Objective players, you should be fighting for an improved queue system

Aldoss

_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »

No you didn't read properly, I referred to weighted random.

I did.

Your solution will not solve the problem that is about to occur in a couple weeks where players that love combat get shoved into modes that doesn't spur that combat. It doesn't matter how it happened, two communities exist and cannot co-exist without being toxic to each other on the grand scale.

The modes and their design are horribly flawed. Nothing short of splitting the queue into objective only and DM only will fix this.

Personally, I'd rather ZOS spend resources fixing the modes and making them actual pvp environments. If they were to do that, I literally wouldn't care at all if there were only solo random and group random queues, and I'd happily try and cap flags. Until that happens, I'll just create the conflict we all signed up for by queuing for a pvp mode inside an MMO, regardless of whether or not that specific bg mode does it for me.

_adhyffbjjjf12

Aldoss wrote: »

_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »

No you didn't read properly, I referred to weighted random.

I did.

Your solution will not solve the problem that is about to occur in a couple weeks where players that love combat get shoved into modes that doesn't spur that combat. It doesn't matter how it happened, two communities exist and cannot co-exist without being toxic to each other on the grand scale.

The modes and their design are horribly flawed. Nothing short of splitting the queue into objective only and DM only will fix this.

Personally, I'd rather ZOS spend resources fixing the modes and making them actual pvp environments. If they were to do that, I literally wouldn't care at all if there were only solo random and group random queues, and I'd happily try and cap flags. Until that happens, I'll just create the conflict we all signed up for by queuing for a pvp mode inside an MMO, regardless of whether or not that specific bg mode does it for me.

its not 'my' solution, its already successfully run in other games right now. ESO has low population therefore you cant split so random is the ONLY fair solution, you cant magic people out of thin air and with random you cant give everyone what they want at the same time all the time.

Aldoss

_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »

its already successfully run in other games right now.

And those games are also team vs team vs team?

Dem_kitkats1

PhoenixGrey wrote: »

The reason for toxicity is not being able to play a DM.

The reason for toxicity is selfishness and being short-sighted. Players have no reason to be toxic to eachother as it's neither Objective or DM player's faults how the queues are set up. And in this case no one "wins". In the end everyone wants the same thing, regardless of mode preference, which is to have the modes completely separated. According to ZOS this cannot happen at the moment because this would splinter the population too much, therefore making longer queue times. I understand this could be a problem because who wants to wait 1/2 hr or longer to get into one match. Those thinking DM queues won't be impacted as well are naive. I've seen many DM players leave for various reasons other than queue changes. More will leave the longer it takes for performance issues to be resolved. Some players will dislike the hybridization changes, others grow tired of class imbalances, or other newer, shinier games will be introduced, etc which results in more players leaving. Therefore the DM population is decreasing as well. Simply, ZOS is mainly looking at population when it comes to the queues, so the only way to see any major changes is to help the population increase.

Being toxic and camping at the spawn of inexperienced/casual teams, or only running around to farm players is being counterproductive to this. It only frustrates players and causes them to quit. It proves nothing except that the reputation of PvP players as being toxic is true, so population remains low and stagnant, and we remain in the same predicament as now. I understand and agree that the objective modes are in desperate need of redesign, and only allow players to completely avoid combat without having to be tactical about it, but even in these modes you can still force players to engage in combat without being overly obnoxious about it.

Aldoss wrote: »

Personally, I'd rather ZOS spend resources fixing the modes and making them actual pvp environments. If they were to do that, I literally wouldn't care at all if there were only solo random and group random queues, and I'd happily try and cap flags. Until that happens, I'll just create the conflict we all signed up for by queuing for a pvp mode inside an MMO, regardless of whether or not that specific bg mode does it for me.

I agree, but very much doubt ZOS will even consider tackling the design issues of the Objective modes until performance is fixed. And from my understanding of how they have to do it, and the magnitude of it, that will take at least a couple of years. So we have to work with what we have and we don't need the problem of lengthy queue times on top of that. So, IMO, to avoid this and still be fair is to get rid of MMR and have a preferential vote. So if DM players are still more prevalent they will get DM more often, but if there happens to be more Objective players queuing at the time they will get their preferred mode. Thus, the results will not be a punishment to the opposing mode players, but it will simply be the population preference at the time and there's no arguing that.

SkaraMinoc

Dem_kitkats1 wrote: »

Being toxic and camping at the spawn of inexperienced/casual teams, or only running around to farm players is being counterproductive to this.

Spawn camping other players as a form of protest so they get upset and complain is one of the few motivation tactics available to get ZOS to make a change. I'm not saying I approve or disapprove. It's going to happen regardless.

PhoenixGrey

Dem_kitkats1 wrote: »

PhoenixGrey wrote: »

The reason for toxicity is not being able to play a DM.

The reason for toxicity is selfishness and being short-sighted. Players have no reason to be toxic to eachother as it's neither Objective or DM player's faults how the queues are set up. And in this case no one "wins". In the end everyone wants the same thing, regardless of mode preference, which is to have the modes completely separated. According to ZOS this cannot happen at the moment because this would splinter the population too much, therefore making longer queue times. I understand this could be a problem because who wants to wait 1/2 hr or longer to get into one match. Those thinking DM queues won't be impacted as well are naive. I've seen many DM players leave for various reasons other than queue changes. More will leave the longer it takes for performance issues to be resolved. Some players will dislike the hybridization changes, others grow tired of class imbalances, or other newer, shinier games will be introduced, etc which results in more players leaving. Therefore the DM population is decreasing as well. Simply, ZOS is mainly looking at population when it comes to the queues, so the only way to see any major changes is to help the population increase.

Being toxic and camping at the spawn of inexperienced/casual teams, or only running around to farm players is being counterproductive to this. It only frustrates players and causes them to quit. It proves nothing except that the reputation of PvP players as being toxic is true, so population remains low and stagnant, and we remain in the same predicament as now. I understand and agree that the objective modes are in desperate need of redesign, and only allow players to completely avoid combat without having to be tactical about it, but even in these modes you can still force players to engage in combat without being overly obnoxious about it.

Aldoss wrote: »

Personally, I'd rather ZOS spend resources fixing the modes and making them actual pvp environments. If they were to do that, I literally wouldn't care at all if there were only solo random and group random queues, and I'd happily try and cap flags. Until that happens, I'll just create the conflict we all signed up for by queuing for a pvp mode inside an MMO, regardless of whether or not that specific bg mode does it for me.

I agree, but very much doubt ZOS will even consider tackling the design issues of the Objective modes until performance is fixed. And from my understanding of how they have to do it, and the magnitude of it, that will take at least a couple of years. So we have to work with what we have and we don't need the problem of lengthy queue times on top of that. So, IMO, to avoid this and still be fair is to get rid of MMR and have a preferential vote. So if DM players are still more prevalent they will get DM more often, but if there happens to be more Objective players queuing at the time they will get their preferred mode. Thus, the results will not be a punishment to the opposing mode players, but it will simply be the population preference at the time and there's no arguing that.

If you have alternatives give me my DM queue. I have nothing against the players but I guess we all need something to do and make ZOS notice.

xDeusEJRx

Dem_kitkats1 wrote: »

PhoenixGrey wrote: »

The reason for toxicity is not being able to play a DM.

Simply, ZOS is mainly looking at population when it comes to the queues, so the only way to see any major changes is to help the population increase.

Being toxic and camping at the spawn of inexperienced/casual teams, or only running around to farm players is being counterproductive to this. It only frustrates players and causes them to quit. It proves nothing except that the reputation of PvP players as being toxic is true, so population remains low and stagnant, and we remain in the same predicament as now. I understand and agree that the objective modes are in desperate need of redesign, and only allow players to completely avoid combat without having to be tactical about it, but even in these modes you can still force players to engage in combat without being overly obnoxious about it.

Which is why their "response" is paradoxical. They do this with the intention of doing the "best" for keeping the community together, but how on earth does this solve or fix anything. It's another ZOS band-aid fix for a giant wound. There's no way this will make the population more healthy if, TDM players are just gonna make the objective players mad and not want to play, if anything it'll cause it to stagnate.

They said the community didn't receive any significant changes, and that's because people treating every game as TDM in objective games were doing the same as they are now, focusing on getting kills. It goes without saying the pop won't change when the same people are doing the same thing after all this time. Meanwhile I doubt the objective players going to see an increase in community, which will just cause the population to stagnate and only the same players will always be consistently playing.

It's funny how zos is all about "testing and gaining data" but won't even give a fair test on separate queues in this instance to see if their hypothesis about pops is even valid.

Merforum

xDeusEJRx wrote: »

Dem_kitkats1 wrote: »

PhoenixGrey wrote: »

The reason for toxicity is not being able to play a DM.

Simply, ZOS is mainly looking at population when it comes to the queues, so the only way to see any major changes is to help the population increase.

Being toxic and camping at the spawn of inexperienced/casual teams, or only running around to farm players is being counterproductive to this. It only frustrates players and causes them to quit. It proves nothing except that the reputation of PvP players as being toxic is true, so population remains low and stagnant, and we remain in the same predicament as now. I understand and agree that the objective modes are in desperate need of redesign, and only allow players to completely avoid combat without having to be tactical about it, but even in these modes you can still force players to engage in combat without being overly obnoxious about it.

Which is why their "response" is paradoxical. They do this with the intention of doing the "best" for keeping the community together, but how on earth does this solve or fix anything. It's another ZOS band-aid fix for a giant wound. There's no way this will make the population more healthy if, TDM players are just gonna make the objective players mad and not want to play, if anything it'll cause it to stagnate.

They said the community didn't receive any significant changes, and that's because people treating every game as TDM in objective games were doing the same as they are now, focusing on getting kills. It goes without saying the pop won't change when the same people are doing the same thing after all this time. Meanwhile I doubt the objective players going to see an increase in community, which will just cause the population to stagnate and only the same players will always be consistently playing.

It's funny how zos is all about "testing and gaining data" but won't even give a fair test on separate queues in this instance to see if their hypothesis about pops is even valid.

You are exactly right the stupidity of NOT trying completely separate queues at any time during this 'testing' is amazing. BUT we did learn without any shadow of a doubt that DM is NOT POPULAR at all, it is at most 30 dudes playing over and over. When I as watching some streamers and having 2 or 3 on my screen at the same time, I started to notice the dudes who play BGs were IN THE SAME MATCHES. WHAT out of all the world, 2 random streamers in a completely random queue are showing up in the SAME MATCH. Then I tried going into a BG and sure enough the streamers where there TOO. And this was prime time like 5pm eastern/2pm pacific.

So ZOS believed these few dudes that DM is massively popular, which they found out was not true. So you would think by simple logic, they would realize maybe Objective BGs is more popular or at least popular enough to have it's own queue, BUT NO they are still believing they same people they just proved WRONG who keep saying objective BGs is low pop. DO A REAL TEST. Make an solo objective only queue and a solo DM only queue for a few months and SEE WHAT HAPPENS.

Or just use the checkboxes method and you should be good.

OBJnoob

SkaraMinoc wrote: »

Dem_kitkats1 wrote: »

Being toxic and camping at the spawn of inexperienced/casual teams, or only running around to farm players is being counterproductive to this.

Spawn camping other players as a form of protest so they get upset and complain is one of the few motivation tactics available to get ZOS to make a change. I'm not saying I approve or disapprove. It's going to happen regardless.

I don’t know why you wouldn’t disapprove— it’s a jerk thing to do. Honestly if you just want to kill stuff and you find yourself spawn camping in an objective mode I have no problem with it. I’m not one of these people that think the game designers need to be police officers.

It’s the forethought that makes it a jerk thing to do.

And the implied notion (just to be clear I’m doubling down on something I said to Phoenix earlier, not giving crap to who I quoted lol,) that players who prefer DM are better than players who prefer objectives and therefore even ABLE to spawn camp is appallingly arrogant.

And one final thought that hopefully makes my two other points stronger… it’s not the good objective players you (or anyone else,) would be spawn camping. It’s the bad ones. The ones that died (and not by your hand, originally.) So while Mr or Mrs DM enthusiast superhero is sating their bloodthirst on noobs and getting a big head about it, the objective players who might give our superhero the very challenge they crave, are out there winning the game instead.

So I mean there’s a lot of callous ironies floating about the topic to my mind— but ultimately it’s a pretty simple summary: Taking your anger out on innocents is wrong. And being childish is… childish.

Merforum

OBJnoob wrote: »

SkaraMinoc wrote: »

Dem_kitkats1 wrote: »

Being toxic and camping at the spawn of inexperienced/casual teams, or only running around to farm players is being counterproductive to this.

Spawn camping other players as a form of protest so they get upset and complain is one of the few motivation tactics available to get ZOS to make a change. I'm not saying I approve or disapprove. It's going to happen regardless.

I don’t know why you wouldn’t disapprove— it’s a jerk thing to do. Honestly if you just want to kill stuff and you find yourself spawn camping in an objective mode I have no problem with it. I’m not one of these people that think the game designers need to be police officers.

It’s the forethought that makes it a jerk thing to do.

And the implied notion (just to be clear I’m doubling down on something I said to Phoenix earlier, not giving crap to who I quoted lol,) that players who prefer DM are better than players who prefer objectives and therefore even ABLE to spawn camp is appallingly arrogant.

And one final thought that hopefully makes my two other points stronger… it’s not the good objective players you (or anyone else,) would be spawn camping. It’s the bad ones. The ones that died (and not by your hand, originally.) So while Mr or Mrs DM enthusiast superhero is sating their bloodthirst on noobs and getting a big head about it, the objective players who might give our superhero the very challenge they crave, are out there winning the game instead.

So I mean there’s a lot of callous ironies floating about the topic to my mind— but ultimately it’s a pretty simple summary: Taking your anger out on innocents is wrong. And being childish is… childish.

Exactly right. I actually can't believe people are admitting and even bragging about harassing other players and others condoning that behavior and nothing happens on the forums or in game. Not a warning, ban, nothing. And it is worse than you think, I stopped playing BGs actually before the DM only disaster, because I was noticing people, myself included, being targeted by the same people. And even when 2 of these dudes were on DIFFERENT teams.

I remember killing one of them, in a flag match, then for the rest of the match this one NB dude followed me around everywhere, but couldn't kill me, then finally a dude from the 3rd team came to specifically help this guy. They killed me and both did some silly dance or something on my head. It happened 2 times but the NB who I killed in the beginning of the match kept trying to kill me the whole match and didn't bother with any objectives at all. Funny we won match. If it goes back to that BGs will die.

Aldoss

Merforum wrote: »

BUT we did learn without any shadow of a doubt that DM is NOT POPULAR at all, it is at most 30 dudes playing over and over.

It's been said, resaid, and resaid again and again, that this theory is patently false.

My BG guild as of just now has 415 members, 45 of which are online at 11:40pm EST, 16 of which are actively in a BG right now, all of which enjoy the DM format. We are not the only BG only guild on PCNA. We host DM centered tournaments. We host DM focused several month long BG seasons where we all queue together specifically to fight each other and not pugs.

To my knowledge, there exists no objective focused guilds like this.

Players get the same matches together because of MMR. There are players in my guild that are leagues beyond my skill that I've literally never seen in a bg once even though they and I queue at the same times.

Merforum

Aldoss wrote: »

Merforum wrote: »

BUT we did learn without any shadow of a doubt that DM is NOT POPULAR at all, it is at most 30 dudes playing over and over.

It's been said, resaid, and resaid again and again, that this theory is patently false.

My BG guild as of just now has 415 members, 45 of which are online at 11:40pm EST, 16 of which are actively in a BG right now, all of which enjoy the DM format. We are not the only BG only guild on PCNA. We host DM centered tournaments. We host DM focused several month long BG seasons where we all queue together specifically to fight each other and not pugs.

To my knowledge, there exists no objective focused guilds like this.

Players get the same matches together because of MMR. There are players in my guild that are leagues beyond my skill that I've literally never seen in a bg once even though they and I queue at the same times.

At this point you are just lying to yourself. ZOS already told everyone the results, DM only population was in the toilet. And even when they tried to trick objective players with a FAKE random queue which fed into DM only, that didn't work the pop was still low. If you guys would not have been so silly about this issue they might have done a proper test with separate queues and everyone would be happy right now.

Dem_kitkats1

xDeusEJRx wrote: »

They said the community didn't receive any significant changes, and that's because people treating every game as TDM in objective games were doing the same as they are now, focusing on getting kills. It goes without saying the pop won't change when the same people are doing the same thing after all this time. Meanwhile I doubt the objective players going to see an increase in community, which will just cause the population to stagnate and only the same players will always be consistently playing.

It's funny how zos is all about "testing and gaining data" but won't even give a fair test on separate queues in this instance to see if their hypothesis about pops is even valid.

As someone who dislikes half of the Objective modes and thought the low probability of getting a DM, in a PvP mode, during previous patches was ridiculous, I completely understand the frustrations of DM players. DM should be a completely separate queue and it always should have been. You're right in that ZOS has backed themselves into a corner by trying implement band-aid fixes and not communicating more with the PvP community, and now they're in this predicament where players don't get what they want and are frustrated once again. I also don't understand the reasoning behind why they didn't conduct a true test with completely separate queues as the players wanted. IMO this would have been a more accurate representation in population preferences with actual separate queues. At that point I think the population would have increased as both DM and Objective players would have gotten what they asked for and finally felt like ZOS was listening to them. But here we are, and there is no way to reverse the damage now.

As much as I disagree with how ZOS has handled problems in the past, I do think that their concern about the population splintering with separate queues is valid now; and to be fair they do have info that we cannot see. Sure DM queue wait times don't seem so bad right now, but we're still pulling from the BG population as a whole. Yes, many Objective players have stopped playing for now, but there are still some that have stuck around, despite everything, because they still want the achievements and rewards. There are also players who are neutral and don't care which modes they get just as long as they can get into a match quickly (not everyone in the community is divided). Even from pulling from the entire population in BGs you see the same names over and over again in high MMR DMs and DM leaderboards. Players say that having a longer wait is fine as long as they get the mode they want, but I think only getting 1 or 2 matches per hr is going get old quickly. Forget about queuing with friends or guild members because, even now, queue wait times are 1\2 hr at least a lot of the time. And as I've mentioned before, I think problems with population are only going to get worse until performance is actually fixed. So, for the sake of not adding more problems on top of problems, I don't mind combining the queues. However, it would be nice for the remaining players to be able to choose their preferences and let the majority win.

SkaraMinoc wrote: »

Spawn camping other players as a form of protest so they get upset and complain is one of the few motivation tactics available to get ZOS to make a change. I'm not saying I approve or disapprove. It's going to happen regardless.

I'm sure with reverting the queues back to the way they were before, ZOS is well aware of the complaints and frustration that they're going to get as they've seen it all before already. So, the fact that with that knowledge and all of the backlash they've received already, and still they have not balked on their decision, leads me to believe that these "protests" will fall on deaf ears. They've made it clear, that for the moment, an increase in population is the way to get change. Being blatantly toxic to other players is being counterproductive to that. In players' attempts to get 1 person angry enough to actually go through the efforts of putting in a complaint, they are actively causing many others to simply not give PvP a chance. Most people won't complain, they will just never queue again, and the population doesn't increase. So really, you're just making the experience bad for everyone.

Aldoss wrote: »

My BG guild as of just now has 415 members, 45 of which are online at 11:40pm EST, 16 of which are actively in a BG right now, all of which enjoy the DM format. We are not the only BG only guild on PCNA. We host DM centered tournaments. We host DM focused several month long BG seasons where we all queue together specifically to fight each other and not pugs.

It's easy to say that the DM population is fine when you're actively coordinating people to play at the same time. Let me tell you that when your premades leave a match because you ended up against PUGs and not your guildies, the teams do not get backfilled. Whenever I'm trying to group queue with someone (PCNA), I have usually have queue times of over 1/2 hr. In my PvP guilds we have a lot of members like yours, but more than half are not active. So what does that tell you about the active population? I don't know what kind of MMR you're in, but I've been playing against the same people for over a year, maybe even two, and until a few weeks ago I was pretty active in BGs.

Aldoss

Merforum wrote: »

At this point you are just lying to yourself.

Cool.

Dem_kitkats1 wrote: »

It's easy to say that the DM population is fine when you're actively coordinating people to play at the same time. Let me tell you that when your premades leave a match because you ended up against PUGs and not your guildies, the teams do not get backfilled.

That doesn't happen. When we're coordinating, no one is taking a queue unless all three teams get it. If a team were to enter the match without confirming, only to leave prior to the start, they'd get a deserter penalty and force the other two teams to wait 15min before queuing again.

These coordinated matches happen less than a few hours per week.

Again, ours is a niche guild specifically for BGs. Merforum is spewing lies that the BG community is "30 dudes". They're demonstrably false.

PhoenixGrey

OBJnoob wrote: »

SkaraMinoc wrote: »

Dem_kitkats1 wrote: »

Being toxic and camping at the spawn of inexperienced/casual teams, or only running around to farm players is being counterproductive to this.

So while Mr or Mrs DM enthusiast superhero is sating their bloodthirst on noobs and getting a big head about it, the objective players who might give our superhero the very challenge they crave, are out there winning the game instead.

So I mean there’s a lot of callous ironies floating about the topic to my mind— but ultimately it’s a pretty simple summary: Taking your anger out on innocents is wrong. And being childish is… childish.

it's childish and I am a role player. So I am innocent and guilty at the same time.

Dem_kitkats1

Aldoss wrote: »

That doesn't happen. When we're coordinating, no one is taking a queue unless all three teams get it. If a team were to enter the match without confirming, only to leave prior to the start, they'd get a deserter penalty and force the other two teams to wait 15min before queuing again.

These coordinated matches happen less than a few hours per week.

Again, ours is a niche guild specifically for BGs. Merforum is spewing lies that the BG community is "30 dudes". They're demonstrably false.

Unfortunately even when you don’t accept the match, teams don't get backfilled because no one else is queueing. So in my experience, when premades decide to decline the match, you'll end up with teams consisting of one or 2 players, or even one team with no players, for the the majority of the match because without coordinating, no one else is queueing.

I agree there are more than 30 players in BGs population as a whole, but once you hit certain MMRs it can feel like that is all there is, as you can have several matches in a day with the same people who are just reconfigured on to different teams each time. I also used to see the same players everyday, every week without failure. So yeah, it can feel like there's only 30 players (that's even being generous in my mind) in BGs because they are the only people you play against. If the population was actually healthy and diverse, this wouldn't be the case, unless you are in top tier high MMR matches.

Darkmage1337

https://www.elderscrollsonline.com/en-us/news/post/61615

"The Whitestrake’s Mayhem in-game event begins Thursday, February 17 at 10AM EST and runs until Tuesday, March 1 at 10AM EST."

So, the Whitestrake’s Mayhem event is happening before the Update 33 (March 14th) Battleground queue changes.
Huzzah, a Battleground event with a busted, broken queue system in place! *Facepalm*
ZOS couldn't wait a few weeks to schedule this event ***AFTER*** the BG queue update?! *Deep sigh*

Merforum

Dem_kitkats1 wrote: »

Aldoss wrote: »

That doesn't happen. When we're coordinating, no one is taking a queue unless all three teams get it. If a team were to enter the match without confirming, only to leave prior to the start, they'd get a deserter penalty and force the other two teams to wait 15min before queuing again.

These coordinated matches happen less than a few hours per week.

Again, ours is a niche guild specifically for BGs. Merforum is spewing lies that the BG community is "30 dudes". They're demonstrably false.

Unfortunately even when you don’t accept the match, teams don't get backfilled because no one else is queueing. So in my experience, when premades decide to decline the match, you'll end up with teams consisting of one or 2 players, or even one team with no players, for the the majority of the match because without coordinating, no one else is queueing.

I agree there are more than 30 players in BGs population as a whole, but once you hit certain MMRs it can feel like that is all there is, as you can have several matches in a day with the same people who are just reconfigured on to different teams each time. I also used to see the same players everyday, every week without failure. So yeah, it can feel like there's only 30 players (that's even being generous in my mind) in BGs because they are the only people you play against. If the population was actually healthy and diverse, this wouldn't be the case, unless you are in top tier high MMR matches.

Exactly correct, waiting 30 minutes for a BG that is max 15 minutes long is a good sign there is a super low pop. Unlike dungeon finder where there might be 100s of DDs waiting for a few tank/healers, BGs doesn't have that problem. They just need any 12 people.

BTW you are right 30 is generous. That number is due to the fact that if you look at the BG leaderboard it is essentially 30 unique accounts with multiple alts. There used to be more unique accounts. A year ago you would only have maybe 1 or 2 of these 30 dudes in each match and that was not game breaking. Then just before this silly DM only test, it was 2-4 of them, meaning pop was already getting lower mostly because of the DMers harassing others. Now it is 6-10 of the same 30 dudes over and over each day.

Also great point about how having your own guild with scheduled events has absolutely no bearing on the day to day, hour by hour ACTUAL BG population situation or queue times. That's like if I said I have my own 4 person group and I used random dungeon finder, and came on the forum to say fake tanks and fake healers don't exist because I never saw one in my premade group WOW.

BTW no one should really care which mode is 'more popular', all the matters is if they had separate queues would wait times be acceptable. If they did that at the beginning instead of DM only the answer would have be yes. If they do it now, it might take a little while but I think it would get there. Although, I think the checkbox solution would be better long term.

OBJnoob

PhoenixGrey wrote: »

OBJnoob wrote: »

SkaraMinoc wrote: »

Dem_kitkats1 wrote: »

Being toxic and camping at the spawn of inexperienced/casual teams, or only running around to farm players is being counterproductive to this.

So while Mr or Mrs DM enthusiast superhero is sating their bloodthirst on noobs and getting a big head about it, the objective players who might give our superhero the very challenge they crave, are out there winning the game instead.

So I mean there’s a lot of callous ironies floating about the topic to my mind— but ultimately it’s a pretty simple summary: Taking your anger out on innocents is wrong. And being childish is… childish.

it's childish and I am a role player. So I am innocent and guilty at the same time.

No now you’re guilty of two things— being childish and not knowing how to role play. You don’t come OOC (out of character,) on a forum and talk about how your character is going to spawn camp for IRL reasons.

Yknow what never mind. You don’t get it, don’t care, and if I say how I really feel the mods will come and have to set this thread on fire for everyone’s good.

You do whatever you want. It’s your right and I respect that. It’s my right to tell you how I feel and I’ve done it. May we both enjoy our future battlegrounds.

And for the record I know my name is obj noob but that’s a very old Xbox handle for a myriad of games. I like deathmatch just fine. I just wish random were random. Seems like a sentence so simple no other sentences are needed.

PhoenixGrey

Merforum wrote: »

OBJnoob wrote: »

SkaraMinoc wrote: »

Dem_kitkats1 wrote: »

Being toxic and camping at the spawn of inexperienced/casual teams, or only running around to farm players is being counterproductive to this.

Spawn camping other players as a form of protest so they get upset and complain is one of the few motivation tactics available to get ZOS to make a change. I'm not saying I approve or disapprove. It's going to happen regardless.

I don’t know why you wouldn’t disapprove— it’s a jerk thing to do. Honestly if you just want to kill stuff and you find yourself spawn camping in an objective mode I have no problem with it. I’m not one of these people that think the game designers need to be police officers.

It’s the forethought that makes it a jerk thing to do.

And the implied notion (just to be clear I’m doubling down on something I said to Phoenix earlier, not giving crap to who I quoted lol,) that players who prefer DM are better than players who prefer objectives and therefore even ABLE to spawn camp is appallingly arrogant.

And one final thought that hopefully makes my two other points stronger… it’s not the good objective players you (or anyone else,) would be spawn camping. It’s the bad ones. The ones that died (and not by your hand, originally.) So while Mr or Mrs DM enthusiast superhero is sating their bloodthirst on noobs and getting a big head about it, the objective players who might give our superhero the very challenge they crave, are out there winning the game instead.

So I mean there’s a lot of callous ironies floating about the topic to my mind— but ultimately it’s a pretty simple summary: Taking your anger out on innocents is wrong. And being childish is… childish.

Exactly right. I actually can't believe people are admitting and even bragging about harassing other players and others condoning that behavior and nothing happens on the forums or in game. Not a warning, ban, nothing. And it is worse than you think, I stopped playing BGs actually before the DM only disaster, because I was noticing people, myself included, being targeted by the same people. And even when 2 of these dudes were on DIFFERENT teams.

I remember killing one of them, in a flag match, then for the rest of the match this one NB dude followed me around everywhere, but couldn't kill me, then finally a dude from the 3rd team came to specifically help this guy. They killed me and both did some silly dance or something on my head. It happened 2 times but the NB who I killed in the beginning of the match kept trying to kill me the whole match and didn't bother with any objectives at all. Funny we won match. If it goes back to that BGs will die.

I did not see spawn camping in the TOS. So there won't be a ban. And yes it will go back to that and ZOS have themselves to blame

Why will DM players run around a flag or towards a ball ? I am not sure what can be done to keep ourselves entertained apart from spawn camping where we might get an actual fight.

Merforum

PhoenixGrey wrote: »

Merforum wrote: »

OBJnoob wrote: »

SkaraMinoc wrote: »

Dem_kitkats1 wrote: »

Being toxic and camping at the spawn of inexperienced/casual teams, or only running around to farm players is being counterproductive to this.

Spawn camping other players as a form of protest so they get upset and complain is one of the few motivation tactics available to get ZOS to make a change. I'm not saying I approve or disapprove. It's going to happen regardless.

I don’t know why you wouldn’t disapprove— it’s a jerk thing to do. Honestly if you just want to kill stuff and you find yourself spawn camping in an objective mode I have no problem with it. I’m not one of these people that think the game designers need to be police officers.

It’s the forethought that makes it a jerk thing to do.

And the implied notion (just to be clear I’m doubling down on something I said to Phoenix earlier, not giving crap to who I quoted lol,) that players who prefer DM are better than players who prefer objectives and therefore even ABLE to spawn camp is appallingly arrogant.

And one final thought that hopefully makes my two other points stronger… it’s not the good objective players you (or anyone else,) would be spawn camping. It’s the bad ones. The ones that died (and not by your hand, originally.) So while Mr or Mrs DM enthusiast superhero is sating their bloodthirst on noobs and getting a big head about it, the objective players who might give our superhero the very challenge they crave, are out there winning the game instead.

So I mean there’s a lot of callous ironies floating about the topic to my mind— but ultimately it’s a pretty simple summary: Taking your anger out on innocents is wrong. And being childish is… childish.

Exactly right. I actually can't believe people are admitting and even bragging about harassing other players and others condoning that behavior and nothing happens on the forums or in game. Not a warning, ban, nothing. And it is worse than you think, I stopped playing BGs actually before the DM only disaster, because I was noticing people, myself included, being targeted by the same people. And even when 2 of these dudes were on DIFFERENT teams.

I remember killing one of them, in a flag match, then for the rest of the match this one NB dude followed me around everywhere, but couldn't kill me, then finally a dude from the 3rd team came to specifically help this guy. They killed me and both did some silly dance or something on my head. It happened 2 times but the NB who I killed in the beginning of the match kept trying to kill me the whole match and didn't bother with any objectives at all. Funny we won match. If it goes back to that BGs will die.

I did not see spawn camping in the TOS. So there won't be a ban. And yes it will go back to that and ZOS have themselves to blame

Why will DM players run around a flag or towards a ball ? I am not sure what can be done to keep ourselves entertained apart from spawn camping where we might get an actual fight.

Get HELP!

PhoenixGrey

Merforum wrote: »

PhoenixGrey wrote: »

Merforum wrote: »

OBJnoob wrote: »

SkaraMinoc wrote: »

Dem_kitkats1 wrote: »

Being toxic and camping at the spawn of inexperienced/casual teams, or only running around to farm players is being counterproductive to this.

Spawn camping other players as a form of protest so they get upset and complain is one of the few motivation tactics available to get ZOS to make a change. I'm not saying I approve or disapprove. It's going to happen regardless.

I don’t know why you wouldn’t disapprove— it’s a jerk thing to do. Honestly if you just want to kill stuff and you find yourself spawn camping in an objective mode I have no problem with it. I’m not one of these people that think the game designers need to be police officers.

It’s the forethought that makes it a jerk thing to do.

And the implied notion (just to be clear I’m doubling down on something I said to Phoenix earlier, not giving crap to who I quoted lol,) that players who prefer DM are better than players who prefer objectives and therefore even ABLE to spawn camp is appallingly arrogant.

And one final thought that hopefully makes my two other points stronger… it’s not the good objective players you (or anyone else,) would be spawn camping. It’s the bad ones. The ones that died (and not by your hand, originally.) So while Mr or Mrs DM enthusiast superhero is sating their bloodthirst on noobs and getting a big head about it, the objective players who might give our superhero the very challenge they crave, are out there winning the game instead.

So I mean there’s a lot of callous ironies floating about the topic to my mind— but ultimately it’s a pretty simple summary: Taking your anger out on innocents is wrong. And being childish is… childish.

Exactly right. I actually can't believe people are admitting and even bragging about harassing other players and others condoning that behavior and nothing happens on the forums or in game. Not a warning, ban, nothing. And it is worse than you think, I stopped playing BGs actually before the DM only disaster, because I was noticing people, myself included, being targeted by the same people. And even when 2 of these dudes were on DIFFERENT teams.

I remember killing one of them, in a flag match, then for the rest of the match this one NB dude followed me around everywhere, but couldn't kill me, then finally a dude from the 3rd team came to specifically help this guy. They killed me and both did some silly dance or something on my head. It happened 2 times but the NB who I killed in the beginning of the match kept trying to kill me the whole match and didn't bother with any objectives at all. Funny we won match. If it goes back to that BGs will die.

I did not see spawn camping in the TOS. So there won't be a ban. And yes it will go back to that and ZOS have themselves to blame

Why will DM players run around a flag or towards a ball ? I am not sure what can be done to keep ourselves entertained apart from spawn camping where we might get an actual fight.

Get HELP!

I am a lost cause

Aldoss

Dem_kitkats1 wrote: »

Unfortunately even when you don’t accept the match, teams don't get backfilled because no one else is queueing. So in my experience, when premades decide to decline the match, you'll end up with teams consisting of one or 2 players, or even one team with no players, for the the majority of the match because without coordinating, no one else is queueing.

Proof for this claim? There are clearly people queuing. Last night my wife and I played in 6 matches in ~2hrs with our longest queue time being 11min.

I'm sorry to not trust you, but I just have a hard time believing that you know for a fact that when a 4 man premade refuses queue, the entire match goes 4v4v0.

Merforum wrote: »

BTW you are right 30 is generous. That number is due to the fact that if you look at the BG leaderboard it is essentially 30 unique accounts with multiple alts. There used to be more unique accounts. A year ago you would only have maybe 1 or 2 of these 30 dudes in each match and that was not game breaking. Then just before this silly DM only test, it was 2-4 of them, meaning pop was already getting lower mostly because of the DMers harassing others. Now it is 6-10 of the same 30 dudes over and over each day.

[snip]

I looked at the pcna leaderboards last night. There are 100 names on that list. Maybe you don't know, but that list also shows you account names. This theory in your head could have been easily solved by simply looking at it.

100 names on the list.
6 accounts have 2 toons on it.

94 accounts on the top 100 deathmatch leaderboards are unique.

[edited for baiting]

GypsyKing22

ZOS needs to redesign the objective modes so that they promote pvp instead of "le high IQ" avoiding fights to win.

I finish relic games with 30+ kills and win because it's actually one of the few objective modes which at least somewhat promotes fighting (cant score if enemy team has your relic, and there is only 1 relic / team).

Chaosball is actually kinda fun, since its also a game mode which promotes fighting and sticking with your group, and protecting the guy who has the ball, but the debuff dot + disabling key skills while holding the ball obviously makes this a lot less balanced than TDM, still a fun game mode every once in a while.

Land grab games need a redesign because the best way to win them is to avoid fights and just run for whatever random flag isn't currently occupied, while the people fighting over flags aren't getting nearly as many points. This is because there are more flags than teams. Reduce the number of max possible flags to 3 and the game mode will be a lot more interesting. (with 2 or only 1 it would be even more interesting)

draigwyrdd

GypsyKing22 wrote: »

ZOS needs to redesign the objective modes so that they promote pvp instead of "le high IQ" avoiding fights to win.

I finish relic games with 30+ kills and win because it's actually one of the few objective modes which at least somewhat promotes fighting (cant score if enemy team has your relic, and there is only 1 relic / team).

Chaosball is actually kinda fun, since its also a game mode which promotes fighting and sticking with your group, and protecting the guy who has the ball, but the debuff dot + disabling key skills while holding the ball obviously makes this a lot less balanced than TDM, still a fun game mode every once in a while.

Land grab games need a redesign because the best way to win them is to avoid fights and just run for whatever random flag isn't currently occupied, while the people fighting over flags aren't getting nearly as many points. This is because there are more flags than teams. Reduce the number of max possible flags to 3 and the game mode will be a lot more interesting. (with 2 or only 1 it would be even more interesting)

I think two flags is a good compromise, since it means that at least one team has to actually contest a flag to get points. One would be an interesting choice as well. I'd like to see this kind of testing be done rather than fiddling with queues.

alberichtano

Well... when I heard that the odds were that every game would be a Deathmatch, I just stopped doing Battlegrounds. I like the tactical games, where I have a chance to be on the winning team. Deathmatches are just a waste of time to me, as I am the worst at that kind of PvP. Being the punching bag for everyone else is just not my kind of fun. So why bother.

alberichtano

GypsyKing22 wrote: »

ZOS needs to redesign the objective modes so that they promote pvp instead of "le high IQ" avoiding fights to win.

I finish relic games with 30+ kills and win because it's actually one of the few objective modes which at least somewhat promotes fighting (cant score if enemy team has your relic, and there is only 1 relic / team).

Chaosball is actually kinda fun, since its also a game mode which promotes fighting and sticking with your group, and protecting the guy who has the ball, but the debuff dot + disabling key skills while holding the ball obviously makes this a lot less balanced than TDM, still a fun game mode every once in a while.

Land grab games need a redesign because the best way to win them is to avoid fights and just run for whatever random flag isn't currently occupied, while the people fighting over flags aren't getting nearly as many points. This is because there are more flags than teams. Reduce the number of max possible flags to 3 and the game mode will be a lot more interesting. (with 2 or only 1 it would be even more interesting)

And..? Why must everything be about fighting? Maybe some of us like to sneak, or outthink our opponents rather than bash them to bits? I have seen your argument before, and I don't understand it. There is already a Deathmatch version where you can fight people to your heart's content. Why is it a problem that there are other modes that are not focused on fighting?

_adhyffbjjjf12

alberichtano wrote: »

GypsyKing22 wrote: »

ZOS needs to redesign the objective modes so that they promote pvp instead of "le high IQ" avoiding fights to win.

I finish relic games with 30+ kills and win because it's actually one of the few objective modes which at least somewhat promotes fighting (cant score if enemy team has your relic, and there is only 1 relic / team).

Chaosball is actually kinda fun, since its also a game mode which promotes fighting and sticking with your group, and protecting the guy who has the ball, but the debuff dot + disabling key skills while holding the ball obviously makes this a lot less balanced than TDM, still a fun game mode every once in a while.

Land grab games need a redesign because the best way to win them is to avoid fights and just run for whatever random flag isn't currently occupied, while the people fighting over flags aren't getting nearly as many points. This is because there are more flags than teams. Reduce the number of max possible flags to 3 and the game mode will be a lot more interesting. (with 2 or only 1 it would be even more interesting)

And..? Why must everything be about fighting? Maybe some of us like to sneak, or outthink our opponents rather than bash them to bits? I have seen your argument before, and I don't understand it. There is already a Deathmatch version where you can fight people to your heart's content. Why is it a problem that there are other modes that are not focused on fighting?

Exactly. DM is barely PVP, its basically simplistic 'what team can X v 1 the other team the best'.

the1andonlyskwex

GypsyKing22 wrote: »

ZOS needs to redesign the objective modes so that they promote pvp instead of "le high IQ" avoiding fights to win.

I finish relic games with 30+ kills and win because it's actually one of the few objective modes which at least somewhat promotes fighting (cant score if enemy team has your relic, and there is only 1 relic / team).

Chaosball is actually kinda fun, since its also a game mode which promotes fighting and sticking with your group, and protecting the guy who has the ball, but the debuff dot + disabling key skills while holding the ball obviously makes this a lot less balanced than TDM, still a fun game mode every once in a while.

Land grab games need a redesign because the best way to win them is to avoid fights and just run for whatever random flag isn't currently occupied, while the people fighting over flags aren't getting nearly as many points. This is because there are more flags than teams. Reduce the number of max possible flags to 3 and the game mode will be a lot more interesting. (with 2 or only 1 it would be even more interesting)

95% of the reason that "avoiding combat" is an effective strategy in objective modes is the fact that DMers are busy avoiding the objectives. If the DMers were actually trying to win, it would be necessary for the other teams to engage in combat.

It's a lot easier to capture objectives unimpeded when half of your opponents are off spawn camping each other.

Sure, it's technically possible for all three teams to run around the map clockwise capturing objectives and never encountering each other, but that just results in a (near) stalemate. Winning consistently (against opponents that are actually trying to win) requires successfully defending captured objectives, or at least winning fights to capture undefended objectives.

Reverb

Do other game modes still exist? After a long stretch of being away from ESO pvp I came back for mayhem and have been running BG on multiple characters for hours at a time. I always queue for solo random, I have never, no exaggeration, honestly never gotten anything but DM in that time.