Would you like competitive PVP arenas to be introduced in ESO ?

WolfyRaps

1. The format will be AvA (not AvAvA like the current BGs),
2. The arena maps will be much smaller, all the matches will be in deathmatch format,
3. The ELO like rating will be visible and the ladderboards would last season long,
4. Similar rated teams will fight each-other,
5. There will be unique rewards and titles for the top teams at the end of each season.

Ezorus

YES (2v2, 3v3)

More PvP options are needed, competitive modes and bigger team BGs. As long as it's no CP. WoW's competitive arena are a good model to go off as long as it doesn't go the same way of 40 mins kiting around a pillar with no one dying. Eso needs to introduce PvP gear that is gained through PvP and only best for it

RatchetKaar

YES (2v2, 3v3)

You asking for pvp arena's but zos never even bugfixed or updated bg's, never added new maps, never gave us the option to do custom bg's.
there is no way they would bother with arena's

Ofc that would be awesome and many ppl i know would enjoy it but zos always pushes away ever good pvp idea with
"no one would play it, so few ppl playing already"
in reality though, if you want ppl to play more bg's you have to give them a purpose as in:
-giving bg only rewards
-bugfixing
-updating bg mechanics (points/the way obj modes being played out etc.)
-adding new maps

So if they don't even bother paying any attention to bg's how is it suppose to get more ppl.
As far as i can see we are stuck in this until the new big mmo comes out bcz zos doesn't wanna take the time need to see if their pvp community can grow with a little bit of attention.
Good dream though, would be fun to do arenas.

Akselmo

YES (2v2, 3v3)

Could just remove the third team from BG's. Would be much more fun.

CooloutAC

WolfyRaps wrote: »

1. The format will be AvA (not AvAvA like the current BGs),
2. The arena maps will be much smaller, all the matches will be in deathmatch format,
3. The ELO like rating will be visible and the ladderboards would last season long,
4. Similar rated teams will fight each-other,
5. There will be unique rewards and titles for the top teams at the end of each season.

deathmatch is all tactics and no strategy and becaomes simply based on what class and metabuild outclasses another. Not as competitive and dynamice as the other game modes for an e-sport audience. But I agree that this game really needs a ranked and unranked options. ranked can be as it is now. unranked can be selecting whatever game mode you want. And a leaderboard with w/l and visible ratings and an actual mmr matchmaker that is protected by heavily penalizing quitters.

Because remember, no matter what system you implement the players will undermine it all if you don't safeguard and enforce it.

CooloutAC

Ezorus wrote: »

More PvP options are needed, competitive modes and bigger team BGs. As long as it's no CP. WoW's competitive arena are a good model to go off as long as it doesn't go the same way of 40 mins kiting around a pillar with no one dying. Eso needs to introduce PvP gear that is gained through PvP and only best for it

I'm not sure making it more gear based is the answer. I never considered wow an e-sport. To me games like LoL, Gw2, and CS are e-sports because its not based on a grind or obtained advantages before the match.

I think we just need to start with having a proper matchmaker and leaderboard and penalities for undermining them. otherwise nothing else will really matter.

Fhritz

Akselmo wrote: »

Could just remove the third team from BG's. Would be much more fun.

What ???? So you prefer standard and boring 2 team bg instead of a more dynamic and strategic 3 team battleground ?

Akselmo

YES (2v2, 3v3)

Fhritz wrote: »

Akselmo wrote: »

Could just remove the third team from BG's. Would be much more fun.

What ???? So you prefer standard and boring 2 team bg instead of a more dynamic and strategic 3 team battleground ?

Yes.

Elo106

YES (1v1, 2v2, 3v3)

Fhritz wrote: »

Akselmo wrote: »

Could just remove the third team from BG's. Would be much more fun.

What ???? So you prefer standard and boring 2 team bg instead of a more dynamic and strategic 3 team battleground ?

What I noticed is once you lead in first place the other 2 teams rather fight each other to secure 2nd place than team up against first place.

The idea that 2nd and 3rd place team up against first place is great in theory but it doesnt work in cyro or bgs.
Especially in BGs since 1st and 2nd get rewards

CooloutAC

Elo106 wrote: »

Fhritz wrote: »

Akselmo wrote: »

Could just remove the third team from BG's. Would be much more fun.

What ???? So you prefer standard and boring 2 team bg instead of a more dynamic and strategic 3 team battleground ?

What I noticed is once you lead in first place the other 2 teams rather fight each other to secure 2nd place than team up against first place.

The idea that 2nd and 3rd place team up against first place is great in theory but it doesnt work in cyro or bgs.
Especially in BGs since 1st and 2nd get rewards

They do this mostly for the daily in bg's. IMO 3 teams makes this mmo different then others, and really contradicts the opinion that everyone can be a tank to easily win in domination mode. With so many players and only a certain amount of flags you need a good team balance and strat.

I do agree with you about cyrodil. But its for the same reasons half this playerbase treats every game mode as a DM. They just don't respect the game and don't care. The enjoy stomping noobs and rage quitting players. They are not competitive.

Rahar

YES (2v2, 3v3)

2v2 and 3v3 arenas would be a lot more interesting than 1v1, which could quickly turn into a stalemate if someone decided to waste others' time and run a tank and block healing build, even in no-CP. So I'd skip that one.

HowlKimchi

YES (1v1, 2v2, 3v3)

Yes! But i'd ban proc sets.

fbours

NO

WolfyRaps wrote: »

1. The format will be AvA (not AvAvA like the current BGs),
2. The arena maps will be much smaller, all the matches will be in deathmatch format,
3. The ELO like rating will be visible and the ladderboards would last season long,
4. Similar rated teams will fight each-other,
5. There will be unique rewards and titles for the top teams at the end of each season.

No, WOW arena is full of elitist and toxicity - not a fun environment. Current state of pvp in wow has been reduced to nothing due to rated arena/bgs. Finding teams to play with will be extremely difficult as is in wow. You will have to play meta classes/builds in order to be on the top. Build diversity will be close to none as is in wow. You will only have those very few teams dominating the ladder while teams aspiring to climb will only get frustrated and quit.

ESO charm is being able to hop in at any time queue for a bg and have fun with a build I created - good, fun casual game. WOW rated arenas are worse that my physical master hws, and way more frustrating.

Also anyone that says wow arena model is good has never played wow and does not know its current state, that's from someone that has 2k rated exp in arena/bg. You want to play mistweaver? Sorry not meta, reroll!

CooloutAC

fbours wrote: »

WolfyRaps wrote: »

1. The format will be AvA (not AvAvA like the current BGs),
2. The arena maps will be much smaller, all the matches will be in deathmatch format,
3. The ELO like rating will be visible and the ladderboards would last season long,
4. Similar rated teams will fight each-other,
5. There will be unique rewards and titles for the top teams at the end of each season.

No, WOW arena is full of elitist and toxicity - not a fun environment. Current state of pvp in wow has been reduced to nothing due to rated arena/bgs. Finding teams to play with will be extremely difficult as is in wow. You will have to play meta classes/builds in order to be on the top. Build diversity will be close to none as is in wow. You will only have those very few teams dominating the ladder while teams aspiring to climb will only get frustrated and quit.

ESO charm is being able to hop in at any time queue for a bg and have fun with a build I created - good, fun casual game. WOW rated arenas are worse that my physical master hws, and way more frustrating.

Also anyone that says wow arena model is good has never played wow and does not know its current state, that's from someone that has 2k rated exp in arena/bg. You want to play mistweaver? Sorry not meta, reroll!

I prefer the GW2 model. elitism and toxicity will always be in competitive games. This game is no different. But people of all skill levels can be competitive. The definition of being competitive is wanting competitive matches. Wanting to stomp noobs is the opposite of competitive.

My issue is with players who think domination and relic mode are somewhow inferior game modes, when really they are just making up excuses for the fact they depend on overpowered builds and gear and can't play with any map strategy. . All brawn and no brains. All tactics and no strat. Like the above poster said, they only want certain meta dueling builds to be viable and refuse to play objectives and selfishly undermine the whole mmr system out of spite. This is the real problem.

Even if we gave these players their own deathmatch unranked practice qeue. They would still hop into the ranked qeue just to ragequit players because they have shown time and time again that is what they enjoy doing the most. They cried to ZOS that qeue times were too long and ZOS saw the playerbase is measly. So zos made random qeues and put in a solo mode. Which they undermine by syncdropping into or grouping on discord. If ZOS is not going to do anything about the cheating and poor sportsmanship by banning quitters, which means also those who decline qeues, while having an actual mmr qeue with a W/L record and Skill rating based leaderboard, I also suggest a maximum of 2 man premades. then this will never be a competitive community.

But to your point, I agree we should not reward these toxic players. Start with ensuring fair play before making any changes imo. I don't mind waiting 30 mins for a qeue if thats what it takes to build the playerbase again. make a ranked and unranked qeue instead of group and solo.

Grimlok_S

NO

My answer is secretly yes, but presently no.

There is no place for anything in this game to call itself competitive with the state of performance as it is, nevermind the class balance.

(They have also said they would never introduce 1v1/2v2/3v3 as that would mean they would need to balance classes for that purpose)

MurderMostFoul

YES (2v2, 3v3)

CooloutAC wrote: »

My issue is with players who think domination and relic mode are somewhow inferior game modes, when really they are just making up excuses for the fact they depend on overpowered builds and gear and can't play with any map strategy. . All brawn and no brains. All tactics and no strat. Like the above poster said, they only want certain meta dueling builds to be viable and refuse to play objectives and selfishly undermine the whole mmr system out of spite. This is the real problem.

This is a woefully misguided sentiment. The fact that people play Deathmatch during objective modes is not because those people are trying to undermine anything. They do so because deathmatch, actual player versus player combat, is more enjoyable than objective modes. The problem is a system that doesn't give the players adequate opportunity to play the way they want.

And many players (probably most) who prefer deathmatch still play the objective. But the fact is, deathmatch is the more challenging mode. I find myself needing to think more strategically to win deathmatch than any objective mode. Running to unoccupied flags, swooping in to grab undefended objectives, and playing keep away with a ball are obvious and simple strategies. These simple strategies which involve avoiding PVP are generally the most effective in objective modes. More "brains" are required to hold the lead in a close deathmatch game. Knowing which targets to focus, when to engage and disengage, shifting the location of a fight, etc. - these subtle strategic elements in Deathmatch require a more thoughtful approach then most objective games.

CooloutAC

MurderMostFoul wrote: »

CooloutAC wrote: »

My issue is with players who think domination and relic mode are somewhow inferior game modes, when really they are just making up excuses for the fact they depend on overpowered builds and gear and can't play with any map strategy. . All brawn and no brains. All tactics and no strat. Like the above poster said, they only want certain meta dueling builds to be viable and refuse to play objectives and selfishly undermine the whole mmr system out of spite. This is the real problem.

This is a woefully misguided sentiment. The fact that people play Deathmatch during objective modes is not because those people are trying to undermine anything. They do so because deathmatch, actual player versus player combat, is more enjoyable than objective modes. The problem is a system that doesn't give the players adequate opportunity to play the way they want.

And many players (probably most) who prefer deathmatch still play the objective. But the fact is, deathmatch is the more challenging mode. I find myself needing to think more strategically to win deathmatch than any objective mode. Running to unoccupied flags, swooping in to grab undefended objectives, and playing keep away with a ball are obvious and simple strategies. These simple strategies which involve avoiding PVP are generally the most effective in objective modes. More "brains" are required to hold the lead in a close deathmatch game. Knowing which targets to focus, when to engage and disengage, shifting the location of a fight, etc. - these subtle strategic elements in Deathmatch require a more thoughtful approach then most objective games.

More enjoyable to that small minority. Not to everyone else. I come from gw2 and other games where conquest mode is the most competitive. To me you are alluding to the fact as to why they are undermining it. Its all out of spite for zos removing deathmatch only option. They are intentionally being selfish, which whether they realize it or not because of their intentions undermines the whole mmr system.

I just unsubscribed from a guy on twitch last night who I thought was cool. But then I see him letting his teamates die, saying its an unwritten rule that you don't interfere with a 1v1. Meanwhile his buddy on the other team, who he let kill a nooby who plays his heart out everyday, had an obscene K/D but the least amount of points in the match lol. and the streamer who let him win was on the last place team and it almost looked like he threw the match.

Its disrespectful to the devs who created the game modes and also to the community and teamates who play to win matches and enjoy the game being about more then who has the most overpowered meta gear and builds. Which is really all deathmatch is about. Its not more strategic at all. Its only about fighting tactics.

I really would love to see a leaderboard based on W/L and skill rating. so people like you will learn how wrong you are about "simple strategies to avoid combat" Its not true in other games with conquest mode that have less players capping points so its definitely not true in this game with 3 teams. The best fighters still come out on top if they have equally good rotations and map strategy. Really thats just an excuse this community uses to justify their behavior and I find it shameful.

MurderMostFoul

YES (2v2, 3v3)

CooloutAC wrote: »

MurderMostFoul wrote: »

CooloutAC wrote: »

My issue is with players who think domination and relic mode are somewhow inferior game modes, when really they are just making up excuses for the fact they depend on overpowered builds and gear and can't play with any map strategy. . All brawn and no brains. All tactics and no strat. Like the above poster said, they only want certain meta dueling builds to be viable and refuse to play objectives and selfishly undermine the whole mmr system out of spite. This is the real problem.

This is a woefully misguided sentiment. The fact that people play Deathmatch during objective modes is not because those people are trying to undermine anything. They do so because deathmatch, actual player versus player combat, is more enjoyable than objective modes. The problem is a system that doesn't give the players adequate opportunity to play the way they want.

And many players (probably most) who prefer deathmatch still play the objective. But the fact is, deathmatch is the more challenging mode. I find myself needing to think more strategically to win deathmatch than any objective mode. Running to unoccupied flags, swooping in to grab undefended objectives, and playing keep away with a ball are obvious and simple strategies. These simple strategies which involve avoiding PVP are generally the most effective in objective modes. More "brains" are required to hold the lead in a close deathmatch game. Knowing which targets to focus, when to engage and disengage, shifting the location of a fight, etc. - these subtle strategic elements in Deathmatch require a more thoughtful approach then most objective games.

More enjoyable to that small minority. Not to everyone else. I come from gw2 and other games where conquest mode is the most competitive. To me you are alluding to the fact as to why they are undermining it. Its all out of spite for zos removing deathmatch only option. They are intentionally being selfish, which whether they realize it or not because of their intentions undermines the whole mmr system.

I just unsubscribed from a guy on twitch last night who I thought was cool. But then I see him letting his teamates die, saying its an unwritten rule that you don't interfere with a 1v1. Meanwhile his buddy on the other team, who he let kill a nooby who plays his heart out everyday, had an obscene K/D but the least amount of points in the match lol. and the streamer who let him win was on the last place team and it almost looked like he threw the match.

Its disrespectful to the devs who created the game modes and also to the community and teamates who play to win matches and enjoy the game being about more then who has the most overpowered meta gear and builds. Which is really all deathmatch is about. Its not more strategic at all. Its only about fighting tactics.

I really would love to see a leaderboard based on W/L and skill rating. so people like you will learn how wrong you are about "simple strategies to avoid combat" Its not true in other games with conquest mode that have less players capping points so its definitely not true in this game with 3 teams. The best fighters still come out on top if they have equally good rotations and map strategy. Really thats just an excuse this community uses to justify their behavior and I find it shameful.

Best solution, 4 modes:

Solo DM
Solo Objective
Group DM
Group Objective

Something tells me the DM options would be the most popular.

CooloutAC

Grimlok_S wrote: »

My answer is secretly yes, but presently no.

There is no place for anything in this game to call itself competitive with the state of performance as it is, nevermind the class balance.

(They have also said they would never introduce 1v1/2v2/3v3 as that would mean they would need to balance classes for that purpose)

1v1 is never a competitive thing in mmo's because there would always be class imbalances no matter what. 2v2 and 3v3 could be a thing and I can see that being deathmatch on much smaller maps. But it still would not be considered as competitive as a 4v4 conquest mode. because in the end you still want it to be less about team meta builds. You want map strategy to be a factor as well and you want more classes and roles viable. otherwise it can be very boring and exclude alot of players and make alot of content irrelevant.

Its almost like these players don't like the game they are playing and maybe should go design their own.

MurderMostFoul wrote: »

CooloutAC wrote: »

MurderMostFoul wrote: »

CooloutAC wrote: »

My issue is with players who think domination and relic mode are somewhow inferior game modes, when really they are just making up excuses for the fact they depend on overpowered builds and gear and can't play with any map strategy. . All brawn and no brains. All tactics and no strat. Like the above poster said, they only want certain meta dueling builds to be viable and refuse to play objectives and selfishly undermine the whole mmr system out of spite. This is the real problem.

This is a woefully misguided sentiment. The fact that people play Deathmatch during objective modes is not because those people are trying to undermine anything. They do so because deathmatch, actual player versus player combat, is more enjoyable than objective modes. The problem is a system that doesn't give the players adequate opportunity to play the way they want.

And many players (probably most) who prefer deathmatch still play the objective. But the fact is, deathmatch is the more challenging mode. I find myself needing to think more strategically to win deathmatch than any objective mode. Running to unoccupied flags, swooping in to grab undefended objectives, and playing keep away with a ball are obvious and simple strategies. These simple strategies which involve avoiding PVP are generally the most effective in objective modes. More "brains" are required to hold the lead in a close deathmatch game. Knowing which targets to focus, when to engage and disengage, shifting the location of a fight, etc. - these subtle strategic elements in Deathmatch require a more thoughtful approach then most objective games.

More enjoyable to that small minority. Not to everyone else. I come from gw2 and other games where conquest mode is the most competitive. To me you are alluding to the fact as to why they are undermining it. Its all out of spite for zos removing deathmatch only option. They are intentionally being selfish, which whether they realize it or not because of their intentions undermines the whole mmr system.

I just unsubscribed from a guy on twitch last night who I thought was cool. But then I see him letting his teamates die, saying its an unwritten rule that you don't interfere with a 1v1. Meanwhile his buddy on the other team, who he let kill a nooby who plays his heart out everyday, had an obscene K/D but the least amount of points in the match lol. and the streamer who let him win was on the last place team and it almost looked like he threw the match.

Its disrespectful to the devs who created the game modes and also to the community and teamates who play to win matches and enjoy the game being about more then who has the most overpowered meta gear and builds. Which is really all deathmatch is about. Its not more strategic at all. Its only about fighting tactics.

I really would love to see a leaderboard based on W/L and skill rating. so people like you will learn how wrong you are about "simple strategies to avoid combat" Its not true in other games with conquest mode that have less players capping points so its definitely not true in this game with 3 teams. The best fighters still come out on top if they have equally good rotations and map strategy. Really thats just an excuse this community uses to justify their behavior and I find it shameful.

Best solution, 4 modes:

Solo DM
Solo Objective
Group DM
Group Objective

Something tells me the DM options would be the most popular.

What Anet learned with guild wars, is that solo mode is not viable. It will always be exploited by sync dropping and there is absolutely no way to stop it. What they did instead was have a ranked mode and an unranked mode. And they heavily penalize quitting and penalize declining a qeue popup. Because alot of players will just see if they get the qeue pop at the same time and just decline it. Which is just as bad as joining and quitting a match. They allow full premades in unranked mode. but limit premades to 2 players in ranked mode which is a compromise.

And I would prefer to just have ranked stay random and as it is, with a leaderboard based on ELO skill rating or W/L with a W/L record shown. and unranked allowing people to choose any modes they want to qeue for just like it was.. I sure as hell don't want to play chaosball so give me a choice too lmao...

fbours

NO

CooloutAC wrote: »

fbours wrote: »

WolfyRaps wrote: »

1. The format will be AvA (not AvAvA like the current BGs),
2. The arena maps will be much smaller, all the matches will be in deathmatch format,
3. The ELO like rating will be visible and the ladderboards would last season long,
4. Similar rated teams will fight each-other,
5. There will be unique rewards and titles for the top teams at the end of each season.

No, WOW arena is full of elitist and toxicity - not a fun environment. Current state of pvp in wow has been reduced to nothing due to rated arena/bgs. Finding teams to play with will be extremely difficult as is in wow. You will have to play meta classes/builds in order to be on the top. Build diversity will be close to none as is in wow. You will only have those very few teams dominating the ladder while teams aspiring to climb will only get frustrated and quit.

ESO charm is being able to hop in at any time queue for a bg and have fun with a build I created - good, fun casual game. WOW rated arenas are worse that my physical master hws, and way more frustrating.

Also anyone that says wow arena model is good has never played wow and does not know its current state, that's from someone that has 2k rated exp in arena/bg. You want to play mistweaver? Sorry not meta, reroll!

I prefer the GW2 model. elitism and toxicity will always be in competitive games. This game is no different. But people of all skill levels can be competitive. The definition of being competitive is wanting competitive matches. Wanting to stomp noobs is the opposite of competitive.

My issue is with players who think domination and relic mode are somewhow inferior game modes, when really they are just making up excuses for the fact they depend on overpowered builds and gear and can't play with any map strategy. . All brawn and no brains. All tactics and no strat. Like the above poster said, they only want certain meta dueling builds to be viable and refuse to play objectives and selfishly undermine the whole mmr system out of spite. This is the real problem.

Even if we gave these players their own deathmatch unranked practice qeue. They would still hop into the ranked qeue just to ragequit players because they have shown time and time again that is what they enjoy doing the most. They cried to ZOS that qeue times were too long and ZOS saw the playerbase is measly. So zos made random qeues and put in a solo mode. Which they undermine by syncdropping into or grouping on discord. If ZOS is not going to do anything about the cheating and poor sportsmanship by banning quitters, which means also those who decline qeues, while having an actual mmr qeue with a W/L record and Skill rating based leaderboard, I also suggest a maximum of 2 man premades. then this will never be a competitive community.

But to your point, I agree we should not reward these toxic players. Start with ensuring fair play before making any changes imo. I don't mind waiting 30 mins for a qeue if thats what it takes to build the playerbase again. make a ranked and unranked qeue instead of group and solo.

I come from gw2 as well - since beta in fact, plat player/full legendaries all that stuff which means nothing now days. I do not prefer gw2 model. You are cornered to play a certain play style if you pick a class - no diversity. Thief, decap bot. Team loses, your fault. There is difference in toxicity, every online game, every forum has it, tell me something I don't know.

WOW arena, failing, GW2 conquest mode, failed, hard and you should know it if you come from gw2, WVW don't get me started, you either face bots or the same team/players over and over and over. Their population is slim, small, probably not much bigger than ESO bgs, probably smaller who knows.

Games are different, all with pros/cons. But comparing ESO to gw2/wow pvp is not comparing apples to apples. You can't. The grass is never greener, somehow people think it that way.

Also, I do mind waiting 30 mins, and am willing to bet most will as well, most people work several hrs a day, and surprisingly a lot gamers are parents now, that is just reality, games are no longer cater to 15 year old that have all the time in the world, and don't have money to spend.

CooloutAC

fbours wrote: »

CooloutAC wrote: »

fbours wrote: »

WolfyRaps wrote: »

1. The format will be AvA (not AvAvA like the current BGs),
2. The arena maps will be much smaller, all the matches will be in deathmatch format,
3. The ELO like rating will be visible and the ladderboards would last season long,
4. Similar rated teams will fight each-other,
5. There will be unique rewards and titles for the top teams at the end of each season.

No, WOW arena is full of elitist and toxicity - not a fun environment. Current state of pvp in wow has been reduced to nothing due to rated arena/bgs. Finding teams to play with will be extremely difficult as is in wow. You will have to play meta classes/builds in order to be on the top. Build diversity will be close to none as is in wow. You will only have those very few teams dominating the ladder while teams aspiring to climb will only get frustrated and quit.

ESO charm is being able to hop in at any time queue for a bg and have fun with a build I created - good, fun casual game. WOW rated arenas are worse that my physical master hws, and way more frustrating.

Also anyone that says wow arena model is good has never played wow and does not know its current state, that's from someone that has 2k rated exp in arena/bg. You want to play mistweaver? Sorry not meta, reroll!

I prefer the GW2 model. elitism and toxicity will always be in competitive games. This game is no different. But people of all skill levels can be competitive. The definition of being competitive is wanting competitive matches. Wanting to stomp noobs is the opposite of competitive.

My issue is with players who think domination and relic mode are somewhow inferior game modes, when really they are just making up excuses for the fact they depend on overpowered builds and gear and can't play with any map strategy. . All brawn and no brains. All tactics and no strat. Like the above poster said, they only want certain meta dueling builds to be viable and refuse to play objectives and selfishly undermine the whole mmr system out of spite. This is the real problem.

Even if we gave these players their own deathmatch unranked practice qeue. They would still hop into the ranked qeue just to ragequit players because they have shown time and time again that is what they enjoy doing the most. They cried to ZOS that qeue times were too long and ZOS saw the playerbase is measly. So zos made random qeues and put in a solo mode. Which they undermine by syncdropping into or grouping on discord. If ZOS is not going to do anything about the cheating and poor sportsmanship by banning quitters, which means also those who decline qeues, while having an actual mmr qeue with a W/L record and Skill rating based leaderboard, I also suggest a maximum of 2 man premades. then this will never be a competitive community.

But to your point, I agree we should not reward these toxic players. Start with ensuring fair play before making any changes imo. I don't mind waiting 30 mins for a qeue if thats what it takes to build the playerbase again. make a ranked and unranked qeue instead of group and solo.

I come from gw2 as well - since beta in fact, plat player/full legendaries all that stuff which means nothing now days. I do not prefer gw2 model. You are cornered to play a certain play style if you pick a class - no diversity. Thief, decap bot. Team loses, your fault. There is difference in toxicity, every online game, every forum has it, tell me something I don't know.

WOW arena, failing, GW2 conquest mode, failed, hard and you should know it if you come from gw2, WVW don't get me started, you either face bots or the same team/players over and over and over. Their population is slim, small, probably not much bigger than ESO bgs, probably smaller who knows.

Games are different, all with pros/cons. But comparing ESO to gw2/wow pvp is not comparing apples to apples. You can't. The grass is never greener, somehow people think it that way.

Also, I do mind waiting 30 mins, and am willing to bet most will as well, most people work several hrs a day, and surprisingly a lot gamers are parents now, that is just reality, games are no longer cater to 15 year old that have all the time in the world, and don't have money to spend.

I hover between g3 and plat but you think it failed Compared to ESO which literally feels like it only has 50 people playing bg's? In GW2 the matches are way more competitive and I don't see the same people in every match even at offpeak times. What failed to you? NO diversity? The only class that is rarely played is warrior, which for years has always been nerfed into the ground for the avg player. But of course the top players can still dominate with it. Every other class is played with a diversity of builds. You can look at sites like metabattle which rate them all.

All these games are mmo's with similar 4v4 arena modes.

I wait 30 mins for a dungeon sometimes. The qeues definitely don't have to be instant but ESO needs to stop claiming this game has an mmr, because at this point it definitely does not. Whats great about this game is you can do other things while queuing, like play cyrodil or duel. Most competitive players will prefer competitive matches and waiting 20-30 mins to get one would be worth it and at the same time would build the playerbase back up. Most people I know who play this game won't even do the daily its so brutal lol.

And so what are you saying? In real life "parents" have to give up atheletic sports too? Thats as lame as the excuse that crashing and disconnects are reasons not to penalize quitting and que decliners. Meanwhile RIOT does it with LoL and those matches can last up to 45 mins long.

Bashev

YES (2v2, 3v3)

I also think that DM and Chaos Ball are fun with 4vs4vs4. All the other modes should be 4vs4. Capture the relic and domination could be really fun if they were 4vs4.

MurderMostFoul

YES (2v2, 3v3)

Bashev wrote: »

I also think that DM and Chaos Ball are fun with 4vs4vs4. All the other modes should be 4vs4. Capture the relic and domination could be really fun if they were 4vs4.

Sadly, I don't think that any of the game modes would work with only two teams, unless they found a way to match two very evenly powered teams against one another. But with current balance and matchmaking, the vast majority of two team matches would be pure domination by one team over the less powerful team.

On second thought, it might work with pre-made teams. At least the onus is on the teams to put together functional four-mans. But in solo queue, one team is almost always going to be significantly stronger than the other. That power differential would be just as outcome determinative in domination and capture the relic as it is in Deathmatch.

Bashev

YES (2v2, 3v3)

MurderMostFoul wrote: »

Bashev wrote: »

I also think that DM and Chaos Ball are fun with 4vs4vs4. All the other modes should be 4vs4. Capture the relic and domination could be really fun if they were 4vs4.

Sadly, I don't think that any of the game modes would work with only two teams, unless they found a way to match two very evenly powered teams against one another. But with current balance and matchmaking, the vast majority of two team matches would be pure domination by one team over the less powerful team.

On second thought, it might work with pre-made teams. At least the onus is on the teams to put together functional four-mans. But in solo queue, one team is almost always going to be significantly stronger than the other. That power differential would be just as outcome determinative in domination and capture the relic as it is in Deathmatch.

I agree here and that is why I want DM and Chaos Ball to be 3 teams. But the other modes, they just dont work with 3 teams. You will win if you just skip any pvp.

MurderMostFoul

YES (2v2, 3v3)

Bashev wrote: »

MurderMostFoul wrote: »

Bashev wrote: »

I also think that DM and Chaos Ball are fun with 4vs4vs4. All the other modes should be 4vs4. Capture the relic and domination could be really fun if they were 4vs4.

Sadly, I don't think that any of the game modes would work with only two teams, unless they found a way to match two very evenly powered teams against one another. But with current balance and matchmaking, the vast majority of two team matches would be pure domination by one team over the less powerful team.

On second thought, it might work with pre-made teams. At least the onus is on the teams to put together functional four-mans. But in solo queue, one team is almost always going to be significantly stronger than the other. That power differential would be just as outcome determinative in domination and capture the relic as it is in Deathmatch.

I agree here and that is why I want DM and Chaos Ball to be 3 teams. But the other modes, they just dont work with 3 teams. You will win if you just skip any pvp.

Yeah, it's problematic both ways.
Team v Team = One team dominates (at least in solo queue)
Team v Team v Team = Avoiding PvP combat is far too effective

Just give us a dedicated DM queue, lol.

Bashev

YES (2v2, 3v3)

MurderMostFoul wrote: »

Bashev wrote: »

MurderMostFoul wrote: »

Bashev wrote: »

I also think that DM and Chaos Ball are fun with 4vs4vs4. All the other modes should be 4vs4. Capture the relic and domination could be really fun if they were 4vs4.

Sadly, I don't think that any of the game modes would work with only two teams, unless they found a way to match two very evenly powered teams against one another. But with current balance and matchmaking, the vast majority of two team matches would be pure domination by one team over the less powerful team.

On second thought, it might work with pre-made teams. At least the onus is on the teams to put together functional four-mans. But in solo queue, one team is almost always going to be significantly stronger than the other. That power differential would be just as outcome determinative in domination and capture the relic as it is in Deathmatch.

I agree here and that is why I want DM and Chaos Ball to be 3 teams. But the other modes, they just dont work with 3 teams. You will win if you just skip any pvp.

Yeah, it's problematic both ways.
Team v Team = One team dominates (at least in solo queue)
Team v Team v Team = Avoiding PvP combat is far too effective

Just give us a dedicated DM queue, lol.

Now this is something we need!!! Sadly noone hear us.

fbours

NO

CooloutAC wrote: »

fbours wrote: »

CooloutAC wrote: »

fbours wrote: »

WolfyRaps wrote: »

1. The format will be AvA (not AvAvA like the current BGs),
2. The arena maps will be much smaller, all the matches will be in deathmatch format,
3. The ELO like rating will be visible and the ladderboards would last season long,
4. Similar rated teams will fight each-other,
5. There will be unique rewards and titles for the top teams at the end of each season.

No, WOW arena is full of elitist and toxicity - not a fun environment. Current state of pvp in wow has been reduced to nothing due to rated arena/bgs. Finding teams to play with will be extremely difficult as is in wow. You will have to play meta classes/builds in order to be on the top. Build diversity will be close to none as is in wow. You will only have those very few teams dominating the ladder while teams aspiring to climb will only get frustrated and quit.

ESO charm is being able to hop in at any time queue for a bg and have fun with a build I created - good, fun casual game. WOW rated arenas are worse that my physical master hws, and way more frustrating.

Also anyone that says wow arena model is good has never played wow and does not know its current state, that's from someone that has 2k rated exp in arena/bg. You want to play mistweaver? Sorry not meta, reroll!

I prefer the GW2 model. elitism and toxicity will always be in competitive games. This game is no different. But people of all skill levels can be competitive. The definition of being competitive is wanting competitive matches. Wanting to stomp noobs is the opposite of competitive.

My issue is with players who think domination and relic mode are somewhow inferior game modes, when really they are just making up excuses for the fact they depend on overpowered builds and gear and can't play with any map strategy. . All brawn and no brains. All tactics and no strat. Like the above poster said, they only want certain meta dueling builds to be viable and refuse to play objectives and selfishly undermine the whole mmr system out of spite. This is the real problem.

Even if we gave these players their own deathmatch unranked practice qeue. They would still hop into the ranked qeue just to ragequit players because they have shown time and time again that is what they enjoy doing the most. They cried to ZOS that qeue times were too long and ZOS saw the playerbase is measly. So zos made random qeues and put in a solo mode. Which they undermine by syncdropping into or grouping on discord. If ZOS is not going to do anything about the cheating and poor sportsmanship by banning quitters, which means also those who decline qeues, while having an actual mmr qeue with a W/L record and Skill rating based leaderboard, I also suggest a maximum of 2 man premades. then this will never be a competitive community.

But to your point, I agree we should not reward these toxic players. Start with ensuring fair play before making any changes imo. I don't mind waiting 30 mins for a qeue if thats what it takes to build the playerbase again. make a ranked and unranked qeue instead of group and solo.

I come from gw2 as well - since beta in fact, plat player/full legendaries all that stuff which means nothing now days. I do not prefer gw2 model. You are cornered to play a certain play style if you pick a class - no diversity. Thief, decap bot. Team loses, your fault. There is difference in toxicity, every online game, every forum has it, tell me something I don't know.

WOW arena, failing, GW2 conquest mode, failed, hard and you should know it if you come from gw2, WVW don't get me started, you either face bots or the same team/players over and over and over. Their population is slim, small, probably not much bigger than ESO bgs, probably smaller who knows.

Games are different, all with pros/cons. But comparing ESO to gw2/wow pvp is not comparing apples to apples. You can't. The grass is never greener, somehow people think it that way.

Also, I do mind waiting 30 mins, and am willing to bet most will as well, most people work several hrs a day, and surprisingly a lot gamers are parents now, that is just reality, games are no longer cater to 15 year old that have all the time in the world, and don't have money to spend.

I hover between g3 and plat but you think it failed Compared to ESO which literally feels like it only has 50 people playing bg's? In GW2 the matches are way more competitive and I don't see the same people in every match even at offpeak times. What failed to you? NO diversity? The only class that is rarely played is warrior, which for years has always been nerfed into the ground for the avg player. But of course the top players can still dominate with it. Every other class is played with a diversity of builds. You can look at sites like metabattle which rate them all.

All these games are mmo's with similar 4v4 arena modes.

I wait 30 mins for a dungeon sometimes. The qeues definitely don't have to be instant but ESO needs to stop claiming this game has an mmr, because at this point it definitely does not. Whats great about this game is you can do other things while queuing, like play cyrodil or duel. Most competitive players will prefer competitive matches and waiting 20-30 mins to get one would be worth it and at the same time would build the playerbase back up. Most people I know who play this game won't even do the daily its so brutal lol.

And so what are you saying? In real life "parents" have to give up atheletic sports too? Thats as lame as the excuse that crashing and disconnects are reasons not to penalize quitting and que decliners. Meanwhile RIOT does it with LoL and those matches can last up to 45 mins long.

Gw2 matches are not competitive, not close, not a little bit, just no. Build diversity, there are 8 classes, each class has one, some two meta specs. Use a different spec on higher rating guess what, you will get *** on by all your teammates, theif decap monkey, guardian support.

What failed to me, hackers, bots, griefing, devs focusing in other mods, no build diversity (metabattle, funny look at godsofpvp, more informative site), no expansion in what 4 years? nothing added. Getting matched to bronze players due to the declining population, to name a few a d the cycle continues. I am wondering if we are taking about the same game.

I am not defending ESO, nor claiming ESO mmr system Is good. But to say other games do it better is also not true, far from it. Very few players want to wait 20-30 mins, very very few, design a game around those players and say bye bye to your player base. Go look at WOW and you will understand. What you are saying will do the opposite from building a player base. People don't wa t to wait 20-30 mins for a 15 min game. I would also like to see different pvp game modes btw. But playing other games like wow and gw2 I do not want ESO to do what they are doing.

I don't understand your last paragraph about parents and athletic sports, nor your analogy. You lost some credibility now that you brought LoL to this topic. Want to compare ESO to minecraft while you are at it? Or rollercoaster tycoon?

fbours

NO

MurderMostFoul wrote: »

Bashev wrote: »

MurderMostFoul wrote: »

Bashev wrote: »

I also think that DM and Chaos Ball are fun with 4vs4vs4. All the other modes should be 4vs4. Capture the relic and domination could be really fun if they were 4vs4.

Sadly, I don't think that any of the game modes would work with only two teams, unless they found a way to match two very evenly powered teams against one another. But with current balance and matchmaking, the vast majority of two team matches would be pure domination by one team over the less powerful team.

On second thought, it might work with pre-made teams. At least the onus is on the teams to put together functional four-mans. But in solo queue, one team is almost always going to be significantly stronger than the other. That power differential would be just as outcome determinative in domination and capture the relic as it is in Deathmatch.

I agree here and that is why I want DM and Chaos Ball to be 3 teams. But the other modes, they just dont work with 3 teams. You will win if you just skip any pvp.

Yeah, it's problematic both ways.
Team v Team = One team dominates (at least in solo queue)
Team v Team v Team = Avoiding PvP combat is far too effective

Just give us a dedicated DM queue, lol.

This is something I can agree with!

CooloutAC

Bashev wrote: »

MurderMostFoul wrote: »

Bashev wrote: »

I also think that DM and Chaos Ball are fun with 4vs4vs4. All the other modes should be 4vs4. Capture the relic and domination could be really fun if they were 4vs4.

Sadly, I don't think that any of the game modes would work with only two teams, unless they found a way to match two very evenly powered teams against one another. But with current balance and matchmaking, the vast majority of two team matches would be pure domination by one team over the less powerful team.

On second thought, it might work with pre-made teams. At least the onus is on the teams to put together functional four-mans. But in solo queue, one team is almost always going to be significantly stronger than the other. That power differential would be just as outcome determinative in domination and capture the relic as it is in Deathmatch.

I agree here and that is why I want DM and Chaos Ball to be 3 teams. But the other modes, they just dont work with 3 teams. You will win if you just skip any pvp.

not true at all. thats impossible and you know you are exaggerating lol. I really wished the leaderboard was based on skill rating and showed W/L record so you guys could at least attempt to be competitive and learn how wrong you are.

CooloutAC

fbours wrote: »

CooloutAC wrote: »

fbours wrote: »

CooloutAC wrote: »

fbours wrote: »

WolfyRaps wrote: »

1. The format will be AvA (not AvAvA like the current BGs),
2. The arena maps will be much smaller, all the matches will be in deathmatch format,
3. The ELO like rating will be visible and the ladderboards would last season long,
4. Similar rated teams will fight each-other,
5. There will be unique rewards and titles for the top teams at the end of each season.

No, WOW arena is full of elitist and toxicity - not a fun environment. Current state of pvp in wow has been reduced to nothing due to rated arena/bgs. Finding teams to play with will be extremely difficult as is in wow. You will have to play meta classes/builds in order to be on the top. Build diversity will be close to none as is in wow. You will only have those very few teams dominating the ladder while teams aspiring to climb will only get frustrated and quit.

ESO charm is being able to hop in at any time queue for a bg and have fun with a build I created - good, fun casual game. WOW rated arenas are worse that my physical master hws, and way more frustrating.

Also anyone that says wow arena model is good has never played wow and does not know its current state, that's from someone that has 2k rated exp in arena/bg. You want to play mistweaver? Sorry not meta, reroll!

I prefer the GW2 model. elitism and toxicity will always be in competitive games. This game is no different. But people of all skill levels can be competitive. The definition of being competitive is wanting competitive matches. Wanting to stomp noobs is the opposite of competitive.

My issue is with players who think domination and relic mode are somewhow inferior game modes, when really they are just making up excuses for the fact they depend on overpowered builds and gear and can't play with any map strategy. . All brawn and no brains. All tactics and no strat. Like the above poster said, they only want certain meta dueling builds to be viable and refuse to play objectives and selfishly undermine the whole mmr system out of spite. This is the real problem.

Even if we gave these players their own deathmatch unranked practice qeue. They would still hop into the ranked qeue just to ragequit players because they have shown time and time again that is what they enjoy doing the most. They cried to ZOS that qeue times were too long and ZOS saw the playerbase is measly. So zos made random qeues and put in a solo mode. Which they undermine by syncdropping into or grouping on discord. If ZOS is not going to do anything about the cheating and poor sportsmanship by banning quitters, which means also those who decline qeues, while having an actual mmr qeue with a W/L record and Skill rating based leaderboard, I also suggest a maximum of 2 man premades. then this will never be a competitive community.

But to your point, I agree we should not reward these toxic players. Start with ensuring fair play before making any changes imo. I don't mind waiting 30 mins for a qeue if thats what it takes to build the playerbase again. make a ranked and unranked qeue instead of group and solo.

I come from gw2 as well - since beta in fact, plat player/full legendaries all that stuff which means nothing now days. I do not prefer gw2 model. You are cornered to play a certain play style if you pick a class - no diversity. Thief, decap bot. Team loses, your fault. There is difference in toxicity, every online game, every forum has it, tell me something I don't know.

WOW arena, failing, GW2 conquest mode, failed, hard and you should know it if you come from gw2, WVW don't get me started, you either face bots or the same team/players over and over and over. Their population is slim, small, probably not much bigger than ESO bgs, probably smaller who knows.

Games are different, all with pros/cons. But comparing ESO to gw2/wow pvp is not comparing apples to apples. You can't. The grass is never greener, somehow people think it that way.

Also, I do mind waiting 30 mins, and am willing to bet most will as well, most people work several hrs a day, and surprisingly a lot gamers are parents now, that is just reality, games are no longer cater to 15 year old that have all the time in the world, and don't have money to spend.

I hover between g3 and plat but you think it failed Compared to ESO which literally feels like it only has 50 people playing bg's? In GW2 the matches are way more competitive and I don't see the same people in every match even at offpeak times. What failed to you? NO diversity? The only class that is rarely played is warrior, which for years has always been nerfed into the ground for the avg player. But of course the top players can still dominate with it. Every other class is played with a diversity of builds. You can look at sites like metabattle which rate them all.

All these games are mmo's with similar 4v4 arena modes.

I wait 30 mins for a dungeon sometimes. The qeues definitely don't have to be instant but ESO needs to stop claiming this game has an mmr, because at this point it definitely does not. Whats great about this game is you can do other things while queuing, like play cyrodil or duel. Most competitive players will prefer competitive matches and waiting 20-30 mins to get one would be worth it and at the same time would build the playerbase back up. Most people I know who play this game won't even do the daily its so brutal lol.

And so what are you saying? In real life "parents" have to give up atheletic sports too? Thats as lame as the excuse that crashing and disconnects are reasons not to penalize quitting and que decliners. Meanwhile RIOT does it with LoL and those matches can last up to 45 mins long.

Gw2 matches are not competitive, not close, not a little bit, just no. Build diversity, there are 8 classes, each class has one, some two meta specs. Use a different spec on higher rating guess what, you will get *** on by all your teammates, theif decap monkey, guardian support.

What failed to me, hackers, bots, griefing, devs focusing in other mods, no build diversity (metabattle, funny look at godsofpvp, more informative site), no expansion in what 4 years? nothing added. Getting matched to bronze players due to the declining population, to name a few a d the cycle continues. I am wondering if we are taking about the same game.

I am not defending ESO, nor claiming ESO mmr system Is good. But to say other games do it better is also not true, far from it. Very few players want to wait 20-30 mins, very very few, design a game around those players and say bye bye to your player base. Go look at WOW and you will understand. What you are saying will do the opposite from building a player base. People don't wa t to wait 20-30 mins for a 15 min game. I would also like to see different pvp game modes btw. But playing other games like wow and gw2 I do not want ESO to do what they are doing.

I don't understand your last paragraph about parents and athletic sports, nor your analogy. You lost some credibility now that you brought LoL to this topic. Want to compare ESO to minecraft while you are at it? Or rollercoaster tycoon?

8 classes with multiple viable specs is not build diversity? Quite a contrast from ESO that has stamden, magcro and stam sorc which dominate other classes by a long mile. But why are you getting offtopic? What does any of this have to do with having competitive matches and a real leaderboard? Do you not know the definition? If people didn't cry about qeu8e times and we had a real mmr, it doesn't matter what level you are playing at you can and should be able to have competitive matches. Without someone so selfish they think they are entitled to stomp noobs. The complete opposite of competitive.

What failed to you is whats wrong with eso, not gw2 bud. There are problems in every pc game. But barely noticeable in gw2, unlike eso which most people in their right mind avoid. Extremely ironic lol.

The mmr system does not exist, because people cry about long qeue times and sync drop in the solo qeue and are constantly rolling toons like the dudes in u50 cyrodil lmao. . Thats why even if we give these selfish players , that ruin matches for competitive players who try to win in each game mode, a DM qeue they will still tier slum in the other gamodes when they get bored or get tired of waiting in qeue. Thats why ZOS took it away from them in the first place. Noone plays cause there is nothing competitive about it.

My last paragraph means the fact you are a parent is no excuse. make time to play the game if you want to play it. Just like people do with real life athletic sports where they have to drive to a physical location other then their desk chair. gimme a break. LOL is the only pc game popular by my standards and the main reason is because their core community is as competitive as the original counterstrike community was and because they ban quitters and smurfers. BTW a term coined by that community like stackers were coined by cs..

Kalik_Gold

YES (1v1, 2v2, 3v3)

Yes I loved this in other competitor MMO's