_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »No you didn't read properly, I referred to weighted random.
_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 wrote: »its already successfully run in other games right now.
PhoenixGrey wrote: »The reason for toxicity is not being able to play a DM.
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.
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.
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.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.
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.Dem_kitkats1 wrote: »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.PhoenixGrey wrote: »The reason for toxicity is not being able to play a DM.
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.Dem_kitkats1 wrote: »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.PhoenixGrey wrote: »The reason for toxicity is not being able to play a DM.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
At this point you are just lying to yourself.
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.
it's childish and I am a role player. So I am innocent and guilty at the same time.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.
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.
Dem_kitkats1 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.
PhoenixGrey 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.
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.
PhoenixGrey 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.
PhoenixGrey 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!
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.
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.
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)
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)
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?
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)