260 replies to this topic

[MischiefSC]

@Dimento Graven;

Of all the things I hold against my first wife throwing away all my original Battletech stuff is literally at the top of the list. If I'd known I would have packed less clothes and more gaming stuff when I left. I still remember how jazzed I was when the Citytech box came out. I'm very familiar with the origin of Battletech and tt gaming, I still play TT quite a bit. You can't really play TT solo so there's no dispute to it being an inherently social game.

Elo is being touted as part of the 3rd expansion or stage of the matchmaking system so I'm confident that it'll make it into the matchmaking process.

I'm also not debating the future of the game since all of it is purely speculative at this point.

As to premade vs pugging, as someone who only pugs I can say that unless most premades scatter like cats at a firework display the majority of games I play in my team is pure pug. Dropping as part of a premade is inherently going to skew your perspective since 100% of those drops will involve a premade. Playing pug 100% of the time I'd say that it's less than 1 in 4 drops I even vaguely suspect that 4 players on my side are a premade. I'm not even counting 2x drops as premade - we're just talking groups large enough to field a significant tactical advantage via communication. A 2x helps obviously but it's not like they can carry a whole team of people who are only NOT shooting themselves in the head because the game doesn't allow it.

My point though comes back to two things:

First, gaming populations favor a large, quiet, solo contingent. Even WoW has a large solo contingency, so much so that Blizzard had to expand the number of instances you could do without a group and had to create 'group only' instances specifically to try and force people to group up. Even at that many are done by people who find people to group with via chat and not guilds. Regardless of how you feel the game is designed to be played the majority of game players globally, in the US and Europe, in games of any sort or stripe you want to mention like to solo some if not most to all of the time. Unless your opinion is that PGI should write off the bulk of gamers who would otherwise play their game (and hopefully pay them) you can't just ignore that.

Second, if PGI took your approach to the game they'd drive away everyone who would go to teamspeak and groups later but wants to try the game solo first. It's your opinion and as such can't be argued for or against by anyone but you however as an approach 'play like X or screw yourself' is a bordering on irrational approach to selling any product. This is why WoW (which I've never played and never would but that's beside the point) is the only successful subscription MMO left. It takes a 'play pretty much however you want, but you're encouraged to join guilds and group if you want to advance'.

Not that I think MWO should follow the WoW lead by any example but there is a world of difference in any game or service product between what gets people in the door and what keeps them.

Pugging will get people into MWO.

CW/player groups keep them.

If you focus your game on the CW/groups/teamspeak you'll never get people in long enough to invest.

I pug exclusively. I have about a 45% win rate over 440 games, including ~150 where I was a total n00b or where I was trying to get a centurion build I liked (doomed to failure where I was a dead weight to my team). I'd say my win/loss rate is about 50% now, which isn't bad for exclusive pugging.

Where you find a problem is with people having a win rate of over 60% with premades. That indicates that there are puggers with less than a 30% win rate. These are people you're in danger of losing. Match them up with each other and not experienced players and the problem largely solves itself.

So where are you getting this vocal minority who wants to, what, outlaw teamspeak? Somehow I'm missing that. What, exactly, are you concerned is going to happen or get made to happen?

[N0MAD]

What gets me is the asumption that there is only a premade on one team every game, that everytime a team get beaten its because a premade of 4 has just stomped a group of 8 pugs. 4 mans being so common would mean that the chances are Very high that if there is a premade of some sort on one team there is an Equal chance there is a premade on the other team.
Again pls show some hard evidence this is not the case. Till you can show evidence that in the majority of games where there is one premade on one side and not the other all arguments in this debate are mute.

[Lorcan Lladd]

N0MAD, on 28 January 2013 - 06:03 PM, said:

What gets me is the asumption that there is only a premade on one team every game, that everytime a team get beaten its because a premade of 4 has just stomped a group of 8 pugs. 4 mans being so common would mean that the chances are Very high that if there is a premade of some sort on one team there is an Equal chance there is a premade on the other team.
Again pls show some hard evidence this is not the case. Till you can show evidence that in the majority of games where there is one premade on one side and not the other all arguments in this debate are mute.

You would be correct if the matchmaking process were completely random.

The matchmaker in MWO puts all players immediately available in the queue on a match; even though 4-man groups are now much more common than the 8-man groups used to be, they are still only a minority in the server population and it is unlikely that two teams will drop simultaneously at any time unless they are synchronizing their drops.
In addition, the matchmaker does not discriminate between a group and solo players when it attempts to fill up the available slots on each team.

As a result, a group will most often be matched against solo players and since groups fill up to four slots in a team at once, there is also a significant chance that two groups will end up in the same team.

[Velba]

Shooting is an exploit too I heard.

[N0MAD]

You have presented your opinion not documented fact sir, i need fact not opinion. You say Random that implies there is random chance that both teams get a premade. You claim that 4 mans are a minority that would suggest that MOST matches are between two 8 man pugs therefore disputting the fact that premades are causing the pugstomps.

[Dimento Graven]

Serapth, on 28 January 2013 - 05:41 PM, said:

20% polled????

Seriously?

There is NO poll that polls even close to 20%... A gallop poll might survey a few thousand, to represent a sampling size of millions!


That said, it's pretty easily calculated.

For a 5% margin of error, with a population size of 5000, the recommended minimum sampling size is 357.




With a 10% margin of error, a sample size of under 100 is acceptable.

Which is why you NEVER trust a poll. You're willing to say that 357 people is 95% accurate of what 5000 people want? No, 'fraid not, that's stupid.

But of course, "...there's lies, damn lies, and then statistics..."

[MischiefSC]

Premades are not the source of pugstomps. Disconnects, AFKs and suicidal rambos (You all go that way, I'm going to run through the tunnel alone and not communicate with anyone) are the source of pugstomps.

[Onyx Rain]

Greyfyl, on 26 January 2013 - 07:55 AM, said:

Actually it's pretty easy since those same people don't want anything to do with putting premades on both teams. If you are truly playing in TS just to "have the fun of playing with their friends" then why would you possibly care if the other team also has people on it who just enjoy "playing on a coordinated team".

Be a man and just admit that you are enjoying playing with an advantage. Nothing wrong with that, the developers have handed you that advantage for the time being, but quit pretending that it has nothing to do with being in easy mode.




This is a real winner of a post here. So now playing on TS is actually a disadvantage? Wow, who would have guessed. Maybe you guys should be allowed to go back to 8 man groups vs pugs to compensate for having the confusion of being in TS.

You people seriously are freaking hilarious with the extents you will go to just to keep the pugstomping train a-rolling.

I played both...pugs and pre-mades...and probably every mix... I prefer equal teams, premade vs premade...pug vs pug.... I'm sure there are people out there that just want the easy button win... I'm not one of them. So where does that leave your argument? I'm the one exception? ...or am I the rule?

I used to be the guy who complained about ts groups in games...until it struck me.. THAT IS THE GAME! I could do it too. I'm complaining about being to lazy or antisocial to take advantage of a gameplay aspect that is there for almost anyone who wants it...it is free, and a head set costs less then a decent mouse. I could play my fps with the arrow keys and no mouse and get some kills but with a mouse I do much better....but hey my mouse broke!!! Ok everyone stop using mice...until i get mine fixed! Hey that guy's monitor is bigger then mine and he doesn't need glasses...stop the game! haxxx!! cheat!!! He should be half blind and have to play on a small monitor like me!...OMG i'm on dial up and this guy has highspeed...no fair he is a cheater!!! Separate rooms for dial up people so we don't have to play highspeed people!!! (would have been nice i suppose if not unrealistic)

Same basic arguments, and when I realized how absurd it was and what a whiner I was for jumping on others who used TS or vent, etc.etc... I stopped. Now it is your turn...stop, because it is stupid and pointless. If you have to rail and whine to someone, then talk to the devs because only they will change it...you'll never convince the masses.

[AEgg]

Dimento Graven, on 28 January 2013 - 06:34 PM, said:

Which is why you NEVER trust a poll. You're willing to say that 357 people is 95% accurate of what 5000 people want? No, 'fraid not, that's stupid.

But of course, "...there's lies, damn lies, and then statistics..."

He's missing one of the most critical parts of that handy little widget. The sample has to be purely random. If the sample is random, yes, ~357 is enough for a fairly accurate representation of 5000.

If it's a public poll, it's not random, and is thus undoubtedly skewed in one direction or another. If people can decide if they want to respond, then the poll is in fact mostly useless. The only exceptions are if the sample size is huge or you already know the distribution and just want to see who is more likely to respond to a poll.

Edit:To the OP, which we seem to have drifted away from, by only the facts, teamspeak is in fact not all that different from outright hacks, as they're both free third party programs that give you a large advantage. (Hacks aren't technically an exploit though, as they aren't part of the game. Exploits are things like falling through the level or getting people stuck on geometry).

However, it's not fair to call TS/Vent/Skype/Etc. an exploit or even bad. What you really should be calling a problem is lack of integrated VOIP. No one wants to "ban" teamspeak. People just want a built in system. Even with teamspeak it's impossible to use voice chat with the people you are randomly matched with.

Edited by AEgg, 28 January 2013 - 07:00 PM.

[Thomas Covenant]

Wraith05, on 28 January 2013 - 08:21 AM, said:

Yes but I haven't seen a computer yet that doesn't have speakers. You don't need a mic or headset to use TS3. Now the other reasons you mentioned are personal reasons so it is accessable to them, they just choose not to use it due to these reasons. And that is OK. I am not trying to force anyone into it but I don't see it as unfair.

As for MWO not having/supporting VOIP.... the C3 is an option in the settings. So they will be putting it in or already have it linked.

If you don't have a mic my understanding is no you can't talk into most computers.

Not having somewhere quite enough, or being in a place that is inappropriate to be talking is personal, but not really a choice for many people, its the reality.
Using a computer and talking aloud have very different requirements to be accessible.

[Wraith05]

Thomas Covenant, on 28 January 2013 - 07:35 PM, said:

If you don't have a mic my understanding is no you can't talk into most computers.

Not having somewhere quite enough, or being in a place that is inappropriate to be talking is personal, but not really a choice for many people, its the reality.
Using a computer and talking aloud have very different requirements to be accessible.

When I started playing MWO my headset broke (no sound, no mic). I only had speakers for the sound. I still got on the TS for the coordination, and the icon showed that I had no mic so it wasn't like I was hiding this fact from the playerbase. They still asked me to group with them, still played with me and still acted like a team. All I did was listen and type out a response once in a while.

You only need a mic on teamspeak if you want to lead the group. All you need to do in order to join a teamspeak group is be willing to listen and follow the instructions.

It is still accessible to all even if you choose to play in an area that you can't use your sound in. You are choosing to keep it quiet as opposed to using the feature, but it is still available to you and your choice is made on personal reasons.

But I'll follow this line of reasoning: So by that logic those that choose to play with the game sound on have an unfair advantage to those who choose to not have any sound. Since after all just having access to sound is an advantage with bitching betty being in the game.

(sorry deaf guys, not meaning this as offensive to you)

The point to this extreme example is where do we draw the line? You could split this game up into a million different sections on the basis that persona A has an unfair advantage from person B because person B's life doesn't let him do what person A can do. And if you do that the game will become unplayable by all.

Again if you don't want to use it, that is more than ok. but please stop crying foul to it.

Edited by Wraith05, 28 January 2013 - 08:27 PM.

[Dimento Graven]

MischiefSC, on 28 January 2013 - 05:55 PM, said:

@Dimento Graven;

Of all the things I hold against my first wife throwing away all my original Battletech stuff is literally at the top of the list. If I'd known I would have packed less clothes and more gaming stuff when I left. I still remember how jazzed I was when the Citytech box came out. I'm very familiar with the origin of Battletech and tt gaming, I still play TT quite a bit. You can't really play TT solo so there's no dispute to it being an inherently social game.

Elo is being touted as part of the 3rd expansion or stage of the matchmaking system so I'm confident that it'll make it into the matchmaking process.

I'm also not debating the future of the game since all of it is purely speculative at this point.

As to premade vs pugging, as someone who only pugs I can say that unless most premades scatter like cats at a firework display the majority of games I play in my team is pure pug. Dropping as part of a premade is inherently going to skew your perspective since 100% of those drops will involve a premade. Playing pug 100% of the time I'd say that it's less than 1 in 4 drops I even vaguely suspect that 4 players on my side are a premade. I'm not even counting 2x drops as premade - we're just talking groups large enough to field a significant tactical advantage via communication. A 2x helps obviously but it's not like they can carry a whole team of people who are only NOT shooting themselves in the head because the game doesn't allow it.

My point though comes back to two things:

First, gaming populations favor a large, quiet, solo contingent. Even WoW has a large solo contingency, so much so that Blizzard had to expand the number of instances you could do without a group and had to create 'group only' instances specifically to try and force people to group up. Even at that many are done by people who find people to group with via chat and not guilds. Regardless of how you feel the game is designed to be played the majority of game players globally, in the US and Europe, in games of any sort or stripe you want to mention like to solo some if not most to all of the time. Unless your opinion is that PGI should write off the bulk of gamers who would otherwise play their game (and hopefully pay them) you can't just ignore that.

Second, if PGI took your approach to the game they'd drive away everyone who would go to teamspeak and groups later but wants to try the game solo first. It's your opinion and as such can't be argued for or against by anyone but you however as an approach 'play like X or screw yourself' is a bordering on irrational approach to selling any product. This is why WoW (which I've never played and never would but that's beside the point) is the only successful subscription MMO left. It takes a 'play pretty much however you want, but you're encouraged to join guilds and group if you want to advance'.

Not that I think MWO should follow the WoW lead by any example but there is a world of difference in any game or service product between what gets people in the door and what keeps them.

Pugging will get people into MWO.

CW/player groups keep them.

If you focus your game on the CW/groups/teamspeak you'll never get people in long enough to invest.

I pug exclusively. I have about a 45% win rate over 440 games, including ~150 where I was a total n00b or where I was trying to get a centurion build I liked (doomed to failure where I was a dead weight to my team). I'd say my win/loss rate is about 50% now, which isn't bad for exclusive pugging.

Where you find a problem is with people having a win rate of over 60% with premades. That indicates that there are puggers with less than a 30% win rate. These are people you're in danger of losing. Match them up with each other and not experienced players and the problem largely solves itself.

So where are you getting this vocal minority who wants to, what, outlaw teamspeak? Somehow I'm missing that. What, exactly, are you concerned is going to happen or get made to happen?

Again my issue is all the lone wolves coming here to making statements like "TS Exploit?" as a half-assed back end way of hinting to PGI that they need to ban TS.

These people coming online to try and keep the game development from progressing, demanding that they be codled and everyone be forced to play without VOIP or organizing pre-mades are destructive to the long term success of this game. People so unwilling to invest effort of joining a community are the ones that are probabaly not going to do much monetary investment in the game either.

Where as if your invested in a community, you'll be more likely to invest a few dollars...

[MischiefSC]

Dimento Graven, on 28 January 2013 - 08:43 PM, said:

Again my issue is all the lone wolves coming here to making statements like "TS Exploit?" as a half-assed back end way of hinting to PGI that they need to ban TS.

These people coming online to try and keep the game development from progressing, demanding that they be codled and everyone be forced to play without VOIP or organizing pre-mades are destructive to the long term success of this game. People so unwilling to invest effort of joining a community are the ones that are probabaly not going to do much monetary investment in the game either.

Where as if your invested in a community, you'll be more likely to invest a few dollars...

Possibly, but I've yet to see any specific metrics on that - do grouped players or people who drop in groups spend more cash than their loner counterparts?

A difficult thing to measure but certainly business significant is the people who never touch the forums - which is to say most people. The people who show up to play the game on their own, spend money and never speak to anyone. I talk in chat every single game. Normally there are at most 2 people who respond, so that's generally 3/4s or more of players who don't even speak in chat. They just come to play.

That's awesome, that's great, they deserve to have a good time.

The issue though is telling these people that you don't value them as a business. That's generally a pretty poor approach to growing your customer base. Pet them, tell them they are pretty, make the game fun and inviting to them regardless of their desire or willingness to get into groups or teamspeak. Then just give some visual representation of groups and group players, let them see the advantages and if it appeals to them they'll join.

Trying to force them to join or punishing them for not joining though? Telling someone 'you have to buy into X to get Y' will, even if they don't care about X, drive them to decline on principle. Telling them 'here is Y. Have fun. Oh, and we also offer X, which has the additional benefits of Z'.

That's how you get people to buy into both X and Y.

Some people are twits. Be that the people who insult pugs over chat or the people who say teamspeak should be banned. Neither should represent a significant percent of the population. The real issue is that the forums here are pretty caustic. It's fortunate I got turned onto this game by a friend on another forum because if I'd come here, seen the forum warriors shaking their e-peens at each other I'd have just walked away. Which would have been unfortunate.

[Thomas Covenant]

Wraith05, on 28 January 2013 - 08:14 PM, said:

When I started playing MWO my headset broke (no sound, no mic). I only had speakers for the sound. I still got on the TS for the coordination, and the icon showed that I had no mic so it wasn't like I was hiding this fact from the playerbase. They still asked me to group with them, still played with me and still acted like a team. All I did was listen and type out a response once in a while.

You only need a mic on teamspeak if you want to lead the group. All you need to do in order to join a teamspeak group is be willing to listen and follow the instructions.

It is still accessible to all even if you choose to play in an area that you can't use your sound in. You are choosing to keep it quiet as opposed to using the feature, but it is still available to you and your choice is made on personal reasons.

But I'll follow this line of reasoning: So by that logic those that choose to play with the game sound on have an unfair advantage to those who choose to not have any sound. Since after all just having access to sound is an advantage with bitching betty being in the game.

(sorry deaf guys, not meaning this as offensive to you)

The point to this extreme example is where do we draw the line? You could split this game up into a million different sections on the basis that persona A has an unfair advantage from person B because person B's life doesn't let him do what person A can do. And if you do that the game will become unplayable by all.

Again if you don't want to use it, that is more than ok. but please stop crying foul to it.

I calmly and collectedly call foul. Remember my action I call upon is that alternate tools be made(see pic below). If you acknowledge a legitimate handicate it does not imply you seek to punish those with an advantage. You are safe. Infact how I choose to respond is to propose how things can be improved. It doesn't make you weak to acknowledge a problem. To bring awareness to something so you have the ability to change the situation, in a way thats best for everyone involved its quite a strong thing to do.


In battlefield heroes common communication is a button and a click away.

[Bagheera]

Thomas Covenant, on 28 January 2013 - 07:35 PM, said:

If you don't have a mic my understanding is no you can't talk into most computers.

Not having somewhere quite enough, or being in a place that is inappropriate to be talking is personal, but not really a choice for many people, its the reality.
Using a computer and talking aloud have very different requirements to be accessible.

Listening is hard. Listening and typing in chat is apparently even harder. No mic or needing to be quiet (the latter applies to me anytime the lady is asleep, our apartment is small) and saying that prevents working with others who are on voip is just an excuse for not wanting to use teamwork.

[Wraith05]

Thomas Covenant, on 28 January 2013 - 09:55 PM, said:

I calmly and collectedly call foul. Remember my action I call upon is that alternate tools be made(see pic below). If you acknowledge a legitimate handicate it does not imply you seek to punish those with an advantage. You are safe. Infact how I choose to respond is to propose how things can be improved. It doesn't make you weak to acknowledge a problem. To bring awareness to something so you have the ability to change the situation, in a way thats best for everyone involved its quite a strong thing to do.


In battlefield heroes common communication is a button and a click away.

I full heartily agree with you mate! Sorry for the defensive tone, most cases I have found on here have been people villianizing those who group (or visa versa if you stand up for PUG's)

I agree there is a problem with in game communication tools. As well as a need of options for those who don't want to use VOIP and some form of quick command system (as you posted).

I was merely pointing out that although it does provide an advantage, it was not an unfair advantage.

[Dragonslayer Ornstein]

He's wrong about it being an exploit, but you are also glossing over the situation that no doubt led him to be that bitter in the first place. The truth is that anyone who plays regularly in premades can easily get a massively positive K/D. Now think about how if someone is winning, someone else is losing, and those are the PUGs. The game is much tougher for a PUG playing alone than it is for any 4man group. If you don't believe me, just try playing alone for 25 matches or so and see if it doesn't hurt those padded K/D and W/L ratios. Now imagine what it's like for somebody doing those 25 matches in a trial mech. That's what new players experience when they first pick up the game, before they've been exposed to the TS servers and participating in premades.


Also, I don't think that anyone really believes that you can ban TS. There is no way to enforce it, and it shouldn't be enforced even if it was possible to. Maybe what they want is some sort of built in VOIP, or at least some sort of voice command/dialog menu, like in Red Orchestra 2 for example. That game has both features built in and its nice. This game has nothing of the sort yet, and that might be contributing to the problem. If there were handier communications options in game than simply typing, even the PUGs could cooperate with you 4man premades! Imagine!

Edited by Dragonslayer Ornstein, 28 January 2013 - 10:24 PM.

[Thomas Covenant]

Wraith05, on 28 January 2013 - 10:15 PM, said:

I full heartily agree with you mate! Sorry for the defensive tone, most cases I have found on here have been people villianizing those who group (or visa versa if you stand up for PUG's)

I agree there is a problem with in game communication tools. As well as a need of options for those who don't want to use VOIP and some form of quick command system (as you posted).

I was merely pointing out that although it does provide an advantage, it was not an unfair advantage.

This game was made for it. It's just kinda ****ty right now for those who don't want to or can't.

[Dimento Graven]

Ok, just to call an end to all this silliness and to let the pugs who want to play the eternal victim, and those who can't stand others using VOIP, from the http://mwomercs.com/game page, pretty much one of the FIRST pages you'll come to, to give you a little info on this game:

Quote

How does gameplay work?

MechWarrior Online puts MechWarriors into a first-person, team-based, tactical battlefield where the victors swim in the spoils of war and are rewarded with the almighty C-Bill (in-game currency).

Each team has 8 players and the two teams are pitted in combat in an enclosed battlefield. Communication is key, be it in-game chat, integrated C3, or a third party VOIP solution, keeping in constant communication with your teammates will drastically increase your team’s chances of success.

The various weight classes of BattleMechs help create their own evolving roles on the battlefield. Fast moving scouts can feed target and tactical information back to the main battle group and the team commander. This information allows the support and assault role pilots to decide where to put their resources to work. Long-range fire support and heavy hitting assault class Mechs will use this invaluable information to finish the job at hand. It is up to you, the pilot, to customize your BattleMech’s loadout and electronic systems to fulfill the role you want to take.

So, there you have it. Those of us forming pre-made teams, using VOIP are playing the game as intended.

Those of you who refuse to form pre-made teams, and utilize a VOIP solution have 3 options:

1. You can either learn to live with everyone else beating the crap out of you on a regular basis
2. You can form/join your own community and be a pre-made.
3. Go find another game designed around your desire to be alone.

That's really it, there's no more need for discussion here. Do I really need to find all the previous forum posts from PGI, all the other marketing pages from PGI, all the other videos from PGI and that have PGI employees utilizing pre-mades and VOIP?

Edited by Dimento Graven, 29 January 2013 - 09:39 AM.

[MaddMaxx]

With the advent of CW, this debate will perish a well deserved end. You will play on Teams with or without Comms of some fashion because without them, the "TEAM" will not be able to compete.

Until then, the so called "exploiters" and those who are "not very sporting" (cough BS cough) will just have to carry that burden, the one bestowed upon them by the "unheard masses" and will do so, with dignity and poise, until such time as they can once and for all shed the shackles of all those less fortunate themselves.

P.S. "Come on CW! The "unheard's" QQ'ing is reaching near deafening levels."