Just some feedback regarding MM in T3 and T5

4874076 · August 8, 2016, 5:15pm

1 hour ago, xKostyan said:

So what you are saying you would rather wait 30 minutes to get a 4v4 with equally “skilled” players instead?

Said nothing about waiting times or match size.

Point as always is in a predetermined nature of matches now, as in every silly score example no player could claim to take my place and make any difference to the match outcome. Something which spits in the face of the very idea of competative gaming. Neither was this a problem before without any added waiting time.

1 hour ago, xKostyan said:

Squads of 3+ can not late join.

and the answer for the other 90%+ of players? Lemme guess ‘git gud’ in an enviornment where its clear it does not matter what they do.

xKostyan · August 8, 2016, 5:30pm

15 minutes ago, JCNB said:

Something which spits in the face of the very idea of competative gaming. Neither was this a problem before without any added waiting time.

BS. People have always complained about “predetermined matches”, no matter the change to MM, balance or game modes, this complaint is always there, be it forums, corp/pub chat or any other communication means.

In bigger games 8v8+ sizes a single player should not be able to single handedly win a game, and capability to do is the “spit in competitive gaming philosophy face”, he should be able to contribute or influence towards a victory, which is not the same.

Majority of you around here demanded bigger sized game and shorter queue - you got them, now deal with it. MM can not make people play better, or pick proper ships in right situation, majority of the so called “lobsided games” are in fact arbitrarily balanced, and most of you should have learned by now that efficiency scores are not a representation of a “balance” at all.

4874076 · August 8, 2016, 6:09pm

15 minutes ago, xKostyan said:

he should be able to contribute or influence towards a victory, which is not the same.

most of you should have learned by now that efficiency scores are not a representation of a “balance” at all.

Should but cant.

Scores are simply a yardstick of everything that was done by a player and nobody compared them to a balance, only how much ‘influence’ they were having.

Individual player actions added up are both the cause of a win and the reason for failure, this nobody is disputing. Only that now for many games they simply dont add up and instead have no influence at all. No close losses in my images and yet the lions share of influence. But i have said all this and i assume you can read.

One of your better attempts to derail a discussion 7/10.

30889229 · August 8, 2016, 6:16pm

IMO larger games are mocu more diff tio be controlled by a single player. A year ago a good player could rule the day and win a game by himself cuz there were only 4 peoplz on each side so everybody was more important. Also u had crazy stuff with R13 implant and stuff, longer hde time for LRF, and so on which made it easier to rule ta day. Cuz this is no longer so easy goo players now cry like little baby cuz no longer win 90% of games soo sad.

Buuuut. it is still possible to win often, u must go with time, yes. New good ships, new exploits nbut u need to stay up 2 date and u must change tactics. Control of many enemies is possible if u are superior but demands specia ship and tactic.Easy way is sqaud.

13427972 · August 8, 2016, 6:24pm

No one is asking to make possible “rambo” situation where one player rules above a whole team.

Having more than one out of ten “fair/close” game is possible. Putting 5 good player on one side and one/two on the other means: killing the balance. This is happening, there must be something wrong about how mm handle “player rating” (and by that i mean whatever stat/s game take in account)

xKostyan · August 8, 2016, 6:59pm

23 minutes ago, JCNB said:

Should but cant.

Every single player with >50% win rate is a living proof of capability to influence a battle.

9 minutes ago, Spongejohn said:

No one is asking to make possible “rambo” situation where one player rules above a whole team.

Having more than one out of ten “fair/close” game is possible. Putting 5 good player on one side and one/two on the other means: killing the balance. This is happening, there must be something wrong about how mm handle “player rating” (and by that i mean whatever stat/s game take in account)

Problem is that pretty much everyone measures pretty much every games closeness and fairness by a final score, while alot of games a very close by a situational measurement while end score is 0-700.

Here is an example that is way to common:

4 games in a row, in every game players are 90% the same and on same teams, with exception of wild randoms that score 0 efficiency anyways.

1st game, com recon, cap dies early team A lose with 0 score, enemy has 1500+ scores

2d beacon hunt on small map team a get a godd balced setup with brawlers and heals/disables, team b goes snipers/xxxx/taclers - team b gets fucked with no lube, descripancy in final scores in thousands.

3rd game beacon hunt on a huge map team a has same setup, team be mass inty rush, team a get fucked with no lube, same descripancies in scores

4th game team battle both team ended up with balanced setup, finale score ±5 kills which is nothing.

Point is, performance of a sinhle player is never the same when looked from isolated game perpective, on top of that even if he has same performance in 2 games, his actual influence is tottaly different.

Star conflict is the definition of the game that is dominated by “snow balling” simply due to how complex the whole game is, which is extremely obvious in big sized games.

In order to create wins singlehandedly one either learn how to create such moments or how how to contribute in creation of those, because having having 90% of team score and all the kills/beacons w.e. does not automaticaly grants you a win in most of the games. I am sure most of you won games for your team while having next to no efficiency scores by doing something important or creating the key opportunity.

And at the end alot of the whining around here looks like “this f apple is rotten” and then ptocedeto show an image of a banana sticking out of monkeys as.

4874076 · August 8, 2016, 7:00pm

26 minutes ago, Spongejohn said:

No one is asking to make possible “rambo” situation where one player rules above a whole team.

Having more than one out of ten “fair/close” game is possible. Putting 5 good player on one side and one/two on the other means: killing the balance. This is happening, there must be something wrong about how mm handle “player rating” (and by that i mean whatever stat/s game take in account)

Yeah agree, look at rennie’s post. All one side has some names to it the other has not. Poor player choices are not the only reason for a 0/34 score in team battle. This would have been news a while ago, not so now, very common occurance.

30889229 · August 8, 2016, 7:05pm

MM has been on for several years. Stats of players have been same. So devs had several years to figure that out. Asuming they are not monkeys hitting on keyboard random they either figured it out by now or its just not possible. It might be that stats are so unreliable that its just not possible, for ex. one might raise its win/loss due to squadplay and be an Ace in soloplay, or one might have come back after long time and fly terrible and so on.

13427972 · August 8, 2016, 9:46pm

A fair match is a game hard to win not because your team is bad, but because equal skills are involved. Numbers ad eff here is not the point.

I know what you mean, if you take in account only numbers, people can be misleaded. But that’s not what we are talking about.
For exemple this game:

1 kill against 10. Sure it could have happened that the game was tense and close till the last 2 min where the team crashed finally against each others and the result of “measuring epeen” went bad.
Instead nope. We managed to make a kill just 'cause someone suicided on our destro. Instead those 10 kills from enemy started from the beginning.
We didn’t get totally owned c’ause the majority of my team was or hiding away in tacklers or jumping to the edge of the map in LRFs. Also some of the enemyes where focusing our destro that I managed to heal a lot. That’s it. no gg here, just sick game.
This was an unbalanced, bad match. And that’s not just one… instead a lot of matches (if not the 95% of them as I stated befor) are that bad.

Team should have pretty much equal numbers of medium/high skilled players. This is not happening. And again:

Quote

client: ADD_PLAYER 0 (OzKent [Ninja], 415626) status 4 team 1
22:19:07.338 | client: ADD_PLAYER 1 (1vovan1, 722325) status 4 team 2
22:19:07.338 | client: ADD_PLAYER 2 (Mapc, 355279) status 4 team 1
22:19:07.338 | client: ADD_PLAYER 3 (AngrySM, 50335) status 4 team 2
22:19:07.338 | client: ADD_PLAYER 4 (SpongeJohn [OWL], 880916) status 2 team 1 group 2783605
22:19:07.338 | client: ADD_PLAYER 5 (Erador [Ninja], 330178) status 2 team 2 group 2783701
22:19:07.338 | client: ADD_PLAYER 6 (g4borg [OWL], 239688) status 4 team 1 group 2783605
22:19:07.338 | client: ADD_PLAYER 7 (millanbel [OWL], 490045) status 6 team 2 group 2783701
22:19:07.341 | client: ADD_PLAYER 4 (SpongeJohn [OWL], 880916) status 4 team 1 group 2783605
22:19:07.341 | client: ADD_PLAYER 5 (Erador [Ninja], 330178) status 4 team 2 group 2783701
22:19:07.420 | client: got init message (and 1st snapshot). ping 100
22:19:08.737 | ====== level started: ‘levels\area1\s1338_pandora_anomaly’ success ======
22:19:09.874 | client: ADD_PLAYER 8 (Triche [], 105908) status 6 team 1 group 2783722
22:19:09.885 | client: ADD_PLAYER 9 (niknak63 [], 2177940) status 6 team 2
22:19:09.893 | client: ADD_PLAYER 10 (Miert [], 61017) status 6 team 1 group 2783722
22:19:09.902 | client: ADD_PLAYER 11 (PACATOSUL [Ace], 1464195) status 6 team 2
22:19:11.202 | client: ADD_PLAYER 10 (Miert [Deft], 61017) status 4 team 1 group 2783722
22:19:11.370 | client: ADD_PLAYER 7 (millanbel [OWL], 490045) status 4 team 2 group 2783701
22:19:11.482 | client: ADD_PLAYER 11 (PACATOSUL [Ace], 1464195) status 4 team 2
22:19:12.376 | client: ADD_PLAYER 8 (Triche [Deft], 105908) status 4 team 1 group 2783722
22:19:13.673 | client: ADD_PLAYER 9 (niknak63 [IT4LY], 2177940) status 4 team 2
22:19:31.196 | client: ADD_PLAYER 12 (I3at0n [Ninja], 309955) status 6 team 1
22:19:31.206 | client: ADD_PLAYER 13 (IAM [333], 1899862) status 6 team 2
22:19:39.894 | client: ADD_PLAYER 14 (Tuwok [Havoc], 589816) status 6 team 1
22:19:39.899 | client: ADD_PLAYER 15 (smersch76UA [NASA], 1193479) status 6 team 2
22:19:43.006 | client: ADD_PLAYER 15 (smersch76UA [NASA], 1193479) status 4 team 2
22:19:43.397 | client: ADD_PLAYER 14 (Tuwok [Havoc], 589816) status 4 team 1
22:19:53.928 | client: ADD_PLAYER 16 (Vollandemort [], 1350372) status 6 team 1
22:19:53.930 | client: ADD_PLAYER 17 (rzuf1111 [], 841529) status 6 team 2

Guess how it ended for Erador and Mill in team 2? And it happened like that 4 time in a row. We got the Deft team and also the better randoms, than at the fifth game they got the deft team and we get Koldrun. 4 win and a lost game.
Sure they/we tried hard and in the end a couple of those game were actually good. But this pattern happen also when there are less vets involved, which send to the ground the quality (and the fun) of the match.

P.s. the quote thinghy doesn’t work for me I mean that I can’t use it, it keep quoting old stuffs instead of what I select.

xKostyan · August 8, 2016, 11:08pm

1 hour ago, Spongejohn said:

I don’t need explanations on how a battle goes. A fair match is a game hard to win not because your team is bad, but because equal skills are involved.

There is no such thing as equal skill, MM has to work with whoever is online and available at immediate request, otherwise your queue time will skyrocket through the roof.

WR/KD/TotalPvP&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; 1.33/2.26/16653&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;(SpongeJohn [OWL], 880916) status 2 team 1 group 2783605 1.45/1.56/13297&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;(g4borg [OWL], 239688) status 4 team 1 group 2783605 1.09/1.59/4439&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;(Mapc, 355279) status 4 team 1 1.68/1.68/10506&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;(Triche [], 105908) status 6 team 1 group 2783722 1.33/1.74/5548&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;(Miert [], 61017) status 6 team 1 group 2783722 1.68/5.33/9345&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;(I3at0n [Ninja], 309955) status 6 team 1 0.84/0.55/1578&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;(Tuwok [Havoc], 589816) status 6 team 1 0.97/1.13/11582&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;(Vollandemort [], 1350372) status 6 team 1 ------------ 1.29/2.05/9119 ======================================================= WR/KD/TotalPvP 0.84/0.93/2283&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;(1vovan1, 722325) status 4 team 2 1.05/2.63/2524&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;(AngrySM, 50335) status 4 team 2 1.63/2.3/9466&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;(Erador [Ninja], 330178) status 2 team 2 group 2783701 1.0/1.57/13372&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;(millanbel [OWL], 490045) status 6 team 2 group 2783701 0.8/0.34/3195&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;(niknak63 [], 2177940) status 6 team 2 1.15/1.62/14709&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;(PACATOSUL [Ace], 1464195) status 6 team 2 0.9/0.67/7166&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;(IAM [333], 1899862) status 6 team 2 1.06/0.9/9678&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;(smersch76UA [NASA], 1193479) status 6 team 2 ------------ 1.05/1.37/7799 ========================================================

Even this is a statistically “fairly” close match up, yes team 1 is slightly better, but this is nowhere near “oh fcuking MM”. Winning in star conflict in general with small discrepancy in final score is really hard. no matter how “balanced” the game is, and team battle is not the only game mode, yet it is easiest to have “close” games in it.

The way “objectives-maps-team compositions-player skill in current situation” relation set up in Star Conflict, having a win with close “objective” points is really hard, and that is caused not by MM, but by the game mechanics and how objectives work themselves

Here is over simplifying example

1v1 Team battle in covops, me vs Hellionexus, fairly “close” match up according to some players, and Hellionexus>Me by others, w/e

yet i will win 80%-20% in kills, or even more it will be absolutely one sided result, yet the difference in what is known as “skill” is slightest at the most. Then extrapolate it into 8v8 with people flying whole xxxx tons of builds, and level of experience in such roles/builds in different situations, and we get edge cases on top of edge cases on top of edge cases, resulting in “domination” of one side.

Until game modes are not changed, no matter how much all of you complain about MM resulting in tuning or w/e, there always be a huge discrepancy in final scores and team performances from objective perspectives.

You want close games, then you have to:

1) Rework, heavily tweak game mode objective mechanics, that must accommodate for “run away snowballing”, currently getting 3-4 kills at the beginning of the Combat Recon/Team Battle can easily be extrapolated into 20-30 kills difference, simply due to the human factor. OR 30-40 (team got wiped for w/e reason-> respawn-> arrival to beacon) seconds of controlling 3 beacons after 1st clash in Domination is pretty much a GG that will result in 90% score -10% or even 100%-0%

2) Create ways to “come back” into the game for losing team, a lot of team based games have that - people with on “hot streaks” worth more points/gold/xp/w.e. if killed, or time based, or something else.

3) Measuring players skill has to be done in overly complicated way simply because how star conflict is

4) Significantly Increase queue times and more strict separation of arbitrary skill in matches.

thing as equal skill, MM has to work with whoever is online and available at immediate request, otherwise your queue time will skyrocket through the roof.

Just blaming MM is pointless, it is hardly the problem and with current setup it is hardly the root cause of all the problems, it is actually not that bad.

P.S. I hate new forum formatting

13427972 · August 9, 2016, 6:36am

Quick reply then I’ll edit later: Kost you forgot OzKent on the top of team 1. Apart that (with all due respect for those players), in team 2 there where just 2 good players, 2 half decent but with bad fits and the rest not whorth to notice on the battlefield.
Team 1? 7 good player. And it went like this over and over.

37718502 · August 9, 2016, 9:08am

Each mode has its own balance with teamsize.
For example: Beacon hunt has the best balance with very big teams(to deny cap/to recover from loses while you have the beacon) contrary to domination as there more = less winchance because you can hardly cap a beacon w/o being interrupted.
Teambattle is the same as Beacon. Can be totally unbalanced with small teams but can become very balanced(or totally roflstomping).
Combat recon is a mix. Can be good in both cases.

xKostyan · August 9, 2016, 2:04pm

7 hours ago, Spongejohn said:

Team 1? 7 good player.

4874076 · August 9, 2016, 8:41pm

Todays gem. Late join domination.

Spoiler

screenshot-160809-204606.jpg.3e3ea68a76c87f2e6067035f15e3e83f.jpg

Started as a triple cap, got half my kills securing a single beacon for the team which took around two minutes… alone. Who knows what my team did in this time as i joined them in the middle of the map to secure our 2nd. A little back and forth with kills to secure our advantage.

Finally… maybe i could help turn this around, nope. Got taken out by a Grey falcon in my little Kris s. Fair enough im way outranked and outta juice by the time he got to me, paid for my death with his own straight away. I didnt make it easy for him (the teams point leader and ‘killer’).

Before i could respawn back to triple cap and FIN. Who knew i had such influence in a game that was ‘balanced’ before i showed up, ruining the straight point run of the other team.

They had more inties and i started on triple cap, so the lesson here seems to be why try when you see that. Be one of those discon halfwits cause your wasting everyones time otherwise.

The very next game in R15 a win. I didnt feel like trying very hard after the R10 debacle.

Spoiler

winner.jpg.f52129cf78822429fc744b72e7203b6c.jpg

Missing a player too.

30889229 · August 9, 2016, 9:33pm

In the first game both have some points, seems balanced to me. Also the MM managed to get u into the weaker team, as it should be.

Second game should indeed not happen. Not in T5. Cant imagine how that was possible. Perhaps new reward mechanisms force experienced players into lower tiers and T5 is now a lotta not fully synergized new players? Then ur tackler style combat would be unknown to them and they might get steamrlled.

Well devs would say “make a bug report”…lol

xKostyan · August 10, 2016, 6:05am

9 hours ago, JCNB said:

Todays gem. Late join domination.

Reveal hidden contents

Started as a triple cap, got half my kills securing a single beacon for the team which took around two minutes… alone. Who knows what my team did in this time as i joined them in the middle of the map to secure our 2nd. A little back and forth with kills to secure our advantage.

Finally… maybe i could help turn this around, nope. Got taken out by a Grey falcon in my little Kris s. Fair enough im way outranked and outta juice by the time he got to me, paid for my death with his own straight away. I didnt make it easy for him (the teams point leader and ‘killer’).

Before i could respawn back to triple cap and FIN. Who knew i had such influence in a game that was ‘balanced’ before i showed up, ruining the straight point run of the other team.

They had more inties and i started on triple cap, so the lesson here seems to be why try when you see that. Be one of those discon halfwits cause your wasting everyones time otherwise.

The very next game in R15 a win. I didnt feel like trying very hard after the R10 debacle.

Hide contents

Missing a player too.

Do you even realise that both of these games are literally the backup data for what I AM SAYING? Let me repeat it again:

_ “Due to the complexity of our game, the team that played slightly better will win with dominating score more often than not, even if the teams are arbitrarily balanced” _

_ -xKostyan _

Read it as many times as it takes to hammer it into your head, and every time you whine about balance make sure to keep this side of the game in your argument!

Here are the team stats from the 2d game and that is with the fact you had LESS players, now tell me with the straight face those were fcuked by MM. which brings us to the post i made earlier regarding game modes and objectives.

WR/KD/TotalPvP
0.96/1.08/3801        infabulous
1.56/3.26/14954        JCNB
1.27/1.34/3271        Hundur
1.22/2.37/4125        Siebenstreich
1.10/0.90/9637        spaser
1.06/1.93/12524        Baikal52
1.35/1.39/4600        SnowBARS87
0.89/0.85/1547        BentusI
0.69/0.29/1885        RIVichsu24

----TEAM 1 Avg----
1.12/1.49/6260


========================================================
WR/KD/TotalPvP    
0.93/1.09/13001        Calingulinferie
0.76/0.47/1278        Kastvip
1.28/1.78/7352        AvengerRabbit
0.93/0.90/4307        Arctica
1.14/1.31/14487        STARIK
0.89/1.05/4165        HudsonHornet
0.83/0.48/3877        XoMo4ka96
0.94/1.08/7538        Goauld
1.04/2.67/8310        BlackImran
1.17/1.55/4401        Valero7777

----TEAM 2 Avg----
1.00/1.238/6871

13427972 · August 10, 2016, 6:34am

“Due to the complexity of our game, the team that played slightly better will win with dominating score more often than not, even if the teams are arbitrarily balanced”

-xKostyan

Kost you can say that over and over as you wish, but if you don’t get why those 2 team are unbalanced than why are we even discussing?
It’s all about how mm recognize good players. The fact that it doesn’t, even if avarage numbers of both teams are equals(ish), lead to this.
No one wants longer que or small matches, just a “tuned” mm that recognize better the skilled pilots.
There is a HUGE difference between pilots with 1.20+ win ratio/2+ kills and 1.0(+/-) wr, 2.0- kills.

Also I think a bigger “buffer” will improve the mm, let more pilots wait in que instead of adding them one by one and balance that buffer of players with teams already in. Probably something like that is already happenening but it can be improved. Even if it lead to slightly more waiting times (seconds, not minutes. Since so far pressing the launch button is pretty much an instajoin).

Ps. OT once again the new forum and formatting bugs are killing me, damn it’s a nightmare.

xKostyan · August 10, 2016, 6:50am

20 minutes ago, Spongejohn said:

“Due to the complexity of our game, the team that played slightly better will win with dominating score more often than not, even if the teams are arbitrarily balanced”

-xKostyan

Kost you can say that over and over as you wish, but if you don’t get why those 2 team are unbalanced than why are we even discussing?

And i will, because there is always room for the tuning, but the fine tuning of MM only will yield next to no result in “close games” department. If you truly want “close games” by objectives, you should be looking at the problem form different perspective.

20 minutes ago, Spongejohn said:

There is a HUGE difference between pilots with 1.20+ win ratio/2+ kills and 1.0(+/-) wr, 2.0- kills.

This statement in itself is false, because you are leaving out to many variables which some of them are but not limited too: ship ranks, total PvP battles, region of play, roles he mostly play in what game-modes and builds

4874076 · August 10, 2016, 7:35am

You are a professional arguement machine kost. Take the bits and pieces of info that back up what you are saying, use it to distort what has been said and ignore the rest. Thats not a game i play and wont be dragged into it. I C U.

If what im posting really backs up what your saying then… ¯_(ツ)_/¯

Ill keep it up, its nice to support others.

9 hours ago, theNoob said:

In the first game both have some points, seems balanced to me. Also the MM managed to get u into the weaker team, as it should be.

Second game should indeed not happen. Not in T5. Cant imagine how that was possible. Perhaps new reward mechanisms force experienced players into lower tiers and T5 is now a lotta not fully synergized new players? Then ur tackler style combat would be unknown to them and they might get steamrlled.

Well devs would say “make a bug report”…lol

The 1st game this time around was more about the story, lost count of the amount of times my teams continued success seems to wholly depend on me doing everything for them. The second i die we go back to a triple cap, this type of thing has been happening a lot more recently. BOOM ‘coms link lost’… ‘our beacon has been captured’ ‘our beacon has been captured’. I dont wanna be the rambo and solo everything however im being left with no other choice but to make the attempt.

2nd game 5 of the enemy team i have played v and with before so no my tackler ‘style’ combat would not be unknown to them. Between them they have 50k battles, so not really possible they never seen a tackler before. Additionally the real monster on our team is guy in a lrf, he just got lucky i suppose. Team had never heard of lrfs too.

13427972 · August 10, 2016, 7:53am

1 hour ago, xKostyan said:

This statement in itself is false, because you are leaving out to many variables which some of them are but not limited too: ship ranks, total PvP battles, region of play, roles he mostly play in what game-modes and builds

Never said that those things doesn’t matters. But those are just less important than other parameters. The more you overengineering on those, the more mm will not work.

To me tbh the perfect solution wuold be letting team know when and where there are other teams in que (not the REAL numbers just a check. There are squads in a given range of rank? yes or no). Organized team play is mostly the better way to counter “randomness”, but that’s my 2cents and I’m not a game designer.

One thing I know for sure, the parameters that mm is using now are irrilevant and lead to broken games.

I only wish I could have more than 1mb upload to show one of my game sessions. You wuold change your mind instantly.