ZOS, this was what you knew was coming. Prepare for the salt.

gariondavey

The DM crew are hard at it again now that you can't choose the game mode.
We choose DM.

Objective players think they can just run to where there isn't any fighting but when coordinated DM players work together they will not only win the objective score, but also farm the objective players.

Does 0-16 and losing the game sound fun to you? I don't think so.

Options are:

1)go to the queue style you had last patch, but remove dm from the "random" queue
2)rework objective modes to 2 teams or fewer objectives to actually promote PVP
3)create a bg lobby so the DM crew can play our games in peace.

https://imgur.com/a/t6qh543

This is just the beginning. The forums will be awash with the people complaining of "they ignore objectives and just dm" and so on.
On PC NA there are hundreds of DM bg players. I know them. I play with them. We have DM BG guilds.

Please fix this situation before you polarize the 2 groups of players further. Either allow us to be separate (options 1, 3) or bring us together (option 2).

@ZOS_Kevin @ZOS_GinaBruno

Thanks!

Lauranae

haha may be you forgot that for months we had to fight in DM, and if we are not the best, we fight back!! and beleive me today in our Crazy King, i killed my share of you!

You dont scare me! bring it on!

RedTalon

Have not noticed that yet did many bgs this afternoon and seems people are just chasing kills and still adjusting to objectives being back won quite a few land grabs and relics. we will see how tonight goes once the server is stable.

Please keep things has is its fun

Lauranae

This afternoon it was a mix of objectifs and killing. And it was fun. I could even complete 3 achievements for crazy king and 1 for DM.

Its a nice change. People are not against killing, they just want to do it with other things.

alberichtano

So basically I still have no reason to go back to Battlegrounds, as DM-ers are wantonly ruining it for everyone else, as I understand the OP. Huh.

mmtaniac

Dying is normal thing in objective, people care about doing something more than killing. Objectives is that more thing. Player who can't killing is useless in deathmatch anyway ,but this way they can do atleast something.

Dem_kitkats1

alberichtano wrote: »

So basically I still have no reason to go back to Battlegrounds, as DM-ers are wantonly ruining it for everyone else, as I understand the OP. Huh.

Players farming players out of protest is nothing new. They did it before the queue changes as well. But yes, the community likes to keep shooting itself in the foot.

Amottica

gariondavey wrote: »

Objective players think they can just run to where there isn't any fighting !

Objective players are not trying to run away from anyone. They just like a BG match with more depth to it, one that requires strategy and a higher level of game play than just DM.

dinokstrunz

Amottica wrote: »

gariondavey wrote: »

Objective players think they can just run to where there isn't any fighting !

Objective players are not trying to run away from anyone. They just like a BG match with more depth to it, one that requires strategy and a higher level of game play than just DM.

Unironically from BGs over the last year or so I've seen more depth and strategy come from DM games when fighting against organised premades.

jaws343

alberichtano wrote: »

So basically I still have no reason to go back to Battlegrounds, as DM-ers are wantonly ruining it for everyone else, as I understand the OP. Huh.

Ruining it?

The screenshot in the OP clearly shows that they won the objective, and killed the other teams repeatedly.

So, clearly they were just better at the objective mode and at killing the other teams. That isn't ruining it. That just means the other teams were bad at the game mode.

dinokstrunz

jaws343 wrote: »

alberichtano wrote: »

So basically I still have no reason to go back to Battlegrounds, as DM-ers are wantonly ruining it for everyone else, as I understand the OP. Huh.

Ruining it?

The screenshot in the OP clearly shows that they won the objective, and killed the other teams repeatedly.

So, clearly they were just better at the objective mode and at killing the other teams. That isn't ruining it. That just means the other teams were bad at the game mode.

exactly this, how on earth do people not understand the most effective strategy is to actually PvP?

_adhyffbjjjf12

dinokstrunz wrote: »

jaws343 wrote: »

alberichtano wrote: »

So basically I still have no reason to go back to Battlegrounds, as DM-ers are wantonly ruining it for everyone else, as I understand the OP. Huh.

Ruining it?

The screenshot in the OP clearly shows that they won the objective, and killed the other teams repeatedly.

So, clearly they were just better at the objective mode and at killing the other teams. That isn't ruining it. That just means the other teams were bad at the game mode.

exactly this, how on earth do people not understand the most effective strategy is to actually PvP?

experienced players know that fighting for kills IS part of the picture with objective based maps, its the same in any other AAAa mmorpg out there. , The issue is some DM only fans struggle with the concept of fighting for kill while also juggling and reacting to other objectives.

dinokstrunz

_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »

dinokstrunz wrote: »

jaws343 wrote: »

alberichtano wrote: »

So basically I still have no reason to go back to Battlegrounds, as DM-ers are wantonly ruining it for everyone else, as I understand the OP. Huh.

Ruining it?

The screenshot in the OP clearly shows that they won the objective, and killed the other teams repeatedly.

So, clearly they were just better at the objective mode and at killing the other teams. That isn't ruining it. That just means the other teams were bad at the game mode.

exactly this, how on earth do people not understand the most effective strategy is to actually PvP?

experienced players know that fighting for kills IS part of the picture with objective based maps, its the same in any other AAAa mmorpg out there. , The issue is some DM only fans struggle with the concept of fighting for kill while also juggling and reacting to other objectives.

There is no struggling of the concept. There's just no reason to do so. BGs are majorly unrewarding and people just want to PvP. At the end of the day this is ZoS problem resolve and those who are playing DM in objective and doing the right thing as its an effective strategy. I've won plenty of objective games just by focusing on kills, you can't lose flags if the opponents are dead.

_adhyffbjjjf12

dinokstrunz wrote: »

_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »

dinokstrunz wrote: »

jaws343 wrote: »

alberichtano wrote: »

So basically I still have no reason to go back to Battlegrounds, as DM-ers are wantonly ruining it for everyone else, as I understand the OP. Huh.

Ruining it?

The screenshot in the OP clearly shows that they won the objective, and killed the other teams repeatedly.

So, clearly they were just better at the objective mode and at killing the other teams. That isn't ruining it. That just means the other teams were bad at the game mode.

exactly this, how on earth do people not understand the most effective strategy is to actually PvP?

experienced players know that fighting for kills IS part of the picture with objective based maps, its the same in any other AAAa mmorpg out there. , The issue is some DM only fans struggle with the concept of fighting for kill while also juggling and reacting to other objectives.

There is no struggling of the concept. There's just no reason to do so. BGs are majorly unrewarding and people just want to PvP. At the end of the day this is ZoS problem resolve and those who are playing DM in objective and doing the right thing as its an effective strategy. I've won plenty of objective games just by focusing on kills, you can't lose flags if the opponents are dead.

oh there is struggling, DMers are evidently following a simplistic single-tactic script in their head because it suits them, applying tactics that are often sub optimal but validating through confirmation bias. They are also clearly ignoring the team tactics at times while they are at it.

NordSwordnBoard

Mony Python's Life of Brian:

BRIAN: Brothers! Brothers! We should be struggling together!
FRANCIS: We are! Ohh.
BRIAN: We mustn't fight each other! Surely we should be united against the common enemy!
EVERYONE: The Judean People's Front?!
BRIAN: No, no! The Romans!

The belittling of each others' game modes only serves to take the focus away from where it should be.

dinokstrunz

_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »

dinokstrunz wrote: »

_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »

dinokstrunz wrote: »

jaws343 wrote: »

alberichtano wrote: »

So basically I still have no reason to go back to Battlegrounds, as DM-ers are wantonly ruining it for everyone else, as I understand the OP. Huh.

Ruining it?

The screenshot in the OP clearly shows that they won the objective, and killed the other teams repeatedly.

So, clearly they were just better at the objective mode and at killing the other teams. That isn't ruining it. That just means the other teams were bad at the game mode.

exactly this, how on earth do people not understand the most effective strategy is to actually PvP?

experienced players know that fighting for kills IS part of the picture with objective based maps, its the same in any other AAAa mmorpg out there. , The issue is some DM only fans struggle with the concept of fighting for kill while also juggling and reacting to other objectives.

There is no struggling of the concept. There's just no reason to do so. BGs are majorly unrewarding and people just want to PvP. At the end of the day this is ZoS problem resolve and those who are playing DM in objective and doing the right thing as its an effective strategy. I've won plenty of objective games just by focusing on kills, you can't lose flags if the opponents are dead.

oh there is struggling, DMers are evidently following a simplistic single-tactic script in their head because it suits them, applying tactics that are often sub optimal but validating through confirmation bias. They are also clearly ignoring the team tactics at times while they are at it.

Do you even play BGs? I've done thousands of BGs and in Solo games people barely communicate with each other. The only time I've seen real organised team tactics is in premades who play Deathmatch which requires real coordination, reaction and position awareness. This whole "DM is simple minded" logic is really quite laughable when you get down into the thick of it.

Since you are on about tactics can you show me where there is any written or video guides for objective game modes in BGs? I'll wait.

Lauranae

dinokstrunz wrote: »

_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »

dinokstrunz wrote: »

_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »

dinokstrunz wrote: »

jaws343 wrote: »

alberichtano wrote: »

So basically I still have no reason to go back to Battlegrounds, as DM-ers are wantonly ruining it for everyone else, as I understand the OP. Huh.

Ruining it?

The screenshot in the OP clearly shows that they won the objective, and killed the other teams repeatedly.

So, clearly they were just better at the objective mode and at killing the other teams. That isn't ruining it. That just means the other teams were bad at the game mode.

exactly this, how on earth do people not understand the most effective strategy is to actually PvP?

experienced players know that fighting for kills IS part of the picture with objective based maps, its the same in any other AAAa mmorpg out there. , The issue is some DM only fans struggle with the concept of fighting for kill while also juggling and reacting to other objectives.

There is no struggling of the concept. There's just no reason to do so. BGs are majorly unrewarding and people just want to PvP. At the end of the day this is ZoS problem resolve and those who are playing DM in objective and doing the right thing as its an effective strategy. I've won plenty of objective games just by focusing on kills, you can't lose flags if the opponents are dead.

oh there is struggling, DMers are evidently following a simplistic single-tactic script in their head because it suits them, applying tactics that are often sub optimal but validating through confirmation bias. They are also clearly ignoring the team tactics at times while they are at it.

Do you even play BGs? I've done thousands of BGs and in Solo games people barely communicate with each other. The only time I've seen real organised team tactics is in premades who play Deathmatch which requires real coordination, reaction and position awareness. This whole "DM is simple minded" logic is really quite laughable when you get down into the thick of it.

Since you are on about tactics can you show me where there is any written or video guides for objective game modes in BGs? I'll wait.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=cvAv0iMGIoU

At least this one, explaining the whole concept. Objectives concept ? NO. Battleground concept. Because its a whole. I love objectives, but objectives free of battles are not fun. As well DM for only DM, i have that in cyro or ic. But both are really great together.

gariondavey

I think some of you are missing the 2nd of the 3 options up top.
Objectives can be fun in bgs, and many people who play dm feel this way, but the way eso does it is wrong.
No other pvp game has 3 team capture the flag, etc. There are 2 teams. They have to fight each other in order to win the game.
Objectives in eso are not like that. I've been in capture the relic games where someone does 0 damage, 0 healing, 0 kda and run 5 flags in 2 minutes.
If you had 2 teams, it would be an excellent game mode. A throwback to warsong gulch days.
Or 3 teams but 1 flag in the middle that you have to get to your base.

Bottom line is many of the objective modes discourage actual pvp. This does a disservice to players who will never develop actual pvp skills other than "oh enemies there - that's bad - I'll go somewhere else". If zos reworked objective modes they could bring the 2 player groups together into something everyone can appreciate.

ArchMikem

Jeez. Those Fire Drake players should get at least a participation award for what you subjected them to.

Lauranae

gariondavey wrote: »

I think some of you are missing the 2nd of the 3 options up top.
Objectives can be fun in bgs, and many people who play dm feel this way, but the way eso does it is wrong.
No other pvp game has 3 team capture the flag, etc. There are 2 teams. They have to fight each other in order to win the game.
Objectives in eso are not like that. I've been in capture the relic games where someone does 0 damage, 0 healing, 0 kda and run 5 flags in 2 minutes.
If you had 2 teams, it would be an excellent game mode. A throwback to warsong gulch days.
Or 3 teams but 1 flag in the middle that you have to get to your base.

Bottom line is many of the objective modes discourage actual pvp. This does a disservice to players who will never develop actual pvp skills other than "oh enemies there - that's bad - I'll go somewhere else". If zos reworked objective modes they could bring the 2 player groups together into something everyone can appreciate.

The only problem is then one alliance will always miss. Or they need to just do battleground not involving alliances. Like a sort of training ......

propertyOfUndefined

There’s a misconception, I think, that all objective players dislike fighting. Not true! If I didn’t enjoy fighting other players, I wouldn’t be PVPing. I just find it boring when killing is the only objective, and there’s just 1 path to victory.

Personally, I couldn’t be happier with the BG queue as it is today! Been getting a good balance of match types… Thank you!

alberichtano

Dem_kitkats1 wrote: »

alberichtano wrote: »

So basically I still have no reason to go back to Battlegrounds, as DM-ers are wantonly ruining it for everyone else, as I understand the OP. Huh.

Players farming players out of protest is nothing new. They did it before the queue changes as well. But yes, the community likes to keep shooting itself in the foot.

I know. Seems like Battlegrounds are just not for me at all any more. That's okey I suppose, I don't have to play every part of the game I guess. But, you know... kinda silly.

Dem_kitkats1

dinokstrunz wrote: »

Do you even play BGs? I've done thousands of BGs and in Solo games people barely communicate with each other. The only time I've seen real organised team tactics is in premades who play Deathmatch which requires real coordination, reaction and position awareness. This whole "DM is simple minded" logic is really quite laughable when you get down into the thick of it.

Since you are on about tactics can you show me where there is any written or video guides for objective game modes in BGs? I'll wait.

Of course there is more tactical play when premades are involved. It's much more easier and viable to be able to deploy any kind of strategy and coordination when members are able to communicate with eachother. This goes for any type of content, whether it be PvE or PvP. It has nothing to do with the mode simply being DM.

gariondavey wrote: »

I think some of you are missing the 2nd of the 3 options up top.
Objectives can be fun in bgs, and many people who play dm feel this way, but the way eso does it is wrong.
No other pvp game has 3 team capture the flag, etc. There are 2 teams. They have to fight each other in order to win the game.
Objectives in eso are not like that. I've been in capture the relic games where someone does 0 damage, 0 healing, 0 kda and run 5 flags in 2 minutes.
If you had 2 teams, it would be an excellent game mode. A throwback to warsong gulch days.
Or 3 teams but 1 flag in the middle that you have to get to your base.

Bottom line is many of the objective modes discourage actual pvp. This does a disservice to players who will never develop actual pvp skills other than "oh enemies there - that's bad - I'll go somewhere else". If zos reworked objective modes they could bring the 2 player groups together into something everyone can appreciate.

I think most people would agree with you that the mode designs are bad, and that the queues should be separated eventually. If population is really an issue, as ZOS states, I think the idea of some kind of lobby queue would be a fair compromise in the meantime. In the grand scheme of things, however, the community as a whole agrees on the same things; separate queues and better modes/maps. Objective mode players are not against DM players, they are with you! However, by targeting non-DM players over things that they have no control over you make it an "us vs them" issue. So the conversation always boils down to DM players vs Objective players and not the issues with the modes themselves. The BG community as a whole should be coming together, demanding changes and offering suggestions. Not one group advocating for themselves by purposely angering and alienating a subset of the already decreasing PvP population, as well as new players, because that didn't work last time. And after all of the testing and changes they've implemented, and all of the complaints they've received in the past couple of months it's clear that they will not backtrack on their decision. So trying to make every Objective mode match to be as unpleasant as possible for all other players is doing more harm than good IMO.

CameraBeardThePirate

I'm a DM player, whatever connotation might come with that. However I don't follow the notion that DMers should protest poorly designed game modes by farming players and ignoring objectives. If anything, highly skilled DMers should be speedrunning these objective modes to prove just how poorly designed these modes are.

I would LOVE objective modes if they were designed well. I love objective based PvP, I played Team Fortress 2 for years and that game doesn't even have a deathmatch mode. The current game modes are terribly designed, and the way the meta has shifted since the last time we saw objective modes is going to make that more clear than ever. In deathmatch, there's no reason to build tanky, but now we're going to start seeing just how ridiculously tanky players can build now which will begin to point out the flaws with these game modes.

You absolutely should NOT be able to stand on a flag holding block, by yourself, with no damage and no team healing, and win the game for your team. However as it stands now that's exactly what the best strategy is for flag modes. Run to an unguarded flag, stand there and tank enemies until they get bored, then rinse and repeat with new flags. You should NOT be able to slot Glorious Defender or Blessed Meridia, walk up to a relic, and take it without the enemy being able to interrupt you, but as it stands now, you can. These strategies AREN'T clever or smart, they're abusing the way that poorly designed game modes interact with the mechanics.

PhoenixGrey

_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »

dinokstrunz wrote: »

jaws343 wrote: »

alberichtano wrote: »

So basically I still have no reason to go back to Battlegrounds, as DM-ers are wantonly ruining it for everyone else, as I understand the OP. Huh.

Ruining it?

The screenshot in the OP clearly shows that they won the objective, and killed the other teams repeatedly.

So, clearly they were just better at the objective mode and at killing the other teams. That isn't ruining it. That just means the other teams were bad at the game mode.

exactly this, how on earth do people not understand the most effective strategy is to actually PvP?

experienced players know that fighting for kills IS part of the picture with objective based maps, its the same in any other AAAa mmorpg out there. , The issue is some DM only fans struggle with the concept of fighting for kill while also juggling and reacting to other objectives.

You do realize fighting is optional in winning objective games right ?

There is no objective mode where you need to fight in order to win. Which is the whole reason why it should not be in the PVP category

aurelius_fx

the only issue i see here is lack of balance on op's match
you were lucky enough to be queued with other people who know how to play against people doing their dailies, what do you want? a cookie? lol that's just modern matchmaking games for you

it also further proves that you can just kill your way into victory in non-dm since it looks like the team with most kills also won the game...

i think that the whole battlegrounds format is heavily flawed itself but making those little petty squabbling "#teamdm and #teamobj" tribe mentality discussions isn't really going forward towards anything productive

Urzigurumash

The best competitors play to win

Necrotech_Master

Lauranae wrote: »

gariondavey wrote: »

I think some of you are missing the 2nd of the 3 options up top.
Objectives can be fun in bgs, and many people who play dm feel this way, but the way eso does it is wrong.
No other pvp game has 3 team capture the flag, etc. There are 2 teams. They have to fight each other in order to win the game.
Objectives in eso are not like that. I've been in capture the relic games where someone does 0 damage, 0 healing, 0 kda and run 5 flags in 2 minutes.
If you had 2 teams, it would be an excellent game mode. A throwback to warsong gulch days.
Or 3 teams but 1 flag in the middle that you have to get to your base.

Bottom line is many of the objective modes discourage actual pvp. This does a disservice to players who will never develop actual pvp skills other than "oh enemies there - that's bad - I'll go somewhere else". If zos reworked objective modes they could bring the 2 player groups together into something everyone can appreciate.

The only problem is then one alliance will always miss. Or they need to just do battleground not involving alliances. Like a sort of training ......

technically alliances are irrelevant in BGs, the 3 teams it sets up pull from anyone who queued regardless of alliance

before all this nonsense with the queues i would do the random BGs with a friend and sometimes we werent the same alliance, so the 3 teams setup is more arbitrary than required, they could easily add 2 team objective modes too, even using the exact same maps we already have for BGs (would work more for stuff like domination/crazy king, but may need repositioning on stuff like relics)

alberichtano

PhoenixGrey wrote: »

_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »

dinokstrunz wrote: »

jaws343 wrote: »

alberichtano wrote: »

So basically I still have no reason to go back to Battlegrounds, as DM-ers are wantonly ruining it for everyone else, as I understand the OP. Huh.

Ruining it?

The screenshot in the OP clearly shows that they won the objective, and killed the other teams repeatedly.

So, clearly they were just better at the objective mode and at killing the other teams. That isn't ruining it. That just means the other teams were bad at the game mode.

exactly this, how on earth do people not understand the most effective strategy is to actually PvP?

experienced players know that fighting for kills IS part of the picture with objective based maps, its the same in any other AAAa mmorpg out there. , The issue is some DM only fans struggle with the concept of fighting for kill while also juggling and reacting to other objectives.

You do realize fighting is optional in winning objective games right ?

There is no objective mode where you need to fight in order to win. Which is the whole reason why it should not be in the PVP category

So you would argue that chess is not a PvP kind of game?

precambria

Did they learn nothing... now they ruin everyones ability to enjoy bgs again, didn't we go over this LIKE 3 YEARS AGO. I only recently tolerated ESO again for doing bgs a few times a week, it's whatever at this point it wasn't even that fun when I could do the only thing I wanted to in the game now there is zero reason to play ESO good riddance. Zenimax's predatory monetization and whatever you call what the handling of PvP/bgs has literally made me quit not just ESO but all video games, I have had better experiences being targeted with extortion than this lol.

Urzigurumash

Necrotech_Master wrote: »

before all this nonsense with the queues

We had to hit accept 100 times before we got into a match. I believe this is what began the series of revisions to the queues. That old problem is gone.