DUST Search - Pubstomping

All Channels

General Discussions

Pubstomping

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 5 post(s)
Sloth9230 Reaper Galactic 2109	Posted - 2013.07.01 23:56:00 - [31] - Quote BMSTUBBY wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: I am working on a rewrite of matchmaking as we speak. We share the same concern. LOL I thought PC and FW was your matchmaking fix. Hummm must not have worked as good as you all thought huh? They never said that, it was the players who said it would it would keep the pros busy

CCP Nullarbor C C P C C P Alliance 1599	Posted - 2013.07.01 23:57:00 - [32] - Quote BMSTUBBY wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: I am working on a rewrite of matchmaking as we speak. We share the same concern. LOL I thought PC and FW was your matchmaking fix. Hummm must not have worked as good as you all thought huh? No, actually pulling people away from the instant battle queue decreases its effectiveness but we like the concept of offering different engagement levels. We still have work to go on that front too.

Noc Tempre Imperfects Negative-Feedback 2059	Posted - 2013.07.02 00:00:00 - [33] - Quote CCP Nullarbor wrote: Noc Tempre wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: I am working on a rewrite of matchmaking as we speak. We share the same concern. What is the goals you are trying to achieve when rewriting the matchmaking? Are you trying to balance skill? SP? WP? Prototype vs Prototype? Shorter queue times? I understand matchmaking is very complex, but also you can't please everyone. What is CCP trying to achieve here? Well the goal is simple, create an even probability for a side to win or lose with the least dependence on individual players. How that is achieved I will write about in a dev blog when we are further along with our simulation. I hope your models look at being above average/below average as logarithmic, not linear, numbers for balancing. An exceptionally bad player and an exceptionally good player does not balance out to two average players.
CAPN' OBVIOUS UNOBTANIUM INC General Tso's Alliance 4	Posted - 2013.07.02 00:01:00 - [34] - Quote CCP Nullarbor wrote: I am working on a rewrite of matchmaking as we speak. We share the same concern. Thank you, glad it's being worked on.
Telcontar Dunedain Imperfects Negative-Feedback 491	Posted - 2013.07.02 00:24:00 - [35] - Quote CCP Nullarbor wrote: Noc Tempre wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: I am working on a rewrite of matchmaking as we speak. We share the same concern. What is the goals you are trying to achieve when rewriting the matchmaking? Are you trying to balance skill? SP? WP? Prototype vs Prototype? Shorter queue times? I understand matchmaking is very complex, but also you can't please everyone. What is CCP trying to achieve here? Well the goal is simple, create an even probability for a side to win or lose with the least dependence on individual players. How that is achieved I will write about in a dev blog when we are further along with our simulation. Have you confirmed that a 50% probability to winning equates to actual fun or have you just gone forward with the assumption that fair > all? Is there any industry literature on matchmaking in gaming that you looked at? Reading over the X-Box Live [url]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TrueSkill[/url] I have some questions and concerns. So in any system like this it seems like it would work great in the beginning but it causes some weird effects. At beginning you put people in different matches based on things like KDR and Win/Loss. Good players vs good players and bad players vs bad players. Good players and bad players start to play matches in which they are less likely to win and have high k/d in the case of good players and bad players are going to do better then they did previously. Over time your statistics start to skew everyone into a muddle of the same stats and you no longer have much to base things on? Do you guys seriously have the bandwidth to design, setup and MAINTAIN this system over time? It's probably going to need constant tuning, monitoring and thoughtfulness to not suck is my guess. Xbox probably has a few employees that specialize in this system... p.s. I reiterate my concern that squads will end up fighting the same opponents over and over again.
FATPrincess - XOXO Shining Flame Amarr Empire 46	Posted - 2013.07.02 00:49:00 - [36] - Quote CCP Nullarbor wrote: Noc Tempre wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: I am working on a rewrite of matchmaking as we speak. We share the same concern. What is the goals you are trying to achieve when rewriting the matchmaking? Are you trying to balance skill? SP? WP? Prototype vs Prototype? Shorter queue times? I understand matchmaking is very complex, but also you can't please everyone. What is CCP trying to achieve here? Well the goal is simple, create an even probability for a side to win or lose with the least dependence on individual players. How that is achieved I will write about in a dev blog when we are further along with our simulation. This isn't the concern. The concern here is that the big corps make squads to stomp players who aren't in a squad, which is the majority of the newer players. By increasing squad size this got even worse because now there are more "good" players stomping everyone in the other team. There are 2 simpler ways to solve this: -Increase WP to 50,000 for the battke academy. Make the new players play more vs new players. -Make a no squads matchmaking mode. Those with squads get to play with those who are in squads as well. Those who don't have squads or aren't interested in squads get to play with same random, unorganized people. -Lower squad size to 4 again. K/D ratio and minimum SP matchmaking separates the player base way too much and can lead to empty or uneven lobbies. -XOXO
hooc roht Deep Space Republic 157	Posted - 2013.07.02 00:51:00 - [37] - Quote CCP Nullarbor wrote: Noc Tempre wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: I am working on a rewrite of matchmaking as we speak. We share the same concern. What is the goals you are trying to achieve when rewriting the matchmaking? Are you trying to balance skill? SP? WP? Prototype vs Prototype? Shorter queue times? I understand matchmaking is very complex, but also you can't please everyone. What is CCP trying to achieve here? Well the goal is simple, create an even probability for a side to win or lose with the least dependence on individual players. How that is achieved I will write about in a dev blog when we are further along with our simulation. Bad idea. if one team is given 3 high powered (high Sp) players and the other team gets the same what happens when one or two decide to AFK? You get a pub stomp....and a pub stomp that can be pretty easy to manipulate into happening. Better to focus on matchmaking on putting like powered players with like powered players then too worry about w/l ratio. The SP tiers has already been suggested and even implemented with the academy. Why reinvent the wheel for a "goal" that no one cares about when the problem is plain to see: low powered players being stomped by high power players not based on skill or strategy but simply because they have acquired more SP. Also why is it taking so long? Why are you dragging your feet? Don't say it is complicated because it is not at all. The academy took how long to put in the game? A day? A week? A rudimentary matchmaking system can be put in the game at any time (matchmaking is server side not client side)...and should have been put in months ago.

CCP Nullarbor C C P C C P Alliance 1630	Posted - 2013.07.02 00:53:00 - [38] - Quote FATPrincess - XOXO wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: Noc Tempre wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: I am working on a rewrite of matchmaking as we speak. We share the same concern. What is the goals you are trying to achieve when rewriting the matchmaking? Are you trying to balance skill? SP? WP? Prototype vs Prototype? Shorter queue times? I understand matchmaking is very complex, but also you can't please everyone. What is CCP trying to achieve here? Well the goal is simple, create an even probability for a side to win or lose with the least dependence on individual players. How that is achieved I will write about in a dev blog when we are further along with our simulation. This isn't the concern. The concern here is that the big corps make squads to stomp players who aren't in a squad, which is the majority of the newer players. By increasing squad size this got even worse because now there are more "good" players stomping everyone in the other team. There are 2 simpler ways to solve this: -Increase WP to 50,000 for the battke academy. Make the new players play more vs new players. -Make a no squads matchmaking mode. Those with squads get to play with those who are in squads as well. Those who don't have squads or aren't interested in squads get to play with same random, unorganized people. K/D ratio and minimum SP matchmaking separates the player base way too much and can lead to empty or uneven lobbies. -XOXO Not sure you understand what I mean by probability. If a fully stacked team joins a battle then the probability of them winning is pretty high, the job of matchmaking is to recognise that and even the odds. Hence we will be taking squads into consideration when building teams. K/D ratio and SP are not good metrics on their own for determining the probability of a win.


CCP Nullarbor C C P C C P Alliance 1630	Posted - 2013.07.02 00:54:00 - [39] - Quote hooc roht wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: Noc Tempre wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: I am working on a rewrite of matchmaking as we speak. We share the same concern. What is the goals you are trying to achieve when rewriting the matchmaking? Are you trying to balance skill? SP? WP? Prototype vs Prototype? Shorter queue times? I understand matchmaking is very complex, but also you can't please everyone. What is CCP trying to achieve here? Well the goal is simple, create an even probability for a side to win or lose with the least dependence on individual players. How that is achieved I will write about in a dev blog when we are further along with our simulation. Bad idea. if one team is given 3 high powered (high Sp) players and the other team gets the same what happens when one or two decide to AFK? You get a pub stomp....and a pub stomp that can be pretty easy to manipulate into happening. Better to focus on matchmaking on putting like powered players with like powered players then too worry about w/l ratio. The SP tiers has already been suggested and even implemented with the academy. Why reinvent the wheel for a "goal" that no one cares about when the problem is plain to see: low powered players being stomped by high power players not based on skill or strategy but simply because they have acquired more SP. Also why is it taking so long? Why are you dragging your feet? Don't say it is complicated because it is not at all. The academy took how long to put in the game? A day? A week? A rudimentary matchmaking system can be put in the game at any time (matchmaking is server side not client side)...and should have been put in months ago. "with the least dependence on individual players"

FATPrincess - XOXO Shining Flame Amarr Empire 46	Posted - 2013.07.02 01:02:00 - [40] - Quote CCP Nullarbor wrote: FATPrincess - XOXO wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: Noc Tempre wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: I am working on a rewrite of matchmaking as we speak. We share the same concern. What is the goals you are trying to achieve when rewriting the matchmaking? Are you trying to balance skill? SP? WP? Prototype vs Prototype? Shorter queue times? I understand matchmaking is very complex, but also you can't please everyone. What is CCP trying to achieve here? Well the goal is simple, create an even probability for a side to win or lose with the least dependence on individual players. How that is achieved I will write about in a dev blog when we are further along with our simulation. This isn't the concern. The concern here is that the big corps make squads to stomp players who aren't in a squad, which is the majority of the newer players. By increasing squad size this got even worse because now there are more "good" players stomping everyone in the other team. There are 2 simpler ways to solve this: -Increase WP to 50,000 for the battke academy. Make the new players play more vs new players. -Make a no squads matchmaking mode. Those with squads get to play with those who are in squads as well. Those who don't have squads or aren't interested in squads get to play with same random, unorganized people. K/D ratio and minimum SP matchmaking separates the player base way too much and can lead to empty or uneven lobbies. -XOXO Not sure you understand what I mean by probability. If a fully stacked team joins a battle then the probability of them winning is pretty high, the job of matchmaking is to recognise that and even the odds. Hence we will be taking squads into consideration when building teams. K/D ratio and SP are not good metrics on their own for determining the probability of a win. Ok then what is the plan? Kick squad members because the other team doesn't have squads? I don't understand, lol. I hope you consider no squad matchmaking anyway. Naughty Dog did it and it's the fairest matchmaking system I've ever seen. Been playing whole day and only got "stomped" 2 or 3 times. -XOXO

hooc roht Deep Space Republic 157	Posted - 2013.07.02 01:03:00 - [41] - Quote CCP Nullarbor wrote: hooc roht wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: Noc Tempre wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: I am working on a rewrite of matchmaking as we speak. We share the same concern. What is the goals you are trying to achieve when rewriting the matchmaking? Are you trying to balance skill? SP? WP? Prototype vs Prototype? Shorter queue times? I understand matchmaking is very complex, but also you can't please everyone. What is CCP trying to achieve here? Well the goal is simple, create an even probability for a side to win or lose with the least dependence on individual players. How that is achieved I will write about in a dev blog when we are further along with our simulation. Bad idea. if one team is given 3 high powered (high Sp) players and the other team gets the same what happens when one or two decide to AFK? You get a pub stomp....and a pub stomp that can be pretty easy to manipulate into happening. Better to focus on matchmaking on putting like powered players with like powered players then too worry about w/l ratio. The SP tiers has already been suggested and even implemented with the academy. Why reinvent the wheel for a "goal" that no one cares about when the problem is plain to see: low powered players being stomped by high power players not based on skill or strategy but simply because they have acquired more SP. Also why is it taking so long? Why are you dragging your feet? Don't say it is complicated because it is not at all. The academy took how long to put in the game? A day? A week? A rudimentary matchmaking system can be put in the game at any time (matchmaking is server side not client side)...and should have been put in months ago. "with the least dependence on individual players" Whatever dude. I am not the one who designed a game that chases new players away in droves. If you want to put up artificial barriers to fixing that problem then go ahead. I won't be losing my job when Dust is closed down due to lack of customers. You will.
Sloth9230 Reaper Galactic 2114	Posted - 2013.07.02 01:05:00 - [42] - Quote hooc roht wrote: I am not the one who designed a game that chases new players away in droves. If you want to put up artificial barriers to fixing that problem then go ahead. I won't be losing my job when Dust is closed down due to lack of customers. You will. Why are you still playing a game that purposefully "carries it's older players", geez man
Azura Sakura Militaires-Sans-Frontieres 167	Posted - 2013.07.02 01:08:00 - [43] - Quote Poplo Furuya wrote: Is this really a thing? Fighting others of equal or superior calibre is the best practice there is. Would think it desirable. Also fun, satisfying, gratifying. I want to choke you. Obviously having militia/STD gear puts you on equal footing against proto stompers
STABBEY WarRavens League of Infamy 28	Posted - 2013.07.02 01:31:00 - [44] - Quote hooc roht wrote: Whatever dude. I am not the one who designed a game that chases new players away in droves. If you want to put up artificial barriers to fixing that problem then go ahead. I won't be losing my job when Dust is closed down due to lack of customers. You will. I dont understand why forum warriors are even voiceing opinions on this. I've played this game since it came out and I've never seen nor heard of you or your corps in game. If you spend 90% of your time in these forums while the real players actualy play the game I dont think you need to be QQing about the game mechanics. Dust wasnt made to be a browser game.
echo47 Sebiestor Field Sappers Minmatar Republic 20	Posted - 2013.07.02 01:42:00 - [45] - Quote hooc roht wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: Noc Tempre wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: I am working on a rewrite of matchmaking as we speak. We share the same concern. What is the goals you are trying to achieve when rewriting the matchmaking? Are you trying to balance skill? SP? WP? Prototype vs Prototype? Shorter queue times? I understand matchmaking is very complex, but also you can't please everyone. What is CCP trying to achieve here? Well the goal is simple, create an even probability for a side to win or lose with the least dependence on individual players. How that is achieved I will write about in a dev blog when we are further along with our simulation. Bad idea. if one team is given 3 high powered (high Sp) players and the other team gets the same what happens when one or two decide to AFK? You get a pub stomp....and a pub stomp that can be pretty easy to manipulate into happening. Better to focus on matchmaking on putting like powered players with like powered players then too worry about w/l ratio. The SP tiers has already been suggested and even implemented with the academy. Why reinvent the wheel for a "goal" that no one cares about when the problem is plain to see: low powered players being stomped by high power players not based on skill or strategy but simply because they have acquired more SP. Also why is it taking so long? Why are you dragging your feet? Don't say it is complicated because it is not at all. The academy took how long to put in the game? A day? A week? A rudimentary matchmaking system can be put in the game at any time (matchmaking is server side not client side)...and should have been put in months ago. Pubstomps dont happen simply because of skill points. There is no incentive to coninue the match if things go sideways for your team, so players AFK or quit. when you have one squad or three or four indviduals playing against an entire team it just gets worse. There is no ingame incentive to win a pub match, or faction warfare the rewards are the same wether you win or loose. You get redlined and still come out ahead in SP/WP and ISK. As for faction warefare right now as Dust players we see no benefit in a faction controlling a system, other than bragging rights.
Kane Fyea DUST University Ivy League 554	Posted - 2013.07.02 01:56:00 - [46] - Quote hooc roht wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: hooc roht wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: Noc Tempre wrote: What is the goals you are trying to achieve when rewriting the matchmaking? Are you trying to balance skill? SP? WP? Prototype vs Prototype? Shorter queue times? I understand matchmaking is very complex, but also you can't please everyone. What is CCP trying to achieve here? Well the goal is simple, create an even probability for a side to win or lose with the least dependence on individual players. How that is achieved I will write about in a dev blog when we are further along with our simulation. Bad idea. if one team is given 3 high powered (high Sp) players and the other team gets the same what happens when one or two decide to AFK? You get a pub stomp....and a pub stomp that can be pretty easy to manipulate into happening. Better to focus on matchmaking on putting like powered players with like powered players then too worry about w/l ratio. The SP tiers has already been suggested and even implemented with the academy. Why reinvent the wheel for a "goal" that no one cares about when the problem is plain to see: low powered players being stomped by high power players not based on skill or strategy but simply because they have acquired more SP. Also why is it taking so long? Why are you dragging your feet? Don't say it is complicated because it is not at all. The academy took how long to put in the game? A day? A week? A rudimentary matchmaking system can be put in the game at any time (matchmaking is server side not client side)...and should have been put in months ago. "with the least dependence on individual players" Whatever dude. I am not the one who designed a game that chases new players away in droves. If you want to put up artificial barriers to fixing that problem then go ahead. I won't be losing my job when Dust is closed down due to lack of customers. You will. How about you learn to program before you say what is easy and what is not. Matchmaking normally would be easy since most developers have their matchmaking based on KDR (Which wouldn't work for this game thanks to the skill system)
Colonel Killar DUST CORE DARKSTAR ARMY 73	Posted - 2013.07.02 03:08:00 - [47] - Quote hooc roht wrote: CAPN' OBVIOUS wrote: I've been getting pretty frustrated lately because of this... I've been playing since open beta and have had some incredibly good battles where both teams duke it out and the battle is super close and super fun. But recently a new trend has occurred, the pubstomp! This isn't happening because the matchmaking system is so bad, ok maybe partly the reason but the other reason and most frequent reason is because of a select few, the puies. Multiple battles over the weekend went something like this... I enter the warbarge and see that the teams are pretty evenly matched, 6man sqd of xxxx on our team, 6man sqd of xxxx on their team (xxxx=good corp) the battles looked as if they'd be extremely fun and close and then the puies get sand in their clam and one of the 6man xxxx squads leaves the battle leaving a bunch of non squaded newberries to face the other dominant and now way better stacked team. I can only imagine two reasons this is happening, 1. You're a puy or 2. You're a puy who's scared to lose proto gear and won't run a battle where your facing a decent opponent because you may lose said proto gear and even more so you're such a puy that you won't run anything besides proto gear in a pub battle. Ok, I've vented now and I feel better but just know, if your squad leaves a battle because of the opposition, you're a puy, puy nah matchmaking is the reason. I have 2.3 Sp spent and i go out use1 or 2 lives then sit in the MCC for the rest of the match if my team gets red lined. I do this because everyone has more SP then me and there is no point in giving them free kills. If my team is unwilling to win from the start i am not going to sacrifice myself for them...and i sure as hell am not going to sacrifice myself to help the other teams SP WP K/D ratio. You all have more SP then me. You all have Uber powers that i do not. You all can go ** yourselves. Don't talk to this person he will lower your IQ
Colonel Killar DUST CORE DARKSTAR ARMY 73	Posted - 2013.07.02 03:12:00 - [48] - Quote hooc roht wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: Noc Tempre wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: I am working on a rewrite of matchmaking as we speak. We share the same concern. What is the goals you are trying to achieve when rewriting the matchmaking? Are you trying to balance skill? SP? WP? Prototype vs Prototype? Shorter queue times? I understand matchmaking is very complex, but also you can't please everyone. What is CCP trying to achieve here? Well the goal is simple, create an even probability for a side to win or lose with the least dependence on individual players. How that is achieved I will write about in a dev blog when we are further along with our simulation. Bad idea. if one team is given 3 high powered (high Sp) players and the other team gets the same what happens when one or two decide to AFK? You get a pub stomp....and a pub stomp that can be pretty easy to manipulate into happening. Better to focus on matchmaking on putting like powered players with like powered players then too worry about w/l ratio. The SP tiers has already been suggested and even implemented with the academy. Why reinvent the wheel for a "goal" that no one cares about when the problem is plain to see: low powered players being stomped by high power players not based on skill or strategy but simply because they have acquired more SP. Also why is it taking so long? Why are you dragging your feet? Don't say it is complicated because it is not at all. The academy took how long to put in the game? A day? A week? A rudimentary matchmaking system can be put in the game at any time (matchmaking is server side not client side)...and should have been put in months ago. Would you like a free trip to Iceland to be made to look like the fool that you are.
Eno Raef KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 4	Posted - 2013.07.02 03:13:00 - [49] - Quote CCP Nullarbor wrote: I am working on a rewrite of matchmaking as we speak. We share the same concern. Militia and standard gear only matches seems like a great way. Sure some teams and players will likely always perform well but at least they won't have the gear advantage.
Kane Fyea DUST University Ivy League 555	Posted - 2013.07.02 03:14:00 - [50] - Quote Eno Raef wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: I am working on a rewrite of matchmaking as we speak. We share the same concern. Militia and standard gear only matches seems like a great way. Sure some teams and players will likely always perform well but at least they won't have the gear advantage. I'd rather have a no squad game mode.

Rogatien Merc Ill Omens EoN. 218	Posted - 2013.07.02 03:17:00 - [51] - Quote Eno Raef wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: I am working on a rewrite of matchmaking as we speak. We share the same concern. Militia and standard gear only matches seems like a great way. Sure some teams and players will likely always perform well but at least they won't have the gear advantage. This has basically been requested ad nauseum. Would bring things more in-line with the working EvE model and give new players a reason to focus on core skills before ramping up to proto gear (conceptually, the early SP focus in this game is the polar opposite of EvE).
FATPrincess - XOXO Shining Flame Amarr Empire 46	Posted - 2013.07.02 03:23:00 - [52] - Quote Kane Fyea wrote: Eno Raef wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: I am working on a rewrite of matchmaking as we speak. We share the same concern. Militia and standard gear only matches seems like a great way. Sure some teams and players will likely always perform well but at least they won't have the gear advantage. I'd rather have a no squad game mode. This please. Gear is irrelevant when you have communication and greater amount of skill (good players) in the opposing team. Any top corp can easily pubstomp a bunch of randoms while using exile ARs. My std LAV can wreak a full team of random players using proto suits. Gear, K/D ratio, SP, it doesn't matter. Stomping will always exist if 6 man top corp squads are playing the game vs randoms. We only need this and more time in the academy, 10k WP is way too low to get out of the academy. -XOXO
STABBEY WarRavens League of Infamy 32	Posted - 2013.07.02 03:47:00 - [53] - Quote Wow CCP since you have all the time in the world to sit here and delete posts why dont you get off your ass and go answer this post: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=90777&find=unread
Alaika Arbosa Matari Combat Research and Manufacture Inc. Interstellar Murder of Crows 473	Posted - 2013.07.02 03:57:00 - [54] - Quote Kane Fyea wrote: Eno Raef wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: I am working on a rewrite of matchmaking as we speak. We share the same concern. Militia and standard gear only matches seems like a great way. Sure some teams and players will likely always perform well but at least they won't have the gear advantage. I'd rather have a no squad game mode. Why couldn't they both be options? 1) Militia, accepts squads 2) Militia, no squads 3) STD/ADV, accepts squads 4) STD/ADV, no squads 5) PRO/Whatever, accepts squads 6) PRO/Whatever, no squads I think that would be the best of both worlds, I also don't think it would be much harder than doing either option singularly.
Michael Cratar Fenrir's Wolves RUST415 232	Posted - 2013.07.02 04:12:00 - [55] - Quote CAPN' OBVIOUS wrote: But recently a new trend has occurred, the pubstomp! Quote: But recently a new trend has occurred, the pubstomp! Where have you been?
CAPN' OBVIOUS UNOBTANIUM INC General Tso's Alliance 9	Posted - 2013.07.02 04:14:00 - [56] - Quote Michael Cratar wrote: CAPN' OBVIOUS wrote: But recently a new trend has occurred, the pubstomp! Quote: But recently a new trend has occurred, the pubstomp! Where have you been? Different type of pubstomp, go back and read the op
hooc roht Deep Space Republic Top Men. 159	Posted - 2013.07.02 04:23:00 - [57] - Quote Colonel Killar wrote: hooc roht wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: Noc Tempre wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: I am working on a rewrite of matchmaking as we speak. We share the same concern. What is the goals you are trying to achieve when rewriting the matchmaking? Are you trying to balance skill? SP? WP? Prototype vs Prototype? Shorter queue times? I understand matchmaking is very complex, but also you can't please everyone. What is CCP trying to achieve here? Well the goal is simple, create an even probability for a side to win or lose with the least dependence on individual players. How that is achieved I will write about in a dev blog when we are further along with our simulation. Bad idea. if one team is given 3 high powered (high Sp) players and the other team gets the same what happens when one or two decide to AFK? You get a pub stomp....and a pub stomp that can be pretty easy to manipulate into happening. Better to focus on matchmaking on putting like powered players with like powered players then too worry about w/l ratio. The SP tiers has already been suggested and even implemented with the academy. Why reinvent the wheel for a "goal" that no one cares about when the problem is plain to see: low powered players being stomped by high power players not based on skill or strategy but simply because they have acquired more SP. Also why is it taking so long? Why are you dragging your feet? Don't say it is complicated because it is not at all. The academy took how long to put in the game? A day? A week? A rudimentary matchmaking system can be put in the game at any time (matchmaking is server side not client side)...and should have been put in months ago. Would you like a free trip to Iceland to be made to look like the fool that you are. A CCP employee comes to the forums and full on lies to us. And you make the choice to call me a fool? Brilliant move fan boy. Keep on defending the indefensible. Note: the lie was about faction warfare and PC not being intended to draw away high level players from pub matches. Link to lie: https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=998548#post998548 Pretty sure everything the dev wrote here is filled with lies but this one is the most easily provable. I am kind of sick it...and i am kind of sick of fan boys defending it.
Eno Raef KILL-EM-QUICK RISE of LEGION 4	Posted - 2013.07.02 04:25:00 - [58] - Quote Pubstomping has been going on for possibly every build and coordinated teams and players better adept at getting kills will most likely win their matches. Having militia and standard only gear matches will reduce the degree of stomping, perhaps to an acceptable amount, even thought it won't remove it completely.
FATPrincess - XOXO Shining Flame Amarr Empire 46	Posted - 2013.07.02 04:48:00 - [59] - Quote Eno Raef wrote: Pubstomping has been going on for possibly every build and coordinated teams and players better adept at getting kills will most likely win their matches. Having militia and standard only gear matches will reduce the degree of stomping, perhaps to an acceptable amount, even thought it won't remove it completely. Gear matchmaking over complicate things. What about people (like me) who run ADV suit with proto weapons? Proto suits with exile AR? It separates the player base way too much. Please stop suggesting gear matchmaking. -XOXO
The Robot Devil BetaMax. CRONOS. 500	Posted - 2013.07.02 05:13:00 - [60] - Quote CCP Nullarbor wrote: FATPrincess - XOXO wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: Noc Tempre wrote: CCP Nullarbor wrote: I am working on a rewrite of matchmaking as we speak. We share the same concern. What is the goals you are trying to achieve when rewriting the matchmaking? Are you trying to balance skill? SP? WP? Prototype vs Prototype? Shorter queue times? I understand matchmaking is very complex, but also you can't please everyone. What is CCP trying to achieve here? Well the goal is simple, create an even probability for a side to win or lose with the least dependence on individual players. How that is achieved I will write about in a dev blog when we are further along with our simulation. This isn't the concern. The concern here is that the big corps make squads to stomp players who aren't in a squad, which is the majority of the newer players. By increasing squad size this got even worse because now there are more "good" players stomping everyone in the other team. There are 2 simpler ways to solve this: -Increase WP to 50,000 for the battke academy. Make the new players play more vs new players. -Make a no squads matchmaking mode. Those with squads get to play with those who are in squads as well. Those who don't have squads or aren't interested in squads get to play with same random, unorganized people. K/D ratio and minimum SP matchmaking separates the player base way too much and can lead to empty or uneven lobbies. -XOXO Not sure you understand what I mean by probability. If a fully stacked team joins a battle then the probability of them winning is pretty high, the job of matchmaking is to recognise that and even the odds. Hence we will be taking squads into consideration when building teams. K/D ratio and SP are not good metrics on their own for determining the probability of a win. What is a good indicator? Low player count really hurts also.



Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.