|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Gyn Wallace
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
234
   |
Posted - 2015.02.18 00:01:00 -
[1] - 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
|
Gyn Wallace
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
237
|
Posted - 2015.02.19 15:45:00 -
[2] - Quote
Aeon Amadi wrote: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.
All evidence does not point to the fact that teams are "balanced." The remainder of your sentence is a portion of the evidence which clearly shows that many teams are not balanced.
Aeon Amadi wrote: But alas, the only thing that seems to ever happen about this is everyone just says "git gud", ...
I've never heard that response to complaints about matchmaking needing improvement.
Aeon Amadi wrote: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?
That's kind of an odd thing to write on the second page of a thread about the need to improve match making. I'd like to know why CCP thinks the WP difference between teams on some matches is greater than 10k, despite MUs that must have been similar enough to put those teams in a match against each other.
I get rofl-stomped when I solo, or when I'm in a squad behaving like we're solo. Then somebody has to log off, and gets replaced, and that ONE new-arrival shames the rest of us into stopping behaving like newbs or chickens with our heads-cut off, and encourages us to use a little discipline and our coms for something other than hilarity. And then we might do the rofl-stomping next match.
How can MU measure that or balance the teams, without giving a vastly greater weight to that new-arrival? Is there something about him that makes him statistically distinct, like having a much batter W/L ratio than players with similar SP?
There must be a way to revise MU, so that Ratatti's example wouldn't happen, i.e. the Mu for one or two people in those Ready To Play squads would so inflate that teams MU, that the last few people added to their team, would have instead been placed on the opposite team. I wish I were smart enough to just give CCP the method, instead I'm left paraphrasing Winston Churchill's comment about Americans: "You can count on CCP doing the right thing, right after they've tried everything else." 
The Dust/Eve Isk Exchange Thread
|
Gyn Wallace
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
239
|
Posted - 2015.02.21 15:06:00 -
[3] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:Dear players,
We have been seeing complaints that the Teambuilder is not working as intended.
...
This has been the case for every single reported/suspected battle of "broken matchmaker" so I still maintain that it is working as intended. ...]
How far apart were the war point totals for the teams in that match? How bad would a stomp have to be for you to recognize that the current match making system had failed to give the players a somewhat balanced fight? (Which I recognize is a different question than "Is match making working as intended?")
Also, (flame suit on) what if the players were given the ability to adjust their Mu manually, raising their calculated SP as much as 5 or 10%? I know; that's crazy; everybody would keep it low, to try to give themselves easier matches.... or would they?
If even only a small portion of the the players adjusted their Mu off the default setting (for newbs) in order to challenge themselves or get into more interesting matches because they've had a run of being on the stomping side, would it partially alleviate the problem?
Its probably not worth the work it would take to implement, but I do wonder if it would help.
The Dust/Eve Isk Exchange Thread
|
Gyn Wallace
OSG Planetary Operations
Covert Intervention
271
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 15:55:00 -
[4] - Quote
By the way, is there some terribly expensive coding impediment to putting more than 16 people on one team, and fewer than 16 on the other team, while still capping the total people in the match at 32?
How much of the problem for teambuilder of balancing a single 6 man practically-infinite-Mu squad is resolved by putting them up against the other 26 people in the match? The huge newbie team would also need a disproportionate number of clones, maybe 250 v 50 instead of 150 v 150.
The Dust/Eve Isk Exchange Thread
|
|
|
| |
|