PDA

View Full Version : Please change matchmaking adjustment for premade parties back



Genoard
25th Feb 2015, 20:44
I usually play Nosgoth with friends and we have 3-4 player party. Most of the time our experience was rather balanced, having both "Hell yeah, we rule!" and "What the ♥♥♥♥, these guys are OP!!" moments. On average, we had quite a fun.

Now, today. In today's patch notes it is stated "Premade parties now matchmake with an increased MMR (above their actual average skill)". Today we were welcomed to no fun zone. All the games we played today we were matched with players who's skill and playtime was far beyond ours (top hours played in our party is 71 hour, we had players with up to 400+ against us). I've never seen so much Sentinel lvl 25 evolved skin players as i've seen today. Needless to say, we lost ~90% of rounds.

This update should've brought balance in a way that premade teams are implied to have co-operation element and thus advantage over other team. But what about parties who play casually? Most co-operation we have is to shout into voice chat "Hey, he's here!". We don't practice any combos like Sentinel dropping human right in front of his buddy Tyrant who was charging attack on the ground(was used against us today). We just gather up in voice chat at the evenings to have some fun, not to train ourselves for e-sport tournament or something.

ElJefe59
25th Feb 2015, 21:39
We just gather up in voice chat at the evenings to have some fun, not to train ourselves for e-sport tournament or something.

I agree with you. My friends and I play casually with 3-4 people. A couple of which only have 20-30 hours of play time. So because we play in a group, it is almost impossible to practice and learn both winning and losing. We just get butt ****ed the entire time.

The change makes sense but change it so it only effects higher MMR groups or something. In order to succeed we have to play alone :/

Aggggh
25th Feb 2015, 21:51
Just being able to coordinate attacking together in a group is a massive advantage over any pug group. You're having just as much fun as all the pug teams that have been getting **** on by premade teams on a daily basis.

Vampmaster
25th Feb 2015, 21:54
There's no real way of telling who's using things like teamspeak and skype, so you can't really tell how much better people are going to perform based on whether of not they're in a team. The only think that would really help is adding more ways to communicate besides chat. Anything on the HUD, provided it's simple and not cluttering things up is welcome and voice commands mapped to keys would be a great help for connunication.

Aggggh
25th Feb 2015, 21:57
There's no real way of telling who's using things like teamspeak and skype, so you can't really tell how much better people are going to perform based on whether of not they're in a team. The only think that would really help is adding more ways to communicate besides chat. Anything on the HUD, provided it's simple and not cluttering things up is welcome and voice commands mapped to keys would be a great help for connunication.

In game voip works just fine. Premade teams only have themselves to blame if they're not using it.

Wolf_the_Legend
25th Feb 2015, 22:06
was thinking the same as they introduced this ... i guess the big majority of ppl are casual in TS ... but actually ur MMR will drop and u will get weaker opponents.

crutchie
3rd Mar 2015, 13:08
It would be annoying at first. I normally play with my 13 Year old who doesn't understand the wait for me part and will attempt to go solo a group of 4 humans waiting. For the team to come. Still the communication is key in this game. Telling people where to regroup at after a slow wipe is so much better than watching the humans go in one a time to their death. Your friends will get better the more they understand the game. and you will be able to destroy things. Also you will be playing less skilled people as you are going solo. Yes it sucks when you are losing. Ask any professional sports team who has hit a rut. Overall though I think it's a good solution to all people that were complaining about high end premades.

Ysanoire
3rd Mar 2015, 14:21
Yes, it is a bit of a problem. I totally understand why this was implemented, but there's NO way to put a number on just how much cooperation there is in a premade. In reality, lower level players are unable to really take advantage of it. In a party of mixed skill (one experienced player with their noob friends), the resulting mmr will probably be a complete lie.

I think the mmr boost from partying should be very small, but I don't really see a good solution to this.

Vampmaster
3rd Mar 2015, 14:32
In game voip works just fine. Premade teams only have themselves to blame if they're not using it.

Requirement of buying extra hardware is a form of pay to win. It's not a problem that the developers have a way to completely alleviate, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't try to minimize the problem by providing alternate means of communication. You can't just go around saying "Oh, well, serves you right for being a cheapskate!". Besides, I do have a mic and even if I managed to get it working, that won't guarantee that it will work particularly well, of that my friends will also have one too.

crutchie
3rd Mar 2015, 15:37
Requirement of buying extra hardware is a form of pay to win. It's not a problem that the developers have a way to completely alleviate, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't try to minimize the problem by providing alternate means of communication. You can't just go around saying "Oh, well, serves you right for being a cheapskate!". Besides, I do have a mic and even if I managed to get it working, that won't guarantee that it will work particularly well, of that my friends will also have one too.

I'm sorry I don't buy that. There are many different computers out there with many different kinds of hardware. The distinction is that the developers are not getting currency from your choice of hardware. People are playing on super high end machines with 30" monitors others are playing on junky 5 year old laptop's with at 14" screen. Guess who has the advantage. You could be throwing out an argument that because I like to play the game with no sound, the fact that the developers decided to put in some awesome sounds you have to pay attention to that it's pay to win. How can you possibly think that a microphone, a piece of hardware that that has been used since DOOM puts the game at a pay to win. Computer games are like Golf. Some people spend thousands of dollars on custom golf clubs. Are you trying to say that golf is pay to win?

HoopleDoople
3rd Mar 2015, 15:40
What we need is some transparency on the mechanics behind this.

In the couple days I played before getting to frustrated with OP Vanguard and horrible Vampire melee changes my win rate plummeted from about 50% to around 20%. I usually play with one friend with MMR a fair amount lower than mine. Playing together we were nowhere near pub stompers - in fact it tended to match us with players that had an MMR more similar to mine so our superior cooperation was offset by harder enemies. If the enemies are even harder than before this could explain the difficulty we had lately.

I don't know how the MMR handicap works, but I suspect it is a fixed amount and this is the cause of the problems. It would be far superior to have a floating handicap that is calculated based on how the group exceeds expectations based on their individual MMRs (if they don't exceed expectations there would be no handicap). It might take a little while to gather sufficient data for a group, but then it also takes a while for a group to establish coordination.

Vampmaster
3rd Mar 2015, 16:28
I'm sorry I don't buy that. There are many different computers out there with many different kinds of hardware. The distinction is that the developers are not getting currency from your choice of hardware. People are playing on super high end machines with 30" monitors others are playing on junky 5 year old laptop's with at 14" screen. Guess who has the advantage. You could be throwing out an argument that because I like to play the game with no sound, the fact that the developers decided to put in some awesome sounds you have to pay attention to that it's pay to win. How can you possibly think that a microphone, a piece of hardware that that has been used since DOOM puts the game at a pay to win. Computer games are like Golf. Some people spend thousands of dollars on custom golf clubs. Are you trying to say that golf is pay to win?

It's not in the sense that games are normally judged by, and I conceded that the developers have no control of what hardware people use, but in the sense that the amount spent dramatically effects a player's success rate, it can be considered pay to win.

In professional sports, players typically get sponsors to provide them with better hardware, as they progress through the leagues, but choosing to play with friends has little/no bearing on that sort of thing. Now, if being in an ESL team were taken into account, that could potentially be an indication that the player is willing to spend more on hardware and if not, it's still a better indication of the level of competition the player is prepared to face and how much practice he/she gets.

Once again, I'm not saying there's a perfect way of assessing how well the team will work together, but some ways are better than others, and providing alternative options will always help minimize the imbalance.

--Ram--
3rd Mar 2015, 16:45
Requirement of buying extra hardware is a form of pay to win. It's not a problem that the developers have a way to completely alleviate, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't try to minimize the problem by providing alternate means of communication. You can't just go around saying "Oh, well, serves you right for being a cheapskate!". Besides, I do have a mic and even if I managed to get it working, that won't guarantee that it will work particularly well, of that my friends will also have one too.

I use a $5 mic, works perfectly well.

Vampmaster
3rd Mar 2015, 16:46
I use a $5 mic, works perfectly well.

Mine does not and my friends don't use them if they have any.

crutchie
3rd Mar 2015, 17:24
Mine does not and my friends don't use them if they have any.

So you take over a thread and label a game, "pay to win" because you don't feel like fixing your mic? Don't blame the game. If you are losing put some effort into it.

Vampmaster
3rd Mar 2015, 17:53
So you take over a thread and label a game, "pay to win" because you don't feel like fixing your mic? Don't blame the game. If you are losing put some effort into it.

Oh, right, so I'm hating on the game now? I explained how I was talking about much more broader context than games are usually judged and said nothing about putting it in the same category as a game with an intentional pay wall. I was trying to illustrate a point about one tiny aspect of the game and you've responded with a personal attack.

It's a scenario can can never completely be avoided in any MP game and hence, I do not judge Nosgoth for that.

EDIT: My original point was relevant to the original topic, as I think hardware and tools like teamspeak contribute highly to the increased performance of players in a team. Not all teams have that and therefore can not be assumed to have the same advantage over random players.

Ysanoire
3rd Mar 2015, 18:30
Cooperation != saying stuff over voip. Whether or not using a mic is reasonable, pay to win, or whatever, is only very remotely relevant.

Edit

In game voip works just fine. Premade teams only have themselves to blame if they're not using it.

The exact same thing can be said about random teams. The possibility to communicate is there.

Vampmaster
3rd Mar 2015, 19:21
Cooperation != saying stuff over voip.

Good cooperation requires good communication. It's much easier to cooperate if you can just tell your teammates what you're doing, where you need them to be and where the enemy is without stopping all movement to type it all out. Simply knowing your teammates, doesn't necessarilly mean you can give them the information that would be of such an advantage.


The exact same thing can be said about random teams. The possibility to communicate is there.

That's why it's innacurate to assume teams would necessarilly communicate better.

_Kine_
3rd Mar 2015, 20:51
There is cohesion between players in a premade squad.
That one word means so much to team-work.

Your lineup does not change, group dynamics remain consistent, players are agreeable in team moves, knowing each other's strengths and weaknesses, group learning, adaptation, execution etc etc etc

These are massive advantages that 4 x strangers do not enjoy.

None of those things require hardware, money, voice comms, levels or experience in-game. They exist because you know the people on your team and they will work with you without question, suspect or hesitation.

These are massive advantages.

---

Now consider the opposite.

4 x strangers of similar skill playing against your premade squad of friends.

Please justify to me how and in which world is that even remotely fair ?

---

Ysanoire
3rd Mar 2015, 21:03
Good cooperation requires good communication.

To an extent. In many lobbies it will be enough to know what you can expect of your teammates. Communication is important of course, but what I was trying to say is that there's a lot more to successful cooperation than talking.


That's why it's innacurate to assume teams would necessarilly communicate better.

That is the point I was making as well.

Genoard
4th Mar 2015, 06:18
There is cohesion between players in a premade squad.
That one word means so much to team-work.

Your lineup does not change, group dynamics remain consistent, players are agreeable in team moves, knowing each other's strengths and weaknesses, group learning, adaptation, execution etc etc etc

These are massive advantages that 4 x strangers do not enjoy.
---
You're talking some military squad or e-sports team stuff here, not 4 friends casually playing together. Here are examples of quite common things in my group:
alchemist sitting in a building because "fire wall, they shall not pass, LOL" while others are outside;
picking classes that aren't quite good against the enemy team we are currently facing because "need to lvl that one up";
not being able to properly tell where the enemy are("they're at the square", "where?", "the stone square ffs", "which ******* one?!"); tyrants going in while others are half-map away;
etc etc etc

o2-D3nTe
4th Mar 2015, 10:14
It may be a good idea for people with hundreds of hours, but when you're in a party with lower levels the increased MMR is a pain.
Before the patch I didn't pub stomp when playing with friends, some of us didn't play a lot to the game, they have spend far less time in game than I did.
As a party we won, but lost a fair amount of games too. I lose more game when playing 3man party than when I play alone.
The increased MMR for party let us face stronger opponents.
The so-called advantages of parties doesn't help us. A better teamwork when playing as a party doesn't mean anything if the players involved are beginners, or at least didn't play that much.

Persiphas
4th Mar 2015, 11:20
Maybe the number that is added to the mmr should increase with the mmr of the players (example, not exact numbers: mmr=500 --> +20; mmr=600 --> +25 ...). This would adress the problem, that premade noobs or casuals don't synergize as well as premade pros, but it also would not deny the fact, that organized noobs tend to be better than unorganized noobs (even if they only say sth like "there is still a vampire in the square house thingy" or pick a class they want to level it still gives an advantage over completely random teams). At high mmr it would make quite a difference and I'm not sure how it would work there. I am quite certain that high mmr players gain a huge advantage from organizing compared to random high mmr players. But in very high mmr range it might also be the case, that every player there knows how to monitor team and enemy movement well and is able to do for example a kidnap->kick combo without communication and thus doesn't take an advantage as big as medium mmr players (idk I'm probably rather medium mmr^^). Would be nice to hear an opinion on that from a high mmr player, although most of them probably just see this thread as some noobs whining because they're bad at the game. Also, the devs could just compare the win/lose ratio of high mmr player parties compared to medium and low mmr players since they should have access to the statistics.
Depending on these informations, mmr and value added would form A) a linear function or B) some kind of skewed to the left deviation... If we consider, that mmr capped players have to wait very long for a match (don't know if it is still an issue), the added number to mmr should not be able to let it surpass the overall mmr cap (It's probably better to play a match random vs. premade than not playing at all XD)

-Moltenmarble