manag dude the 4 in the premade don't count since you said you are as likely to end up on a premade side than not. No, if you are a pug you are less likely to end up on the premade team than on the pug team in the example I gave.

More importantly though, people against the current system please stop saying split the q's. We need a matchmaking system that includes different faction teams when necessary. This will make premades fight eachother much more often (without much longer q's) and make puggers happy as well. It will also make premaders that want good matches happy since they will get them more than 10% of the time lol.

If you say split q's you are hurting your chance of anything being done since we don't have the numbers to support that without cross server and swtor apparently has problems getting that to work.

The only way to make the devs have some slight chance of listening is if many of us can agree on something and I think matchmaking is it. With matchmaking everyone is happier except for premades that only want to pugstomp.

The only way to make the devs have some slight chance of listening is if many of us can agree on something and I think matchmaking is it. With matchmaking everyone is happier except for premades that only want to pugstomp.

Which will never happen because people on the forums are only a small portion of the total amount of players. Because of that you see a split between PUGes and groupers that is close to even because a lot more of the "elites" get on the forums then the "ordinary" player. If BW wanted a good % of what people want they could just patch in a vote when you log in asking a question like "Should we make 3 que's for PVP? One for solo/2, 1 for larger groups and 1 for ranked." With a 1 vote per account a yes or no bubble. I am willing to put money that the results would differ from the 50/50 we see on here and would be in favor PUGers, who want a better match making system then playing premades all the time.

BTW the best reason to not be in a Premade.... BECAUSE I DON'T FEEL LIKE IT AND I CAN PLAY HOW I WANT TO PLAY AS I AM PAYING MY MONEY NOT YOURS TO ENJOY A GAME. IF IT WAS YOUR MONEY ALLOWING ME TO PLAY THEN YOU CAN TELL HOW TO PLAY ALL TOU WANT BUT IT'S NOT.

BECAUSE I DON'T FEEL LIKE IT AND I CAN PLAY HOW I WANT TO PLAY AS I AM PAYING MY MONEY NOT YOURS TO ENJOY A GAME. IF IT WAS YOUR MONEY ALLOWING ME TO PLAY THEN YOU CAN TELL HOW TO PLAY ALL TOU WANT BUT IT'S NOT.

I LIKE TO WEAR STRENGTH STATS ON MY TROOPER CAUSE I THINK THEY LOOK NICE AND HAVING 1000 STRENGTH AND ONLY 500 AIM JUST MAKES SENSE TO ME. I KEEP GETTING MY *** KICKED THOUGH, WHY CAN'T I JUST HAVE A BRACKET FOR STRENGHT WEARING COMMANDOS? DON'T TELL ME I'M PLAYING THE TROOPER WRONG, I PAY THE SAME AS YOU ******ES!

Oh look, I have cap lock too.

I'm not telling you how to play, I'm telling you how to win.

I'm not telling you how to play, I'm telling you how to win.

+1

Seriously, this isn't rocket science. Organized Disciplined groups beat disorganized undisciplined groups, that's been a fact of warfare since oh, the Romans at least (Macedonians before that?).

I LIKE TO WEAR STRENGTH STATS ON MY TROOPER CAUSE I THINK THEY LOOK NICE AND HAVING 1000 STRENGTH AND ONLY 500 AIM JUST MAKES SENSE TO ME. I KEEP GETTING MY *** KICKED THOUGH, WHY CAN'T I JUST HAVE A BRACKET FOR STRENGHT WEARING COMMANDOS? DON'T TELL ME I'M PLAYING THE TROOPER WRONG, I PAY THE SAME AS YOU ******ES!

 

Oh look, I have cap lock too.

 

I'm not telling you how to play, I'm telling you how to win.

It's still the same thing just in a gray area. Play this way (they way I play) or get owned repeatedly until you just give up and quit (which would help no one.) which is the same as "group like me, and play like me" just worded more polietly. The CAPs was for the reading impaired, my reason for not grouping is just as vaild as anyone else's reason for grouping. Too say "your reasons for playing your way aren't as good as my reasons that you should play like me" shows just how narrow minded a person is.

As usual you bring a char and thier gear into it which doesn't suprise me. Your suggesting that because somone wants to have an even match it must because they don't know how to play? Far from it, it's an undeniable fact that premades tip the scale in PVP. Take a PVP match lets say one is a full PUG one is a man premade. one has 5 Mercs (has happened to me several times) and the premade team has 2 healers and a tank and then whatever else. Who is going to win? Mercs get *****, and with that lack of DPS they will not be able to do much of anything. So yeah sorry for people wanting a fair fight. Their is no perfect solution to solve this. Either ques get a little longer for more even fights or the ques get longer because people enjoy noobstomping and people just stop playing PVP. So take your pick even fights and waiting a little longer or continue with how it is until the que is out of control long and the premades have to do exactly what has been suggested over and over in order to have a decent que time... play each other.

manag dude the 4 in the premade don't count since you said you are as likely to end up on a premade side than not. No, if you are a pug you are less likely to end up on the premade team than on the pug team in the example I gave.

 

QUOTE]

 

Ok this is your example:

 

Quote: Originally Posted by DarthRaika

 

Manag....16 players q up. 8 imps 8 pubs. 4 people are a premade 12 are puggers. 8 are sad 4 are happy. not 50/50 buddy.

 

It's elementary statistics. Using Bayes theorem, given that there is one premade (group of 4), the chance that the premade is on your side is 50%.

 

Also, I assert that the four in the premade do count, and they're happy too. That makes 8 happy, 8 sad.

It's still the same thing just in a gray area. Play this way (they way I play) or get owned repeatedly until you just give up and quit (which would help no one.) which is the same as "group like me, and play like me" just worded more polietly. The CAPs was for the reading impaired, my reason for not grouping is just as vaild as anyone else's reason for grouping. Too say "your reasons for playing your way aren't as good as my reasons that you should play like me" shows just how narrow minded a person is.

 

As usual you bring a char and thier gear into it which doesn't suprise me. Your suggesting that because somone wants to have an even match it must because they don't know how to play? Far from it, it's an undeniable fact that premades tip the scale in PVP. Take a PVP match lets say one is a full PUG one is a man premade. one has 5 Mercs (has happened to me several times) and the premade team has 2 healers and a tank and then whatever else. Who is going to win? Mercs get *****, and with that lack of DPS they will not be able to do much of anything. So yeah sorry for people wanting a fair fight. Their is no perfect solution to solve this. Either ques get a little longer for more even fights or the ques get longer because people enjoy noobstomping and people just stop playing PVP. So take your pick even fights and waiting a little longer or continue with how it is until the que is out of control long and the premades have to do exactly what has been suggested over and over in order to have a decent que time... play each other.

See, you are equating Playing with Winning. Just like the trooper wearing strength gear, you are free to play as you like, but you must accept the consequences of doing so. I know Commando's are Sub par in terms of balance, but I choose to use one as my main. When I die/lose on the Commando, I don't get angry at my opponents for being good. One of two things happened:

They're better than me (80% likely) or I'm using a sub-optimal class/spec/tactic for personal reasons (20% likely).

Yet... somehow I doubt the idea that there is a "less right" way to play is going to stick with most people. It seems they're more keen to blame something on being OP, unfair, and justify it with a reason I'm pretty sure I've seen my 6 year old cousin use.

As for even matching... well I agree. A matchmaking system that tried to match by either group size/valor-rank/composition/etc... would be great. That system needs to be flexible enough though, to say "Hey, I've had 16 people waiting 3/4/5 minutes without an optimal composition, time to set up a match." A split queue doesn't do that.

PS. There is a reason Min/Maxxer's exist and are generally the best. There are many ways to play Mario, but only one way to save the Princess.

+1

 

Seriously, this isn't rocket science. Organized Disciplined groups beat disorganized undisciplined groups, that's been a fact of warfare since oh, the Romans at least (Macedonians before that?).

yes. it was the hallmark of alexander's modified phalanx formations.

yes. it was the hallmark of alexander's modified phalanx formations.

<.< I think we can look even further back, at prehistoric wolves/pack animals vs. food

sigh manag........ sigh...sigh

The premade can be ignored. There are 12 players hoping to get with the premade. Only 4 of them will. You can read stuff in books but you obviously can't apply it.

BTW, don't try to compete against me in math/science you will fail miserably.

Why I don't count the premade is because in my example I don't need to and in the happy part since we are talking about premades and pugs there are always far more pugs in a mmo. This is due to many things such as pugs playing less often while paying the same amount, and lots of other reasons. BTW if there were equal numbers then this wouldn't be an issue.

See, you are equating Playing with Winning. Just like the trooper wearing strength gear, you are free to play as you like, but you must accept the consequences of doing so. I know Commando's are Sub par in terms of balance, but I choose to use one as my main. When I die/lose on the Commando, I don't get angry at my opponents for being good. One of two things happened:

 

They're better than me (80% likely) or I'm using a sub-optimal class/spec/tactic for personal reasons (20% likely).

 

Yet... somehow I doubt the idea that there is a "less right" way to play is going to stick with most people. It seems they're more keen to blame something on being OP, unfair, and justify it with a reason I'm pretty sure I've seen my 6 year old cousin use.

 

As for even matching... well I agree. A matchmaking system that tried to match by either group size/valor-rank/composition/etc... would be great. That system needs to be flexible enough though, to say "Hey, I've had 16 people waiting 3/4/5 minutes without an optimal composition, time to set up a match." A split queue doesn't do that.

 

PS. There is a reason Min/Maxxer's exist and are generally the best. There are many ways to play Mario, but only one way to save the Princess.

Yet again your playing in a gray area, and slightly off topic. It's all together different saying "nerf this so I don't get beat so much" or "My char sucks because..." which is a while different topic as the class balances can be pretty huge Maurader vs. merc for example.

No one should have to conform to anyone else's style of play to have fun. A PUGer shouldnt have to put in 45+ hours a week, where as the Elitiest shouldn't have to play all by there lonesome. As for Mario there is a different way to save the princess, should I get the feather and fly past everything and then just land on Koopa? Maybe I should use the flower and just shoot him? I think what you mean to say is the out come is the same the problem is the path to that outcome is very unbalanced. You have PUGers the get the flower and have to blast their way through and and when they get to Koopa... guess what he is invincible because now Koopa has 3 turtles that are healing him and he is invincible to the fireball. That's what most PVP matches are when you compare PUG groups to Premade.

No one should have to conform to anyone else's style of play to have fun.

Fun is subjective and can not be balanced around. Likewise, my Trooper with 1000 strength and 500 aim shouldn't have to conform to that boring ol' stacking aim playstyle to have "fun."

But please enlighten me. Define "Fun" for me in your own words.

 

BTW, don't try to compete against me in math/science you will fail miserably.

 

.

Whoops, looks like I did.

You are equally likely as a PUGer to benefit from as to be detrimented by a premade. What's so difficult to understand?

Whoops, looks like I did.

 

You are equally likely as a PUGer to benefit from as to be detrimented by a premade. What's so difficult to understand?

Anyone including you and many other on this forum that dont get the reason as to why solo should be vs solo and group should be vs groups are just stupid. why even have the 2 options when one set people is being throw in with the other set of people. you want to have premades go to rwz. but wait i forgot rwz is just farmed half the time. people dont want to do rwz cause they dont want to put effort so they make premade and go to wz and roll people.

Simple fix for both is all group get throw to RWZ and SOLO is for WZ. mix the 2 sets of people screw **** up for the other people. Why you think RWZ dont allow solo people?? people are just plain stupid

Anyone including you and many other on this forum that dont get the reason as to why solo should be vs solo and group should be vs groups are just stupid. why even have the 2 options when one set people is being throw in with the other set of people. you want to have premades go to rwz. but wait i forgot rwz is just farmed half the time. people dont want to do rwz cause they dont want to put effort so they make premade and go to wz and roll people.

 

 

Simple fix for both is all group get throw to RWZ and SOLO is for WZ. mix the 2 sets of people screw **** up for the other people. Why you think RWZ dont allow solo people?? people are just plain stupid

I never said anything as to what should be done. However, as a statistician, all I did was attempt to explain simple statistics.

What you do with the results is up to you.

Anyone including you and many other on this forum that dont get the reason as to why solo should be vs solo and group should be vs groups are just stupid. why even have the 2 options when one set people is being throw in with the other set of people. you want to have premades go to rwz. but wait i forgot rwz is just farmed half the time. people dont want to do rwz cause they dont want to put effort so they make premade and go to wz and roll people.

 

 

Simple fix for both is all group get throw to RWZ and SOLO is for WZ. mix the 2 sets of people screw **** up for the other people. Why you think RWZ dont allow solo people?? people are just plain stupid

First, ranked is 8 people. No less, no more... exactly 8 people needed. Please explain how a 4 man premade is suppose to be an 8 man premade? And before you try "Find 4 friends" realize something; Non-ranked is 1-4. If for whatever reason you can not find 1, 2, or 3 more friends, you can still play.

Second, there are two buttons is to give more people access to warzones. Let's think of non-ranked as a playground. Everyone shares the playground. It's much cheaper to have one playground, and it's community building. Now you've got one "faction" who is unhappy with sharing the playground. Is the right answer give those people their own playground... or make them (like children) understand that We all share the Playground?

Back to the game. Same queue's shares the pool. Bigger pool, more games. More games, more chances for fun, more people playing. Everyone should be happy. Some people aren't happy (for personal reasons) and now demand their own queue. Like the playground, is the right answer to give them their own playground? (No)

You make some changes, you up the rules, you try and be respectful for their differences. Mk2 recruit, free BM relics, games played for daily (instead of wins), etc... You understand some people are worse than others, and you try and give them a more level field (Proper Matchmaking anyone?). Yet you still do not give them their own queue. They still have to share the playground.

Bump because the fact that Premade Vs Pug matches still exists is preposterous. Split the queues, they simply do not belong faced against one another. At the very least force teams to face groups of players, doesn't matter if they're incomplete teams, 3+ people do not belong against a full on PUG, face them against at least a group of 2+.

I run both Premades and Pugs, the truth is Pug play is far more frequent, especially if a person wants to enjoy ALT play or simply is more active than their friends/guild. Can't force your players into waiting and queuing only in groups for a less than unbearable experience, being punished for playing when friends/guildmates aren't online is not a very pleasant nor enjoyable experience.

With the disgustingly small player pools competition grows stale extremely quickly; why you (Bioware) have not implemented Cross Server queues to support a more robust pool and the possibility of a proper matchmaking system is just inefficient, complete lack of foresight, incompetence or perhaps simple ignorance.

I'm all for fair competition but the fact is Premade Vs Pug play is simply not competition. For a Premade it is rarely if ever a challenge 9/10 times it is a clear and easy victory. For a PUG it is nothing short of one of the most frustrating, annoying and unbearable experiences this game has to offer; this is not something you want the vast majority of your player base to experience, especially the newcomers trying out your game.

Split Premade and PUG queues, implement an adequate matchmaking system and cross server function, at the very least for PvP.

Split Premade and PUG queues.

No. (for the exact reasons of longer queue times and mismatched 2-3 teams.)

implement an adequate matchmaking system and cross server function, at the very least for PvP.

Yes, yes, yes. Full agreement.

there are always far more pugs in a mmo..

this much seems true in my experience. make of it what you will. but I think that anyone who says otherwise is kidding him/herself.

:2cents:

Dude manag good luck to you if you think you understand statistics.

Lets make it simple. There are 3 people. Only 1 can win. Assuming all else equal what % chance does each have at winning? I don't think that is 50%.

It is pretty obvious that there are more puggers than premaders (not on forums though) and the whining is from the puggers. So thats what we are discussing here. The premade is already the premade. They are not hoping to be on the premade. They are lol. The 12 puggers are the ones hoping and only 4 can be. If you are never 1 of the 4 premaders then you are with the 12. The 4 doesn't matter. You are competing with 11 others to be on the premade team. Simple.

If you don't understand this though I'm done. The important thing here is matchmaking. I'm just making the thread stay at the top lol.

No. (for the exact reasons of longer queue times and mismatched 2-3 teams.)

 

 

 

Yes, yes, yes. Full agreement.

Yes, with cross server function, queue times would not be a problem. The pools would be big enough to support the split queues. Premade Vs Pug play should not exist, period.

If Bioware keeps it up and does not implement Cross Server function, proper matchmaking and split queues in a tactful manner (anything more than 2 queues could not be supported by the population of this game, simple Premade and Pug queue split would be sufficient) the game will slowly bleed out the remainder of the players it has.

Premades are the minority, although I enjoy competitive and engaging play and consider myself part of this category, the game will be nothing without the masses, the masses here are the Pugs, not the Premades. Accept it and stop deluding yourself. Elite are called elite for a reason and they sure as heII don't belong against Pugs.

True competition is in Ranked play, I'll admit it had a disastrous implementation and horrendous support topped off with poor matchmaking; but that is were premades belong. Bioware needs to fix it and make it more attractive for Premades to end up here instead of against Pugs.

Leon, in a perfect world we would have cross server and split q's /etc. However, lets be realistic. BW isn't doing cross server anytime soon.

What we can have if we press them enough is a matchmaking system that makes premades wait at least a couple minutes if needed and allows for different faction teams.

This will end sync q'n outright. It will also end the problem where if multiple premades are q'n they still mostly fight pugs. It will also make it so that pugs are more likely to either be on a premade against another premade or they are pugvpug.

Lets please get behind that system. Making it into whether we get cross server or not is rather pointless since BW isn't going to anytime soon.

Dude manag good luck to you if you think you understand statistics.

 

.

This is going nowhere. You do not grasp simple statistics. It's pointless.

Premade Vs Pug play should not exist, period.

=P not meaning to sound childish or rude, but adding "Period" on the end of your statement doesn't end the argument, doesn't strengthen your point, and really just sounds stupid.

Please explain to me why PuG's should get their own queue?

We're talking about people who are not willing to take 5 minutes and put a group together (or make friends to begin with). Their complaint is that they're losing, but they are unwilling to take the steps to fix that. I get there are times when PuG'ing is your only option (friends not on, only got a half hour or so, or simply not feeling social today.) Shouldn't an Massive Multiplayer Game be encouraging people to group up and step up?

If PuG's do get their own queue, why should they get rewards equal to the "group" queue?

The complain is once again, PuG's lose to premades because... because... better group composition, coordination, communication, etc... If PuG's get their own little casual happy-palace queue, why should they be rewarded for essentially wallowing in their sucktastic-ness. =P I know that sounds rude, but it's pretty much true.

Why do we need split queue's instead of (or with) proper matchmaking? Wouldn't a more flexible, inclusive system be better than split pools?

Leon, in a perfect world we would have cross server and split q's /etc. However, lets be realistic. BW isn't doing cross server anytime soon.

 

What we can have if we press them enough is a matchmaking system that makes premades wait at least a couple minutes if needed and allows for different faction teams.

 

This will end sync q'n outright. It will also end the problem where if multiple premades are q'n they still mostly fight pugs. It will also make it so that pugs are more likely to either be on a premade against another premade or they are pugvpug.

 

Lets please get behind that system. Making it into whether we get cross server or not is rather pointless since BW isn't going to anytime soon.

Agreed. That sounds like a decent suggestion and temporary fix to our problems. Would suffice as the problems you mentioned are some of the biggest in the current system. Sincerely hope Bioware has not thrown Cross Server off the table completely, it so easily and eloquently fixes an abundance of problems and loopholes.