DUST Search - Sticky:[Update] Teambuilder logic

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

Sticky:[Update] Teambuilder logic

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 4 post(s)

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 17511	Posted - 2015.02.17 08:42:00 - [1] - Quote Dear players, We have been seeing complaints that the Teambuilder is not working as intended. I have stated before, and state again, that we have not been able to verify a single instance of it not working as intended. That does not mean, as some players seemed to infer, that I personally have to play the battle to "verify" that it works. That is of course not the case, as we have all these details logged on our servers. Below is a sample of such a report for an individual battle. It is a really good example, that a community member sent to [email protected], and for that I thank him and everyone else who has sent us suspect battles. We have looked at every single one, and there is always an explanation. Here, it seems that two squads of Ready to Play have been able to queue sync, and proceed to stomp against "unsquaded" players and reported as such. The fact is that in this battle, there were 8 squads, ranked and placed thus: 6 man squad of Ready to Play = Rank 1 - Placed on Team A 5 man squad of WarRavens, KEQ, Shadows of Vortex and TRUE SAVAGES (you cannot rely on "corporations = squads") = Rank 2 - Placed on Team B 4 man squad of Incorruptibles = Rank 3 - Placed on Team B 2 man squad of Ready to Play = Rank 4 - Placed on Team A 2 man squad of Rivet Heads = Rank 5 - Placed on Team B 2 man squad of The New Suffering and Commando Perkone (NPC Corp) - Rank 6 - Placed on Team A 1 man squad of Caught Me with My Pants Down - Rank 7 - Placed on Team A 1 man squad of Heaven84 Devils - Rank 8 - Placed on Team A Total players in squads on Team A = 12 Total players in squads on Team B = 11 To recap: The sum of MU on each side is as close as possible, and there is an equal number of squadded players on each side, with the two second best/largest squads on Team B, the team that did not have the 8 Ready to Play members. The fact that the 8 were on the same side was pure chance, not Q-syncing. Team A went on to win the battle but I doubt the extra 2 Ready to Play members made such a difference. This has been the case for every single reported/suspected battle of "broken matchmaker" so I still maintain that it is working as intended. Happy to be proven otherwise, so keep sending examples to us! "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Dust User KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 1690	Posted - 2015.02.17 09:01:00 - [2] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: KEQ Thanks for the publicity. +1
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 2196	Posted - 2015.02.17 09:11:00 - [3] - Quote I hope this is somewhat related; Can we please get some sort of ELO system implemented in faction warfare. I am regularly seeing players that have under 1000 lifetime kills get utterly smashed by q-syncs of veterans that can have upwards of 70 000 each. This game mode has been greatly affected by what I believe is bad behaviour on the playerbases part, and when you have the "elite" kicking the teeth of newbs in, the community loses more potential players. It's nearly impossible to get matches started until afternoon in the states due to FW being in such an unhealthy spot. The decision that FW should be a training ground for pc is wrong and seriously needs to be addressed. Afking also needs to be addressed as even some well known forum goers have been known to afk through FW matches all day just because of the apex suits. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 849	Posted - 2015.02.17 09:46:00 - [4] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: 5 man squad of WarRavens, KEQ, Shadows of Vortex and TRUE SAVAGES (you cannot rely on "corporations = squads") Been saying that for weeks. I can't tell how certain things are intended, but I have to ask how much is SP is taken into consideration. My 1.2 million SP alt is always taken into the same tier battles as my 45 million SP character, me. For me, its always been the SP imbalance that wrecks matchmaking. I always wonder at the end of a really bad stomp, What is my combined + 300 million SP six man squad doing against mlt starter fits? Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
steadyhand amarr shadows of 514 3574	Posted - 2015.02.17 10:18:00 - [5] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: I hope this is somewhat related; Can we please get some sort of ELO system implemented in faction warfare. I am regularly seeing players that have under 1000 lifetime kills get utterly smashed by q-syncs of veterans that can have upwards of 70 000 each. This game mode has been greatly affected by what I believe is bad behaviour on the playerbases part, and when you have the "elite" kicking the teeth of newbs in, the community loses more potential players. It's nearly impossible to get matches started until afternoon in the states due to FW being in such an unhealthy spot. The decision that FW should be a training ground for pc is wrong and seriously needs to be addressed. Afking also needs to be addressed as even some well known forum goers have been known to afk through FW matches all day just because of the apex suits. Faction warfare working as intented it's ment as the next step. Don't want to get smashed find a squad the whole point of FW is that you and 16 buddy's can smash face to win a planet for your side. The only thing I feel FW should have is a lock out to stop newbs jumping in before they are ready or at least a window explaining what it is You can never have to many chaples -Templar True adamance
Jebus McKing Nos Nothi 1491	Posted - 2015.02.17 10:26:00 - [6] - Quote It is far too common on the EU server that there is a 6-man (corp) (proto) squad on one side against a large numer of solo players or small, unorganized squads on the other side. Even if the MUs of both teams match the advantage goes to the players in the corp squad, which makes sense of course in a way. The thing is the people running solo are less likely to work together with their teammates and are less likely to bring supperior gear. So even if MUs are on the same level that doesn't mean that the matches will be balanced. I'm of the impression that there already is a MU modifier for squads ranking the whole squad higher than the sum of its individual players? Maybe this is where we can make some adjustments. I rarely run solo because of this. I always get paired up with a bunch of randoms against organized squads and I always have the feeling the teambuilder expects me to perform as well as if I was in a squad with a bunch of friends. But this is not the case. When playing solo my efficiency is considerably worse than when I'm in a squad. Well, after all, this is just my perception of the situation and it might be that I'm subconsciously turning a blind eye to those situations where a bunch of randoms beat the crap out of a corp squad. Anyway, I will try to gather some evidence. pé¿pâûpé¦pü»pé¦pé¡pâúpâ¦péÆs½îpüúpüªpüäpéïpÇé wwwwwwwwwww
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 2198	Posted - 2015.02.17 10:40:00 - [7] - Quote steadyhand amarr wrote: MINA Longstrike wrote: I hope this is somewhat related; Can we please get some sort of ELO system implemented in faction warfare. I am regularly seeing players that have under 1000 lifetime kills get utterly smashed by q-syncs of veterans that can have upwards of 70 000 each. This game mode has been greatly affected by what I believe is bad behaviour on the playerbases part, and when you have the "elite" kicking the teeth of newbs in, the community loses more potential players. It's nearly impossible to get matches started until afternoon in the states due to FW being in such an unhealthy spot. The decision that FW should be a training ground for pc is wrong and seriously needs to be addressed. Afking also needs to be addressed as even some well known forum goers have been known to afk through FW matches all day just because of the apex suits. Faction warfare working as intented it's ment as the next step. Don't want to get smashed find a squad the whole point of FW is that you and 16 buddy's can smash face to win a planet for your side. The only thing I feel FW should have is a lock out to stop newbs jumping in before they are ready or at least a window explaining what it is "Pc is for the 'elite'" and "faction warfare is where the elite go to 'train' (aka stack teams and kick the crap out of noobs or anyone who hasn't also stacked teams as hard as they can and when the 'elite' encounter each other they try to break sync)" and "pubs are where the elite get to stomp and lord it over others because they have nigh infinite isk" And people wonder why new player retention is abysmal and there are dead game modes. I'm not up for arguing, but I'll tell you right now that 'working as intended' line is horsecrap. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
Regis Blackbird DUST University Ivy League 639	Posted - 2015.02.17 10:49:00 - [8] - Quote Thanks for the insight Rattati However, if the system works as intended, what is your explanation why we have total stomps one way or the other? (in your example the two teams Mu were almost identical, right?) There have to be something missing in the calculations, or some unknown factor giving rise these one sided battles? If the goal is to match Mu perfectly, then I guess it's "working as intended". If the goal is to provide evenly matched and fun games... Well...
shaman oga Dead Man's Game 4031	Posted - 2015.02.17 11:07:00 - [9] - Quote We will send some pics from EU server. Some have luck, some have money, trading is not a crime. Minmatar omni-merc
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7243	Posted - 2015.02.17 11:14:00 - [10] - Quote Rattati the complaints invariably stem from half a dozen newbies on the same team as guys like me and guys like cat merc or anyone from molon labe. The other team has half a dozen more. The team balancer is working as intended, but the intent does not help players without multiple roles proto skilled out with people like me who are only moderately less effective in STD than we are in proto. Combining that with squads in comms and the learning cliff in DUST is actually STEEPER than EVE online. For players with less than 30 mil SP and less than 30m iSK there is little feeling of personal agency. Militia newbies in pubs might as well be getting slapped around by Thor himself when Im running my pink sentinels. That is a massively frustrating thing. Then you get the randoms like me who usually aren't in squad who get trainwrecked by coordinated squads. I'm not sympathetic towards them. Playing alone isn't meant to be the most profitable tactic. If you're alone and fielding proto you're likely going to consistently lose money. My concern lies entirely with NPE and those who gut out the torture to hit the 10-15m milestone. They still aren't ready for tge shark tank 90% of the time. If we can we need to start filtering newer characters into matches together. FW and PC are the exception. In both I am of the opinion that If you queue in, you are stating you can hang with the big kids. Let's be fair. Some can. But for PC and FW joining the slaughter is a CHOICE. Getting blitzbashed in pubs is not. AV


CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 17520	Posted - 2015.02.17 11:49:00 - [11] - Quote I get ROFLstomped in BF all the time, sometimes teams try their hardest, and sometimes that's not enough. Of course we can do better, but that's not the point of the thread. It is to explain that the method is working as intended, and is a massive improvement from what we had. The matchmaker itself, that's where we can get the next improvements. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

Aeon Amadi Chimera Core 8777	Posted - 2015.02.17 12:06:00 - [12] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: I get ROFLstomped in BF all the time, sometimes teams try their hardest, and sometimes that's not enough. Of course we can do better, but that's not the point of the thread. It is to explain that the method is working as intended, and is a massive improvement from what we had. The matchmaker itself, that's where we can get the next improvements. Isn't the MU system primarily centralized around WP/Sec..? Wouldn't players with a higher team-focus (not necessarily victory focused) like Logistics be considered of a higher "MU" than Johnny NoBody doing nothing but slaying? Would that not also, by design, put a team-focused Logistics against a really powerful Slayer expecting that their MU would be similar for different reasons..? Have a suggestion for the Planetary Services Department? *Founder of AIV*
Denchlad 7 TheMysteriousEnd 1768	Posted - 2015.02.17 12:07:00 - [13] - Quote The example listed above of the EU server being especially stompy I can shed some light on. I normally am in a pubstomping squad with DMG guys. Normally consisting of Myself - 58mil SP LHughes - ~70mil SP Lorelei Zee - ~40mil SP manboar thunder fist ~40mil SP TheD1CK - ~65mil SP So as you can see, high SP players playing as a team. That makes it hard for whoever the matchmaker puts us against. We nornally are faced with a squad of 6 whatever mode we play. Normally Prima Galicus, Third Rock, Rainbow Effect/Negative Feedback or Academy Inferno. Some battles are intense bloodbaths, others are complete roflstomps. Against any of those corps. The issue I see is the other players the matchmaker seeds into the game. I've been in matches where PG have been completely obliterated by my team, and others where they have completely obliterated us, despite having unchanged squads. I think the only possible solution would be forcing other large squads in the place of the smaller squads, and pushing the other small squads into a different match of their own. E.g. 6-6-4 on one team, 6-5-5 on the other, with the other match as 3-3-3-3-2-2 and 3-3-3-2-2-1-1-1. Seems a bit fairer. Only issue would be the time of the day on each server and the amount of available players. "Why build ontop of foundations that aren't solid?" Currently on Dust hiatus.
Aeon Amadi Chimera Core 8777	Posted - 2015.02.17 12:13:00 - [14] - Quote Another thing I want to bring to light is that not all players perform the same all the time. I could run a Prototype Gallente Assault for a few hours and then suddenly get a random hair up my kitten and decide to try out a Minmatar Commando for a few games, only being able to run Standard until I further invested into it. If the MU system is still considering that I'm a high-value slayer with a penchant for eye-gouging, how does it consider when I go into a lesser power tier? Am I still expected to perform the same with inferior equipment just because of how I performed previously? EDIT: What about complete changes in class or role? If my MU is being off-set by the fact that I'm a team-playing Logi with a few really intense battles in which I'm getting massive amounts of WP/sec, how does that affect my MU whenever I change out to be a Dropship pilot? Have a suggestion for the Planetary Services Department? *Founder of AIV*

CCP Rattati C C P C C P Alliance 17520	Posted - 2015.02.17 12:26:00 - [15] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: I get ROFLstomped in BF all the time, sometimes teams try their hardest, and sometimes that's not enough. Of course we can do better, but that's not the point of the thread. It is to explain that the method is working as intended, and is a massive improvement from what we had. The matchmaker itself, that's where we can get the next improvements. Isn't the MU system primarily centralized around WP/Sec..? Wouldn't players with a higher team-focus (not necessarily victory focused) like Logistics be considered of a higher "MU" than Johnny NoBody doing nothing but slaying? Would that not also, by design, put a team-focused Logistics against a really powerful Slayer expecting that their MU would be similar for different reasons..? No, MU is correlated with WP/s but based on W/L, just like ELO rankings, which are used in all competitive sports.. "As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"

steadyhand amarr shadows of 514 3574	Posted - 2015.02.17 12:28:00 - [16] - Quote I think a big problem here is some people just won't admit they are bad at dust and blame the matchmaker for their own screw ups or blame their team etc etc. You can never have to many chaples -Templar True adamance
Aikuchi Tomaru Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 2676	Posted - 2015.02.17 12:41:00 - [17] - Quote steadyhand amarr wrote: I think a big problem here is some people just won't admit they are bad at dust and blame the matchmaker for their own screw ups or blame their team etc etc. Regarding the opening post it seems like random people forming a squad messes things up a bit to their disadvantage. Something the matchmaking isn't able to factor in: How well a squad works together. RtP probably used voice comms while the people on the other team just used the squad finder or something. Solution 1: Stop squadding up with pure randoms. It's no different from playing normally, just that you get more Squad WP and maybe get a single big Warbarge strike out of it. Solution 2: I guess the matchmaking should value corp squads different from squads consisting of random people. Problem here being that this could be exploitet. Sign up for Caldari FW and defeat the evil Gallente Overlords!
Breakin Stuff Goonfeet Special Planetary Emergency Response Group 7243	Posted - 2015.02.17 12:43:00 - [18] - Quote steadyhand amarr wrote: I think a big problem here is some people just won't admit they are bad at dust and blame the matchmaker for their own screw ups or blame their team etc etc. There will be some of this to a point. I personally have never had the anecdotal 5-7 loss stomp streak and I run solo all the time. AV
steadyhand amarr shadows of 514 3575	Posted - 2015.02.17 13:23:00 - [19] - Quote Iv been playing shooters since you could be lay shooters abs iv learned one thing. Which ever team communicates the best will always win. And you can't matchmake for that. If you get a bunch of randoms who =800 points and squad who practice a lot but are not that great and as a result also =800 points. Which flat out stomp the randoms. The matchmaker is not going to give you win it's simply going to make sure dad's play other dad's and not progamers but if one group of dad's play together a lot... you gunna lose. You can never have to many chaples -Templar True adamance
Jebus McKing Nos Nothi 1491	Posted - 2015.02.17 13:45:00 - [20] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: I get ROFLstomped in BF all the time, sometimes teams try their hardest, and sometimes that's not enough. Of course we can do better, but that's not the point of the thread. It is to explain that the method is working as intended, and is a massive improvement from what we had. The matchmaker itself, that's where we can get the next improvements. So assuming the teambuilder works as intended and teams are well balanced then the next question we have to ask is why is it that people seem to give up after a couple of minutes into a game? Sure, you can get stomped horribly in other games too but more likely than not people will at least try until the end of match. And why shouldn't they? There is nothing to be gained from sitting around in the spawn area and nothing to be lost by keeping trying. In DUST you will lose ISK if you keep trying (sometimes even when winning the match), and you will have a very hard time turning around matches in cheap suits. While it's true that a vet in a STD suit can beat another vet in a PRO suit, the same thing does not work for noobs. A new player without his core skills up and only using a STD loadout has little to no chance of beating a vet in a PRO loadout. I see people go 0/10+ regularly and to be honest I cannot blame them if they stop trying after 5 minutes. (Also, we should not aspire to get DUST to the same level as BF, but to outshine it! ) Sorry for this horribly off-topic post. pé¿pâûpé¦pü»pé¦pé¡pâúpâ¦péÆs½îpüúpüªpüäpéïpÇé wwwwwwwwwww

Starlight Burner ROGUE RELICS VP Gaming Alliance 136	Posted - 2015.02.17 15:53:00 - [21] - Quote The matchmaker shouldn't take 1 or 2 player squads in mind. Those players are 'solo' or 'duo' . They have little to nothing to contribute to the team when there is a squad of 12 ( 2 squads of 6) working. Solo and Duo players are hurting the matchmaking. Thank god for CCP Rattati!! Rogue Relics is my home away from home.
Sole Fenychs Sinq Laison Gendarmes Gallente Federation 613	Posted - 2015.02.17 16:02:00 - [22] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: CCP Rattati wrote: I get ROFLstomped in BF all the time, sometimes teams try their hardest, and sometimes that's not enough. Of course we can do better, but that's not the point of the thread. It is to explain that the method is working as intended, and is a massive improvement from what we had. The matchmaker itself, that's where we can get the next improvements. Isn't the MU system primarily centralized around WP/Sec..? Wouldn't players with a higher team-focus (not necessarily victory focused) like Logistics be considered of a higher "MU" than Johnny NoBody doing nothing but slaying? Would that not also, by design, put a team-focused Logistics against a really powerful Slayer expecting that their MU would be similar for different reasons..? No, MU is correlated with WP/s but based on W/L, just like ELO rankings, which are used in all competitive sports.. ...Does W/L really matter in a game mode where sixteen uncoordinated newberries try to slaughter each other? Wins and Losses in pubs are more of a matter of correlation than of causation, unless the individual/squad in question is absolute elite or matched up against complete failures.
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback. 4601	Posted - 2015.02.17 16:18:00 - [23] - Quote I think this shows a good reason why 6 man squads may hurt the matchmaker system for public play. In a 4 man system Ready to Play would have been broken into 2 components of 4 likely with a Rank of 1 and 2. This may have ensured that they end up on opposite sides. Does the MU system have a modifier based on squad member count or is it just a simple sum of it's parts? Also, I think it reiterates the need to have a release valve for large groups of players through 8-16 man squads in faction warfare and PC away from public play. Raiding and Platoons can't come fast enough along with a reasonable scaling of rewards through these game modes that drives veteran players to them. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
JIMvc2 Consolidated Dust 710	Posted - 2015.02.17 17:26:00 - [24] - Quote I enjoyed steam rolling the Ready to Play corp. yawn seriously change your corp name to Ready to get demolished. All these made up corps just squad up and boom = Nothing in return. >.>... MAG Raven vet 7 times. Favorite weapon F90 and Highest Kills 78 and 23 deaths.
The-Errorist 1056	Posted - 2015.02.17 17:57:00 - [25] - Quote The problem is probably with MU, the stat used to rank players. What it was this instead? Here's the old thread for it. Suits, Tanks, a mode
Stefan Stahl Seituoda Taskforce Command 988	Posted - 2015.02.17 18:46:00 - [26] - Quote CCP Rattati wrote: Dear players, We have been seeing complaints that the Teambuilder is not working as intended. I have stated before, and state again, that we have not been able to verify a single instance of it not working as intended. Does the system work as you intended it to? Yes. Does the system work like the players are expecting it to? No. Don't get me wrong, the teambuilder was a huge step forward for Dust and I'm thankful for it's existence. On the other hand I believe that the complaints have merit to them too. People are expecting the game to make fun matches, which is a fair expectation from their side. You are expecting the teambuilder to distribute mu-chunks evenly, which is a fair expectation from your point of view. These two concepts are related to one another, but they aren't the same. That's how we get complaints about unfit matchmaking from players and assertions of veracity from your side. As you can see I'm trying to make a case for matchmaking on top of teambalancing. Is there any progress on that front?
Regis Blackbird DUST University Ivy League 640	Posted - 2015.02.17 19:06:00 - [27] - Quote The-Errorist wrote: The problem is probably with MU, the stat used to rank players. What it was this instead? Here's the old thread for it. I am leaning towards the same conclusion, even if Rattati have stated numerous times Mu correlates perfectly to player skill. The thing is, I just don't see how a individual metric based on team W/L can ever correlate to my skill. I would absolutely love to see some Mu data (graphP0rn) which displays Mu evolution over time, or Mu difference between teams compared to win margin, to clearly display its supposed effectiveness. Take me for example. I am a very casual player which generally suck at pure killing (more a support person, adjusting strategy and fitting to suite the situation) I only get time to play a couple of matches per week (full time job and two small kids) Usually play solo, but enjoy teamwork if I get the time. I very rarely get a K/D ratio above 1.0 (and I don't care) My WP varies greatly between 200 - 2000, depending on the role I can fill on the team. If faced with a proto-stomp, usually switch to (BPO) gear to minimise ISK loss, while retaining some killing power to take a few with me. (Focus switching from attempting to win to inflict as much ISK loss as possible) Now the thing is, I very rarely feel that my contribution resulted in the team winning or loosing. Usually the WIN/LOSS is totally out of my control, so how can a metric based on this determine my personal skill as a player??? I would like to see a graph of my Mu evolution over the last year. I think it will be all over the place.
Aeon Amadi Chimera Core 8783	Posted - 2015.02.17 23:17:00 - [28] - Quote Aikuchi Tomaru wrote: steadyhand amarr wrote: I think a big problem here is some people just won't admit they are bad at dust and blame the matchmaker for their own screw ups or blame their team etc etc. Regarding the opening post it seems like random people forming a squad messes things up a bit to their disadvantage. Something the matchmaking isn't able to factor in: How well a squad works together. RtP probably used voice comms while the people on the other team just used the squad finder or something. Solution 1: Stop squadding up with pure randoms. It's no different from playing normally, just that you get more Squad WP and maybe get a single big Warbarge strike out of it. Solution 2: I guess the matchmaking should value corp squads different from squads consisting of random people. Problem here being that this could be exploitet. What about guys like myself who run exclusively solo but notice extreme changes in the battle dynamics? In some games I run against nothing but MLT fitted guys, despite having 60m+ SP and a few suits proto'd out. Can watch my video on the 'Black Ops' Gallente Assault fitting I've got on youtube if you want to see how that turns out. Then in some games I go against two full proto squads of different corporations whereas my team always seems to be a mashed together mix of newbros and other corps. Theories abound but I seriously doubt that 16 people can ever be off their game at the exact same time in order to allow for one team to apply a badger sized hole in their rear. Have a suggestion for the Planetary Services Department? *Founder of AIV*
Gyn Wallace OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 234	Posted - 2015.02.18 00:01:00 - [29] - Quote Regis Blackbird wrote: The thing is, I just don't see how a individual metric based on team W/L can ever correlate to my skill. I think you've hit the nail on the head. I generally suck, except when I've got a really good squad leader. Does having about 50M sp and a W/L ratio that's awesome when a really good squad leader is leading me, and a W/L ratio that's really bad whenever the really good squad leaders log off, make my individual MU almost irrelevant? I'd imagine that the key to good match balance lies in identifying those individuals, most likely squad leaders or just people who inspire an excellent use of coms, so that their presence on a team reflects their desperate impact on the rest of the squad's performance. Figuring out that threshold or stat that identifies those individuals, and appropriately weighing their MU, would seem to be the key. Some people have awesome gun game and even running solo have a huge impact on match outcomes. Some people have incredible leadership skills and act as force multipliers for their entire squad. Figuring out how to identify the second category of people and weigh them appropriately can't be easy, but they're more important to match balance than the individual with great gun game. Particularly with respect to the OP; I blame Dux. The Dust/Eve Isk Exchange Thread
Aeon Amadi Chimera Core 8793	Posted - 2015.02.19 03:17:00 - [30] - Quote See, this is the thing I can't seem to wrap my head around. Sure, all evidence points to the fact that teams are "balanced" but for some reason we still have these matches where one team just gets completely obliterated to the point where the victor team's MCC only took damage from the loss team's MCC and the victor's still have 100+ clones by the end of the match. But alas, the only thing that seems to ever happen about this is everyone just says "git gud", as if to say that one person is supposed to be good enough to account for the fifteen people on his team that somehow weren't good enough to make for even a "close" match or provide a "good fight" that they still lost.... It was a stomp. Meaning that 16 people, trying -at all-, did not make a difference and got utterly destroyed. You can deflect all you want with the "people just need to admit when they suck at the game" but clearly something is wrong and clearly there's no drive to fix it, otherwise we'd admit that something is wrong with the sheer amount of these stomp matches and make an effort to figure out why they happen. Can we just assume that the community doesn't care to fix it and just say that instead of trolling with the "git gud" bits? Can we just admit that we have no interest in changing this? Have a suggestion for the Planetary Services Department? *Founder of AIV*



Pages: [1] 2 3 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last 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.