| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
KEROSIINI-TERO
The Rainbow Effect
1830
   |
Posted - 2015.03.08 12:06:00 -
[1] - Quote
These questions were arised in the recent thread about Teambuilder logic by CCP Rattati.
Sadly he closed the thread without a word on these. Assuming it was an innocent overlook considering the forum flood of posts, here are the questions again:
---
Even though this was probably explained in the Teambuilder threads and I probably know the answers,
I have to be sure and I believe the answer would clarify everyone's thoughts:
1) If a 6-man squads Mu is high enough, will the Teambuilder do the following:
[A theoretical infinite Mu 6-man squad] --> Team A
[The 16 next highest Mu entities, whether squadded or not] --> Team B
[The 10 lowest Mu players of the match] --> Team A
???
The importance is to realise if Teambuilder will not organise chunks of players just by left-right-left-right-left-right and so on.
2) The squads have a 'multiplier' to their Mu in order to emphasize their weight.
Is the multiplier, or the weight, relatively higher for squads for more people?
In other words, is a 6-man squads resulting Mu higher than three 2-man squads'?
(Also, for the people wondering: it's worth emphasizing that Matchmaking and Teambuilder are entirely different things and latter begins it's work after the first has handed it the players to work with)
Looking at both sides of the coin.
Even Aurum one.
|
|
CCP Rattati
C C P
C C P Alliance
18216
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 13:16:00 -
[2] - Quote
These are all answered in my previous blogs/threads.
Step 1)
All squads and individuals are converted to units. Each unit is the sum of Mu of all the individuals in the squad.
Step 2)
Multiplier is applied to all units
Step 3)
The highest value unit is placed randomly on Team A or Team B, let's say Team A for simplicity.
Step 4)
Units are placed on the opposite Team, Team B, until the sum on Team B exceeds Team A.
Step 5)
Units are placed on Team A until the sum of Mu exceeds Team B or either team has 16 player. Then the rest go on the other team.
Step 6)
Repeat until all units have been placed.
This method guarantees that the two best squads are always on opposite sides.
It also guarantees that the second best and third best squads are on the opposite side of the best squad.
If there is a single 6 man squad and no other squads, it gets placed on one Team and ALL the best individuals on the opposite side, due to the multiplier, usually 8-10 of the best solo players fight the 6 man squad.
"As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"
|
|
Big Burns
0uter.Heaven
Back and Forth
676
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 13:27:00 -
[3] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:These are all answered in my previous blogs/threads.
Step 1)
All squads and individuals are converted to units. Each unit is the sum of Mu of all the individuals in the squad.
Step 2)
Multiplier is applied to all units
Step 3)
The highest value unit is placed randomly on Team A or Team B, let's say Team A for simplicity.
Step 4)
Units are placed on the opposite Team, Team B, until the sum on Team B exceeds Team A.
Step 5)
Units are placed on Team A until the sum of Mu exceeds Team B or either team has 16 player. Then the rest go on the other team.
Step 6)
Repeat until all units have been placed.
This method guarantees that the two best squads are always on opposite sides.
It also guarantees that the second best and third best squads are on the opposite side of the best squad.
If there is a single 6 man squad and no other squads, it gets placed on one Team and ALL the best individuals on the opposite side, due to the multiplier, usually 8-10 of the best solo players fight the 6 man squad.
Finally, this method has never been shown to have not worked as intended. Players concern is usually because the second best squad isn't all in the same corporation so it looks like randoms.
My only response to this is....#BringBackCubs! 
Dust514- 90% L3 / 10% R1
|
KEROSIINI-TERO
The Rainbow Effect
1830
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 13:33:00 -
[4] - Quote
Thanks.
And the multiplier is... What?
Is that the thing that would make sure that six man squads converted Mu is higher than three two man squads'? Assuming identical players.
Looking at both sides of the coin.
Even Aurum one.
|
Pagl1u M
Dead Man's Game
RUST415
1729
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 13:51:00 -
[5] - Quote
Show us MUs of the various players.
One of the few assaults you'll find in a PC match!
|
jordy mack
WarRavens
343
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 13:55:00 -
[6] - Quote
is step 4 done in order of next highest mu, or does it just go down the list adding ppl untill the numbers even out?
Less QQ more PewPew
|
Mossellia Delt
Militaires Sans Jeux
2332
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 14:00:00 -
[7] - Quote
This doesn't seem to work at all though.
When I'm playing its stacked, badly.
Team A will have a 6 man squad, plus a 3 man squad with a high MU
While team B will have everyone solo with 2 good players and 14 blues who can't get more then 200 WPs.
Delt for CPM2
CPM1 MISSION : FAILED
Moss-delt on skype
|
KEROSIINI-TERO
The Rainbow Effect
1830
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 14:27:00 -
[8] - Quote
Mossellia Delt wrote:This doesn't seem to work at all though.
When I'm playing its stacked, badly.
Team A will have a 6 man squad, plus a 3 man squad with a high MU
While team B will have everyone solo with 2 good players and 14 blues who can't get more then 200 WPs.
The resulting WP can NOT be used to gauge whether teambuilder works or not, although it might be the result of it.
Team builder can not know if some people have a bad day, or they are not interested at that time.
I do agree that most time people can not tell if there's a squad or not.
My suspicions arose on few cases where I had friends on both sides, squadded up in several squads.
Looking at both sides of the coin.
Even Aurum one.
|
Big Burns
0uter.Heaven
Back and Forth
679
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 14:28:00 -
[9] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:These are all answered in my previous blogs/threads.
Step 1)
All squads and individuals are converted to units. Each unit is the sum of Mu of all the individuals in the squad.
Step 2)
Multiplier is applied to all units
Step 3)
The highest value unit is placed randomly on Team A or Team B, let's say Team A for simplicity.
Step 4)
Units are placed on the opposite Team, Team B, until the sum on Team B exceeds Team A.
Step 5)
Units are placed on Team A until the sum of Mu exceeds Team B or either team has 16 player. Then the rest go on the other team.
Step 6)
Repeat until all units have been placed.
This method guarantees that the two best squads are always on opposite sides.
It also guarantees that the second best and third best squads are on the opposite side of the best squad.
If there is a single 6 man squad and no other squads, it gets placed on one Team and ALL the best individuals on the opposite side, due to the multiplier, usually 8-10 of the best solo players fight the 6 man squad.
Finally, this method has never been shown to have not worked as intended. Players concern is usually because the second best squad isn't all in the same corporation so it looks like randoms.
Rattati please read my post concerning "MU". It gets deep into the subject. I wanna know how it works because it's affecting myself and others and promotes 6 man proto squads.
Dust514- 90% L3 / 10% R1
|
|
CCP Rattati
C C P
C C P Alliance
18217
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 14:31:00 -
[10] - Quote
Mossellia Delt wrote:This doesn't seem to work at all though.
When I'm playing its stacked, badly.
Team A will have a 6 man squad, plus a 3 man squad with a high MU
While team B will have everyone solo with 2 good players and 14 blues who can't get more then 200 WPs.
I have checked hundreds of battles, and demonstrated in a recent thread a sample of such a deep dive.
How many have you checked, and where is your data?
How do you determine who is in squads and who not?
"As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"
|
|
|
|
Arkena Wyrnspire
Fatal Absolution
Negative-Feedback
22526
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 14:33:00 -
[11] - Quote
Having taken pictures of a few unbalanced matches I later realised that they were caused by squads on one side bailing.
Gallente Guide
|
Big Burns
0uter.Heaven
Back and Forth
681
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 14:36:00 -
[12] - Quote
Ok! I guess I'll re-type EVERYTHING on this post instead of you taking 30 seconds to read mine and reply. And YOU wonder why the community is always on your case. A little respect goes a long way man.
CCP Rattati^
Dust514- 90% L3 / 10% R1
|
Lorhak Gannarsein
Nos Nothi
4402
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 14:38:00 -
[13] - Quote
Mossellia Delt wrote:This doesn't seem to work at all though.
When I'm playing its stacked, badly.
Team A will have a 6 man squad, plus a 3 man squad with a high MU
While team B will have everyone solo with 2 good players and 14 blues who can't get more then 200 WPs.
First off, you can't see the other team's squad breakdowns, second off your numbers seem pretty vague and nonspecific, and so the conclusion to which I must therefore arrive is that you are exaggerating.
There is no reason that a squad is any good.
I don't know how MU is calculated, but let's say, for argument's sake, pulling numbers right out of my arse, six guys with an individual MU of 10 squad up via Squad Finder.
They get a multiplier of 3.5 for being in full squad, for a squad MU of 210.
There's also a squad of three guys with an individual MU of 40, getting a multiplier of 2, for a total of 240. These mercs are vastly more competent than the full squad, and are selected for team A, while the full squad is first pick on team B.
All works out; it turns out through the magic of blueberries the MUs end up approximately equal on both teams; some more competent players show up and carry team B. All is well, the teambuilder has functioned as it is intended, and no-one gets butthurt cos it looks like a team of nobodies has won.
On the flipside, let's say that noob squad joins the same corp after that match (they were all REALLY IMPRESSED by one another). The competent squad fills out with a fourth corp member. They now have a much larger MU of 400 - they'll be first pick for sure.
A third group, and a fourth show up - there are only a few of them, a four-man squad and a three-man squad. None of these guys share corps - they're friends from a chat channel or something. They have MU of 25 each - that gets multiplied by 2.5 for a total of 250 and by 2 for a total of 150.
The MU balancer now takes the competent team first; they take team A's total to 400. The two new squads conveniently have MUs that add up to 400 together, so those seven get added to team B in order to fill out the team balance. The group of newly-corp'd newbies are the next largest group; they get added to team A. There being no more squads, the teams get filled up in order - there might be some competent players here with MU of 50 or 60, even, but they don't matter compared to the squads.
Team A wins convincingly; the group of extremely skilled players on top of the number of somewhat-organised meatshields carries the day.
The killboard shows up, and it looks like team A has two large squads from two different corps, and team B had nobodies.
Then you, being one of the randoms on team B, go on the forums and complain about a thing that would make sense if you stopped and thought for a minute, and here I am at 1:30AM straining my brain trying to think about numbers that make sense.
I'm going on the assumption, incidentally, that the team with lower MU gets to pick next - as opposed to how it might be selections in the same way that your gym class picked players on the football team.
The former, of course, being a much more sensible method of selection.
Guys, we need to stop calling MU a 'matchmaker' when it's actually a 'teambuilder'.
And I want to play FE:A now. Damn.
|
Big Burns
0uter.Heaven
Back and Forth
681
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 14:39:00 -
[14] - Quote
I'm asking because I want to know how it works. I always get put into games with Dia Farron, Kaizuka Sniper, Milkman, Frosty Kitty, and Duna 2002 all on the other team at the same time.
Back in 1.5-1.7 I ran tanks/logi uplinks. I would AVERAGE 4,000WP's per game and have an AVERAGE of 35 kills per game. Not bragging, just found a way to be productive given that current state of the game. Is this why my "MU" is SOOOO high? No one wants to squad with me, except a few good players. Everyone always leaves my squad because they get recked, by those guys above.
They always say they are taking a break, but then I see them post lfs in a chat. I confronted a few of them and they said my MU was high, and they didn't want to face NS all day. How can I fix this...I'm not B.S.ing. This is a legitimate problem for me. I would imagine it's a legitimate problem for a lot of vets...given how few of us there are in comparison to the newer players. This forces myself and others to run solo or stick together and this is why people always joke about the best players being "butt-buddies". It's not the way we want it...you have no idea.
^^^There! Please tell me why this is happening and is this why OP players stick together, creating pubstomping squads....because no one else will play with them...
Dust514- 90% L3 / 10% R1
|
KEROSIINI-TERO
The Rainbow Effect
1830
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 14:40:00 -
[15] - Quote
Big Burns wrote:Ok! I guess I'll re-type EVERYTHING on this post instead of you taking 30 seconds to read mine and reply. And YOU wonder why the community is always on your case. A little respect goes a long way man.
CCP Rattati^
That was for me?
Let me explain.
On the original thread by Mr Rattati himself, people did not know those things.
I assumed I knew but wasn't sure so instead of educating people while not being sure,
I asked the question 1).
The question still needs answering, the multiplier has been mentioned but not specified if it is the assumed squad multilplier - and not a multiplier for anything else.
Looking at both sides of the coin.
Even Aurum one.
|
Soldner VonKuechle
SAM-MIK
General Tso's Alliance
1641
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 14:44:00 -
[16] - Quote
KEROSIINI-TERO wrote:Big Burns wrote:Ok! I guess I'll re-type EVERYTHING on this post instead of you taking 30 seconds to read mine and reply. And YOU wonder why the community is always on your case. A little respect goes a long way man.
CCP Rattati^ That was for me? Let me explain. On the original thread by Mr Rattati himself, people did not know those things. I assumed I knew but wasn't sure so instead of educating people while not being sure,
I asked the question 1). The question still needs answering, the multiplier has been mentioned but not specified if it is the assumed squad multilplier - and not a multiplier for anything else.
Naw, BB wasnt given attention by Ratatti, after seeing he posted in your thread.
So his legitimate question about MU generation is befuddled by his dire need to be an excellent personality.
Hey Soldner, why are you such a cynic?
Ever read the dust forums? You'll know why.
|
Forlorn Destrier
Incorruptibles
3299
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 14:50:00 -
[17] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:Mossellia Delt wrote:This doesn't seem to work at all though.
When I'm playing its stacked, badly.
Team A will have a 6 man squad, plus a 3 man squad with a high MU
While team B will have everyone solo with 2 good players and 14 blues who can't get more then 200 WPs. I have checked hundreds of battles, and demonstrated in a recent thread a sample of such a deep dive. How many have you checked, and where is your data? How do you determine who is in squads and who not?
I think people are over-reacting, but in an effort to have transparency and put these complaints to rest, is it possible to show the MU of each player on the leaderboard?
I would propose that the adjusted number for being in a squad be reflected so if you are solo you one match and in a squad the next you can see the actual impact of being in a squad. Also, a total MU score for each team would be nice as well, if we can't show individual MU scores.
Thanks for listening.
I am the Forgotten Warhorse, a Lord of Lightning
I am Havok, Incorruptible
|
|
CCP Rattati
C C P
C C P Alliance
18221
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 14:50:00 -
[18] - Quote
KEROSIINI-TERO wrote:Big Burns wrote:Ok! I guess I'll re-type EVERYTHING on this post instead of you taking 30 seconds to read mine and reply. And YOU wonder why the community is always on your case. A little respect goes a long way man.
CCP Rattati^ That was for me? Let me explain. On the original thread by Mr Rattati himself, people did not know those things. I assumed I knew but wasn't sure so instead of educating people while not being sure,
I asked the question 1). The question still needs answering, the multiplier has been mentioned but not specified if it is the assumed squad multilplier - and not a multiplier for anything else.
I have no idea what you are asking...
"As well as stupid, Rattati is incredibly slow and accident-prone, and cannot even swim"
|
|
Forlorn Destrier
Incorruptibles
3299
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 14:52:00 -
[19] - Quote
Forlorn Destrier wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:Mossellia Delt wrote:This doesn't seem to work at all though.
When I'm playing its stacked, badly.
Team A will have a 6 man squad, plus a 3 man squad with a high MU
While team B will have everyone solo with 2 good players and 14 blues who can't get more then 200 WPs. I have checked hundreds of battles, and demonstrated in a recent thread a sample of such a deep dive. How many have you checked, and where is your data? How do you determine who is in squads and who not? I think people are over-reacting, but in an effort to have transparency and put these complaints to rest, is it possible to show the MU of each player on the leaderboard? I would propose that the adjusted number for being in a squad be reflected so if you are solo you one match and in a squad the next you can see the actual impact of being in a squad. Also, a total MU score for each team would be nice as well, if we can't show individual MU scores. Thanks for listening.
Showing both team and individual MU at the same time would, or course, be the ideal.
I am the Forgotten Warhorse, a Lord of Lightning
I am Havok, Incorruptible
|
Sequal's Back
Dead Man's Game
RUST415
364
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 14:53:00 -
[20] - Quote
And how does it work when the "best squad" in Team A is facing 2 squads in Team B because they were second and third in MU, and decides to leave?
It usually happens, because 1 good squad can't face 2 others even if their MU is globally better. Then, Team A only have 2 or 3 (at best) good players left, and the matchmaking picks up absolute random players on Team A in order to make a 16 man team.
You end up with Team A getting stomped by 2 organiszd squads..
Rise? That's what they used to call me. Sequal Rise. That was my name.
Now I come Back to you, at the turn of the tide.
|
|
|
Forlorn Destrier
Incorruptibles
3299
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 14:55:00 -
[21] - Quote
Sequal's Back wrote:And how does it work when the "best squad" in Team A is facing 2 squads in Team B because they were second and third in MU, and decides to leave?
It usually happens, because 1 good squad can't face 2 others even if their MU is globally better. Then, Team A only have 2 or 3 (at best) good players left, and the matchmaking picks up absolute random players on Team A in order to make a 16 man team.
You end up with Team A getting stomped by 2 organiszd squads..
I would imagine that Scotty finds the best available players it can to fill the gap.
I am the Forgotten Warhorse, a Lord of Lightning
I am Havok, Incorruptible
|
Big Burns
0uter.Heaven
Back and Forth
681
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 14:56:00 -
[22] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:KEROSIINI-TERO wrote:Big Burns wrote:Ok! I guess I'll re-type EVERYTHING on this post instead of you taking 30 seconds to read mine and reply. And YOU wonder why the community is always on your case. A little respect goes a long way man.
CCP Rattati^ That was for me? Let me explain. On the original thread by Mr Rattati himself, people did not know those things. I assumed I knew but wasn't sure so instead of educating people while not being sure,
I asked the question 1). The question still needs answering, the multiplier has been mentioned but not specified if it is the assumed squad multilplier - and not a multiplier for anything else. I have no idea what you are asking...
Nevermind Rattati. Good for nothing. NEVERMIND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
....Deep breath...
My question: Why is my MU so high? Is it because I ran tank for the majority of my dust carreer? Yes or No.
Second question: Is it, or is it not true that vets squad together because no one else will squad with them, because their MU is too high? Yes or No.
Dust514- 90% L3 / 10% R1
|
Forlorn Destrier
Incorruptibles
3300
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 14:59:00 -
[23] - Quote
Big Burns wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:KEROSIINI-TERO wrote:Big Burns wrote:Ok! I guess I'll re-type EVERYTHING on this post instead of you taking 30 seconds to read mine and reply. And YOU wonder why the community is always on your case. A little respect goes a long way man.
CCP Rattati^ That was for me? Let me explain. On the original thread by Mr Rattati himself, people did not know those things. I assumed I knew but wasn't sure so instead of educating people while not being sure,
I asked the question 1). The question still needs answering, the multiplier has been mentioned but not specified if it is the assumed squad multilplier - and not a multiplier for anything else. I have no idea what you are asking... Nevermind Rattati. Good for nothing. NEVERMIND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ....Deep breath... My question: Why is my MU so high? Is it because I ran tank for the majority of my dust carreer? Yes or No. Second question: Is it, or is it not true that vets squad together because no one else will squad with them, because their MU is too high? Yes or No.
Act like an adult - the "question" was poorly formed and not understandable. He said he didn't understand - maybe try to rephrase the question so he does. Acting the way you are will only convince him to ignore you and this thread, and where is the positive in that?
I am the Forgotten Warhorse, a Lord of Lightning
I am Havok, Incorruptible
|
DIX RFOR CHICKS
T.U.R.D. R.O.C.K.
69
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 15:03:00 -
[24] - Quote
Why has scotty or team builder or matchmaking so SCREWED up lately?
I have been running into Qsynced squads of 8-12 guys all from the same corp. I thought that was fixed? I also thought going into battles at the end was fixed too,,,but I have seen all well that worked. |
KEROSIINI-TERO
The Rainbow Effect
1831
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 15:26:00 -
[25] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:I have no idea what you are asking...
Rephrasing my question 2).
2) The squads have a 'multiplier' to their Mu in order to emphasize their weight.
Is the multiplier, or the weight, relatively higher for squads for more people?
In other words, is a 6-man squads resulting relative Mu higher than three 2-man squads'?
Is (1x 6man-squad) > (3x 2man-squad) = true ???
Looking at both sides of the coin.
Even Aurum one.
|
KEROSIINI-TERO
The Rainbow Effect
1832
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 15:31:00 -
[26] - Quote
Big Burns wrote:
Nevermind Rattati. Good for nothing. NEVERMIND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
....Deep breath...
My question: Why is my MU so high? Is it because I ran tank for the majority of my dust carreer? Yes or No.
Second question: Is it, or is it not true that vets squad together because no one else will squad with them, because their MU is too high? Yes or No.
Big Burns, get out of this thread. You are making a mess.
There was 2 questions I asked and hoped answers for - now neither one is getting any.
Stay in your own thread - which you already made. Thanks.
Looking at both sides of the coin.
Even Aurum one.
|
Diablo Gamekeeper
Vherokior Combat Logistics
Minmatar Republic
95
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 15:31:00 -
[27] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:These are all answered in my previous blogs/threads.
Step 1)
All squads and individuals are converted to units. Each unit is the sum of Mu of all the individuals in the squad.
Step 2)
Multiplier is applied to all units
Step 3)
The highest value unit is placed randomly on Team A or Team B, let's say Team A for simplicity.
Step 4)
Units are placed on the opposite Team, Team B, until the sum on Team B exceeds Team A.
Step 5)
Units are placed on Team A until the sum of Mu exceeds Team B or either team has 16 player. Then the rest go on the other team.
Step 6)
Repeat until all units have been placed.
This method guarantees that the two best squads are always on opposite sides.
It also guarantees that the second best and third best squads are on the opposite side of the best squad.
If there is a single 6 man squad and no other squads, it gets placed on one Team and ALL the best individuals on the opposite side, due to the multiplier, usually 8-10 of the best solo players fight the 6 man squad.
Finally, this method has never been shown to have not worked as intended. Players concern is usually because the second best squad isn't all in the same corporation so it looks like randoms.
What's Mu?
The new signature
|
DIX RFOR CHICKS
T.U.R.D. R.O.C.K.
69
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 15:40:00 -
[28] - Quote
Diablo Gamekeeper wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:These are all answered in my previous blogs/threads.
Step 1)
All squads and individuals are converted to units. Each unit is the sum of Mu of all the individuals in the squad.
Step 2)
Multiplier is applied to all units
Step 3)
The highest value unit is placed randomly on Team A or Team B, let's say Team A for simplicity.
Step 4)
Units are placed on the opposite Team, Team B, until the sum on Team B exceeds Team A.
Step 5)
Units are placed on Team A until the sum of Mu exceeds Team B or either team has 16 player. Then the rest go on the other team.
Step 6)
Repeat until all units have been placed.
This method guarantees that the two best squads are always on opposite sides.
It also guarantees that the second best and third best squads are on the opposite side of the best squad.
If there is a single 6 man squad and no other squads, it gets placed on one Team and ALL the best individuals on the opposite side, due to the multiplier, usually 8-10 of the best solo players fight the 6 man squad.
Finally, this method has never been shown to have not worked as intended. Players concern is usually because the second best squad isn't all in the same corporation so it looks like randoms. What's Mu?
MU= MUBAR kinda like FUBAR ...it could be said that matchmaking or teambuilding is MUBAR or MU. Messed Up Beyond All Recognition |
Sequal's Back
Dead Man's Game
RUST415
364
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 15:52:00 -
[29] - Quote
Forlorn Destrier wrote:Sequal's Back wrote:And how does it work when the "best squad" in Team A is facing 2 squads in Team B because they were second and third in MU, and decides to leave?
It usually happens, because 1 good squad can't face 2 others even if their MU is globally better. Then, Team A only have 2 or 3 (at best) good players left, and the matchmaking picks up absolute random players on Team A in order to make a 16 man team.
You end up with Team A getting stomped by 2 organiszd squads.. I would imagine that Scotty finds the best available players it can to fill the gap.
I don't think so, and that's where the problem comes from. Scottty dont know about MU, he just picks up any player he can find and THEN the teambuilder will look at the Mu, but it wont have any other choice than putting the new guys on the A team.
Rise? That's what they used to call me. Sequal Rise. That was my name.
Now I come Back to you, at the turn of the tide.
|
postapo wastelander
Corrosive Synergy
RISE of LEGION
1038
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 16:28:00 -
[30] - Quote
Big Burns wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:These are all answered in my previous blogs/threads.
Step 1)
All squads and individuals are converted to units. Each unit is the sum of Mu of all the individuals in the squad.
Step 2)
Multiplier is applied to all units
Step 3)
The highest value unit is placed randomly on Team A or Team B, let's say Team A for simplicity.
Step 4)
Units are placed on the opposite Team, Team B, until the sum on Team B exceeds Team A.
Step 5)
Units are placed on Team A until the sum of Mu exceeds Team B or either team has 16 player. Then the rest go on the other team.
Step 6)
Repeat until all units have been placed.
This method guarantees that the two best squads are always on opposite sides.
It also guarantees that the second best and third best squads are on the opposite side of the best squad.
If there is a single 6 man squad and no other squads, it gets placed on one Team and ALL the best individuals on the opposite side, due to the multiplier, usually 8-10 of the best solo players fight the 6 man squad.
Finally, this method has never been shown to have not worked as intended. Players concern is usually because the second best squad isn't all in the same corporation so it looks like randoms. My only response to this is....#BringBackCubs!
My only responce to this is..#BanAllSpammers!
"Sebiestor Hetzer"
|
|
|
Regis Blackbird
DUST University
Ivy League
655
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 16:38:00 -
[31] - Quote
Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:Having taken pictures of a few unbalanced matches I later realised that they were caused by squads on one side bailing.
^ This is probably the main reason we have loopsided battles.
I might not fully understand the Mu concept, but I willing to take a leap with CCP Rattati's statement that it truly represent the skill of the individual player, and that the Teambuilder is working as expected. What then is left is the Matchmaker.
So how do we prevent this behaviour (leaving game)?
I would say: Don't let the same people meet eachother time and time again.
(Difficult with our numbers, I know...) |
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
7370
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 18:40:00 -
[32] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:Mossellia Delt wrote:This doesn't seem to work at all though.
When I'm playing its stacked, badly.
Team A will have a 6 man squad, plus a 3 man squad with a high MU
While team B will have everyone solo with 2 good players and 14 blues who can't get more then 200 WPs. I have checked hundreds of battles, and demonstrated in a recent thread a sample of such a deep dive. How many have you checked, and where is your data? How do you determine who is in squads and who not?
@ Rattati
You can't always predict a stomp, but you can get pretty close. You need only commit to memory the names of those who always roll with a stomp squad. Take Kaizuka Sniper, Addict Punk, Milkman, and Aki Tan for example. If you see one of these names in an Ambush match, you can expect with near certainty that they will be in a stomp squad.
Some vets alternate between modes and sometimes roll with smaller squads. Other vets stomp ambush matches, and that's pretty much it all they do. After playing hundreds of matches, you can get a pretty good feel for who is who. Just read the names at the top the leader board after a stomp.
Even if corp names vary, stomp squads stick out. And if you see one on Team A, and you see none on Team B, you can predict outcome with pretty good odds.
Shoot scout with yes.
- Ripley Riley
|
Vrain Matari
Mikramurka Shock Troop
Minmatar Republic
2536
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 18:53:00 -
[33] - Quote
Regis Blackbird wrote:Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:Having taken pictures of a few unbalanced matches I later realised that they were caused by squads on one side bailing. ^ This is probably the main reason we have loopsided battles. I might not fully understand the Mu concept, but I willing to take a leap with CCP Rattati's statement that it truly represent the skill of the individual player, and that the Teambuilder is working as expected. What then is left is the Matchmaker. So how do we prevent this behaviour (leaving game)? I would say: Don't let the same people meet eachother time and time again. (Difficult with our numbers, I know...)
My favorite answer to this is differential payouts.
A merc's end-of-match payout of both ISK and SP could be multiplied in those case where he was able to kill a higher-mu enemy(or member of a higher mu squad).
Prolly wouldn't change who won the match and wouldn't mean the merc died any less, but it would mean that if the merc(or squad) stayed in match and fought what they knew was going to be a tough fight, they would do okay in terms of payout and progression.
It might even justify the lower mu solos or squads pulling out better gear to fight the big dogs because the increased payouts would balance the losses.
From the other perspective the higher mu squads and solos would just get standard payout out of an encounter, but the fights would be better and over time we'd be building a more competent(or at least tougher) playerbase.
PSN: RationalSpark
|
Derpty Derp
Dead Man's Game
886
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 18:53:00 -
[34] - Quote
If the squad Mu is built based on Solo Mu, then perhaps we should have separate squad Mu?
Because I have been in matches where the squad of high Mu solo players push a damn good squad onto the other team, but aren't anywhere near the level of 'teamplay' that the 'lesser Mu' squad' who always play together are.
If we already have separate Mu for squads, then I'm buggered if I can tell what's wrong, but the redlining in those matches with multiple squads on the same team, speaks for itself. |
Raptor Princess
ALLOTEC INC
165
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 18:54:00 -
[35] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:Mossellia Delt wrote:This doesn't seem to work at all though.
When I'm playing its stacked, badly.
Team A will have a 6 man squad, plus a 3 man squad with a high MU
While team B will have everyone solo with 2 good players and 14 blues who can't get more then 200 WPs. I have checked hundreds of battles, and demonstrated in a recent thread a sample of such a deep dive. How many have you checked, and where is your data? How do you determine who is in squads and who not?
I have been in a couple of matches which were incredibly lopsided lately - I was in one a couple of weeks back where there were 6 members of one corp and 3 from another on one team and no squads on my team (aside from myself and one other blueberry in solo squads). I'm aware that just because they're in the same corp, the 6 guys from the same corporation may not have been in a squad, but it did seem like a bit of a coincidence. The game went terribly, but it got stuck on the defeat screen so I couldn't screenshot it, unfortunately.
Team balancing has improved since the fix though, so thanks! It's just a few matches that aren't quite right, usually.
|
Lorhak Gannarsein
Nos Nothi
4407
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 18:58:00 -
[36] - Quote
Derpty Derp wrote:If the squad Mu is built based on Solo Mu, then perhaps we should have separate squad Mu?
Because I have been in matches where the squad of high Mu solo players push a damn good squad onto the other team, but aren't anywhere near the level of 'teamplay' that the 'lesser Mu' squad' who always play together are.
If we already have separate Mu for squads, then I'm buggered if I can tell what's wrong, but the redlining in those matches with multiple squads on the same team, speaks for itself.
this is me: I often play with full squads of extremely competent people.
We don't play as a group; we're not really fussed.
Six skilled solo players in a squad =/= six decent team-players in a squad.
Guys, we need to stop calling MU a 'matchmaker' when it's actually a 'teambuilder'.
And I want to play FE:A now. Damn.
|
Adipem Nothi
Nos Nothi
7371
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 19:07:00 -
[37] - Quote
Appendix to Post #32.
Example: https://twitter.com/YoJollyRoger/status/567818226651127808
Rattati wrote:Blauhelme, Molon, Gallicus and more. If I had these teams before the match I would have been hard pressed to pick a winner...
If I saw the names Extacy, Hoser or GP Machine I would expect to see a stompsquad. These guys are old beasts, and the old beasts tend to play together. If I didn't see any old-names or beasts on Team A, I'd expect a stomp. Delboy's an old name, but he seems to be soloing.
Now this match is a special case.
Those old names on Team B were paired with what appears to be a full squad of Prima Gallicus. I would not be hard pressed to pick a winner here. This looks like a catastrophic stomp to me.
Shoot scout with yes.
- Ripley Riley
|
Big Burns
0uter.Heaven
Back and Forth
688
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 19:39:00 -
[38] - Quote
Forlorn Destrier wrote:Big Burns wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:KEROSIINI-TERO wrote:Big Burns wrote:Ok! I guess I'll re-type EVERYTHING on this post instead of you taking 30 seconds to read mine and reply. And YOU wonder why the community is always on your case. A little respect goes a long way man.
CCP Rattati^ That was for me? Let me explain. On the original thread by Mr Rattati himself, people did not know those things. I assumed I knew but wasn't sure so instead of educating people while not being sure,
I asked the question 1). The question still needs answering, the multiplier has been mentioned but not specified if it is the assumed squad multilplier - and not a multiplier for anything else. I have no idea what you are asking... Nevermind Rattati. Good for nothing. NEVERMIND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ....Deep breath... My question: Why is my MU so high? Is it because I ran tank for the majority of my dust carreer? Yes or No. Second question: Is it, or is it not true that vets squad together because no one else will squad with them, because their MU is too high? Yes or No. Act like an adult - the "question" was poorly formed and not understandable. He said he didn't understand - maybe try to rephrase the question so he does. Acting the way you are will only convince him to ignore you and this thread, and where is the positive in that?
"the "question" was poorly formed and not understandable."
Yea if your *******d!!!!!! Process of Elimination, Critical Thinking, Commone Sense! C'mon people!! Do I really need to hold your hand and walk you through it?
Dust514- 90% L3 / 10% R1
|
Big Burns
0uter.Heaven
Back and Forth
688
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 19:44:00 -
[39] - Quote
Forlorn Destrier wrote:Big Burns wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:KEROSIINI-TERO wrote:Big Burns wrote:Ok! I guess I'll re-type EVERYTHING on this post instead of you taking 30 seconds to read mine and reply. And YOU wonder why the community is always on your case. A little respect goes a long way man.
CCP Rattati^ That was for me? Let me explain. On the original thread by Mr Rattati himself, people did not know those things. I assumed I knew but wasn't sure so instead of educating people while not being sure,
I asked the question 1). The question still needs answering, the multiplier has been mentioned but not specified if it is the assumed squad multilplier - and not a multiplier for anything else. I have no idea what you are asking... Nevermind Rattati. Good for nothing. NEVERMIND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ....Deep breath... My question: Why is my MU so high? Is it because I ran tank for the majority of my dust carreer? Yes or No. Second question: Is it, or is it not true that vets squad together because no one else will squad with them, because their MU is too high? Yes or No. Act like an adult - the "question" was poorly formed and not understandable. He said he didn't understand - maybe try to rephrase the question so he does. Acting the way you are will only convince him to ignore you and this thread, and where is the positive in that?
And another thing! The customer is ALWAYS right. He needs to do his f*cking job and grow up, maybe if he did his f*cking job instead of ignoring people for weeks at a time, then I wouldn't have gotten to this point. Why doesn't he grow up, cup his f*cking balls and handle his sh*t, take care of his responsibilities and stop acting like a little b*tch! Go f*ck yourself Rattati! No good piece of f*cking sh*t!
Dust514- 90% L3 / 10% R1
|
Soldner VonKuechle
SAM-MIK
General Tso's Alliance
1643
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 19:50:00 -
[40] - Quote
Big Burns wrote:Forlorn Destrier wrote:Big Burns wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:KEROSIINI-TERO wrote:
That was for me?
Let me explain.
On the original thread by Mr Rattati himself, people did not know those things.
I assumed I knew but wasn't sure so instead of educating people while not being sure,
I asked the question 1).
The question still needs answering, the multiplier has been mentioned but not specified if it is the assumed squad multilplier - and not a multiplier for anything else.
I have no idea what you are asking... Nevermind Rattati. Good for nothing. NEVERMIND!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ....Deep breath... My question: Why is my MU so high? Is it because I ran tank for the majority of my dust carreer? Yes or No. Second question: Is it, or is it not true that vets squad together because no one else will squad with them, because their MU is too high? Yes or No. Act like an adult - the "question" was poorly formed and not understandable. He said he didn't understand - maybe try to rephrase the question so he does. Acting the way you are will only convince him to ignore you and this thread, and where is the positive in that? And another thing! The customer is ALWAYS right. He needs to do his f*cking job and grow up, maybe if he did his f*cking job instead of ignoring people for weeks at a time, then I wouldn't have gotten to this point. Why doesn't he grow up, cup his f*cking balls and handle his sh*t, take care of his responsibilities and stop acting like a little b*tch! Go f*ck yourself Rattati! No good piece of f*cking sh*t!
Honestly BB, you are currently the most toxic, divisive and angry player with community spotlight.
You have good points and ideas, but your temper and arrogance undermine you.
I truly look forward to your exile.
Hey Soldner, why are you such a cynic?
Ever read the dust forums? You'll know why.
|
|
|
Big Burns
0uter.Heaven
Back and Forth
689
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 19:56:00 -
[41] - Quote
Thanks. I'm trying, but sometimes the back-lash makes me weak. Like I know someone is gonna start sucking Rattati's d*ck in a few minutes, talkin bout- "You should have said that BB, take it back, Ratttati is trying his best." lol. Q*eers.
Dust514- 90% L3 / 10% R1
|
cris bleu
Carbon 7
Iron Oxide.
91
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 20:03:00 -
[42] - Quote
Big Burns wrote:...
Second question: Is it, or is it not true that vets squad together because no one else will squad with them, because their MU is too high? Yes or No.
Hi BB, Please can you hang on for a bit while CCP Rattati reads everyone's minds so he can answer this question about their motivation for you? |
DIX RFOR CHICKS
T.U.R.D. R.O.C.K.
75
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 20:04:00 -
[43] - Quote
Big Burns Baby,,
You are gonna have to settle down and kool your jets. Does you no good to catch a ban. You can't go around cursing everyone out becuz you have a hard on for someone. Gonna have to learn to argue maturely ,,I think it is called debate,,I still haven't mastered it. It is much easier to make personal attacks and call names but what does that get you?
Nothing, but a vacation. Just relax and breathe.
Oh yeah
#FreeCubs |
Big Burns
0uter.Heaven
Back and Forth
689
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 20:06:00 -
[44] - Quote
cris bleu wrote:Big Burns wrote:...
Second question: Is it, or is it not true that vets squad together because no one else will squad with them, because their MU is too high? Yes or No. Hi BB, Please can you hang on for a bit while CCP Rattati reads everyone's minds so he can answer this question about their motivation for you?
Sure...in the meantime I'll correct your sentence their.
"Hi BB, Can you please hang on for a bit, while CCP Rattat reads everyone's mind, so he can answer this question about their motivation for you?"
Their you go dumbsh*t. Is he ready?
Dust514- 90% L3 / 10% R1
|
cris bleu
Carbon 7
Iron Oxide.
91
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 20:46:00 -
[45] - Quote
Big Burns wrote:cris bleu wrote:Big Burns wrote:...
Second question: Is it, or is it not true that vets squad together because no one else will squad with them, because their MU is too high? Yes or No. Hi BB, Please can you hang on for a bit while CCP Rattati reads everyone's minds so he can answer this question about their motivation for you? Sure...in the meantime I'll correct your sentence their. "Hi BB, Can you please hang on for a bit, while CCP Rattat reads everyone's mind, so he can answer this question about their motivation for you?" Their you go dumbsh*t. Is he ready?
Tip: don't post angry or you might, for example, use "their" instead of "there" in a post correcting someone else's English. |
Big Burns
0uter.Heaven
Back and Forth
690
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 21:05:00 -
[46] - Quote
cris bleu wrote:Big Burns wrote:cris bleu wrote:Big Burns wrote:...
Second question: Is it, or is it not true that vets squad together because no one else will squad with them, because their MU is too high? Yes or No. Hi BB, Please can you hang on for a bit while CCP Rattati reads everyone's minds so he can answer this question about their motivation for you? Sure...in the meantime I'll correct your sentence their. "Hi BB, Can you please hang on for a bit, while CCP Rattat reads everyone's mind, so he can answer this question about their motivation for you?" Their you go dumbsh*t. Is he ready? Tip: don't post angry or you might, for example, use "their" instead of "there" in a post correcting someone else's English.
A reverse psychological maneuver, I haven't seen trolling like that since...well never.
Dust514- 90% L3 / 10% R1
|
Greiv Rabbah
M.T.A.C Assault Operations Command
Lokun Listamenn
190
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 21:39:00 -
[47] - Quote
Lorhak Gannarsein wrote:Mossellia Delt wrote:This doesn't seem to work at all though.
When I'm playing its stacked, badly.
Team A will have a 6 man squad, plus a 3 man squad with a high MU
While team B will have everyone solo with 2 good players and 14 blues who can't get more then 200 WPs. First off, you can't see the other team's squad breakdowns, second off your numbers seem pretty vague and nonspecific, and so the conclusion to which I must therefore arrive is that you are exaggerating. There is no reason that a squad is any good. I don't know how MU is calculated, but let's say, for argument's sake, pulling numbers right out of my arse, six guys with an individual MU of 10 squad up via Squad Finder. They get a multiplier of 3.5 for being in full squad, for a squad MU of 210. There's also a squad of three guys with an individual MU of 40, getting a multiplier of 2, for a total of 240. These mercs are vastly more competent than the full squad, and are selected for team A, while the full squad is first pick on team B. All works out; it turns out through the magic of blueberries the MUs end up approximately equal on both teams; some more competent players show up and carry team B. All is well, the teambuilder has functioned as it is intended, and no-one gets butthurt cos it looks like a team of nobodies has won. On the flipside, let's say that noob squad joins the same corp after that match (they were all REALLY IMPRESSED by one another). The competent squad fills out with a fourth corp member. They now have a much larger MU of 400 - they'll be first pick for sure. A third group, and a fourth show up - there are only a few of them, a four-man squad and a three-man squad. None of these guys share corps - they're friends from a chat channel or something. They have MU of 25 each - that gets multiplied by 2.5 for a total of 250 and by 2 for a total of 150. The MU balancer now takes the competent team first; they take team A's total to 400. The two new squads conveniently have MUs that add up to 400 together, so those seven get added to team B in order to fill out the team balance. The group of newly-corp'd newbies are the next largest group; they get added to team A. There being no more squads, the teams get filled up in order - there might be some competent players here with MU of 50 or 60, even, but they don't matter compared to the squads. Team A wins convincingly; the group of extremely skilled players on top of the number of somewhat-organised meatshields carries the day. The killboard shows up, and it looks like team A has two large squads from two different corps, and team B had nobodies. Then you, being one of the randoms on team B, go on the forums and complain about a thing that would make sense if you stopped and thought for a minute, and here I am at 1:30AM straining my brain trying to think about numbers that make sense. I'm going on the assumption, incidentally, that the team with lower MU gets to pick next - as opposed to how it might be selections in the same way that your gym class picked players on the football team. The former, of course, being a much more sensible method of selection. EDIT: I have discovered proof that it does indeed work the sensible way I thought it ought! Shockingly, it is in that thread!CCP Rattati wrote:
6 man squad of Ready to Play = Rank 1 - Placed on Team A
5 man squad of WRRV, KEQ, SoV and TRUE SAVAGES (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
Wow someone who understands how the teambuilding works without having to be told. and then realizes that rattata already explained it when nobody was listening.
too bad nobodys still listening, because this is the Dust 514 forums.
If you arent crying "NERF!" nobody's ever listening.
sadly, when you do cry nerf, the devs are listening.
Sebiestor scout, MTAC pilot, Merc w/ a face
|
Vrain Matari
Mikramurka Shock Troop
Minmatar Republic
2537
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 22:08:00 -
[48] - Quote
Greiv Rabbah wrote:Lorhak Gannarsein wrote:Mossellia Delt wrote:This doesn't seem to work at all though.
When I'm playing its stacked, badly.
Team A will have a 6 man squad, plus a 3 man squad with a high MU
While team B will have everyone solo with 2 good players and 14 blues who can't get more then 200 WPs. First off, you can't see the other team's squad breakdowns, second off your numbers seem pretty vague and nonspecific, and so the conclusion to which I must therefore arrive is that you are exaggerating. There is no reason that a squad is any good. I don't know how MU is calculated, but let's say, for argument's sake, pulling numbers right out of my arse, six guys with an individual MU of 10 squad up via Squad Finder. They get a multiplier of 3.5 for being in full squad, for a squad MU of 210. There's also a squad of three guys with an individual MU of 40, getting a multiplier of 2, for a total of 240. These mercs are vastly more competent than the full squad, and are selected for team A, while the full squad is first pick on team B. All works out; it turns out through the magic of blueberries the MUs end up approximately equal on both teams; some more competent players show up and carry team B. All is well, the teambuilder has functioned as it is intended, and no-one gets butthurt cos it looks like a team of nobodies has won. On the flipside, let's say that noob squad joins the same corp after that match (they were all REALLY IMPRESSED by one another). The competent squad fills out with a fourth corp member. They now have a much larger MU of 400 - they'll be first pick for sure. A third group, and a fourth show up - there are only a few of them, a four-man squad and a three-man squad. None of these guys share corps - they're friends from a chat channel or something. They have MU of 25 each - that gets multiplied by 2.5 for a total of 250 and by 2 for a total of 150. The MU balancer now takes the competent team first; they take team A's total to 400. The two new squads conveniently have MUs that add up to 400 together, so those seven get added to team B in order to fill out the team balance. The group of newly-corp'd newbies are the next largest group; they get added to team A. There being no more squads, the teams get filled up in order - there might be some competent players here with MU of 50 or 60, even, but they don't matter compared to the squads. Team A wins convincingly; the group of extremely skilled players on top of the number of somewhat-organised meatshields carries the day. The killboard shows up, and it looks like team A has two large squads from two different corps, and team B had nobodies. Then you, being one of the randoms on team B, go on the forums and complain about a thing that would make sense if you stopped and thought for a minute, and here I am at 1:30AM straining my brain trying to think about numbers that make sense. I'm going on the assumption, incidentally, that the team with lower MU gets to pick next - as opposed to how it might be selections in the same way that your gym class picked players on the football team. The former, of course, being a much more sensible method of selection. EDIT: I have discovered proof that it does indeed work the sensible way I thought it ought! Shockingly, it is in that thread!CCP Rattati wrote:
6 man squad of Ready to Play = Rank 1 - Placed on Team A
5 man squad of WRRV, KEQ, SoV and TRUE SAVAGES (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
Wow someone who understands how the teambuilding works without having to be told. and then realizes that rattata already explained it when nobody was listening. too bad nobodys still listening, because this is the Dust 514 forums. If you arent crying "NERF!" nobody's ever listening. sadly, when you do cry nerf, the devs are listening.
Well, first this is it's math, second thing is it's statistics.
Best thing about an education in statistics is that it teaches you right quick that you can't rely on your intuition when it comes to recognizing what is a reasonable or unreasonable run of wins or losses.
Not even with something as simple as flipping a coin. With something as complex as a DUST match, our intuitions are worth kittenshit, tbh.
PSN: RationalSpark
|
Mortishai Belmont
G.L.O.R.Y
General Tso's Alliance
585
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 22:10:00 -
[49] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:These are all answered in my previous blogs/threads.
Step 1)
All squads and individuals are converted to units. Each unit is the sum of Mu of all the individuals in the squad.
Step 2)
Multiplier is applied to all units
Step 3)
The highest value unit is placed randomly on Team A or Team B, let's say Team A for simplicity.
Step 4)
Units are placed on the opposite Team, Team B, until the sum on Team B exceeds Team A.
Step 5)
Units are placed on Team A until the sum of Mu exceeds Team B or either team has 16 player. Then the rest go on the other team.
Step 6)
Repeat until all units have been placed.
This method guarantees that the two best squads are always on opposite sides.
It also guarantees that the second best and third best squads are on the opposite side of the best squad.
If there is a single 6 man squad and no other squads, it gets placed on one Team and ALL the best individuals on the opposite side, due to the multiplier, usually 8-10 of the best solo players fight the 6 man squad.
Finally, this method has never been shown to have not worked as intended. Players concern is usually because the second best squad isn't all in the same corporation so it looks like randoms.
I don't like feeling my squad should have to carry the other 10 guys. So it always ends up my squad getting stomped by the other balanced team because we get the "special" blueberries to compensate for out numbers. Even if we are THAT good, my 6 can't take on 16 at once, we shouldn't be expected to either.
Or we get on the balanced team and just smite the opposition.
It should be RANDOM. That's the only way to ensure it's fair, I'd much rather leave it up to fate if I get screwed in the match making.
The new C.EO. of G.L.O.R.Y,
I'm that Heavy you warn your team about <3
-Heavy/Commando/Logi/Assault/Scout-
|
postapo wastelander
Corrosive Synergy
RISE of LEGION
1062
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 23:00:00 -
[50] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:These are all answered in my previous blogs/threads.
Step 1)
All squads and individuals are converted to units. Each unit is the sum of Mu of all the individuals in the squad.
Step 2)
Multiplier is applied to all units
Step 3)
The highest value unit is placed randomly on Team A or Team B, let's say Team A for simplicity.
Step 4)
Units are placed on the opposite Team, Team B, until the sum on Team B exceeds Team A.
Step 5)
Units are placed on Team A until the sum of Mu exceeds Team B or either team has 16 player. Then the rest go on the other team.
Step 6)
Repeat until all units have been placed.
This method guarantees that the two best squads are always on opposite sides.
It also guarantees that the second best and third best squads are on the opposite side of the best squad.
If there is a single 6 man squad and no other squads, it gets placed on one Team and ALL the best individuals on the opposite side, due to the multiplier, usually 8-10 of the best solo players fight the 6 man squad.
Finally, this method has never been shown to have not worked as intended. Players concern is usually because the second best squad isn't all in the same corporation so it looks like randoms.
BUT
Rattati the major issue is if you have two squad synced for battle on one side the MU do not see "there is need to put another two squads on other one".
If you will have one group and some loners on both side the MU system will works, but with two groups syncs you need to implement more than just MU system.
"Sebiestor Hetzer"
|
|
|
Greiv Rabbah
M.T.A.C Assault Operations Command
Lokun Listamenn
191
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 23:13:00 -
[51] - Quote
Big Burns wrote:
And another thing! The customer is ALWAYS right. He needs to do his f*cking job and grow up, maybe if he did his f*cking job instead of ignoring people for weeks at a time, then I wouldn't have gotten to this point. Why doesn't he grow up, cup his f*cking balls and handle his sh*t, take care of his responsibilities and stop acting like a little b*tch! Go f*ck yourself Rattati! No good piece of f*cking sh*t!
Shut the F*** UP!
If the customer is always right, then listen to a high paying customer right now when i say Rattati has a job to do and i'd rather he be doing it than cross referencing everything on the forums to pick out an undefined thread to find an undefined question. Common sense says when you didnt ask the question here you should not expect someone who is AT WORK to stop working just to unbury your question so he can answer it on someone elses thread. that would be a waste of my and other players' money.
stop trolling man.
yeah being a vet puts you in the exclusive stomp or get stomped club. does it suck? yeah. do we get over it and move on? most of us. why are you being childish about it?
OP asked you to leave his thread. So get out.
Sebiestor scout, MTAC pilot, Merc w/ a face
|
Greiv Rabbah
M.T.A.C Assault Operations Command
Lokun Listamenn
192
|
Posted - 2015.03.08 23:22:00 -
[52] - Quote
Big Burns wrote:cris bleu wrote:Big Burns wrote:...
Second question: Is it, or is it not true that vets squad together because no one else will squad with them, because their MU is too high? Yes or No. Hi BB, Please can you hang on for a bit while CCP Rattati reads everyone's minds so he can answer this question about their motivation for you? Sure...in the meantime I'll correct your sentence their. "Hi BB, Can you please hang on for a bit, while CCP Rattat reads everyone's mind, so he can answer this question about their motivation for you?" Their you go dumbsh*t. Is he ready?
how the hell you gonna correct someones sentence with worse grammar than it started out with?
obvious troll is reeaalllly reeeaaalllllyy obvious this time.
Sebiestor scout, MTAC pilot, Merc w/ a face
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University
Ivy League
11116
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 03:42:00 -
[53] - Quote
Regis Blackbird wrote:Arkena Wyrnspire wrote:Having taken pictures of a few unbalanced matches I later realised that they were caused by squads on one side bailing. ^ This is probably the main reason we have loopsided battles. I might not fully understand the Mu concept, but I willing to take a leap with CCP Rattati's statement that it truly represent the skill of the individual player, and that the Teambuilder is working as expected. What then is left is the Matchmaker. So how do we prevent this behaviour (leaving game)? I would say: Don't let the same people meet eachother time and time again. (Difficult with our numbers, I know...)
Players bailing out in the middle of a match might actually be it. I have occasionally seen matches where both teams were full in the beginning but then later on one team loses a lot of players midway through the match for whatever reason. This might mean that no amount of matchmaking or team building would fix the problem assuming that the core problem is player abandonment.
One commonly suggested solution is to enforce team locking meaning no one leaves a match or suffers a penalty for leaving early. But we all know that idea has problems especially when the server has to try to tell apart an accidental disconnect from that of an intentional disconnect or when players decide to AFK instead of leave which doesn't get resolved by the common suggestion.
On Twitter: @HilmarVeigar #greenlightlegion #dust514 players are waiting.
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University
Ivy League
11116
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 03:46:00 -
[54] - Quote
postapo wastelander wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:These are all answered in my previous blogs/threads.
Step 1)
All squads and individuals are converted to units. Each unit is the sum of Mu of all the individuals in the squad.
Step 2)
Multiplier is applied to all units
Step 3)
The highest value unit is placed randomly on Team A or Team B, let's say Team A for simplicity.
Step 4)
Units are placed on the opposite Team, Team B, until the sum on Team B exceeds Team A.
Step 5)
Units are placed on Team A until the sum of Mu exceeds Team B or either team has 16 player. Then the rest go on the other team.
Step 6)
Repeat until all units have been placed.
This method guarantees that the two best squads are always on opposite sides.
It also guarantees that the second best and third best squads are on the opposite side of the best squad.
If there is a single 6 man squad and no other squads, it gets placed on one Team and ALL the best individuals on the opposite side, due to the multiplier, usually 8-10 of the best solo players fight the 6 man squad.
Finally, this method has never been shown to have not worked as intended. Players concern is usually because the second best squad isn't all in the same corporation so it looks like randoms. BUT Rattati the major issue is if you have two squad synced for battle on one side the MU do not see "there is need to put another two squads on other one". If you will have one group and some loners on both side the MU system will works, but with two groups syncs you need to implement more than just MU system.
If the steps listed by CCP Rattati are correct, then it shouldn't be possible for two squads of the same group to q-sync into the same team. One squad would be in Team A while the other squad that q-synced would be put on Team B. At least that's how it's suppose to work right now.
On Twitter: @HilmarVeigar #greenlightlegion #dust514 players are waiting.
|
Raptor Princess
ALLOTEC INC
165
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 04:02:00 -
[55] - Quote
Maken Tosch wrote:postapo wastelander wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:These are all answered in my previous blogs/threads.
Step 1)
All squads and individuals are converted to units. Each unit is the sum of Mu of all the individuals in the squad.
Step 2)
Multiplier is applied to all units
Step 3)
The highest value unit is placed randomly on Team A or Team B, let's say Team A for simplicity.
Step 4)
Units are placed on the opposite Team, Team B, until the sum on Team B exceeds Team A.
Step 5)
Units are placed on Team A until the sum of Mu exceeds Team B or either team has 16 player. Then the rest go on the other team.
Step 6)
Repeat until all units have been placed.
This method guarantees that the two best squads are always on opposite sides.
It also guarantees that the second best and third best squads are on the opposite side of the best squad.
If there is a single 6 man squad and no other squads, it gets placed on one Team and ALL the best individuals on the opposite side, due to the multiplier, usually 8-10 of the best solo players fight the 6 man squad.
Finally, this method has never been shown to have not worked as intended. Players concern is usually because the second best squad isn't all in the same corporation so it looks like randoms. BUT Rattati the major issue is if you have two squad synced for battle on one side the MU do not see "there is need to put another two squads on other one". If you will have one group and some loners on both side the MU system will works, but with two groups syncs you need to implement more than just MU system. If the steps listed by CCP Rattati are correct, then it shouldn't be possible for two squads of the same group to q-sync into the same team. One squad would be in Team A while the other squad that q-synced would be put on Team B. At least that's how it's suppose to work right now.
I often see more than 6 people from the same corp on one side. They may not all have been in squads together, mind you. You won't often find 8 people from the same corp on the same team without squads though. If I'm ever in a match with someone else from my corp, they always seem to be on the opposing team.
|
Shinobi MumyoSakanagare ZaShigurui
Onikanabo Brigade
Caldari State
1829
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 04:19:00 -
[56] - Quote
Big Burns wrote:I'm asking because I want to know how it works. I always get put into games with Dia Farron, Kaizuka Sniper, Milkman, Frosty Kitty, and Duna 2002 all on the other team at the same time.
Back in 1.5-1.7 I ran tanks/logi uplinks. I would AVERAGE 4,000WP's per game and have an AVERAGE of 35 kills per game. Not bragging, just found a way to be productive given that current state of the game. Is this why my "MU" is SOOOO high? No one wants to squad with me, except a few good players. Everyone always leaves my squad because they get recked, by those guys above.
They always say they are taking a break, but then I see them post lfs in a chat. I confronted a few of them and they said my MU was high, and they didn't want to face NS all day. How can I fix this...I'm not B.S.ing. This is a legitimate problem for me. I would imagine it's a legitimate problem for a lot of vets...given how few of us there are in comparison to the newer players. This forces myself and others to run solo or stick together and this is why people always joke about the best players being "butt-buddies". It's not the way we want it...you have no idea.
^^^There! Please tell me why this is happening and is this why OP players stick together, creating pubstomping squads....because no one else will play with them...
That's where I remember you from , tanking ... you were one hell of a tanker .
I wanted to say something when you came back but I figured everyone would figure that out on their own .
You were a good heavy too .
Doubts are like flies and should be treated as such and crushed .
|
postapo wastelander
Corrosive Synergy
RISE of LEGION
1066
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 09:03:00 -
[57] - Quote
Maken Tosch wrote:postapo wastelander wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:These are all answered in my previous blogs/threads.
Step 1)
All squads and individuals are converted to units. Each unit is the sum of Mu of all the individuals in the squad.
Step 2)
Multiplier is applied to all units
Step 3)
The highest value unit is placed randomly on Team A or Team B, let's say Team A for simplicity.
Step 4)
Units are placed on the opposite Team, Team B, until the sum on Team B exceeds Team A.
Step 5)
Units are placed on Team A until the sum of Mu exceeds Team B or either team has 16 player. Then the rest go on the other team.
Step 6)
Repeat until all units have been placed.
This method guarantees that the two best squads are always on opposite sides.
It also guarantees that the second best and third best squads are on the opposite side of the best squad.
If there is a single 6 man squad and no other squads, it gets placed on one Team and ALL the best individuals on the opposite side, due to the multiplier, usually 8-10 of the best solo players fight the 6 man squad.
Finally, this method has never been shown to have not worked as intended. Players concern is usually because the second best squad isn't all in the same corporation so it looks like randoms. BUT Rattati the major issue is if you have two squad synced for battle on one side the MU do not see "there is need to put another two squads on other one". If you will have one group and some loners on both side the MU system will works, but with two groups syncs you need to implement more than just MU system. If the steps listed by CCP Rattati are correct, then it shouldn't be possible for two squads of the same group to q-sync into the same team. One squad would be in Team A while the other squad that q-synced would be put on Team B. At least that's how it's suppose to work right now.
I think there is language barier (from my side ofcourse).
What i meant was give a MU implement what push wih to put qsynced people against themselves.
If there will be two groups, there should be two groups on both sides.
That will works better than only qsynced squad on one side against lonely mercs on other.
"Sebiestor Hetzer"
|
Balistyc Farshot
The Exemplars
RISE of LEGION
88
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 16:52:00 -
[58] - Quote
Forlorn Destrier wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:Mossellia Delt wrote:This doesn't seem to work at all though.
When I'm playing its stacked, badly.
Team A will have a 6 man squad, plus a 3 man squad with a high MU
While team B will have everyone solo with 2 good players and 14 blues who can't get more then 200 WPs. I have checked hundreds of battles, and demonstrated in a recent thread a sample of such a deep dive. How many have you checked, and where is your data? How do you determine who is in squads and who not? I think people are over-reacting, but in an effort to have transparency and put these complaints to rest, is it possible to show the MU of each player on the leaderboard? I would propose that the adjusted number for being in a squad be reflected so if you are solo you one match and in a squad the next you can see the actual impact of being in a squad. Also, a total MU score for each team would be nice as well, if we can't show individual MU scores. Thanks for listening.
The squad piece would require a decent amount of server crunching I bet. Think about the lag we get from too many chat posts. Lets keep it to showing each of our MUs at system refresh (Put it into a stored procedure and display it from there). You don't need to tell us what makes it move. Just give us a loose heads up like a credit score. I am sure we will figure it out pretty quickly.
Otherwise lets be nice to the one CCP member who still replies to us on these boards. I am sure he drew the short straw for that gig.
Q-syncing - If I have learned anything it is that CCP is listening now. We are getting player trading for once. That will change the game so massively CCP doesn't understand that the social aspect was nice but sharing gear makes corp membership more valuable.
If you recall the discussion about changing squad sizes. They heard the resounding message that some people want to play together in 16 versus whoever else fashion and qsyncing shows that we will try anything to make it work. I would not be surprised if we had a qsync style of play coming soon. The main concern is going to be balance. So if they make that expect some bumps along the way with qsync stomps. COD, BattleField, and PS2 have never been able to figure out decent match making systems, so we should expect a work in progress.
Heavy with a massive bullet hose called Lola (Burst HMG).
|
Mossellia Delt
Militaires Sans Jeux
2336
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 17:17:00 -
[59] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:Mossellia Delt wrote:This doesn't seem to work at all though.
When I'm playing its stacked, badly.
Team A will have a 6 man squad, plus a 3 man squad with a high MU
While team B will have everyone solo with 2 good players and 14 blues who can't get more then 200 WPs. I have checked hundreds of battles, and demonstrated in a recent thread a sample of such a deep dive. How many have you checked, and where is your data? How do you determine who is in squads and who not?
Well, I am guessing the 6 and 3 who are of the same corps are in squads, and I could see using the neocom that my team didn't have a squad. And that my team had 12 NPC corp guys who looked fresh out of the academy
Delt for CPM2
CPM1 MISSION : FAILED
Moss-delt on skype
|
Onesimus Tarsus
is-a-Corporation
3122
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 17:30:00 -
[60] - Quote
Kdr matchmaking would have had all these people killing clones instead of posting...
Except me of course, I'd be doing all the dying.
KDR matchmaking fixes everything but the stupid purple Quafe stuff.
|
|
|
ScI-Iurk
Molon Labe.
General Tso's Alliance
62
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 18:10:00 -
[61] - Quote
I don't think there is anything wrong with the matchmaking as is. If Rattati says the numbers are working it is probably functioning as well as can be. If there is still problems in the match other solutions have to be found.
Personally I have the feeling that a system which gives you a penalty for quitting combined with a system to fold a match might solve this issue.
Example the matchmaker makes two even teams and the two best players on one team quit leaving the tree best players on the opposing team. It becomes a stompfest. two people quit the match and get fined by their hiring company for say 1mil isk (or more if need be). The 6 out of the 12 remaining players choose to fold but keep playing till its done. They get sp and maybe no or a smaller payout than normal. The stompers get normal reward.
This cuts short stomping matches while preventing them from occurring on the other side. It would even be possible to up the reward for the losing side while the match is going to make sure people keep trying.
If these options are implemented properly it could change the dynamic of losing matches and also make it less crappy to end up in a match which wasn't going great for your side. |
Vesta Opalus
T.H.I.R.D R.O.C.K
RISE of LEGION
484
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 19:22:00 -
[62] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:These are all answered in my previous blogs/threads.
Step 1)
All squads and individuals are converted to units. Each unit is the sum of Mu of all the individuals in the squad.
Step 2)
Multiplier is applied to all units
Step 3)
The highest value unit is placed randomly on Team A or Team B, let's say Team A for simplicity.
Step 4)
Units are placed on the opposite Team, Team B, until the sum on Team B exceeds Team A.
Step 5)
Units are placed on Team A until the sum of Mu exceeds Team B or either team has 16 player. Then the rest go on the other team.
Step 6)
Repeat until all units have been placed.
This method guarantees that the two best squads are always on opposite sides.
It also guarantees that the second best and third best squads are on the opposite side of the best squad.
If there is a single 6 man squad and no other squads, it gets placed on one Team and ALL the best individuals on the opposite side, due to the multiplier, usually 8-10 of the best solo players fight the 6 man squad.
Finally, this method has never been shown to have not worked as intended. Players concern is usually because the second best squad isn't all in the same corporation so it looks like randoms.
I had a few matches in a row last night where I was the only person on my team who went positive in KDR, I went like 11-1, 8-2, etc, everyone else on the team was completely stomped.
Could the current matchmaking system result in a circumstance where SQUAD 1 (the stompers on the other team) is #1 in MU, then one person on the other team is #2 in MU (in this example, that would be me), then a bunch of low MU players would fill out the rest of the slots?
I think the biggest remaining problem in matchmaking is that the matchmaking thinks its ok to put players with 1 MU up against people with 1000 MU (values are examples based on what I just pulled out of my butt).
All those low MU players just need to be removed from the equation and put into their own game. They shouldnt even be matched up in games where people like me or that opposing squad exist. They just cant compete. Even if they are matched with a high MU squad on the same team, they are still just food for the opposing high MU players. |
Dust 0001
Spyders Inc.
1
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 20:54:00 -
[63] - Quote
CCP Rattati sucks at his job. Get good Rattati. Get good. My 12 year old brother can code better than half your company. Eat sh*t maggot.
I am Big Burns.
|
Morbeus V Kain
The Naughty Ninjas
Smart Deploy
0
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 21:13:00 -
[64] - Quote
Dust 0001 wrote:CCP Rattati sucks at his job. Get good Rattati. Get good. My 12 year old brother can code better than half your company. Eat sh*t maggot.
^^
Someone got banned. |
Nothing Certain
Bioshock Rejects
1570
|
Posted - 2015.03.09 21:16:00 -
[65] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:Mossellia Delt wrote:This doesn't seem to work at all though.
When I'm playing its stacked, badly.
Team A will have a 6 man squad, plus a 3 man squad with a high MU
While team B will have everyone solo with 2 good players and 14 blues who can't get more then 200 WPs. I have checked hundreds of battles, and demonstrated in a recent thread a sample of such a deep dive. How many have you checked, and where is your data? How do you determine who is in squads and who not?
I believe you when you say it is working, but on the other hand, it definitely isn't. Matches are terribly one sided and there is no way to balance a 6 man squad of good players if there isn't six even better players on the other side. I know 4 man squads and metalevels are being considered, just understand the huge amount of frustration this is causing people.
I'm kind of dense but it seems to me that making 1 man squads is detrimental as well.
Because, that's why.
|
Dragonmeballs
Better Hide R Die
83
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 19:17:00 -
[66] - Quote
A few thoughts on the comments made by Rattati and others so bear with me as this contains math and I beg your forgiveness for it length:
Team building as explained by Rattati is based on "initial conditions" before the match starts. Each merc or squad is assigned a value. The sum of each side is supposed to be similar. This should bring a balanced match.
Take for example the typical squad of stompers we see 5-9 pm EST every freaking day it seems: The squad would look like this: A,B,C,D,E where A,B,C are the shooters and D,E are logistical/support.
Individual MUs (assume 1-10): A,B,C=8; D,E=7: This squad's Mu = 38.
This seems fair but as you know the key to winning is communication/coordination among the squad.
Rattati explained there is a multiplier (Step 2) say 1.2. Now this squad's Mu is 45.6. In other words you going to need at least 9 random solo players on the other side with an average Mu of 5 just to match this squad initially.
Would a 5 v 9 match work, probably not--I'll expand on this later.
Fill out the rest of the teams. Add 11 more to the stomp team and 7 more to the other team selecting Mu values so the sum of each side is similar.
Now here is the problem: As soon as the match starts the 11 added to the stomp team realize they are with a stomp squad. They forgo the cheap fits and bring out ADV or better. They run with the stompers and now a herd is formed. This herd is difficult to turn back for a team of randoms. As soon as the team of randoms is on their heals the momentum has shifted and a stomp unfolds. (We all know that tactically there are ways to mitigate a stomp but lets save that for another thread)
No amount of matchmaking math can predict the result of herd mentality. The herd mentality is not confined to the winning team. It occurs on the loosing side as well. Nobody in their right mind will keep spamming PRO suits in attempt to turn back a stomp that is fully underway. That is why an OMS that is 78-60 at 12 minutes unravels into a 75-24 in the span of the next 3 minutes.
Therefore the mid match conditions (mid game team Mu) are very different than the initial conditions. And here lies the problem and therefore the reason stomps have become so prevalent. There is no easy way to predict how each of the herds will alter the team Mu values.
I said no easy way but I believe there is a way to deal with this problem before the next match. I submit the multiplier for the squad Mu of should be a variable.
A fair question to ask is how is CCP supposed to adjust this multiplier (Step 2)? Simple. These squads don't stomp in a one and done style. They persist...for hours. What if the the squad Mu multiplier were to increase until a suitable outcome is found? (I define a suitable outcome as a match that ends with a 8-10 clone difference between the teams--these are the matches we all like to be part of btw)
The rub here is the multiplier delta for a given squad would be based on their performance over the course of hours. Difficult to do I admit but I don't believe it to be impossible.
Don't like the adjusting the multiplier then I see nothing wrong (as a means to compensate) by shorting the stomp team a randoms as a means to balance the match. I also see nothing wrong with making a stomp squad wait until there is a suitable squad for them to take on. Note: I do not propose this for Dom or Skirm--only Ambush. I'm not that well versed in those game modes so I won't recommend changes at this time.
More than a few times in the last few weeks I have seen two hours go by without a win. Is it the same stomp squad? NO! Some nights there are three or more but they never seem to find each other when I'm in the match. However, when they do it is tempting to grab popcorn and watch how things unfold when the balancing equation works as intended.
To be clear Rattati I am not criticizing the work you have done to date on this. I don't envy your task. I just submit your math needs to add one more dimension.
Blueberry!....Make yourself useful and shoot the blurry thing running this way!
|
Soldier Sorajord
Subsonic Synthesis
RISE of LEGION
187
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 19:44:00 -
[67] - Quote
Funny enough, You can actually get destroyed for being a squad. I'm not sure how the system works, but The MU I guess likes putting me and the people I run with (who run typically std/adv gear) In with people who Pub stomp 24/7. 11/10 IGN Matchmaking. *Slow clap*
Because Matchmaking is totally effective when You see someone go 15/0 every single game they play.
I'm one of the blueberries that Isn't useless, cause I always have a rep tool, and USE IT. B)
|
Soldner VonKuechle
SAM-MIK
General Tso's Alliance
1693
|
Posted - 2015.03.10 19:49:00 -
[68] - Quote
Soldier Sorajord wrote:Funny enough, You can actually get destroyed for being a squad. I'm not sure how the system works, but The MU I guess likes putting me and the people I run with (who run typically std/adv gear) In with people who Pub stomp 24/7. 11/10 IGN Matchmaking. *Slow clap*
Because Matchmaking is totally effective when You see someone go 15/0 every single game they play.
Mu =team balancer =/= match making.
There is no match making, only team balancing.
BigBurns is exiled,and so with that, the forum's jimmies will no longer be rustled.
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University
Ivy League
11126
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 00:08:00 -
[69] - Quote
Mossellia Delt wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:Mossellia Delt wrote:This doesn't seem to work at all though.
When I'm playing its stacked, badly.
Team A will have a 6 man squad, plus a 3 man squad with a high MU
While team B will have everyone solo with 2 good players and 14 blues who can't get more then 200 WPs. I have checked hundreds of battles, and demonstrated in a recent thread a sample of such a deep dive. How many have you checked, and where is your data? How do you determine who is in squads and who not? Well, I am guessing the 6 and 3 who are of the same corps are in squads, and I could see using the neocom that my team didn't have a squad. And that my team had 12 NPC corp guys who looked fresh out of the academy
Those are very poor indicators of determination. Let me explain.
Without having any clear indicators on the roster or without first knowing ahead of time that someone you know is definitely in a squad, you can't tell beyond a shadow of a doubt that some of the players you have seen who happen to be from the same corp are in a squad. Take me as an example. I very seldom join a squad and usually only after I finish hosting a lecture on the weekends. I'm a solo player. A lone wolf. Yet every now and then I run into someone in my team who happens to be from Dust University. Yet we don't squad up and I hardly communicate unless I'm in a squad which, again, is a post-lecture thing for me on the weekends.
Also, the same is true on the opposite team filled only with randoms. They may seem random but they could be alts from veterans or they could already be their own squads without looking like they do. Again, take me as an example. After I finish a lecture, I tend to squad up with random players who may be coming from other corps and not necessarily from Dust University. So me and the other guys/girls might seem like nothing more than random players without any squad formed, but in reality we are coordinating.
So until we have visual indicators to show who is in a squad in the opposing team, we will never know for sure.
On Twitter: @HilmarVeigar #greenlightlegion #dust514 players are waiting.
|
TITAIN RUNNER
OUTCAST MERCS
RISE of LEGION
1
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 09:38:00 -
[70] - Quote
CCP Rattati wrote:These are all answered in my previous blogs/threads.
Step 1)
All squads and individuals are converted to units. Each unit is the sum of Mu of all the individuals in the squad.
Step 2)
Multiplier is applied to all units
Step 3)
The highest value unit is placed randomly on Team A or Team B, let's say Team A for simplicity.
Step 4)
Units are placed on the opposite Team, Team B, until the sum on Team B exceeds Team A.
Step 5)
Units are placed on Team A until the sum of Mu exceeds Team B or either team has 16 player. Then the rest go on the other team.
Step 6)
Repeat until all units have been placed.
This method guarantees that the two best squads are always on opposite sides.
It also guarantees that the second best and third best squads are on the opposite side of the best squad.
If there is a single 6 man squad and no other squads, it gets placed on one Team and ALL the best individuals on the opposite side, due to the multiplier, usually 8-10 of the best solo players fight the 6 man squad.
Finally, this method has never been shown to have not worked as intended. Players concern is usually because the second best squad isn't all in the same corporation so it looks like randoms.
then why was me any my squad mate in a dom 2 vs 4 an the 4 proceeded to proto stomp us into oblivion
theirs the big an the bad.....then theirs me
|
|
|
Raptor Princess
ALLOTEC INC
165
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 13:09:00 -
[71] - Quote
Maken Tosch wrote:Mossellia Delt wrote:CCP Rattati wrote:Mossellia Delt wrote:This doesn't seem to work at all though.
When I'm playing its stacked, badly.
Team A will have a 6 man squad, plus a 3 man squad with a high MU
While team B will have everyone solo with 2 good players and 14 blues who can't get more then 200 WPs. I have checked hundreds of battles, and demonstrated in a recent thread a sample of such a deep dive. How many have you checked, and where is your data? How do you determine who is in squads and who not? Well, I am guessing the 6 and 3 who are of the same corps are in squads, and I could see using the neocom that my team didn't have a squad. And that my team had 12 NPC corp guys who looked fresh out of the academy Those are very poor indicators of determination. Let me explain. Without having any clear indicators on the roster or without first knowing ahead of time that someone you know is definitely in a squad, you can't tell beyond a shadow of a doubt that some of the players you have seen who happen to be from the same corp are in a squad. Take me as an example. I very seldom join a squad and usually only after I finish hosting a lecture on the weekends. I'm a solo player. A lone wolf. Yet every now and then I run into someone in my team who happens to be from Dust University. Yet we don't squad up and I hardly communicate unless I'm in a squad which, again, is a post-lecture thing for me on the weekends. Also, the same is true on the opposite team filled only with randoms. They may seem random but they could be alts from veterans or they could already be their own squads without looking like they do. Again, take me as an example. After I finish a lecture, I tend to squad up with random players who may be coming from other corps and not necessarily from Dust University. So me and the other guys/girls might seem like nothing more than random players without any squad formed, but in reality we are coordinating. So until we have visual indicators to show who is in a squad in the opposing team, we will never know for sure.
If there were 6 players from a corp all running in a pack, it's safe to assume they're a squad (especially when only one is a squad leader). If it was dust university, I wouldn't assume they were in a squad because I've never seen a squad of them in the year I've been playing. Other corps however, regularly work together.
You also tend to bump into the same people over and over again, so know which randoms are in squads together.
|
Stormblade Green
KnightKiller's inc.
48
|
Posted - 2015.03.11 13:26:00 -
[72] - Quote
There is tend to and always...... I went 5 matches yesterday in a Dom. against the exact same people....... Why?
One might say... I'm very skilled... yet I'm his apprentice... So what does that say about my mentor?
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 3 :: [one page] |