83 replies to this topic

[Shootu]

This thread isn't intended to be another PUG vs Premade argument. I'm also aware that PGI has plans to incorporate skill level and other factors into the match maker. My intentions here is to simply show that 4 man groups in a PUG match with 8 man teams is far too large a percentage of the overall team and has a huge influence on the outcome of a given match. It simply isn't a fair playing field and in the end I believe we need a fair playing field to retain players.

First some background. Some friends and I came over to MWO from WOT. I had over 17,000 matches in WOT when I made the move. What we found puzzling in MWO was the size of the groups allowed based on the team size. At the time there was no limit which seemed a bit extreme to us based on our experience in WOT. Now of course groups are limited to 4 but that is still extreme when one group can compose 50% of the overall team.

For those that don't know much about WOT, each team is 15 players and the maximum group size in a PUG match is 3. So at most one group can compose 20% of the overall team. We found that even at 20% of the team we could consistently run 60-70% win rates while grouped. On the rare occasion two of our groups were on the same side of the same match our win rate was easily 90+% and even then we only composed 40% of the overall team.

I believe there are lessons to be learned in this that apply to MWO. In fact, my play experience has shown the same percentages apply to MWO. When we group up with 3-4 players we have a 70%+ win rate. Some nights we never lost a match. When I play solo my win rate is 30-40% if I run during peak US hours. My win rate is higher if I play solo during non-peak hours. My assumption is that is because I'm facing less groups during non-peak hours.

So in the interest of fair play, fun, and player retention I would like to see MWO get closer to the total team percent of a group in WOT for PUG matches. Even with only two players in a group, that group will be 25% of the overall team which is probably too much but it is certainly more fair than 50%.

Now for those that will undoubtedly not like this idea please explain what the downside is to capping PUG groups at 2. 8 vs 8 premade matchups are now in the game so there is an avenue for a more competitive game. I can't see any reason for the "need" for 4 man groups in PUG's unless I simply want an advantage over random competition.

Edited: fixed a typo: none peak changed to non-peak.

Edited by Shootu, 07 December 2012 - 09:18 AM.

[Shae Starfyre]

+1

[Bloody Moon]

Exactly, big +1 from me.

PGI already have plenty of data from the 4-man team implementation to show that these teams are farming down the pugs and barely lose any games except when facing another 4-man premade.

Matchmaking for teams should slap 3 and 4 player premades into pub games only if there is another similar premade on the other side.

The other thing they should implement is something to prevent "sync dropping", it is a rather simple thing requiring only a few lines of code, but it would go a long way in balancing pug games.

Edited by Bloody Moon, 07 December 2012 - 06:30 AM.

[Shootu]

@Bloody Moon. I thought about adding a piece about the drop syncing and would like to see them address that as well. Smaller groups would make it exponentially harder to get in the same match on the same side but I would think it would be possible to "distribute" groups based on the time stamp of queue entry. In other words, if two groups come into the queue within a certain time limit of each other then put them in different matches or at the very least on separate teams. To find the appropriate time threshold some testing would need to be done of course but I would think it would be possible. It wouldn't eliminate drop syncing completely but it sure would make it a lot harder to be successful at. After a short time I suspect people would just stop trying because it wouldn't be worth the effort.

Edited by Shootu, 07 December 2012 - 10:01 AM.

[Syllogy]

-1

You would probably be surprised to see how many 3-4 man groups get rolled by teams made entirely of PUGs.

Also, this would create a massive headache for groups that want to roll together that don't have 8 people, effectively driving a wedge between singles (that don't communicate) and organized groups.

Don't forget that 12 vs. 12 is coming, and that could tip the balance.

If you want to fix the Premade vs. PUG ROFL-fest, fix the double-dropping exploit that is still being used.

Personally, I'd limit it by either only allowed 1 premade group per team, or forcing each team to have an equal number of premade groups with holes filled by PUGs.

Edited by Syllogy, 07 December 2012 - 10:09 AM.

[Dukov Nook]

The answer is not to break up the community into smaller units.

-1

[Shootu]

Syllogy, on 07 December 2012 - 10:07 AM, said:

-1

You would probably be surprised to see how many 3-4 man groups get rolled by teams made entirely of PUGs.

Also, this would create a massive headache for groups that want to roll together that don't have 8 people, effectively driving a wedge between singles (that don't communicate) and organized groups.

Thanks for the reply Syllogy. My thoughts are as follows:

What do current groups do that have have 5-7 players? See the headache number appears arbitrary. Now the headache range is 5 through 7 because everyone can't play together in one group and they don't have enough players to be an 8 man team. However, they really can play together if they wanted to by simply staying on the same TS or vent channel and drop in different games in smaller groups. We did this all the time when people was online we really enjoyed talking with. Sometimes we had 10 people on the same channel even though we was playing 4 different games. When we needed to call something out we did. It wasn't that difficult.

By preserving the current system, the argument would seem to be we have to make sure groups with 3-4 people have a good experience. What about all the others? This dynamic isn't new. It isn't going to drive any larger wedge into the community than there already is.

Syllogy, on 07 December 2012 - 10:07 AM, said:

Don't forget that 12 vs. 12 is coming, and that could tip the balance.

Under the current system, that means one group can still compose 33% of the team which I would argue is far too much influence for one group to have in a PUG match.

Syllogy, on 07 December 2012 - 10:07 AM, said:

If you want to fix the Premade vs. PUG ROFL-fest, fix the double-dropping exploit that is still being used.

Personally, I'd limit it by either only allowed 1 premade group per team, or forcing each team to have an equal number of premade groups with holes filled by PUGs.

This would imply that 4 man groups being 50% of a given team are balanced. I'm arguing they are not. Even is it is limited to one 4 man per side then the PUG's are at the mercy of which group they get stuck with since that group will essentially determine the outcome of the match. I'm arguing we limit the amount of influence any group can have on a given match by limiting the group size to 2. Smaller groups ensures a more even distribution over a given number of matches.

I believe since the game is in beta now is the time to try other ideas so see how they work out. We have more than enough data with the current system and I believe it would be pretty easy to show statistically how skewed the results have been if the data was available to the public. In MWO that data is not available to the public. In WOT that data is available to the public and the results are quite clear.

Edited by Shootu, 07 December 2012 - 12:05 PM.

[Shootu]

Dukov Nook, on 07 December 2012 - 10:07 AM, said:

The answer is not to break up the community into smaller units.

-1

Then what is the answer? See I don't have any problem with a difference of opinion. What I would like to see is a solution.

My argument is that a group should not be such a large percentage of a team that it essentially determines the outcome of a given PUG match. Your argument is what?

Smaller groups reduces the influence of a given group in any PUG match and over a large period of matches spreads the distribution more evenly. In WOT it was rare that people argued that the group size was too small in PUG matches and yet it was only 20% of the overall group. It is clear what an impact even 20% of the team had on matches over a period of time. Here we have 50%.

Edited by Shootu, 07 December 2012 - 11:58 AM.

[Elder Thorn]

minimum teams should be 3, but 3 is a strange number for Battletech so 4 is fine.

What is needed though is 12vs12

[NoxMorbis]

Yes please, make everything more safe and equal. I haven't even played since the last patch this game has gotten so boring. Weight balancing is a great example. What if we want to use lights and we WANT to be out weight classed as part of our tactics? Oh can't do that! That's forbidden, unless you're in an 8 man premade. How about just get rid of premade, group coordination completely. Make everytone except premades happy!

I just got tired of not being able to coordinate with my homies over voice using 4+ 5-6-7 or even 8 premades. It's not always viable to have 8 of your merc group on. Then we're forced to 4, and people get left out. Well, I'm not sitting earound waiting. I'm playing a different game now. Running around without coms and coordination and without people I know is about as fun as Unreal tounament. BORING.

But I understand that PUGS are the most important aspect of the game economicaly. I hope it works for PGI that way because they are losiong their cooperative, coordinated fan base. Probably doesn't matter though.

Edited by NoxMorbis, 07 December 2012 - 01:17 PM.

[Meatball095]

I agree that premades unfairly tip the balance of the battle against the team with only PUGs. However, I do not agree that premades should be limited to 2, since this will break up a lot of groups of causal friends that like to play together.

The solution is to match premades against premades. For examples:

• Team A: Party of 4 and 4 PUGs
  
• Team B: Party of 4 and 4 PUGs

or

• Team A: Party of 2, Party of 2, and 4 PUGs
  
• Team B: Party of 4 and 4 PUGs.

or

• Team A: Party of 4 and 4 PUGs
  
• Team B: Party of 2, Party of 3, and 4 PUGs

Parties on opposing teams should be matched so that the party capabilities are *about* equal. Then the PUGs should be used to make up the inequalities between the capabilities of the parties.

For example, say we had two parties of 4.

• Team A will have a party of four heavies
  
• Team B will have a party of two mediums and two heavies.
  
• Then MWO needs to assign two medium PUGs to Team A, and assign two heavies to Team B.
  
• At this point, each team has four heavies and two mediums.
  
• The remaining two PUGs should be of equal class.

That is the solution. Do not limit the ability to socialize in MWO...

Meatball095 likes this

Edited by Meatball095, 07 December 2012 - 01:19 PM.

[NoxMorbis]

I don't like the weight class balancing at all. I also don't think premades should be matched always by skill level. That removes learning from those better than you and could lead to a stale game. (You always know what you're going up against.)

Where is this balancing thing going to end? As stated above, why not blance according to everything, weapons, dps, alpha strike, speed, days old a person's account is, how much money they have spent on special items, weather or not they have been playing x amount of time (one gets out of form quickly if they don't play often) and **** it could go on until we die of F-ing bordom!

Making all things 'safe and fair' for care bears has destroyed more games that I can count. I absolutely hate not being able to use tactical choices in a game like this. For Fks sake, why not just have premade weapons groups and load outs too?

Edited by NoxMorbis, 07 December 2012 - 01:52 PM.

[Bloody Moon]

NoxMorbis, on 07 December 2012 - 01:51 PM, said:

Where is this balancing thing going to end?

When the matchmaker can no longer be abused to farm uncoordinated pug newbies as a veteran group.
You might be having fun stomping through all the newbs, but i find it quite boring both from the premade and the pug perspective.

[Willie Sauerland]

Honestly, I think the answer does not lie in the number of premades or how many are in the group of premades. What matters is the communication during the match.

First, C3 needs to be implemented. Typing in the chat while under duress is difficult at best. There are several teamspeak servers around but honestly, PGI wants to get C3 working and I think they should as soon as possible.

Second, even with just the chat, it should be used to lay out a basic plan before the match starts. The PUGs I've been on which have won (against premades, mind you) communicated.

This is a team oriented game and people need to play like it instead of lone-wolfing. I haven't been able to read my teammate's mind when they just wander off - so communication is key over any match making changes (and no, I do not PUG stomp).

Just my 2 C-Bills worth....

Edited by Willie Sauerland, 07 December 2012 - 02:28 PM.

[Shootu]

NoxMorbis, on 07 December 2012 - 01:51 PM, said:

I don't like the weight class balancing at all. I also don't think premades should be matched always by skill level. That removes learning from those better than you and could lead to a stale game. (You always know what you're going up against.)

Where is this balancing thing going to end? As stated above, why not blance according to everything, weapons, dps, alpha strike, speed, days old a person's account is, how much money they have spent on special items, weather or not they have been playing x amount of time (one gets out of form quickly if they don't play often) and **** it could go on until we die of F-ing bordom!

Making all things 'safe and fair' for care bears has destroyed more games that I can count. I absolutely hate not being able to use tactical choices in a game like this. For Fks sake, why not just have premade weapons groups and load outs too?

So your solution is to do what? Nothing? You've made two posts but haven't made any suggestions. If you don't like ours how about come up with one of your own and present it. One thing for sure is that if the developers try to do something to address this or any issue, some segment of the player base isn't going to like it because it negatively impacted their experience but it hopefully improved the experience for more players thus expanding the player base.

You ask where does the balancing end. It doesn't. If this game lasts 10 years they will be balancing it for 10 years. Meatball at least made a suggestion to counter my suggestion. Why can't we try mine, his, other's ideas to see if the game attracts and retains more players and improves the player experience?

[Shootu]

Willie Sauerland, on 07 December 2012 - 02:27 PM, said:

Honestly, I think the answer does not lie in the number of premades or how many are in the group of premades. What matters is the communication during the match.

First, C3 needs to be implemented. Typing in the chat while under duress is difficult at best. There are several teamspeak servers around but honestly, PGI wants to get C3 working and I think they should as soon as possible.

Second, even with just the chat, it should be used to lay out a basic plan before the match starts. The PUGs I've been on which have won (against premades, mind you) communicated.

This is a team oriented game and people need to play like it instead of lone-wolfing. I haven't been able to read my teammate's mind when they just wander off - so communication is key over any match making changes (and no, I do not PUG stomp).

Just my 2 C-Bills worth....

It will help. No doubt about that. I just can't help but wonder what it will be like though if we get comms from everyone on our team. WOT did not have total team comms. In game voice comms was available but only to groups. My experience tells me I would probably shut down total team comms. Why? Well in my previous experience often times the talk is nothing about the game itself and I don't care if someone just got high or is drunk or whatever else.

I was on a TS server with a WOT clan where people were bragging about their needle marks. To each their own. If someone wants to kill themselves more power to them but I really don't want to hear about their experience. It isn't my cup of tea so-to-speak.

So although I believe voice comms will help I'm not sure it is going to be the answer people are hoping it will be.

[Willie Sauerland]

Shootu, on 07 December 2012 - 02:40 PM, said:

It will help. No doubt about that. I just can't help but wonder what it will be like though if we get comms from everyone on our team. WOT did not have total team comms. In game voice comms was available but only to groups. My experience tells me I would probably shut down total team comms. Why? Well in my previous experience often times the talk is nothing about the game itself and I don't care if someone just got high or is drunk or whatever else.

I was on a TS server with a WOT clan where people were bragging about their needle marks. To each their own. If someone wants to kill themselves more power to them but I really don't want to hear about their experience. It isn't my cup of tea so-to-speak.

So although I believe voice comms will help I'm not sure it is going to be the answer people are hoping it will be.

The C3 system is supposed to create a channel for each team and automatically add you to it for the duration of the match. Once the match is done, the channel would go away and a new one created for you when you enter another match. I significantly doubt you will experience the same behavior you saw on the WOT Clan TS. Besides, since every match you will be in will have a new channel I bet the overall experience will be different from match to match.

Sure, there will be people who will not (or cannot) communicate no matter what is provided for them so I certainly don't expect it to be the whole answer. I do expect it to go a long way toward fixing the issue though.

[NoxMorbis]

Shootu, on 07 December 2012 - 02:40 PM, said:

It will help. No doubt about that. I just can't help but wonder what it will be like though if we get comms from everyone on our team. WOT did not have total team comms. In game voice comms was available but only to groups. My experience tells me I would probably shut down total team comms. Why? Well in my previous experience often times the talk is nothing about the game itself and I don't care if someone just got high or is drunk or whatever else.

I was on a TS server with a WOT clan where people were bragging about their needle marks. To each their own. If someone wants to kill themselves more power to them but I really don't want to hear about their experience. It isn't my cup of tea so-to-speak.

So although I believe voice comms will help I'm not sure it is going to be the answer people are hoping it will be.

Bloody Moon, on 07 December 2012 - 02:21 PM, said:

When the matchmaker can no longer be abused to farm uncoordinated pug newbies as a veteran group.
You might be having fun stomping through all the newbs, but i find it quite boring both from the premade and the pug perspective.

My point is that premade veterans don't need carebear "fixes" to make everything"equal." We know what we're doing, and we want CHOICE over our situation. If that means running all lights against all assualts--that choice should be our own.--Let me say it once more so you you get it--PREMADES, noy PUGs, but PREMADES don't need weight balancing because we understand what we might go up against.

What problem do you have with those of us who are playing in 8 man premades against other 8 man premades?

And I'm blown away by your statement thath in com programs there are people who you wish not to play with, so you'll just shut coms down? LOL. Wow. Why nto find people who are conducive to your personality and playstyle? What a concept.

Really man? You have no idea how to switch channels and find people you like? What do you do in real life--stay inside all the time and just "shut down life?"

Edited by NoxMorbis, 07 December 2012 - 06:56 PM.

[Socket7]

I think I found the problem with my last match... thankfully, this only seems to happen on fridays when the big premades are waiting on the rest of their gang to form up into a full 8 man group.

[Shootu]

NoxMorbis, on 07 December 2012 - 06:54 PM, said:

My point is that premade veterans don't need carebear "fixes" to make everything"equal." We know what we're doing, and we want CHOICE over our situation. If that means running all lights against all assualts--that choice should be our own.--Let me say it once more so you you get it--PREMADES, noy PUGs, but PREMADES don't need weight balancing because we understand what we might go up against.

What problem do you have with those of us who are playing in 8 man premades against other 8 man premades?

And I'm blown away by your statement thath in com programs there are people who you wish not to play with, so you'll just shut coms down? LOL. Wow. Why nto find people who are conducive to your personality and playstyle? What a concept.

Really man? You have no idea how to switch channels and find people you like? What do you do in real life--stay inside all the time and just "shut down life?"

Ok Nox, you can go troll elsewhere now. It should be pretty clear this thread has nothing to do with 8 vs 8 premade teams... Hence PUG used everywhere including the title.