678 replies to this topic

[Mista Whizzard]

So basically, you just killed the Run Hot or Die league untill further notified. 40+ teams of potenitally the worlds best (and highest spending) players thankyou very much. Not.

Edited by Mista Whizzard, 12 October 2012 - 08:32 PM.

[Supraluminal]

sandu, on 12 October 2012 - 08:28 PM, said:

This is better then what phase 1 proposes. Makes everybody happy : pugs and premades.

Except the pugs that get tossed in to fill out the premades, quite possibly. Potentially still a decent idea, depending on the details of implementation.

EGG, on 12 October 2012 - 08:19 PM, said:

I'd like to point out the benefits of:

- Communicating with your stakeholders (project management definition, not financial)
- Laying out a basic roadmap
- Acknowledging obvious issues and widely held concerns
- Formatting communication in a concise and humour-free manner

As opposed to:
- Lack of communication
- Trite jokes
- Avoiding addressing widely held concerns

Most of the forum dissent of the past week could have been avoided with clearer, earlier communication about obvious issues.

Humor as a tool for communication is fine. Humor as a substitute for communication is when it becomes a problem.

[vijil]

Overall, great. I speak as a PUG but even if I was a premade player this would be great.

Perhaps however a better way to do groups:
_______
A: Groups of 4 or less are allowed in the pool with PUGs, Ideally with a similar group on the other side, but this would not be a requirement. The idea here being to expose new players to team tactics. Class matching would still apply.

B: Groups of 5 or more will have to play other groups of 5 or more, with a warning that it may not be fair numbers wise OR allow a few pugs to even the numbers if the team is happy to do so, but still always 2 groups of at least 5 facing each other. NO class matching here. Want to try out 8 jenners vs 8 atlas? Go for it. Premades should be allowed to find their own effective combinations.
_______
[edit: Ninja'd to the same basic idea. Great minds think alike!]

Edited by vijil, 12 October 2012 - 08:35 PM.

[machine]

This is what I think of when I think of quality communication with the community. When you listen, I pay.
I just hope support for Run Hot or Die is fast comming =)

I am clicking to move from Veteran Founder to Elite Founder.

Edit: Upgrade Complete.

Edited by machine, 12 October 2012 - 08:41 PM.

[RobinSage]

Roger that boss!!

[Hekalite]

Phase 1 of the match making "fix" is an abomination. The only limiting factor on PUGs is there is no way to automatically group people into an integrated voice channel. Asking people to play a team oriented game with half a team is just plain stupid. If people are too antisocial to group up, then they deserve every stomping they get. Just concentrate your efforts on matching groups of 8 with other groups of 8 and single players with other single players of equal skill.

[sandu]

Supraluminal, on 12 October 2012 - 08:31 PM, said:

Except the pugs that get tossed in to fill out the premades, quite possibly. Potentially still a decent idea, depending on the details of implementation.

Just put a "looking for a group" option like we have in TS3.

[IceTitan]

Not to be an *** but this recent patch made things worst than it was... Was playable yesterday and now 12th/now 13th. Is completely unplayable, almost like now the game only works well for Windows 7 users and like crap for Vista... since regardless of the settings game works worst. And yeah sent a ticket... but not impressed with how these fixes feel more half baked.....

[Squigles]

The matchmaker is somewhat of a kick in the pants. Phase 1 is just rubbish, and phase 2 is just about as rubbish. We tend to get on in groups of 8 people that play together. So, what, after you implement phase 2 when we lose even 1 member of our group at least 3 others get kicked to the curb in the name of "fairness".

Also going to be interesting to see how this "idea" works out once we go to 12 man teams....you can group with 2,3,4 or 12. Cute.

Wouldn't it be a bit simpler and less punishing to the people who are in clans/guilds/corps, to just integrate VOIP directly into the game and remove the "no communication" complaint from the equation?

[Thomas Blood]

You are all awesome. Thank you for not only listening to the community, but communicating back with us effectively. Thank you!!!!!!!

[pantherzero]

love that the open beta is being pushed back untill the stability is better =D and the activate button on the game time!

slightly concerned about the match making. i definatly agree with trying to place groups with other groups but fixing the numbers are going
prevent groups of friends playing causal games with each other.

As for 'protecting the pugs' i started pug for 5 weeks before getting in witha group, was at this point that i decided to get founders, as a pug if i hadnt been stomped a few times by premades i probably wouldnt have looked at joining a group and would have got bored of the game and left.

imo a change to any group will be faced off with another group + pug make up so that if you group with less than 4 you will be paired with another team that has 1 small group less than 4 + pugs but if you group with a group of 4 or more then the other team needs to have a team of at least 4.
reducing the restrictions should help to prevent any extra wait times and still let groups of friends play to gether =)



that said really enjoying this game, keep up te good work PGI !!!

[Sir Roland MXIII]

vijil, on 12 October 2012 - 08:32 PM, said:

Overall, great. I speak as a PUG but even if I was a premade player this would be great.

Perhaps however a better way to do groups:
_______
A: Groups of 4 or less are allowed in the pool with PUGs, Ideally with a similar group on the other side, but this would not be a requirement. The idea here being to expose new players to team tactics. Class matching would still apply.

B: Groups of 5 or more will have to play other groups of 5 or more, with a warning that it may not be fair numbers wise OR allow a few pugs to even the numbers if the team is happy to do so, but still always 2 groups of at least 5 facing each other. NO class matching here. Want to try out 8 jenners vs 8 atlas? Go for it. Premades should be allowed to find their own effective combinations.
_______
[edit: Ninja'd to the same basic idea. Great minds think alike!]

You may have been d but the idea is still a good one. I like it.

[3ffigy]

Garth Erlam, on 12 October 2012 - 05:56 PM, said:

Just to make sure everyone sees this: "This is why we move to Phase 2 VERY soon after Phase 1."

The issue for those of us that run with our merc corps is that an 8 person group is not a steady state nor is a 4. We have people filter in and out all night meaning our groups can be any number of people between 1-8 and having to potentially kick 3 people from a 7 person group because 1 leaves is very undesirable and destructive to player dynamics within a merc corp, likewise with splitting our 7 up into 3 and 4 members. We play as a group because it is fun to play with our friends. If anything my own group has been very interested in seeing 12 man groups implemented. I understand the desire is to prevent premade groups from stomping random groups, but you are simply trading which group feels the pain within the matchmaking system. I suspect many of the matchmaking issues could be helped by having more people in the matchmaking pool so as to have a greater likelihood of there being available premade and random groups to match against. Also, we've found that having those 1-2 random players join us when we are a group of 6-7 has been very beneficial to recruiting.

Edited by 3ffigy, 12 October 2012 - 09:05 PM.

[CrashieJ]

does this mean that the character account wipes have been pushed back also?

[Metalice99]

Was seriously doubting the direction the devs were taking, and was evaluating whether i wanted to be a part of it any more. Thankfully, this announcement has cleared up any doubt i had and has reinvigorated my faith in MWO. Founders time flexibility and rushed open beta were the two massive issues on my mind, and have both been addressed professionally, and you have obviously taken on board what your hordes of rabid (yet loyal) beta testers have been shouting at you. Now go forth and continue with the vision!

[Angst]

vijil, on 12 October 2012 - 08:32 PM, said:

Overall, great. I speak as a PUG but even if I was a premade player this would be great.

Perhaps however a better way to do groups:
_______
A: Groups of 4 or less are allowed in the pool with PUGs, Ideally with a similar group on the other side, but this would not be a requirement. The idea here being to expose new players to team tactics. Class matching would still apply.

B: Groups of 5 or more will have to play other groups of 5 or more, with a warning that it may not be fair numbers wise OR allow a few pugs to even the numbers if the team is happy to do so, but still always 2 groups of at least 5 facing each other. NO class matching here. Want to try out 8 jenners vs 8 atlas? Go for it. Premades should be allowed to find their own effective combinations.
_______
[edit: Ninja'd to the same basic idea. Great minds think alike!]

How would you determine which pugs got stuck in as the randoms in these matches, without a seperate queue for full-group games and perhaps the built in voice comms we have ?

There needs to be a lobby of sorts to accomplish any of this that you guys are talking about.

They're limiting it to 4 man lances so that there is more possibility that a team of pugs can beat a team with a group on it. It's the same model that WoT uses, though they only allow 3 man platoons in a 15v15 game. Consider ourselves lucky that we get 4 man lances in an 8v8 game. It's to lessen the group effect in the vast majority of random games, especially when this goes 12v12 eventually.

That being said, the company battle mode in WoT that this seems to be modeled on forces you to put a full team together (you make your team, and then people can queue into a seperate MM queue to join the pre-made battles I think would be the way to do it), and there is a decent UI to do it, even though iirc it still matches you randomly for the most part. I get the gripe about teams of greater than 4, but from playing a *lot* of WoT, I don't necessarily see PGI ever re-enabling the pug-stomp type games that most of us are used to. I would expect it to be max teams of 4 in random games from here on out.

I think groups of less than maximum size and greater than 4 probably won't be supported overall, especially when we get to 12 man teams. Don't really see how it will brutalize teams, clearly they'll have to give people with the in-between groups an outlet to fill out their groups or drop down into the randoms. Maybe the rewards for winning a grouped game will be better than the randoms too. *shrug* Just my thoughts.

Edited by Angst, 12 October 2012 - 09:11 PM.

[Butane9000]

Another comment. Allow groups of 4 to match in together, not just a lance (4) then 4 pugs or a incomplete 4 man group. Though that should definitely be an option.

[Squidhead Jax]

HandofBane, on 12 October 2012 - 08:09 PM, said:

Now wait a damn minute. So you are saying the "solution" to matchmaking is to completely **** on folks who run in smaller groups bigger than a single lance?

It seems so

Until CW is in, I really think there should just be an extra weighting based on group size in the matchmaker.

[Sir Roland MXIII]

By the way, I felt the urge to create a poll between Beorning / Vijil's MM suggestion and the Phase One & Two MM presented here.

Find it here in Suggestions:
http://mwomercs.com/...2-mm-how-about/

Edited by Sir Roland MXIII, 12 October 2012 - 09:21 PM.

[Eastern Wind]

Thank you, Paul