them that its a net positive . Its not gonna further break tonnage balancing , spawn mech placement and team balance . And people will get positive experience of playing together with a big coordinated group ! Which will also do their best to communicate with the rest of the team .

I mean , nothing bad can come out mixing groups with a bunch of random pugs while not having a robust functional matchmaker that can balance groups vs groups or groups vs solos.So its all positives!

[pbiggz]

Besh, on 19 January 2024 - 03:36 AM, said:

At this point, it’s clear you simply object for the sake of objecting .

No dude. I’m objecting because you are wrong.

Besh, on 19 January 2024 - 03:36 AM, said:

All I did was mentioning that not only do playernumbers go down, average number of matches played per player/season also does . Its a fact that has been mainly over looked when people argued &quot;not enough players&quot;, and its a contributing factor to matchmaking problems .

If you react this negatively to me asking you to show me, then it calls into question whether what you are saying is actually true. I’m not trying to start a fight with you, we’re having a discussion about the future of the game and we can’t afford to have a discussion based on how some guys feel.

Besh, on 19 January 2024 - 03:36 AM, said:

As for a player survey : its interesting that you flat out deny it could have meaning and value . To assert &quot;what they [players] need is not necessarily what they want&quot; speaks volumes . And has nothing to do with what I suggested above . I suggested to ask people about how often they play MW:O, for how long, how many matches, and what contributes to their playing behaviour .

It is not unknown in the business world to actually ASK customers about stuff . Ofc a company can go &quot;We don't need to ask you anything, we know everything, and you dont know what you need anyways !&quot;...but I assume that would not go down well with customers in any case .

I actually have professional training in game design, something I don’t know that you have, so I’m not talking out of my ***.

Players who are not versed in game design don’t have the vocabulary to explain what their pain points are. That doesn’t mean you as a designer shouldn’t talk to them, but you need to listen and then parse out the data from the noise. Where and when you do that takes time and resources and doing it wrong can lead you astray.

It’s why the designers need to so carefully and meticulously gather information on their own. For example, in the mechwarrior sphere many players will complain that the game is “unbalanced” and then demand pgi use tabletop values to “balance” the game. Should pgi actually do that? No. They should not.

If you want another RL example, blizzard entertainment recently held a fan poll to decide what the set bonuses for the next raid tier set should be, and people immediately said things like “going to the other class forum to vote for their worst set bonuses”. When you are running a ship that needs to be as tight as a game, unfortunately, you need to run it as an authoritarian.

Edit: another mwo example is sniping, which, whether it’s out of whack or not, became a bogeyman the moment the cauldron came into the picture; it became that bogeyman in a few very vocal circles on the forum and upon even the slightest interrogation it’s obvious that those circles are filled with players who walk brawlers across open territory unsupported and expect to survive. Should pgi listen to them when they demand nerfs? Are they really articulating their needs? Or just lashing out? You know the answer.

Edited by pbiggz, 19 January 2024 - 04:27 AM.

[Stavus]

for the greater good of the game with its limited player base this is not a good idea

do not do this



if you enjoy the game great ... but allowing large groups to "stomp" randoms will be the final nail for this game


yea .. it sucks some days when you cant fit everyone .. but sync drop usually does a decent job of keeping you on the same team as other unit members and the overall wuality of random games is kept fairly balanced for it




i feel you ... bigger groups would be grat some days ... for the gorup that is ... everyone else is just going to get pushed out to the point it would become pointless to play without a full drop

[Stavus]

pbiggz, on 19 January 2024 - 04:22 AM, said:

No dude. I’m objecting because you are wrong.

you've just invalidated your entire argument as this is a matter of opinion and cannot be objectively "wrong" in either direction



be objective not subjective

[pbiggz]

Besh, on 19 January 2024 - 07:53 AM, said:

You say I am wrong . That is your opinion, and thats ok . Does not mean it is correct though .

I say you are wrong because you have not presented a cogent argument backed up by facts or theory. I have. My major was in game design. I actually know what i'm talking about. All you've done is point at a statistic (which you have yet to actually share) and wink, as though it should be manifestly obvious that there's causation.

Besh, on 19 January 2024 - 07:53 AM, said:

Actually, my impression is you did not read, or understand what I wrote, and therefore can not even evaluate whether I am wrong, or not .

I actually did read your post, so saying "no you didn't" as an attempt to discredit me and my response is kind of laughable.

Besh, on 19 January 2024 - 07:53 AM, said:

When I mentioned a poll, I did not mention people's feelings, at all . In fact, I mentioned nothing of what you come up with in your post above . My suggestions for polling questions were pretty short and precise . I did not suggest asking players about what is wrong or right with the Game . I did not mention asking players about balance . I especially did not mention sniping . The "blizzard" example also has nothing to do with what I suggested .

Do you understand how polls work? You have to ask people questions. They answer the questions. Their answers are influenced by their feelings. How you word the questions matters, sure, but that doesn't stop people's views, prejudices, ignorance, and feelings from impacting their responses. That is called bias. When writing a poll you are meant to accommodate for expected biases.

My argument is that a poll introduces a number of unnecessary biases that PGI doesn't need to even deal with, because they already gather the needed information without asking players directly for input. I explained this clearly, you're just trying to move the goal posts again to make it seem like I don't know what im talking about.

Besh, on 19 January 2024 - 07:53 AM, said:

If you are insecure, or having trouble understanding what I wrote re a player poll, let me know . I will then quote myself in a follow up post .

Ad hominem

Besh, on 19 January 2024 - 07:53 AM, said:

In the meantime, I would very much appreciate if you would stop misrepresenting what I am writing .

I've explained multiple times to you why your argument is not backed up by any of the data we have. You point at one statistic and wink at it and expect everyone to draw the exact same conclusion, then try to bully anyone who disagrees with you.

Stavus, on 19 January 2024 - 08:59 AM, said:

you've just invalidated your entire argument as this is a matter of opinion and cannot be objectively "wrong" in either direction



be objective not subjective

No i haven't.

Besh is attempting to make the claim that there is declining match count, and that there is causation between that stat (which he has not shared) and the soup queue.

You can't be honest and make that claim.

Stavus, on 19 January 2024 - 08:56 AM, said:

for the greater good of the game with its limited player base this is not a good idea

do not do this



if you enjoy the game great ... but allowing large groups to "stomp" randoms will be the final nail for this game


yea .. it sucks some days when you cant fit everyone .. but sync drop usually does a decent job of keeping you on the same team as other unit members and the overall wuality of random games is kept fairly balanced for it




i feel you ... bigger groups would be grat some days ... for the gorup that is ... everyone else is just going to get pushed out to the point it would become pointless to play without a full drop

And for the record, I agree on this. There should not be any larger groups in the queue than we have now. It's already a compromise but its a necessary one to serve the widest playerbase. Asking for larger groups does make grouping up into your only hope of winning. Asking to restrict or silo off the groups just soft bans a very active part of the community and risks compromising our one last working queue.

Edited by pbiggz, 19 January 2024 - 09:22 AM.

[Arnetheus]

Magic Pain Glove, on 19 January 2024 - 03:57 AM, said:

12 Players groups should be allowed in QP. I am in full support , I suggest we try this for 2 months . After all its what the SOUP enthusiasts wanted 3 years ago , just expanded a lil bit. I was convinced by them that its a net positive . Its not gonna further break tonnage balancing , spawn mech placement and team balance . And people will get positive experience of playing together with a big coordinated group ! Which will also do their best to communicate with the rest of the team .

I mean , nothing bad can come out mixing groups with a bunch of random pugs while not having a robust functional matchmaker that can balance groups vs groups or groups vs solos.So its all positives!

Completely support this!

In no way, shape or form will this break the quickplay.
There will be only happiness and rainbows, over people being finally able to embrace the friendship that is unlimited size groups.
Especially solo players. They will no longer feel so lonely, fighting beside 6, 8 or 11-folk groups.
Don't let those filthy compies dissuade anyone from wanting this. They were against 4-mans, and they will be against 12-mans, but you will be resolute!

[Ignatius Audene]

https://leaderboard.isengrim.org/stats

Someone asked for the AVG matches statistics?
Ofcourse, it's up to u how u interpret the statistics and what conclusions u draw. 10+ year old niche game might be one mayor factor.

Edited by Ignatius Audene, 22 January 2024 - 12:37 AM.