MMR is killing BGs for me, and maybe you too

Strider__Roshin

20+ minute queues aren't fun, and as much as I love BGs the thought of logging in, and having to wait so long to get some solid PvP is quite discouraging.

I don't know about you guys, but I went from living in BGs to just logging in for my daily, and that's it.

Solariken

Agreed. And to make it worse, I have to wait half an hour just to almost always be put in a PUG group of 3 to fight two stacked premades.

BNOC

Do what other's are doing, re-roll another character, play 10-50 bg's then go straight in to low MMR BG's at 50 and smash everyone the whole way there. If you get the casuals complaining, something might happen.

DaveMoeDee

BNOC wrote: »

Do what other's are doing, re-roll another character, play 10-50 bg's then go straight in to low MMR BG's at 50 and smash everyone the whole way there. If you get the casuals complaining, something might happen.

I guess this is a good reason to use characters horseriding speed in the new horse-enabled BG.

Valabrog

MMR is terrible:

1. the more you play, the more you get punished, because you start to face former emperors, grand warlords and premades non stop..And i dont talk about months of playing - I mean weeks..If you play 20 bgs per day to learn pvp basics, system thinks you are pvp hardcore char and locks you in a cage with beasts. And there is no way back except maybe stop playing for couple of days (if mmr rank can be lowered at all..)

2. MMR system thinks, that team with 1 grand warlord and 3 sergeants/tyros is equal to a premade team..It thinks that 1 experienced player could best a premade with a support of 3 newbs.

3. I would love simple random draw - sometimes you would be lucky with team mates, sometimes not..But everyone could have a chance.

gannicus1389

not just having to wait for 10~20minutes, but when you get in a game after waiting that long it is usually vs 2 premades running cheesy builds (sloads/zaans/skoria), etc.

I am getting tired of thsi game.

bg needs cp, everything including proc sets hits w ay harder than supposed to.
impreg/fortified brass/heavy armor set up adds maybe like 15~20% resistence but you still get exploded by sorcs/nightblades spamming surprise attack, while if you are a DK your only doing dmg from class dots and a burst combo that depends on a very clunky 2 handeed skill that is very hard to land on expeerience or high mobile players...


my experience with this game is just going downhill, and I am not sure how long I am gonna stay.

honestly if they fix what is wrong, it is just going to bring something else.


i mean look at the new set. are you all looking forward to fight a premade that farmed ultimate on a target dummy fight you with 2k weapon dmg bonust for 10 seconds?
I am not.

BNOC

Valabrog wrote: »

1. the more you play, the more you get punished, because you start to face former emperors, grand warlords and premades non stop..And i dont talk about months of playing - I mean weeks..If you play 20 bgs per day to learn pvp basics, system thinks you are pvp hardcore char and locks you in a cage with beasts. And there is no way back except maybe stop playing for couple of days (if mmr rank can be lowered at all..)

No offence, but there's no penalty for new players - The leaderboards literally reflect the people that have played the most games.

Those 20 games a day you do, let's say they were all DM and you averaged 3k score a game (A new player could probably do that) - You've got 60k points.

A veteran who plays 10 games at 5.5k score (Easily achieved by a vet) has 55k points and sits behind you on the leaderboards.

What your point is expressing actually isn't a bad thing as it at least balances leaderboards a tiny tiny tiny bit better due to weaker players starting to score less in comparison. It also keeps improving players running parallel to players of equal skill. (Though the matchmaking may not be accurate at doing so)

However, the same way newer players shouldn't be competing against veterans in game, they shouldn't be competing on the leaderboards - Let alone topping them on time played.

Also another side to this - I or any Vet can make a level 10 sorc or even a level 50 and go in BG's and go 30-0+ over and over again and something has to be in place to pull you out of that crowd and say something isn't right here.

NordSwordnBoard

On PS4 the que has been really quick, no longer than 5 minutes. Even for specific games. The MMR, I hardly notice any effects from it... except the last match before scoring closed one Sunday, I found myself with a bunch of the other top 15 players on the board all in the same match.

brandonv516

NordSwordnBoard wrote: »

On PS4 the que has been really quick, no longer than 5 minutes. Even for specific games. The MMR, I hardly notice any effects from it... except the last match before scoring closed one Sunday, I found myself with a bunch of the other top 15 players on the board all in the same match.

Yeah top 16 players would be on low MMR characters....

That's how they get up the board quickly. You don't notice because your MMR is too low.

ChunkyCat

Man. OP hit the nail dead on.

I used to log in just to play BGs for a couple hours. Then it turned into getting two matches per hour with a whole lotta boredom in between.

Finally just re-rolled a new character, same specs as original, just to get around the MMR queue. I even hopped into a few sub-level 50 BGs and had some fun in there.

But all that level grinding, sky shard hunting, skill leveling is just mind numbing. As soon as this new toon hits that MMR wall, I’m done.

brandonv516

ChunkyCat wrote: »

Man. OP hit the nail dead on.

I used to log in just to play BGs for a couple hours. Then it turned into getting two matches per hour with a whole lotta boredom in between.

Finally just re-rolled a new character, same specs as original, just to get around the MMR queue. I even hopped into a few sub-level 50 BGs and had some fun in there.

But all that level grinding, sky shard hunting, skill leveling is just mind numbing. As soon as this new toon hits that MMR wall, I’m done.

Yep.

My main can't make the leaderboards. Ever.

The AP output isn't as competitive with Cyro as it was with fast queues.

Eventually alts will be in the same situation as main characters.

This should be a priority fix but it's likely "working as intended".

exeeter702

Yeah it really is unfortunate. Bgs arent even competitive by their very design, i dont see why ZOS feels the need to implement this system, for what? so other players have a more enjoyable experience. The issue here is an aggressive mmr system works very well for games with a healthy player base and a structured ranked format. Not for a bg system that emphasizes 3 team nonsense within an mmo that has other pvp options.

All that happens is you penalize those that prefer the small scale structurd nature of bgs. Premades vs pugs is another issue, but having solo queues be populated by a wide range of skill levels is hardly an issue.

Qwazzy

I like to play with my friends on my main characters. I can no longer do that post Summerset, unless we want to get one or two games an hour. What was wrong with the old system?

Strider__Roshin

Qwazz wrote: »

I like to play with my friends on my main characters. I can no longer do that post Summerset, unless we want to get one or two games an hour. What was wrong with the old system?

People got sick of premades so ZOS implemented this system so that people who play BGs all the time will constantly be stuck fighting premades.

Valabrog

BNOC wrote: »

Valabrog wrote: »

1. the more you play, the more you get punished, because you start to face former emperors, grand warlords and premades non stop..And i dont talk about months of playing - I mean weeks..If you play 20 bgs per day to learn pvp basics, system thinks you are pvp hardcore char and locks you in a cage with beasts. And there is no way back except maybe stop playing for couple of days (if mmr rank can be lowered at all..)

No offence, but there's no penalty for new players - The leaderboards literally reflect the people that have played the most games.

Those 20 games a day you do, let's say they were all DM and you averaged 3k score a game (A new player could probably do that) - You've got 60k points.

A veteran who plays 10 games at 5.5k score (Easily achieved by a vet) has 55k points and sits behind you on the leaderboards.

What your point is expressing actually isn't a bad thing as it at least balances leaderboards a tiny tiny tiny bit better due to weaker players starting to score less in comparison. It also keeps improving players running parallel to players of equal skill. (Though the matchmaking may not be accurate at doing so)

However, the same way newer players shouldn't be competing against veterans in game, they shouldn't be competing on the leaderboards - Let alone topping them on time played.

Also another side to this - I or any Vet can make a level 10 sorc or even a level 50 and go in BG's and go 30-0+ over and over again and something has to be in place to pull you out of that crowd and say something isn't right here.

The system should take into account medals per match and extract high value players right away..Maybe I missunderstood, but do you agree that players who played 20 matches and got 60k should stand higher than player who played 10 matches and got 50k?

I took a screenshot yesterday - duo pro sorcs wrecked 2 premades in a match..I was in a team witch those sorcs And most of the time we were 3 vs 4 vs 4. I admire such skill, but why me there? I ended up with 1/10, while they ended with 20+/5. Why punish player for trying to learn?

Thogard

Valabrog wrote: »

BNOC wrote: »

Valabrog wrote: »

1. the more you play, the more you get punished, because you start to face former emperors, grand warlords and premades non stop..And i dont talk about months of playing - I mean weeks..If you play 20 bgs per day to learn pvp basics, system thinks you are pvp hardcore char and locks you in a cage with beasts. And there is no way back except maybe stop playing for couple of days (if mmr rank can be lowered at all..)

No offence, but there's no penalty for new players - The leaderboards literally reflect the people that have played the most games.

Those 20 games a day you do, let's say they were all DM and you averaged 3k score a game (A new player could probably do that) - You've got 60k points.

A veteran who plays 10 games at 5.5k score (Easily achieved by a vet) has 55k points and sits behind you on the leaderboards.

What your point is expressing actually isn't a bad thing as it at least balances leaderboards a tiny tiny tiny bit better due to weaker players starting to score less in comparison. It also keeps improving players running parallel to players of equal skill. (Though the matchmaking may not be accurate at doing so)

However, the same way newer players shouldn't be competing against veterans in game, they shouldn't be competing on the leaderboards - Let alone topping them on time played.

Also another side to this - I or any Vet can make a level 10 sorc or even a level 50 and go in BG's and go 30-0+ over and over again and something has to be in place to pull you out of that crowd and say something isn't right here.

The system should take into account medals per match and extract high value players right away..Maybe I missunderstood, but do you agree that players who played 20 matches and got 60k should stand higher than player who played 10 matches and got 50k?

I took a screenshot yesterday - duo pro sorcs wrecked 2 premades in a match..I was in a team witch those sorcs And most of the time we were 3 vs 4 vs 4. I admire such skill, but why me there? I ended up with 1/10, while they ended with 20+/5. Why punish player for trying to learn?

What he’s saying is that the player who played 10 matches and got 5.5k per match would have spent even more time queueing than the other.

When # of games matters, someone with no wait time to get a game is going to be consistently above someone who has a 40 min wait time to play a 15 min game.

BigBadVolk

many said before what I said, but why not make a sep random queu that wont land you on leaderboards so its mostly for solos and randoms, and groups and people with MMR can go for a leaderboard queu or smth like that idk :d

exeeter702

BigBadVolk wrote: »

many said before what I said, but why not make a sep random queu that wont land you on leaderboards so its mostly for solos and randoms, and groups and people with MMR can go for a leaderboard queu or smth like that idk :d

Because segmenting the player base participating in bgs will make the queue times even worse. Leaderboards arent really the issue themselves, at least most intelligent players know not to place stock into them as they only reflect time spent, and there is no practical way to create a leaderboard system reflecting wins and performance when BGs are desgined they way they are in ESO.

The issue is forcing a matchmaking restriction to try and force balanced games in a pvp format that inherently cannot be balanced. And those that play it regularly get screwed. This issue only further exacerbates the leader board one because leaderboard score is ultimatley time spent, and if you are getting long queues, you arent making the leaderboard. But again. Most give *** all for leaderboard scores, they just want to play games on their main, which your suggestion would make that even harder.

Grimlok_S

Maybe it does degrade, or they adjusted the timers.

My stamdk was consistently having 20 minute solo queue, now it usually pops just after 5 minutes, if not the 10 minute mark.

Still, I am consistently being placed against coordinated teams while being the only player over cp160 on my team.

I have almost stopped playing the character despite preferring the playstyle.

Ankaridan

Echoing sentiments. I used to play BGs religiously and even gained several alliance ranks (in the mid-20s) from straight battlegrounds.

Now I find I only do the daily quest because of how long the queue is (usually 3 or more games to get even 2nd place team), and I'm guaranteed to be up against at least one premade in every match. I'm also willing to put money down that in the last 3 months, the only 'random battleground' it has put me into has been Deathmatch. With an average of 4-6 sorcs dominating everyone.

I don't think I've been on a winning team since Summerset came out, and my motivation to play in Battlegrounds as a solo player is severely diminished.

Hotdog_23

I enjoy BG but I must suck because my que times are generally just a minute or two on console.

Maybe separate the groups of premade only against other premades and individuals against other individuals grouped together. I only que as a alone and when I go up against what appears to be a premade group they just face roll the other 2 groups. But then again I have been in groups that work together well even if they are not a premade and face roll the other 2 teams.

Azramel

I love to play BGs but waiting 20+ minutes to get into a 10 minute game is getting old.

Raevyness

Has this issue been fixed or addressed in a patch? I've been getting much longer queues..

Bashev

Raevyness wrote: »

Has this issue been fixed or addressed in a patch? I've been getting much longer queues..

Average queue for me is 5 min. The queue time is very good right now.

Sylosi

What else do you expect, MMORPG devs don't learn. (mind you nether do MMORPG PvP players who continue to play/whine when it is clear PvP is a disaster in themepark MMORPGs)

PvP always falls off in these games so really you should design for that inevitability of low population, which means you shouldn't make your instanced PvP mode something like 4v4v4 because that sort of setup is the most difficult to matchmake, which in turn will just kill off your PvP even faster because you will be stuck in the catch 22 situation of bad matchmaking vs queue time with a small population.

So they should have either gone for 2v2/3v3 modes so they have more discrete units to match from the same sized population.

Or they should have gone the other way and done "battlegrounds" with something like 20 vs 20 and longer lasting matches, then limited the max pre-made to 4 to reduce their impact on a match. It also allows more options to balance out the 4 man with say a 3 man and 2 man on the other side, plus also lets them mix players easier, you can still stick in lower MMR players, because that works ok when you have 20 per side, unlike with teams of 4 where 2 lower MMR players are half the team.

But they don't learn, so they go with "e-sport" team sizes that are the worst possible option if your game does not have a big population to matchmake from. (and having three teams is just /facepalm in regard to matchmaking)

ChaosWotan

The PvP system in BG is so obviously flawed that anyone who is seriously into competitive gaming should just leave. It seems like most first generation pvp players have done that already. The activity on this forum is also reduced 50-60% (or more) compared to 2014/15.

I'm just doing BG to get motifs and "grind" AP (when the Cyro map is empty) because I want the Legate black dye for PvE. When a PvP system is a joke or a grind treat it for what it is, or leave.

NekoN3ko

CP is a huge crutch in PvP. Glad its not in BG's.

ChaosWotan

In order not to appear too negative it's prb best to clarify my last post above by saying that Cyro is only a grind because large-scale pvp has not changed in five years (except IC which broke the EP EU pvp community...), but new players today will likely love Cyro the way we did, back when it was new.

And BG today is only a joke from an esport competitive perspective or if you are a casual who never tries to improve. Despite the drawbacks there also positive aspects when fighting in BG.

My own skills have improved (slightly) in BG, and this incremental progress feels kind of good, though it feels absurd when I get assigned to a team where one skilled gamer has 20 kills and I got 1, which happened today.

How can one measure personal progress when a single team member does almost all the damage in one match and then change to a new team in the next match where all 4 are noobs, followed by a third match with team members who once again have a different mix of skill levels?

But if the goal and ambition are simply to chill with ten min of gaming, then I rather play BG than Battlefield or Call of Duty, which one may consider as a compliment

DaveMoeDee

Valabrog wrote: »

MMR is terrible:

1. the more you play, the more you get punished, because you start to face former emperors, grand warlords and premades non stop..And i dont talk about months of playing - I mean weeks..If you play 20 bgs per day to learn pvp basics, system thinks you are pvp hardcore char and locks you in a cage with beasts. And there is no way back except maybe stop playing for couple of days (if mmr rank can be lowered at all..)

2. MMR system thinks, that team with 1 grand warlord and 3 sergeants/tyros is equal to a premade team..It thinks that 1 experienced player could best a premade with a support of 3 newbs.

3. I would love simple random draw - sometimes you would be lucky with team mates, sometimes not..But everyone could have a chance.

I get the complaint about premades, but former emperors? Are you complaining because you aren't fighting noob fodder?

Iskiab

Stop doing premades, it’ll shave 20 minutes off your queue time per match.

chrightt

Actually MMRs are a very good system WHEN and only when they work properly. If the MMR system is working like an actual MMR system, your MMR wouldn't increase if you're constantly losing. If you've won 10 matches in a row and getting queued up with stronger people now that just seems fair to me. Of course, wait timers can be longer (especially if you're in a premade) but that is more "fun" for everyone else that won't get steamrolled by you because you're experienced with 10 wins in a row and they just hit CP160. Not fun for you but fun for the 11 others playing which sounds like a win if I were a dev.