9 hours ago, JCNB said:
blah blah
And you make no arguments what so ever, but hey some one has to be the forum whiner, since WPKs are gone, it is your time to shine buddy.
9 hours ago, Spongejohn said:
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.
If you are trying to measure a skill, every single factor is important, because all of them pile up on top of each other, and even the slightest wrong decision can mean a player totally dominates the game or being totally useless dragging his team down, but at the end players skill is un-measurable, it can be attempted to be estimated, predicted and extrapolated from bigger sample pool, yet it will never ensure the performance and influence in a singular game, simply due to the fact that this game so much variety of factors and situations and a human being can not possibly equally good at all of them, and the “better” overall the player is, the more variables are added in his relative performance. It is much easier to predict an influence of a newbie - he’ll be pretty bad no mat he flies, but “tops” are completely different story - get a Takamina in a Fed healer in a beacon hunt on Easter Mining station (especially spawning on a team that comes from the open), and see his team get wrecked.
Match Maker can not be ideal or perfect for everybody, it can only cater to a group of player base, as of now it caters to a player base that constantly demanded bigger and faster games, we already had time frame when MM tried to cater to skill separation, did you forget overwhelming amount of xxxx on forums regarding that? Yet even then games were won by one sided scores.
What you basically want a separation of all the people with “<1.1” Win ratio form all the “>1.2” with small floating buffer in between, I get it, and it make perfect sense and i would love the same, but this means much longer wait times, much smaller game sizes on average, and still most of the games will be won/lost with one sided scores, and still there are plenty of those players in higher bracket that only want to take something like Gauss Gunship or Plasma-gun strafing CovOp and simply collect frags, those will be the 1st to come instead of you on forums and start arguing how everything is xxxx again and how it is worse than before.
I find current MM not great or awesome, it is fine as a model ground catering to the majority of game-population, keeping that same population count up. As long as MM priorities and target audience stays the same, you can only fine tune it that much, which will not solve the problem one sided results, and one guy carrying his team and still lose.
Just recently there were some changes to Beacon hunt game mode -> timers were a bit tuned, just a bit, but did you notice how Beacon Hunt mode on average results in more close objective scores at the end, than before? There always will be one sided game, they can not be eliminated, period, but appearance of close games can be drastically improved via game modes them-self, it is possible to accommodate and compensate to a certain degree of a MM results, because no matter what one team will be better than another that is why one team wins and another loses (with extremely rare draws)
