What's Wrong With Battlegrounds?

trackdemon5512

divnyi wrote: »

Aldoss wrote: »

The last one I saw was just before this update. There was a massive forum thread calling MA The most OP set and had numerous people calling for it be nerfed. The winning team of that tourney wasn't running it.

Because MA is ganker set, why would you run gankers in the teamplay contest?

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

divnyi wrote: »

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

Forget the notion of fighting against a competent team. BG populations have dwindled so badly that if you have a group queueing they’re almost certainly going against inexperienced or ungrouped pre-made players.

Wrong. There is hidden MMR, which separates strong players from weak players. It only groups everyone together when population shrinks.

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

Dedicated PvP is for Cyrodiil. You want drawn out battles to test mettle it’s done there over and over. But BGs is for objective play.

Cyrodiil is literally objective-oriented game, with flags, sieges and everything.

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

ESO PvP Balance is TERRIBLE for BGs. I can tell that when a pack of four pre-made werewolves can go around a BG match howling and outclassing 8 other players with no effort.

I didn't see any werewolf in a long time, yet alone, a pack. Why would anyone want to run something that limits you to a single bar, doesn't have burst setups, doesn't have ulti burst, and where all the skills cost a whole lot? 10k extra armor, in Hrothgar meta?

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

Balance in the tank situation you just mentioned means sure a tank can walk onto a flag and grab it. But it shouldn’t take 4 DPS hammering it to slow it down or kill it. Why? Because then what’s the point of being DPS? What’s the point of being healer? What’s the point of being anything but a tank?

You probably never seen how groups with PvP healers do.

There is literally no point in being Damage Per Second in PvP, because DPS doesn't kill, burst kills.

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

ESO BGs allow you to be everything

No, they are not. Each PvP build have limitations it is played around.

1) MMR means nothing when the population is so low that high ranked players are forced into matches with low ranked. That’s exactly what is and has been happening for quite some time.

2) Cyrodiil itself may be objective based but the zone is explicitly designed so that an individual can entirely avoid the war to get skyshards, do delves, or kill players individually without constantly moving with the zergs from keep to keep, getting scrolls, etc. Many battles out there are small 2 or 4 player groups taking on opponents just for the hell of it. Cyrodiil is no super focused on the immediate objective as a Capture the Flag or Chaosball match is.

3) It’s an example that balance isn’t there and your comment about Hrothgar proves the point. We now move to another unbalanced set for BGs

4) DPS just stands for dedicated damage dealer in PvP. Maybe they’re glass cannons or what not. Whatever their focus is targeting enemies and killing them crazy fast. Burst kills fast but damage dealers do so all the same. The point being made is that players build to extremes and it basically breaks play. Unkillable tanks getting relics that an entire team can’t take down is inherently unbalanced. A small scale competitive game would seek to limit that so play remains consistent. Every other game but ESO does that with BGs.

5) You say each PVP build has limitations but with over 500 set combinations, many movesets, several classes and races, those limitations are not well defined or extremely broad ranged. A player can make a tank that kills AND heals easily covering a full spread. Werewolves were notorious for that for quite some time. A game like Overwatch limits a character to the moves in their role and that’s it. It’s much more balanced in terms of matching and ensuring the game goes according to the designed rules and developer intentions. ESOs push towards be whatever does not work when you need fairness to provide a proper match.

A BG match needs to be a contest of strategy. Instead it’s currently a contest of power and with no way to reign in that power along with the extremes that power provides you get matches that just become killing floors. It’s not really a Rugby game if all players are tackling each other and no one is actually doing anything with the ball.

1. There are enough players in the uptime to do MMR, at least PC/EU.

2. Cyro is a horse simulator, nothing you say will change that.

3. You wanted homogeneous gameplay, you got homogenous gameplay. Everyone runs Dank Convergence and Hrothgar Chill together. Isn't that what you dreamed of?

4. Most bursty characters are gankblades. You can visit the PvP forum branch to check out how 30k char was ganked in IC in 2 GCDs flat. Same burst on full-on tanks will leave them with approx 10-15k, in case of coordinated burst will straight out wipe.

5. There aren't 500 set combinations, because most sets aren't useful in PvP. What you are talking about is averaged min-maxed builds, that's not "tanks". That's bruisers at most. And they all have downside of being unable to kill without ulti & burst sets with big cooldown.

It’s not really a Rugby game alright.

1) PC EU is the only server having all players on at one time. You have 5 other servers not experiencing that and MMR is basically meaningless there because not enough players are trying to fill matches.

2) You can debase Cyrodiil as a horse simulator but those who play know it’s about strategically distracting opponent groups in order to take keeps when the servers are full. That said there are more than enough players to accomplish this play and allow solo players to do their own thing. BGs isn’t like that. One player down presents a serious disadvantage. And one player going off to kill whomever, not focusing on the team objective has the same effect.

3) Everyone runs it because it’s broken. A proper BG would have such control that this wouldn’t be an issue. Any organized real world game has such rules.

4) You keep missing the point about how play is supposed to be in balanced PVP contests.

5) There are over 500 Sets. There are far more combinations when you can pair any of them together in countless ways for variation. It’s impossible to account for every single combination and how they synergize with classes, weapons, movesets, etc.

Cyrodiil is a free for all war. But Battlegrounds is very much so like a rugby game, tennis match, basketball game. There is small limited field, a timer, and specific objectives to be accomplished within those limitations for a team to win. It’s very much a controlled PvP mode. ZOS’ inability to exercise its control over player has led to a chaos where players don’t play to objectives, go against the spirit of the game, and aren’t penalized for it.

moo_2021

jaws343 wrote: »

But in objective modes, a tank designed to withstand the beating from an entire 12 man group is showing up and parking themselves directly in front of a relic for 15 minutes and there is no way, even coordinated together, that the other two teams are going to kill that person. So essentially, one person shuts down the ability for the other teams to even take the relic from them.

Or in chaos ball, even on my full DPS sorc build, I can run the ball and hold it for a few minutes, mostly just outhealing the damage and dodgerolling/LOSing attacks, and letting my team kill everyone who comes for it. But I am killable if outplayed, by even just one person. But in the hands of that same tank mentioned above, they just get the relic and hold it for the entire match with no chance of anyone getting it from them.

How do they tank like that?

Can't they be pulled or knocked? or damaged by resistance-ignoring abilities?

Eevee_42

I can’t believe the amount of outrage happening over the temporary deatchmatch queue. Do you people not realize that pvp players have been forced into an objective queue over the past year? Don’t give me the “but there was a chance for DM” argument because it was so rare that it was negligible. Do you all realize that we haven’t been able to specifically queue for deathmatch with a group for two years now? These battleground experiments have absolutely decimated the population to the point where it has nearly withered down to nothing except for casuals trying to get a daily reward. I think this change is probably the last hope of retaining any remaining serious pvp population.

You hate deathmatch so much that you can’t handle this temporary change? Think about how the past two years have felt for people who play BGs as their main form of gameplay in ESO. Stop pointing your fingers at pvp players for “playing DM during objective games” and look at the real root cause of these problems here. The beginning of the end was ZOS culling a huge amount of the population by forcing a solo queue. Bringing the objective group queue back was exciting at first because we could play with friends, but it got old very quickly. Now that the BG population was single handedly killed by ZOS, they keep having to resort to these queues that can’t please everybody. They’ve just pitted all of us against each other and created this animosity.

[snip] In a perfect world, ZOS wouldn’t have destroyed BGs for years. But this is what we are left with for now.

[Edited for Baiting]

Sheezabeast

Why would ZOS cater to the people who were hurting teams and being toxic and selfish? This is....this is entirely the wrong decision. I was on teams so many times where people would beg people to help defend or run relics, help with the chaos ball...and they would be out ganking nowhere near the team in no strategic way, thumbing their nose at TEAMplay, and we would lose because of people not helping the team.

Why are you taking the side of the people who aren't the team players, ZOS?

Bjond

Aldoss wrote: »

Bjond wrote: »

DM heavily favors gear and ping. Non-DM heavily favors clever strategy.

This is false equivalency [snip]

You may be entirely correct, but I'll never ever bother to find out because the Aion DM experience was so bad. I'll punt anything that looks even remotely like DM. Objective BGs are something I will play, though, because of VERY good experiences with them in multiple previous MMOs.

Hallothiel wrote: »

(And understand about killing other players as a tactic; that’s not what this is about. It’s about those who ignore objectives & just kill other players. Really spoils doing bgs)

I love players that ignore objectives in those kinds of fights. Make them waste time killing you so you can win. It's this kind of play that opens the door to ALL players rather than only those micro-focused on tactics.

However, your point about enjoyment is extremely valid. And, from running BGs with some guildies that were new to them, it was a sentiment they echoed, too. IMHO, the reason is that almost no one knows what the objectives are. Of course all experienced BG'ers know, but their numbers are so small they don't count in the aggregate of all potential BG'ers. All a PvE'er knows about BG's is that it's PvP. "So, uh, we kill other players, right?" becomes what they do. They have a really bad experience as a result and never come back.

BGs badly need tutorials (ideally mandatory before you can run one) that teach objectives. The few web sites I checked do an absolutely horrid job of describing BGs -- jumping directly into minutae on gear/tactics and ignoring the major objective. Here's an example on reddit: nice guide, but objectives are buried under walls of text about tactical details. [snip]

If you want PvP, you have to support PvP over PvE. It needs major constant attention. It needs rewards that are outright better than PvE rewards in PvE, too. From running in several PvEvP MMOs, I'd guess the populations tend toward "10% rabid PvP'ers, 70% want BIS gear, 20% rabid PvE'er (hates PvP)". So, if you want big numbers in PvP, it's very simple: give it better gear than PvE. SWTOR had a thriving wonderful BG population until they killed it by moving the few BIS parts in it to PvE.

Machiavellian, but if you break up trial sets so 1/3 comes from BGs, 1/3 from Cyro, and 1/3 from trials, that would do it. You'd also be able to hear the forum outrage from the moon, but those same shouters would then hit BGs and Cyro.

[edited for baiting & to remove quote]

drunkendx

so...

Only DM BG now.

Welp, good to know that I won't need to queue for BG for a while...

DM is boring, other modes are orders of magnitude more fun.

Mandragora

After reading some of the reasons behind I can understand why some players want to remove the modes, but on the other hand - isn't diversity better than one mode in long time games? It is for me, but ZOS is doing this constantly - removing everything in the name of streamlining - there is no knight guild (yes it is me again), because they think it was clever to group up fighters guild with Meridia and look - they got rid of palladins. There are no priests, because you know temples have been taken by mages guild! There is no Mora Tong, because there is Dark Brotherhood already. They have no duplicated skills in varienty of classes, because I guess they wouldn't be able to maintain it, but sometimes I really miss that. They have frost staves with taunt, because why they would add magic weapons if they can remove frost damage from mages. Maybe it is clever, but it is not fun, I'm sorry. So even if those modes are not perfetct, for those players who don't have the need to kill other players may be other modes viable option to still play pvp. On the other hand maybe those players wouldn't bother with battlegrounds outside of event, so it will work better and it is what pvp players do want. Truth is I don't really enjoy that kind of content, so maybe I shouldn't comment about it, but I don't know, just some perspective to add to it and ramble over my pain with ESO.

Schokolade

Eevee_42 wrote: »

I can’t believe the amount of outrage happening over the temporary deatchmatch queue. Do you people not realize that pvp players have been forced into an objective queue over the past year? Don’t give me the “but there was a chance for DM” argument because it was so rare that it was negligible. Do you all realize that we haven’t been able to specifically queue for deathmatch with a group for two years now? These battleground experiments have absolutely decimated the population to the point where it has nearly withered down to nothing except for casuals trying to get a daily reward. I think this change is probably the last hope of retaining any remaining serious pvp population.

You hate deathmatch so much that you can’t handle this temporary change? Think about how the past two years have felt for people who play BGs as their main form of gameplay in ESO. Stop pointing your fingers at pvp players for “playing DM during objective games” and look at the real root cause of these problems here. The beginning of the end was ZOS culling a huge amount of the population by forcing a solo queue. Bringing the objective group queue back was exciting at first because we could play with friends, but it got old very quickly. Now that the BG population was single handedly killed by ZOS, they keep having to resort to these queues that can’t please everybody. They’ve just pitted all of us against each other and created this animosity.

[snip] In a perfect world, ZOS wouldn’t have destroyed BGs for years. But this is what we are left with for now.

[Edited for Baiting]

This.
Btgs were destroyed by ZOS itself

Eevee_42 wrote: »

I can’t believe the amount of outrage happening over the temporary deatchmatch queue. Do you people not realize that pvp players have been forced into an objective queue over the past year? Don’t give me the “but there was a chance for DM” argument because it was so rare that it was negligible. Do you all realize that we haven’t been able to specifically queue for deathmatch with a group for two years now? These battleground experiments have absolutely decimated the population to the point where it has nearly withered down to nothing except for casuals trying to get a daily reward. I think this change is probably the last hope of retaining any remaining serious pvp population.

You hate deathmatch so much that you can’t handle this temporary change? Think about how the past two years have felt for people who play BGs as their main form of gameplay in ESO. Stop pointing your fingers at pvp players for “playing DM during objective games” and look at the real root cause of these problems here. The beginning of the end was ZOS culling a huge amount of the population by forcing a solo queue. Bringing the objective group queue back was exciting at first because we could play with friends, but it got old very quickly. Now that the BG population was single handedly killed by ZOS, they keep having to resort to these queues that can’t please everybody. They’ve just pitted all of us against each other and created this animosity.

[snip] In a perfect world, ZOS wouldn’t have destroyed BGs for years. But this is what we are left with for now.

[Edited for Baiting]

This.
Btgs were destroyed by ZOS itself
Also before who liked DM had a minor chance of rng, 'cause DM - Relic - Dominion - CK, so 25% vs 75%.

Franchise408 wrote: »

ThePlacidHatter wrote: »

Artim_X wrote: »

IMO the primary issue is the lack of pop. No one wants to constantly play with the same people, but that's how it currently feels like.

After removing the buff you can get in a deathmatch it became a great mode for getting that small scale experience. However, when BGs pop started to drop and ZOS took away the choice to play a specific mode, players became more inclined to play any mode like a deathmatch.

ZOS need to improve BG rewards or something to get the pop back up to what it was in its prime so that it can once again be viable to give us back our choices.

Maybe bring game mode selection back and give each game mode a daily reward.
If they bring back game mode selection, they should probably get rid of either Crazy King or Domination, though. They are too similar to have their own queues.

Just make the queue what it used to be:

-Deathmatch
-Flag games (Domination, Crazy King)
-Capture games (Chaos Ball, Capture The Relic)

Problem solved, literally everyone is happy.

And this is the best solution.
Low players with flags games? Their choice, you can't blame people for like DM more, or worst, make all of them play other games.

divnyi

Schokolade wrote: »

Also before who liked DM had a minor chance of rng, 'cause DM - Relic - Dominion - CK, so 25% vs 75%.

It's not how it was. Lots of people deliberately queued for DMs, so you got DM streaks playing random.

Solantris

Just have two separate queues: deathmatch and objective based. There are two types of pvp players, just split us up. It's less about the mode itself and more about the end goal / win condition. Do you bg to kill people or to get points? It's one or the other for most people, but it is a spectrum. You can't throw the people on the ends together, because they fundamentally disagree on what constitutes a win condition. Having two options fixes that, and people in the middle can queue either one.

We no longer have a player base capable of sustaining a queue for each individual type of bg, but realistically, two queues is sustainable. Players play the same game for entirely different reasons and our options should reflect that.

As for the massive qq about this deathmatch test, I don't have the patience anymore. [snip] Watched friends leave, one by one. Had to deal with capture the relic / flag games / chaos nonsense when all I want to do is fight other players. It's a bit rich to see the ridiculous whinging about this when I and everyone around me has been forced into game modes we don't enjoy for forever, because more casual players complained endlessly about queuing into people whose entire gameplay is specialised for that purpose. [snip] But we can't segregate ourselves, so people crying about us treating matches as deathmatch when we havent had the option option to queue for what we ACTUALLY enjoy really annoys me. [snip]

I don't think it's right, but personally I'm ecstatic for this test. If only so that I can bg as much as I want without it being a chore for the first time in forever. This entire game is skewed so heavily towards pve, it's nice to have ONE change that doesn't completely neuter or destroy the way I want to play for once. Every other update has.

[edited for baiting]

aetherial_heavenn

Aldoss wrote: »

[

There's an extreme difference from an average player running an OP set and Magio, Shoddy, Timber, Pope, etc running those sets.

All of whom were on my death recaps, over and over and over, the other night in different combinations. I wouldn't mind but on my baby NB trying her first few non Death Match BG's it wasn't fun and I didn't learn much about playing her, or the objectives and strategy. It was a bit sad that good players were reduced to whumping poor li'l me over and over because they couldn't choose to play against their own experience level, or play the mini game of their choice. (Not their fault.)

I learned a bit about how to play her for a few secs, got a bunch of XP, and got some skills levelled though. Which was my objective. So it didn't worry me. BUT.....

If I had been new to PvP and wanted to see how BG's worked, this wouldn't have made me want to try again. Particularly as they often ignored the objectives to get repeated kills: maybe I was a strategic threat? Phhht. [snip] You can't be strategic if you spend most of the match respawning and running back.


I hope they give people three options - capture/flag/death match - after this test. And that they fix the ranking-matching system when numbers are low so new players aren't scared off completely.

[edited for baiting]

Skullderic

"Battlegrounds
All Battleground queues are set to offer Deathmatch game modes only."

Ummm. ZOS makes me lmao all the time.

Odovacar

Interesting OP but I don't like the idea of loadouts.

cyclonus11

Such a weird decision, even if temporary. Why not let players select the game modes they want to queue for, like we have with dungeons? Just making everything Deathmatch doesn't make any sense and nobody was asking for that.

Soulshine

Finding it sort of ironic that they did this for BGs due to "popular demand" -- meanwhile all the whinging over removing DLCs from random daily pve queue has gotten no response.

I enjoy dlcs in my randoms and also enjoy DMs in my BGs, so I am not bothered by this. But I really am left scratching my head over from where are they pulling their data. Most BGs I have done almost always have at least one person who either refuses to play the objective, or simply doesn't know how to.

Giving us a DM queue might have been a better option than removing all other modes. I mean I get that this is a test. But seems to me the way to actually find out how many people want to actively DM vs play other modes is by offering them all, not removing all but one. If they were all active and it appeared that DM queue did not have that much participation vs the other 3 modes, would you not have a better picture?

They could have also done something to help the people that don't know how to do BGs by adding some sort of tutorial mode so that people can actually do them at least once and properly understand what is going on. They are fairly easy to do once you get your feet wet even once, but something other than a text explanation from the NPC goes a long way.

I appreciate they are trying to figure out how to improve BG experience yet don't really see to much benefit from this test tbh.

FreeMaN_A

Any news about how long this "test" will last? Terrible idea btw...

Franchise408

Debating if I should just avoid the BG queue altogether, or bring my unkillable tanks into DM

DracoSaggitaExSole

I dislike this change, a lot. Fans of deathmatch had the opportunity to queue for deatmatch only. Having various objective based battleground options made this aspect of PvP fun. And not mundane only deathmatch. The fact that player dissregard objectives in other game modes could be compensating by offering rewards for objective focued gameplay, players would than be motivate to participate in undertaking objectives. Thats my opinion, taking out game modes is a very narrow minded, dumb solution.

AScarlato

MurderMostFoul wrote: »

I understand why people who don't like Deathmatch would not be excited about this change, but it is ultimately fair for ZOS too allow the players who do prefer death match to actually play it with some regularity. For months, players who prefer death match have been forced to only play the mode they like 20% of the time at best. Now it's their turn to play the mode they like. Sure, ZOS could have addressed this issue more eloquently, but this is just a temporary change, and it will hopefully lead to a better system for everyone in the end.

For crying out loud. The entire playerbase was treated the same - RNG Battlegrounds. Anyone who liked specific modes only got to play them on an RNG basis.

At least for you, you still got to play deathmatch when it did pop. This change means people who enjoy flag games or objective games don't get to play them AT ALL. THEY ARE REMOVED.

[snip] This is not fair to anyone but the minority of players like yourself that only enjoy deathmatch.

Personally I think the system was fine as is. I have different characters that excelled in different games. Sure I got screwed by RNG when I got modes that character wasn't good at, but this was for everyone. It was very chaotic and random which made winning possible for any team. Now all we get is who has more Hrothgar/Convergence on their team. Zzzzz.

MurderMostFoul

AScarlato wrote: »

MurderMostFoul wrote: »

I understand why people who don't like Deathmatch would not be excited about this change, but it is ultimately fair for ZOS too allow the players who do prefer death match to actually play it with some regularity. For months, players who prefer death match have been forced to only play the mode they like 20% of the time at best. Now it's their turn to play the mode they like. Sure, ZOS could have addressed this issue more eloquently, but this is just a temporary change, and it will hopefully lead to a better system for everyone in the end.

For crying out loud. The entire playerbase was treated the same - RNG Battlegrounds. Anyone who liked specific modes only got to play them on an RNG basis.

At least for you, you still got to play deathmatch when it did pop. This change means people who enjoy flag games or objective games don't get to play them AT ALL. THEY ARE REMOVED.

[snip] This is not fair to anyone but the minority of players like yourself that only enjoy deathmatch.

Personally I think the system was fine as is. I have different characters that excelled in different games. Sure I got screwed by RNG when I got modes that character wasn't good at, but this was for everyone. It was very chaotic and random which made winning possible for any team. Now all we get is who has more Hrothgar/Convergence on their team. Zzzzz.

This change benefits anyone who's been wanting to play death match more frequently. I personally would prefer to be able to have a mix, but deathmatch is my favorite, and so if I were to be forced into one mode, i would choose deathmatch.

And we now know that death match was the mode preferred by most players when game mode selection was enabled, so I'm not certain where you or others are getting your numbers from.

[edited to remove quote]

AScarlato

MurderMostFoul wrote: »

AScarlato wrote: »

MurderMostFoul wrote: »

I understand why people who don't like Deathmatch would not be excited about this change, but it is ultimately fair for ZOS too allow the players who do prefer death match to actually play it with some regularity. For months, players who prefer death match have been forced to only play the mode they like 20% of the time at best. Now it's their turn to play the mode they like. Sure, ZOS could have addressed this issue more eloquently, but this is just a temporary change, and it will hopefully lead to a better system for everyone in the end.

For crying out loud. The entire playerbase was treated the same - RNG Battlegrounds. Anyone who liked specific modes only got to play them on an RNG basis.

At least for you, you still got to play deathmatch when it did pop. This change means people who enjoy flag games or objective games don't get to play them AT ALL. THEY ARE REMOVED.

[snip] This is not fair to anyone but the minority of players like yourself that only enjoy deathmatch.

Personally I think the system was fine as is. I have different characters that excelled in different games. Sure I got screwed by RNG when I got modes that character wasn't good at, but this was for everyone. It was very chaotic and random which made winning possible for any team. Now all we get is who has more Hrothgar/Convergence on their team. Zzzzz.

This change benefits anyone who's been wanting to play death match more frequently. I personally would prefer to be able to have a mix, but deathmatch is my favorite, and so if I were to be forced into one mode, i would choose deathmatch.

And we now know that death match was the mode preferred by most players when game mode selection was enabled, so I'm not certain where you or others are getting your numbers from.

So you are saying that because some people only want to play deathmatch, it's fair that they removed content for everyone else?

Go check the poll on the Battlegrounds/PVP forum. People who approve of this change are the minority.

[edited to remove quote]

trackdemon5512

MurderMostFoul wrote: »

AScarlato wrote: »

MurderMostFoul wrote: »

I understand why people who don't like Deathmatch would not be excited about this change, but it is ultimately fair for ZOS too allow the players who do prefer death match to actually play it with some regularity. For months, players who prefer death match have been forced to only play the mode they like 20% of the time at best. Now it's their turn to play the mode they like. Sure, ZOS could have addressed this issue more eloquently, but this is just a temporary change, and it will hopefully lead to a better system for everyone in the end.

For crying out loud. The entire playerbase was treated the same - RNG Battlegrounds. Anyone who liked specific modes only got to play them on an RNG basis.

At least for you, you still got to play deathmatch when it did pop. This change means people who enjoy flag games or objective games don't get to play them AT ALL. THEY ARE REMOVED.

[snip] This is not fair to anyone but the minority of players like yourself that only enjoy deathmatch.

Personally I think the system was fine as is. I have different characters that excelled in different games. Sure I got screwed by RNG when I got modes that character wasn't good at, but this was for everyone. It was very chaotic and random which made winning possible for any team. Now all we get is who has more Hrothgar/Convergence on their team. Zzzzz.

This change benefits anyone who's been wanting to play death match more frequently. I personally would prefer to be able to have a mix, but deathmatch is my favorite, and so if I were to be forced into one mode, i would choose deathmatch.

And we now know that death match was the mode preferred by most players when game mode selection was enabled, so I'm not certain where you or others are getting your numbers from.

No. We know that Deathmatch was preferred by the more VOCAL members of the forum commenters. That’s very different. We also know that individuals who played in flag games treated them like Deathmatches and ignored objectives. That’s not the same as the majority of players wanting Deathmatches, just that these players were affecting the play in Flag Games.

ZOS has stated that there is a clear engagement problem with BGs: most players don’t engage and those that have remained tend to treat everything like a deathmatch despite the modes. Changing it all to Deathmatches appeases them but in no way addresses the problem of the majority of ESO not playing BGs. Hence it’s a flawed test.

[edited to remove quote]

AScarlato

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

MurderMostFoul wrote: »

AScarlato wrote: »

MurderMostFoul wrote: »

I understand why people who don't like Deathmatch would not be excited about this change, but it is ultimately fair for ZOS too allow the players who do prefer death match to actually play it with some regularity. For months, players who prefer death match have been forced to only play the mode they like 20% of the time at best. Now it's their turn to play the mode they like. Sure, ZOS could have addressed this issue more eloquently, but this is just a temporary change, and it will hopefully lead to a better system for everyone in the end.

For crying out loud. The entire playerbase was treated the same - RNG Battlegrounds. Anyone who liked specific modes only got to play them on an RNG basis.

At least for you, you still got to play deathmatch when it did pop. This change means people who enjoy flag games or objective games don't get to play them AT ALL. THEY ARE REMOVED.

[snip] This is not fair to anyone but the minority of players like yourself that only enjoy deathmatch.

Personally I think the system was fine as is. I have different characters that excelled in different games. Sure I got screwed by RNG when I got modes that character wasn't good at, but this was for everyone. It was very chaotic and random which made winning possible for any team. Now all we get is who has more Hrothgar/Convergence on their team. Zzzzz.

This change benefits anyone who's been wanting to play death match more frequently. I personally would prefer to be able to have a mix, but deathmatch is my favorite, and so if I were to be forced into one mode, i would choose deathmatch.

And we now know that death match was the mode preferred by most players when game mode selection was enabled, so I'm not certain where you or others are getting your numbers from.

No. We know that Deathmatch was preferred by the more VOCAL members of the forum commenters. That’s very different. We also know that individuals who played in flag games treated them like Deathmatches and ignored objectives. That’s not the same as the majority of players wanting Deathmatches, just that these players were affecting the play in Flag Games.

ZOS has stated that there is a clear engagement problem with BGs: most players don’t engage and those that have remained tend to treat everything like a deathmatch despite the modes. Changing it all to Deathmatches appeases them but in no way addresses the problem of the majority of ESO not playing BGs. Hence it’s a flawed test.

I personally didn't mind those players - on my team or not. I'm an objective player so I would laugh my ass off when someone had 35 kills and their team was in last place. When on my team at least they took opponents off the playing field for a time. When not, they were one less person on the other team working on objectives.

I enjoyed the occasional deathmatch pre-Hrothgar/Convergence when I felt we weren't in a proc meta, but now it's pretty unplayable for me. Proccing everyone to death is not fun or interesting.

[edited to remove quote]

MurderMostFoul

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

MurderMostFoul wrote: »

AScarlato wrote: »

MurderMostFoul wrote: »

I understand why people who don't like Deathmatch would not be excited about this change, but it is ultimately fair for ZOS too allow the players who do prefer death match to actually play it with some regularity. For months, players who prefer death match have been forced to only play the mode they like 20% of the time at best. Now it's their turn to play the mode they like. Sure, ZOS could have addressed this issue more eloquently, but this is just a temporary change, and it will hopefully lead to a better system for everyone in the end.

For crying out loud. The entire playerbase was treated the same - RNG Battlegrounds. Anyone who liked specific modes only got to play them on an RNG basis.

At least for you, you still got to play deathmatch when it did pop. This change means people who enjoy flag games or objective games don't get to play them AT ALL. THEY ARE REMOVED.

[snip] This is not fair to anyone but the minority of players like yourself that only enjoy deathmatch.

Personally I think the system was fine as is. I have different characters that excelled in different games. Sure I got screwed by RNG when I got modes that character wasn't good at, but this was for everyone. It was very chaotic and random which made winning possible for any team. Now all we get is who has more Hrothgar/Convergence on their team. Zzzzz.

This change benefits anyone who's been wanting to play death match more frequently. I personally would prefer to be able to have a mix, but deathmatch is my favorite, and so if I were to be forced into one mode, i would choose deathmatch.

And we now know that death match was the mode preferred by most players when game mode selection was enabled, so I'm not certain where you or others are getting your numbers from.

No. We know that Deathmatch was preferred by the more VOCAL members of the forum commenters. That’s very different. We also know that individuals who played in flag games treated them like Deathmatches and ignored objectives. That’s not the same as the majority of players wanting Deathmatches, just that these players were affecting the play in Flag Games.

This is what we know:

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

When Battlegrounds first launched, we initially saw some data and feedback showing a preference specifically towards the Deathmatch game mode.

This change is not ideal. But it at least temporarily provides a benefit to a long underserved portion of the battlegrounds community. And based upon the statement above, that portion of the community is substantial.

[edited to remove quote]

xaraan

The problem with objective based games is the 3 way fight IMO. It only takes one of the three groups to decide it's a TDM and suddenly it gives a free victory to the other team that avoids the fight and the team that didn't avoid it gets sucked into the fight b/c choice is die or fight, which leaves the other team free to play the objective.

I think they should keep TDM three way, and change all objective matches to 1 team vs 1 team, maybe even bump the players on each team up to 6 for those objective games depending on population support. There should also be some tweaks to how the matches work past that IMO, like choas ball doing more damage the closer you are to your spawn, or less flags on the flag game to force players more into fighting over those spots and not just for running flag to flag constantly, etc.

AScarlato

And again you post as though objective players were somehow "overserved" by being treated EQUALLY to deathmatch players.

DM players will always find something to complain about. You know what else is comparable to your DM player ignoring objectives? Your average PVEr / new player / the tank built for objectives who isn't going to regear and respect for BGs / someone who doesn't have meta sets joining DM and being 1 shot by everyone. You know - that player who goes 0/17/1 on your team.

In modes outside DM, that player can still do SOMETHING to help their team, like find an uncontested flag and score some points. Now this type of player will only be a liability - more than the DM players were on objective games, and probably be discouraged from playing Battlegrounds at all. No one wants to join DM just to be a play thing for everyone else in the match.

M0ntie

This is a terrible change! I hate Deathmatch, and love it when my team can win in the other modes because they actually play it as it is supposed to be played, such as running around capturing all the flags, while some players fight as if it were deathmatch. If players just want to kill other players, go to IC or Cyro.

Having only Death match will guarantee that I never do another BG.

shmity72

i build for solo queue W rather than k/d. k/d is accomplished by a 4 man team with dedicated healers /glass cannons....thinks i thoughts this was a really poor decision

good bye 'objectives' and 'complex tactics'

mergadeth

Does anybody know what will happen to the achievements for the other modes? I'm in the middle of a few and looking forward to completing them for the furnishing rewards and titles etc.

mergadeth

also...does this mean they might fix the pit hero achievement finally? Been stuck at 937 of 1000 since MYM this summer.