DUST Search - Matchmaking feedback

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Matchmaking feedback

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 4 post(s)
PO0KY Virtual Syndicate 644	Posted - 2014.09.17 23:26:00 - [1] - Quote I'm pretty unimpressed with the matchmaking update. It seems every game I've been in, the enemy just crumbles. Look at this cringe-worthy game for example. http://i.imgur.com/Em2gw18.jpg What gives? How have your games been going? I'm so helpful.

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 7308	Posted - 2014.09.17 23:43:00 - [2] - Quote PO0KY wrote: I'm pretty unimpressed with the matchmaking update. It seems every game I've been in, the enemy just crumbles. Look at this cringe-worthy game for example. http://i.imgur.com/Em2gw18.jpg What gives? How have your games been going? All I can do is check if the teams were as balanced as possible, I would appreciate if the screenshots were sent to [email protected] If the teams are as equal as possible, then frankly, the battle is in their hands. Doesn't mean that battles will win themselves. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Haerr Legio DXIV 1416	Posted - 2014.09.18 00:07:00 - [3] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: PO0KY wrote: I'm pretty unimpressed with the matchmaking update. It seems every game I've been in, the enemy just crumbles. Look at this cringe-worthy game for example. http://i.imgur.com/Em2gw18.jpg What gives? How have your games been going? All I can do is check if the teams were as balanced as possible, I would appreciate if the screenshots were sent to [email protected] If the teams are as equal as possible, then frankly, the battle is in their hands. Doesn't mean that battles will win themselves. Would you actually want us to send in a screenshot when an ambush (50 clone) match ends with 45+ clones left on one side? I mean is that valuable feedback unless it happens a few times in a row? Perhaps it would be better to send in screenshots of matches that end at 0 & 0? It could be good looking at matches that go down to the wire as well. Don't you already have all the data anyways? Would a date+time+screenshot be worthwhile for anything? Not trying to pester you or anything, it is just... good fights and so on. Oh look a bunny! -> =ƒÉç
BlazeXYZ xCosmic Voidx Ishuk-Raata Enforcement Directive 226	Posted - 2014.09.18 00:09:00 - [4] - Quote PO0KY wrote: I'm pretty unimpressed with the matchmaking update. It seems every game I've been in, the enemy just crumbles. Look at this cringe-worthy game for example. http://i.imgur.com/Em2gw18.jpg What gives? How have your games been going? I was playing with you in one of them we were literally dominating. Lol. The Blazing Intellect Machine
PO0KY Virtual Syndicate 650	Posted - 2014.09.18 00:19:00 - [5] - Quote BlazeXYZ wrote: PO0KY wrote: I'm pretty unimpressed with the matchmaking update. It seems every game I've been in, the enemy just crumbles. Look at this cringe-worthy game for example. http://i.imgur.com/Em2gw18.jpg What gives? How have your games been going? I was playing with you in one of them we were literally dominating. Lol. I remember that! I think we had like 80 kills between us and maybe 5 or 6 deaths. I'm so helpful.
zzZaXxx Vengeance Unbound 512	Posted - 2014.09.18 00:20:00 - [6] - Quote When a battle has a very uneven result, take a pic of the killboard and send it to Rattati. He can then check to make sure that the teams were even in terms of Mu.
maluble Espi0nage 71	Posted - 2014.09.18 00:35:00 - [7] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: PO0KY wrote: I'm pretty unimpressed with the matchmaking update. It seems every game I've been in, the enemy just crumbles. Look at this cringe-worthy game for example. http://i.imgur.com/Em2gw18.jpg What gives? How have your games been going? All I can do is check if the teams were as balanced as possible, I would appreciate if the screenshots were sent to [email protected] If the teams are as equal as possible, then frankly, the battle is in their hands. Doesn't mean that battles will win themselves. No disrespect but thats a really lazy answer. How about keeping new players in academy till 10mil sp. You ask for a screenshot, what does that accomplish? New players are the issue how can you not see that. 90% of the games i get are full of what I assume based on the leaderboard to be new players that dont understand how to play the game. I think future fps's should require an IQ test to play.
Atiim 12236	Posted - 2014.09.18 00:38:00 - [8] - Quote Keep in mind that this feature has just deployed, so it may take a bit of time (I estimate about 2 weeks) for everyone's Mu to reach a consistent, and stable level. At least, that's a theory. I personally won't be able to play 'till the weekend, so I won't be able to test it out for now. The 1st Matari Commando -HAND
Meee One Hello Kitty Logistics 1151	Posted - 2014.09.18 05:01:00 - [9] - Quote PO0KY wrote: I'm pretty unimpressed with the matchmaking update. It seems every game I've been in, the enemy just crumbles. Look at this cringe-worthy game for example. http://i.imgur.com/Em2gw18.jpg What gives? How have your games been going? Here's how all of mine went,win or loss. beginning:ooh assaults,heavies,logis,and scouts a little of everything this'll be fun! 10% in:noticing less assaults and no more logis 15% :more scouts more heavies,1-2 assaults 1 logistics (myself). 20%:scouts and heavies everywhere,1 logistics 25% and on: SG scouts with REs,1 logistics Yeah,this system is terrible. I've died more to OHK antics today than in the whole of last week. I was literally the only non-scout in several matches.And i suffered badly because of it...going 0/13,0/14 with only 100-500 WP,afterall scouts don't need logistics like heavies do. I was singled out horriby because my suit is slow at evasion. It got so bad i actually had to start running MLT fits just to curb my expenses. I lost over 5 million wearing ADV gear within 3 matches. Some serious attention needs to be directed at equipment prices. Was banned for fighting for logistics survival on 7/25/2014 02:11. Logistics will never be respected.
Regis Blackbird DUST University Ivy League 406	Posted - 2014.09.18 05:17:00 - [10] - Quote Atiim wrote: Keep in mind that this feature has just deployed, so it may take a bit of time (I estimate about 2 weeks) for everyone's Mu to reach a consistent, and stable level. At least, that's a theory. I personally won't be able to play 'till the weekend, so I won't be able to test it out for now. I can't say anything about the improvements as I haven't had the chance to play yet. However, in the original discussion Rattati conducted, he mentioned a second parameter (WP/s) which is strongly correlated to Mu, but converges much faster. https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=2322344#post2322344 The question I have is if this new "parameter" is used in today's (new) team balancing mechanic, as he didn't mentioned this in his announcement? Perhaps there are still improvements to come? Another very interesting idea he mentioned was to use WP/s as a Academy graduation criteria, I.e you only graduate after reaching a certain level of WP/s rather that a fixed WP value.

ZDub 303 Escrow Removal and Acquisition Negative-Feedback 3282	Posted - 2014.09.18 05:34:00 - [11] - Quote maluble wrote: No disrespect but thats a really lazy answer. How about keeping new players in academy till 10mil sp. You ask for a screenshot, what does that accomplish? New players are the issue how can you not see that. 90% of the games i get are full of what I assume based on the leaderboard to be new players that dont understand how to play the game. I think future fps's should require an IQ test to play. He's asking for screenshots so he can go back and find the battle probably. See if the Mu scores were matched or not. If they were matched and its a stomp, then he can log at as a 'failure' of the system, maybe figure out why that happened and adjust how Mu is calculated to provide better matchmaking. If the Mu scores were not matched and it was a stomp, he can try to figure out why the Mu scores weren't matched. Its a brand new feature. Don't be shocked if it requires a little iteration or some situational bugs come out of the code and need to be fixed. B C R U are letters, not words - Wierd Al Yankovich

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 7328	Posted - 2014.09.18 06:15:00 - [12] - Quote ZDub 303 wrote: maluble wrote: No disrespect but thats a really lazy answer. How about keeping new players in academy till 10mil sp. You ask for a screenshot, what does that accomplish? New players are the issue how can you not see that. 90% of the games i get are full of what I assume based on the leaderboard to be new players that dont understand how to play the game. I think future fps's should require an IQ test to play. He's asking for screenshots so he can go back and find the battle probably. See if the Mu scores were matched or not. If they were matched and its a stomp, then he can log at as a 'failure' of the system, maybe figure out why that happened and adjust how Mu is calculated to provide better matchmaking. If the Mu scores were not matched and it was a stomp, he can try to figure out why the Mu scores weren't matched. Its a brand new feature. Don't be shocked if it requires a little iteration or some situational bugs come out of the code and need to be fixed. Exactly "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 2812	Posted - 2014.09.18 06:34:00 - [13] - Quote Are old player mu scores already calculated or are we all starting at baseline anf building? If everyone starts at baseline theres gonna be a sharp early period of terrorizing lower rated players. I really hope that warpoint earnings are included in mu over kd or theres going to be a very sharp drop in vehicle survival in matches with me. Funny as I find this I prefer to hunt tanks and dropships driven by good drivers

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 7329	Posted - 2014.09.18 07:01:00 - [14] - Quote Mu has been calculated fer every player from May 2013 and is used. For veterans they are going to have a solid stabilized Mu. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 2816	Posted - 2014.09.18 08:00:00 - [15] - Quote Thanks for answering. So is therre a better way to get screenshots and recordings if I tear ass through matches than my smartphone camera? Also to gather video evidence of other anomalies I can thus far provide only anecdotal tales of? I would like to provide more meaningful feedback than "oh god this is happening!"
Jebus McKing Legio DXIV 655	Posted - 2014.09.18 08:21:00 - [16] - Quote The way I see it is that this is not a matchmaking update. It does not prevent new players from being in the same match as veterans. The only thing it does is making sure that from the players that are currently in the queue it tries to make teams as balanced as possible, so that both teams have the same chance at the start of the match. However if there is one squad of vets and 26 noobs in the queue there is not much team balance can do. One team will end up with a good squad and the other with 16 noobs. Then again even if the teams are balanced we noticed that - especially in ambush matches - it is very hard to make a comeback if you spawn in the wrong spot at the start of the match and the first wave of your team gets destroyed. It usually boils down to which vet squad is quicker at farming the enemy team's noobs. You have to post numbers and math to be taken seriously. // @JebusMcKing
Haerr Legio DXIV 1419	Posted - 2014.09.18 08:24:00 - [17] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Thanks for answering. So is therre a better way to get screenshots and recordings if I tear ass through matches than my smartphone camera? Also to gather video evidence of other anomalies I can thus far provide only anecdotal tales of? I would like to provide more meaningful feedback than "oh god this is happening!" ^ We had this yesterday, one match was like -"Oh familiar names! >:) Maybe it is working?", next match was like -"Lol no." Really not sure how to contribute other than saying "doesn't seem to work for me", which really isn't helping in anyway. Oh look a bunny! -> =ƒÉç
Haerr Legio DXIV 1419	Posted - 2014.09.18 08:28:00 - [18] - Quote Jebus McKing wrote: -snip- It usually boils down to which vet squad is quicker at farming the enemy team's noobs. - Quick kill off that guy running or he'll move their spawn! - Make sure to quickly shoot out the bodies of the militia guys so that they're forced to spawn in again quicker! - Don't kill them off to quickly or their spawn will move! (And we'll have to search the entire map for the last few clones in order for the match to end...) I think preventing new guys from joining those matches, even if it leaves the game at 8v8, 12v12, 10v10, 14v14, would be a good idea. There is something to be said for taking a second look at "Smart Derploy" too. Oh look a bunny! -> =ƒÉç
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 2816	Posted - 2014.09.18 10:04:00 - [19] - Quote Doesn't have to be newbs in ambush for a stomp. Because of how smart deploy sucks what ambush is, is intended to be a massacre. Rather like in real life, the person who has the initiative and siezes the advantage first will facilitate the enemy team being butchered by the numbers. This leads many players to feeling... ambushed. Doesn't matter if you are a vet or not. If the enemy squad gets the drop on you, you are getting farmed unless you are a mad genius at spawn-assaulting. The smart deploy insures this. Not the newberries. If everyone was in comms and timed the spawns together spawn camping becomes far less successful. Then the massacre has a chance to reverse. The problem is that "smart" deploy has an IQ of approximately 57. I'm pretty sure hiring Forrest Gump would turn out better in ambushes.
BL4CKST4R La Muerte Eterna Dark Taboo 3087	Posted - 2014.09.18 10:34:00 - [20] - Quote What if there could be a size limit to the squads in pubs, this would allow for the system to not have to throw in an entire squad vs random when it can't find another squad to match against. And allow for relatively casual play for pubs. On the flip side make it so Mu has to match two squads against each other and then fill in the gaps, most of the time a squad v random will always be a massacre no matter how good they randoms or squad players are. supercalifragilisticexpialidocious

CUSE TOWN333 KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 1440	Posted - 2014.09.18 10:41:00 - [21] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: PO0KY wrote: I'm pretty unimpressed with the matchmaking update. It seems every game I've been in, the enemy just crumbles. Look at this cringe-worthy game for example. http://i.imgur.com/Em2gw18.jpg What gives? How have your games been going? All I can do is check if the teams were as balanced as possible, I would appreciate if the screenshots were sent to [email protected] If the teams are as equal as possible, then frankly, the battle is in their hands. Doesn't mean that battles will win themselves. yes because there is one final thing to be calculated in team balance. that is a players heart or big balls. you have many skilled players in dust but some fold like a wet tissue at the first sign of trouble in a pub match and run off to snipe as soon as they lose 2 proto suits. so scotty is going to have to figure out what players fight hard the whole match and split them between the 2 teams. KEQ diplomat/ intel /GC officer
y678iop Ostrakon Agency Gallente Federation 8	Posted - 2014.09.18 11:03:00 - [22] - Quote PO0KY wrote: I'm pretty unimpressed with the matchmaking update. It seems every game I've been in, the enemy just crumbles. Look at this cringe-worthy game for example. http://i.imgur.com/Em2gw18.jpg What gives? How have your games been going? Get off the foreign servers P00ky, you over powered core spamming POS.... This is an alt. It is here to be banned, so that I may be outrageous and speak the TRUTH.
TheD1CK Dead Man's Game 1236	Posted - 2014.09.18 11:16:00 - [23] - Quote Overall, not much has changed, though teams 'look' more even, I think the matchmaking is better But exactly what CUSE points out, balancing the teams in terms of 'MU' leaves a hole where You have mercs that don't contribute unless there team is winning, But thats unavoidable Teams on the scoresheet look closer and 'some' of the battles played today and yesterday have been good, So something is definetly working out there Rattati... Just one flaw I have noticed.. AFKers Since the update, more than half the games I am in have a matching number of AFKers (or close to) Is this intended ? to not allow one team be weighed down by them? but then both teams are burdened Has anyone else noticed this flaw? Innapropriate Irrelevence... Welcome to the Dust Forum, hang around to see why everyone else left :/
y678iop Ostrakon Agency Gallente Federation 8	Posted - 2014.09.18 11:23:00 - [24] - Quote TheD1CK wrote: Overall, not much has changed, though teams 'look' more even, I think the matchmaking is better But exactly what CUSE points out, balancing the teams in terms of 'MU' leaves a hole where You have mercs that don't contribute unless there team is winning, But thats unavoidable Teams on the scoresheet look closer and 'some' of the battles played today and yesterday have been good, So something is definetly working out there Rattati... Just one flaw I have noticed.. AFKers Since the update, more than half the games I am in have a matching number of AFKers (or close to) Is this intended ? to not allow one team be weighed down by them? but then both teams are burdened Has anyone else noticed this flaw? By afker you mean mercs with 0 kills 0 deaths 0 wp at the end of the game? Many times this is not afkers, just people who come in right at the end, due to people who are mad leaving right at the end, happens all the time. This is an alt. It is here to be banned, so that I may be outrageous and speak the TRUTH.

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 7342	Posted - 2014.09.18 11:23:00 - [25] - Quote TheD1CK wrote: Overall, not much has changed, though teams 'look' more even, I think the matchmaking is better But exactly what CUSE points out, balancing the teams in terms of 'MU' leaves a hole where You have mercs that don't contribute unless there team is winning, But thats unavoidable Teams on the scoresheet look closer and 'some' of the battles played today and yesterday have been good, So something is definetly working out there Rattati... Just one flaw I have noticed.. AFKers Since the update, more than half the games I am in have a matching number of AFKers (or close to) Is this intended ? to not allow one team be weighed down by them? but then both teams are burdened Has anyone else noticed this flaw? I am setting up an AFK taskforce to tackle this situation, players who get kicked for AFKing, get AFK warnings and otherwise demonstrate serial AFK behaviour will get some kind of attention. We also want to change the passive ISK and SP generation to reflect contribution to battle, i.e. WP more closely "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

y678iop Ostrakon Agency Gallente Federation 8	Posted - 2014.09.18 11:25:00 - [26] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: TheD1CK wrote: Overall, not much has changed, though teams 'look' more even, I think the matchmaking is better But exactly what CUSE points out, balancing the teams in terms of 'MU' leaves a hole where You have mercs that don't contribute unless there team is winning, But thats unavoidable Teams on the scoresheet look closer and 'some' of the battles played today and yesterday have been good, So something is definetly working out there Rattati... Just one flaw I have noticed.. AFKers Since the update, more than half the games I am in have a matching number of AFKers (or close to) Is this intended ? to not allow one team be weighed down by them? but then both teams are burdened Has anyone else noticed this flaw? I am setting up an AFK taskforce to tackle this situation, players who get kicked for AFKing, get AFK warnings and otherwise demonstrate serial AFK behaviour will get some kind of attention. We also want to change the passive ISK and SP generation to reflect contribution to battle, i.e. WP more closely Oh god, yes this. This is an alt. It is here to be banned, so that I may be outrageous and speak the TRUTH.
CUSE TOWN333 KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 1442	Posted - 2014.09.18 11:43:00 - [27] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: TheD1CK wrote: Overall, not much has changed, though teams 'look' more even, I think the matchmaking is better But exactly what CUSE points out, balancing the teams in terms of 'MU' leaves a hole where You have mercs that don't contribute unless there team is winning, But thats unavoidable Teams on the scoresheet look closer and 'some' of the battles played today and yesterday have been good, So something is definetly working out there Rattati... Just one flaw I have noticed.. AFKers Since the update, more than half the games I am in have a matching number of AFKers (or close to) Is this intended ? to not allow one team be weighed down by them? but then both teams are burdened Has anyone else noticed this flaw? I am setting up an AFK taskforce to tackle this situation, players who get kicked for AFKing, get AFK warnings and otherwise demonstrate serial AFK behaviour will get some kind of attention. We also want to change the passive ISK and SP generation to reflect contribution to battle, i.e. WP more closely players running around with 0 kills and 0 deaths and 0 WP should get kicked from battle even if they are not AFKing. you should give more isk to people fighting hard and we can call it the get off your butt and do something award. bf3 had that mechanic right because they give you more XP for doing things to help your team win like defending letters and attacking letters. even the new players fought like mad men throwing there fragile bodys at letters over and over for the win in bf3 for that XP. KEQ diplomat/ intel /GC officer
steadyhand amarr shadows of 514 3333	Posted - 2014.09.18 11:54:00 - [28] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: TheD1CK wrote: Overall, not much has changed, though teams 'look' more even, I think the matchmaking is better But exactly what CUSE points out, balancing the teams in terms of 'MU' leaves a hole where You have mercs that don't contribute unless there team is winning, But thats unavoidable Teams on the scoresheet look closer and 'some' of the battles played today and yesterday have been good, So something is definetly working out there Rattati... Just one flaw I have noticed.. AFKers Since the update, more than half the games I am in have a matching number of AFKers (or close to) Is this intended ? to not allow one team be weighed down by them? but then both teams are burdened Has anyone else noticed this flaw? I am setting up an AFK taskforce to tackle this situation, players who get kicked for AFKing, get AFK warnings and otherwise demonstrate serial AFK behaviour will get some kind of attention. We also want to change the passive ISK and SP generation to reflect contribution to battle, i.e. WP more closely Where did ccp find you tbh the punishment must be persentage of there total sp to make sure it stings enough and sets them back enough not to try it again You can never have to many chaples -Templar True adamance
Zindorak 1.U.P 913	Posted - 2014.09.18 11:56:00 - [29] - Quote Either stomped or stomping Pokemon master! I suck at Tekken lol
TheD1CK Dead Man's Game 1236	Posted - 2014.09.18 12:07:00 - [30] - Quote Again, CUSE makes a good point The reward for actually performing a role in battle is usually low, the encouragement for EZ WP Usually means Logi/Vehicle or a Scout as these roles will generate the most WP via EQ or AV So the Assault/Heavy who is defending a point is starved for WP as they can't access it Forgive the derail, but I've started so I will finish Until Vehicles got DMG WP, Logistics was the way to farm WP via Reps/Links/Hives/Scans Now I would consider those on almost equal in terms of WP earning (depending on situation) The Scout, has the advantage of moving on to the next WP gain quickly, so WP can be good Assault/Heavy left pretty far behind in terms of how much WP they can earn A solid fix to this, would be too add WP rewards for Defending/Assaulting an objective, maybe then points for 'Saviour' kills to reward defending your teammates would also add to it One other thing overlooked, Logi recieves 'Guardian' for leashing a Heavy and farming his stomp Could we receive 'Slayer' points for killing someone while they recieve Logi reps..? So if pigs flew and any of this happened, All roles would have chances for decent WP earnings - Logi would be back in the lead, so I would advise a 'nerf' to equipment WP Reps-15 WP Spawns-15 WP Supply-15WP-Scans-15WP As the 25WP currently for Spawn/Rep is too high, and Supply too low. (Logi's will argue this, but the proof is when you see 20+ Links in a map and no Hives) - Again sorry for going off topic, but all things considered.. WP earnings are important to team balance Innapropriate Irrelevence... Welcome to the Dust Forum, hang around to see why everyone else left :/

DeathwindRising ROGUE RELICS VP Gaming Alliance 539	Posted - 2014.09.18 12:11:00 - [31] - Quote Best matches I've had in a long time. Sure we get afk guys but it doesn't matter. We win anyways. Battles may look one sided, such as one team dominating control points, but the clone counts are so close that I routinely order my squad to carry needle and at some points not spawn at all so we can clone the other team before they clone us. Proto stompers have been getting man handled. I've never seen them lose so many suits before. Of course, I ran a match in a BPO suit with a std RR and no damage mods and went 43-3... So idk just how well the match making is currently working.
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. 2141	Posted - 2014.09.18 12:20:00 - [32] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: TheD1CK wrote: Overall, not much has changed, though teams 'look' more even, I think the matchmaking is better But exactly what CUSE points out, balancing the teams in terms of 'MU' leaves a hole where You have mercs that don't contribute unless there team is winning, But thats unavoidable Teams on the scoresheet look closer and 'some' of the battles played today and yesterday have been good, So something is definetly working out there Rattati... Just one flaw I have noticed.. AFKers Since the update, more than half the games I am in have a matching number of AFKers (or close to) Is this intended ? to not allow one team be weighed down by them? but then both teams are burdened Has anyone else noticed this flaw? I am setting up an AFK taskforce to tackle this situation, players who get kicked for AFKing, get AFK warnings and otherwise demonstrate serial AFK behaviour will get some kind of attention. We also want to change the passive ISK and SP generation to reflect contribution to battle, i.e. WP more closely ty Rattati, I've been waiting for two years to read this post. "Heres the deal, in the 40s there was Normandy today you got punks, some need culling real bad." --Truth Logi for Hire
Vell0cet Vengeance Unbound Dark Taboo 2259	Posted - 2014.09.18 14:29:00 - [33] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: TheD1CK wrote: Overall, not much has changed, though teams 'look' more even, I think the matchmaking is better But exactly what CUSE points out, balancing the teams in terms of 'MU' leaves a hole where You have mercs that don't contribute unless there team is winning, But thats unavoidable Teams on the scoresheet look closer and 'some' of the battles played today and yesterday have been good, So something is definetly working out there Rattati... Just one flaw I have noticed.. AFKers Since the update, more than half the games I am in have a matching number of AFKers (or close to) Is this intended ? to not allow one team be weighed down by them? but then both teams are burdened Has anyone else noticed this flaw? I am setting up an AFK taskforce to tackle this situation, players who get kicked for AFKing, get AFK warnings and otherwise demonstrate serial AFK behaviour will get some kind of attention. We also want to change the passive ISK and SP generation to reflect contribution to battle, i.e. WP more closely How to fight rubber-band AFKers: on the server, poll player inputs. If they're constant then player is AFK. To save resources, poll every player every 30 seconds or so. If input is constant between 30 sec intervals, set AFK_suspicion_flag = true. When this is set to true, poll input every second for 10 seconds. If all 10 polls have exactly the same input, boot the player. Best PvE idea ever!
REDBACK96USMC Ghosts of Dawn General Tso's Alliance 51	Posted - 2014.09.18 16:04:00 - [34] - Quote Vell0cet wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: TheD1CK wrote: Overall, not much has changed, though teams 'look' more even, I think the matchmaking is better But exactly what CUSE points out, balancing the teams in terms of 'MU' leaves a hole where You have mercs that don't contribute unless there team is winning, But thats unavoidable Teams on the scoresheet look closer and 'some' of the battles played today and yesterday have been good, So something is definetly working out there Rattati... Just one flaw I have noticed.. AFKers Since the update, more than half the games I am in have a matching number of AFKers (or close to) Is this intended ? to not allow one team be weighed down by them? but then both teams are burdened Has anyone else noticed this flaw? I am setting up an AFK taskforce to tackle this situation, players who get kicked for AFKing, get AFK warnings and otherwise demonstrate serial AFK behaviour will get some kind of attention. We also want to change the passive ISK and SP generation to reflect contribution to battle, i.e. WP more closely How to fight rubber-band AFKers: on the server, poll player inputs. If they're constant then player is AFK. To save resources, poll every player every 30 seconds or so. If input is constant between 30 sec intervals, set AFK_suspicion_flag = true. When this is set to true, poll input every second for 10 seconds. If all 10 polls have exactly the same input, boot the player. Could you lay this out in a flow chart with proper function diagrams? Seriously though, this. One other option is ensuring there is a ground spawn in the same area as the MCC drop. Do not allow MCC spawns for the first spawn of a match. This will require ground spawn and give the opposing team the ability to FARM afk's. That way you would actually reward the active players. Another Option Keep all rewards at 0 for Isk and SP until the first point is gained. I cant think of anyone that cannot find a way to make at least 5 points in a match if they are playing.
REDBACK96USMC Ghosts of Dawn General Tso's Alliance 51	Posted - 2014.09.18 16:09:00 - [35] - Quote One other option. Make inside the MCC Redline area. That is still plenty of time to get out before you suicide.
Edgar Reinhart Resheph Interstellar Strategy Gallente Federation 9	Posted - 2014.09.18 16:38:00 - [36] - Quote As a casually improving, relative, noob I'm interested to see how things play out. People have to be aware that this isn't matchmaking in the sense that, 'all good players play each other' and all 'reasonable players play each other.' It is just trying to balance the teams as much as possible based on who is in the queue at that time. If there is one proto squad and 26 people like myself waiting for the match then nothing the algorithms can do is going to balance that battle. You'll end up with a squad of, let us say What the French, stomping the bejesus out of the top 16 of the remaining players with the remaining 10 players picking up the pieces. In this sense Rattati is right. The maths can do it's best but if there is a fundamental imbalance coming into the match no amount of jiggery pokery is going to fix that. It can just get as close as possible on a team, not individual basis. With such a small player base the only way around that would be to adopt the tabletop idea of flat out equal 'points' per team meaning that it could be entirely possible to have a match that is one Beta Vet vs. 16 fresh Academy graduates........ Now I think that that could be fun but it's a different beast entirely. The fact that there is a degree of imbalance in Dust's gameplay is, in my opinion, one of it's best features and hardest things to get right. It is what has kept me playing inspite of all the Burst HMGs to the face my Medic suit receives. The idea of coming across something that you can't kill is accepted and embraced in RPGs but all kind of confusing in an FPS. New players have to be made aware of this and Vets have to accept the odd boring (for them) match. Maybe there could be better implementation but I for one don't want to be put in a position where I'm just running around with other people in exactly the same tier of equipment with exactly the same stats. It needs work but balanced teams of mixed abilities is interesting. Hence the fact that I'd love to see this type of matchmaking work.
Ryme Intrinseca Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 1894	Posted - 2014.09.18 16:46:00 - [37] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: We also want to change the passive ISK and SP generation to reflect contribution to battle, i.e. WP more closely Have all my +1s <3
Ryme Intrinseca Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 1894	Posted - 2014.09.18 16:51:00 - [38] - Quote CUSE TOWN333 wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: TheD1CK wrote: Overall, not much has changed, though teams 'look' more even, I think the matchmaking is better But exactly what CUSE points out, balancing the teams in terms of 'MU' leaves a hole where You have mercs that don't contribute unless there team is winning, But thats unavoidable Teams on the scoresheet look closer and 'some' of the battles played today and yesterday have been good, So something is definetly working out there Rattati... Just one flaw I have noticed.. AFKers Since the update, more than half the games I am in have a matching number of AFKers (or close to) Is this intended ? to not allow one team be weighed down by them? but then both teams are burdened Has anyone else noticed this flaw? I am setting up an AFK taskforce to tackle this situation, players who get kicked for AFKing, get AFK warnings and otherwise demonstrate serial AFK behaviour will get some kind of attention. We also want to change the passive ISK and SP generation to reflect contribution to battle, i.e. WP more closely players running around with 0 kills and 0 deaths and 0 WP should get kicked from battle even if they are not AFKing. Actually not a bad idea. If you've gone halfway through a dom or skirm, not got any WP and not died, you're clearly not actually playing the game. Even a new player will at least have managed to die a few times . Simply kick anyone with 0 WP, zero deaths at the halfway stage.
Gabriel Ceja Knights of Eternal Darkness League of Infamy 58	Posted - 2014.09.18 17:31:00 - [39] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Mu has been calculated fer every player from May 2013 and is used. For veterans they are going to have a solid stabilized Mu. Hey I'm curious as to if this system also applies to factional warfare or not "Throw on the flux capacitor." activates fuel injector "WOOOOOO!!!"
Kaeru Nayiri Krusual Covert Operators Minmatar Republic 29	Posted - 2014.09.18 17:44:00 - [40] - Quote Absolutely great matches yesterday, much higher average of good vs bad matches. Very much appreciate the work.

Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 2824	Posted - 2014.09.18 17:54:00 - [41] - Quote Gabriel Ceja wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Mu has been calculated fer every player from May 2013 and is used. For veterans they are going to have a solid stabilized Mu. Hey I'm curious as to if this system also applies to factional warfare or not It can't. You queue for a faction in FW. It cant swap you from amarr to minmatar because the team isnt balanced... or we could accept longer wait times.
PO0KY Virtual Syndicate 681	Posted - 2014.09.18 17:58:00 - [42] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Gabriel Ceja wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Mu has been calculated fer every player from May 2013 and is used. For veterans they are going to have a solid stabilized Mu. Hey I'm curious as to if this system also applies to factional warfare or not It can't. You queue for a faction in FW. It cant swap you from amarr to minmatar because the team isnt balanced... or we could accept longer wait times. Longer wait times on a fw? Aint nobody go time for that I'm so helpful.
Dust User KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 644	Posted - 2014.09.18 18:37:00 - [43] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: I am setting up an AFK taskforce to tackle this situation, players who get kicked for AFKing, get AFK warnings and otherwise demonstrate serial AFK behaviour will get some kind of attention. We also want to change the passive ISK and SP generation to reflect contribution to battle, i.e. WP more closely Looks like I'm going to be in trouble.
Vrain Matari Mikramurka Shock Troop Minmatar Republic 2241	Posted - 2014.09.18 22:23:00 - [44] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: TheD1CK wrote: Overall, not much has changed, though teams 'look' more even, I think the matchmaking is better But exactly what CUSE points out, balancing the teams in terms of 'MU' leaves a hole where You have mercs that don't contribute unless there team is winning, But thats unavoidable Teams on the scoresheet look closer and 'some' of the battles played today and yesterday have been good, So something is definetly working out there Rattati... Just one flaw I have noticed.. AFKers Since the update, more than half the games I am in have a matching number of AFKers (or close to) Is this intended ? to not allow one team be weighed down by them? but then both teams are burdened Has anyone else noticed this flaw? I am setting up an AFK taskforce to tackle this situation, players who get kicked for AFKing, get AFK warnings and otherwise demonstrate serial AFK behaviour will get some kind of attention. We also want to change the passive ISK and SP generation to reflect contribution to battle, i.e. WP more closely gobsmacked Old Minmatar merc sheds a single tear of joy. Dev....lifts merc honor. Antimeritocratic soulless dole whimpers. Not quite up to Vogon standards, but it's from the heart. PSN: RationalSpark
Thor Odinson42 Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 4635	Posted - 2014.09.18 23:27:00 - [45] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: TheD1CK wrote: Overall, not much has changed, though teams 'look' more even, I think the matchmaking is better But exactly what CUSE points out, balancing the teams in terms of 'MU' leaves a hole where You have mercs that don't contribute unless there team is winning, But thats unavoidable Teams on the scoresheet look closer and 'some' of the battles played today and yesterday have been good, So something is definetly working out there Rattati... Just one flaw I have noticed.. AFKers Since the update, more than half the games I am in have a matching number of AFKers (or close to) Is this intended ? to not allow one team be weighed down by them? but then both teams are burdened Has anyone else noticed this flaw? I am setting up an AFK taskforce to tackle this situation, players who get kicked for AFKing, get AFK warnings and otherwise demonstrate serial AFK behaviour will get some kind of attention. We also want to change the passive ISK and SP generation to reflect contribution to battle, i.e. WP more closely I'm going to fly to Iceland and buy you a beer. Level 4 Forum Warrior Very, very bitter vet PSN: wbrom42
Thor Odinson42 Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 4636	Posted - 2014.09.19 14:04:00 - [46] - Quote Breakin Stuff wrote: Gabriel Ceja wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: Mu has been calculated fer every player from May 2013 and is used. For veterans they are going to have a solid stabilized Mu. Hey I'm curious as to if this system also applies to factional warfare or not It can't. You queue for a faction in FW. It cant swap you from amarr to minmatar because the team isnt balanced... or we could accept longer wait times. It shouldn't for FW. I don't want anything to do with longer wait times for FW. The window of availability already sucks for me. Using boosters for FW is something I can no longer do because of this. I am lucky to get 10 Min FW matches in a week given my normal playtimes. Level 4 Forum Warrior PSN: wbrom42
Fox Gaden Immortal Guides 4279	Posted - 2014.09.19 14:30:00 - [47] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Mu has been calculated fer every player from May 2013 and is used. For veterans they are going to have a solid stabilized Mu. Hmm, since I have mostly been playing Crash Gaden for the last year, and I really sucked a year ago, Fox Gaden is going to have a really low MU for a while. I wonder how long it would take for Fox to adjust back to a Mu that represents my current skill level? Hand/Eye coordination cannot be taught. For everything else there is the Learning Coalition.


Pages: 1 2 :: [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.

Oh look a bunny! -> =ƒÉç

Oh look a bunny! -> =ƒÉç

Oh look a bunny! -> =ƒÉç