DUST Search - [IMPERATIVE FEEDBACK] CCP you HAVE to fix this

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

[IMPERATIVE FEEDBACK] CCP you HAVE to fix this

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 6 post(s)

CCP Nullarbor C C P C C P Alliance 1521	Posted - 2013.06.29 23:25:00 - [1] - Quote So as a few people have pointed out in this thread already that the academy itself is fine and actually meets our intended goal which is to provide a safe area to practice the first few games before being thrown in the deep end. The problem is the deep end is very deep at the moment, and we need an improved matchmaking system to fix this. We are not happy with our current system and so are going back to the drawing board and creating a new matcher to provide more balanced teams. Think of it like a tier system but rather than discrete intervals of 0 - 10,000 WP then 10,000 - 30,000 WP etc we instead have a continuous sliding scale of difficulty and match players based on multiple criteria. No ETA on delivering this just yet but it is a high priority (I am working on it as we speak).


CCP Nullarbor C C P C C P Alliance 1532	Posted - 2013.06.29 23:59:00 - [2] - Quote Aeon Amadi wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: So as a few people have pointed out in this thread already that the academy itself is fine and actually meets our intended goal which is to provide a safe area to practice the first few games before being thrown in the deep end. The problem is the deep end is very deep at the moment, and we need an improved matchmaking system to fix this. We are not happy with our current system and so are going back to the drawing board and creating a new matcher to provide more balanced teams. Think of it like a tier system but rather than discrete intervals of 0 - 10,000 WP then 10,000 - 30,000 WP etc we instead have a continuous sliding scale of difficulty and match players based on multiple criteria. No ETA on delivering this just yet but it is a high priority (I am working on it as we speak). Thanks so much Nullarbor. Any changes youre thinking about as far as Faction Warfare? The new player slaughter is just as bad there, unfortunately. What about a system like Eve in which only certain dropsuits can entire certain sites? Militia/Standard for one site class, allow advanced in for another and then finally Prototype for a no-limits applied style? Queueing for faction warfare would be great if we can provide it, maybe even full team sync although this is particularly difficult to get working correctly. The problem with divisions like certain classes of items is it splits up the pool of available players for the matching system to work effectively. So customization comes at the cost of reduced match quality or potentially long waiting times. This is all part of our experimentation at the moment though and balanced matches is the primary success criteria.


CCP Nullarbor C C P C C P Alliance 1545	Posted - 2013.06.30 01:14:00 - [3] - Quote Telcontar Dunedain wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: Aeon Amadi wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: So as a few people have pointed out in this thread already that the academy itself is fine and actually meets our intended goal which is to provide a safe area to practice the first few games before being thrown in the deep end. The problem is the deep end is very deep at the moment, and we need an improved matchmaking system to fix this. We are not happy with our current system and so are going back to the drawing board and creating a new matcher to provide more balanced teams. Think of it like a tier system but rather than discrete intervals of 0 - 10,000 WP then 10,000 - 30,000 WP etc we instead have a continuous sliding scale of difficulty and match players based on multiple criteria. No ETA on delivering this just yet but it is a high priority (I am working on it as we speak). Thanks so much Nullarbor. Any changes youre thinking about as far as Faction Warfare? The new player slaughter is just as bad there, unfortunately. What about a system like Eve in which only certain dropsuits can entire certain sites? Militia/Standard for one site class, allow advanced in for another and then finally Prototype for a no-limits applied style? Queueing for faction warfare would be great if we can provide it, maybe even full team sync although this is particularly difficult to get working correctly. The problem with divisions like certain classes of items is it splits up the pool of available players for the matching system to work effectively. So customization comes at the cost of reduced match quality or potentially long waiting times. This is all part of our experimentation at the moment though and balanced matches is the primary success criteria. I'm genuinely confused why people want to continue to hold newbs hands even in lowsec. I'm also worried that CCP would take requests like this seriously as if it would be a good thing. At some point the training wheels come off and its time to fight and figure out how to getgoodGäó and you don't do that without playing "scary" players. I'm concerned about the current very low population combining with this new queuing code. When I asked Foxfour he said there is no method by which you attempt to keep people from being matched with the same people OVER AND OVER AND OVER again. If you deploy this and its horrible...you have a backout plan? You really don't need to leave something like this in place for a month and run the rest of us out of this game. Actually the motivation for queueing in FW is more to improve the experience of getting into a battle because at the moment it is tricky to get an open spot. We are also designing out some changes to FW which should see it move to being more of a challenge than instant battle. The new queueing is specifically designed to handle lower population which is one of the flaws of the current system.


CCP Nullarbor C C P C C P Alliance 1548	Posted - 2013.06.30 01:31:00 - [4] - Quote Telcontar Dunedain wrote: If by "challenge" you mean some kind of wager like the old system? I don't like that. Complicated hasn't worked out so far. Leave it in PC. Nope. Telcontar Dunedain wrote: Why not just have FW be simple. We queue whatever size group we want into whatever side we want. Size 1-16 WHO CARES. Matchmaking happens. We either get a stacked team if available OR the queuing system brings together the best it can. Fight. Simple and gets us team fights. Yes people might run into organized groups! SHOCKING The might LEARN that its better if they organize by finding another squad to join them in queing first! What a concept. Lets get some fights going. Don't make it complicated. "Hisec is where individuals learn to squad, lowsec is where squads learn to team" Something more like this, there is more to it but we're not ready to reveal details just yet.


CCP Nullarbor C C P C C P Alliance 1554	Posted - 2013.06.30 01:53:00 - [5] - Quote Avinash Decker wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: So as a few people have pointed out in this thread already that the academy itself is fine and actually meets our intended goal which is to provide a safe area to practice the first few games before being thrown in the deep end. The problem is the deep end is very deep at the moment, and we need an improved matchmaking system to fix this. We are not happy with our current system and so are going back to the drawing board and creating a new matcher to provide more balanced teams. Think of it like a tier system but rather than discrete intervals of 0 - 10,000 WP then 10,000 - 30,000 WP etc we instead have a continuous sliding scale of difficulty and match players based on multiple criteria. No ETA on delivering this just yet but it is a high priority (I am working on it as we speak). CCP Eterne wrote: Improving overall gear balancing so there is no "best" choice and there are tactical choices to make [. So does this mean matchmaking won't take gear in consideration? Because I think its a good thing if it doesn't and just split population and create longer ques for proto , etc . I think its better to balance the gear levels so one isn't better that the other . I'm not going to go into the details of how it works because it's complicated and will probably start a huge misinformed discussion. However the end result should be irrespective of whether a player is good because of their gear or their ability to shoot straight or out think the other player, they should be matched with equally challenging opponents. Time (and many simulations) will tell if we are able to achieve that balance.


CCP Nullarbor C C P C C P Alliance 1554	Posted - 2013.06.30 01:56:00 - [6] - Quote Telcontar Dunedain wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: Telcontar Dunedain wrote: If by "challenge" you mean some kind of wager like the old system? I don't like that. Complicated hasn't worked out so far. Leave it in PC. Nope. Telcontar Dunedain wrote: Why not just have FW be simple. We queue whatever size group we want into whatever side we want. Size 1-16 WHO CARES. Matchmaking happens. We either get a stacked team if available OR the queuing system brings together the best it can. Fight. Simple and gets us team fights. Yes people might run into organized groups! SHOCKING The might LEARN that its better if they organize by finding another squad to join them in queing first! What a concept. Lets get some fights going. Don't make it complicated. "Hisec is where individuals learn to squad, lowsec is where squads learn to team" Something more like this, there is more to it but we're not ready to reveal details just yet. You waited quite a while on PC to talk to us and all anyone could help with was fiddle numbers... I'd like to be able to tell the boys that they will be able to login and get a team queue in 1.3 That and the FPS basics are what we need most. We are still in the design phase, first step will be going through it all with the CPM then we can open it up for further discussion with players.