| Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Thor Odinson42
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
5912
   |
Posted - 2015.02.03 17:02:00 -
[1] - Quote
How do you push people into squads and work to win matches?
The shiny stuff being talked about for months teased at the ability to spend much of your time out of pubs and with your own team, but it appears this stuff is SoonTM.
I don't care what anybody says, you can't balance or even consider the statistics at their face value if we have droves of solo players that get wrecked once or twice and then finding a roof to camp from.
I'm selling Templar Codes. 2 of 5 remaining. 225 mil ISK. Message me in game.
|
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
1510
|
Posted - 2015.02.03 22:36:00 -
[2] - Quote
Squadding up is no miracle cure. Without mics it doesn't do much and many people don't have mics. You just go from 6 guys going 2-10 to a squad going 12-60.
Because, that's why.
|
Thor Odinson42
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
5924
|
Posted - 2015.02.03 22:55:00 -
[3] - Quote
Nothing Certain wrote:Squadding up is no miracle cure. Without mics it doesn't do much and many people don't have mics. You just go from 6 guys going 2-10 to a squad going 12-60.
I don't think its a miracle cure.
I think the solo play is a symptom of the lack of incentives for winning. If winning mattered and was compensated for you'd see people doing more to win. Teamwork is the key to winning.
See the connection?
I'm selling Templar Codes. 2 of 5 remaining. 225 mil ISK. Message me in game.
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
6337
|
Posted - 2015.02.04 03:08:00 -
[4] - Quote
Problem:
Six 50+M SP Vets in a squad.
Solution:
Decrease squad size.
If we want better matches, we need to fix matchmaking.
Shoot scout with yes.
- Ripley Riley
|
Thor Odinson42
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
5942
|
Posted - 2015.02.04 03:14:00 -
[5] - Quote
Adipem Nothi wrote:Problem:
Six 50+M SP Vets in a squad.
Solution:
Decrease squad size.
If we want better matches, we need to fix matchmaking.
I'm down for that. Especially when there are more ways to deploy as a team.
I'm selling Templar Codes. 2 of 5 remaining. 225 mil ISK. Message me in game.
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
6337
|
Posted - 2015.02.04 03:16:00 -
[6] - Quote
Then that makes two of us.
Shoot scout with yes.
- Ripley Riley
|
Imp Smash
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
615
|
Posted - 2015.02.04 06:11:00 -
[7] - Quote
Disagree. Smaller squads will not fix matchmaking imo.
And I say 'opinion' very humbly simply because we HAD 4 man squads for a bit over a year back in the day and pub stomping was just as prevalent then as now. When the squad size went up to 6 nothing changed matchmaking wise.
History says your assumption is incorrect.
However, autosquad assign would do a lot. People are WAY more likely to stick near a green dot than a blue dot. Especially if suddenly they can hear them. |
taxi bastard
Amarr Templars
Amarr Empire
383
|
Posted - 2015.02.04 07:20:00 -
[8] - Quote
auto squad would do nothing besides give squad vision to those who don't usually have it. Not everyone speaks the same language and in Euro time there is a good chance that no one actually has the same first language if they were randomly paired.
most squads in dust consists of 6 vet players using superior gear. the simple truth is that most good players choose to play this way. If you have a squad on one side and no squad on the other the battle is lopsided as you probably have 6 of the best 8 players on one side and 2 on the other.
For pubs the simplest solution is to increase waiting times for squads so that every battle they have a similar level squad as opposition on the other side. At anyone time there are plenty of squads deployed so i should not imagine the extra wait would be that much more.
making pub squads smaller would be advantageous in that it would create more squads to be matched against and reduce waiting times and also help balance the rest of the match sheet.
You must remember this is a game and it has many types of paying players. Not everyone is a "hardcore" duster like the majority here on the forums. some people will play games for "me" time and will not want the social interaction that being in a squad brings. some people will play purely for social interaction and winning or loosing will be of little significance to their enjoyment.
what i assume is generally a common theme is the desire to have a good fight. Stomping or being stomped is demoralizing as your here for enjoyment, which neither result achieves. To achieve that goal there must be compromise from the biggest unbalancing factor i.e. squads themselves. Be it longer waits for battles, smaller squads or a combination of both something needs to be done.
if i remember correctly there used to be auto squad at the same time as 4 man squads? if i am right it did not do much of note.
On a personal note i play more solo play than squad play as its my preference. I always push for the win even when the rest of the team has thrown in the towel irrelevant if i am in a squad or not. I find being in a squad increases my chance of having a boring match as usually the battle is too one sided. Saying that some of the best matches are when i am in squad facing other squads, but they are few and far between. It sounds stupid but i would rather be stomped, than stomp as there is alot more to do.
If i expected alot more close fights i am sure i would have an increased interest to squad more often. As for team deploy - this would be awesome
"Attention Axiom shoppers try red its the new blue" - WALL-E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1BQPV-iCkU
CCP's update
|
Haerr
Nos Nothi
2283
|
Posted - 2015.02.04 08:24:00 -
[9] - Quote
Scotty the Matchmaking A.I. would work better if:
Matches only started every even 5 mins:
GÇö That way there will be more players in queue at the same time.
'Blocks' of players were to be balanced against each other:
GÇö A squad of 6 x 50+mil SP will only ever play against a team which also has a squad of 6 x 50+mil SP.
Maximum number of new players (<10 mil sp) per team:
GÇö Maybe 4~6?
Maximum number of poorly performing players per team:
GÇö Maybe 4~6?
(A poorly performing new player would count towards BOTH limits.)
Player with high ping, choke, and / or loss would be forced to play on 'Automatic' server.
GÇö Because they negatively influence the game experience of the rest of the 31 players in the match.
And / or
Latency compensation should have diminishing returns.
GÇö At some point latency compensation is more jarring for the player that is being subjected to it than it benefits the laggy mofos that make this happen: LINKY
Gû¼+¦GòÉGòÉn¦ñ
|
Lorhak Gannarsein
Legio DXIV
4244
|
Posted - 2015.02.04 08:31:00 -
[10] - Quote
Haerr wrote:Scotty the Matchmaking A.I. would work better if: Matches only started every even 5 mins: GÇö That way there will be more players in queue at the same time. 'Blocks' of players were to be balanced against each other: GÇö A squad of 6 x 50+mil SP will only ever play against a team which also has a squad of 6 x 50+mil SP. Maximum number of new players (<10 mil sp) per team: GÇö Maybe 4~6? Maximum number of poorly performing players per team: GÇö Maybe 4~6? (A poorly performing new player would count towards BOTH limits.) Player with high ping, choke, and / or loss would be forced to play on 'Automatic' server. GÇö Because they negatively influence the game experience of the rest of the 31 players in the match. And / orLatency compensation should have diminishing returns. GÇö At some point latency compensation is more jarring for the player that is being subjected to it than it benefits the laggy mofos that make this happen: LINKY
I feel like every single one of these is directed at me :(
Not that I disagree with them.
Adipem Nothi wrote:Solution:
Decrease squad size.
This one seems like a pretty good bet, but even so; there are plenty of three-man groups that can carry a pub.
Used to wonder why people'd hang out on the forums but wouldn't play the game...
|
|
|
Haerr
Nos Nothi
2284
|
Posted - 2015.02.04 08:36:00 -
[11] - Quote
Lorhak Gannarsein wrote:I feel like every single one of these is directed at me :(
Not that I disagree with them. Lorhak! :D
Just prepping for your return... tehe ^_^
Gû¼+¦GòÉGòÉn¦ñ
|
Justicar Karnellia
Ikomari-Onu Enforcement
Caldari State
919
|
Posted - 2015.02.04 12:38:00 -
[12] - Quote
I can't remember the exact thread, but I think they mentioned that was the plan, one queue for squads and one for solos... this will make matchmaking simpler, as squads will faced off against other squads and those who queue solo will end up facing solo rabble. Squad size would need to be lowered to make 4 x 4 squads. Wait times would go up, but I'm fine with that.
I've lasted two years as an exclusively non-corp player and both sides of the stomp are no fun. I think last night I ended up on the side of a proto-stomp corp (I think dead man's game or some such) and the enemy team was redlined about 5 minutes into the game... and I spent most of my game not firing and running around looking for something/anything to shoot at. Of course, the player list on the other side was just solo rabble....
It's a difficult problem to tackle with such an anemic player count. I think though, it is really the worst thing for a new player. I've lost count of the number of people I've tried to "introduce" to Dust only to have them rage quit after having their militia fits being stomped into the ground by an organised proto squad.
|
Imp Smash
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
619
|
Posted - 2015.02.04 23:14:00 -
[13] - Quote
Well, considering the wealth of different opinions and reasoning besides such -- I am against smaller squads, but I must admit the only way to find out is to try it out. Reduce squad size and see how it goes.
My only fear with that is that if matchmaking does what I think it does, not change, it'll just limit our ability to play with friends and not get reverted back to 6 man.
Maybe gradual introduction? Make bush and dom 4 person squads only and see how it looks? If after a few months game win loss margins drop considerably expand to skirm?
I would really hate to see such a large and polarly divided change made in a sweeping manner. |
Starlight Burner
ROGUE RELICS
VP Gaming Alliance
107
|
Posted - 2015.02.05 10:29:00 -
[14] - Quote
Disagree with decreasing squad size.
People play public matches to casually play the game, play with corp mates or play with their friends while making some sort of income.
If you decrease the squad sizes to 4 nothing stops people from continuing with the current norm 'synced squads'
A matchmaker based on taking the squads average SP total and setting them with squads & players 6M SP up and 6M SP below of that SP average would normalize matches out based on players around your range.
What if no one is around your squads average SP?
Well, after 1m and 30s of searching the matchmaker extends the search pool out to 15M SP up and 15M SP below of your squads average.
What if it still can't find anyone after that?
After 3m searching, the game will place you in whoever is searching for a battle.
The only downside to this would be players that have upwards 70+ SP. They will take longer to find a match; however once they hit the 3m mark they get matched with ANYONE looking for a battle. So, nobody is searching for 10m at a time unless Scotty messes up.
This will balance out games more without the need of hurting the casual or fun seeking player who plays with friends or corp mates.
Thank god for CCP Rattati!!
Rogue Relics is my home away from home.
|
Alaika Arbosa
Minmatar Republic
2459
|
Posted - 2015.02.05 15:15:00 -
[15] - Quote
Auto squadmaker
barring that, reduce squads to 4.
It won't prevent but it will limit it.
However, if squad sizes are reduced, it might cause more work than we first realize due to needing to rebalance things like Warbarge strike costs.
Still wondering when we're going to get the metalocked matches.
We the pc players make up a huge majority of active players. --Roman837
^^ROFLMAO
OMG I need to catch my breath now..
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |