No ability to choose Deathmatch Sucks

WordsOfPower

Amottica wrote: »

The outspoken complaints of players getting tired of constantly being pulled into DM matches when Zenimax brought back the option to queue for a random DM. A great many people made it clear they do not want constant or near-constant DM matches for their randoms because it is boring to do that all the time.

This corroborated Zenimax's statement and I will go with that vs guesses. Those threads complaining about the near-constant DM pops were notably more active than this thread showing the interest in random BGs is much greater than a DM-only queue.

You can't have it both ways, Amottica. Either DM interest is the majority or the minority.

You can't complain about the state of the random queue in Update 32 AND also say that there are more people wanting to play objectives.

The reason that people were getting DM when they queued for random is that 90%+ of players were queueing for DMs and there weren't enough players at any one time to put together an objective game.

I know it seems inconceivable to some of the posters on this forum but the majority of BG players want to fight each other. Ya know, Player vs Player. They'd even happily do that WHILE doing objectives, if the game modes were set up to support a fair and sensible reward.

And they WILL continue to farm players in protest until the DM only queue is reintroduced.

Objective players should be campaigning to split the queues, too, while trying to recruit enough players to Objective BG guilds so that you can actually form a 12 player game.

What am I saying? Of course you're not gonna do that, cuz the majority of objective players are not hardcore, they're just there for dailies or grinding Alliance Skill line, in PvE gear.

Trust me, one of two things will happen. Either the DM players will win and the DM queue will return, or else the DM players will stop playing, and BGs will be a ghost town like all the other PvP areas in the game.

BGs are the last chance to retain PvP players in the game, and I for one am not going down without a fight, in all senses of the phrase.

@ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_Kevin

RealLoveBVB

WordsOfPower wrote: »

And they WILL continue to farm players in protest until the DM only queue is reintroduced.

Oh noes, please stop killing players in bgs.

Honestly, what kind of protest is it exactly?
And what about this "continued"? Haven't had a match yet where a team was spawn camping or "obvious" farming on someone.

I had to queue at 2 am this morning for a bg, because the daily reward was just unlocked there because of yesterday's night maintenance.
I had a instant match. Relic hunt on the lava map. Every player in every team was playing for the objective. Either defending or attacking. No selfish DM'ers fighting on some useless corner.
-That- is fun.

When I remember DM queues, then you had way higher waiting times and only things you had was a big aoe ball of 12 tanks neutralizing themselves with their defensive playstyle.
That is -no- fun.

Amottica

WordsOfPower wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

The outspoken complaints of players getting tired of constantly being pulled into DM matches when Zenimax brought back the option to queue for a random DM. A great many people made it clear they do not want constant or near-constant DM matches for their randoms because it is boring to do that all the time.

This corroborated Zenimax's statement and I will go with that vs guesses. Those threads complaining about the near-constant DM pops were notably more active than this thread showing the interest in random BGs is much greater than a DM-only queue.

You can't have it both ways, Amottica. Either DM interest is the majority or the minority.

You can't complain about the state of the random queue in Update 32 AND also say that there are more people wanting to play objectives.

The reason that people were getting DM when they queued for random is that 90%+ of players were queueing for DMs and there weren't enough players at any one time to put together an objective game.

I know it seems inconceivable to some of the posters on this forum but the majority of BG players want to fight each other. Ya know, Player vs Player. They'd even happily do that WHILE doing objectives, if the game modes were set up to support a fair and sensible reward.

And they WILL continue to farm players in protest until the DM only queue is reintroduced.

Objective players should be campaigning to split the queues, too, while trying to recruit enough players to Objective BG guilds so that you can actually form a 12 player game.

What am I saying? Of course you're not gonna do that, cuz the majority of objective players are not hardcore, they're just there for dailies or grinding Alliance Skill line, in PvE gear.

Trust me, one of two things will happen. Either the DM players will win and the DM queue will return, or else the DM players will stop playing, and BGs will be a ghost town like all the other PvP areas in the game.

BGs are the last chance to retain PvP players in the game, and I for one am not going down without a fight, in all senses of the phrase.

@ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_Kevin

I never suggested the majority are interested in DMs. It’s clear that most are not which is why players complained when the the option to queue for random BGs returned but it mostly popped as a DM because we were used to fill the matches for those who requested a DM specific BG. Heck, those threads were many times more active than this thread and there was more than one.

So no, certain didn’t want it both ways.

WordsOfPower

I'm sensing that the only explanation for the huge divergence of experience here is server.

On PC-EU, update 32, DMs popped almost immediately

The waits are longer now, not shorter.

And you don't get DMs any more, because there is no option to queue for them and many DM players just aren't queueing any more.

If people on this forum actually believe there are more players interested in objectives than DM, then I think we are now so divided that we don't even seem to have the same perception.

You objective players are clearly 'winning' on this forum because most of the PvP players don't even bother coming here.

I wonder what things would be like if this last fact changed

Aldoss

WordsOfPower wrote: »

I'm sensing that the only explanation for the huge divergence of experience here is server.

On PC-EU, update 32, DMs popped almost immediately

The waits are longer now, not shorter.

I've mentioned this before as well for PCNA. From the start of the DM test and through update 32, BGs popped very quickly as both group and solo queues. Averages were around 3-5 minutes.

From the moment U33 launched, queue times have lagged and are now averaging over 10 minutes. Last night, most queue times were greater than 15 minutes for my wife and I in group queue. This is further exacerbated by the fact that some game modes can be completed in under 5 minutes, making the queue time invested worthless (to us).

Jaimeh

I like objective modes, but removing the option for deathmatch, just means that people play objective modes as deathmatch, ruining the fun for everyone, so it'd be good if they retained the options for DM/objectives/everything, and if queue times for either modes were long, move you to the 'everything' option automatically after a while.

Amottica

Jaimeh wrote: »

I like objective modes, but removing the option for deathmatch, just means that people play objective modes as deathmatch, ruining the fun for everyone, so it'd be good if they retained the options for DM/objectives/everything, and if queue times for either modes were long, move you to the 'everything' option automatically after a while.

I have no issue with a DM-specific queue but it should be specific and never draw from the random queue. After all, that was the real problem with the DM-specific option is it pulled players from the other queue to form groups.

Of course, the problem is if Zenimax did this then the long queue would drive players to the random queue where they would still just do DM. So the solution is to somehow make DM very unappealing in objective-based matches.

buzzclops

Im sorry but 2 teams wouldnt work in eso bgs. Unless its a sudden death deathmatch type arena. The games would just end after the first fight and its always been the case whenever i get a lobby that has a team leaving. The team that wins the first fight will most likely always win the other fights. The third team always helps create chaos and you can strategize around having three teams. The problem with flag games is that there is too many flags and that a player by themselves cant defend a flag vs 2+ because it flips with numbers. If you had to actually capture the flag like you pick a relic then you could strategize and leave someone behind to defend 1vx style and/or call others for help while he actually can delay enemies. Imho capture the relic and chaosball are fine. To stay on topic yes a deathmatch queu and a random non dm would be ideal

Purdomination33

I seriously don’t even know how to play the other games. [snip] was the reason for this change? The other crappy game modes feeling left out or something. I que up hoping to hit battlegrounds, if not then I just try to kill people in some game mode I have no interest in.

[edited for profanity bypass]

_adhyffbjjjf12

Purdomination33 wrote: »

I seriously don’t even know how to play the other games. [snip] was the reason for this change? The other crappy game modes feeling left out or something. I que up hoping to hit battlegrounds, if not then I just try to kill people in some game mode I have no interest in.

Issue : game has too many issues so new players don't join so not enough of a population to support DM fans and fans of all the other 4 map types.

Correct Solution : fix root gameplay issues and in mean time a single queue with weighted randomization to reflect participating player preference. Eventually when issues are resolved the player base will increase as new players are not alienated at which point the queues can be split.

[edited to remove quote]

Synaptic

Personally I just enjoy it when my team mates who are often 0-12 yell at me to go for the objective and I just reply with "There is no objective, this is DM" . As long as there is no DM queue I'll keep enjoying these "totally awesome and not poorly designed" game modes where everyone runs around from one objective to another actively avoiding fighting the best way I know how, by killing as many of them as I can.

_adhyffbjjjf12

Synaptic wrote: »

Personally I just enjoy it when my team mates who are often 0-12 yell at me to go for the objective and I just reply with "There is no objective, this is DM" . As long as there is no DM queue I'll keep enjoying these "totally awesome and not poorly designed" game modes where everyone runs around from one objective to another actively avoiding fighting the best way I know how, by killing as many of them as I can.

what an awesome team player. You are playing solo in a team game, you are blindly following a simplistic tactic that your opponent team will read like a book, and you are create a tactical disadvantage for your team which will mean you will lose more often or not as you are in the wrong place at the wrong time blindly hammering away to get your oh so important kill rate and therefore creating a numerical disadvantage for your team on the correct locations.

Synaptic

_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »

Synaptic wrote: »

Personally I just enjoy it when my team mates who are often 0-12 yell at me to go for the objective and I just reply with "There is no objective, this is DM" . As long as there is no DM queue I'll keep enjoying these "totally awesome and not poorly designed" game modes where everyone runs around from one objective to another actively avoiding fighting the best way I know how, by killing as many of them as I can.

what an awesome team player. You are playing solo in a team game, you are blindly following a simplistic tactic that your opponent team will read like a book, and you are create a tactical disadvantage for your team which will mean you will lose more often or not as you are in the wrong place at the wrong time blindly hammering away to get your oh so important kill rate and therefore creating a numerical disadvantage for your team on the correct locations.

That was kinda my point mate.

I don't care about winning or losing in objectives game modes because what I want to be playing is DM. The game gives me the freedom to play the way I want to so that's what I do, I go for kills instead or avoiding fights in favor of objectives.
As for the point about K/D, it's really hard for me to understand sometimes how my team mates are doing poorly on objectives when I'm doing great on kills and even in some cases winning in 1v2 or v3 situations.
There is no strategy involved in these game modes, if two teams are fighting the best course of action for the 3rd team is to stay away from that fight and focus on objectives, so essentially it's not in your interest to get into a fight and allow someone to run around and cap objectives.

In summary, yes I'm salty about DM only queue being taken away.

Urzigurumash

Objective Modes should reward players for fighting well, not for fleeing.

This can easily be solved:

1. Scrap Relic and Domination
2. Put a massive snare on the Chaosball and increase its DoT
3. One Flag Crazy King

Now we have 3 distinct modes, all of which would reward fighting well.

gariondavey

Urzigurumash wrote: »

Objective Modes should reward players for fighting well, not for fleeing.

This can easily be solved:

1. Scrap Relic and Domination
2. Put a massive snare on the Chaosball and increase its DoT
3. One Flag Crazy King

Now we have 3 distinct modes, all of which would reward fighting well.

2 team relic! 6 per team. Or 1 relic that spawns in the middle and 3 teams fight to get it to their base.

Urzigurumash

gariondavey wrote: »

Urzigurumash wrote: »

Objective Modes should reward players for fighting well, not for fleeing.

This can easily be solved:

1. Scrap Relic and Domination
2. Put a massive snare on the Chaosball and increase its DoT
3. One Flag Crazy King

Now we have 3 distinct modes, all of which would reward fighting well.

2 team relic! 6 per team. Or 1 relic that spawns in the middle and 3 teams fight to get it to their base.

I think we should assume it is not desirable to change the 3 Team structure, with the given maps, queue structure, etc.

But yeah 1 Relic spawning at the Chaosball spawn point would work for sure. If the Chaosball had a snare these modes would be fairly distinct.

For that matter 1 Flag Domination could work too - just one single flag that never moves, but each game it would spawn at a random location. This would give us the experience of static match-long fights at odd places like the side flags at Mor Khazgur and Eld Angavar, upstairs at the Arcane University, the small tower at Istirus, etc. That sounds fun to me. Maybe some of the mechanics of flipping / medals would have to change to make it work though so that 4 Goliath Tanks aren't guaranteed victory, etc.

There's an underappreciated side of having one queue - you can't spec as a Health tank and just queue up for objectives, you have a high chance of being useless in a DM.

OBJnoob

-facepalm- capture the relic really only works with 3 teams and if they have their own base. How is it different from chaosball if there’s only one and it spawns where the ball spawns? For that matter how is it any different from deathmatch?

Trust me, I’ve always thought the ques should be separate and that we all deserve to have what we want. But this notion that “objective players should be fighting for better modes,” is dumb and frankly subversive. People who REFUSE to do anything except kill kill kill and whine and complain if anyone suggests there might be something else worthwhile to do THAT TAKES SKILL also…

Us obj enthusiasts don’t want to hear half your suggestions because they are bad suggestions that only a DM-Only person would enjoy. I really don’t know why such talented gamers and strategists can’t find some methodology or enjoyment in objective modes… but I think it has something to do with their childish decision to just not— and of course that they think they are so awesome and better than everyone else.

I have no idea what Zos thinks they’re doing… they’re really being morons refusing to do the absolute only single thing that makes sense and would make everyone happy.

But I can’t sympathize yet. Give it another 3 months at least. The shoe is on the other foot now. Yes, it does suck, doesn’t it?

Decimus

OBJnoob wrote: »

-facepalm- capture the relic really only works with 3 teams and if they have their own base. How is it different from chaosball if there’s only one and it spawns where the ball spawns? For that matter how is it any different from deathmatch?

Trust me, I’ve always thought the ques should be separate and that we all deserve to have what we want. But this notion that “objective players should be fighting for better modes,” is dumb and frankly subversive. People who REFUSE to do anything except kill kill kill and whine and complain if anyone suggests there might be something else worthwhile to do THAT TAKES SKILL also…

Us obj enthusiasts don’t want to hear half your suggestions because they are bad suggestions that only a DM-Only person would enjoy. I really don’t know why such talented gamers and strategists can’t find some methodology or enjoyment in objective modes… but I think it has something to do with their childish decision to just not— and of course that they think they are so awesome and better than everyone else.

I have no idea what Zos thinks they’re doing… they’re really being morons refusing to do the absolute only single thing that makes sense and would make everyone happy.

But I can’t sympathize yet. Give it another 3 months at least. The shoe is on the other foot now. Yes, it does suck, doesn’t it?

I have always enjoyed objective game modes in other MMOs and tried to enjoy them in ESO... but it just stops being fun when you're carrying around enemy team's relic, they're holding yours and you're trying to 1v4 the enemy team because your team decides to play deathmatch against the 3rd team.

Problem? 3 Teams.


In every other MMO (with more active BG player bases I might add) there has not been a third team to ruin any fun you might potentially have and no amount of "methodology" can remove third partying, whether you're a deathmatch enjoyer or objective player.

Atleast if it's team vs team you can stick to your team mates without losing the game instantly when a third team just steamrolls the empty objectives while your team fights the 3rd team.


3-Way BGs is terrible design and they should revamp the whole system (along with the maps to accommodate team vs team).

Dem_kitkats1

Urzigurumash wrote: »

Objective Modes should reward players for fighting well, not for fleeing.
2. Put a massive snare on the Chaosball and increase its DoT

Yes! I agree with this 100%. The Objective shouldn't force people to avoid combat. This would also make it much more difficult for players to exploit hard to reach areas of the map.

gariondavey wrote: »

2 team relic! 6 per team. Or 1 relic that spawns in the middle and 3 teams fight to get it to their base.

This too. Capture the Relic is awful with 3 teams, or 3 seperate relics. Either the weaker team is descended on by the two other teams, or while two teams are fighting over 1 relic, the third can easily win the uncontested relic with zero effort.

WordsOfPower

OBJnoob wrote: »

Us obj enthusiasts don’t want to hear half your suggestions because they are bad suggestions that only a DM-Only person would enjoy. I really don’t know why such talented gamers and strategists can’t find some methodology or enjoyment in objective modes… but I think it has something to do with their childish decision to just not— and of course that they think they are so awesome and better than everyone else.

I have no idea what Zos thinks they’re doing… they’re really being morons refusing to do the absolute only single thing that makes sense and would make everyone happy.

But I can’t sympathize yet. Give it another 3 months at least. The shoe is on the other foot now. Yes, it does suck, doesn’t it?

Much to agree and disagree with here. It seems you support separate queues, so props to you for that.

I agree that the shoe being on one foot is really the cause of all this frustration.

Where I take issue is that you think we don't like the objective modes because they're about something other than killing. We would enjoy them if they could be combined with killing. But they are just really bad. We are not childish. We just don't want to play something where PvP skill is minimal.

We enjoy PvP because it's difficult, unpredictable, there are lots of different builds and playstyles, and winning is satisfying if you've tried hard.

Problem is, in BGs, playing PvP well does not lead to victory but more likely to loss. Running away is honestly the best way to win those games. I've kept a careful record of my games this patch and when I've won its been either : chaosball and I've kited everyone while alternately spamming HtD and Vigor, Domination and I've captured all the empty flags where there was no fighting, or relics where I stealthed in or used CC immunity cheese.

I take no enjoyment from this and fail to see how anyone could.

gariondavey

OBJnoob wrote: »

-facepalm- capture the relic really only works with 3 teams and if they have their own base. How is it different from chaosball if there’s only one and it spawns where the ball spawns? For that matter how is it any different from deathmatch?

Trust me, I’ve always thought the ques should be separate and that we all deserve to have what we want. But this notion that “objective players should be fighting for better modes,” is dumb and frankly subversive. People who REFUSE to do anything except kill kill kill and whine and complain if anyone suggests there might be something else worthwhile to do THAT TAKES SKILL also…

Us obj enthusiasts don’t want to hear half your suggestions because they are bad suggestions that only a DM-Only person would enjoy. I really don’t know why such talented gamers and strategists can’t find some methodology or enjoyment in objective modes… but I think it has something to do with their childish decision to just not— and of course that they think they are so awesome and better than everyone else.

I have no idea what Zos thinks they’re doing… they’re really being morons refusing to do the absolute only single thing that makes sense and would make everyone happy.

But I can’t sympathize yet. Give it another 3 months at least. The shoe is on the other foot now. Yes, it does suck, doesn’t it?

Is this satire? The forum name and these comments I can't see as anything other than that.

newtinmpls

gariondavey wrote: »

I know 400+ players on pc na who prefer dms

Hundreds of people is not a high enough number to be meaningful for a multi-sever, multi country MMO.

And I would bet anyone who has a long standing preference for a particular gaming style and is in multiple active guilds could probably come up with "hundreds of people" who like or dislike whatever they like or dislike.

newtinmpls

WordsOfPower wrote: »

We enjoy PvP because it's difficult, unpredictable, there are lots of different builds and playstyles, and winning is satisfying if you've tried hard.

Problem is, in BGs, playing PvP well does not lead to victory but more likely to loss.

I would disagree, in that the type of playstyle that these games are requiring is a type of PvP, but not "the same" as (for instance) retaking a keep.

The games with objectives are interesting to me because they aren't just kill kill kill or gank gank gank.

If there was some of this in Cyrodiil I would try it more.

WordsOfPower

To be clear : i mostly hate Cyrodiil because there is perhaps even less skill involved there, in most cases. It's all zerg on zerg. Occasionally you can find small groups going at it, which is exactly what BGs were originally designed to replicate

Giraffon

It's game design. That's the issue. It's not that it should be one way or the other. It's that the players should be able to check a box (character specific) that represents what their default battleground match type will be.

precambria

Giraffon wrote: »

It's game design. That's the issue. It's not that it should be one way or the other. It's that the players should be able to check a box (character specific) that represents what their default battleground match type will be.

Yeah, and to think they allowed such madness to take place for so long. Imagine people choosing which thing they would rather do, I wonder how many other games that have multiple modes to play decided to entirely remove the ability to choose which one you want to play. Oh yeah, none because it's ludicrous. having the function in the game and it being fine (compared to this) and than... it hurts my mind so much I just quit the friking game.

It's not complicated or in need of debates, just do what the Giraffon said. Zos stop being infantile about this you are a multi million dollar company, why are you acting out of resentment towards your own customers this is like a terrible relationship fr.

WordsOfPower

Also...

Imagine running the data and discovering that among Deathmatch, 'Flag Games', and 'Relic Games', Deathmatch was by far the most popular and had queues considerably shorter than the other modes, and then deciding to treat those players with condescension by nudging them into playing the other modes, purely because the queues were a bit long for those modes and you wanted to find a quick solution to this??!!!

There are some things that ZOS could do with this game which would take so little in the way of development time but would completely revive the numbers of people playing.

When I see them doing the opposite, it actually makes me wonder if they are intentionally trying to steer the game towards all-solo, all-casual.

Maybe there won't BE an ES6. Maybe it will be an Anniversary Edition of ESO with all DLC and a promise that they never have to PvP if they don't want to, because its been removed from the game, and IC and Cyrodiil have been transformed into overland zones?????

Play the way you want to, unless it involves PvP.

OBJnoob

@decimus I’ve played WoW and Everquest a long time ago… sure it’d be cool if eso had an arena system. Or overland pvp. Or only two factions, in your opinion. But the differences are what makes the game different. It’s pretty similar to the other games in the genre anyway… how many of your favorite things can be tacked on until ESO isn’t original at all? I think the triple factions are one of the most unique and awesome things about ESO combat. And if you don’t think so then you are obviously just as right as me, in that it’s only our opinions, but you really are wrong if you think there can be no methodology found to prevent third partying. Play Pubg for a while. You’ll learn that you have control over more than you think. But I’m sure you still feel the same way. Which is fine. But to use one final example… some people want animation canceling to be gone because they think it’s pointless finger mashing, a glitch, and stupid. Most of us however would probably disagree because we like that it’s an original feature of eso.

@gariondavey Most certainly not being satirical nor do I see how my name implies I’m being anything other than literal and honest. The name itself is satirical… in that when I play a game I like to win it by the rules of the game, not declare myself the winner by upholding some other standard I made for myself. So I’m normally on a flag. Or guarding a flag. Or trying to steal a flag (not only eso.) And people tend to call those people noobs (not only eso.)

So while those of you that responded to me did it with respect (probably more than my comment deserved, ty,) I can not ignore all the other people whose comments I have read, nor the overwhelming demeanor of the conversation itself.

How many DMers must swear to spawn camp in protest before I’m correct to call them childish?

The only answer is to have separate ques. Anything else, anything else at all, is a distraction and a delay. Isn’t it clear that some people like the other modes just the way they are? And now those people are happy after being forlorn for like a year. And two weeks in and all of a sudden the scorned DM crowd knows how to fix obj to make everyone happy. No…. No, you’re making yourselves happy. Sorry but I’m the sort of person to call BS when I smell it.

PhoenixGrey

OBJnoob wrote: »

I really don’t know why such talented gamers and strategists can’t find some methodology or enjoyment in objective modes… but I think it has something to do with their childish decision to just not— and of course that they think they are so awesome and better than everyone else.

We are better than everyone else at PVP combat. I do find a certain satisfaction in spawn camping objective players though if that counts as enjoyment for you

There is certainly no incentive or purpose for combat in objective game modes. If your bunch really think there is then you are equally bad at objectives as we talented DM'ers are !

Urzigurumash

This shouldn't be controversial:

Ideally, adjust the objectives to encourage fighting like a good non-cheesed match of Chaosball does and we can have one queue and everybody can have fun.

If you all remember, back before the queue system was ever changed for the first time, despite its problems, it was a good mix, maybe 4/5 DM, 1/5 Objectives, and everybody played the objectives and had fun because it was a nice little break from DM and nobody was bored with them. That's what I recall on my server.

Once we had that patch or so where it was mostly objectives, which I think was during a time when Alessian WWs still ran rampant, people became tired of these modes. Now we're left with the undesirable situation for the "Random Enthusiast" who just wants to win and/or have fun of not knowing what our teammates want to do.