Implement something to prevent people in IC from queueing out mid-fight.

IxSTALKERxI

Just make it so you can't start your queue unless you are inside your starting base. ez

Just_Attivi

Honestly, I quite like the idea mentioned above,
- Can Accept a queue, anytime, any situation (ie: you queued for a random normal, hopped in IC, and mid fight your DPS queue finally pops, take it, port out, enjoy!)
- - can not Initiate a new queue while in combat (ie: Im in IC, and this player/boss has started smacking me, I need to leave combat before I can port out). Infuriating when people start a fight then port out when they realize theyre losing lol.

-I do like being able to port out, rather than run through the sewers to get to the base, time isnt always plentiful, and while the stones of retreat exist, if youre just grinding mobs, youre not likely earning enough AP to justify the cost of the stones.

React

Here is a prime example of why something needs to be done about this.

The fight in this video starts of as a 3v1 - me vs a 3 man group who has been farming telvar. I kill the nightblade and arcanist, and when the templar healer/tank is the only person left (and another DC shows up) he simply queues out of the campaign to avoid dying/losing his telvar (@ timestamp 1:15). He never even has to drop block or stop moving to do it.

This completely defeats the risk vs reward aspect of imperial city. An integrity change is desperately needed. If you are in direct combat with other players in imperial city, you should not be able to initiate a new queue.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eA5yjq-4fa0

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

React wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

This wouldn't work because players would just have someone group queue them who is sitting outside of combat and there's no way that it could be coded to prevent that easily without ruining the goal of group queuing.
It's already annoying enough that you can't queue for a different Cyrodiil campaign whilst in Cyro or a different sewer whilst in IC.

Nah, this is completely wrong. First of all, if the group lead is sitting in the same district as any group member in combat, they'll also be in combat. Second, the players abusing this don't/won't have an extra person sitting outside of their zone waiting to queue them out. That is just absurd to even suggest.

It takes 0 effort as a solo player to have a second account at lvl 10 in your group as lead whilst you play solo in the zone. Start to get attacked? tab queue tab.
The group lead doesn't even need to be in PVP zones if there are on the same alliance. Why wouldn't someone do this if they are already queuing out to avoid death currently?

Also are players really suggesting that despite not having a fix for in combat bug for 7+ years a queue system that depends on your combat state will be a good idea?

React

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

React wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

This wouldn't work because players would just have someone group queue them who is sitting outside of combat and there's no way that it could be coded to prevent that easily without ruining the goal of group queuing.
It's already annoying enough that you can't queue for a different Cyrodiil campaign whilst in Cyro or a different sewer whilst in IC.

Nah, this is completely wrong. First of all, if the group lead is sitting in the same district as any group member in combat, they'll also be in combat. Second, the players abusing this don't/won't have an extra person sitting outside of their zone waiting to queue them out. That is just absurd to even suggest.

It takes 0 effort as a solo player to have a second account at lvl 10 in your group as lead whilst you play solo in the zone. Start to get attacked? tab queue tab.
The group lead doesn't even need to be in PVP zones if there are on the same alliance. Why wouldn't someone do this if they are already queuing out to avoid death currently?

Also are players really suggesting that despite not having a fix for in combat bug for 7+ years a queue system that depends on your combat state will be a good idea?

Tell me, how exactly is somebody going to tab into a second account while their main is being attacked in order to pop a queue? That is quite a bit more complex than being able to activate the queue yourself on the same account you're being attacked on. In any case, this is a huge stretch.

Yes, we are suggesting that something be done about an exploit that is completely circumventing the purpose of a PVP gamemode. The suggestion outlined multiple times in this thread would not prevent players from queuing out unless they are in direct combat with another player, not if they're just stuck in combat. Just like how imperial city doors work.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

React wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

React wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

This wouldn't work because players would just have someone group queue them who is sitting outside of combat and there's no way that it could be coded to prevent that easily without ruining the goal of group queuing.
It's already annoying enough that you can't queue for a different Cyrodiil campaign whilst in Cyro or a different sewer whilst in IC.

Nah, this is completely wrong. First of all, if the group lead is sitting in the same district as any group member in combat, they'll also be in combat. Second, the players abusing this don't/won't have an extra person sitting outside of their zone waiting to queue them out. That is just absurd to even suggest.

It takes 0 effort as a solo player to have a second account at lvl 10 in your group as lead whilst you play solo in the zone. Start to get attacked? tab queue tab.
The group lead doesn't even need to be in PVP zones if there are on the same alliance. Why wouldn't someone do this if they are already queuing out to avoid death currently?

Also are players really suggesting that despite not having a fix for in combat bug for 7+ years a queue system that depends on your combat state will be a good idea?

Tell me, how exactly is somebody going to tab into a second account while their main is being attacked in order to pop a queue? That is quite a bit more complex than being able to activate the queue yourself on the same account you're being attacked on. In any case, this is a huge stretch.

Yes, we are suggesting that something be done about an exploit that is completely circumventing the purpose of a PVP gamemode. The suggestion outlined multiple times in this thread would not prevent players from queuing out unless they are in direct combat with another player, not if they're just stuck in combat. Just like how imperial city doors work.

You literally said yourself:

React wrote: »

The players that I frequently see farming telvar in IC will pop a queue the moment they see me, and they'll disappear 10 seconds later.

You think it takes more than 1 second to tab hit 2 keys and tab back? (thats IF the player is playing observing game rules and not macroing this)

Also Doors in ESO PVP are not a good example to take of working mechanics :P

I can just forsee the change going through and the posts here afterwards from players complaining about 'more zerg groups in IC' or 'IC is even more dead' IMO there's a lot more interested changes to be focused on before this one.

CameraBeardThePirate

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

React wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

React wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

This wouldn't work because players would just have someone group queue them who is sitting outside of combat and there's no way that it could be coded to prevent that easily without ruining the goal of group queuing.
It's already annoying enough that you can't queue for a different Cyrodiil campaign whilst in Cyro or a different sewer whilst in IC.

Nah, this is completely wrong. First of all, if the group lead is sitting in the same district as any group member in combat, they'll also be in combat. Second, the players abusing this don't/won't have an extra person sitting outside of their zone waiting to queue them out. That is just absurd to even suggest.

It takes 0 effort as a solo player to have a second account at lvl 10 in your group as lead whilst you play solo in the zone. Start to get attacked? tab queue tab.
The group lead doesn't even need to be in PVP zones if there are on the same alliance. Why wouldn't someone do this if they are already queuing out to avoid death currently?

Also are players really suggesting that despite not having a fix for in combat bug for 7+ years a queue system that depends on your combat state will be a good idea?

Tell me, how exactly is somebody going to tab into a second account while their main is being attacked in order to pop a queue? That is quite a bit more complex than being able to activate the queue yourself on the same account you're being attacked on. In any case, this is a huge stretch.

Yes, we are suggesting that something be done about an exploit that is completely circumventing the purpose of a PVP gamemode. The suggestion outlined multiple times in this thread would not prevent players from queuing out unless they are in direct combat with another player, not if they're just stuck in combat. Just like how imperial city doors work.

You literally said yourself:

React wrote: »

The players that I frequently see farming telvar in IC will pop a queue the moment they see me, and they'll disappear 10 seconds later.

You think it takes more than 1 second to tab hit 2 keys and tab back? (thats IF the player is playing observing game rules and not macroing this)

Also Doors in ESO PVP are not a good example to take of working mechanics :P

I can just forsee the change going through and the posts here afterwards from players complaining about 'more zerg groups in IC' or 'IC is even more dead' IMO there's a lot more interested changes to be focused on before this one.

It is a bad faith argument to say that we shouldn't implement a good change just because people would find (an even more exploitative) way around.

Doing this would still stop the majority of players from abusing the queue. You act like everyone and their mother has multiple accounts on a PC that's powerful enough to handle 2 clients running. I really don't see how that would be any more than a handful of cases.

React

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

React wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

React wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

This wouldn't work because players would just have someone group queue them who is sitting outside of combat and there's no way that it could be coded to prevent that easily without ruining the goal of group queuing.
It's already annoying enough that you can't queue for a different Cyrodiil campaign whilst in Cyro or a different sewer whilst in IC.

Nah, this is completely wrong. First of all, if the group lead is sitting in the same district as any group member in combat, they'll also be in combat. Second, the players abusing this don't/won't have an extra person sitting outside of their zone waiting to queue them out. That is just absurd to even suggest.

It takes 0 effort as a solo player to have a second account at lvl 10 in your group as lead whilst you play solo in the zone. Start to get attacked? tab queue tab.
The group lead doesn't even need to be in PVP zones if there are on the same alliance. Why wouldn't someone do this if they are already queuing out to avoid death currently?

Also are players really suggesting that despite not having a fix for in combat bug for 7+ years a queue system that depends on your combat state will be a good idea?

Tell me, how exactly is somebody going to tab into a second account while their main is being attacked in order to pop a queue? That is quite a bit more complex than being able to activate the queue yourself on the same account you're being attacked on. In any case, this is a huge stretch.

Yes, we are suggesting that something be done about an exploit that is completely circumventing the purpose of a PVP gamemode. The suggestion outlined multiple times in this thread would not prevent players from queuing out unless they are in direct combat with another player, not if they're just stuck in combat. Just like how imperial city doors work.

You literally said yourself:

React wrote: »

The players that I frequently see farming telvar in IC will pop a queue the moment they see me, and they'll disappear 10 seconds later.

You think it takes more than 1 second to tab hit 2 keys and tab back? (thats IF the player is playing observing game rules and not macroing this)

Also Doors in ESO PVP are not a good example to take of working mechanics :P

I can just forsee the change going through and the posts here afterwards from players complaining about 'more zerg groups in IC' or 'IC is even more dead' IMO there's a lot more interested changes to be focused on before this one.

You'd lose control of your character to tab out to another account. You do not lose control of your character when you activate a queue on M&K.

I don't know about you, but I typically have a further second or two delay when I alt tab out of ESO to other game clients. You'd have to constantly have two eso clients open and signed in to do this.

It's absurd to even discuss this though, honestly. This is such an elaborate workaround to a completely reasonable and functional solution to the exploit. 99% of the people abusing this would never go to those lengths to continue doing so.

I have no idea how you're jumping to the conclusions from the last part of your post. Your argument doesn't seem like it's being made in good faith, and gives the impression this is likely something you abuse yourself.

DizzyMac

Some of the IC pro gankers are the worst for this. they are more than happy to farm players for telvar, but the minute they meet their match they port out and back in again.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

React wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

React wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

React wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

This wouldn't work because players would just have someone group queue them who is sitting outside of combat and there's no way that it could be coded to prevent that easily without ruining the goal of group queuing.
It's already annoying enough that you can't queue for a different Cyrodiil campaign whilst in Cyro or a different sewer whilst in IC.

Nah, this is completely wrong. First of all, if the group lead is sitting in the same district as any group member in combat, they'll also be in combat. Second, the players abusing this don't/won't have an extra person sitting outside of their zone waiting to queue them out. That is just absurd to even suggest.

It takes 0 effort as a solo player to have a second account at lvl 10 in your group as lead whilst you play solo in the zone. Start to get attacked? tab queue tab.
The group lead doesn't even need to be in PVP zones if there are on the same alliance. Why wouldn't someone do this if they are already queuing out to avoid death currently?

Also are players really suggesting that despite not having a fix for in combat bug for 7+ years a queue system that depends on your combat state will be a good idea?

Tell me, how exactly is somebody going to tab into a second account while their main is being attacked in order to pop a queue? That is quite a bit more complex than being able to activate the queue yourself on the same account you're being attacked on. In any case, this is a huge stretch.

Yes, we are suggesting that something be done about an exploit that is completely circumventing the purpose of a PVP gamemode. The suggestion outlined multiple times in this thread would not prevent players from queuing out unless they are in direct combat with another player, not if they're just stuck in combat. Just like how imperial city doors work.

You literally said yourself:

React wrote: »

The players that I frequently see farming telvar in IC will pop a queue the moment they see me, and they'll disappear 10 seconds later.

You think it takes more than 1 second to tab hit 2 keys and tab back? (thats IF the player is playing observing game rules and not macroing this)

Also Doors in ESO PVP are not a good example to take of working mechanics :P

I can just forsee the change going through and the posts here afterwards from players complaining about 'more zerg groups in IC' or 'IC is even more dead' IMO there's a lot more interested changes to be focused on before this one.

You'd lose control of your character to tab out to another account. You do not lose control of your character when you activate a queue on M&K.

I don't know about you, but I typically have a further second or two delay when I alt tab out of ESO to other game clients. You'd have to constantly have two eso clients open and signed in to do this.

It's absurd to even discuss this though, honestly. This is such an elaborate workaround to a completely reasonable and functional solution to the exploit. 99% of the people abusing this would never go to those lengths to continue doing so.

I have no idea how you're jumping to the conclusions from the last part of your post. Your argument doesn't seem like it's being made in good faith, and gives the impression this is likely something you abuse yourself.

I barely play ESO let alone dead IC. But I've seen a lot of poor changes be made to the game by players who don't really understand its mechanics and/or the consequences of such changes. Sure there might be a temporary win in some situations but you are way more likely to push players away from an already fairly dead part of PVP in exchange for still having the problem manifest itself for players who care enough to do it. Also at the same time during the 7 months of implementing the queue change 0 other pvp features will be worked on and personally I think there are a lot more pressing changes to make in the game.

We're already seeing the only content this year specifically for PVP be Cyro Monster sets and thats after essentially 3 years of 0 content outside of some emotes and costumes.

Additionally 'jumping to conclusions' is kind of what you are doing in your post's not really me, saying that I can foresee the complains coming after the change is made is simply based on all such previous changes. I'm not assuming how or what you play outside of quoting your own post back to you.

Queuing is a notoriously buggy area of the game code already so I personally wouldn't really trust it to be messed around with further when it already gets stuck / drops on game crash or relog etc.

Personally I think it would be nice if they added more incentives to actually go to IC and especially the sewers, made it so that you can only earn as many telvars as you are carrying per kill so that you have to risk to earn big. Make travelling between home base and districts harder so that you can't simply pop back up in any segment after dying. These types of changes.

Finally if you are determined to add this type of thing you are looking at completely the wrong way of implementing it imo. Let players queue. but make their character stay in place vulnerable, not blocking for x seconds whilst they are in the port screen. If you manage to kill them in that time e.g. 20s you get their telvars.

Just_Attivi

Combat bug would need to be addressed, valid point. I havent really encountered the combat bug much in IC as I have in cyro, so I kind of forgot its consideration.

Having a fail state for queue isnt a bad idea either. something like "begin queue, cant block/move/cast for X Seconds to complete queue, any actions cancel queue," where "X" would need balancing, 15-20 seconds is probably the right spot for that. would essentially get the same end result most of us want for IC- forcing a stop to instant port outs.

regarding more content/bug addresses/not breaking more code for the love of god and all that is holy, well... while valid points, theres no reason we shouldnt be able to have it all :P but yea, i get those concerns.

End of the day, I know Id participate more in IC pvp if the ganks/Xv1'ers that queue out the moment they fail their gank/zerg down couldnt just port out without a proper fight/evasion.

CameraBeardThePirate

Just_Attivi wrote: »

Combat bug would need to be addressed, valid point. I havent really encountered the combat bug much in IC as I have in cyro, so I kind of forgot its consideration.

Having a fail state for queue isnt a bad idea either. something like "begin queue, cant block/move/cast for X Seconds to complete queue, any actions cancel queue," where "X" would need balancing, 15-20 seconds is probably the right spot for that. would essentially get the same end result most of us want for IC- forcing a stop to instant port outs.

regarding more content/bug addresses/not breaking more code for the love of god and all that is holy, well... while valid points, theres no reason we shouldnt be able to have it all :P but yea, i get those concerns.

End of the day, I know Id participate more in IC pvp if the ganks/Xv1'ers that queue out the moment they fail their gank/zerg down couldnt just port out without a proper fight/evasion.

The combat bug wouldn't even matter if it was implemented like the doors in IC - you can still activate the doors in combat so long as you haven't dealt or received damage recently. This queue solution should function the same and would therefore not be impacted by Combat bug.

Just_Attivi

Also a Valid solution. if it did function as the doors do, that would work (and maybe thats why I havent noticed the combat bug much in IC, I rarely mount/need to change item slots since no siege, so the usual 'aw shoot im in combat' moments dont happen as much lol).

Necrotech_Master

React wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

React wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

This wouldn't work because players would just have someone group queue them who is sitting outside of combat and there's no way that it could be coded to prevent that easily without ruining the goal of group queuing.
It's already annoying enough that you can't queue for a different Cyrodiil campaign whilst in Cyro or a different sewer whilst in IC.

Nah, this is completely wrong. First of all, if the group lead is sitting in the same district as any group member in combat, they'll also be in combat. Second, the players abusing this don't/won't have an extra person sitting outside of their zone waiting to queue them out. That is just absurd to even suggest.

It takes 0 effort as a solo player to have a second account at lvl 10 in your group as lead whilst you play solo in the zone. Start to get attacked? tab queue tab.
The group lead doesn't even need to be in PVP zones if there are on the same alliance. Why wouldn't someone do this if they are already queuing out to avoid death currently?

Also are players really suggesting that despite not having a fix for in combat bug for 7+ years a queue system that depends on your combat state will be a good idea?

Tell me, how exactly is somebody going to tab into a second account while their main is being attacked in order to pop a queue? That is quite a bit more complex than being able to activate the queue yourself on the same account you're being attacked on. In any case, this is a huge stretch.

Yes, we are suggesting that something be done about an exploit that is completely circumventing the purpose of a PVP gamemode. The suggestion outlined multiple times in this thread would not prevent players from queuing out unless they are in direct combat with another player, not if they're just stuck in combat. Just like how imperial city doors work.

you dont have to run the 2 accounts on the same computer, i literally have 2 full gaming desktops on my desk which i can be running both of my eso accounts if i wanted

in that situation, theres no alt-tabbing involved, its literally just clicking keys on another keyboard

i never actually considered the use case of using the 2nd acct to queue out of IC, but could see it as being possible (not something i would do either, if im going to die im going down fighting lol)

CameraBeardThePirate

Necrotech_Master wrote: »

React wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

React wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

This wouldn't work because players would just have someone group queue them who is sitting outside of combat and there's no way that it could be coded to prevent that easily without ruining the goal of group queuing.
It's already annoying enough that you can't queue for a different Cyrodiil campaign whilst in Cyro or a different sewer whilst in IC.

Nah, this is completely wrong. First of all, if the group lead is sitting in the same district as any group member in combat, they'll also be in combat. Second, the players abusing this don't/won't have an extra person sitting outside of their zone waiting to queue them out. That is just absurd to even suggest.

It takes 0 effort as a solo player to have a second account at lvl 10 in your group as lead whilst you play solo in the zone. Start to get attacked? tab queue tab.
The group lead doesn't even need to be in PVP zones if there are on the same alliance. Why wouldn't someone do this if they are already queuing out to avoid death currently?

Also are players really suggesting that despite not having a fix for in combat bug for 7+ years a queue system that depends on your combat state will be a good idea?

Tell me, how exactly is somebody going to tab into a second account while their main is being attacked in order to pop a queue? That is quite a bit more complex than being able to activate the queue yourself on the same account you're being attacked on. In any case, this is a huge stretch.

Yes, we are suggesting that something be done about an exploit that is completely circumventing the purpose of a PVP gamemode. The suggestion outlined multiple times in this thread would not prevent players from queuing out unless they are in direct combat with another player, not if they're just stuck in combat. Just like how imperial city doors work.

you dont have to run the 2 accounts on the same computer, i literally have 2 full gaming desktops on my desk which i can be running both of my eso accounts if i wanted

in that situation, theres no alt-tabbing involved, its literally just clicking keys on another keyboard

i never actually considered the use case of using the 2nd acct to queue out of IC, but could see it as being possible (not something i would do either, if im going to die im going down fighting lol)

But again, this is such an absurd reason to not implement a good change. The amount of people that own 2 gaming PCs and 2 ESO accounts is already pretty low. The overlap of that cohort and people that would go into IC and abuse the queue system like that would be even lower. It's not a reason at all to prevent people from easily abusing the system.

Necrotech_Master

CameraBeardThePirate wrote: »

Necrotech_Master wrote: »

React wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

React wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

This wouldn't work because players would just have someone group queue them who is sitting outside of combat and there's no way that it could be coded to prevent that easily without ruining the goal of group queuing.
It's already annoying enough that you can't queue for a different Cyrodiil campaign whilst in Cyro or a different sewer whilst in IC.

Nah, this is completely wrong. First of all, if the group lead is sitting in the same district as any group member in combat, they'll also be in combat. Second, the players abusing this don't/won't have an extra person sitting outside of their zone waiting to queue them out. That is just absurd to even suggest.

It takes 0 effort as a solo player to have a second account at lvl 10 in your group as lead whilst you play solo in the zone. Start to get attacked? tab queue tab.
The group lead doesn't even need to be in PVP zones if there are on the same alliance. Why wouldn't someone do this if they are already queuing out to avoid death currently?

Also are players really suggesting that despite not having a fix for in combat bug for 7+ years a queue system that depends on your combat state will be a good idea?

Tell me, how exactly is somebody going to tab into a second account while their main is being attacked in order to pop a queue? That is quite a bit more complex than being able to activate the queue yourself on the same account you're being attacked on. In any case, this is a huge stretch.

Yes, we are suggesting that something be done about an exploit that is completely circumventing the purpose of a PVP gamemode. The suggestion outlined multiple times in this thread would not prevent players from queuing out unless they are in direct combat with another player, not if they're just stuck in combat. Just like how imperial city doors work.

you dont have to run the 2 accounts on the same computer, i literally have 2 full gaming desktops on my desk which i can be running both of my eso accounts if i wanted

in that situation, theres no alt-tabbing involved, its literally just clicking keys on another keyboard

i never actually considered the use case of using the 2nd acct to queue out of IC, but could see it as being possible (not something i would do either, if im going to die im going down fighting lol)

But again, this is such an absurd reason to not implement a good change. The amount of people that own 2 gaming PCs and 2 ESO accounts is already pretty low. The overlap of that cohort and people that would go into IC and abuse the queue system like that would be even lower. It's not a reason at all to prevent people from easily abusing the system.

im not saying something shouldnt be done, was giving react an example of a way to do it without running 2 copies of eso on the same system

(another alternative for running on the same system is putting both instances in windowed mode so they are side by side)

the poster who brought this up was playing devils advocate for the suggested queue-blocking system