Sole Fenychs
Sinq Laison Gendarmes
Gallente Federation
612
   |
Posted - 2015.02.15 13:55:00 -
[1] - Quote
Aeon Amadi wrote:Don't get me wrong, I thoroughly enjoy losing match after match after match, constantly changing fits and escalating in power tiers in some hopeless effort to maybe even up the odds while the "match maker" screws me every time. Maybe my MU is so high that it feels it's necessary to pit me and a team of Militia wielding redline snipers up against full proto squads consistently, even though I continuously lose round after lound, rather than - I dunno - being on the winning team sometime. Ten minutes ago, Dust 514 made it's mark in my autobiography as the first - and to date, only - game that I've ever actually broken a controller to the point it needed a replacement. See you guys next week when my over-priced, "brand new" relic DS3 comes in and I can continue playing this ever-more frustrating game that somehow can't seem to ever nail a decent match setup.
I know that feel, bro.
Thank god that I barely have access to my PS3 these days. |
Sole Fenychs
Sinq Laison Gendarmes
Gallente Federation
612
|
Posted - 2015.02.16 12:11:00 -
[2] - Quote
Mobius Wyvern wrote:Adipem Nothi wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:
we know what we want to do on matchmaking,
1) 4 man squads for pubs, 8/12/16 for FW and PC
2) Academy 2.0
3) Metalevel locked modes with escalating risk reward
That squad idea is utterly moronic. That's just going to encourage even more people to queue-sync two squads, which the matchmaker still permits. What is so ******* hard about a system that puts an equal number of squadded players on both sides?
No, four people squads will be very useful.
It allows the system to be more fine-grained in terms of team balance. You can't cut up a squad when you balance the teams, so having smaller squads means that there's more possible variations of team makeups.
Depending on how the matchmaker works, this could actually ease up the situation.
The question is if the matchmaker even takes player histories into account.
Rattati, can the matchmaker see if a squad is using voice chat actively? That would help tremendously.
Hell, how about a checkbox for "we are coordinating on voice chat"? This would allow coordinated teams to get into games against other coordinated teams, by allowing random squads/squads without voice chat to be judged as lower value than the coordinated ones.
Everyone knows that it's teamwork that really breaks the game.
Depending on how Q-synching works, a four people limit per squad might lower the amount of allied players of a team. Having two squads that amount to eight people is far better than twelve stompers. (Note: I never looked into the specifics of Q-synching because it doesn't affect me directly)
Also, I actually think that the solo gameplay idea might have some merit.
I would greatly enjoy some kind of FFA game mode where the Slayer classes excell. Hell, the huge bandwith of Logis would actually have good synergy with REs in that game mode, so all classes would have their merit, aside from Sentinels.
Either that or a 3on3 game mode, where squads are mandatory.
The advantage of game modes with lower player counts is that there is more pressure on every single individual. I know it from my RTS games - If you are in a team game, you are secure in thinking that your team mates will take up some slack.
But if you play solo or in smaller teams, you feel more responsible and try to be better than in a game with half a dozen people on your side.
One of the issues in pubs is, after all, blueberries that just want to do racing with their LAVs and newbies who are trying to learn how to fly dropships.
You wouldn't do that with four or eight players. |