Upcoming Changes to Battleground Queues

Unknown_Redemption

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Hello all!

When Battlegrounds first launched, we initially saw some data and feedback showing a preference specifically towards the Deathmatch game mode. With the recent removal of the option to choose a game mode when queuing for a Battleground, we’ve now seen an uptick in players choosing to treat any game mode as Deathmatch. In an effort to increase Battleground population and interest, the Solo and Group queues will only offer the Deathmatch game mode for a period of time. This change will occur during next week's maintenances, on September 20 for PC/Mac/Stadia and September 22 on consoles.

After we have a chance to digest some of the feedback and data from this experiment, we’ll decide on what the next steps should be for Battleground queue options and consider the best way to add the other Battleground game modes back in.

Thanks for your continued interest and support! We’re excited to hear what you think.

Will you consider removing the achievement requirements for the BG Housing items?

Nirntrotter

Wow, sorry what? I mean, I generally agree with the sentiment that the non-DM modes are poorly designed and that taking choice away from people generally does not fix the problem or make them suddenly like what they didn't like in the first place. Mid-scale battleground modes are usually my favourite content in MMOs, except for ESO, so yeah, I get it. I just wonder what this will mean going forward. Wouldn't want to get stuck with achievs that I suddenly can't complete anymore.

ValarMorghulis1896

Coerfroid wrote: »

Really? This is very sad news.
Removing the tactical game-modes will remove a lot of fun and excitement.
A lot of players enjoy the tactical elements over blunt ganking and playing for objectives actually encourages teamplay.

This.
...the most boring game-mode is the only one remaining and Hrothgar is still activatet? I like ZOS' humor - not. Thank you for nothing.

Jaimeh

I don't run BGs too often, but personally I like crazy king, and it's a pity they are disabling it along with the other modes, even temporarily, in favour of death match. These modes also have achievements associated with them as well, so if someone wants to go after them, they'll have to wait if and when they come back @ZOS_GinaBruno?

Coerfroid

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Hello all!

...we’ve now seen an uptick in players choosing to treat any game mode as Deathmatch...

Am I the only one that feels reminded of the movie "Idiocracy"? So there is a number od players unable to grasp objectives and they are getting to decide how the game is to be played?
What will be next? Removing tank roles because " ...an uptick of players choosing to fake-tank..."?

Really, I do appreciate devs looking into the issue of queue times and decrease of interest, but I do think they are on the wrong road here.

How about a "ranked mode" that may be deathmatch-only for simplicities sake, with weekly/mothly ranking rewards and a "casual mode" for players that prefer tactical game-modes that employ teamplay and skill?

Xairvaiss

What a horrible idea. I'm as achievement hunter having only flag and relic games to do, and you take off it from me...
Why don't let all enjoy BGs with variety of options?
- Solo DM
- Group DM
- Solo Objective
- Group Objective
- Is this so hard? With this move you will give for everybody what they want...

Luke_Flamesword

Lol, if we will have only deathmatch for now, can we at least have working achievment for kills (I really want this red dye)

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/579613/pit-hero-achievement-bugged/

It's not working since last Midyear mayhem in June - it's almost 3 months now without any feedback...

gariondavey

Coerfroid wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Hello all!

...we’ve now seen an uptick in players choosing to treat any game mode as Deathmatch...

Am I the only one that feels reminded of the movie "Idiocracy"? So there is a number od players unable to grasp objectives and they are getting to decide how the game is to be played?
What will be next? Removing tank roles because " ...an uptick of players choosing to fake-tank..."?

Really, I do appreciate devs looking into the issue of queue times and decrease of interest, but I do think they are on the wrong road here.

How about a "ranked mode" that may be deathmatch-only for simplicities sake, with weekly/mothly ranking rewards and a "casual mode" for players that prefer tactical game-modes that employ teamplay and skill?

@Coerfroid I don't think you understand...

Dm players could easily, and have, been able to win at any game mode.
We prefer to play games as dm because it requires the most pvp skill vs avoiding players and actual pvp combat. I'm a member of one, if not, the biggest bg guilds on pc na. It is full of very talented players who enjoy fighting against other players in complete pvp combat.

Acting like dm players are dumb is disingenuous and inaccurate.

And for what it is worth, most of us would be fine with group dm queue + solo random queue (with a slight increase in dm frequency vs the current likelihood of getting dm).

Soul_Soliloquy

Much sadness, flag games are my fave BG’s

VaranisArano

gariondavey wrote: »

Coerfroid wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Hello all!

...we’ve now seen an uptick in players choosing to treat any game mode as Deathmatch...

Am I the only one that feels reminded of the movie "Idiocracy"? So there is a number od players unable to grasp objectives and they are getting to decide how the game is to be played?
What will be next? Removing tank roles because " ...an uptick of players choosing to fake-tank..."?

Really, I do appreciate devs looking into the issue of queue times and decrease of interest, but I do think they are on the wrong road here.

How about a "ranked mode" that may be deathmatch-only for simplicities sake, with weekly/mothly ranking rewards and a "casual mode" for players that prefer tactical game-modes that employ teamplay and skill?

Coerfroid I don't think you understand...

Dm players could easily, and have, been able to win at any game mode.
We prefer to play games as dm because it requires the most pvp skill vs avoiding players and actual pvp combat. I'm a member of one, if not, the biggest bg guilds on pc na. It is full of very talented players who enjoy fighting against other players in complete pvp combat.

Acting like dm players are dumb is disingenuous and inaccurate.

And for what it is worth, most of us would be fine with group dm queue + solo random queue (with a slight increase in dm frequency vs the current likelihood of getting dm).

Let's see if I can figure out the logic of this.

"We can totally win all the "play the objective" games if we played the objectives but we choose not to play the objective because that's not what we want to do. But we would totally win if we did."

Okay.

Because when you don't play the objective, you lose.

I believe you. You would totally win if you played the objective. Most players who are good at killing are also good at doing the type of PVP that happens to succeed at BG objectives.

However, from my perspective, I'm afraid the only thing I can see is that your team lost, because you weren't playing the objective.

Do what makes you happy, I guess.

ClawOfTheTwoMoons

Personally the only objective mode I like is crazy king, but if this means I don't have to play chaos ball or CtR I'm fine with it~

Skoomah

VaranisArano wrote: »

gariondavey wrote: »

Coerfroid wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Hello all!

...we’ve now seen an uptick in players choosing to treat any game mode as Deathmatch...

Am I the only one that feels reminded of the movie "Idiocracy"? So there is a number od players unable to grasp objectives and they are getting to decide how the game is to be played?
What will be next? Removing tank roles because " ...an uptick of players choosing to fake-tank..."?

Really, I do appreciate devs looking into the issue of queue times and decrease of interest, but I do think they are on the wrong road here.

How about a "ranked mode" that may be deathmatch-only for simplicities sake, with weekly/mothly ranking rewards and a "casual mode" for players that prefer tactical game-modes that employ teamplay and skill?

Coerfroid I don't think you understand...

Dm players could easily, and have, been able to win at any game mode.
We prefer to play games as dm because it requires the most pvp skill vs avoiding players and actual pvp combat. I'm a member of one, if not, the biggest bg guilds on pc na. It is full of very talented players who enjoy fighting against other players in complete pvp combat.

Acting like dm players are dumb is disingenuous and inaccurate.

And for what it is worth, most of us would be fine with group dm queue + solo random queue (with a slight increase in dm frequency vs the current likelihood of getting dm).

Let's see if I can figure out the logic of this.

"We can totally win all the "play the objective" games if we played the objectives but we choose not to play the objective because that's not what we want to do. But we would totally win if we did."

Okay.

Because when you don't play the objective, you lose.

I believe you. You would totally win if you played the objective. Most players who are good at killing are also good at doing the type of PVP that happens to succeed at BG objectives.

However, from my perspective, I'm afraid the only thing I can see is that your team lost, because you weren't playing the objective.

Do what makes you happy, I guess.

The underlying reason a lot of BG players ignore game mode objectives is because the game mode objectives are poorly designed because they actively encourage people to not fight each other to win the game.

I can’t tell you how many times I’m playing Domination and opponents run away from me when they see me running up to them to fight them at a flag.

Crazy King isn’t much different because it’s just Domination with moving flags. People run away from actually fighting you.

Capture the Relic is the same. People just pick up the relic and run away from you. They pop an immovable potion as they are grabbing the relic and run off.

Chaos Ball is slightly different. You get mega tanks that don’t actually fight and just hold the ball the entire match. Or you engage in fighting against another team and half the match is over as the Chaos ball holder is way on the other side of the map.

The common denominator here is that those game modes actively discourage fighting.

Deathmatch minded players are looking for a boxing match. The other game mode players are looking for track and field. It’s two completely different types of sports.

Foto1

thanks, Zos! we have been waiting for this for almost a year. it makes sense to return to pvp again

Taggund

Alendrin wrote: »

The problem with some of the modes is they encourage the players to avoid pvp. In a pvp zone. I like this change but would be happy if the other modes were redesigned to encourage pvp not encourage avoiding pvp in order to win.

That is part of the strategy for an objective BG, Know when to fight, know where to fight, and even who (which team) to fight. There are still fights, they just are associated with meeting a goal other than just killing.

FrankonPC

Coerfroid wrote: »

Really? This is very sad news.
Removing the tactical game-modes will remove a lot of fun and excitement.
A lot of players enjoy the tactical elements over blunt ganking and playing for objectives actually encourages teamplay.

Yes, there will alway be the random group that just won't grasp how the objectives work and end up with twice the kills and half the victory points. But it only takes so long to learn.

It would be a very bad move to remove them completely and I trust in the commujnity to give a constructive feedback about it.

Now, if there are those who actually prefer a dedicated deathmatch mode over random tactical modes, then separate queues may be the answer.

I think you and a few other people in this chat are underestimating how team oriented deathmatch actually is.

If you look at domination, on some maps and a lot of the time you're encouraged to go to individual flags and take them yourselves. Don't fight anyone, just flip flags.

Crazy king is the same thing after more than one flag. Just go to the new spawn.

Capture the relic is side swiping a group that went too far in on another relic, you're more successful by doing what others are not doing.

TDM on the other hand requires no weak links, healers are rewarded more because they're the most valuable asset in tdm and if you go off by yourself, you get rekt.

Pure tanks aren't as valuable in TDM, but tanky players with damage or roots/snares can be based on group dynamics.

A lot of the flag games could be great if they were tinkered with, but they more often than not do not promote what you say you enjoy. Adjusting them would be great for everyone.

FrankonPC

Skoomah wrote: »

The underlying reason a lot of BG players ignore game mode objectives is because the game mode objectives are poorly designed because they actively encourage people to not fight each other to win the game.

I can’t tell you how many times I’m playing Domination and opponents run away from me when they see me running up to them to fight them at a flag.

Crazy King isn’t much different because it’s just Domination with moving flags. People run away from actually fighting you.

Capture the Relic is the same. People just pick up the relic and run away from you. They pop an immovable potion as they are grabbing the relic and run off.

Chaos Ball is slightly different. You get mega tanks that don’t actually fight and just hold the ball the entire match. Or you engage in fighting against another team and half the match is over as the Chaos ball holder is way on the other side of the map.

The common denominator here is that those game modes actively discourage fighting.

Deathmatch minded players are looking for a boxing match. The other game mode players are looking for track and field. It’s two completely different types of sports.

Exactly this. There's no contention over flag games, if there is you typically lose. If domination had one or two less flags it would be a great game mode because it's contested flags. Still flag oriented to win, but you have to fight to win them. In its current state you don't fight if you want to win.

gariondavey

VaranisArano wrote: »

gariondavey wrote: »

Coerfroid wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Hello all!

...we’ve now seen an uptick in players choosing to treat any game mode as Deathmatch...

Am I the only one that feels reminded of the movie "Idiocracy"? So there is a number od players unable to grasp objectives and they are getting to decide how the game is to be played?
What will be next? Removing tank roles because " ...an uptick of players choosing to fake-tank..."?

Really, I do appreciate devs looking into the issue of queue times and decrease of interest, but I do think they are on the wrong road here.

How about a "ranked mode" that may be deathmatch-only for simplicities sake, with weekly/mothly ranking rewards and a "casual mode" for players that prefer tactical game-modes that employ teamplay and skill?

Coerfroid I don't think you understand...

Dm players could easily, and have, been able to win at any game mode.
We prefer to play games as dm because it requires the most pvp skill vs avoiding players and actual pvp combat. I'm a member of one, if not, the biggest bg guilds on pc na. It is full of very talented players who enjoy fighting against other players in complete pvp combat.

Acting like dm players are dumb is disingenuous and inaccurate.

And for what it is worth, most of us would be fine with group dm queue + solo random queue (with a slight increase in dm frequency vs the current likelihood of getting dm).

Let's see if I can figure out the logic of this.

"We can totally win all the "play the objective" games if we played the objectives but we choose not to play the objective because that's not what we want to do. But we would totally win if we did."

Okay.

Because when you don't play the objective, you lose.

I believe you. You would totally win if you played the objective. Most players who are good at killing are also good at doing the type of PVP that happens to succeed at BG objectives.

However, from my perspective, I'm afraid the only thing I can see is that your team lost, because you weren't playing the objective.

Do what makes you happy, I guess.

Depends what you consider "winning"

BalticBlues

I do not mind a Deathmatch game once in a while, but NOTHING ELSE?
I prefer having ALL MODES. Only one mode is just BORING.
Looks like I will take a break then.

TequilaFire

Just bite the bullet and go back to being able to choose the BG mode.
No BGs for me if you take away the variety.
If you really want people to come back adjust the new OP sets you just introduced causing players to not want to play any PvP mode.

jaws343

FrankonPC wrote: »

Skoomah wrote: »

The underlying reason a lot of BG players ignore game mode objectives is because the game mode objectives are poorly designed because they actively encourage people to not fight each other to win the game.

I can’t tell you how many times I’m playing Domination and opponents run away from me when they see me running up to them to fight them at a flag.

Crazy King isn’t much different because it’s just Domination with moving flags. People run away from actually fighting you.

Capture the Relic is the same. People just pick up the relic and run away from you. They pop an immovable potion as they are grabbing the relic and run off.

Chaos Ball is slightly different. You get mega tanks that don’t actually fight and just hold the ball the entire match. Or you engage in fighting against another team and half the match is over as the Chaos ball holder is way on the other side of the map.

The common denominator here is that those game modes actively discourage fighting.

Deathmatch minded players are looking for a boxing match. The other game mode players are looking for track and field. It’s two completely different types of sports.

Exactly this. There's no contention over flag games, if there is you typically lose. If domination had one or two less flags it would be a great game mode because it's contested flags. Still flag oriented to win, but you have to fight to win them. In its current state you don't fight if you want to win.

Domination would be far better as straight king of the hill in one spot. Whoever can hold the 1 point the longest for the match wins.

Same for Crazy King. 1 spot that rotates, forcing everyone to that one spot to fight over it.

Lady_Galadhiel

For real? Ok so people really only want to see the easiest and most banal game mode Bgs have to offer?

Woozywyvern

If this is a permanent change, please make the Assault and Support Skill Lines available in other areas of the game.

Marto

Skoomah wrote: »

The underlying reason a lot of BG players ignore game mode objectives is because the game mode objectives are poorly designed because they actively encourage people to not fight each other to win the game.

And that is good design for a PVP team gamemode.

Fighting should not be the only thing to do.

Counter Strike is not just shooting and getting kills. There is area denial, distractions, and sneaking around to plant a bomb.
Battle Royales are not just shooting and getting kills. There's hiding, positioning, and looting.
MOBAs are not just getting kills. There's farming, pushing, supporting.

Players being able to top the scoreboard and winning with 2 kills and 20 deaths is not only a valid playstyle, it's the playstyle that should be encouraged in any objective gamemode.

Feljax

I'm not a fan of DM only but hopefully this test gives ZoS some data to work with. Hoping the other game types return soon, though. I play a dedicated healer and I like the variety of game modes that exist now.

A suggestion I have is to make it so that the system would never put you in the same game mode as you last played thus avoiding the RNG of getting placed in the same game mode multiple times in a row, which I think many would agree can be frustrating. For example, I like capture the relic but not over and over again.

Also, it would be nice if support classes got a little more love in terms of medals. I mean, it's not a huge deal being at the bottom of the list all the time but it is a little bit of a bummer.

MurderMostFoul

Lady_Galadhiel wrote: »

For real? Ok so people really only want to see the easiest and most banal game mode Bgs have to offer?

As someone who has literally played and won 1,000s of BG matches, I don't understand how people can possibly believe that deathmatch is "easiest."

It is far easier to win objective modes where you can entirely avoid combat. Just sprint to open flags in domination and crazy King, sneak capture flags in capture the relic, and grab and run away with the ball in chaos ball. Those basic tactics are incredibly easy, and make winning feel cheap. It's far more difficult to consistently win player versus player combat engagements, have proper target selection, threat assessment, death avoidance, and team combat coordination, all which are required to win a game of death match. Sure, if you happen to be on a stacked team in death match against significantly inferior opponents, it'll be easier. But that's true of objective modes as well. But when team power levels are at least somewhat balanced, winning death match presents the greatest challenge.

I pvp because I enjoy creating builds and testing them in dynamic combat against other players. BG death match is the best forum to do so. All the other BG modes de-emphasize combat, and hence fail to provide adequate assessment of the combat power of builds, or the combat skill of players.

KhajiitLivesMatter

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Hello all!

When Battlegrounds first launched, we initially saw some data and feedback showing a preference specifically towards the Deathmatch game mode. With the recent removal of the option to choose a game mode when queuing for a Battleground, we’ve now seen an uptick in players choosing to treat any game mode as Deathmatch. In an effort to increase Battleground population and interest, the Solo and Group queues will only offer the Deathmatch game mode for a period of time. This change will occur during next week's maintenances, on September 20 for PC/Mac/Stadia and September 22 on consoles.

After we have a chance to digest some of the feedback and data from this experiment, we’ll decide on what the next steps should be for Battleground queue options and consider the best way to add the other Battleground game modes back in.

Thanks for your continued interest and support! We’re excited to hear what you think.

give us cp bgs thanks

tomofhyrule

Coerfroid wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Hello all!

...we’ve now seen an uptick in players choosing to treat any game mode as Deathmatch...

Am I the only one that feels reminded of the movie "Idiocracy"? So there is a number od players unable to grasp objectives and they are getting to decide how the game is to be played?
What will be next? Removing tank roles because " ...an uptick of players choosing to fake-tank..."?

I know you're joking, but I definitely feel the overlap between the "We should only have DM for BGs since nobody likes objectives and everyone just makes it DM anyway!" and the "We should only have non-DLC dungeons in the random queue since nobody likes DLC dungeons and everyone just burns through mechanics anyway!" arguments.

...which means I can feel the overlap between the "I don't play BGs since I hate that it always turns into DM and I get mocked for trying to play objective" and the "I don't PUG dungeons since I hate that people fake roles and speedrun through and I get mocked for wanting to actually play with proper roles" arguments.

I will say that DM vs. Objective BGs do require a different build - DM needs a more bursty build, whereas the objectives favor more tanky styles, and that's not something a lot of casual PvPers have access to, particularly those that main support roles in PvE. I can see how it would be beneficial to separate DM and Objective based on builds. However, there are a number of people who like to play objective and not DM, and this 'solution' just drives them away from PvP by making it completely impossible to even try to play their favored mode.

Is driving people away from PvP really going to help much, considering the population isn't as big as many on the forums want to think it is?

ajkb78

The problem is your data won't include the players like me who can't stand death match mode. We just won't play BGs while the other modes are disabled.

You'll never completely eradicate the problem of kill farmers in non death match battlegrounds, but you can deter it. Go back to 2 queues, 1 death match bg and 1 for all other modes. Amend the non death match modes so that if your kills-to-points ratio exceeds a certain threshold, your respawn timer grows exponentially longer.

It's obviously legitimate to kill players in other modes, but generally you do so to dispossess a capture point or steal the chaosball. So you get a few kills but lots of points for contributing to the objective. Whereas kill farmers typically have nothing to do with the objective, they just farm players so will have say 25 kills and barely any points. Up their respawn timer based on kills to points ratio and suddenly when they're looking at a 2 or 3 minute respawn timer the game mode becomes unappealing. They'll just go and queue in the death match queue where they belong.

CaperGuy

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Hello all!

When Battlegrounds first launched, we initially saw some data and feedback showing a preference specifically towards the Deathmatch game mode. With the recent removal of the option to choose a game mode when queuing for a Battleground, we’ve now seen an uptick in players choosing to treat any game mode as Deathmatch. In an effort to increase Battleground population and interest, the Solo and Group queues will only offer the Deathmatch game mode for a period of time. This change will occur during next week's maintenances, on September 20 for PC/Mac/Stadia and September 22 on consoles.

After we have a chance to digest some of the feedback and data from this experiment, we’ll decide on what the next steps should be for Battleground queue options and consider the best way to add the other Battleground game modes back in.

Thanks for your continued interest and support! We’re excited to hear what you think.

What I think, is that in an ideal world Zenimax would curb the behavior of the players treating any type of game mode as Deathmatch by perhaps de-incentivizing, I.E. - give 0 AP / 0 item rewards and/or a deserter debuff if they do this. The tricky thing though, which is why I don't think that would happen is that I don't see how you could easily determine that through code automatically because it's a bit too much of a subjective thing. Plus you have new players who don't know what to do in the first place, so it could risk punishing them by mistake. Then there could be the case of players who want to pretend it's a Deathmatch not actually caring about the AP/rewards in the first place.

The more I think about it, all I can think of that would help curb that problem of players treating any game mode as Deathmatch....would be to bring specific game mode queuing back. Hopefully that would reduce the behavior in Chaosball/Capture modes, etc. Or maybe give groups the option to duel other groups in 2v2s, 3v3s, etc, or to queue into a no reward BG map against a specific other group.

trackdemon5512

@ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_Kevin

It has recently come to my attention that an additional change has been made to this “adjustment” that was announced on Twitch by ZOS Staff. Specifically that instead of what Gina initially stated there will be separate queues implemented allowing for Flag Games still and not just Deathmatches.

If so can you officially confirm or deny that here to clear up any confusion? And if so can you further explain why such a drastic change was announced via an informal Twitch instead of being posted to the Official Forums thus creating even more confusion for players trying to get an understanding of the situation?