DUST Search - Matchmaking by cumulative KDR/WPDR

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Matchmaking by cumulative KDR/WPDR

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 7 post(s)
Onesimus Tarsus NoGameNoLife 2162	Posted - 2014.06.26 17:43:00 - [1] - Quote Do it, and the whole game rights itself. Players that have high KDR/WPDR, be it by any means, are suddenly playing players that do the same. Pure skill winners will always be on top, but the poseurs will fall. If people squad up, the matchmaker creates an aggregate KDR/WPDR by squad average. No one ever gets involved in a stomp, and every match is much more likely to be close and exciting. Plus, weapons instantly balance, FOTM becomes a suicide pact, and oddball playstyles/ niche players never get used as punching bags while they ply their trade.. You're welcome. I'd like to see some blue-tag or red-tag action on this, but I realize the amount of irons in the fire. K/D(r) WP/D(r) matchmaking fixes the whole game. Period.
Kallas Hallytyr Skullbreakers 535	Posted - 2014.06.26 18:58:00 - [2] - Quote +1
One Eyed King Land of the BIind 2146	Posted - 2014.06.26 19:05:00 - [3] - Quote Yes please. This is how a minja feels
Onesimus Tarsus NoGameNoLife 2164	Posted - 2014.06.26 21:31:00 - [4] - Quote I honestly believe that a large, large percentage of the forum-reading fan-base is crutch-riding protostompers. That is why only the brave few here want to see it done. Sad thing. It's a totally server-side fix that insta-fixes so many things about this game, and reveals true balance problems as soon as they become broken. If this fix is implemented, more time can be spent on fine-tuning and improving the in-game experience. K/D(r) WP/D(r) matchmaking fixes the whole game. Period.
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11238	Posted - 2014.06.26 21:35:00 - [5] - Quote Onesimus Tarsus wrote: Do it, and the whole game rights itself. Players that have high KDR/WPDR, be it by any means, are suddenly playing players that do the same. Pure skill winners will always be on top, but the poseurs will fall. If people squad up, the matchmaker creates an aggregate KDR/WPDR by squad average. No one ever gets involved in a stomp, and every match is much more likely to be close and exciting. Plus, weapons instantly balance, FOTM becomes a suicide pact, and oddball playstyles/ niche players never get used as punching bags while they ply their trade.. You're welcome. I'd like to see some blue-tag or red-tag action on this, but I realize the amount of irons in the fire. As long as that is relegated to Public contracts in High Sec space that's absolutely fine by me. In Low like PC and FW? You just have to HTFU. " Those men died loving duty more than they feared death..... they died well." -Templar Ouryon after Iesa III
Onesimus Tarsus NoGameNoLife 2164	Posted - 2014.06.26 22:15:00 - [6] - Quote True Adamance wrote: Onesimus Tarsus wrote: Do it, and the whole game rights itself. Players that have high KDR/WPDR, be it by any means, are suddenly playing players that do the same. Pure skill winners will always be on top, but the poseurs will fall. If people squad up, the matchmaker creates an aggregate KDR/WPDR by squad average. No one ever gets involved in a stomp, and every match is much more likely to be close and exciting. Plus, weapons instantly balance, FOTM becomes a suicide pact, and oddball playstyles/ niche players never get used as punching bags while they ply their trade.. You're welcome. I'd like to see some blue-tag or red-tag action on this, but I realize the amount of irons in the fire. As long as that is relegated to Public contracts in High Sec space that's absolutely fine by me. In Low like PC and FW? You just have to HTFU. Heck, everyone would. K/D(r) WP/D(r) matchmaking fixes the whole game. Period.
bogeyman m Minmatar Republic 284	Posted - 2014.06.27 04:25:00 - [7] - Quote Bump. Duct tape 2.0 ... Have WD-40; will travel. Cross Atu for CPM1

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 3233	Posted - 2014.06.27 07:50:00 - [8] - Quote It saddens me to know that better matchmaking would have helped the game and its new player retention a long time ago. I can tell you though that we are hopefully making some progress on matchmaking, and specifically team making, based on cumulative WP/battlesecond, cumulative KDR is not as good because of snipers, but I hadn't thought of WP/D. We will take a look at how that compares to our other data and calculate the correlation to W/L ratio and see how it performs. This is independent work from hotfixes and will be deployed when ready. Matchmaking like this is of course only in random matches, not PC. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

SAIRAX SIS Nyain San General Tso's Alliance 85	Posted - 2014.06.27 08:38:00 - [9] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: It saddens me to know that better matchmaking would have helped the game and its new player retention a long time ago. I can tell you though that we are hopefully making some progress on matchmaking, and specifically team making, based on cumulative WP/battlesecond, cumulative KDR is not as good because of snipers, but I hadn't thought of WP/D. We will take a look at how that compares to our other data and calculate the correlation to W/L ratio and see how it performs. This is independent work from hotfixes and will be deployed when ready. Matchmaking like this is of course only in random matches, not PC. PC was die. Deficit game. R.I.P endcontent. thank you CCP :) yoroshiku ne !pÇÇpÇÇCute Cat NyaoooonpÇÇGÖ¬
True Adamance Praetoriani Classiarii Templares Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris 11298	Posted - 2014.06.27 08:38:00 - [10] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: It saddens me to know that better matchmaking would have helped the game and its new player retention a long time ago. I can tell you though that we are hopefully making some progress on matchmaking, and specifically team making, based on cumulative WP/battlesecond, cumulative KDR is not as good because of snipers, but I hadn't thought of WP/D. We will take a look at how that compares to our other data and calculate the correlation to W/L ratio and see how it performs. This is independent work from hotfixes and will be deployed when ready. Matchmaking like this is of course only in random matches, not PC. And certainly not FW I hope. " We need to reclaim their fates and envelop them in ours. And we need to love them, no matter how much it hurts."


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 3242	Posted - 2014.06.27 10:33:00 - [11] - Quote True Adamance wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: It saddens me to know that better matchmaking would have helped the game and its new player retention a long time ago. I can tell you though that we are hopefully making some progress on matchmaking, and specifically team making, based on cumulative WP/battlesecond, cumulative KDR is not as good because of snipers, but I hadn't thought of WP/D. We will take a look at how that compares to our other data and calculate the correlation to W/L ratio and see how it performs. This is independent work from hotfixes and will be deployed when ready. Matchmaking like this is of course only in random matches, not PC. And certainly not FW I hope. Expand on FW please, why not, post the players faction choice. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

steadyhand amarr shadows of 514 3192	Posted - 2014.06.27 10:46:00 - [12] - Quote FW was ment to be a free for all as it mattered so which ever side could organise it self better and/or get a higher quality of troops would win. The problem with this system is the LP store heavily scews who signs up with who. If the CR or RR is the gun of choice people flock to that faction. The second problem is players who see FW as a oohh shiny and get dumped into amarr because its first in the list(i tested this :-P) And lasty noone at the moment will go anyware near FW because you took out isk rewards stateing the market woukd fill that role which we now know will never happen and everyone said was stuiped. The core function of FW "fight for your chosen faction" is complety underminded by the core systems not working correctly. Ie fw should be a free forall with high isk rewards matched to higher standardings. Pub matches were ntended as entry level low reward games. Also put a SP lock om FW newbs have no place in it and will just get wrf pawned till they have a soild understanding of whats going on You can never have to many chaples -Templar True adamance
shaman oga Nexus Balusa Horizon 2362	Posted - 2014.06.27 10:48:00 - [13] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Expand on FW please, why not, post the players faction choice. The problem in FW is there is almost no one playing it, 90% of time i try to queue for a match i get 00:00. PSN: ogamega I'm not a chef, i'm just a man who likes to cook.
steadyhand amarr shadows of 514 3193	Posted - 2014.06.27 11:02:00 - [14] - Quote Lack of people is due to lack of isk, the moment you throw in good isk rewards and a FW event it will spring right back You can never have to many chaples -Templar True adamance
Bayeth Mal OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 593	Posted - 2014.06.27 11:05:00 - [15] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: It saddens me to know that better matchmaking would have helped the game and its new player retention a long time ago. I can tell you though that we are hopefully making some progress on matchmaking, and specifically team making, based on cumulative WP/battlesecond, cumulative KDR is not as good because of snipers, but I hadn't thought of WP/D. We will take a look at how that compares to our other data and calculate the correlation to W/L ratio and see how it performs. This is independent work from hotfixes and will be deployed when ready. Matchmaking like this is of course only in random matches, not PC. Yeah but too bad the players never said this. It's not even like there's a place where people post these sorts of things. Like a kind of messaging place, but instead of it being directly between people it kinda goes on this wall where it's open to everybody, and then other people can add their own messages, they could agree or disagree and have conversations about it... ...it'd be really awesome if there was something like that. Heading over to Destiny Beta and a few others Hit me up for Skype and PSN

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 3243	Posted - 2014.06.27 11:07:00 - [16] - Quote steadyhand amarr wrote: Lack of people is due to lack of isk, the moment you throw in good isk rewards and a FW event it will spring right back Making changes/additions to FW is one thing, I am asking why we should not make the FW sides as equal as possible? "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

SCATTORSHOT RINNEGATE A.P.E.X BRUTE FORCE 79	Posted - 2014.06.27 11:25:00 - [17] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: steadyhand amarr wrote: Lack of people is due to lack of isk, the moment you throw in good isk rewards and a FW event it will spring right back Making changes/additions to FW is one thing, I am asking why we should not make the FW sides as equal as possible? Yes i think FW team balance is good to merge because what i see now in FW caldari is a full team of militians against gallente pro players. +1 Waiting The Sagaris From Ages. CCP: SoonTM
steadyhand amarr shadows of 514 3193	Posted - 2014.06.27 11:28:00 - [18] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: steadyhand amarr wrote: Lack of people is due to lack of isk, the moment you throw in good isk rewards and a FW event it will spring right back Making changes/additions to FW is one thing, I am asking why we should not make the FW sides as equal as possible? ....i need to get used to the interaction... Fw was ment to be the next step up so it was down to players to squad up and tough it out with what ever squads the other side could throw at them almost like a PC lite. As winning these matches ment somthing matchmakeing them defeated the point and turned FW into just another pub match. However what happend in reality is everyone flooded in and it was just a mess because 6 man squads would just lumped with random solo people or a whole q sync squad would rofol stomp a whole side of randoms. But i feel it was the implemention of FW that caused this. Which is why its not juat a case of too matchmake or not. Matchmakeing changes the fundamental purpose of FW which was to fight for your side vs what ever those dirty rebels could throw at you. The problems in FW steam from the systems which squew the sides. Does that make any sense; my tldr is u cant talk about matchmakeing in FW without talking about its purpose feel and why its a mess now. Also if matchmakeing works i would expect each empire to hold 50/50 in space EvE side needs to be included here too. Ugg FW is complex beast you cant take any part in isolation like pubmatches. Also loving the dev feedback :-D You can never have to many chaples -Templar True adamance
shaman oga Nexus Balusa Horizon 2362	Posted - 2014.06.27 11:40:00 - [19] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: steadyhand amarr wrote: Lack of people is due to lack of isk, the moment you throw in good isk rewards and a FW event it will spring right back Making changes/additions to FW is one thing, I am asking why we should not make the FW sides as equal as possible? There is no problem to add matchmaking to FW too, the problem is there are not enough players to fill 2 FW of the same faction at the same time, so matchmaking on FW is pointless at the current state of things. PSN: ogamega I'm not a chef, i'm just a man who likes to cook.
Ryme Intrinseca The Rainbow Effect 1396	Posted - 2014.06.27 11:40:00 - [20] - Quote I doubt you have the playerbase to support a serious matchmaking attempt. It was attempted before (launch of 1.4 or 1.5 maybe?) and the queue times were unbearable, people simply stopped playing the game until they patched out the matchmaking.

Greiv Rabbah KiLo. 6	Posted - 2014.06.27 12:07:00 - [21] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: steadyhand amarr wrote: Lack of people is due to lack of isk, the moment you throw in good isk rewards and a FW event it will spring right back Making changes/additions to FW is one thing, I am asking why we should not make the FW sides as equal as possible? I agree that the isk and player problem are linked, but it seems those with isk are hoarding and widening the gap between new player and vet, with vets dropping out all the while still hoarding. You want to know about player retention I've been preaching it: player market would save players, redistribute isk, bring in new players, BRING BACK LOST PLAYERS, retain recruits(seriously, please tell me why I have to drag recruits to my house and make them play, its not right!) and give vets a reason to be doing something other than pubs all day by making fw more sustainable. Bring in player market, watch items and isk redistribute, profit. Why haven't you done this? You'd soothe a lot of ppl that waited over a year just to get told a feature advertised in the fkin manual was getting dropped. And theme are mostly very angry players/fringe players/former players that a lot of them used to be core players until 1) got tired of waiting 2) got tired of everything in the game being changed/removed(I mean seriously in an mmo, leveling should matter) 3) biomassed after the "legion keynote" (the day will live in infamy) 4) finally got chased off by the list of things we will never be getting (hey everybody, pilot suits MTACs jetpacks mcc-120mil isk railgun-1mil isk VTOL fighters... There's an expansion coming in 2013 you heard?)
SponkSponkSponk The Southern Legion Final Resolution. 884	Posted - 2014.06.27 12:10:00 - [22] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Making changes/additions to FW is one thing, I am asking why we should not make the FW sides as equal as possible? You should, but bear in mind that you'll be hampered by 1. Generally-lower player population for reasons explained previously 2. Much more incentive to, and success with, team stacking (via multiple squads from the same corp/alliance/whatever) I've said before, but lowering the max squad size will generally make matchmaking more fair, because it keeps synergistic effects manageable and reduces the ability for one or two good players to carry an entire squad (or indeed, team). Dust/Eve transfers
Onesimus Tarsus NoGameNoLife 2172	Posted - 2014.06.27 12:12:00 - [23] - Quote If there's nobody playing, that's bad enough. If when you do get a match it's kdr padders vs normal people, it's a useless, futile rout. Apply kdrwprmm and everything fixes. Everyone comes in "stacked" by those stats, and you fill games from the bottom up. Voila. K/D(r) WP/D(r) matchmaking fixes the whole game. Period.
The-DON of-DOT-MAFIA The DOT MAFIA 37	Posted - 2014.06.27 12:13:00 - [24] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: It saddens me to know that better matchmaking would have helped the game and its new player retention a long time ago. I can tell you though that we are hopefully making some progress on matchmaking, and specifically team making, based on cumulative WP/battlesecond, cumulative KDR is not as good because of snipers, but I hadn't thought of WP/D. We will take a look at how that compares to our other data and calculate the correlation to W/L ratio and see how it performs. This is independent work from hotfixes and will be deployed when ready. Matchmaking like this is of course only in random matches, not PC. Is CCP fixing the latency issues or do you think that high KDR players ( excluding snipers ) are really that good?
steadyhand amarr shadows of 514 3195	Posted - 2014.06.27 12:14:00 - [25] - Quote I still dont get why we dont have a no squad rule in pub matches and make squads play in FW that way everyone gets what they one. The only unhappy people are the tryhards who just want to stomp newbs You can never have to many chaples -Templar True adamance
Greiv Rabbah KiLo. 6	Posted - 2014.06.27 12:17:00 - [26] - Quote shaman oga wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Expand on FW please, why not, post the players faction choice. The problem in FW is there is almost no one playing it, 90% of time i try to queue for a match i get 00:00. People would be more attracted by FW with: Complete LP store Possibility to sell back unused items (to the market for their value) Separate class skill from racial skill (assault, logi, scout) Sorry for the double post, but I see an obvious problem here. I like the lp store and I think if a market gets implemented the lp store will be good and useful however! That doesn't fix the issue with players not understanding how factional battles are spawned(last I checked the process was queue up FW, beat up eve player until they go fight in FW areas, watch your battle spawn. Am I wrong here?) Class and race are separate skill. I don't understand what you mean there. Everything else you said is great man
John Demonsbane Unorganized Ninja Infantry Tactics League of Infamy 3565	Posted - 2014.06.27 12:35:00 - [27] - Quote Bayeth Mal wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: It saddens me to know that better matchmaking would have helped the game and its new player retention a long time ago. I can tell you though that we are hopefully making some progress on matchmaking, and specifically team making, based on cumulative WP/battlesecond, cumulative KDR is not as good because of snipers, but I hadn't thought of WP/D. We will take a look at how that compares to our other data and calculate the correlation to W/L ratio and see how it performs. This is independent work from hotfixes and will be deployed when ready. Matchmaking like this is of course only in random matches, not PC. Yeah but too bad the players never said this. It's not even like there's a place where people post these sorts of things. Like a kind of messaging place, but instead of it being directly between people it kinda goes on this wall where it's open to everybody, and then other people can add their own messages, they could agree or disagree and have conversations about it... ...it'd be really awesome if there was something like that. So... Much... Truth.... why can't I like this moar?! (The godfather of tactical logistics)
shaman oga Nexus Balusa Horizon 2364	Posted - 2014.06.27 12:42:00 - [28] - Quote Greiv Rabbah wrote: shaman oga wrote: Separate class skill from racial skill (assault, logi, scout) Class and race are separate skill. I don't understand what you mean there. Everything else you said is great man If they separate class bonus (e.g. 5% bonus on equipment pg/cpu cost), from racial bonus (e.g. +5% on active scan precision and scan duration) buy LP/aur PRO suit would be much more convenient, right now even if you buy a LP/AUR PRO suit you don't have the class bonus and this is a problem for me, also give only the class bonus would not be OP and players who have spent SP on their suits will still have the advantage of the racial bonus. PSN: ogamega I'm not a chef, i'm just a man who likes to cook.
Greiv Rabbah KiLo. 6	Posted - 2014.06.27 12:49:00 - [29] - Quote shaman oga wrote: Greiv Rabbah wrote: shaman oga wrote: Separate class skill from racial skill (assault, logi, scout) Class and race are separate skill. I don't understand what you mean there. Everything else you said is great man If they separate class bonus (e.g. 5% bonus on equipment pg/cpu cost), from racial bonus (e.g. +5% on active scan precision and scan duration) buy LP/aur PRO suit would be much more convenient, right now even if you buy a LP/AUR PRO suit you don't have the class bonus and this is a problem for me, also give only the class bonus would not be OP and players who have spent SP on their suits will still have the advantage of the racial bonus. Ah ah the bonuses! I see what you mean, I was surprised when I found out the class bonuses didn't apply when using a different race of same class. it doesnt say in game anywhere either. Yeah i agree with this 100% why was this not already part of the game? Thanks for clarifying
Bayeth Mal OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 596	Posted - 2014.06.27 13:34:00 - [30] - Quote steadyhand amarr wrote: I still dont get why we dont have a no squad rule in pub matches and make squads play in FW that way everyone gets what they one. The only unhappy people are the tryhards who just want to stomp newbs So people who want to get together and grind ISK shouldn't be able to do so? Heavies who want their logi buddies to run with them shouldn't be able to? No point in running an active scanner either, or bothering to use ewar mods on your scout. Just have matches with meta level caps. Will need to rebalance the meta values on some things though. Heading over to Destiny Beta and a few others Hit me up for Skype and PSN

John Demonsbane Unorganized Ninja Infantry Tactics League of Infamy 3567	Posted - 2014.06.27 15:01:00 - [31] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: steadyhand amarr wrote: Lack of people is due to lack of isk, the moment you throw in good isk rewards and a FW event it will spring right back Making changes/additions to FW is one thing, I am asking why we should not make the FW sides as equal as possible? If you gave us team deploy, no problem. Why? Reason 1: Friendly fire! I do not want to be forced to squad up with any more randoms than absolutely necessary in a game mode where they can kill me and I can't do anything about it unless I want to waste the week or so of effort it takes to regain the standings loss from a TK ban. Reason 2, 3 and 4: See reason 1. Reason 5: FW is supposed to be competitive, right? A middle ground between pubs and PC? So it shouldn't necessarily be treated the same way as pubs. As a competitive outlet, we should be able to q-sync in large groups to do our thing. Matchmaking would thwart that in the absence of a team deploy option. (The godfather of tactical logistics)
Lorhak Gannarsein Legio DXIV 3852	Posted - 2014.06.27 15:47:00 - [32] - Quote Greiv Rabbah wrote: shaman oga wrote: Greiv Rabbah wrote: shaman oga wrote: Separate class skill from racial skill (assault, logi, scout) Class and race are separate skill. I don't understand what you mean there. Everything else you said is great man If they separate class bonus (e.g. 5% bonus on equipment pg/cpu cost), from racial bonus (e.g. +5% on active scan precision and scan duration) buy LP/aur PRO suit would be much more convenient, right now even if you buy a LP/AUR PRO suit you don't have the class bonus and this is a problem for me, also give only the class bonus would not be OP and players who have spent SP on their suits will still have the advantage of the racial bonus. Ah ah the bonuses! I see what you mean, I was surprised when I found out the class bonuses didn't apply when using a different race of same class. it doesnt say in game anywhere either. Yeah i agree with this 100% why was this not already part of the game? Thanks for clarifying Because then during Uprising when logis had 1hp/s/level, I would have specced all of them to three so I'd have 14hp/s passive on top of 800 bricked armour :) CCP Rattati Best Dev AmLogi 5 GÇó AmAss 5 GÇó AmSent 4 GÇó CalScout 5 CalLogi, you're next!
shaman oga Nexus Balusa Horizon 2365	Posted - 2014.06.27 18:22:00 - [33] - Quote Lorhak Gannarsein wrote: Because then during Uprising when logis had 1hp/s/level, I would have specced all of them to three so I'd have 14hp/s passive on top of 800 bricked armour :) I'm sure it is not what he mean, but a different design of the skill tree is needed imo, one skill that allows you to play a entry level logi with much more comfort, but still give an advantage to who have specced into a proto logi. (logo is just an example, i'm talking about scouts, assaults, commando and sentinels as well) PSN: ogamega I'm not a chef, i'm just a man who likes to cook.
Ares 514 D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 942	Posted - 2014.06.27 18:50:00 - [34] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: It saddens me to know that better matchmaking would have helped the game and its new player retention a long time ago. I can tell you though that we are hopefully making some progress on matchmaking, and specifically team making, based on cumulative WP/battlesecond, cumulative KDR is not as good because of snipers, but I hadn't thought of WP/D. We will take a look at how that compares to our other data and calculate the correlation to W/L ratio and see how it performs. This is independent work from hotfixes and will be deployed when ready. Matchmaking like this is of course only in random matches, not PC. Wouldn't WP/battlesecond match making just result in logi vs logi? Overlord of Broman
Ares 514 D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 942	Posted - 2014.06.27 18:52:00 - [35] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: True Adamance wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: It saddens me to know that better matchmaking would have helped the game and its new player retention a long time ago. I can tell you though that we are hopefully making some progress on matchmaking, and specifically team making, based on cumulative WP/battlesecond, cumulative KDR is not as good because of snipers, but I hadn't thought of WP/D. We will take a look at how that compares to our other data and calculate the correlation to W/L ratio and see how it performs. This is independent work from hotfixes and will be deployed when ready. Matchmaking like this is of course only in random matches, not PC. And certainly not FW I hope. Expand on FW please, why not, post the players faction choice. I completely agree you don't want match making in FW for many of the reasons already listed by others. Hell, I can't even deploy to the faction i want without waiting 8 minutes usually. Overlord of Broman
Ares 514 D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 942	Posted - 2014.06.27 18:52:00 - [36] - Quote John Demonsbane wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: steadyhand amarr wrote: Lack of people is due to lack of isk, the moment you throw in good isk rewards and a FW event it will spring right back Making changes/additions to FW is one thing, I am asking why we should not make the FW sides as equal as possible? If you gave us team deploy, no problem. Why? Reason 1: Friendly fire! I do not want to be forced to squad up with any more randoms than absolutely necessary in a game mode where they can kill me and I can't do anything about it unless I want to waste the week or so of effort it takes to regain the standings loss from a TK ban. Reason 2, 3 and 4: See reason 1. Reason 5: FW is supposed to be competitive, right? A middle ground between pubs and PC? So it shouldn't necessarily be treated the same way as pubs. As a competitive outlet, we should be able to q-sync in large groups to do our thing. Matchmaking would thwart that in the absence of a team deploy option. Exactly. Do not prevent players from q-syncing FW. Overlord of Broman
Harpyja Legio DXIV 1950	Posted - 2014.06.27 19:03:00 - [37] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: steadyhand amarr wrote: Lack of people is due to lack of isk, the moment you throw in good isk rewards and a FW event it will spring right back Making changes/additions to FW is one thing, I am asking why we should not make the FW sides as equal as possible? FW teams do need to be as balanced as possible, don't listen to whoever says so otherwise. Because you can choose which faction you're fighting for as soon as one faction is winning, everyone flocks to that faction, e.g. Gal/Cal FW. Rail rifles have been more utilized than plasma rifles (at least before Bravo), yet all the pro players flocked to Gallente. Why? Because it became too reliable that Gallente almost always stomps Caldari. I feel that players don't even play Gal FW for the LP items, but to pad their KDRs against militia newbs on Caldari. Today was particularly awful due to the event, because now it was a bunch of protos redlining Caldari militia almost every match. I actually play Caldari for the LP but I can't get anywhere with 75 LP/battle and 0 standings gains over multiple hours of play. It's so incredibly demoralizing and rage enducing, getting stomped every battle because you're the only player to score over 1000 WP on your team while the second place player doesn't even have 300. Teams need to be balanced. Militia newbs against militia newbs. Stompers against stompers. And people who want to stomp won't be able to because they won't be playing militia newbs. And now there's reason to play Caldari FW, because those who play for LP will face teams of equal opposition instead of playing the demoralizing battles we got currently. I'd be much better for AFK'ing in the MCC than throwing away millions of ISK in hopeless battles. "By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32 -- "Scouts should fart repeatedly while cloaked"- TechMechMeds
John Demonsbane Unorganized Ninja Infantry Tactics League of Infamy 3573	Posted - 2014.06.27 19:08:00 - [38] - Quote Harpyja wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: steadyhand amarr wrote: Lack of people is due to lack of isk, the moment you throw in good isk rewards and a FW event it will spring right back Making changes/additions to FW is one thing, I am asking why we should not make the FW sides as equal as possible? FW teams do need to be as balanced as possible, don't listen to whoever says so otherwise. Because you can choose which faction you're fighting for as soon as one faction is winning, everyone flocks to that faction, e.g. Gal/Cal FW. Rail rifles have been more utilized than plasma rifles (at least before Bravo), yet all the pro players flocked to Gallente. Why? Because it became too reliable that Gallente almost always stomps Caldari. I feel that players don't even play Gal FW for the LP items, but to pad their KDRs against militia newbs on Caldari. Today was particularly awful due to the event, because now it was a bunch of protos redlining Caldari militia almost every match. I actually play Caldari for the LP but I can't get anywhere with 75 LP/battle and 0 standings gains over multiple hours of play. It's so incredibly demoralizing and rage enducing, getting stomped every battle because you're the only player to score over 1000 WP on your team while the second place player doesn't even have 300. Teams need to be balanced. Militia newbs against militia newbs. Stompers against stompers. And people who want to stomp won't be able to because they won't be playing militia newbs. And now there's reason to play Caldari FW, because those who play for LP will face teams of equal opposition instead of playing the demoralizing battles we got currently. I'd be much better for AFK'ing in the MCC than throwing away millions of ISK in hopeless battles. Balanced teams are fine by me, I just want to be able to play in larger groups. I fight for the Amarr, trust me that I feel your pain of railing against hopeless odds dodging awoxers while randoms spin around in circles shooting the MCC. (The godfather of tactical logistics)
Ares 514 D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 943	Posted - 2014.06.27 19:21:00 - [39] - Quote Harpyja wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: steadyhand amarr wrote: Lack of people is due to lack of isk, the moment you throw in good isk rewards and a FW event it will spring right back Making changes/additions to FW is one thing, I am asking why we should not make the FW sides as equal as possible? FW teams do need to be as balanced as possible, don't listen to whoever says so otherwise. Because you can choose which faction you're fighting for as soon as one faction is winning, everyone flocks to that faction, e.g. Gal/Cal FW. Rail rifles have been more utilized than plasma rifles (at least before Bravo), yet all the pro players flocked to Gallente. Why? Because it became too reliable that Gallente almost always stomps Caldari. I feel that players don't even play Gal FW for the LP items, but to pad their KDRs against militia newbs on Caldari. Today was particularly awful due to the event, because now it was a bunch of protos redlining Caldari militia almost every match. I actually play Caldari for the LP but I can't get anywhere with 75 LP/battle and 0 standings gains over multiple hours of play. It's so incredibly demoralizing and rage enducing, getting stomped every battle because you're the only player to score over 1000 WP on your team while the second place player doesn't even have 300. Teams need to be balanced. Militia newbs against militia newbs. Stompers against stompers. And people who want to stomp won't be able to because they won't be playing militia newbs. And now there's reason to play Caldari FW, because those who play for LP will face teams of equal opposition instead of playing the demoralizing battles we got currently. I'd be much better for AFK'ing in the MCC than throwing away millions of ISK in hopeless battles. The issue you describe may occur, but I would argue it's due to the horrible payout structure. Why does everyone get the same LP regardless of what they did? Why do you get so little LP when you loose even if you were the only one on the team that did anything? Overlord of Broman
Ares 514 D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 943	Posted - 2014.06.27 19:22:00 - [40] - Quote John Demonsbane wrote: Harpyja wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: steadyhand amarr wrote: Lack of people is due to lack of isk, the moment you throw in good isk rewards and a FW event it will spring right back Making changes/additions to FW is one thing, I am asking why we should not make the FW sides as equal as possible? FW teams do need to be as balanced as possible, don't listen to whoever says so otherwise. Because you can choose which faction you're fighting for as soon as one faction is winning, everyone flocks to that faction, e.g. Gal/Cal FW. Rail rifles have been more utilized than plasma rifles (at least before Bravo), yet all the pro players flocked to Gallente. Why? Because it became too reliable that Gallente almost always stomps Caldari. I feel that players don't even play Gal FW for the LP items, but to pad their KDRs against militia newbs on Caldari. Today was particularly awful due to the event, because now it was a bunch of protos redlining Caldari militia almost every match. I actually play Caldari for the LP but I can't get anywhere with 75 LP/battle and 0 standings gains over multiple hours of play. It's so incredibly demoralizing and rage enducing, getting stomped every battle because you're the only player to score over 1000 WP on your team while the second place player doesn't even have 300. Teams need to be balanced. Militia newbs against militia newbs. Stompers against stompers. And people who want to stomp won't be able to because they won't be playing militia newbs. And now there's reason to play Caldari FW, because those who play for LP will face teams of equal opposition instead of playing the demoralizing battles we got currently. I'd be much better for AFK'ing in the MCC than throwing away millions of ISK in hopeless battles. Balanced teams are fine by me, I just want to be able to play in larger groups. I fight for the Amarr, trust me that I feel your pain of railing against hopeless odds dodging awoxers while randoms spin around in circles shooting the MCC. I run Amarr to and feel your pain. I always try to ensure i bring a full squad of my corp so that we can win. Overlord of Broman

Harpyja Legio DXIV 1952	Posted - 2014.06.27 19:45:00 - [41] - Quote Ares 514 wrote: The issue you describe may occur, but I would argue it's due to the horrible payout structure. Why does everyone get the same LP regardless of what they did? Why do you get so little LP when you loose even if you were the only one on the team that did anything? I doubt that it's due to the payout structure. I agree that the payout structure is awful, but I do not believe that it's causing the problems. Gallente wins almost all of its battles, and this draws a lot of people in. Some are after earning easy LP and standings. But I also feel that a lot are just after easy kills and wins to pad their stats. If I wanted to stomp and pad my stats, I'd choose to fight for Gallente. There's absolutely no reason to fight for Caldari. If teams become balanced, then those who flock to one side to pad their stats will no longer be able to do so. Then there's reason to fight for Caldari because fighting for Caldari will no longer mean countless stomps without any standings progression and few LPs. "By His light, and His will"- The Scriptures, 12:32 -- "Scouts should fart repeatedly while cloaked"- TechMechMeds
Soraya Xel Abandoned Privilege Top Men. 2761	Posted - 2014.06.27 21:01:00 - [42] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: but I hadn't thought of WP/D. We will take a look at how that compares to our other data and calculate the correlation to W/L ratio and see how it performs. War Points per Death has been my personally favorite leaderboard metric for ages, as it allows slayers and logis alike to rank. I'm actually pretty disappointed a metric like it was never put on the leaderboard in-game. (Total kills, total war points, kill/death ratio, are all effectively useless measures for a leaderboard, and it's all we have in the DUST client.) I'd like to be your CPM1 candidate
Bayeth Mal OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 600	Posted - 2014.06.27 21:55:00 - [43] - Quote Harpyja wrote: FW teams do need to be as balanced as possible, don't listen to whoever says so otherwise. Because you can choose which faction you're fighting for as soon as one faction is winning, everyone flocks to that faction, e.g. Gal/Cal FW. Rail rifles have been more utilized than plasma rifles (at least before Bravo), yet all the pro players flocked to Gallente. Why? Because it became too reliable that Gallente almost always stomps Caldari. I feel that players don't even play Gal FW for the LP items, but to pad their KDRs against militia newbs on Caldari. Today was particularly awful due to the event, because now it was a bunch of protos redlining Caldari militia almost every match. I actually play Caldari for the LP but I can't get anywhere with 75 LP/battle and 0 standings gains over multiple hours of play. It's so incredibly demoralizing and rage enducing, getting stomped every battle because you're the only player to score over 1000 WP on your team while the second place player doesn't even have 300. Teams need to be balanced. Militia newbs against militia newbs. Stompers against stompers. And people who want to stomp won't be able to because they won't be playing militia newbs. And now there's reason to play Caldari FW, because those who play for LP will face teams of equal opposition instead of playing the demoralizing battles we got currently. I'd be much better for AFK'ing in the MCC than throwing away millions of ISK in hopeless battles. Actually one of the reasons why Gallente got such a massive head start was that a lot of Dust Corps/Alliances that are part of bigger EVE groups are actually allied with Gallente. Covert Intervention (my alliance) included as well was several other large Alliances in the game. So we were under direction to only fight for Gallente so as to not mess with our pilots EVE side. (That rule has lessened now as Dust is a sinking ship the EVE side feels more sorry for us than anything else). After that initial bump, yeah it was probably people jumping on the band wagon. Though it did get pretty ridiculous, I was running BPO gear and still wrecking everyone. The Caldari players had just stopped even trying. I jumped over and ran a couple of matches for Cal, even formed a squad out of the random blues, but when I got 1/3rd of our entire teams kills while running my BPO logi fit I gave up. The Caldari players just sucked. Heading over to Destiny Beta and a few others Hit me up for Skype and PSN
Adipem Nothi Nos Nothi 2260	Posted - 2014.06.27 22:05:00 - [44] - Quote Soraya Xel wrote: (Total kills, total war points, kill/death ratio, are all effectively useless measures for a leaderboard) ^ Everyone gets a sticker. Shoot scout with yes... - Ripley Riley
John Demonsbane Unorganized Ninja Infantry Tactics League of Infamy 3577	Posted - 2014.06.27 22:48:00 - [45] - Quote Adipem Nothi wrote: Soraya Xel wrote: (Total kills, total war points, kill/death ratio, are all effectively useless measures for a leaderboard) ^ Everyone gets a 1st place sticker AND a participation trophy. Will there be ribbons? I like ribbons. I think honestly you could even just make it something very simple like balancing the teams by career WP and it would still be leaps and bound ahead of what we have now. That might be somethng for you to look into short term, Rattati, until you can build a more sophisticated algorithm. Otherwise, if you are really forced into using only a single stat, WP/D is probably best, IMO, but if you're really going to do it right, I'm sure some kind of composite score could be made (I'm not heinz doofenshertz so I don't know what the best way to go about that is) The other, absolutely mandatory condition that should need to be met is that if there is one full squad on team A, then the next squad should always be assigned to team B. For my money thats the single most important thing for a matchmaking system to do, there is literally no reason for one team to have 2 squads and the other to have none, but it happens all the time The AI should then be able to shuffle the teams at the last second before deploying if a third squad shows up, such that the team with the highest "score" (total or average of whatever primary metric we chose, be it WP/D or something else) is always the one that ends up alone on one side. Invariably the Scrubs inc squad ends up alone on team A while Nyain San and a second squad of Nyain Chan all end up on team B with the current system. (The godfather of tactical logistics)
Vrain Matari Mikramurka Shock Troop Minmatar Republic 2141	Posted - 2014.06.28 04:04:00 - [46] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: It saddens me to know that better matchmaking would have helped the game and its new player retention a long time ago. I can tell you though that we are hopefully making some progress on matchmaking, and specifically team making, based on cumulative WP/battlesecond, cumulative KDR is not as good because of snipers, but I hadn't thought of WP/D. We will take a look at how that compares to our other data and calculate the correlation to W/L ratio and see how it performs. This is independent work from hotfixes and will be deployed when ready. Matchmaking like this is of course only in random matches, not PC. +1 Rattati. This is the first reasonable matchmaking proposal to come out of CCP. WP/batttlesecond and WP/D are both reasonable proposals. One choice for a simple predictor would be historical end-of-match win/loss ranking. Why? Because it's a totally agnostic variable, and does not depend on assumptions or models wrt how variables predict for W/L ratio. A more fine grained agnostic predictor would be historical end of match relative leaderboard ranking. A further refinement of this would be to weight each end-of-match ranking by the ranking of allies and opponents. Also, i would be tempted to test candidate predictors against a withheld subset of matches that were entertainingly close. Finally, if computation is cheap, one could feed a genetic algorithm a subset of likely(or all) variables and iterate through generations until one had a robust predictor. PSN: RationalSpark
Jathniel G I A N T General Tso's Alliance 1057	Posted - 2014.06.28 04:19:00 - [47] - Quote steadyhand amarr wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: steadyhand amarr wrote: Lack of people is due to lack of isk, the moment you throw in good isk rewards and a FW event it will spring right back Making changes/additions to FW is one thing, I am asking why we should not make the FW sides as equal as possible? ....i need to get used to the interaction... Having a Dev tact you back is like 'wow wtf!?' isn't it? lol This guy takes some initiative, and if anything forces ranters to make "concrete" arguments for their points. If only Rattati was here when Arkyna used to make all his super epic long, logic & numbers threads...
TechMechMeds Inner.Hell 3717	Posted - 2014.06.28 11:17:00 - [48] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: It saddens me to know that better matchmaking would have helped the game and its new player retention a long time ago. I can tell you though that we are hopefully making some progress on matchmaking, and specifically team making, based on cumulative WP/battlesecond, cumulative KDR is not as good because of snipers, but I hadn't thought of WP/D. We will take a look at how that compares to our other data and calculate the correlation to W/L ratio and see how it performs. This is independent work from hotfixes and will be deployed when ready. Matchmaking like this is of course only in random matches, not PC. What happens when vets are training newbs or playing with lower tier players?. Would the mm pick the average or medium of the squad?. I will spam your face with aurum proto.
Powerh8er The Rainbow Effect Dirt Nap Squad. 456	Posted - 2014.06.28 11:31:00 - [49] - Quote I rather have few bad matches now and then, rather than waiting forever just to have some scotty the matchmaking AI error.
Jaysyn Larrisen OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1165	Posted - 2014.06.28 11:51:00 - [50] - Quote John Demonsbane wrote: Adipem Nothi wrote: Soraya Xel wrote: (Total kills, total war points, kill/death ratio, are all effectively useless measures for a leaderboard) ^ Everyone gets a 1st place sticker AND a participation trophy. Will there be ribbons? I like ribbons. I think honestly you could even just make it something very simple like balancing the teams by career WP and it would still be leaps and bound ahead of what we have now. That might be somethng for you to look into short term, Rattati, until you can build a more sophisticated algorithm. Otherwise, if you are really forced into using only a single stat, WP/D is probably best, IMO, but if you're really going to do it right, I'm sure some kind of composite score could be made (I'm not heinz doofenshertz so I don't know what the best way to go about that is) The other, absolutely mandatory condition that should need to be met is that if there is one full squad on team A, then the next squad should always be assigned to team B. For my money thats the single most important thing for a matchmaking system to do, there is literally no reason for one team to have 2 squads and the other to have none, but it happens all the time The AI should then be able to shuffle the teams at the last second before deploying if a third squad shows up, such that the team with the highest "score" (total or average of whatever primary metric we chose, be it WP/D or something else) is always the one that ends up alone on one side. Invariably the Scrubs inc squad ends up alone on team A while Nyain San and a second squad of Nyain Chan all end up on team B with the current system. Totally disagree with that. The ability to q-synch in FW is one of the only (maybe the only) redeeming qualities about that game mode. To answer CCP Rattati's question directly ref. match making: Don't limit players outside pub matches. For pub matches i think a meta cap on suits / modules / weapons would be entirely acceptable (basically limit gear not players). There is absolutely no reason I should have to schedule a PC and drop ISK on a clone pack to have a simple mechanic that allows me to field a team of up to 16 folks. I will do you one further: I wouldn't mind team deploy in FW. For the guys that will get up in arms with me and say we need a constraining matchmaking system in FW: 1) If you put the meta limit on pubs you solve a lot of the problems. 2) FW matchmaking issues are exacerbated by the ISK sink. People feel the match is going south and start running Starter Suits which makes the match spiral even further out of control. 4) Under no circumstances do I want a system that forces our guys to play against each other unless it's our choosing. Dust (Legion) and Eve are all underpinned by the social aspects of the game. Dust is still the only game on PS3 that i'm aware of that you can actually form a team of more than 4 to 6 folks to play co-operatively in an organized fashion. 5) If you had a properly balanced risk / reward payout system in FW (LP and ISK both) you would get more folks in the game mode period; that alone helps match making. OSG rarely does Gal pure FW anymore...the cue times are too long. Usually I'll take a squad or two in specifically on the Caldari side and we absolutely wreck house. We fight on every side other than Gal and usually get decent fights and that's ok. FW isn't designed to be balanced unless you remove all linkages from EVE. Again, see comment #4. "Why do you have to stomp?" We don't, most guys rarely bring in anything over ADV gear because they don't want to lose money either. Team play is the number one leveling factor in this game and that's what brought the vast majority of vets to this game a long time ago...why would you involve any system that constrains that, particularly in a game mode or really a game tier, that is designed to offer higher level competition than public matches doesn't make sense to me. "Endless money forms the sinews of War." - Cicero Skype: jaysyn.larrisen Twitter: @JaysynLarrisen

Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 1679	Posted - 2014.06.28 11:55:00 - [51] - Quote Sell FW suits/weapons/modules in batches of 10. Put isk rewards in. Get rid of that "losing gets you next to zero loyalty points." No one likes to be consistently on a losing side getting nothing for the effort except broke. Leave higher isk rewards in pubs to compensate.
Onesimus Tarsus Company of Marcher Lords Amarr Empire 2184	Posted - 2014.06.28 17:31:00 - [52] - Quote Good Lord. Q: Why not put an anti-stomp mm system in place? A: I like to stomp. K/D(r) WP/D(r) matchmaking fixes the whole game. Period.
John Demonsbane Unorganized Ninja Infantry Tactics League of Infamy 3582	Posted - 2014.06.28 18:59:00 - [53] - Quote Jaysyn Larrisen wrote: Stuff that doesn't actually apply to what I said. It would appear that you missed my earlier post where I said I don't want this type of system for FW either, I want team deploy. The post of mine that you quoted applies only to pubs. (The godfather of tactical logistics)
Leovarian L Lavitz BATTLE SURVEY GROUP Dark Taboo 1123	Posted - 2014.06.29 01:24:00 - [54] - Quote Battle Impact is a good number to go by, warpoints/50/battles (number of lifetime battles/last month's battles, rolling two week battles or weekly battles whichever is more recent) Omni-Soldier Few are my equal in these specialties, none compare in all of them
Emo Skellington The Neutral Zone Psychotic Alliance 82	Posted - 2014.06.29 01:41:00 - [55] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: True Adamance wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: It saddens me to know that better matchmaking would have helped the game and its new player retention a long time ago. I can tell you though that we are hopefully making some progress on matchmaking, and specifically team making, based on cumulative WP/battlesecond, cumulative KDR is not as good because of snipers, but I hadn't thought of WP/D. We will take a look at how that compares to our other data and calculate the correlation to W/L ratio and see how it performs. This is independent work from hotfixes and will be deployed when ready. Matchmaking like this is of course only in random matches, not PC. And certainly not FW I hope. Expand on FW please, why not, post the players faction choice. Guristas Sasha Mordu's Blood raider Supporter of Legion Supporter of Valkyrie Supporter/Fan of Eve
Tom Hamp Ikomari-Onu Enforcement Caldari State 34	Posted - 2014.06.29 11:06:00 - [56] - Quote Greiv Rabbah wrote: shaman oga wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Expand on FW please, why not, post the players faction choice. The problem in FW is there is almost no one playing it, 90% of time i try to queue for a match i get 00:00. People would be more attracted by FW with: Complete LP store Possibility to sell back unused items (to the market for their value) Separate class skill from racial skill (assault, logi, scout) Agreed re: filling out the lp store. We should have consistent weapon types and suits available across the board with sensible parity(but please do something about the flaylock+give Amarr nades. It isn't uprising 1.2 anymore guys). Along with that I think if a market gets implemented the lp store will be good and useful however! That doesn't fix the issue with players not understanding how factional battles are spawned(last I checked the process was queue up FW, beat up eve player until they go fight in FW areas, watch your battle spawn. Am I wrong here?) Class and race are separate skill. I don't understand what you mean there. Everything else you said is great man yeah like state sentinels and state mags smgs top off the with other missing necessities the lonely guy
Onesimus Tarsus Company of Marcher Lords Amarr Empire 2187	Posted - 2014.06.29 12:26:00 - [57] - Quote Most likely, kdr padders are the biggest rl cash spenders here, and that affects dynamics quite a bit, CCP-side. K/D(r) WP/D(r) matchmaking fixes the whole game. Period.
iKILLu osborne Hellstorm Inc League of Infamy 45	Posted - 2014.06.30 00:49:00 - [58] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: steadyhand amarr wrote: Lack of people is due to lack of isk, the moment you throw in good isk rewards and a FW event it will spring right back Making changes/additions to FW is one thing, I am asking why we should not make the FW sides as equal as possible? cause every battle would be a bloody battle. imagine If it was 16 proto vs 16 proto it would be like playing a pc. , costing a crap ton of isk with a lp payout that can only go towards certain gear. everybody would eventually quit playing due to low isk. However you could make it to have: 6 players (1-9m sp), 6 players (9-15m sp), 4 ppl(15m+sp) on each team. and if a full squad of 15m+sp joined it would be 4 players(9-15sp) and if you do intend to balance matchmaking in fw how do you plan to stop q syncing (yes i q sync what of it?) hey you liar! i didn't sneak up on you, i was following you for 5 minutes , waiting for you to hack that cru for a camp
The-Errorist SVER True Blood 775	Posted - 2014.06.30 02:49:00 - [59] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: It saddens me to know that better matchmaking would have helped the game and its new player retention a long time ago. I can tell you though that we are hopefully making some progress on matchmaking, and specifically team making, based on cumulative WP/battlesecond, cumulative KDR is not as good because of snipers, but I hadn't thought of WP/D. We will take a look at how that compares to our other data and calculate the correlation to W/L ratio and see how it performs. This is independent work from hotfixes and will be deployed when ready. Matchmaking like this is of course only in random matches, not PC. Some time ago, I made a formula that could be used for matchmaking. What do you think of it? I also made a spreadsheet with lots of example and I have a history of revisions I made in other tabs. VR1 is for vehicles and R1 is the current iteration of the formula. MAG + Dust cb vet, an alt of Velvet Overkill & Agent Overkill. http://vimeo.com/93181621
Mark Crusader Capital Acquisitions LLC General Tso's Alliance 24	Posted - 2014.06.30 05:53:00 - [60] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: steadyhand amarr wrote: Lack of people is due to lack of isk, the moment you throw in good isk rewards and a FW event it will spring right back Making changes/additions to FW is one thing, I am asking why we should not make the FW sides as equal as possible? FW should pull players from allied queues if there are not enough to fill a match. You would still receive the LP and standing for the faction you queued for, but you might end up playing along side allied factions against their enemies. During lulls in FW participation this would essentially create a two faction system, but the matchmaking system would have a larger pool of players to draw from.

Sylwester Dziewiecki Interregnum. 318	Posted - 2014.06.30 08:27:00 - [61] - Quote Perfect matchmaking is ilusion. Nosum Hseebnrido
iKILLu osborne Hellstorm Inc League of Infamy 45	Posted - 2014.06.30 09:17:00 - [62] - Quote i've seen alot of people posting in this thread that gallente is the dominant faction(lol) so i would like to gently remind everybody of why that is so. Z platoon retired because of the mass suicide that was organised (those who did it know of what i speak) that resulted in us losing all the factional space we had gained and the annoucement of legion(bye-bye dust) if it was not from that you gallente scum would still be flooding our mailbox with hate(yes extreme prejudice). our sole mission was the retaking of caldari prime and we still plan on fulfilling that mission I have spoke with Z-13 and he said to start warming the orbital lasers. hey you liar! i didn't sneak up on you, i was following you for 5 minutes , waiting for you to hack that cru for a camp
The Lion ElJonson 1st Legion The Dark Angels 64	Posted - 2014.06.30 10:43:00 - [63] - Quote Why not restrict pub matchs to 3 classes? Milita and low equip, medium, and proto, if you have 1 proto mod equip ped you can assess the lower battles if you know what i mean Millions of isks worth of ships in space yet theres nothing quite like a face to face
Onesimus Tarsus Company of Marcher Lords Amarr Empire 2189	Posted - 2014.06.30 18:30:00 - [64] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: It saddens me to know that better matchmaking would have helped the game and its new player retention a long time ago. I can tell you though that we are hopefully making some progress on matchmaking, and specifically team making, based on cumulative WP/battlesecond, cumulative KDR is not as good because of snipers, but I hadn't thought of WP/D. We will take a look at how that compares to our other data and calculate the correlation to W/L ratio and see how it performs. This is independent work from hotfixes and will be deployed when ready. Matchmaking like this is of course only in random matches, not PC. If sniping is that much more lethal by nature, then kdr mm would correct that. It might mean that career snipers will have to participate in matches where the nature of the match no longer feeds their kdr and they will have to diversify and... adapt... to the changing play field. K/D(r) WP/D(r) matchmaking fixes the whole game. Period.
John Demonsbane Unorganized Ninja Infantry Tactics League of Infamy 3594	Posted - 2014.06.30 23:06:00 - [65] - Quote Onesimus Tarsus wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: It saddens me to know that better matchmaking would have helped the game and its new player retention a long time ago. I can tell you though that we are hopefully making some progress on matchmaking, and specifically team making, based on cumulative WP/battlesecond, cumulative KDR is not as good because of snipers, but I hadn't thought of WP/D. We will take a look at how that compares to our other data and calculate the correlation to W/L ratio and see how it performs. This is independent work from hotfixes and will be deployed when ready. Matchmaking like this is of course only in random matches, not PC. If sniping is that much more lethal by nature, then kdr mm would correct that. It might mean that career snipers will have to participate in matches where the nature of the match no longer feeds their kdr and they will have to diversify and... adapt... to the changing play field. gasp (The godfather of tactical logistics)

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 3473	Posted - 2014.07.01 11:39:00 - [66] - Quote The-Errorist wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: It saddens me to know that better matchmaking would have helped the game and its new player retention a long time ago. I can tell you though that we are hopefully making some progress on matchmaking, and specifically team making, based on cumulative WP/battlesecond, cumulative KDR is not as good because of snipers, but I hadn't thought of WP/D. We will take a look at how that compares to our other data and calculate the correlation to W/L ratio and see how it performs. This is independent work from hotfixes and will be deployed when ready. Matchmaking like this is of course only in random matches, not PC. Some time ago, I made a formula that could be used for matchmaking. What do you think of it? I also made a spreadsheet with lots of example and I have a history of revisions I made in other tabs. VR1 is for vehicles and R1 is the current iteration of the formula. I read your work and thread. We will look at it in reference when we continue our work on improving matchmaking. Thanks! "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Senator Snipe Escrow Removal and Acquisition Dirt Nap Squad. 152	Posted - 2014.07.01 11:42:00 - [67] - Quote + 1. Ambush would be more fun. I can just see it :) My forge skills are unmatchable
Onesimus Tarsus Company of Marcher Lords Amarr Empire 2202	Posted - 2014.07.01 12:46:00 - [68] - Quote Sylwester Dziewiecki wrote: Perfect matchmaking is ilusion. So is the perfect trip to the grocery store. Let's stop eating. K/D(r) WP/D(r) matchmaking fixes the whole game. Period. Seriously. Think about it.
Jaysyn Larrisen OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1187	Posted - 2014.07.01 13:44:00 - [69] - Quote John Demonsbane wrote: Jaysyn Larrisen wrote: Stuff that doesn't actually apply to what I said. It would appear that you missed my earlier post where I said I don't want this type of system for FW either, I want team deploy. The post of mine that you quoted applies only to pubs. Ha! I answered them in order of appearance - sorry. "Endless money forms the sinews of War." - Cicero Skype: jaysyn.larrisen Twitter: @JaysynLarrisen
bogeyman m Minmatar Republic 291	Posted - 2014.07.01 16:17:00 - [70] - Quote SponkSponkSponk wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Making changes/additions to FW is one thing, I am asking why we should not make the FW sides as equal as possible? You should, but bear in mind that you'll be hampered by 1. Generally-lower player population for reasons explained previously 2. Much more incentive to, and success with, team stacking (via multiple squads from the same corp/alliance/whatever) I've said before, but lowering the max squad size will generally make matchmaking more fair, because it keeps synergistic effects manageable and reduces the ability for one or two good players to carry an entire squad (or indeed, team). - add matchmaking - require squads (no solos) - make squad size 4 - add minimum SP requirement Duct tape 2.0 ... Have WD-40; will travel. Cross Atu for CPM1

Atiim Fooly Cooly. 10093	Posted - 2014.07.01 17:22:00 - [71] - Quote steadyhand amarr wrote: Lack of people is due to lack of isk, the moment you throw in good isk rewards and a FW event it will spring right back I'm sure increasing the LP payouts would be best. Taking Care of The Pilot Infestation in North American Skirmish -HAND
Nevyn Tazinas Company of Marcher Lords Amarr Empire 34	Posted - 2014.07.01 19:32:00 - [72] - Quote Ability to 'random squad' would also be a huge boon to matches I feel. If there are part squads in the match, Squad Leader can set 'Accept Randoms for Match' or not as he wants. These players would only be in the squad for the one match, not permanently. Any left over after part squads are filled would be put into a totally random squad with a random player as lead. It's not going to go up against fully organised squads like this, but it would mean something. And would mean you don't have to go organising a full squad before hand, and you can meet new people Squads dropping to 4 players would also make this 4 squads a side if pure randoms/already full squads, which makes for a better split between objectives. 6 is often stacking a bit heavy in one spot for skirmish maps.
Ares 514 D.A.R.K L.E.G.I.O.N D.E.F.I.A.N.C.E 945	Posted - 2014.07.01 19:35:00 - [73] - Quote Reducing squad size is a horrible idea. Many still play this game only to play with their friends. Reducing the number of friends they can play with and going backwards in time is not the way to fix matchmaking. Overlord of Broman
Onesimus Tarsus Company of Marcher Lords Amarr Empire 2224	Posted - 2014.07.02 15:33:00 - [74] - Quote The problem is that all other fixes are artificial balances. kmm (I've finally decided to shorten it to that) is a real balance. If followed, every aspect of the game self-balances. Why? Because the game is kdr. You can argue that some meta game exists, and that might require some meta fix, but the game is kdr. Match make by that, and watch as everything fixes itself automatically. The problem is, and I know I'm repeating ad nauseam, people want no-challenge stomps more than life itself around here. K/D(r) WP/D(r) matchmaking fixes the whole game. Period. Seriously. Think about it.
Seymour KrelbornX Holdfast Syndicate Amarr Empire 255	Posted - 2014.07.02 20:37:00 - [75] - Quote shaman oga wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Expand on FW please, why not, post the players faction choice. The problem in FW is there is almost no one playing it, 90% of time i try to queue for a match i get 00:00. People would be more attracted by FW with: Complete LP store Possibility to sell back unused items (to the market for their value) Separate class skill from racial skill (assault, logi, scout) give us isk in FW and I'll play it... don't see why mercs cant make isk for it but eve pilots can... makes no sense and makes FW useless to me.
One Eyed King Land of the BIind 2246	Posted - 2014.07.02 20:49:00 - [76] - Quote Seymour KrelbornX wrote: shaman oga wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Expand on FW please, why not, post the players faction choice. The problem in FW is there is almost no one playing it, 90% of time i try to queue for a match i get 00:00. People would be more attracted by FW with: Complete LP store Possibility to sell back unused items (to the market for their value) Separate class skill from racial skill (assault, logi, scout) give us isk in FW and I'll play it... don't see why mercs cant make isk for it but eve pilots can... makes no sense and makes FW useless to me. It goes back to their intention that the weapon salvage could be used to get isk in a market place. Now that the market place will no longer be coming to Dust, it seems obvious they should reinstate isk rewards. This is how a minja feels
Greiv Rabbah KiLo. 11	Posted - 2014.07.02 23:43:00 - [77] - Quote Why dont we move Scotty the matchmaking ai to "instant battle" and restore the battle finder. Use matchmaking for randoms andpull queue synching players to the planet of their choice with ambush and oms in separate queues?
Greiv Rabbah KiLo. 11	Posted - 2014.07.03 12:44:00 - [78] - Quote John Demonsbane wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: steadyhand amarr wrote: Lack of people is due to lack of isk, the moment you throw in good isk rewards and a FW event it will spring right back Making changes/additions to FW is one thing, I am asking why we should not make the FW sides as equal as possible? If you gave us team deploy, no problem. Why? Reason 1: Friendly fire! I do not want to be forced to squad up with any more randoms than absolutely necessary in a game mode where they can kill me and I can't do anything about it unless I want to waste the week or so of effort it takes to regain the standings loss from a TK ban. Reason 2, 3 and 4: See reason 1. Reason 5: FW is supposed to be competitive, right? A middle ground between pubs and PC? So it shouldn't necessarily be treated the same way as pubs. As a competitive outlet, we should be able to q-sync in large groups to do our thing. Matchmaking would thwart that in the absence of a team deploy option. This is wrong. Factional is more advanced gameplay yes. If you're too green or carebeary to step into low sec that should be as much your choice as it is in eve, but queue synching isn't a problem. Grinding isk with friends isn't a problem. Running with squads of ppl you know instead of struggling against a squad of blueberries isn't a problem. What is a problem is battle finder was replaced with Scotty and now all we have are either FW that's never active and random pubs. Random pubs handled by a matchmaking AI that nobody EVER liked. Factional should be more organized competitive play, where you ideally know your own team, but if you spot a battle going on at a certain planet between two NPC megacorps in your battle finder you SHOULD be able to sign up to battle there. Your friends squads should too if there's room. Random pubs belong in an "instant battle" tab in our neocom, not taking over our "battle finder"
Onesimus Tarsus Company of Marcher Lords Amarr Empire 2361	Posted - 2014.07.25 11:17:00 - [79] - Quote Oh, and CCP, this style of matchmaking also generates the most money in aurum sales and it eats up gear the fastest. K/D(r) WP/D(r) matchmaking fixes the whole game. Period. Beh!

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 4797	Posted - 2014.07.25 12:40:00 - [80] - Quote Preaching to the choir my man. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"


Fox Gaden Immortal Guides 3962	Posted - 2014.07.25 16:04:00 - [81] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: It saddens me to know that better matchmaking would have helped the game and its new player retention a long time ago. I can tell you though that we are hopefully making some progress on matchmaking, and specifically team making, based on cumulative WP/battlesecond, cumulative KDR is not as good because of snipers, but I hadn't thought of WP/D. We will take a look at how that compares to our other data and calculate the correlation to W/L ratio and see how it performs. This is independent work from hotfixes and will be deployed when ready. Matchmaking like this is of course only in random matches, not PC. Logi will have substantially higher WP/Battlesecond than Sentinels (probably by a factor of 4x). WP/Death would be a little closer because Sentinels probably die less than Logi, but Logi are still likely to have a high WP/Death score than an equally skilled Sentinel. Hand/Eye coordination cannot be taught. For everything else there is the Learning Coalition.

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 4817	Posted - 2014.07.25 16:51:00 - [82] - Quote Fox Gaden wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: It saddens me to know that better matchmaking would have helped the game and its new player retention a long time ago. I can tell you though that we are hopefully making some progress on matchmaking, and specifically team making, based on cumulative WP/battlesecond, cumulative KDR is not as good because of snipers, but I hadn't thought of WP/D. We will take a look at how that compares to our other data and calculate the correlation to W/L ratio and see how it performs. This is independent work from hotfixes and will be deployed when ready. Matchmaking like this is of course only in random matches, not PC. Logi will have substantially higher WP/Battlesecond than Sentinels (probably by a factor of 4x). WP/Death would be a little closer because Sentinels probably die less than Logi, but Logi are still likely to have a high WP/Death score than an equally skilled Sentinel. If you remember, we also track the players MU, basically ELO rankings, that is purely based on W/L ratios. The theory would be as KDR/WP matchmaking convergers, and players start playing other "equals", then MU steps in, so high MU sentinels can fight high MU logis, if there efforts contribute to the teams winning or losing. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

TYCHUS MAXWELL The Fun Police 247	Posted - 2014.07.25 16:54:00 - [83] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: It saddens me to know that better matchmaking would have helped the game and its new player retention a long time ago. I can tell you though that we are hopefully making some progress on matchmaking, and specifically team making, based on cumulative WP/battlesecond, cumulative KDR is not as good because of snipers, but I hadn't thought of WP/D. We will take a look at how that compares to our other data and calculate the correlation to W/L ratio and see how it performs. This is independent work from hotfixes and will be deployed when ready. Matchmaking like this is of course only in random matches, not PC. As people have hinted at in this thread it wasn't like people weren't screaming it at least since uprising (Wasn't here for Beta.) Like a lot of the problems though the devs before you buried their heads in the sand and addressed it too late. We had a matchmaking system for a while but the couple minute wait times on an already thinning community led to it being removed again. That's probably why they threw you into the mix now after running away to work on Legion. They horribly mishandled the mechanics of a fps trying to treat it like they would Eve and ignored the community feedback on why newcomers didn't want to stick around and reviewers just went meh. I'd love to see a matchmaking update but to be realistic unless you guys have more numbers on a growing player base or greater coding skills then the last guys, it's just going to lead back to the long matchmaking timers that everyone will hate and demand the removal of matchmaking again. I say greater coding skills but I of course have no idea how matchmaking was supposedly implemented the first time around. And in this case, all this may be patronizing as you probably do know what the past devs did, but in the case that the other devs didn't make that clear, here you go lol.
Fox Gaden Immortal Guides 3963	Posted - 2014.07.25 17:01:00 - [84] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Fox Gaden wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: It saddens me to know that better matchmaking would have helped the game and its new player retention a long time ago. I can tell you though that we are hopefully making some progress on matchmaking, and specifically team making, based on cumulative WP/battlesecond, cumulative KDR is not as good because of snipers, but I hadn't thought of WP/D. We will take a look at how that compares to our other data and calculate the correlation to W/L ratio and see how it performs. This is independent work from hotfixes and will be deployed when ready. Matchmaking like this is of course only in random matches, not PC. Logi will have substantially higher WP/Battlesecond than Sentinels (probably by a factor of 4x). WP/Death would be a little closer because Sentinels probably die less than Logi, but Logi are still likely to have a high WP/Death score than an equally skilled Sentinel. If you remember, we also track the players MU, basically ELO rankings, that is purely based on W/L ratios. The theory would be as KDR/WP matchmaking convergers, and players start playing other "equals", then MU steps in, so high MU sentinels can fight high MU logis, if there efforts contribute to the teams winning or losing. So you have already accounted for the WP discrepancy. What does MU and ELO stand for in this context? I may not have been following the balance discussions closely enough. Hand/Eye coordination cannot be taught. For everything else there is the Learning Coalition.

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 4818	Posted - 2014.07.25 17:24:00 - [85] - Quote http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_system "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Onesimus Tarsus Company of Marcher Lords Amarr Empire 2361	Posted - 2014.07.25 18:57:00 - [86] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_system A bit complicated, considering that all you have to do is figure out to further decimal places in an ever-changing kdr stack and everything else will settle out on its own. Other than that, I suppose if it works... K/D(r) WP/D(r) matchmaking fixes the whole game. Period. Beh!
Nothing Certain Bioshock Rejects 986	Posted - 2014.07.25 19:15:00 - [87] - Quote Ares 514 wrote: John Demonsbane wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: steadyhand amarr wrote: Lack of people is due to lack of isk, the moment you throw in good isk rewards and a FW event it will spring right back Making changes/additions to FW is one thing, I am asking why we should not make the FW sides as equal as possible? If you gave us team deploy, no problem. Why? Reason 1: Friendly fire! I do not want to be forced to squad up with any more randoms than absolutely necessary in a game mode where they can kill me and I can't do anything about it unless I want to waste the week or so of effort it takes to regain the standings loss from a TK ban. Reason 2, 3 and 4: See reason 1. Reason 5: FW is supposed to be competitive, right? A middle ground between pubs and PC? So it shouldn't necessarily be treated the same way as pubs. As a competitive outlet, we should be able to q-sync in large groups to do our thing. Matchmaking would thwart that in the absence of a team deploy option. Exactly. Do not prevent players from q-syncing FW. But isn't one of the main reasons there is a ten minute wait is because no one wants to play against this? The other issues are ISK and loyalty store being lopsided in value of items. Because, that's why.
John Demonsbane Unorganized Ninja Infantry Tactics League of Infamy 3829	Posted - 2014.07.25 19:35:00 - [88] - Quote Nothing Certain wrote: Ares 514 wrote: John Demonsbane wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: steadyhand amarr wrote: Lack of people is due to lack of isk, the moment you throw in good isk rewards and a FW event it will spring right back Making changes/additions to FW is one thing, I am asking why we should not make the FW sides as equal as possible? If you gave us team deploy, no problem. Why? Reason 1: Friendly fire! I do not want to be forced to squad up with any more randoms than absolutely necessary in a game mode where they can kill me and I can't do anything about it unless I want to waste the week or so of effort it takes to regain the standings loss from a TK ban. Reason 2, 3 and 4: See reason 1. Reason 5: FW is supposed to be competitive, right? A middle ground between pubs and PC? So it shouldn't necessarily be treated the same way as pubs. As a competitive outlet, we should be able to q-sync in large groups to do our thing. Matchmaking would thwart that in the absence of a team deploy option. Exactly. Do not prevent players from q-syncing FW. But isn't one of the main reasons there is a ten minute wait is because no one wants to play against this? The other issues are ISK and loyalty store being lopsided in value of items. I highly doubt that q-synching alone has anything to do with low FW participation, at least not in a way that would be substantially improved upon by matchmaking. The high risk low reward payout system is a far bigger issue. (The godfather of tactical logistics)
Fox Gaden Immortal Guides 3971	Posted - 2014.07.25 21:03:00 - [89] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elo_rating_system Thanks. Hand/Eye coordination cannot be taught. For everything else there is the Learning Coalition.
Onesimus Tarsus Company of Marcher Lords Amarr Empire 2362	Posted - 2014.07.25 21:06:00 - [90] - Quote Nothing Certain wrote: Ares 514 wrote: John Demonsbane wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: steadyhand amarr wrote: Lack of people is due to lack of isk, the moment you throw in good isk rewards and a FW event it will spring right back Making changes/additions to FW is one thing, I am asking why we should not make the FW sides as equal as possible? If you gave us team deploy, no problem. Why? Reason 1: Friendly fire! I do not want to be forced to squad up with any more randoms than absolutely necessary in a game mode where they can kill me and I can't do anything about it unless I want to waste the week or so of effort it takes to regain the standings loss from a TK ban. Reason 2, 3 and 4: See reason 1. Reason 5: FW is supposed to be competitive, right? A middle ground between pubs and PC? So it shouldn't necessarily be treated the same way as pubs. As a competitive outlet, we should be able to q-sync in large groups to do our thing. Matchmaking would thwart that in the absence of a team deploy option. Exactly. Do not prevent players from q-syncing FW. But isn't one of the main reasons there is a ten minute wait is because no one wants to play against this? The other issues are ISK and loyalty store being lopsided in value of items. q-synching: keeping the stomp alive. K/D(r) matchmaking fixes the whole game. Period. It even fixes WP/D(r). Beh!

Sgt Kirk Fatal Absolution 6733	Posted - 2014.07.26 02:47:00 - [91] - Quote SCATTORSHOT RINNEGATE wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: steadyhand amarr wrote: Lack of people is due to lack of isk, the moment you throw in good isk rewards and a FW event it will spring right back Making changes/additions to FW is one thing, I am asking why we should not make the FW sides as equal as possible? Yes i think FW team balance is good to merge because what i see now in FW caldari is a full team of militians against gallente pro players. +1 Dude, its not Gallente PRO players honestly. All I do is FW all day and I can tell you I see more squads on Caldari than Gallente. And yet they still win. I could name some corps that lost to Gallente Blueberries but I don't remember their names specifically. I dont know what it is about Caldari players but they just suck, the only time they win is when Nyain San carries their sorry asses to victory. It must be a morale issue, idk. see you space cowboy...
John Demonsbane Unorganized Ninja Infantry Tactics League of Infamy 3830	Posted - 2014.07.26 16:29:00 - [92] - Quote Onesimus Tarsus wrote: q-synching: keeping the stomp alive. I think you're missing a crucial point, this is not intended to facilitate stomping (I have never and do not plan to engage in any pubstomps) This is only FW we are talking about here. When they added friendly fire and the LP standings, the whole point was to create a middle tier of competitive gameplay between pubs and PC, one that would also serve as an ISK sink for the PC rich. A game mode in which you are unable to deploy in a large group can not serve that purpose. If you take away the ability to q-synch (or again, just give us team deploy, everyone is happy) you're no different than pubs. On the flip side, if you make FW more attractive, both in terms of competitiveness (team deploy/qsynch) and reward (better scaling of payouts) then you make a clear differentiation. All the people who want to qsynch and get good fights will go to FW.... leaving pubs more open and less stompy. Everybody wins! (The godfather of tactical logistics)
Onesimus Tarsus Grundstein Automation 2362	Posted - 2014.07.26 16:44:00 - [93] - Quote John Demonsbane wrote: Onesimus Tarsus wrote: q-synching: keeping the stomp alive. I think you're missing a crucial point, this is not intended to facilitate stomping (I have never and do not plan to engage in any pubstomps) This is only FW we are talking about here. When they added friendly fire and the LP standings, the whole point was to create a middle tier of competitive gameplay between pubs and PC, one that would also serve as an ISK sink for the PC rich. A game mode in which you are unable to deploy in a large group can not serve that purpose. If you take away the ability to q-synch (or again, just give us team deploy, everyone is happy) you're no different than pubs. On the flip side, if you make FW more attractive, both in terms of competitiveness (team deploy/qsynch) and reward (better scaling of payouts) then you make a clear differentiation. All the people who want to qsynch and get good fights will go to FW.... leaving pubs more open and less stompy. Everybody wins! Concur. K/D(r) matchmaking fixes the whole game. Period. It even fixes WP/D(r). Beh!
Maximus Aurelicus Gallente Federation Resistance General Tso's Alliance 1	Posted - 2014.09.12 15:19:00 - [94] - Quote Onesimus Tarsus wrote: John Demonsbane wrote: Onesimus Tarsus wrote: q-synching: keeping the stomp alive. I think you're missing a crucial point, this is not intended to facilitate stomping (I have never and do not plan to engage in any pubstomps) This is only FW we are talking about here. When they added friendly fire and the LP standings, the whole point was to create a middle tier of competitive gameplay between pubs and PC, one that would also serve as an ISK sink for the PC rich. A game mode in which you are unable to deploy in a large group can not serve that purpose. If you take away the ability to q-synch (or again, just give us team deploy, everyone is happy) you're no different than pubs. On the flip side, if you make FW more attractive, both in terms of competitiveness (team deploy/qsynch) and reward (better scaling of payouts) then you make a clear differentiation. All the people who want to qsynch and get good fights will go to FW.... leaving pubs more open and less stompy. Everybody wins! Concur. Couldn't agree more. Concur. Keep getting Blueprints as you play after creating account through this
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 2125	Posted - 2014.09.12 15:46:00 - [95] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: steadyhand amarr wrote: Lack of people is due to lack of isk, the moment you throw in good isk rewards and a FW event it will spring right back Making changes/additions to FW is one thing, I am asking why we should not make the FW sides as equal as possible? In a perfect world, there would be no need for matchmaking for FW. There would simply be a map and facilities to assault. You would see where battles were underway and could choose to defend for that particular facility or to attack a different enemy held facility. There is no need to see who is attacking where, just that where is under attack. If you choose to defend that facility, you can, if you want to attack another, you can. @OP I wholeheartedly support this idea and am of the opinion that it cannot arrive soon enough. "Heres the deal, in the 40s there was Normandy today you got punks, some need culling real bad." --Truth Logi for Hire
zzZaXxx Vengeance Unbound 503	Posted - 2014.09.12 20:32:00 - [96] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: It saddens me to know that better matchmaking would have helped the game and its new player retention a long time ago. I can tell you though that we are hopefully making some progress on matchmaking, and specifically team making, based on cumulative WP/battlesecond, cumulative KDR is not as good because of snipers, but I hadn't thought of WP/D. We will take a look at how that compares to our other data and calculate the correlation to W/L ratio and see how it performs. This is independent work from hotfixes and will be deployed when ready. Matchmaking like this is of course only in random matches, not PC. Breaks my heart too. I'll tell you what, as one of the occasional protostompers, I can tell you this game is unplayable for noobs. CCP set themselves up real nice with that didn't they? Works in EVE because of high security space and PVE. Well.....maybe they'll get it right with Legion. But yes, something like this is needed! I don't always necessarily want to form/join an elite squad. I like just getting out there and playing with who I've got, but it's so frustrating and expensive going up against elite squads in Ambush with a mediocre squad. Sad to say, but the game is funner in an elite squad, even if you're stomping most of the time, because a)stomping is funner than being stomped, and b) you get good fights when another good squad is on the other side. And all this is true in Domination and Skirmish too, except the stomping is dragged out 3x as long for double the boredom. Currently there is no way out of this. Older players like myself have found our niche and our way to enjoy the game despite the nonexistant matchmaking and various and sundry flaws. We're not going to change. (Though if you somehow made it possible for whole teams to sync up against each other in FW a lot of us would go that route. It would make FW a protostomp zone for noobs but help make pubs safer for them.) Newer players are just trying to survive and not having much success. If I was a new player, without connections, I'd get real frustrated real quick and say screw this crap I don't spend time playing a video game to be constantly ground beneath bootheels....meh I'm playing Destiny.
zzZaXxx Vengeance Unbound 504	Posted - 2014.09.12 20:48:00 - [97] - Quote Greiv Rabbah wrote: John Demonsbane wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: steadyhand amarr wrote: Lack of people is due to lack of isk, the moment you throw in good isk rewards and a FW event it will spring right back Making changes/additions to FW is one thing, I am asking why we should not make the FW sides as equal as possible? If you gave us team deploy, no problem. Why? Reason 1: Friendly fire! I do not want to be forced to squad up with any more randoms than absolutely necessary in a game mode where they can kill me and I can't do anything about it unless I want to waste the week or so of effort it takes to regain the standings loss from a TK ban. Reason 2, 3 and 4: See reason 1. Reason 5: FW is supposed to be competitive, right? A middle ground between pubs and PC? So it shouldn't necessarily be treated the same way as pubs. As a competitive outlet, we should be able to q-sync in large groups to do our thing. Matchmaking would thwart that in the absence of a team deploy option. This is wrong. Factional is more advanced gameplay yes. If you're too green or carebeary to step into low sec that should be as much your choice as it is in eve, but queue synching isn't a problem. Grinding isk with friends isn't a problem. Running with squads of ppl you know instead of struggling against a squad of blueberries isn't a problem. What is a problem is battle finder was replaced with Scotty and now all we have are either FW that's never active and random pubs. Random pubs handled by a matchmaking AI that nobody EVER liked. Factional should be more organized competitive play, where you ideally know your own team, but if you spot a battle going on at a certain planet between two NPC megacorps in your battle finder you SHOULD be able to sign up to battle there. Your friends squads should too if there's room. Random pubs belong in an "instant battle" tab in our neocom, not taking over our "battle finder" Here here!! It's so simple. Makes you wonder how they've managed to keep the matchmaking in such a rudimentary state. I wonder if they were squabbling with each other the whole time, not able to agree on what to do? It's just so frustrating and incomprehensible. No developer can get under your skin and make you rage like CCP can. They get so many things spot on but just seem to not get other vitally important things at all. And you never know why. No gamers ever have been subjected to the mental anguish that CCP has put DUST players through.
Maiden selena MORTIMOR Amarr Templars Amarr Empire 176	Posted - 2014.09.12 21:05:00 - [98] - Quote shaman oga wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Expand on FW please, why not, post the players faction choice. The problem in FW is there is almost no one playing it, 90% of time i try to queue for a match i get 00:00. People would be more attracted by FW with: Complete LP store Possibility to sell back unused items (to the market for their value) Separate class skill from racial skill (assault, logi, scout) Give fw higher isk payouts than pubs and I'll never play anything else...oh no fw pays lp only...your offering imperial credits to a Hutt on a planet outside the Senate's control your lp. Has no value to me no im not a mortedeamor alt..im her slave When my master is banned I represent her wishes and that of the Mortimor famil


Pages: 1 2 3 4 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.