262 replies to this topic

[Elandyll]

Joseph Mallan, on 24 January 2013 - 08:28 AM, said:

that is what I said. I will drop with 2-3 other teammates and the remainder of PUGs and I will likely face a 2-4 man + the remainder of PUGs. So if My 2 man+ 6PUGs drops against a 4man + 4 PUGs, shouldn't i be complaining as much as PUGs? I am obviously being treated Unfairly since I was only a 2 man and the other side had a full 4 man! WHy aren't I complaining that it's unfair to ME(and my teammate)?

No. The Matchmaking will not make sure to drop you against another premade, it can be any mix of premade(s) and pug, or just pug.

But yes, you can also face another premade that will be larger than you, it's the current dice roll. Heck, you can even have to face 2x premades, or fall in a group with another pre-made besides your own, the Matchmaker is THAT F* up.

[Joseph Mallan]

Elandyll, on 24 January 2013 - 08:32 AM, said:

No. The Matchmaking will not make sure to drop you against another premade, it can be any mix of premade(s) and pug, or just pug.

But yes, you can also face another premade that will be larger than you, it's the current dice roll. Heck, you can even have to face 2x premades, or fall in a group with another pre-made besides your own, the Matchmaker is THAT F* up.

This is why I like it the way it is! I don't know if I'm going to face the Wilson's Hussars(craptastic) or Zeta Battalion of Wolf's Dragoons(UberElite Assault force) or some force in between. It's thrilling to jump in the mix and go, 'Oh crap! These f*ckers are good' or 'Oh man that was painful to watch!' It's that whole box of chocolates thing!

[Remorse]

So late to this thread so maybe I missed this question going through all those pages but here goes. Why ask for pug stats for pug stomping? I recall that at some point it was said that pugs meet groups only every tenth match or so (dont recall if it was officiall claim or not). Now Im not a math wizard but would this regularity put the pugs' stats totally useless to this calculation due to them playing 90% of the time against each other and 5% with the premades and only got stomped 5% of their matches. Ofcourse these numbers may be well of since my recollection is not the greatest but in any case: If it isnt an every match occurance, what needs to be asked are the stats from the people who only drop in 4-mans.

Also wasnt the stage 1 of match making making both teams drop with same mech classes ( light for light, medium for medium and so on)? It has nothing to do with making matches group vs group. In fact if the groups have different compositions its more likely that they wont be in the same match on opposite sides.

[Killerwithin]

Remorse, on 24 January 2013 - 08:41 AM, said:

So late to this thread so maybe I missed this question going through all those pages but here goes. Why ask for pug stats for pug stomping? I recall that at some point it was said that pugs meet groups only every tenth match or so (dont recall if it was officiall claim or not). Now Im not a math wizard but would this regularity put the pugs' stats totally useless to this calculation due to them playing 90% of the time against each other and 5% with the premades and only got stomped 5% of their matches. Ofcourse these numbers may be well of since my recollection is not the greatest but in any case: If it isnt an every match occurance, what needs to be asked are the stats from the people who only drop in 4-mans.

Also wasnt the stage 1 of match making making both teams drop with same mech classes ( light for light, medium for medium and so on)? It has nothing to do with making matches group vs group. In fact if the groups have different compositions its more likely that they wont be in the same match on opposite sides.

I would have to say every single match you drop into there is a premade somewhere either 4 or 8 man on either your side or their side. The likelyhood of you dropping into a pure 8 solo pug group is slim to none where as you a solo pug are simply filling in the empty gaps of other searching matches be it 4 mans or 8 mans.

[Thirdstar]

Remorse, on 24 January 2013 - 08:41 AM, said:

Why ask for pug stats for pug stomping? I recall that at some point it was said that pugs meet groups only every tenth match or so (dont recall if it was officiall claim or not). Now Im not a math wizard but would this regularity put the pugs' stats totally useless to this calculation due to them playing 90% of the time against each other and 5% with the premades and only got stomped 5% of their matches.

I see this one has joined the pantheon of MWO myths.

Said statement was by a community manager. Some details may vary but the gist is that he played 10-20 matches, then went to get the stats from the backend/metrics. Hence this story that keeps going around.

I hope I don't have to tell you why this statement should not be taken as any kind of definitive word about premade distribution.

[Ilwrath]

Thirdstar, on 24 January 2013 - 08:49 AM, said:

I see this one has joined the pantheon of MWO myths.

Said statement was by a community manager. Some details may vary but the gist is that he played 10-20 matches, then went to get the stats from the backend/metrics. Hence this story that keeps going around.

I hope I don't have to tell you why this statement should not be taken as any kind of definitive word about premade distribution.

The only stats that matter is what we can see for our selves. Get the marking of premades done and we will see if there is reason for complaints about matchmaking. I think it is.

[abloobloo]

My study, for all its flaws, it the most objective, fact based assessment of how pugs are doing that we, as a community, have available to us right now. And that will remain the case until either the devs release detailed statistics or someone else does another study with a broader sample. In the absence of any other data, I would accept this finding over anecdotal, subjective reports of pug player experience.

[JeepStuff]

Here are a couple of other flaws with your logic. Sorry if they've been said before, 13 pages is a lot of responses to swat through:

1. Time of day. When I play during prime time (the only time most of us are available to play), then the matches are all steam-rolls. 8-0 and 0-8. I'll elaborate on this in #2. But since this makes primetime no fun to play, most of the time when I'm aching to have a good game I will stay up until 1am and play from 1am to 3am, and then I'll have some good games. These good games mix with the steamrolls and polute the thing you're trying to measure. So in other words, the very problem you are trying to measure may change the behavior of the player in undesired ways. The problem (and it's a real problem) forces solo players to play at inconvenient times, which is a shame. It will all get fixed, I'm just saying right now it's a problem.

2. You assume that 1:1 equals fun. That's not necessarily true. If I played for a couple hours and all the games were split evenly between 0-8 and 8-0, that does not equal a good night because it's not that much fun to be on either side of a steamroll. The best games are the close games. And close games right now are a rare and elusive thing. Whether you are winning or losing right now, the game experience is not great. Your assumption that "1:1 = good" is not true, because if it's 1:1 with all steamrolls then it sucks, but if it's 1:1 with all close games (which is exactly what Elo matchmaking is supposed to do), then everything is working properly in my opinion. But you aren't measuring close games, you're just measuring 1:1, which is not a good indicator of anything.

EDITED for clarity.

Edited by EJT, 24 January 2013 - 11:53 AM.

[Wraith05]

Critical Fumble, on 24 January 2013 - 08:29 AM, said:

He'd still have a gaping hole in the research. Without a control you can't legitimately say that something has an effect or not. You'd need that group playing in a premade team free environment and another containing premades. Probably not going to happen.

If you were testing for a variable you'd be right. But we aren't testing a variable to answer why something happens we are just testing to see what the average pug win loss ratio is with the current matchmaker. To do that all we need is data from random people solo queuing. And lots of it.

Using control groups would be if you were trying to answer why something is happening. Such as why do pugs have a win loss ratio below one? Then you'd set up a control group of pure pug on pug and test the variables such as trial mechs mc groups in queue etc to find which is actually causing the loss.

[a rabid chihuahua]

THIS IS MAAAAATTTTTHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!! gonnna have another beer now*

[Dagger6T6]

Thirdstar, on 23 January 2013 - 07:57 PM, said:

Study is flawed because he has 31 data points. 31! Yeeesh

But sure lets have another flame war because OP think 31 is a reasonable sample.

3 out of 4 dentists is good enough for the FDA and ADA

Edited by Dagger6T6, 24 January 2013 - 01:22 PM.

[LarkinOmega]

I'm actually sad to see that you're still so foolish Thirdstar.

[BLUPRNT]

I PUG alot. I win some I lose some. It seems to be more often than not a steamroll either way. Sometimes I have losing streak that seems to coincide with me trying to obtain some goal of C-Bills or XP. Sometimes I have a winning streak usually when I just jumped on to kill some time. Either way its addicting and leads to neglegance on my part to sustain a well managed lifestyle for myself and family (neglecting my duties of man of the house).

PGI, Nerf the game!

If you are having a bad PUG experience, learn, change, and adapt.

This does not speak for the new player experience that can be seen by spectating. Many o facepalm! (Which explains why I'm spectating and lost).

Edited by BLUPRNT, 24 January 2013 - 05:10 PM.

[Critical Fumble]

Wraith05, on 24 January 2013 - 01:04 PM, said:

If you were testing for a variable you'd be right. But we aren't testing a variable to answer why something happens we are just testing to see what the average pug win loss ratio is with the current matchmaker. To do that all we need is data from random people solo queuing. And lots of it.

Using control groups would be if you were trying to answer why something is happening. Such as why do pugs have a win loss ratio below one? Then you'd set up a control group of pure pug on pug and test the variables such as trial mechs mc groups in queue etc to find which is actually causing the loss.

Here's the thing, though, his question was:

abloobloo, on 23 January 2013 - 07:46 PM, said:

You often see pugs on these forums cry foul of premades. They claim that premades ruin the game, and that pugs are constantly being wiped off the map, round after round. Eventually, after hearing the anti-premade mantra over and over again, I thought to myself "is this really the case?"

He then went on to say:

Quote

I went into this with the hypothesis that the win/loss ratio of pugs would cluster at around 1:1 indicating that they are, on average, giving as good as they get.

I can largely agree that this is the case, I've mentioned that when MM decides to endow one side with a better team or simply better players than the other, there is only a one in eight chance less that you would benefit rather than lose out from that. However, his sample was:

A- pitifully small, not really his fault, but someone else did some work recently and concluded there were 6,000 players on in one given day. That number may be high, but keep in mind that to make 31 even one percent of the active playerbase there would have to be only 3,100 active players. When you take a bite out of a sandwich, some bites have more sauce than other bites, but bigger bites are more likely to have an average amount.

B- selective, again not really his fault. Well, ok, maybe kinda his fault, but it would have been a pain in the *** to get a non-selective sample. For instance, if you're trying to figure out the average income per household in your area, short of getting you hands on tax information, you need to go set up shop to gather info in a high traffic area. But you have to be careful where you set up shop - if you take information in a pricey shopping mall, you'll get far different statistic than if you set up in front of a low-end grocery store. I can't say definitively that the where his sample is from makes it faulted because I don't have statistics on it, either; but it does keep me from taking it on faith.

Because of the above two, its much more reliable to do an actual scientific test with a control. For all any of us know, the 31 people in the test could be better than the average player, and their W:L and K:D might skyrocket without the influence of premade teams, or they might be horrible and are actually just being carried by premade teams on their side; but we can't actually know unless we actually tested it.

Sidebar - the W:L K:D of your average player is not really the issue that concerns me about this game. The success of the game depends on it being fun, which is not derived from having at least a 1:1 W:L, or everyone who has less than that would leave, and then the players who's W:L dropped would leave, et cetera, until one dude was left. It may seem strange, but I have more fun losing a close match than winning in a landslide.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Dagger6T6, on 24 January 2013 - 01:22 PM, said:

3 out of 4 dentists is good enough for the FDA and ADA

31 out of how many thousands is less than 75% tho lol

[Thirdstar]

Dagger6T6, on 24 January 2013 - 01:22 PM, said:

3 out of 4 dentists is good enough for the FDA and ADA

So you're saying MWO has a grand total of a 120 players?


Edit: Ninjaed by Buddah

Edited by Thirdstar, 24 January 2013 - 10:32 PM.

[Thirdstar]

abloobloo, on 24 January 2013 - 11:26 AM, said:

My study, for all its flaws, it the most objective, fact based assessment of how pugs are doing that we, as a community, have available to us right now. And that will remain the case until either the devs release detailed statistics or someone else does another study with a broader sample. In the absence of any other data, I would accept this finding over anecdotal, subjective reports of pug player experience.

Your study is a collection of anecdotes. That's it. You have zero supporting data. You have no surveys, no follow up, no control group. Your initial sample is not verifiable, you have absolutely no way to know that data is accurate. I won't rehash the fact that player stats show nothing about whether a person is even dropping in a premade or in a PUG. Using your study would be WORSE than having nothing.

Please, go read this. http://www.amazon.co...f/dp/0393310728
It has some excellent example of how bad data can lead to bad decisions.

[Wraith05]

@ critical fumble. I wasn't arguing that his was/wasn't a flawed presentation of the information with a small sample size.

My statement in post#235 was in response to what I quoted and gave a suggested way to gather enough data to determine if the pug experience was 1:1 W/L or not. I never intended it to gather data on the grouping populations impact on the solo population. Simply a way to gather data accurately and unbiasedly, if participants were 100% honest and random, to see the distribution of a solo players experienced. This would be used to support or not support the hypothesis that the solo player population experiences a bell curved distribution of win/loss with the 1:1 being around the middle of the bell.

You then argued that my suggested method was also flawed due to a lack of control group in post 239. Which I explained in post 249 why I felt a control group was unnecessary for what I had outlined in post 235.

edit: though in the end it really doesn't matter because I'm too lazy to actually go through with the gathering and analyzing of data and frankly just don't give a damn.

As for what you said about his study, I mostly agree.

Sorry for any confusion. =)

Edited by Wraith05, 24 January 2013 - 10:34 PM.

[Thirdstar]

Wraith05, on 24 January 2013 - 10:31 PM, said:

edit: though in the end it really doesn't matter because I'm too lazy to actually go through with the gathering and analyzing of data and frankly just don't give a damn.

Ugh. I can understand the feeling in your edit. I'm bloody tired of this. I spent 3 pages arguing with Yokaiko and I was just wearied by the end. I had another longish post typed up and then just said F*&K it.

Bah.

Edited by Thirdstar, 24 January 2013 - 10:43 PM.

[MischiefSC]

So I've been asking every single match 'Any premades? If not, do you want to X?' with X being whatever simple direction seems like a good choice for the map.

I'm only getting responses from anyone about being a premade every 7 or 8 games in the evening, about every other game at peak times. Interesting I seem to be on the opposite side of premades more often then I've got one on my own side.

As someone who PUGs exclusively I'll be the first to say that pugstomps are driven at least as much by Rambo play styles and poor tactical choices as they are by being matched with premades. The occasional premade Raven or missileboat + ECM equipped tagger teams are irritating, as are the Cat-lances (streak SRM guy, dual AC20 guy, laser guy and LRM guy. You know who you are) but they're not that common if you avoid peak playtimes.

Finding I really enjoy the game on off-peak where it's almost always pug vs pug and do not enjoy the peak playtimes. Even when there are premades on my 'team' sometimes they don't even try to give any guidance, about half the time (literally) they seem to be focused on kill-stealing or trying to get the PUGs to go meatshield for them. When premades happily announce themselves in chat and say 'we're going to X' it almost universally leads to a better organized PUG group.

I still say though that better skill-based matchmaking will do more than splitting pug/premades up. I say that as someone who only PUGs.