Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
Results 21 to 37 of 37

  Click here to go to the first staff post in this thread.   Thread: Matchmaker SNAFU

  1. #21
    @ Robert - Nice to hear your anecdotes. I've personally been mismatched in most games since launch. What makes you think that your experiences trump those of tnankie? Clearly he and others like myself have had a less than stellar experience, and have been asking for changes for quite some time now. Why so quick to dismiss us?

    @ Alex - Is it safe to assume that if I respond to your questions honestly I'll be banned again? You haven't created an environment that's conducive to open and honest discussion.

  2. #22
    Jim,

    I assumed that when you said the following, you were implying that this happens in general: "You could argue that "pro" players are very happy to sit and play a mismatched game, but it's an absolutely terrible experience for new players, or anyone who's interested in playing a fair game. Stoic is dramatically reducing the quality of play for most players."

    My experience is different, and lines up with those couple of friends who have started playing TBS:F yesterday. Of course, you are right about one thing: both my experience and yours are potentially entirely unrepresentative of the average gamer's experience. If other people have similar complaints, it might be worthwhile for Stoic to set up a poll (as they have done in the past, repeatedly, for many issues) and see how prevalent your issues are.

    The only question I have--trying to be helpful--is whether you are playing with a 1-point team or something else. It could be that there's a large number of 1-point players, but almost no 2-point teams; the former are matched against each other while the latter get matched with other teams of various power.

  3. #23
    I find it somewhat ironic that you Jim, are taking the position of caring for the interests of other players. You stand alone (as far as I know) as the ONLY player with a past of active griefing and verbal abuse in this game. I'm not going to bother reading or responding to any reply, just wanted to put your comments in perspective for others so they take your "concern" with a grain of salt.

  4. #24
    @ Robert - In many of the games I've been playing, I have the base team with only an upgraded Thrasher. My opponents tend to have 3-4 upgraded units. If the decision is for these games to proceed, it would make sense to upgrade 1-2 of my units for the game, or downgrade some of theirs.

  5. #25
    Regarding the possibility of a poll - you really have to question whether you're getting a good sample by putting a poll up on the site, or even in the backer emails. It's more likely to be the already-involved players that respond to those.

    I'd argue that the presence of multiple threads about matchmaking is some good evidence that something's off (e.g. https://stoicstudio.com/forum/showthr...barrier-un-fun).

  6. #26
    Eh. Pinbot had a bad Sunday morning, but hasn't complained since. (And if he does, I'll listen.) At the moment, I just don't hear a lot of voices crying out. But I may start unofficially polling newbs, just to see if the problem exists for a large number of players. Til then--your voice is heard, but it is only one amongst many.

  7. #27
    And tnankie?

    General rule of thumb is that people are less likely to complain than they are to just move on and play something else. You might get some people talk about problems in the game, but there's going to be something of a sample bias if you only look at people in-game.

    The easy thing is to listen to the fanbois on the message forum. It's much harder to take criticism from the other folks and improve the game. That's why as a general rule of thumb it's wise to weigh negative feedback more heavily than positive.

  8. #28
    Superbacker netnazgul's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Belarus
    Posts
    456
    Quote Originally Posted by jimntonik View Post
    @ Robert - Nice to hear your anecdotes. I've personally been mismatched in most games since launch. What makes you think that your experiences trump those of tnankie? Clearly he and others like myself have had a less than stellar experience, and have been asking for changes for quite some time now. Why so quick to dismiss us?
    I can say that I've got some mismatches in pre-release, but since release it's well matching for now. A storm of lags though
    In general I don't see too much evident problems in matchmaker (at least from my point of view), but it's always good to see how to improve it and make it better.

    PS: And, personally, I too find your messages a bit agressive
    If you don't know where to put it - put it in the pillage

    Steelhammer Tribune issues collected here
    Some of my Factions games can be observed here
    Also possible streaming at http://www.twitch.tv/netnazgul

  9. #29
    Well thanks for your concern Jim, but as I said my ranking is 1200+ I am not really a new player. I do still think that the matchmaker needs tweaking.

    Alex I think the matchmaker is fine when it has a large pool of players to draw from (ie the 800, 790 figures you referenced) however I still think it performs poorly/gives the game a bad reputation when there are less players in the queue. There are, and always will be, cycles in activity; look at the steam concurrent user thing on the steam home page.

    I know this is not a direct comparison as there are teams involved but the World of tanks match maker will wait 10 minutes before throwing you into a match. Especially interesting as matches there are a maximum of 15 minutes. Whereas in factions matches are x minutes (I'd guess 20?) on average yet the matchmaker only waits 1 minute before sending you to your doom.

  10. #30
    @ tnankie - Didn't mean to imply that you were a newb, I was putting you under the "looking for a fair fight" umbrella (which is where I fall too).

  11. #31
    Backer Conundrum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    20
    Quote Originally Posted by jimntonik View Post
    The easy thing is to listen to the fanbois on the message forum. It's much harder to take criticism from the other folks and improve the game. That's why as a general rule of thumb it's wise to weigh negative feedback more heavily than positive.
    I'm gonna go ahead and turn this around on you:

    "The easy thing is to listen to the vocal minority on the message forum. It's much harder to get a sense of what the playerbase as a whole wants, and improve the game. That's why, as a general rule of thumb, it's wise to treat forum posts as what they are - a very small sample size of the community."

    This applies equally to both praise AND criticism. If every developer had a knee-jerk reaction to any complaint on a forum, their game would quickly spiral into chaos (this HAS happened before).

    I personally don't appreciate you taking potshots at Stoic after the incredible amount of effort they've put into this game, and into keeping its players happy. Who are you to call them stubborn? And I find it hilarious that you're (again!) accusing people of being dismissive, when your counter arguments often consist of "You disagree with me, so you're wrong". This is exactly what happened last time you were "banned" (read: temporarily suspended) - you weren't "responding to questions honestly", you were being unnecessarily aggressive.

  12. #32
    @ Conundrum - My comments were based on tnankie's feedback, and I didn't dismiss anyone's comments. Although to be fair, it would seem that you're guilty of the same in your above post? Pot or kettle?

    The point is that positive feedback is much easier to provide than negative feedback. Forum posts are for the most part inversely related to game experience. Think of it as a Fermi equation for negative feedback.If somebody has a bad time, they're more likely to say "This sucks", and move on and download another game than to go to the trouble of signing up for the forum and write out a post explaining their issues with the current implementation. Most players don't have the temperament of beta testers.

  13.   This is the last staff post in this thread.   #33
    Creative Director Alex's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    108
    Quote Originally Posted by tnankie View Post
    Well thanks for your concern Jim, but as I said my ranking is 1200+ I am not really a new player. I do still think that the matchmaker needs tweaking.

    Alex I think the matchmaker is fine when it has a large pool of players to draw from (ie the 800, 790 figures you referenced) however I still think it performs poorly/gives the game a bad reputation when there are less players in the queue. There are, and always will be, cycles in activity; look at the steam concurrent user thing on the steam home page.

    I know this is not a direct comparison as there are teams involved but the World of tanks match maker will wait 10 minutes before throwing you into a match. Especially interesting as matches there are a maximum of 15 minutes. Whereas in factions matches are x minutes (I'd guess 20?) on average yet the matchmaker only waits 1 minute before sending you to your doom.
    We'll be increasing the amount of time it looks for an accurate match in the next update or two since this should be an easy fix. Finding the "best" amount of time without losing players is something we're trying to balance, and it's one of our foremost concerns. Right now I believe it's 1.5 minutes. We'd also like to give players the option of choosing whether to enter an unfair match or back out if they like, but this will take a little more work on our end.

    Quote Originally Posted by jimntonik View Post
    @ Alex - Is it safe to assume that if I respond to your questions honestly I'll be banned again? You haven't created an environment that's conducive to open and honest discussion.
    Pretty sure you got suspended last time for being rude and annoying other posters. So if you're not rude, like literally every other poster on the forum, then you've got nothing to worry about. But if you're going to keep pretending like you have no idea what I'm talking about then we'll never be able to start this relationship on the right foot, eh?

    So how would you recommend improving the the matchmaking? I'm happy to listen as we always have been.
    Last edited by Alex; 02-26-2013 at 05:52 PM.

  14. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by jimntonik View Post
    The point is that positive feedback is much easier to provide than negative feedback.
    Omg, this made me laugh. my stomach hurts.

    On the internet? Where people provide negative feedback without ever having played a game and willingly misinterpret information just to shitstorm?

  15. #35
    Backer Slimsy Platypus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Northeast US
    Posts
    368
    I certainly can understand the frustration, as I imagine it would be quite intimidating to have a group full of non-promoted units against a fully developed team. I've had a couple matches like this and from the start we both knew it would be an uphill battle for them. I typically always try to spark up a healthy chat so the experience isn't horrible for them, but I know it must suck. Unfortunately for me, I can't directly relate because I snatched the starter pack as quickly as my fingers would let me.

    That being said, I'm curious as to about how many games it is taking you guys to get a group of Rank 1 units in the current build? Maybe what could happen, is that whenever a new player starts playing Factions they get's a more strict matchmaking restriction. However, if the player is daring or just desperate for a match, they can choose to click a big red danger button that will put them in the regular queue. Their ability to utilize this would last for about however long it takes to build a team of Rank 1 units. Thoughts?

    One thing we have to keep in mind, is that on the other side it is absolutely a blast to be able to see your team grow stronger and to develop your team from zero to hero. I think we just need to find the healthy balance and have a system in place that facilitates a healthy new player experience. I think the elo system and current matchmaking is a great start, but at this point we have found a hole in the system that lets a little un-fun stuff through
    Last edited by Slimsy Platypus; 02-26-2013 at 06:32 PM.

  16. #36
    I think it took me about 20 games give or take 3. This was before achievements and using 30 sec. clock most of the time. A realistic estimate would be 25-30 I'd guess for most players starting from scratch.

  17. #37
    Backer Slimsy Platypus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Northeast US
    Posts
    368
    After rereading and correcting the spelling in my post I just thought of another idea. What if some future achievements granted you a Rank 1 unit as a reward to help speed up the process of getting your team up-to-snuff. Just had a unit die with full armor? Well bang, you get some mercy achievment that gives you a blank Shieldmaster to work with. Got in 10 damage with puncture? Bam - here's a naked Bowmaster. That might be fun and help alleviate that period where new players feel like they are at a an extreme disadvantage (and to boot doesn't require complicating the matchmaking). Simply food for thought.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •