483 replies to this topic

[Mad Elf]

I've been seeing the same sort of problems that most others have: totally imbalanced weights, totally imbalanced ECM, and teams composed of one or two good players and the remainder completely useless noobs, TKers, AFKers, etc.

What I want to comment about is the sync-drop issue.

When my "clan" can scrounge up eight players online at the same time, we drop as an eight-man. If we have five, six, or seven (which happens a lot), we try to sync-drop so we can play together. Most of the time it doesn't work; a lot of the time when we do end up in the same match, we're on opposing sides (and fight it out properly). It isn't an attempt to exploit the system to get easy matches; it's an attempt to get around this daft "4 player max" rule that was instituted a while back.

Any chance of making playing together easier by removing the max?

(Also: with the way that matchmaking is going, it looks like my hopes of being able to choose which map we drop into (you know, so we can pick mechs with appropriate heat balance, weapons, camoflage...) are being pushed further and further away...)

[John MatriX82]

Mad Elf, on 28 February 2013 - 05:03 AM, said:

Any chance of making playing together easier by removing the max?

I guess you'll be able to do what you wish when the devs will introduce match rooms, so that you can create rules, decide on which map to play on and so on.

[Inertiaman]

Pretty sure none of that is happening according to this week's Ask The Devs answers.

[Blue Max]

Yea....the assault team even felt bad and apologized, not their fault, lol. Interesting anyway, myself (Treby) and a Cent managed to kill one of the awesomes before they rolled us.

Void Angel, on 27 February 2013 - 09:44 PM, said:

I'm pretty sure everyone believes you anyway. =)

Honestly, I really do think that it's simply a priority issue. Move weight classes higher up their priority list in matching and things will work ok.

[Jelan]

So the random matchmaking is the same as the way they implemented it for 8 mans? Aside from lmao at all the whining going on from the same people that told us to suck it up in 8 mans it does lead to a risk of the same issues occuring that you have in 8 mans:

Whilst there are ideal loadouts there are also certain mechs or loadouts that will hamper you team, so optimal 8 mans are built around these premises

No room for Medium mechs
As much ECM as possible
No LRM mechs
Raven 3L, Atlas D-DC and Splat Cats are the most popular choices.

In the few solo drops i did yesterday it certainly appears that Atlas D-DC's are appearing more and there were less mediums except ECM Cicadas

[Xie Belvoule]

Alex Harding, on 28 February 2013 - 04:06 AM, said:

The ELO system is SOOOO GOOOD, it made me to write my first QQ post ever.

By messing up with weight system the matchmaking went to total randomness. It didn't screw up my statistics much (except win/loss ratio). I still get some kills each match, but the victory is totally random based on what teams gets more tonnage and more LRMs. Its just not entertaining anymore. No amount of skill will help 4 lights and 4 mediums against tight packed group of atlases (except base cap which is so much fun). I've seen lots of matches where enemy had 50%+ advantage in tonnage. Outcome was predictable.

I'm in for several months, and I was okay with all of the changes in that time, not happy with some of them, but at least they made sense in a way or I would just grit my teeth and bear with the bugs. But this last patch really killed the fun in game, it lost all the feeling of balance.

Not sure how did you guys intended that thing to work, but matching teams by grouping good and terrible players to get a sum of skill and throwing random weight classes in is the worst idea ever. If it was supposed to work in a different way I didn't notice it.

Please don't turn this game into WoT.

What he said^

[Bambina]

This f*****g "matchmaker" is a piece of s***t.

Right now two D-DC and two Raven3L in enemy team, no Light and no ECM in my team, half of my team bloody noobs in trialmechs. We got stomped in 3min. This should be fun? PGI, i call u, are u serious??

At least PGI is only making games (at least they try), if they would building cars, we had each year a million more dead ppl on the streets.

[Xie Belvoule]

Bambina, on 28 February 2013 - 10:44 AM, said:

This f*****g "matchmaker" is a piece of s***t.

Right now two D-DC and two Raven3L in enemy team, no Light and no ECM in my team, half of my team bloody noobs in trialmechs. We got stomped in 3min. This should be fun? PGI, i call u, are u serious??

At least PGI is only making games (at least they try), if they would building cars, we had each year a million more dead ppl on the streets.

QFT

[Inertiaman]

Bambina, on 28 February 2013 - 10:44 AM, said:

This f*****g "matchmaker" is a piece of s***t.

Right now two D-DC and two Raven3L in enemy team, no Light and no ECM in my team, half of my team bloody noobs in trialmechs. We got stomped in 3min. This should be fun? PGI, i call u, are u serious??

At least PGI is only making games (at least they try), if they would building cars, we had each year a million more dead ppl on the streets.

Dude if you're seeing trial mechs you need to improve your psr.

[Laserhupe]

not only the matchmaking...

hitboxes, netcode, dmgtransfer, maps all that stuff is buggy or wont even function normally, BUT all mechanics where are MC involved are working well.

imo PGI just wants to rip off its playerbase, but they aren´t able to develope a functional product.

OH take a look, the next heromech is coming....

betastatus is ridiculous for 20% of a game.

[Void Angel]

Alex Harding, on 28 February 2013 - 04:06 AM, said:

The ELO system is SOOOO GOOOD, it made me to write my first QQ post ever.

By messing up with weight system the matchmaking went to total randomness. It didn't screw up my statistics much (except win/loss ratio). I still get some kills each match, but the victory is totally random based on what teams gets more tonnage and more LRMs. Its just not entertaining anymore. No amount of skill will help 4 lights and 4 mediums against tight packed group of atlases (except base cap which is so much fun). I've seen lots of matches where enemy had 50%+ advantage in tonnage. Outcome was predictable.

I'm in for several months, and I was okay with all of the changes in that time, not happy with some of them, but at least they made sense in a way or I would just grit my teeth and bear with the bugs. But this last patch really killed the fun in game, it lost all the feeling of balance.

Again, it's not Elo. Nor is tonnage always a sure-thing predictor of victory - though it can certainly become so if the mismatch is too great. But that's not Elo. This is a problem with the matchmaker enforcing Elo at a higher priority than weight class at some point in its algorithm. If you just move weight class up to a higher priority, all the frustrating tonnage variation should go away.

Even so, I really don't find it to be that bad - but I'm also playing an assault 'mech: partly because I'm enjoying the new heavy beam weapons buff, and partly because I had the bad judgement to buy a Spider for my light. To be clear, I don't see a lot of problems on my Spider either, but I have a much smaller sample of games to go by.

Quote

Not sure how did you guys intended that thing to work, but matching teams by grouping good and terrible players to get a sum of skill and throwing random weight classes in is the worst idea ever. If it was supposed to work in a different way I didn't notice it.

That's not what they're doing - the matchmaker tries to find opposing teams of roughly the same Elo (using a target value) and weight class, then starts being less and less strict as more time passes without a full match. It'll flow something like this:

• Is there a player of Elo nearly equal to the target and of any weight class trying to find a game? Add to the match. Now find another player with Elo equal to the target and of the same weight class. Repeat step until match is full, or a certain number of seconds have elapsed since matching started in which case:
  
• Widen the search to include players of nearly equal Elo to the target and one weight class heavier/lighter than a given 'mech in the match(or possibly the average weight class.) Now do the same for the other team. Repeat this step until the team is full or a certain number of seconds has elapsed, in which case:
  
• et cetera, et cetera, allowing greater differences in weight and lowering the Elo target until the match is full, or the final time period for matchmaking is begun, in which case:
  
• Really? Still no one? Seriously, we'll take anyone at all. Can you stand your 'mech up, see lighting and hear thunder? You're in. No? Fine. "Failed to Find Match."

We don't know precisely how it prioritizes the parameters, but based on my observations I suspect that it starts out matching Elo, then looks for weight class - and that it loosens the requirements for weight class before it loosens Elo. I strongly suspect that if it were to enforce weight classes more strictly, and even over Elo, match quality would improve.

Edited for matchmaker flow chart accuracy (see Thontor's post below.)

Edited by Void Angel, 28 February 2013 - 12:31 PM.

[Void Angel]

Laserhupe, on 28 February 2013 - 11:20 AM, said:

not only the matchmaking...

hitboxes, netcode, dmgtransfer, maps all that stuff is buggy or wont even function normally, BUT all mechanics where are MC involved are working well.

imo PGI just wants to rip off its playerbase, but they aren´t able to develope a functional product.

OH take a look, the next heromech is coming....

betastatus is ridiculous for 20% of a game.

There are no game mechanics which involve MC, except for the bonus C-bills for hero 'mechs. Nor is the game "nonfunctional." I happen to know, since I have been playing it. Furthermore, the netcode, missile pathing, hitboxes, etc. are all either working well (I know of nothing that's been formally added to the game that "doesn't function." Don't even try to bring up the Command Console) or being improved. This includes the matchmaker, despite the current difficulties. Making wild, offensive accusations and shooting invective at the devs is not helpful, and simply serves to mark you as one of those constantly angry people whose opinion is not important - since it is based on your desire for an emotional high rather than facts and reason.

Edited by Void Angel, 28 February 2013 - 12:33 PM.

[Homeless Bill]

ELO is working great for me. I've been losing more often, the players on both teams are typically better than I'm accustomed to, and the number of 8-0 rolls has been drastically reduced (perhaps 10% of my matches end in a wipe, down from over 50% in Phase 2).

A lot of people are whining about tonnage mismatches, but you shouldn't worry about it. Even with some massive tonnage disparities, I rarely see a wipe anymore. Plus, it's more fun fighting dangerous odds.

Speaking of which, you should totally make a pre-made 5 vs PUG 8 deathmatch game mode. Pleeeease? =D

[Void Angel]

Nah, tonnage mismatches suck, and shouldn't happen.

PS. "Elo" is not an acronym

[Magnarr]

Not complaining about the defeat, just look at the odd matchup. 5 lights on one side, 0 on the other. Zero!

[Devil Fox]

They seriously need to fix this... the weight balancing would be fine IF the Raven 3L wasn't the god given tool. I walked out of 5 games... 3 were enemy LRM spawn camping, another was a base sitting LRM PPC team and the last one had 5 ECM. When the matchmaker system can place the best chassis, which have the best utility on the other team then fail to find any counter for the other... the bias begins.

1 on 1 you might be able to kill a 3L... but flock's of them you can't, and that's all the matchmaker system is throwing up... I pug alot, and quite frankly this game is going to the wayside because it isn't enjoyable. I either get the matches where we stomp them, or more often the case where I wonder how people can actually play this game.

Whilst PGI keep saying to wait, it's yet another feature (like the ecm) that was brought forward before it's time. It needs the collision (2 months away), and the state-rewind to even the odds for lower ELO player's in heavier mech's being paired up with ELO equal or greater in light mechs.

As it stands 4man groups are abusing the shocking system of ELO with heavily biased machines, whether mostly assault, light's etc to force the ELO system just to search for any machine in a queue to pit them against. What I want to know is when are they going to tighten up the matchmaker system to ensure more adequate weight/chassis balance? OR even to begin to take into consideration load-out's, trying to make more balanced groups?

[Void Angel]

"Elo" is not an acronym

[Tenoctris]

Two things I've noticed about ELO. One positive and one negative. From a pugging prespective, sometimes you do drop in as a pug into a 4+man premade and they stack themselves a certain way. It's usually pretty obvious when this happens. Everything here is based off dropping into mostly full 16man pug matches.

The Positive: ELO is working great in terms of who(the person behind the computer) you are being matched up against. I've noticed a pretty big change in the overall skill level of the people I drop in with. As I improve/win everyone around me; allies and enemies alike become more intelligent and skilled. And when I suck I end up with more of the "other" kind of people, I don't like to discuss the "others", you know who and what they are.

The Negative: ELO is failing in terms of what(the actual pixels on screen) you are being matched up against. I've seen anything from teams made up of mostly Atlas and lights, teams of all meds, teams of 6 Catapults, just the most random totally not intended matching. ELO is still young which means it hasn't filled its fat brain with all the relevent data from us. This could be a direct result of that, which goes away once ELO grows up. Perhaps ELO isn't taking mech choice into account when making a match. It's pulling 16 random people with the same scoring but not making the decision that 5 Atlas on each team is a little ridiculous.

ELO is half working and half not working. The match making pre ELO patch was much better in terms of the what but less effective in terms of who. Keep up the good work guys, the game improves every patch.

[mekabuser]

quite a bit of qq about tonnage.. good thing you guys werent sherman tank gunners in ww2

[Void Angel]

Yeah, they complained about having to fight heavier, better-armored tanks, too.