| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
demens grimwulff
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
614
   |
Posted - 2015.07.12 13:54:00 -
[1] - Quote
And I will start it.
Current public matchmaking is horrible. The system is broken, and as I have said in another thread, in regards to this issue, 99% of the time, the results of the match can be determined prior to joining the match.
Here is an example from last night:
While talking with Sgt Kirk about this very issue, I sat in queue for 10 minutes to get into a public skirm match. Scotty'ed.
Queued for FW and after 5 minutes, I got in.
When I got out, I tried queuing for another public skirm, sat in queue for 10 minutes. Scotty'ed.
Queued again for public skirm... 5 minutes, left queue.
Heimdallr suggested Domination... 1 minute, re-queue, 3 minutes, gave up and went to read a book.
Even when you get into public matches, it seems like the "blueberries" or "redberries", depending on the lucky side, have never even played an FPS before. Sadly, more often than not, the players who have an established character in the game, seem to be expected to carry 10 people, or more, against several squads of "balanced" members.
Match quality has deteriorated, and people wonder why FW has become the preferred deploy for most larger corps. Adjust the 'mu' system, or remove it... either way, something needs to be done in order to democratize the public queue.
CPM2 Candidate
Intent to run is found here: Intent
Allow me to help improve Dust
|
Moochie Cricket
Fatal Absolution
Negative-Feedback
1
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 14:13:00 -
[2] - Quote
I now que for at least two different types of pubs at a time (never ambush, I hate ambush) to somewhat mitigate the wait times/balance issues. Seems to kinda work, but could just be in my head.
Caldari Tribute Montage
|
Z3dog
BIG BAD W0LVES
123
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 14:16:00 -
[3] - Quote
demens grimwulff wrote:And I will start it.
Current public matchmaking is horrible. The system is broken, and as I have said in another thread, in regards to this issue, 99% of the time, the results of the match can be determined prior to joining the match.
Here is an example from last night:
While talking with Sgt Kirk about this very issue, I sat in queue for 10 minutes to get into a public skirm match. Scotty'ed.
Queued for FW and after 5 minutes, I got in.
When I got out, I tried queuing for another public skirm, sat in queue for 10 minutes. Scotty'ed.
Queued again for public skirm... 5 minutes, left queue.
Heimdallr suggested Domination... 1 minute, re-queue, 3 minutes, gave up and went to read a book.
Even when you get into public matches, it seems like the "blueberries" or "redberries", depending on the lucky side, have never even played an FPS before. Sadly, more often than not, the players who have an established character in the game, seem to be expected to carry 10 people, or more, against several squads of "balanced" members.
Match quality has deteriorated, and people wonder why FW has become the preferred deploy for most larger corps. Adjust the 'mu' system, or remove it... either way, something needs to be done in order to democratize the public queue.
I squadded with two new people the other day and went into a pub. Neither of them had any idea what they where doing. Mostly just wandering aimlessly and trying not to get killed on our side of the map. Nevermind the objective.
bandwidth lol
And totally not p2w haha
|
Aeon Amadi
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
11
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 14:17:00 -
[4] - Quote
The MU System is noble but it has it's flaws.
A player that frequently runs with his corp-mates and friends is likely going to have an artificially inflated MU score because of it and the game is going to consider them to be something they're not, at least by my understanding. I could by wrong and if I am I apologize.
Thing is, if that is true, than virtually every time you run with your bros you're both positively and negatively impacting your own MU score - positively because it is rising but negatively because those gains aren't truly how you as a player operate. IMO the best solution for that would be to have a separate variable to account for whenever you're running with a team and whenever you're running solo.
For instance: On a scale of 1-to-100, with higher numbers being better, my MU score could be somewhere in the 40's but because I run with teams frequently and we're coordinated my score will rise because of my increased KDR, WP accrual, etc. So, whereas my TRUE score is in the 40's the game thinks I'm in a much higher bracket, so it tries to fill in gaps in matches with that artificially high score and I'm left having to deal with more competition than I can reasonably handle as a result.
And there are some playstyles that this sort of thing MUST FACTOR IN because it is impossible to achieve those higher gains otherwise: Gallente Logis, for instance, can expect much lower WP accrual without a squad because their Intel Assist WP accrual simply cannot exist without squad-mates. Warbarge Strikes are another good example. You don't get the WP gains with those sort of gameplay mechanics running solo, so that must be taken into account when considering the "skill" of a player.
Reduced squad sizes were a good thing as that further narrows the chances for that team-play factor to matter as much in the overall scheme of things. I'm all for it. However, unless pub matches become solo-que only, there is no reasonable way (to my knowledge) to account for solo vs team-play except through different score systems.
But yanno, I could be wrong and just talking out of my ass.
10% of US schools no longer teach Cursive. A decade from now, 10% of the US isn't going to understand all the squiglies.
|
Z3dog
BIG BAD W0LVES
124
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 14:32:00 -
[5] - Quote
demens grimwulff wrote:And I will start it.
Current public matchmaking is horrible. The system is broken, and as I have said in another thread, in regards to this issue, 99% of the time, the results of the match can be determined prior to joining the match.
Here is an example from last night:
While talking with Sgt Kirk about this very issue, I sat in queue for 10 minutes to get into a public skirm match. Scotty'ed.
Queued for FW and after 5 minutes, I got in.
When I got out, I tried queuing for another public skirm, sat in queue for 10 minutes. Scotty'ed.
Queued again for public skirm... 5 minutes, left queue.
Heimdallr suggested Domination... 1 minute, re-queue, 3 minutes, gave up and went to read a book.
Even when you get into public matches, it seems like the "blueberries" or "redberries", depending on the lucky side, have never even played an FPS before. Sadly, more often than not, the players who have an established character in the game, seem to be expected to carry 10 people, or more, against several squads of "balanced" members.
Match quality has deteriorated, and people wonder why FW has become the preferred deploy for most larger corps. Adjust the 'mu' system, or remove it... either way, something needs to be done in order to democratize the public queue.
They should try to make the matchmaking as random as possible. At least then there wouldn't be a system in place that is actively preventing balanced games.
bandwidth lol
And totally not p2w haha
|
General Mosquito
Fatal Absolution
Negative-Feedback
72
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 14:33:00 -
[6] - Quote
Remove the scrubs ability to q sync pubs, and shockingly, no more pubstomping.
I don't like the queue times, but I can actually play pubs solo now and have an effect on the outcome of the match. Its glorious.
General Butt Naked - Biomassed
The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned
Only 9 more alts to go.
|
Z3dog
BIG BAD W0LVES
124
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 14:37:00 -
[7] - Quote
General Mosquito wrote:Remove the scrubs ability to q sync pubs, and shockingly, no more pubstomping.
I don't like the queue times, but I can actually play pubs solo now and have an effect on the outcome of the match. Its glorious.
Might be nice to eliminate squads from pubs as a test for a short period of time. If it works keep it. If not change it back.
bandwidth lol
And totally not p2w haha
|
General Mosquito
Fatal Absolution
Negative-Feedback
72
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 14:43:00 -
[8] - Quote
Z3dog wrote:General Mosquito wrote:Remove the scrubs ability to q sync pubs, and shockingly, no more pubstomping.
I don't like the queue times, but I can actually play pubs solo now and have an effect on the outcome of the match. Its glorious.
Might be nice to eliminate squads from pubs as a test for a short period of time. If it works keep it. If not change it back.
Turning it down to 4 eliminated the worst of the bad actors from pubs already.
Seriously, I didn't realize how many scrubs needed at least 7 buddies with them to get a win. Its hilarious.
General Butt Naked - Biomassed
The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned
Only 9 more alts to go.
|
Z3dog
BIG BAD W0LVES
124
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 14:47:00 -
[9] - Quote
General Mosquito wrote:Z3dog wrote:General Mosquito wrote:Remove the scrubs ability to q sync pubs, and shockingly, no more pubstomping.
I don't like the queue times, but I can actually play pubs solo now and have an effect on the outcome of the match. Its glorious.
Might be nice to eliminate squads from pubs as a test for a short period of time. If it works keep it. If not change it back. Turning it down to 4 eliminated the worst of the bad actors from pubs already. Seriously, I didn't realize how many scrubs needed at least 7 buddies with them to get a win. Its hilarious.
not only 7 buddies, but 7 buddies on their side and randoms on the other.
bandwidth lol
And totally not p2w haha
|
General Mosquito
Fatal Absolution
Negative-Feedback
72
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 14:52:00 -
[10] - Quote
Z3dog wrote:General Mosquito wrote:Z3dog wrote:General Mosquito wrote:Remove the scrubs ability to q sync pubs, and shockingly, no more pubstomping.
I don't like the queue times, but I can actually play pubs solo now and have an effect on the outcome of the match. Its glorious.
Might be nice to eliminate squads from pubs as a test for a short period of time. If it works keep it. If not change it back. Turning it down to 4 eliminated the worst of the bad actors from pubs already. Seriously, I didn't realize how many scrubs needed at least 7 buddies with them to get a win. Its hilarious. not only 7 buddies, but 7 buddies on their side and randoms on the other.
You didn't hear? That is what a competitive game mode looks like!
Even better is 16 v randoms, which is what the q syncers said wouldn't happen, but has been the case in more than 50% of the FW matches I have played. I can't even remember getting a 16 v 16 in an FW match since the changes.
Not that I mind, as it is exactly what I said would happen, and what the teamstackers said they were not looking for.
General Butt Naked - Biomassed
The Attorney General - Biomassed when unbanned
Only 9 more alts to go.
|
|
|
Tesfa Alem
Death by Disassociation
1
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 16:20:00 -
[11] - Quote
General Mosquito wrote:Remove the scrubs ability to q sync pubs, and shockingly, no more pubstomping.
I don't like the queue times, but I can actually play pubs solo now and have an effect on the outcome of the match. Its glorious.
you must have been pretty bad before the patch if teamwork was your go to excuse as to why you lost instead of yourself.
people aren't switching to fw for the stomps, fw is now the only way to play dust if you have more than 3 friends online that you have made over the last 2 years.
now that pubs are noob central, i guess you can finally be that big fish in a small pond.
Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
"I sometimes wonder why I share stuff "- CCP Rattati
|
Iron Wolf Saber
Den of Swords
19
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 16:41:00 -
[12] - Quote
Would comment but some folks wouldn't like it.
CPM 1, Secretary
Omni-Soldier, Forum Warrior
\\= ADV HAVs =// Unlocked
|
Regnier Feros
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
443
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 18:08:00 -
[13] - Quote
[REDACTED]
ZariaOwnsWhips
|
Darken-Sol
Intruder Excluder
2
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 18:27:00 -
[14] - Quote
demens grimwulff wrote:And I will start it.
Current public matchmaking is horrible. The system is broken, and as I have said in another thread, in regards to this issue, 99% of the time, the results of the match can be determined prior to joining the match.
Here is an example from last night:
While talking with Sgt Kirk about this very issue, I sat in queue for 10 minutes to get into a public skirm match. Scotty'ed.
Queued for FW and after 5 minutes, I got in.
When I got out, I tried queuing for another public skirm, sat in queue for 10 minutes. Scotty'ed.
Queued again for public skirm... 5 minutes, left queue.
Heimdallr suggested Domination... 1 minute, re-queue, 3 minutes, gave up and went to read a book.
Even when you get into public matches, it seems like the "blueberries" or "redberries", depending on the lucky side, have never even played an FPS before. Sadly, more often than not, the players who have an established character in the game, seem to be expected to carry 10 people, or more, against several squads of "balanced" members.
Match quality has deteriorated, and people wonder why FW has become the preferred deploy for most larger corps. Adjust the 'mu' system, or remove it... either way, something needs to be done in order to democratize the public queue.
Perhaps you too should graduate to FW. Pubs should be like an extended academy. For new bros or the scrubs that need to fight them
Crush them
|
demens grimwulff
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
620
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 18:43:00 -
[15] - Quote
Darken-Sol wrote:
Perhaps you too should graduate to FW. Pubs should be like an extended academy. For new bros or the scrubs that need to fight them
That is all I run now, as the public matchmaking system is broken.
However, there is no good money making system for FW, so it is necessary to supplement income with public matches. They are the only way to make money outside of PC, currently, so a working public matchmaking system is vital to the economy.
CPM2 Candidate
Intent to run is found here: Intent
Allow me to help improve Dust
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University
Ivy League
12
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 18:50:00 -
[16] - Quote
Aeon Amadi wrote:The MU System is noble but it has it's flaws.
A player that frequently runs with his corp-mates and friends is likely going to have an artificially inflated MU score because of it and the game is going to consider them to be something they're not, at least by my understanding. I could by wrong and if I am I apologize.
Thing is, if that is true, than virtually every time you run with your bros you're both positively and negatively impacting your own MU score - positively because it is rising but negatively because those gains aren't truly how you as a player operate. IMO the best solution for that would be to have a separate variable to account for whenever you're running with a team and whenever you're running solo.
For instance: On a scale of 1-to-100, with higher numbers being better, my MU score could be somewhere in the 40's but because I run with teams frequently and we're coordinated my score will rise because of my increased KDR, WP accrual, etc. So, whereas my TRUE score is in the 40's the game thinks I'm in a much higher bracket, so it tries to fill in gaps in matches with that artificially high score and I'm left having to deal with more competition than I can reasonably handle as a result.
And there are some playstyles that this sort of thing MUST FACTOR IN because it is impossible to achieve those higher gains otherwise: Gallente Logis, for instance, can expect much lower WP accrual without a squad because their Intel Assist WP accrual simply cannot exist without squad-mates. Warbarge Strikes are another good example. You don't get the WP gains with those sort of gameplay mechanics running solo, so that must be taken into account when considering the "skill" of a player.
Reduced squad sizes were a good thing as that further narrows the chances for that team-play factor to matter as much in the overall scheme of things. I'm all for it. However, unless pub matches become solo-que only, there is no reasonable way (to my knowledge) to account for solo vs team-play except through different score systems.
But yanno, I could be wrong and just talking out of my ass.
I agree with the idea of having a separate MU value given to me for either being in a full squad with my bros or running solo. There should also be separate MU values given to me for each of the game modes in the public matches. One for skirmish, one for ambush, one for acquisition, and one for domination. This is because play styles often change every time I switch between Ambush and Skirmish.
Also, is there any way to know if winning or lossing a FW match has any impact on my MU? If so, that could also explain why I'm constantly being pitted against players who are far above my caliber than necessary in a pub match. My MU should not be affected by my progress in FW or PC.
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
demens grimwulff
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
620
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 18:55:00 -
[17] - Quote
Aeon Amadi wrote:The MU System is noble but it has it's flaws.
Regardless of the nobility, no other FPS has a system that punishes players like the current one does. Other FPS games have a similar system, that still makes evenly matched teams (albeit, with the same real chance you will get stomped out), but without the ridiculous queue times, and impossibly uneven team assignments.
Aeon Amadi wrote:
A player that frequently runs with his corp-mates and friends is likely going to have an artificially inflated MU score because of it and the game is going to consider them to be something they're not, at least by my understanding. I could by wrong and if I am I apologize.
Thing is, if that is true, than virtually every time you run with your bros you're both positively and negatively impacting your own MU score - positively because it is rising but negatively because those gains aren't truly how you as a player operate. IMO the best solution for that would be to have a separate variable to account for whenever you're running with a team and whenever you're running solo.
For instance: On a scale of 1-to-100, with higher numbers being better, my MU score could be somewhere in the 40's but because I run with teams frequently and we're coordinated my score will rise because of my increased KDR, WP accrual, etc. So, whereas my TRUE score is in the 40's the game thinks I'm in a much higher bracket, so it tries to fill in gaps in matches with that artificially high score and I'm left having to deal with more competition than I can reasonably handle as a result.
Correct. We, as non-NDA members (and I am assuming even those behind NDA know, but who knows if they do), can't even offer suggestions on how to improve the system, since we don't know what is weighted, and what is included but at a small impact. It is impossible to tell. Until we know something more, it needs to be heavily revised, or nerfed so that the public matchmaking will work.
Aeon Amadi wrote:And there are some playstyles that this sort of thing MUST FACTOR IN because it is impossible to achieve those higher gains otherwise: Gallente Logis, for instance, can expect much lower WP accrual without a squad because their Intel Assist WP accrual simply cannot exist without squad-mates. Warbarge Strikes are another good example. You don't get the WP gains with those sort of gameplay mechanics running solo, so that must be taken into account when considering the "skill" of a player.
Reduced squad sizes were a good thing as that further narrows the chances for that team-play factor to matter as much in the overall scheme of things. I'm all for it. However, unless pub matches become solo-que only, there is no reasonable way (to my knowledge) to account for solo vs team-play except through different score systems.
But yanno, I could be wrong and just talking out of my ass.
Another reason why I think the system is broken... the system needs to account for 20+ variables, but it only seems to look at 2 or 3... KDR, Win/Loss, and total War Points. Even then, when it "evens out" the teams, 1 person can't carry 6 bad blueberries, let alone when they are put against two, very good squads, and be expected to win. This is the sort of placement you get, if you can get in, and your mu is heavily weighted down by unaccounted for variables.
CPM2 Candidate
Intent to run is found here: Intent
Allow me to help improve Dust
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University
Ivy League
12
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 18:56:00 -
[18] - Quote
demens grimwulff wrote:Darken-Sol wrote:
Perhaps you too should graduate to FW. Pubs should be like an extended academy. For new bros or the scrubs that need to fight them
That is all I run now, as the public matchmaking system is broken. However, there is no good money making system for FW, so it is necessary to supplement income with public matches. They are the only way to make money outside of PC, currently, so a working public matchmaking system is vital to the economy.
Now that Planetary Conquest has been uberhauled (yes, I just made up that word), I'm going to see if PC can be my primary source of income.
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
demens grimwulff
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
620
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 18:57:00 -
[19] - Quote
Maken Tosch wrote:demens grimwulff wrote:Darken-Sol wrote:
Perhaps you too should graduate to FW. Pubs should be like an extended academy. For new bros or the scrubs that need to fight them
That is all I run now, as the public matchmaking system is broken. However, there is no good money making system for FW, so it is necessary to supplement income with public matches. They are the only way to make money outside of PC, currently, so a working public matchmaking system is vital to the economy. Now that Planetary Conquest has been uberhauled (yes, I just made up that word), I'm going to see if PC can be my primary source of income.
Ehhh... PC payouts can be quite bad (I got 400k in one match and was #2 on my team). If you rely on PC to supplement your wages, you will have a rude awakening coming to you.
CPM2 Candidate
Intent to run is found here: Intent
Allow me to help improve Dust
|
demens grimwulff
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
620
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 18:58:00 -
[20] - Quote
General Mosquito wrote:You didn't hear? That is what a competitive game mode looks like!
Even better is 16 v randoms, which is what the q syncers said wouldn't happen, but has been the case in more than 50% of the FW matches I have played. I can't even remember getting a 16 v 16 in an FW match since the changes.
Not that I mind, as it is exactly what I said would happen, and what the teamstackers said they were not looking for.
I run FW daily, and only see a q-sync, maybe... 30% of the time. Just as likely as if you allowed 16 man deployment, but without the frustration of having to get everyone voiced in one spot, have the squads hit the right timer, hope they get in, etc.
CPM2 Candidate
Intent to run is found here: Intent
Allow me to help improve Dust
|
|
|
Darken-Sol
Intruder Excluder
2
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 18:59:00 -
[21] - Quote
demens grimwulff wrote:Darken-Sol wrote:
Perhaps you too should graduate to FW. Pubs should be like an extended academy. For new bros or the scrubs that need to fight them
That is all I run now, as the public matchmaking system is broken. However, there is no good money making system for FW, so it is necessary to supplement income with public matches. They are the only way to make money outside of PC, currently, so a working public matchmaking system is vital to the economy.
Im selling apex suits
Crush them
|
demens grimwulff
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
620
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 19:13:00 -
[22] - Quote
Darken-Sol wrote:demens grimwulff wrote:Darken-Sol wrote:
Perhaps you too should graduate to FW. Pubs should be like an extended academy. For new bros or the scrubs that need to fight them
That is all I run now, as the public matchmaking system is broken. However, there is no good money making system for FW, so it is necessary to supplement income with public matches. They are the only way to make money outside of PC, currently, so a working public matchmaking system is vital to the economy. Im selling apex suits
Assuming you win 100% of the rounds, it will require 50 rounds (roughly, and w/o boosters)... even, assuming you only run APEX gear the whole time, and you die an average of 5 times per round, the math works out as such:
5 * 50 = 250 deaths
250 * 20,000 = 5,000,000 (20k is a rough average of my average APEX suit)
250 * 10,000 = 2,000,000 (gains from refund; my APEX average about 1/2 of the returns
5,000,000 - 2,000,000 + 10,000,000 = 13,000,000
13 million isk if you only run APEX, die an average of 5 times, and win every round. Overall profit is anywhere from 17 million, to 47 million, but to get the more expensive APEX suits, you will not be winning 100% of the time. Now, same calculation for pubs
In the same period of time, you can run up to 2 to 3 times the number of pubs, and make almost the same profit, but APEX suits will only sell for that amount for a short period of time, and there is an ever diminishing market. I doubt you'll see a huge gain in the long run, and, even then, it is not the sustainable path for the game as we move forward. Public matchmaking is the basic game mode and is the one that every new person will play... if it dries up due to lack of proper matchmaking, the game will die a long, slow death.
CPM2 Candidate
Intent to run is found here: Intent
Allow me to help improve Dust
|
Darken-Sol
Intruder Excluder
2
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 19:26:00 -
[23] - Quote
demens grimwulff wrote:Darken-Sol wrote:demens grimwulff wrote:Darken-Sol wrote:
Perhaps you too should graduate to FW. Pubs should be like an extended academy. For new bros or the scrubs that need to fight them
That is all I run now, as the public matchmaking system is broken. However, there is no good money making system for FW, so it is necessary to supplement income with public matches. They are the only way to make money outside of PC, currently, so a working public matchmaking system is vital to the economy. Im selling apex suits Assuming you win 100% of the rounds, it will require 50 rounds (roughly, and w/o boosters)... even, assuming you only run APEX gear the whole time, and you die an average of 5 times per round, the math works out as such: 5 * 50 = 250 deaths 250 * 20,000 = 5,000,000 (20k is a rough average of my average APEX suit) 250 * 10,000 = 2,000,000 (gains from refund; my APEX average about 1/2 of the returns 5,000,000 - 2,000,000 + 10,000,000 = 13,000,000 13 million isk if you only run APEX, die an average of 5 times, and win every round. Overall profit is anywhere from 17 million, to 47 million, but to get the more expensive APEX suits, you will not be winning 100% of the time. Now, same calculation for pubs In the same period of time, you can run up to 2 to 3 times the number of pubs, and make almost the same profit, but APEX suits will only sell for that amount for a short period of time, and there is an ever diminishing market. I doubt you'll see a huge gain in the long run, and, even then, it is not the sustainable path for the game as we move forward. Public matchmaking is the basic game mode and is the one that every new person will play... if it dries up due to lack of proper matchmaking, the game will die a long, slow death.
I want to kill people that can kill me back. I roll Amarr FW 90% of the time. Theres really no reason to play a pub unless someone in squad is crying about isk.
Crush them
|
DUST Fiend
17
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 19:30:00 -
[24] - Quote
The player base is dwindling, only being kept afloat by a constant stream of noobs who only play for a short while, and the few die hard vets who won't leave even once the servers go dark.
With no real funding or full sized dev team, you're only getting little bits and pieces as time goes on. No CPM will ever change that, because CPM is ultimately powerless and more or less a nod to EVE in a stab at making the player base relevant.
Basically, if your suggestion requires resources or any real degree of programming, you may as well put with your dreams: in the trash |
Kain Spero
Negative-Feedback
5
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 19:44:00 -
[25] - Quote
I have to say a lot of the issues in pubs for veteran or higher end players is due to those player pools being of a greatly reduced size. For public play match leaving is still a really big issue as well.
Owner of Spero Escrow Services
Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
|
Maken Tosch
DUST University
Ivy League
12
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 20:23:00 -
[26] - Quote
demens grimwulff wrote:Maken Tosch wrote:demens grimwulff wrote:Darken-Sol wrote:
Perhaps you too should graduate to FW. Pubs should be like an extended academy. For new bros or the scrubs that need to fight them
That is all I run now, as the public matchmaking system is broken. However, there is no good money making system for FW, so it is necessary to supplement income with public matches. They are the only way to make money outside of PC, currently, so a working public matchmaking system is vital to the economy. Now that Planetary Conquest has been uberhauled (yes, I just made up that word), I'm going to see if PC can be my primary source of income. Ehhh... PC payouts can be quite bad (I got 400k in one match and was #2 on my team). If you rely on PC to supplement your wages, you will have a rude awakening coming to you.
Is that accounting for salvage and any ISK you get as a bonus from the corp for participating?
Eve Online Invite
https://secure.eveonline.com/trial/?invc=ed64524f-15ca-4997-ab92-eaae0af74b7f&action=buddy
|
demens grimwulff
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
622
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 20:36:00 -
[27] - Quote
Maken Tosch wrote:demens grimwulff wrote:Ehhh... PC payouts can be quite bad (I got 400k in one match and was #2 on my team). If you rely on PC to supplement your wages, you will have a rude awakening coming to you. Is that accounting for salvage and any ISK you get as a bonus from the corp for participating?
Even with clone sales, isk earned from holding districts is not enough to provide a paycheck, considering, due to the high cost of clone packs ($30 mill).... so no "bonus isk" from the corp. Basically, the economy of the current PC set up is not that of times passed... it isn't an isk fountain, but more like, a self-sustaining flow. If you dedicate 100% of your CP to selling clones, that is one thing... you might be able to provide a mill or two to your members, each, but not wallet inflating numbers like it used to be. Besides, most people who want to PC, prefer to actually PC over getting a mill or two.
Salvage isn't even that great, depending on who you go against. If you earned 400k in a match, odds are, you're only getting basic or militia in your salvage. The higher end complex stuff does drop, but not at the rate one would consider useful and/or bank filling.
CPM2 Candidate
Intent to run is found here: Intent
Allow me to help improve Dust
|
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
1
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 20:52:00 -
[28] - Quote
I thought you were going to say a port either to PC or PA4. Anywho +1
"There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner
*The Mascot of 0uter.Heaven *
Internet down atm :(
|
Talos Vagheitan
Ancient Exiles.
2
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 20:59:00 -
[29] - Quote
Matchmaking is a complicated issue. There's one thing I never see people talk about though.
The most popular mode in Dust by far, Domination is inherently one sided.
At least in most maps, the point is highly entrenched and easy to defend, which gives a huge advantage to whoever hacks first and gets links in the area.
By comparison, I've seen way more big comebacks in Acquisition and ambush much more often than Dom.
Maybe the Dom point needs to become mobile like Aq, or at least be placed in areas much harder to defend.
Official CPM Platform
|
demens grimwulff
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
622
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 21:04:00 -
[30] - Quote
Talos Vagheitan wrote:Matchmaking is a complicated issue. There's one thing I never see people talk about though.
The most popular mode in Dust by far, Domination is inherently one sided.
At least in most maps, the point is highly entrenched and easy to defend, which gives a huge advantage to whoever hacks first and gets links in the area.
By comparison, I've seen way more big comebacks in Acquisition and ambush much more often than Dom.
Maybe the Dom point needs to become mobile like Aq, or at least be placed in areas much harder to defend.
Dom is, basically, "First to cap and camp, wins".
Acq... I have mixed feelings on. It can either be a ground-and-pound, or a tank spam match... not many in betweens, from my experience.
CPM2 Candidate
Intent to run is found here: Intent
Allow me to help improve Dust
|
|
|
demens grimwulff
Negative-Feedback.
Negative-Feedback
622
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 21:05:00 -
[31] - Quote
501st Headstrong wrote:I thought you were going to say a port either to PC or PA4. Anywho +1
Movement too a more advanced platform is necessary for Dust's survival... but once we get there, the bad mu system will only limit our growth.
CPM2 Candidate
Intent to run is found here: Intent
Allow me to help improve Dust
|
Darken-Sol
Intruder Excluder
2
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 21:08:00 -
[32] - Quote
Talos Vagheitan wrote:Matchmaking is a complicated issue. There's one thing I never see people talk about though.
The most popular mode in Dust by far, Domination is inherently one sided.
At least in most maps, the point is highly entrenched and easy to defend, which gives a huge advantage to whoever hacks first and gets links in the area.
By comparison, I've seen way more big comebacks in Acquisition and ambush much more often than Dom.
Maybe the Dom point needs to become mobile like Aq, or at least be placed in areas much harder to defend.
Two points would be awesome.
Crush them
|
501st Headstrong
0uter.Heaven
1
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 21:18:00 -
[33] - Quote
demens grimwulff wrote:501st Headstrong wrote:I thought you were going to say a port either to PC or PA4. Anywho +1 Movement too a more advanced platform is necessary for Dust's survival... but once we get there, the bad mu system will only limit our growth.
Why do I feel like the MU isn't the issue however...? The main priblem imI see is newberries just dont understand the game? They dont understand suit styles, they play barely any Academy before being lumped in with the rest of us. Also, there are a lot of people on PS4, old vets. Fairly certain a stronger NPE and explanation, coupled with more players probably have a crudload of SP saved now would alleviate the issue
"There are no rights. The world owes no one a living."-Sumner
*The Mascot of 0uter.Heaven *
Internet down atm :(
|
Leither Yiltron
Molon Labe.
1
|
Posted - 2015.07.12 22:31:00 -
[34] - Quote
A few notes:
(1) Your place on the boards at the end of a PC match have no bearing on the amount of ISK you receive. It is meted out as an even split between all team members.
(2) Commenting that matchmaking "isn't working" is pointless. Of course matchmaking isn't working- there are roughly 2.5k people logged into Dust at any given point in time. Let's assume, rather generously, that 75% of them are actually in battle or looking for battle at any given point in time. That's 1875 players. Then you have to split everyone into different game modes and account for the fact that most of them should be playing a battle at any one point in time. I'm not going to crunch it, because it should be clear that the numbers get very small very fast. Why would it be particularly surprising that there are few good matches to be made?
Dust has problems on a fundamental level that many people, Rattati included, have characteristically felt like matchmaking is a magic-bullet to fix. But it isn't and never will be. Taken collectively these problems result in snowball matches and gameplay where players rapidly lose incentive to try to win, and in a feedback loop that rapidly escalates matches from bad to worse.
- Overly defense-oriented game modes disproportionately reward teams which rush to objectives and then camp at them over teams with mobility. It's hardly possible to find a gap in the armor when the defending team has very little incentive to move. There are a few specific aspects of this overarching theme that deserve their own mention:
- Lack of sincere secondary objectives reduces the relevant number of points required to be contested for a victory to a very small number
- Many objectives in Skirmish, for example, are typically placed so close together that the amount of ground that you need to hold to hold multiple objectives is further reduced. Many city maps' ownership revolves around a tiny smattering of choke points.
- Horridly defender-oriented map design. If an objective isn't in a tiny room with a small number of immutable entry points, it's in the midst of a pack of defenders' cover/emplacements surrounded by great gulfs of empty space where only a tree could fail to figure out where attacks are coming from.
- Utterly unreliable spawning, particularly for attackers. This is a gigantic, gaping hole that makes meaningful attacks on contested objectives an uphill battle. Dust has been leaning on Uplinks for 3 years even though they're garbage as a main spawning mechanic. In practice both CRU's and Uplinks are easily camped (this is particularly egregious for CRU's) because of a total lack of spawn protection. The cloaking mechanic has never been enough considering that all the available spawning mechanics dump the aspiring spawner in pinpoint accurate locations to be killed off while they're still disoriented from coming out of a black screen. Without a way to avoid crossing the "fields of death" on all of Dust's maps, players inevitably lose interest in pushing.
- Power disparity and creep in equipment. The most recent round of tiericide is a great start, but I doubt it's strong enough to give more than a taste of the kind of game improvements we can see from figuring out proper power balance. Dust's asset cost system gives an incentive for a winning team to put on better gear (as defenders, their risk of losing it goes down), while the losing team is pushed to move into cheaper gear (for fear that their lack of defensive footing will lead to a higher likelihood of losing it). The gear gap has been such that it was quite literally impossible to have fun or remotely fair fights as someone in, for instance, STD gear versus someone in PRO. Without 25m SP for all the right bells ans whistles it's still impossible. As soon as the match starts tipping one way or another the power gap on both teams widens, and without relevantly powerful support from teammates even players who want to use better gear can't possibly justify it.
- Clone counts which punish attackers from attempting to apply non-flipping pressure to objectives, which is absurd. In pub matches you're going to have a relatively uncoordinated team, and any time you make an unsuccessful push on an objective you move towards being ******. Clone counts are definitely stilted to favor defending players.
After three changes to matchmaking over as many years without a substantive improvement in match quality, it's bordering on insanity to imagine that any more tinkering with the numbers can more than marginally improve the situation.
That's not even the end of the list. Focusing community discussion concerning these long term issues and eventually identifying a basic consensus on them are the essence of what I'd like to bring to the table as a Council member. I've got a long ass history of sticking to my guns when long term as hell issues are identified by the community.
Have a pony
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 2 :: [one page] |