159 replies to this topic

[Kraven Kor]

Serapth, on 04 January 2013 - 04:32 PM, said:

I agree completely though, the fix is in making the matchmaker not suck. A fix that should be fairly trivial to implement.

How do you know that?

Have you coded a matchmaker for a Multiplayer Shooter game?

I haven't. I've got some coder friends so I have some inkling that "computers are hard," but I don't know how simple this would be, I don't know what the unintended consequences would be, and I know that anything they did choose to look into implementing would be months down the road, where the matchmaker fixes they have proposed are already being coded, tested, and QA'd.

[Alcatraz968]

Why can't premade's complain about how bad pugs are????

[Serapth]

Kraven Kor, on 04 January 2013 - 04:59 PM, said:

How do you know that?

Have you coded a matchmaker for a Multiplayer Shooter game?

I haven't. I've got some coder friends so I have some inkling that "computers are hard," but I don't know how simple this would be, I don't know what the unintended consequences would be, and I know that anything they did choose to look into implementing would be months down the road, where the matchmaker fixes they have proposed are already being coded, tested, and QA'd.

Very similar, yes. I've worked for game dev companies in the past and currently run a game programming tutorial site. I've also done some major server side development ( granted, banking teller network, but still realtime, and probably a hell of a lot more complicated than a game, although lower latency but a hell of a lot more security ). I also have a small amount of hobbyist experience with CryEngine.

So yeah, I am somewhat qualified to make that statement.


Now, it could be hard to add such logic to the matchmaker... but if that is the case, it's because their design was horrible, which would bode really badly for the future as they add more functionality to the matchmaker.

Edited by Serapth, 04 January 2013 - 05:04 PM.

[Nuclear Weapon]

*sigh*

Im amuzed about how many threads can exist with the very same topic at once xD

[Serapth]

Nuclear Weapon, on 04 January 2013 - 05:03 PM, said:

*sigh*

Im amuzed about how many threads can exist with the very same topic at once xD

Is that kinda telling that there might be a problem?

[Horned Bull]

Alcatraz968, on 04 January 2013 - 05:01 PM, said:

Why can't premade's complain about how bad pugs are????

You probably missed like a half of the "pug vs premade" threads. A week ago there was a thread exclusively about how bad pub players are by trolling_premade_cooldudes.

[Serapth]

Korm, on 04 January 2013 - 05:08 PM, said:

You probably missed like a half of the "pug vs premade" threads. A week ago there was a thread exclusively about how bad pub players are by trolling_premade_cooldudes.

Korm, on 04 January 2013 - 05:08 PM, said:

You probably missed like a half of the "pug vs premade" threads. A week ago there was a thread exclusively about how bad pub players are by trolling_premade_cooldudes.

No doubt with mandatory screenshot of their 1100 damage round, to prove how large their e-peen is.

[Inviticus]

In order to promote longevity and a fair experience for everyone, premades should NEVER be matched against a pure PuG group. It's insanity to expect this kind of situation to encourage anything other than the demise of the game...

[Kraven Kor]

Serapth, on 04 January 2013 - 05:05 PM, said:

Is that kinda telling that there might be a problem?

Everyone wants to pay less in taxes. Does that mean we should lower taxes?

Everyone wants to be famous. Should everyone actually be famous?

Most everyone thinks their boss is a @#$%. Is everyone's boss in fact a @#$%?

The number of threads indicate a lot of people believe this is a problem. They may even be right. But you simply can't just make every change the vocal minority or even majority clamor for. PGI has to weigh their decisions, and again unless someone shows me a snippet of the current MM code and how they would fix it - so simply - then I have to at least ask: "Do you know for a fact it would be that easy? Can you predict every possible permutation, scenario, cheat, or bug?"

Inviticus, on 04 January 2013 - 05:12 PM, said:

In order to promote longevity and a fair experience for everyone, premades should NEVER be matched against a pure PuG group. It's insanity to expect this kind of situation to encourage anything other than the demise of the game...

Then how did Battlefield Bad Company survive, where most games I joined - at the start, and now - were on private servers, ran by a clan usually running their guys together on TS and stomping the other team, over and over again?

[Serapth]

Kraven Kor, on 04 January 2013 - 05:18 PM, said:

Everyone wants to pay less in taxes. Does that mean we should lower taxes?

Everyone wants to be famous. Should everyone actually be famous?

Most everyone thinks their boss is a @#$%. Is everyone's boss in fact a @#$%?

The number of threads indicate a lot of people believe this is a problem. They may even be right. But you simply can't just make every change the vocal minority or even majority clamor for. PGI has to weigh their decisions, and again unless someone shows me a snippet of the current MM code and how they would fix it - so simply - then I have to at least ask: "Do you know for a fact it would be that easy? Can you predict every possible permutation, scenario, cheat, or bug?"

If the majority of the user base want something changed, yes, they very much should change it. Or, if for game reasons they cannot change it, they should simply explain why.

Having a large part of the community crying out about a problem ( premades vs pugs, ECM, streaks, etc... ) to only be greated by deafening silence from the developers.... that's a problem.

If PGI came out and said "Yeah, we can't put a premade on each team because of ____", that would silence a great many of these threads.

They dont.

Thus the threads.


Hopefully that is why they are hiring this person. That said, the fact it says nothing about communicating with anyone other than a marketing guy doesn't inspire a ton of hope.

Edited by Serapth, 04 January 2013 - 05:24 PM.

[Horned Bull]

Serapth, on 04 January 2013 - 05:22 PM, said:

If the majority of the user base want something changed, yes, they very much should change it. Or, if for game reasons they cannot change it, they should simply explain why.

Having a large part of the community crying out about a problem ( premades vs pugs, ECM, streaks, etc... ) to only be greated by deafening silence from the developers.... that's a problem.

If PGI came out and said "Yeah, we can't put a premade on each team because of ____", that would silence a great many of these threads.

They dont.

Thus the threads.


Hopefully that is why they are hiring this person. That said, the fact it says nothing about communicating with anyone other than a marketing guy doesn't inspire a ton of hope.

Actually there was a Paul's post where he stated, that devs aren't happy with the current matchmaker and pubstomping. Sadly I forgot to screencap it.

[Inviticus]

Kraven Kor, on 04 January 2013 - 05:19 PM, said:

Then how did Battlefield Bad Company survive, where most games I joined - at the start, and now - were on private servers, ran by a clan usually running their guys together on TS and stomping the other team, over and over again?

There is no comparison. Players have options as to what kind of experience they want. Options we do not have. We're forced to fight whatever the matchmaker gives us therefore the matchmaker needs to be changed in order to promote fair fights which means at the very least, equal numbers of premade teams on either side.

Other games are able to do this so why not this one?

[Kraven Kor]

Inviticus, on 04 January 2013 - 05:46 PM, said:

There is no comparison. Players have options as to what kind of experience they want. Options we do not have. We're forced to fight whatever the matchmaker gives us therefore the matchmaker needs to be changed in order to promote fair fights which means at the very least, equal numbers of premade teams on either side.

Other games are able to do this so why not this one?

Uh, so as a new player to BFBC:2, I knew how to find servers more suited to my skill level... how?

Mostly I was doing the random servers, ranked matches - just "play now" or whatever - and half the time ending up on the opposite end of one unholy *** kicking.

All I am saying is, I don't understand how "getting stomped by a premade" in this game, is so much worse than my own experiences getting stomped by experienced players in more online games than I can count. How will it kill MWO if it didn't kill some umpteen other online games (from just the limited library I have played) over the years?

[Wraith05]

So I've read some of the suggestions here but I don't think we found one that will work fully quite yet.

My favorite so far is the 4 man pre-made per team.

In theory I like it, but what about groups of 2-3? When I pug and ask if anyone is a group most common answer I get is "In a 2 man group" So would they be considered pugs or the premade per team? Would the other team be matched with an equal number premade? Will it only be 1 pre made per team?

Pug only queue.

Good for pugs, bad for pre-mades. And not because of pug stomping but because even if the pre-mades don't want to admit it. We need pugs to fill out games and keep being matched against different people. So my fear of this feature is if you take the pugs out of the queues you'll just end up with a smaller version of the 8 man queue. Long waits, hard to find games, and 1-2 viable top builds due to no weight restrictions.

It's a team game so join a team:

I understand not wanting to be on team speak all the time. Sometimes I just want to play the game and not talk to others. I still work as a team, but I don't want to listen to the idle chat in the server. Or hear about 1 guy did this awesome shot, or bragging about how good he is.

So no, telling pugs to just join a clan/team is not an option for everyone. But at the same time when I do pug, I pug with the knowledge I'm getting put into a group of randoms so I expect the teamwork to be random from worthless teammates to a spartan phalanx.

And finally just a request to both pugs and premades.

Pug's: Please stop assuming that your 0-8 loss was due to premades unless they said so in chat or you saw the same group of people 2 games +.

Also stop assuming premades group together as a crutch or just to pugstomp. Most of them don't most premades group because they like the team aspect of this game and like working together with clanmates/friends/even strangers.

Premades: Stop assuming pugs suck at this game. They don't they just choose to do a random groups no matter the reason. And 1 or 2 bad apples will make the whole batch look rotten in a game. Just like if we were to fight an 8vs8 and one team's scouts decided to run up and stand in front of us (extreme example). That team would lose badly.

And also be more accepting to your pug allies. Talk to them, explain why things go bad and how to fix it next time. Be open and warm and help them find groups if they want or ways to improve their gameplay in a nice way.

Rant done!

Edited by Wraith05, 04 January 2013 - 06:05 PM.

[Serapth]

Kraven Kor, on 04 January 2013 - 04:15 PM, said:

And again, when I PUG, and I'm not that great, I'm getting around a 50/50 win rate. So empirical evidence seems to support my opinion, or at least from my own experience.

Since you wrote this, I played about 15 matches, and I think I won 3. I believe about 8 were 8-0 8-1 wipes. In all that time I think I did less that 250 damage once ( generally in a hunchback ), so its not like im a terrible player.

I am not calling you a liar, but I can't imagine anyone that pugs regularly has a 50/50 win/loss ratio.

[IceSerpent]

Serapth, on 04 January 2013 - 03:40 PM, said:

Frankly, I cant fathom a reason why people wouldn't support adding a premade to each side of the match. The only argument that holds water is they enjoy pugstomping/stat padding.

Nobody opposes the idea, those of us on the Evil Premade ™ side of the barricade simply don't care what happens to the PUG queue. What we do care about is what happens to 8v8 queue (just because it's our sandbox) and inability to drop with less than 8 people is a major problem. Inability to drop against a specified opponent is another major problem. Lack of some sort of BV-like restrictions is also a big issue (slightly less major though). In other words, the root of all this pug vs. premade debate is that we got a sandbox, but haven't got any sand in it yet.

[Kraven Kor]

Serapth, on 04 January 2013 - 06:11 PM, said:

Since you wrote this, I played about 15 matches, and I think I won 3. I believe about 8 were 8-0 8-1 wipes. In all that time I think I did less that 250 damage once ( generally in a hunchback ), so its not like im a terrible player.

I am not calling you a liar, but I can't imagine anyone that pugs regularly has a 50/50 win/loss ratio.

Serapth, on 04 January 2013 - 06:11 PM, said:

Since you wrote this, I played about 15 matches, and I think I won 3. I believe about 8 were 8-0 8-1 wipes. In all that time I think I did less that 250 damage once ( generally in a hunchback ), so its not like im a terrible player.

I am not calling you a liar, but I can't imagine anyone that pugs regularly has a 50/50 win/loss ratio.

I'm only going from memory; I PUG, I do 4-man, I do 8-man and it doesn't divide my stats up.

I doubt I'm exactly 50/50 when PUGging, but I'm not seeing 8, 9, 12 matches in a row where I lose. I'll lose 2 or 3, at least one an 8/0 stomp, then win 1 or 2, then lose one, win 2, etc. I even am on the winning side of 8/0 stomps when PUGging, on occasion.

[Horned Bull]

Serapth, on 04 January 2013 - 06:11 PM, said:

Since you wrote this, I played about 15 matches, and I think I won 3. I believe about 8 were 8-0 8-1 wipes. In all that time I think I did less that 250 damage once ( generally in a hunchback ), so its not like im a terrible player.

I am not calling you a liar, but I can't imagine anyone that pugs regularly has a 50/50 win/loss ratio.

I pug only and I can assure you it's actually possible.

Edit:

Shortly after introduction of Step 2 my ratio went over 50%. Recently due to some pretty bad loses my win/lose ratio is close to 50% again.

Edited by Korm, 04 January 2013 - 06:45 PM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Serapth, on 04 January 2013 - 03:32 PM, said:

Now, if the matchmaker guaranteed a premade on each side of the fight... that then is balanced AND would lead to actually interesting fights instead of a one side stat padding exercise.

You are asking for a fair fight in a war/combat simulation game. But how can the game be fair when one side insists on playing with half a deck, blindfolded, and muzzled? Premades use Chat servers to communicate. MWO has a dedicated Team Chat Server for the PUGs to use. Do the PUGs use it? YES. and they have just increased their chances of winning. If you bring a knife to a gun fight, you get what you asked for! I can tell when my 4 man runs into an 8 man team. Their coordination is better, and because of that they dominate. When it happens to us we go, "8 Man? Yeah. Ouch! Yeah. Ready up lets go again." No whine, just acceptance that the better team just won, and move on! We don't blame the 8 man for being better than us. We try to learn from the experience and apply the lessons next game.

[Faldrin]

Only a average player but only 100% pug and getting a close to 50/50 win lose rate is possible. I am pro pug only option as a lot of people on here will know.

But I am sitting at about a 40% win rate and never got a pre-game in. The reason I am so pro pug only option is not to do with stat padding, sinc-drops (that don't happen that often but is not needed as 4 man is a major game winner) or am bad blah blah blah.
But in closed beta the best games was when it was 100% pug they was always fun. Yes there was some 8-0 stomps but they was rare to the point of seeing it like once every 20 games. And its the fun games that keep new players playing. I disagree with Kraven Kor view on this but I don't believe he is lying at all.

Just think he is wrong on he overall view.

Edited by Faldrin, 04 January 2013 - 06:57 PM.