One lesson to learn from WoT (Squads)

Suggestions Social
21

Mister bold guy, i can read without your bold typing. Nobody is trying to take out the squad system, i just said that.

Maybe you aren’t. Others in this thread are. Using bold type is a simple yet effective method to emphasize certain key sentences in a text, making it easier to remember them and increasing the efficiency of thought processes. This is simply a common application of psychology.

 

At this moment at least, when you are matched with 3 bots, and 4 guys in a squad in the other team, it means that yes, you WILL loose. I’m not denying that there is a chance to win. But it’s so small, it doesn’t even count, i’m not going to try to play another 3 days at T4 hoping i will beat that team once out of 20 times, or be the lucky extra guy to join them.

Bots are usually evened out with an equal number of bots. Also if you have that many problems with T4 why not play T3 until you get better? I can play T4 with T3 ships no problem.

 

What i ask is simple! You have a 4 man squad, you HAVE to be matched with another 4 man squad, nobody is asking you to play alone! What is the problem with that, it’s not fun anymore? If because of the low population you won’t find another team of 4 to be matched against, tough luck for you 4 people! But there should be 8 people online at tier 4 no? Specially if teams are as nice and easy to get as you say. If not, i say again, tough luck! You can’t just farm people all night long.

So what is the problem of being one of those 8 people? Why does everyone else have to carry you to a win? No need to make ridiculous waiting times for other people because you are too lazy to find yourself a squad or don’t want to join a corporation.

 

Also, for all the people asking for 8 man teams, or 16 man teams: that’s all nice and sweet, but why not take advantage of the experience of another game, you know witch one. You make a special bracket with a special matchmaker for big team games, like the companies in you know what game :slight_smile: You want a team of 8 vs randoms? Are you absolutely insane?

I already mentioned that with proper coordination neither teamspeak nor a squad is actually required to win vs premade teams. Why don’t you try watching the map and informing teammates/telling them what to do? As long as you stay polite and give reasonable commands they will usually obey.

 

Also, are you telling me to use global chat to organise players? Seriously? It’s hard to see the chat, that’s an interface problem, but let’s get over it. I see some people trying to coordinate, do you know the answers they usually get? They start with S T and end with F U…get it? That’s how it is…you can’t compare global chat with randoms vs Teamspeak/Skype in a corp. Please.

Did you try using the “hide/show chat” function (eye symbol in the lower left corner). If not I really suggest you do. Yes, the game currently has a lot of trolls in global? So what, ignore them. I’ve made plenty of teams on global before my licence ran out. And yes I can compare since I played both.

22

Bots are usually evened out with an equal number of bots. Also if you have that many problems with T4 why not play T3 until you get better? I can play T4 with T3 ships no problem.

I can play T4 with T3 ships, but the rewards are all T3. What is the point? Rewards are based on the ship you play, not the ships you play against.

I am satisfied with my level of performance, i just played and won a game where i eliminated all 3 stations, in a T4 match, but with randoms. I was lucky the other guys waren’t very good, but hey that’s random for you, you win some, you loose some. Vs teams, there is no random element, you just loose, with a very slim chance of winning.

 

So what is the problem of being one of those 8 people? Why does everyone else have to carry you to a win? No need to make ridiculous waiting times for other people because you are too lazy to find yourself a squad or don’t want to join a corporation.

Somebody has to carry me for a win? What’s the fun in that? No, but against a squad, 1 player can’t make a difference. Not one significant enough. Not in this game. And the game should not force me to play in a team if i don’t want to. It should have team oriented balance, like the one i proposed, team vs team. The que times are around 2-3 minutes anyway, going to 5 minutes at a lower peak time. If in 3 minutes there is no other team to match yours, you want to keep farming people without a team. That is not balanced. It means that to satisfy you 4 guys, all the others that play to relax have to be farmed. Just no. Accept the fact and hope we will keep gaining players and not loosing them in the long run, like they are going to loose me and all the other people bothered by this if they don’t implement team vs team. More people will mean more teams for you to play against. I will be happy for not playing against a team, you will be happy because you’ll be able to play in a team all you want. Right now the main problem causing this is really low population at T4, and this population’s growth will be slowed if this problem is not fixed.

 

 

I already mentioned that with proper coordination neither teamspeak nor a squad is actually required to win vs premade teams. Why don’t you try watching the map and informing teammates/telling them what to do? As long as you stay polite and give reasonable commands they will usually obey.

You are comparing trying to type, hoping to be listened etc, with a hardened farmer team on Teamspeak. Please reconsider.

23

The suggestion forum is not for the discussion about rivalries between corps.

24

I can play T4 with T3 ships, but the rewards are all T3. What is the point? Rewards are based on the ship you play, not the ships you play against.

I am satisfied with my level of performance,

Look I am cutting this discussion short as you’re obviously not intending to listen to anything I say anyway. All I can do is offer you any knowledge or experience I have accumulated while playing this and similar games… What I won’t do is repeat the same thing over and over. Whether you choose to listen to it is your choice.

 

As a quick note tho, if all of your ship slots are T3 ships you will be matched against T3 opponents. The addition was only meant to show that even without T4 ships or a squad it is still possible to compete in T4 matches.

25

Im really confused by this post…

 

im not tryin to troll but if its such an issue to u, why not join a corp or make some ingame friends to play with?

 

i think 4 man platoons are ESSENTIAL to this game succeeding it was the main selling point to me and its the 1 reason that i will pay for a licence (me and several R/L friends play together) if they removed this i would prob stop playin TBH

26

What do you suggest would fix it? squads of 2?

 

I like it how it is currently and hate WOT matchmaking cause when i play it with 4 friends it was either 2 groups of 2, or one group of 3 and a solo. I love being able to play with 4 at a time, and if that means i need to get steamrolled every once in a while while going in solo that’s fine by me.

 

 

Edit-

 

And Ive never seen a botter in star conflict and Im tier 3…

 

Squads of two is essentially the only solution. Raising the total number per game to 15 (after release, obviously) is also an option. This thread is completely  understandable. Playing a game where your input doesn’t influence the outcome of the game at all gets boring, annoying and unattractive. People will leave the game disappointed unless this has an acceptable solution.

 

a) team size increases as you go up the tiers

b) squad of 4 still is limited to what their ships can do. I went back to t1 a while back to play with a friend who had just started the game, and the lack of all the advanced modules, resistances, missiles that I had started taking for granted and using missiles with really hurt. I still managed to get into third place while I easily achieved first place back when I started.

c) In higher tiers squads of 4 are so common, it balances each other out most of the time

 

Also I would ask you to please stop comparing this game to WoT. Enough people do it already. This game is NOT WoT. It has an entirely DIFFERENT gameplay mechanic. Things that apply in WoT do NOT apply in Star Conflict. Also I agree with cyrigal that the party system in WoT was horrid.

World of Tanks is one of the most successful games that has been released in quite a long time (excluding mainstream releases). Star Conflict is essentially the exact same as World of Tanks. You’re welcome to disagree with it, but it doesn’t make it false. Over half the reviews that have been written about Star Conflict call the game ‘WoT in Space’, and for good reason. It follows the exact same experience model with a few minor changes. It’s like comparing Call of Duty to Battlefield. Same game with a few noticeable changes.

 

There really isn’t anything wrong with 4 man squads, mainly because that the opposing team has the chance to have the same thing. I usually play with 3 man squad on tier 1 games, and we do have a balanced win loss. Despite given the advantage of communication. At times squads of 4 in other tech levels lose to a random team. When it comes to corps, squads, teams, ship selection, usually you should take into account that you can do the same thing any other player can in a game.

Though it is understandable, a team with more communication might be more effective than one without. But even so the effectiveness of a player usually determines the outcome of a game and this goes for any game, not just this one.

So you’re telling me that having 50% of a team being made before the matchmaker even does anything doesn’t have enough influence on a game to ruin it? On top of that, this statement is absolutely ridiculous: “mainly because that the opposing team has the chance to have the same thing.” Chance should never be calculated into a formula which has the potential to make or break a game. To me the solutions are simple; either raise the maximum player cap per game or reduce the amount of players allowed to party.

 

 

tl;dr

Allowing 50% of one team to be grouped together (perhaps the entire team if two groups of 4 joined on the same team) would allow too much influence being placed on a match, thus making most matches entirely unfair and out of the normal solo gamers’ hands. This has an entire capability of breaking the game and should not be ignored.

27

What if the match making system, matched people who have a squad of 4, with another squad of 4…

Or even allow squads of 8, but only those players will be against another “premade” squad.

28

What if the match making system, matched people who have a squad of 4, with another squad of 4…

Or even allow squads of 8, but only those players will be against another “premade” squad.

 

Those squads would never get any games.

29

What if the match making system, matched people who have a squad of 4, with another squad of 4…

Or even allow squads of 8, but only those players will be against another “premade” squad.

 

 

they hav said they plan to implement this much like tanks ‘company battles’

 

the main point bein over looked by every one is THIS IS BETA! the pop is still low they r tryin to implement as many mechanics and test them as they can. until a short while ago higher tier fights were 12 per side where a 4man plat wasnt as big an iffluence etc. and i wouldnt b suprised to see that they plan the fights to get bigger when the population allows, but for now they prob dont wanna lose players who would want to play with their friends (like me) as this would just hurt community overal and increase the problem

 

At most they could drop it to 3 man plats but 2 man? that would make a LOT of people quit

30

Match making in regards to having a balance between squads is something that needs to happen NOW. I understand this is a beta. Having said that when you roll into a match and you have a four man squad from NASA with a fifth NASA member (just bad luck i guess) and a four man squad from PULSE and all you have is a pure pug then its just pure rubbish. Again i know this is a beta. Argue population numbers all you want but implementing a MM that can take squads into account surely isn’t that hard.

Getting a MM that can balance out tiers would also be nice. Having just come from a game where my team had four T3 ships whilst the enemy had only 1 T3 ship AND 2 T1’s was just utter garbage. They stood no chance and in the end were just farmed. Three of their ships simply left the battle.

IF they want a positive rep to spread about this game and raise the population numbers addressing this issue is a very good place to start. I for one enjoyed my time but i’m out and wont be spending any money on this game nor will i be recommending it to my friends (all of which are waiting for a filler game until Star Citizen comes out) until this particular issue has been resolved. As far as a BETA goes my time in the game was fairly enjoyable and smooth without many problems. The team balancing is one that can’t be ignored however. I wish the devs the best of luck and i hope they address the needs of the community a bit faster in the future.   

31

In current situation and number of player per battle everything above 2 members per squad is overkill.

Scenario from yesterday, T1/2 battle, me solo in random arcade as captain on one side, squad of 3 players on other side in T2 interceptors. What do you think how many seconds passed before i was dead? Around 30, all 3 warped at my position and that was it, end of battle.

Solution would be:

  1. With current number of players per battle, limit them on 2 players per squad.

  2. Implementing new mode “Corporate battles” for those who need bigger squads and better cooperation in battles.

 

My 2 cents.

32

Corps, etc. are irrelevant to squad size. Sure corps have a sense of community, but that’s different. there are plenty of solo mercs out there that group up and have fun together. and that’s really what the game is about. 

 

If you want to talk true competitive nature, and balance, there are a lot more things that need to be adjusted before you worry about squad size. Squad size would be the last thing on that long, long, long list. 

 

 

This was mentioned and touched on before, but there are many ways to handle this kind of situation the OP is talking about. 

 

I only played WoT briefly. I did not enjoy it, so i did not play long. The MMing is absolutely terrible. And any issue with that can be adjusted by MMing. WoT doesn’t even attempt to balance MMing. 

 

To use an Example, League of Legends uses a numerical system, that is hidden from playeres eyes, to  match players together. This is referred to as ‘ELO’. Why, I’m not sure because it’s far from a true ELO system. but it has a name. so we’ll call it what it is. 

 

When you group up with players, you get an artificial boost to your ELO score. IE: if me and a friend are both ranked 1200 by the system. if we group together, it does not average our scores and say we are 1200. Instead it averages our scores and then adds a boost. We’re in a coordinated group, so we actually play better than we normally do. IE: our combined average ELO is something more like 1250. So we will see slightly stronger opponents than we normally do. Now, if we group with 2 other friends for a group of 4, a further boost is added. IE: if we all have 1200 rating, our combined average will actually be something like 1300 or greater. This provides balance to the MMing, as coordinated groups play better. 

 

Furthermore, they’ve recently added another criteria to the Queue: Number of matches played. This game is too young to implement that kind of thing, but it’s something to keep in mind. a 1200 player with 1000 wins will outperform a 1200 player with only 200 wins a vast majority of the time. 

 

LoL does not have perfect MMing by far. Keep that in mind. but this is often inflated by smurfs and other people ‘cheating’ the system. However League does have one of the better systems i’ve seen, especially for a true F2P game. 

 

These kinds of criteria added to MMing can help balance out squad size. we don’t really need to restrict squad size based on matches. MMing should take into account squad size, and whatever other criteria it’s using to determine skill, and make adjustments accordingly. 

 

I’m not saying this should be implemented here, it’s just an example of what other games use, and work well. It’s up to the devs here to decide what works best for their game. However I strongly encourage them to what is successful in other highly competitive games. they did something right, and that can be emulated. 

 

TL;DR: the problem here isn’t really squad size, it’s player skill. Putting highly skilled squads against less skilled squads isn’t a fault of squad size. as this can happen randomly even if squad size is restricted. Rather it is a fault of matchmaking. Ideally matchmaking should be trying to make you win 50% of your matches. if you’re winning 60% of your matches, MMing should be trying to put you against harder and harder opponents to even out your win ratio. This is how you can make a highly competitive and fair (or at least fair enough) system. 

 

 

Furthermore, The power balance between tiers could be adjusted as well. the top 10% of players could probably take a tier 1 ship against a tier 3 ship and do fairly well. However that’s not most of us. In fact, it’s barely any of us. so first and foremost the queue should account for ship tier, based on what is in your hanger. If it cannot find a good match based on skill (IE: you’re too skilled for that tier) it should bump you a tier until it finds a suitable match. 

 

Banner Saga does something similar to this. you have Tier 1 and Tier 2 units you can pull into battle, that have a level system (similar to how synergy works here, but it’s a little more customization  as you can pick what stats you upgrade). Each unit is given a power rating based on it’s level and tier. your entire squad (translates into hanger) is then given a number and you are matched with players with a similar power rating and win ratio. However these are 1v1 matches so it’s a lot easier to balance out. 

 

If something like this were implemented in combination with a win ratio score it would help the highest skilled players get matches more quickly. they can run Tier 1 and Tier 2 ships against tier 3 and tier 4 ships and not have to be in queue for 10 minutes while it tries to find a match for them on their tier 4s. while this is not ideal for them, as they likely want to play their Tier 4s, it’s another option they have. sit in queue forever, or put myself at a disadvantage. If anything, this gives them more bragging rights. which we all know they love. This is the only situation where it is acceptable to put lower tier ships in queue with higher tier ships. 

 

So, if the top 4 players all queued together on T4 ships, i’d expect them to be in Queue for a very long time. unless they got on T1 or T2 ships. then i’d say they can go against some of the top 20% players T3 and T4 ships. 

 

If these players were to complain about such a system, it’s clear they have ulterior motives. IE: they aren’t wanting fair and challenging matches. they want to steamroll people below their skill level. this creates a toxic environment and really should be discouraged anyway. 

 

This can combat some of the negative stigma we have now. ‘oh crap, we have a guy with T1 ships in a T3 match. this is not going well for us already.’ instead the players will understand, hey, they gave us a T1. that guy must be a badass. 

33

I have an idea.

The devs could implement an option for squad vs squad. For example, an 8v8 you would need 4 squads to queue at the same time for triangulation to occur. The only requirement is you must be in a squad of 4.

This could potentially encourage people in squads to engage in more co-operative game-play and cross-squad communication, squad A, squad B, squad C etc. 

The incentive could be a higher reputation gain, more money etc. Thus, lessening the number of squads in pug matchmaking. 

Everybody’s happy, except the guy with no friends.

 

Another idea is a 30s lockout time for squads in the queue, which allows time for opposing squads to jump into the matchmaking queue. It would have to prioritise squads however to effectively balance games. I’m unsure how effective this would be though. 

 

P

34

I have an idea.

The devs could implement an option for squad vs squad. For example, an 8v8 you would need 4 squads to queue at the same time for triangulation to occur. The only requirement is you must be in a squad of 4.

This could potentially encourage people in squads to engage in more co-operative game-play and cross-squad communication, squad A, squad B, squad C etc. 

The incentive could be a higher reputation gain, more money etc. Thus, lessening the number of squads in pug matchmaking. 

Everybody’s happy, except the guy with no friends.

 

Another idea is a 30s lockout time for squads in the queue, which allows time for opposing squads to jump into the matchmaking queue. It would have to prioritise squads however to effectively balance games. I’m unsure how effective this would be though. 

 

P

 

A setup like this would be largely dependent on the population. getting a full squad of 4 isn’t really easy, and would likely be restricted to larger corps. 

 

So while in theory this may not be bad, you would need a sufficiently large population to be able to make balanced matches. The majority of 4 man squads i see are actually for PvE scenarios or corps in PvP. of course, this could be they are the only obvious ones. 

 

to put it bluntly, how many people do you know that do full four man queues? do you do this? how many people that you interact with outside your core group do this? I’d be surprised if you have a core group. and i’d be surprised if you interact with a lot of players regularly. 

 

I honestly do not see this game getting that big in its current state. a lot of game systems need to evolve for it to reach that level of competitive fairness. This is a specialized queue you’re suggesting. there are too many problems with the existing queue to warrant the existence of a brand new one. This kind of queue would be great for competitive matches against rival corps, but then you would want full 8 man queues to go against eachother. or do a reduced map and have 4v4 matches. it has a place in the game, but currently this kind of queue is not for general consumption. In any case, it’s not something worth implementing until the game has established itself and has a core population. 

 

What the game needs now is something that attracts a core population. Fair MMing is one of those things. 

35

Any kind of restrictions or squad vs squad matchmaking crap would ruin the game as it is right now (Well it is ruined already by the last patch), there are just not enough players to enforce stuff like that without xxxx up the queue times major.

 

Realistic queues are long enough to begin with already.

36

A setup like this would be largely dependent on the population. getting a full squad of 4 isn’t really easy, and would likely be restricted to larger corps. 

 

So while in theory this may not be bad, you would need a sufficiently large population to be able to make balanced matches. The majority of 4 man squads i see are actually for PvE scenarios or corps in PvP. of course, this could be they are the only obvious ones. 

 

to put it bluntly, how many people do you know that do full four man queues? do you do this? how many people that you interact with outside your core group do this? I’d be surprised if you have a core group. and i’d be surprised if you interact with a lot of players regularly. 

 

I honestly do not see this game getting that big in its current state. a lot of game systems need to evolve for it to reach that level of competitive fairness. This is a specialized queue you’re suggesting. there are too many problems with the existing queue to warrant the existence of a brand new one. This kind of queue would be great for competitive matches against rival corps, but then you would want full 8 man queues to go against eachother. or do a reduced map and have 4v4 matches. it has a place in the game, but currently this kind of queue is not for general consumption. In any case, it’s not something worth implementing until the game has established itself and has a core population. 

 

What the game needs now is something that attracts a core population. Fair MMing is one of those things. 

+1 , and the post from Oni before this ,+ 1000000 , but i didnt want to Quote this Wall of text xD

37

I’d like to elaborate a little bit more on how MMing could work. especially for hangers of mixed tiers, or squads of mixed skill levels. 

 

I’ll be pulling from League of Legends again, and sorry for that. but like i said, it’s one of the better Free systems out there. 

 

When you’re playing with a higher skilled partner, the system weights the average in favor of the higher skill player. 

 

IE: if i’m at 1200 and i’m With a friend who is 1100. Our average score isn’t 1150. But rather closer to 1175. Furthermore, because we are in queue together a boost is added. so the opponents me and my friend would go against are likely around the 1190 range. much much closer to my skill level rather than his. Essentially the greater the difference, the more weight is put on the higher score. A 1200 player with a 900 player might end up averaging out to 1150. This prevent abuse of more skilled players queuing with unskilled players to abuse dominate matches and ruin games. 

 

In League, I often play with new players on my main account. I do this for two reasons. they crest the learning curve faster when fighting more skilled opponents, especially since i’m there to explain what went wrong and why. and because i’ve invested a lot in my main account. I’d rather play with by big guns, rather than a smurf account that has little of the content unlocked. 

 

The same kind of thing could be added to a revamped hanger system. IE: if I have a fully decked out T4 ship, and 2 or 3 T1 ships that have no equipment, a true average would not be appropriate  IE: the system should account for major differences in both player skill levels and power level of ships in your hanger. 

 

So I see two options really for Hanger balance in MMing. 

 

Option 1) Tier based. 

 

MMing looks at the highest tier ship you have equiped and matches you with similar tier ships. IE: if you have 1 T4 and 3 T1 in your hanger, you will fly against, and with, T4 ships. 

 

Pros: you won’t see T4 ships in T2 matches. 

 

Cons: you can see T1 ships in T4 matches if someone brings a T4 ship along with T1 ships in their hanger. 

 

Option 2) Averaged weighting of individual ships in hanger

 

MMing looks at both the tier of ship and the equipment installed to determine what kinds of ships to match you against. 

 

So let’s say you have two tier 2 ships and 1 tier 3 ship. Your tier 2 ships are fully decked out. and you just bought your t3 ship. 

 

Let’s arbitrarily assign a score and say the tier 2 ships are worth 1400 and 1300. and the Tier 3 ship is worth 2000. and because you have mixed tiers, the system adds a weight to the average of your scores

 

So your average ship strength is 1700. 

 

The system will then try to match you with players around your skill level, and with an average ship strength of 1700. 

 

Pros: Friendly for newer players who don’t understand exactly how MMing works. they can bring in their new ships witht heir old ships and not disrupt game balance excessively

 

Cons: you will still have mixed tiers of ships in matches. there is a lot of room for abuse, as players can bring a fully decked T4 ship, and deflate their ship value by putting in T1s. 

 

Again, these are examples of what can be done. I’m not saying they should be. (although I think either option is better than the current state of MMing)

38

I have a suggestion for you my lonely friend. Find a corp, find a squad. Then maybe us coordinated people will stop tearing your xxxx. 

39

I have a suggestion for you my lonely friend. Find a corp, find a squad. Then maybe us coordinated people will stop tearing your xxxx. 

So as a player who’s been in the game 5 days I have a small question focused on this above mentality… And just how does one find a corporation that fits their level of maturity and playstyle? Do I look for such a corporation via the only in game social tool I readily see, the general chat between matches? Am I to sift random msgs spanning the range from a million variations of “bacon”, various players sexuality, racial slurs, religious commentary, and general silliness for a few sane comments based upon an interest in bringing in new pilots? That’s what I’ve seen so far… There have been a few corp advertisements for players. Namely all by EVO looking for serious players of a set tier with a required 15hrs a week of gameplay. There is no issue with that, an I say good for them, but as an example I do not fit that category. This leaves the above to sift through for what? A large portion of the player base is not organized or serious about doing so from what I have seen thus far. Matches have been lopsided for the majority, with a few good hard fights, and I do mean a few. Granted this is lower tiers that I see, ie 1 and 2. However the lopsided issue has not improved but worsened now that I am being pushed into T2 matches with my upper end T1’s. I am improving in skill, and I don’t mind being beat. However it is obvious to me that there is NO WAY to compete vs an organized team of skilled players with top level gear and full implants. Now I say GREAT to them for working for all that, and they should definitely get to enjoy it! However I’m not so sure that steam rolling lower tier matches is a good way for them to get that enjoyment. It’s work enough trying to garner the creds and experience for a decent ship and fit when transitioning tiers… even less fun when your now more expensive but definitely less powerful ship is eating a bigger hole in your wallet while your getting ripped a new one unless your lucky to be on a team WITH such a group.

 

Right now, the social tools in game simply aren’t there… as it stands now one must endure the above long enough to find some friends. However with little in the way of social outreach during gameplay, and less meaningful dialog between matches going on, I’m not seeing where one finds access to said corporate warfare beyond random luck or, as many do, begging for random invite between bacon msgs.

 

This has just been my experience, and I don’t think it’s the only experience, others will vary. However I don’t think my experience and view on this is uncommon, so consider it for a few.