How to make battlegrounds succeed

Solariken

Battlegrounds are my crack. They are truly glorious and my personal favorite thing about ESO. The only thing missing in this excellent feature of ESO is population, and it's sad because it doesn't have to be this way. Here is a bulletproof plan for ZOS to bring about the dawn of a great new bg era:

1. Open up battleground access to base game. If you truly care about the health of this facet of ESO, you have to do this. You must. I highly doubt anyone who bought Morrowind will feel shorted, and if they do the rest of us will talk sense into them. I'm sure this is already something ZOS plans to do eventually, but there is such a thing as too late.

1-1. Restrict leaderboard rewards to the Morrowind DLC and ESO+. If there needs to be some bg-related incentive to buy Morrowind (or battleground-specific DLC) then this is it. Base-game players will still receive the same AP and Rewards for the Worthy as the rest of us.

2. Revert battlegrounds to non-CP. If you want them to be accessible and attractive to the widest audience possible, remove the obligatory thousand-hour grind that is Champion rank. I have fun playing both CP and non-CP, but I don't want to be smashing low-CP characters into the dirt based on the fact that I've been playing longer. Bg's NEED to be non-CP or a large pool of potential bg'ers is completely alienated.

3. Increase AP rewards. Gains should of course be kept significantly below what is available in Cyrodiil, but there needs to be incentive to play bg's. @del9 had a great suggestion in chat recently to award additional AP at a 1:1 ratio with medal score, which provides further incentive to play the objectives.

4. Allow the option of selecting specific game modes, but set it up like the dungeon finder where the best rewards are reserved for those who select random mode.

5. (Bonus) Reduce the deserter penalty to 10 minutes. I understand that the penalty is there to discourage deserters but 99% of the time it just hoses the unlucky player who suffers a game crash (and it's happened to all of us).

Feel free to offer up other selections guys, hopefully ZOS eyes wander in here. Bg's or bust!

@ZOS_BrianWheeler @ZOS_GinaBruno

KRBMMO

1 - Separate pre-mades from pickup groups
2 - Separate pre-mades from pickup groups
3 - Separate pre-mades from pickup groups
4 - Separate pre-mades from pickup groups
5 - Separate pre-mades from pickup groups
6 - Separate pre-mades from pickup groups
7 - Separate pre-mades from pickup groups

Solariken

KRBMMO wrote: »

1 - Separate pre-mades from pickup groups
2 - Separate pre-mades from pickup groups
3 - Separate pre-mades from pickup groups
4 - Separate pre-mades from pickup groups
5 - Separate pre-mades from pickup groups
6 - Separate pre-mades from pickup groups
7 - Separate pre-mades from pickup groups

Haha I knew this would be hotly suggested. It's a good idea but IMO something that should be addressed after a healthy population is already achieved. If added right away it would just punish people who like to play with their friends/guilds by forcing them to sit through impossibly long queue times.

Kartalin

I think if BGs were part of the base game and accessible by all we’d have enough population for both cp and no cp queues.

Jawasa

Give us a good ranking and matchmaking system so it becomes competativ. Then throw in perfect asylum weapons or master weapons for top 3%.

Sylosi

Solariken wrote: »

KRBMMO wrote: »

1 - Separate pre-mades from pickup groups
2 - Separate pre-mades from pickup groups
3 - Separate pre-mades from pickup groups
4 - Separate pre-mades from pickup groups
5 - Separate pre-mades from pickup groups
6 - Separate pre-mades from pickup groups
7 - Separate pre-mades from pickup groups

Haha I knew this would be hotly suggested. It's a good idea but IMO something that should be addressed after a healthy population is already achieved. If added right away it would just punish people who like to play with their friends/guilds by forcing them to sit through impossibly long queue times.

You won't get a healthy population unless matches are good, one of the reasons instanced PvP dies off so quick in nearly every MMORPG is they don't have even decent matchmaking (which includes things like pre-mades vs solo groups), and by the time they do bother to add matchmaking it is too late the players interested in that have left the game, matchmaking is way more important than things like being to choose the mode or AP rewards.

But then I guess it is already too late for this game, as you can't add "competitive" PvP 3 years in when anyone that really had an interest in that sort of thing would have left long ago, because this game has had nothing as far as that is concerned. (and let's not even go into what a joke having the matches 3-way is)

Solariken

Jawasa wrote: »

Give us a good ranking and matchmaking system so it becomes competativ. Then throw in perfect asylum weapons or master weapons for top 3%.

Special weapons would be a huge boon for sure. Definitely yes.

I'm on the fence though about ultra-competitive matchmaking. I would hate to see the community toxify and be reduced to a never-ending dck measuring contest. I'd rather we just fight each other for fun and cool rewards.

ChunkyCat

It all sounds so reasonable.

Ankael07

Allow an audiance to watch any game without including the said audiance to the queue so it doesnt affect PVP players.
The arena in Oblivion has left a nostalgic scar on my soul...

Rainraven

Ankael07 wrote: »

Allow an audiance to watch any game without including the said audiance to the queue so it doesnt affect PVP players.
The arena in Oblivion has left a nostalgic scar on my soul...

That would be awesome.

Also, please everything the OP suggests. All of those things. I think there are a lot of us who would play BGs who aren't right now because there are so many barriers. You want people to play them too, right ZOS? Then make them accessible.

And let the premades find each other, I doubt many of the highest tier are excited to roflstomp pugs instead of getting a good fight. The answer to that problem is not just weeding out everybody else from the whole experience.

BroanBeast1215

they could do a lot for BG popularity if they fixed the stupid bugs that either

1.) give you a infinite load screen after death
2.) have your character stuck in 3person/1st person limbo until the match is nearly over

Apherius

BroanBeast1215 wrote: »

they could do a lot for BG popularity if they fixed the stupid bugs that either

1.) give you a infinite load screen after death
2.) have your character stuck in 3person/1st person limbo until the match is nearly over

3) Kill you instantly if you walk on a volcanic rune under/near a ennemi base - this is actually and shouldn't be the case.

del9

1. - Yes. OPEN IT UP TO BASE GAME @ZOS_GinaBruno . This will make all of the next suggestions possible.

I think all of the next suggestions would make the game better, the only thing I'd add is have matchmaking, or some kind of casual queue. Pugs arent having fun at prime time.

But none of this would be feasible without increasing pop first. OPEN UP BGS TO BASE GAME

BroanBeast1215

Apherius wrote: »

BroanBeast1215 wrote: »

they could do a lot for BG popularity if they fixed the stupid bugs that either

1.) give you a infinite load screen after death
2.) have your character stuck in 3person/1st person limbo until the match is nearly over

3) Kill you instantly if you walk on a volcanic rune under/near a ennemi base.

QFE!!

Nogawd

I vote too for opening to the base game. I pay for my sub and buy a bunch of crowns every month. I don't need this exclusive for me and BG's were not any reason why I sub. I would rather have more players.

Apherius

BroanBeast1215 wrote: »

Apherius wrote: »

BroanBeast1215 wrote: »

they could do a lot for BG popularity if they fixed the stupid bugs that either

1.) give you a infinite load screen after death
2.) have your character stuck in 3person/1st person limbo until the match is nearly over

3) Kill you instantly if you walk on a volcanic rune under/near a ennemi base.

QFE!!

Damn , i'm french, i don't understand what this mean xD

Just for precision , what I said is actually the case , it's something that i don't want anymore on battleground, the " instant kill zone " prevent you to get in the ennemies base" , but players use this " instant kill zone " in order to win a match ... even if nobody planned to get in their base.

paallterrain148

1. Add a penalty for every pre grouped member who is in your party. Say 8% of the score needed to win. If you have 2 randoms you start with 16% of the score needed to win. 4 randoms would be 32% ahead. I just picked those numbers, may need some tweaking

2. Give AP for kills. Make it much less then Cyrodiil but with no diminished returns.

3. Fix cp in PvP or remove it again. I play CP PvP because that's where the population is. I much prefer no CP though.

4. Everything else listed above. We get CP on console in a few days. I'll give bgs a go after, but I can already see the writing on the wall. Meta premade or don't even que up.

Beardimus

Agree with all the points. 1.1 is brilliant as often that's been used as a counter.

I'm not fussed about game type queue, as I think it will lead to longer queues. I'm ok with random.

And I concur on seperate queues too, in that pre-made PUG PWNers need to be stopped. There's a few on Xbox EU that get everyone's goat and put em off.

leeux

What would make *me* want to do Battlegrounds:

* Change the matches to be just 4v4 (the three way fights are stupid in any "competitive" system, to say the least.)
* Assure that EVERY group has the same number of members BEFORE the match starts (it still happens that match starts with one or more groups having less members.)
* CP vs noCP: I don't mind either mode, BUT separate queues: CP players should face CP players, and noCP players vs noCP, or else it's nonsensical for a supposedly """"competitive""" activity. Even better, let players choose if they want to queue on the CP mode or noCP, but then EVERYONE is subject to the same rules (i.e. CP players gets the CP system disabled).
* Premades vs solo, this has to go... or, alternatively, some sort of battlelevel buff has to be introduced to solo players that happen to land in a premade battle... nothing too unbalanced, but the field has to be leveled the same for everyone, and voice comms is TOO unbalancing in such matches (f.e. coordinating focusing targets makes all the difference in certain fights.)

These, of course, are my opinion only... but I don't participate in battlegrounds in the current state and I won't ever participate unless something is done to the system... just my 2c.

gabriebe

Make it so you can enter 12-24 people as a group and sort them into teams of your choosing as a battlemaster. Lots of guild vs guild action, or intra guild competitions, could be done this way. If they don't want to do this in BGs, they could at least repurpose the Stormhaven dueling area for that purpose.

del9

paallterrain148 wrote: »

1. Add a penalty for every pre grouped member who is in your party. Say 8% of the score needed to win. If you have 2 randoms you start with 16% of the score needed to win. 4 randoms would be 32% ahead. I just picked those numbers, may need some tweaking

2. Give AP for kills. Make it much less then Cyrodiil but with no diminished returns.

3. Fix cp in PvP or remove it again. I play CP PvP because that's where the population is. I much prefer no CP though.

4. Everything else listed above. We get CP on console in a few days. I'll give bgs a go after, but I can already see the writing on the wall. Meta premade or don't even que up.

I talked about your #2 idea with Solariken. We both agreed AP for all kills would promote more kill farming during objective matches, which is already a problem. Instead, AP for medal scores would motivate more players to play objectives. And a 1 to 1 ratio would still be significantly less AP than Cyro. It would also reward solo players who did well but got paired with a bad team.

But enjoy non cp while you still can! The change hasn't been as bad as I feared, but it won't be your same BGs anymore. And if you are <400 cp, rip in pieces.

DeHei

Just be as good as your opponents, then you will have success

Emma_Overload

Kartalin wrote: »

I think if BGs were part of the base game and accessible by all we’d have enough population for both cp and no cp queues.

THIS. BY the way, I think there is some faulty logic by the ZOS devs, who apparently think that offering us the choice of CP and No-CP would "split" the BG population. I know for a fact that there are many players (like me) who REFUSE to play No-CP, and there are obviously some players here on the forums who quit playing BGs once they were made CP only.

The solution is so simple... just offer BOTH No-CP and CP, and let players make the choice. I would rather wait in a long queue than not play at all!

Thogard

del9 wrote: »

paallterrain148 wrote: »

1. Add a penalty for every pre grouped member who is in your party. Say 8% of the score needed to win. If you have 2 randoms you start with 16% of the score needed to win. 4 randoms would be 32% ahead. I just picked those numbers, may need some tweaking

2. Give AP for kills. Make it much less then Cyrodiil but with no diminished returns.

3. Fix cp in PvP or remove it again. I play CP PvP because that's where the population is. I much prefer no CP though.

4. Everything else listed above. We get CP on console in a few days. I'll give bgs a go after, but I can already see the writing on the wall. Meta premade or don't even que up.

I talked about your #2 idea with Solariken. We both agreed AP for all kills would promote more kill farming during objective matches, which is already a problem. Instead, AP for medal scores would motivate more players to play objectives. And a 1 to 1 ratio would still be significantly less AP than Cyro. It would also reward solo players who did well but got paired with a bad team.

But enjoy non cp while you still can! The change hasn't been as bad as I feared, but it won't be your same BGs anymore. And if you are <400 cp, rip in pieces.

I really really like that AP idea

ecru

bg's suck because there are three teams instead of two. i've made enough posts about this already and don't feel like typing up another one, but the tl;dr is that three teams doesn't allow for any matchmaking, gives more of an advantage to premades than two larger teams would, and forces people to be engaged by up to 2x their numbers throughout the entire match. it's not fun or interesting, sorry.

no one here gets it, zos doesn't seem to get it, so yeah. it works in every other game in existence for a reason.

del9 wrote: »

I think all of the next suggestions would make the game better, the only thing I'd add is have matchmaking, or some kind of casual queue.

if anyone could come up with a way for a matchmaking system to account for a third team, i'd love to hear it.

(you can't)

leeux wrote: »

What would make *me* want to do Battlegrounds:

* Change the matches to be just 4v4 (the three way fights are stupid in any "competitive" system, to say the least.)

i'm guessing you've never pvp'd in another mmorpg? the smaller matches are, the more easily they are imbalanced by a strong team, or a strong healer on one team.

4v4 would only ever be suited for a premade-only, ranked mode. 8v8 is the absolute minimum zos should be looking at for normal bg's.

Drakkdjinn

Solariken wrote: »

Battlegrounds are my crack. They are truly glorious and my personal favorite thing about ESO. The only thing missing in this excellent feature of ESO is population, and it's sad because it doesn't have to be this way. Here is a bulletproof plan for ZOS to bring about the dawn of a great new bg era:

1. Open up battleground access to base game. If you truly care about the health of this facet of ESO, you have to do this. You must. I highly doubt anyone who bought Morrowind will feel shorted, and if they do the rest of us will talk sense into them. I'm sure this is already something ZOS plans to do eventually, but there is such a thing as too late.

1-1. Restrict leaderboard rewards to the Morrowind DLC and ESO+. If there needs to be some bg-related incentive to buy Morrowind (or battleground-specific DLC) then this is it. Base-game players will still receive the same AP and Rewards for the Worthy as the rest of us.

2. Revert battlegrounds to non-CP. If you want them to be accessible and attractive to the widest audience possible, remove the obligatory thousand-hour grind that is Champion rank. I have fun playing both CP and non-CP, but I don't want to be smashing low-CP characters into the dirt based on the fact that I've been playing longer. Bg's NEED to be non-CP or a large pool of potential bg'ers is completely alienated.

3. Increase AP rewards. Gains should of course be kept significantly below what is available in Cyrodiil, but there needs to be incentive to play bg's. @del9 had a great suggestion in chat recently to award additional AP at a 1:1 ratio with medal score, which provides further incentive to play the objectives.

4. Allow the option of selecting specific game modes, but set it up like the dungeon finder where the best rewards are reserved for those who select random mode.

5. (Bonus) Reduce the deserter penalty to 10 minutes. I understand that the penalty is there to discourage deserters but 99% of the time it just hoses the unlucky player who suffers a game crash (and it's happened to all of us).

Feel free to offer up other selections guys, hopefully ZOS eyes wander in here. Bg's or bust!

@ZOS_BrianWheeler @ZOS_GinaBruno

100% - Take note ZoS

ecru

something else i forgot to mention about "matchmaking" with three teams is that assuming perfect matchmaking (which is impossible with three teams, but let's just pretend it is), you would still lose two thirds of your games.

lose-lose-win.

lose-lose-lose-win-lose-lose-win-lose-win. sound fun?

even the best players would be lucky to see a 40-45% win rate and a consistent win rate that high with three teams would give you a very very high ELO, meaning that if you were somehow good enough to come close to winning almost half of your games, every game would be stacked against you. your teammates would be awful, and your opponents would be very good. on to of that, some players would dip down to sub 30, possibly sub 25%. nobody likes to lose that much.

alephthiago

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/346372/battlegrounds-should-be-open-for-everyone-serious-talk-zos/p1

paallterrain148

I talked about your #2 idea with Solariken. We both agreed AP for all kills would promote more kill farming during objective matches, which is already a problem. Instead, AP for medal scores would motivate more players to play objectives. And a 1 to 1 ratio would still be significantly less AP than Cyro. It would also reward solo players who did well but got paired with a bad team.

But enjoy non cp while you still can! The change hasn't been as bad as I feared, but it won't be your same BGs anymore. And if you are <400 cp, rip in pieces.

Good call on that. AP for medal score would be more in line with objectives. I like that better.

Thogard

ecru wrote: »

something else i forgot to mention about "matchmaking" with three teams is that assuming perfect matchmaking (which is impossible with three teams, but let's just pretend it is), you would still lose two thirds of your games.

lose-lose-win.

lose-lose-lose-win-lose-lose-win-lose-win. sound fun?

even the best players would be lucky to see a 40-45% win rate and a consistent win rate that high with three teams would give you a very very high ELO, meaning that if you were somehow good enough to come close to winning almost half of your games, every game would be stacked against you. your teammates would be awful, and your opponents would be very good. on to of that, some players would dip down to sub 30, possibly sub 25%. nobody likes to lose that much.

I’m at a 60% win rate so I don’t know about your numbers there.. but I aggressively play objectives and queue with partial or full premades at least 50% of the time

ecru

Thogard wrote: »

ecru wrote: »

something else i forgot to mention about "matchmaking" with three teams is that assuming perfect matchmaking (which is impossible with three teams, but let's just pretend it is), you would still lose two thirds of your games.

lose-lose-win.

lose-lose-lose-win-lose-lose-win-lose-win. sound fun?

even the best players would be lucky to see a 40-45% win rate and a consistent win rate that high with three teams would give you a very very high ELO, meaning that if you were somehow good enough to come close to winning almost half of your games, every game would be stacked against you. your teammates would be awful, and your opponents would be very good. on to of that, some players would dip down to sub 30, possibly sub 25%. nobody likes to lose that much.

I’m at a 60% win rate so I don’t know about your numbers there.. but I aggressively play objectives and queue with partial or full premades at least 50% of the time

right, you're at 60% because there's no matchmaking. my post was suggesting what would happen if there was working matchmaking.