Jump to content

[Idea] Balancing Premade Groups In Phase X


3 replies to this topic

Poll: Do you like the ideas bellow (read the post before voting)? (12 member(s) have cast votes)

Do you like groupings like 2+6, 3+5, and so on? (explained in the first post)

  1. yes (11 votes [91.67%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 91.67%

  2. no (1 votes [8.33%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 8.33%

Do you think it will be easy to find matches with these groupings in place? (explained in the first post)

  1. yes (11 votes [91.67%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 91.67%

  2. no (1 votes [8.33%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 8.33%

Do you think total tonnage is a good balancing? (explained below - please suggest others)

  1. yes (7 votes [58.33%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 58.33%

  2. no (5 votes [41.67%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 41.67%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Darkblood

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Patron
  • The Patron
  • 370 posts
  • LocationBrazil

Posted 21 November 2012 - 12:05 PM

This is my idea to fix the following perceived problem: PGI is having a hard time trying to find a matchmaking that (1) separates PUGs from Premades and (2) allow people to find matches in a sensible time frame.

(DISCLAIMER: this may not be the problem at all, but since they are obscure about it we have no choice but guessing...)

My idea is to separate them completely (I wanted to include a poll to that, but they only allow three questions), if you launch on your own you´ll be aways facing only people that dropped on their own. Even a two-man group is excluded from this queue. In this case matching weight classes is fine and you can find matches pretty quickly.

Premades: there might be a problem if you try to match two groups with exact: Number of players AND composition (in terms of weight classes). So my suggestion is:

First the matchmaking "groups groups": the following combinations are possible:

2+6 (8) <- means: a group of 2 players and a group of 6
3+5 (8)
4+4 (8)
2+5 (7)
3+4 (7)
8
7

Then you build opposing teams with the same number of mechs, so you have many options of 8 vs 8 and 7 vs 7 matches, 8 vs 8 being most probable. It gets even easier if you allow 6 vs 6 matches (then you get 6, 2+4, 3+3 combinations too)

For balance you could use the total mech weight in the team, plus or minus 10%-15% (can be fine tuned later) - the same used in tabletop for ages. Of course people running a team with 8 commandos or 8 atlases might have a hard time finding a match - but they´ll know the cause of that.

Edited by Darkblood, 02 December 2012 - 05:16 AM.


#2 Cayote

    Member

  • Pip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 19 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 09:17 PM

I believe this is a confusing, bad poll. No worthwhile results can be determined by it.

#3 SuperSpaceWhale

    Rookie

  • 5 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 09:57 PM

I think the poll is easy enough to understand. If they ever get around to reforming the matchmaking system or adding more options for finding matches, than what he is suggesting will most definitely work. I think it would work regardless though....

#4 Darkblood

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Patron
  • The Patron
  • 370 posts
  • LocationBrazil

Posted 22 November 2012 - 05:44 AM

View PostCayote, on 21 November 2012 - 09:17 PM, said:

I believe this is a confusing, bad poll. No worthwhile results can be determined by it.


I guess the pool is quite obscure if you don't read my post, and sadly I have no way of putting the pool after the explanatory text. Anyway, I just added a warning besides each question so that people read my post before answering.





2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users