Future of Battlegrounds

Moonspawn · August 18

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

Are you saying you would ignore all the other 5 endlessly respawning players?

Yes I'm confident in ignoring those 5 to target you.

Now I get it. You're talking about ''discarding positioning and target selection''. Thankfully that's already written in there. I trust you don't need help understanding that catching someone inside a sandwich in a 4v4v4 is an opportunity to target them.

xylena_lazarow · August 18

Moonspawn wrote: »

I trust you don't need help

Correct. I'm confident I can outmaneuver the 5 spawners, kill you, then get out. If you're a troll tank, I'm hitting you first before killing the squishy player, to send a message.

Moonspawn · August 18

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

@MincMincMinc
Correct me if I'm wrong, but your entire KDA MMR idea seems to be about NOT placing high and low MMR players in the same matches. Yes?

Yeah that is the point of any mmr system? You seem to still be stuck on the notion that matches will always be a mix and we cant ever have a system that avoids that..

Why is it that you want to avoid placing high and low MMR players in the same matches?

Uhhhhh maybe because it is boring for high mmr players to wait 20-30 mins in que just to slaughter new pvp players that have no interest in playing the game. Half of my matches just stop after the first fight since the losing team farming dailies just waits in spawn because they know they are better off letting the match end quicker will let them reque and hopefully get on a winning team faster so they can complete their daily.

At the same time new pvp players or people just questing dailies can only explain what is going on by thinking the game has rampant cheating going on.

Neither of which are healthy for player retention.

Perfect. Keep that answer at the forefront of your mind. We'll get back to it later.

Right now the game places high and low MMR players in the same matches. It always has. Correct?

I dont understand, are you suggesting that it would be better to make sure that brand new pvp players are matched against 10 year veteran pvpers?

We have long queue times even with a system that obviously mixes high and low MMR players. If we went with your idea of keeping them separate, wouldn't these 20-30 min queues be even longer?

shadoza · August 18

My opinion: Having followed this thread for a short time, I have come to a conclusion that I do not want to participate in PvP mini games in ESO. It feels as if the PvP has been reduced to a system of mechanics and strategizing mechanics. (Not unlike the min/max, meta of the dungeon groups.) The purpose of the PvP mini games appears to be to collect ego points. That ego is built on bravado. Building ratings by attack the low level players? In my day, we called that school yard bullying.

Mixing MMR under the posted strategies of targeting the most vulnerable in the group would only cull them from the PvP mini games completely. It is not fun to be the fodder for someone's PvP ego. After a few games of die, spawn die, the player is going to avoid the PvP. This brings down the numbers and extend the wait time for PvP mini games to pop.

My experience: I used to play PvP regularly in another game. The development team of that game was bias. They continued to adjust the PvP game play in the direction that certain groups who was believed to be 'kings' of PvP. The Dev team set a rule that not only allowed a prebuilt group to enter PvP but gave them preferred status in the queue. What this did was reduce the population of the queue because pugs cannot be a prebuilt group. To combat that situation this Dev team decided to allow the PvP to pop even if one of the three groups was not properly populated.
*3 teams of 5 men*
This resulted in two full teams and one team that had only 2 players. I was a member of that team. The other member was camped in the spawn area where it could never be attacked and still get credits for the fight. <==sad behavior ) Since I was only one and the board showed only two, the remaining two teams fought each other and ignored the me. If I left the game at this point, the match would have been ended with no wins.
Instead of bailing, I screamed for help into my guild channel. Then I went a picked up two relics because the no bother with them. I set them down and waited. Screamed for help again providing an update that I had two of the four relics and no way to defend them. (I was ranged DPS / glass cannon) No one came to test me. No challenges. The two other groups were set one against the other and I didn't matter to them. I decided to take a change and run over to the now abandoned third relic. I picked it up and ran back to my home spot. I now had three relics. The other two groups were fighting for the one relic that was left. At length, and it seemed forever, my guild mates arrived. Tank took over the relic babysitting, healer and I went over to where the other two groups were fighting and snuck their relic out from under them. Our team, which was discounted because we usually sucked, won the match with all four relics. Most of them were collected by a single player whom no one bothered to challenge.
There is no moral to this story; however, it is a warning as to what can come to PvP mini games when one focuses on only favoring the strong or the loud. PvP died in that game. Group dungeons died in that game. That game kind of died too. It didn't die because of the play together; stay together nonsense. It died because the group play was so far off balanced that no one played group activities. And, the game had fallen so off balance between group play and solo play, that when the group play fell down, there was nothing left to carry the game.

Conclusion: Discussions on how to fix PvP should included ideas of how to encourage players to become involved in PvP. All this talk of ganking new PvP players or using them as point fodder is not going to keep the mini game alive and popping.

i11ionward · August 18

Haki_7 wrote: »

Three-teams BGs: Endless possibilities

Two-teams BGs: Lopsided snoozefest 😪

Update 47 drops.
I decide it’s a good time to try a new PvP build.
Log in.
Oh wow, PvP weekend — 8v8 Deathmatch! Sounds like fun, let’s jump in.

I play around 10 matches.
Every single one ends in either a total stomp win or a total stomp loss. Scores like 15–500, 500–60, 100–500. No close games at all.

At this point I’m thinking: 8v8 Deathmatch might be one of the worst modes.
And then I realize… even capture the relic 8v8 feels better. (Which is crazy, because back in the 4v4v4 days I never thought I’d say anything good about relics lol.)

So yeah, I’m done with BGs until this Deathmatch weekend is over.

Honestly, I just want 4v4v4 back.
Or to be more precise, I’d like to see a mixed queue of 8v8 and 4v4v4, made up of the most fun modes. For me, that would be:

Domination 4v4v4 (Domination 8v8 has too many flags, matches end in 3 minutes, not fun)

Deathmatch 4v4v4 (Deathmatch 8v8 is just horribly unbalanced)

Capture the Relic 8v8 (no need to explain why 4v4v4 relic is broken)

Chaos Ball 4v4v4 or 8v8 (both are mostly fine)

Crazy King 4v4v4 or 8v8 (both are mostly fine)

Jierdanit · August 18

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

@MincMincMinc
Correct me if I'm wrong, but your entire KDA MMR idea seems to be about NOT placing high and low MMR players in the same matches. Yes?

Yeah that is the point of any mmr system? You seem to still be stuck on the notion that matches will always be a mix and we cant ever have a system that avoids that..

Why is it that you want to avoid placing high and low MMR players in the same matches?

Uhhhhh maybe because it is boring for high mmr players to wait 20-30 mins in que just to slaughter new pvp players that have no interest in playing the game. Half of my matches just stop after the first fight since the losing team farming dailies just waits in spawn because they know they are better off letting the match end quicker will let them reque and hopefully get on a winning team faster so they can complete their daily.

At the same time new pvp players or people just questing dailies can only explain what is going on by thinking the game has rampant cheating going on.

Neither of which are healthy for player retention.

Perfect. Keep that answer at the forefront of your mind. We'll get back to it later.

Right now the game places high and low MMR players in the same matches. It always has. Correct?

I dont understand, are you suggesting that it would be better to make sure that brand new pvp players are matched against 10 year veteran pvpers?

We have long queue times even with a system that obviously mixes high and low MMR players. If we went with your idea of keeping them separate, wouldn't these 20-30 min queues be even longer?

Idk where you are getting these numbers.

I havent had a 20 min queue for solo 8v8 or 4v4 once since the bgs released.

MincMincMinc · August 18

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

@MincMincMinc
Correct me if I'm wrong, but your entire KDA MMR idea seems to be about NOT placing high and low MMR players in the same matches. Yes?

Yeah that is the point of any mmr system? You seem to still be stuck on the notion that matches will always be a mix and we cant ever have a system that avoids that..

Why is it that you want to avoid placing high and low MMR players in the same matches?

Uhhhhh maybe because it is boring for high mmr players to wait 20-30 mins in que just to slaughter new pvp players that have no interest in playing the game. Half of my matches just stop after the first fight since the losing team farming dailies just waits in spawn because they know they are better off letting the match end quicker will let them reque and hopefully get on a winning team faster so they can complete their daily.

At the same time new pvp players or people just questing dailies can only explain what is going on by thinking the game has rampant cheating going on.

Neither of which are healthy for player retention.

Perfect. Keep that answer at the forefront of your mind. We'll get back to it later.

Right now the game places high and low MMR players in the same matches. It always has. Correct?

I dont understand, are you suggesting that it would be better to make sure that brand new pvp players are matched against 10 year veteran pvpers?

We have long queue times even with a system that obviously mixes high and low MMR players. If we went with your idea of keeping them separate, wouldn't these 20-30 min queues be even longer?

Well the majority of the que time is due to zos poorly separating the ques into 4 categories first off. Again they wouldn't entirely be separated as it doesn't prevent matches from happening in any way.

Moonspawn · August 18

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

@MincMincMinc
Correct me if I'm wrong, but your entire KDA MMR idea seems to be about NOT placing high and low MMR players in the same matches. Yes?

Yeah that is the point of any mmr system? You seem to still be stuck on the notion that matches will always be a mix and we cant ever have a system that avoids that..

Why is it that you want to avoid placing high and low MMR players in the same matches?

Uhhhhh maybe because it is boring for high mmr players to wait 20-30 mins in que just to slaughter new pvp players that have no interest in playing the game. Half of my matches just stop after the first fight since the losing team farming dailies just waits in spawn because they know they are better off letting the match end quicker will let them reque and hopefully get on a winning team faster so they can complete their daily.

At the same time new pvp players or people just questing dailies can only explain what is going on by thinking the game has rampant cheating going on.

Neither of which are healthy for player retention.

Perfect. Keep that answer at the forefront of your mind. We'll get back to it later.

Right now the game places high and low MMR players in the same matches. It always has. Correct?

I dont understand, are you suggesting that it would be better to make sure that brand new pvp players are matched against 10 year veteran pvpers?

We have long queue times even with a system that obviously mixes high and low MMR players. If we went with your idea of keeping them separate, wouldn't these 20-30 min queues be even longer?

Well the majority of the que time is due to zos poorly separating the ques into 4 categories first off. Again they wouldn't entirely be separated as it doesn't prevent matches from happening in any way.

Assuming that population isn't enough to separate players into multiple tiers, are you willing to make a genuine effort to understand how we could have balanced matches even if there were only two tiers?

Haki_7 · August 19

And to think that people would have reinstalled the game just for three-teams DM weekend. Instead, we get this:

i11ionward · August 19

Haki_7 wrote: »

And to think that people would have reinstalled the game just for three-teams DM weekend. Instead, we get this:

Objectively, 8v8 deathmatch is a complete disaster.
I really hope ZOS will pay attention to this issue and the problems with Battlegrounds.

i11ionward · August 19

By the way, I also want to point out the issue with spawn camping and how poorly the maps are actually designed. More than once in 8v8 deathmatch, I’ve noticed situations where at the start of the match, the teams can be roughly even, around 100-100. Then, one team manages to break through the other, and after that, one team just traps the other at their spawn, ending the match with a score like 100-500. This is yet another example of how poorly the maps and spawn points are designed.

Even though 4v4v4 maps don’t fully solve the spawn camping problem, in 4v4v4 it’s not as oppressive. Sooner or later, the third team rushes in, and the team being farmed at the spawn has to respond, which gives the first team a chance to regroup safely.

So yes, ZOS, bring back our 4v4v4 deathmatch!

MincMincMinc · August 19

i11ionward wrote: »

By the way, I also want to point out the issue with spawn camping and how poorly the maps are actually designed. More than once in 8v8 deathmatch, I’ve noticed situations where at the start of the match, the teams can be roughly even, around 100-100. Then, one team manages to break through the other, and after that, one team just traps the other at their spawn, ending the match with a score like 100-500. This is yet another example of how poorly the maps and spawn points are designed.

Even though 4v4v4 maps don’t fully solve the spawn camping problem, in 4v4v4 it’s not as oppressive. Sooner or later, the third team rushes in, and the team being farmed at the spawn has to respond, which gives the first team a chance to regroup safely.

So yes, ZOS, bring back our 4v4v4 deathmatch!

What can we expect when they make spawns designed to disadvantage the already losing team

The losing team is always up on the wall, so they know they didnt win the first engagement
Then there is a good chance they are down a player because one of their guys escaped and is running around so they are maybe 6-7 vs 8.
Then they have to make the commitment to jump down and nobody wants to be the first penguin off the iceberg
Then as they are falling one by one they have to endure 2-3s of enemy attacks before they can even land and cast
Then they all have to spend 10s or more going defensive to recover and regroup.....maybe setting them back minutes at a time because they are forced to use their ults defensively
Then they can finally try fighting the 6 or 7v8 against enemies that already beat them in an 8v8

Spawns on the maps should be at level with the ground which would entice hesitant group members to stay balled up with their team as they leave. Then zos just needs to make a one way wall so enemies cant go hard into the spawn. Zos could go a step further and have a two tiered system where there is the one way wall hard safe spawn that forces players out after a 10s timer(enough time to buff up while safe) Then you get pushed out into a soft spawn area where enemies would take a dot damage like slaughterfish if they entered.

Honestly I think having more of a timed spawn regroup mechanic would help the newer players too, to atleast force them to respawn together and have a better chance of staying grouped up

NxJoeyD · August 19

MincMincMinc wrote: »

i11ionward wrote: »

By the way, I also want to point out the issue with spawn camping and how poorly the maps are actually designed. More than once in 8v8 deathmatch, I’ve noticed situations where at the start of the match, the teams can be roughly even, around 100-100. Then, one team manages to break through the other, and after that, one team just traps the other at their spawn, ending the match with a score like 100-500. This is yet another example of how poorly the maps and spawn points are designed.

Even though 4v4v4 maps don’t fully solve the spawn camping problem, in 4v4v4 it’s not as oppressive. Sooner or later, the third team rushes in, and the team being farmed at the spawn has to respond, which gives the first team a chance to regroup safely.

So yes, ZOS, bring back our 4v4v4 deathmatch!

What can we expect when they make spawns designed to disadvantage the already losing team
The losing team is always up on the wall, so they know they didnt win the first engagement

Then there is a good chance they are down a player because one of their guys escaped and is running around so they are maybe 6-7 vs 8.

Then they have to make the commitment to jump down and nobody wants to be the first penguin off the iceberg

Then as they are falling one by one they have to endure 2-3s of enemy attacks before they can even land and cast

Then they all have to spend 10s or more going defensive to recover and regroup.....maybe setting them back minutes at a time because they are forced to use their ults defensively

Then they can finally try fighting the 6 or 7v8 against enemies that already beat them in an 8v8

Spawns on the maps should be at level with the ground which would entice hesitant group members to stay balled up with their team as they leave. Then zos just needs to make a one way wall so enemies cant go hard into the spawn. Zos could go a step further and have a two tiered system where there is the one way wall hard safe spawn that forces players out after a 10s timer(enough time to buff up while safe) Then you get pushed out into a soft spawn area where enemies would take a dot damage like slaughterfish if they entered.

Honestly I think having more of a timed spawn regroup mechanic would help the newer players too, to atleast force them to respawn together and have a better chance of staying grouped up

100%, this.

The Devs could fix this by creating respawn attribute points at random spaces all over the map.

When a player revives the game will revive them in any one of the established random respawn pads.

There’s a handful of different logics they could use to help determine which one(s); but other games have had similar mechanics.

It would break up spawn camping because an entire squad couldn’t sit on singular, known, spawn and camp the other team.

This is ESPECIALLY bobbins now with subclassing and MRR where we way too often see one side with healers and the other side without; setting up the spawn camp before the match even starts.

MincMincMinc · August 19

NxJoeyD wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

i11ionward wrote: »

By the way, I also want to point out the issue with spawn camping and how poorly the maps are actually designed. More than once in 8v8 deathmatch, I’ve noticed situations where at the start of the match, the teams can be roughly even, around 100-100. Then, one team manages to break through the other, and after that, one team just traps the other at their spawn, ending the match with a score like 100-500. This is yet another example of how poorly the maps and spawn points are designed.

Even though 4v4v4 maps don’t fully solve the spawn camping problem, in 4v4v4 it’s not as oppressive. Sooner or later, the third team rushes in, and the team being farmed at the spawn has to respond, which gives the first team a chance to regroup safely.

So yes, ZOS, bring back our 4v4v4 deathmatch!

What can we expect when they make spawns designed to disadvantage the already losing team
The losing team is always up on the wall, so they know they didnt win the first engagement

Then there is a good chance they are down a player because one of their guys escaped and is running around so they are maybe 6-7 vs 8.

Then they have to make the commitment to jump down and nobody wants to be the first penguin off the iceberg

Then as they are falling one by one they have to endure 2-3s of enemy attacks before they can even land and cast

Then they all have to spend 10s or more going defensive to recover and regroup.....maybe setting them back minutes at a time because they are forced to use their ults defensively

Then they can finally try fighting the 6 or 7v8 against enemies that already beat them in an 8v8

Spawns on the maps should be at level with the ground which would entice hesitant group members to stay balled up with their team as they leave. Then zos just needs to make a one way wall so enemies cant go hard into the spawn. Zos could go a step further and have a two tiered system where there is the one way wall hard safe spawn that forces players out after a 10s timer(enough time to buff up while safe) Then you get pushed out into a soft spawn area where enemies would take a dot damage like slaughterfish if they entered.

Honestly I think having more of a timed spawn regroup mechanic would help the newer players too, to atleast force them to respawn together and have a better chance of staying grouped up

100%, this.

The Devs could fix this by creating respawn attribute points at random spaces all over the map.

When a player revives the game will revive them in any one of the established random respawn pads.

There’s a handful of different logics they could use to help determine which one(s); but other games have had similar mechanics.

It would break up spawn camping because an entire squad couldn’t sit on singular, known, spawn and camp the other team.

This is ESPECIALLY bobbins now with subclassing and MRR where we way too often see one side with healers and the other side without; setting up the spawn camp before the match even starts.

Well for 10-20-maybe even 30 years of gaming these game modes have been developed. There is the Call of duty approach where respawn points bias away from the enemy team. Spawn camping involves holding more choke points on the map.

Then there are the Moba style games like LoL or Dota where you have the directional maps which have more simple spawns that try to group teams up for more team oriented combat. IMO the eso combat system or BG layout would fit more into this aspect instead of the random spawn method.

For the healing balance all you need to do is save the last match's variable on each character for their healing score. Then every new bg match just tries to pair up and balance out the values.

xylena_lazarow · August 19

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Well for 10-20-maybe even 30 years of gaming these game modes have been developed.

The original Unreal Tournament 1999 used random spawns around the map and it worked extremely well, I rarely got spawn killed, and there would always be a weapon nearby. It's like the whole game industry has spent a quarter century trying to reinvent the wheel. I still can't believe they don't use the safe spawn that already exists in IC and Cyro towns.

NxJoeyD · August 19

MincMincMinc wrote: »

NxJoeyD wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

i11ionward wrote: »

By the way, I also want to point out the issue with spawn camping and how poorly the maps are actually designed. More than once in 8v8 deathmatch, I’ve noticed situations where at the start of the match, the teams can be roughly even, around 100-100. Then, one team manages to break through the other, and after that, one team just traps the other at their spawn, ending the match with a score like 100-500. This is yet another example of how poorly the maps and spawn points are designed.

Even though 4v4v4 maps don’t fully solve the spawn camping problem, in 4v4v4 it’s not as oppressive. Sooner or later, the third team rushes in, and the team being farmed at the spawn has to respond, which gives the first team a chance to regroup safely.

So yes, ZOS, bring back our 4v4v4 deathmatch!

What can we expect when they make spawns designed to disadvantage the already losing team
The losing team is always up on the wall, so they know they didnt win the first engagement

Then there is a good chance they are down a player because one of their guys escaped and is running around so they are maybe 6-7 vs 8.

Then they have to make the commitment to jump down and nobody wants to be the first penguin off the iceberg

Then as they are falling one by one they have to endure 2-3s of enemy attacks before they can even land and cast

Then they all have to spend 10s or more going defensive to recover and regroup.....maybe setting them back minutes at a time because they are forced to use their ults defensively

Then they can finally try fighting the 6 or 7v8 against enemies that already beat them in an 8v8

Spawns on the maps should be at level with the ground which would entice hesitant group members to stay balled up with their team as they leave. Then zos just needs to make a one way wall so enemies cant go hard into the spawn. Zos could go a step further and have a two tiered system where there is the one way wall hard safe spawn that forces players out after a 10s timer(enough time to buff up while safe) Then you get pushed out into a soft spawn area where enemies would take a dot damage like slaughterfish if they entered.

Honestly I think having more of a timed spawn regroup mechanic would help the newer players too, to atleast force them to respawn together and have a better chance of staying grouped up

100%, this.

The Devs could fix this by creating respawn attribute points at random spaces all over the map.

When a player revives the game will revive them in any one of the established random respawn pads.

There’s a handful of different logics they could use to help determine which one(s); but other games have had similar mechanics.

It would break up spawn camping because an entire squad couldn’t sit on singular, known, spawn and camp the other team.

This is ESPECIALLY bobbins now with subclassing and MRR where we way too often see one side with healers and the other side without; setting up the spawn camp before the match even starts.

Well for 10-20-maybe even 30 years of gaming these game modes have been developed. There is the Call of duty approach where respawn points bias away from the enemy team. Spawn camping involves holding more choke points on the map.

Then there are the Moba style games like LoL or Dota where you have the directional maps which have more simple spawns that try to group teams up for more team oriented combat. IMO the eso combat system or BG layout would fit more into this aspect instead of the random spawn method.
For the healing balance all you need to do is save the last match's variable on each character for their healing score. Then every new bg match just tries to pair up and balance out the values.

Exactly! Holding an objective point takes some coordination and that’s supposed to be a factor in PvP.

Muti-point spawns would provide the opposing team an opportunity to turn the tide of combat through regrouping and proper cooperative strategy; which should be the point. But that can’t happen with the structure they have now.

Eh, the healing is the lipstick on the pig here.

One of my concerns is that if they don’t address the self healing aspect we could potentially see fewer and fewer healing builds in PvP.

My thought has always been some form of “competitive indexing”, whereby the game assigns a numerical score (index) which goes up or down based on the choices a player makes in their build.

You could simply use the index to better match make .. OR .. you could take it a step further to balance performance by adjusting ability values based on choices in the build. … so for example if a build is super tanky or has multiple above average heal abilities slotted then damage tooltip output is reduced as a balance. … the player would have the durability they wanted but they’re going to have to work harder and smarter on the damage end. Conversely a player that’s built with crazy high damage output could see healing abilities or resistances adjusted downward to balance; creating a counterplay aspect to every build.

MincMincMinc · August 19

NxJoeyD wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

NxJoeyD wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

i11ionward wrote: »

By the way, I also want to point out the issue with spawn camping and how poorly the maps are actually designed. More than once in 8v8 deathmatch, I’ve noticed situations where at the start of the match, the teams can be roughly even, around 100-100. Then, one team manages to break through the other, and after that, one team just traps the other at their spawn, ending the match with a score like 100-500. This is yet another example of how poorly the maps and spawn points are designed.

Even though 4v4v4 maps don’t fully solve the spawn camping problem, in 4v4v4 it’s not as oppressive. Sooner or later, the third team rushes in, and the team being farmed at the spawn has to respond, which gives the first team a chance to regroup safely.

So yes, ZOS, bring back our 4v4v4 deathmatch!

What can we expect when they make spawns designed to disadvantage the already losing team
The losing team is always up on the wall, so they know they didnt win the first engagement

Then there is a good chance they are down a player because one of their guys escaped and is running around so they are maybe 6-7 vs 8.

Then they have to make the commitment to jump down and nobody wants to be the first penguin off the iceberg

Then as they are falling one by one they have to endure 2-3s of enemy attacks before they can even land and cast

Then they all have to spend 10s or more going defensive to recover and regroup.....maybe setting them back minutes at a time because they are forced to use their ults defensively

Then they can finally try fighting the 6 or 7v8 against enemies that already beat them in an 8v8

Spawns on the maps should be at level with the ground which would entice hesitant group members to stay balled up with their team as they leave. Then zos just needs to make a one way wall so enemies cant go hard into the spawn. Zos could go a step further and have a two tiered system where there is the one way wall hard safe spawn that forces players out after a 10s timer(enough time to buff up while safe) Then you get pushed out into a soft spawn area where enemies would take a dot damage like slaughterfish if they entered.

Honestly I think having more of a timed spawn regroup mechanic would help the newer players too, to atleast force them to respawn together and have a better chance of staying grouped up

100%, this.

The Devs could fix this by creating respawn attribute points at random spaces all over the map.

When a player revives the game will revive them in any one of the established random respawn pads.

There’s a handful of different logics they could use to help determine which one(s); but other games have had similar mechanics.

It would break up spawn camping because an entire squad couldn’t sit on singular, known, spawn and camp the other team.

This is ESPECIALLY bobbins now with subclassing and MRR where we way too often see one side with healers and the other side without; setting up the spawn camp before the match even starts.

Well for 10-20-maybe even 30 years of gaming these game modes have been developed. There is the Call of duty approach where respawn points bias away from the enemy team. Spawn camping involves holding more choke points on the map.

Then there are the Moba style games like LoL or Dota where you have the directional maps which have more simple spawns that try to group teams up for more team oriented combat. IMO the eso combat system or BG layout would fit more into this aspect instead of the random spawn method.
For the healing balance all you need to do is save the last match's variable on each character for their healing score. Then every new bg match just tries to pair up and balance out the values.

Exactly! Holding an objective point takes some coordination and that’s supposed to be a factor in PvP.

Muti-point spawns would provide the opposing team an opportunity to turn the tide of combat through regrouping and proper cooperative strategy; which should be the point. But that can’t happen with the structure they have now.

Eh, the healing is the lipstick on the pig here.

One of my concerns is that if they don’t address the self healing aspect we could potentially see fewer and fewer healing builds in PvP.

My thought has always been some form of “competitive indexing”, whereby the game assigns a numerical score (index) which goes up or down based on the choices a player makes in their build.

You could simply use the index to better match make .. OR .. you could take it a step further to balance performance by adjusting ability values based on choices in the build. … so for example if a build is super tanky or has multiple above average heal abilities slotted then damage tooltip output is reduced as a balance. … the player would have the durability they wanted but they’re going to have to work harder and smarter on the damage end. Conversely a player that’s built with crazy high damage output could see healing abilities or resistances adjusted downward to balance; creating a counterplay aspect to every build.

I just go off the notion that zos needs a simple and functional system. You can spend months developing a complex system and have it just not work or go obsolete. For instance what is a healer choice? Oh they slotted 4 heal skills and maybe only one damage skill so they must be a healer......except my stamsorc literally only has one damage skill but has 3 or 4 healing abilities. There are too many possible niches. We already have a healing value that represents a healers output, just use that.

Its far easier to make complex systems ontop of simple systems. Like look at how much overwatch can complicate their system. It is because they have flat values expected per character(build) where that dynamic doesn't exist in eso.

Moonspawn · August 19

@MincMincMinc The 8v8 match below was balanced by CLONING MAGIC, and it would STILL be horrific. How would your MMR idea make it fun?

MincMincMinc · August 19

Moonspawn wrote: »

@MincMincMinc The 8v8 match below was balanced by CLONING MAGIC, and it would STILL be horrific. How would your MMR idea make it fun?

Uhh the mmr wouldnt place a bg regular and the other obviously lower MMR players in the same game. I honestly dont think i can explain it in any other way

Moonspawn · August 19

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

@MincMincMinc The 8v8 match below was balanced by CLONING MAGIC, and it would STILL be horrific. How would your MMR idea make it fun?

Uhh the mmr wouldnt place a bg regular and the other obviously lower MMR players in the same game. I honestly dont think i can explain it in any other way

Which players there could be in the same match? Use the target order: 1-8 Green and 1-8 Orange.

Dock01 · August 19

Chrisilis wrote: »

Dock01 wrote: »

Honestly, they should just remove BG altogether. If it sparks this much argument, it’s clearly poorly designed. Don’t get me wrong , I play BG every day when I log in, but it’s not out of excitement. I just want to finish my dailies, especially PvP, even if it’s really bad XD.

Absolutely not. Any Battlegrounds are better than no Battlegrounds, problems notwithstanding. As argumentative as these threads can be its only because people are passionate about the subject. Imo, Battlegrounds are the best thing about ESO even now. They should definitely NOT be removed.

It's been how many years already? we are beating a ded horse at this point so might as well bury it, its pointless to keep arguing with each other only for the dev to ignore it , if he dint want to implement any feedback from the community, then what's the point of all this? Might as well remove bg , the que is too random for solo lmao , you can have roles in dungeons but not in solo bg ? That doesnt make any sense lol and the fact that we "LOSE" MMR if a player from our group leaves, is very telling, the dev have 0 clue on how pvp works i have never seen a pvp mode that punishes you DIRECTLY for having a team member leave, the individual should be the only one losing MMR LOL NOT US as well ??? also wheres the anti cheat ? the monthly check up ? PVP like this isnt a cake walk to maintain its need 24/7 constant care , also there are cheaters in every games server side or not lol

Chrisilis · August 19

Its been 9 or 10 months, it is beating a dead horse, it is pointless to keep arguing, clearly the devs dont give two ******* about feedback, yeah yeah yeah, no kidding. Still a no on removing Bg's. Its my hobby, I play every day, I'm not ready to find a new hobby, I wasn't ready for them to go and "update" my old hobby, I'm getting by on this version of my hobby. Nobodys coming along telling em to get rid of you're part of the game so do us all a favor and cut it while we collectively bang our heads against the wall, kay? Kay.

NxJoeyD · August 20

MincMincMinc wrote: »

NxJoeyD wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

NxJoeyD wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

i11ionward wrote: »

By the way, I also want to point out the issue with spawn camping and how poorly the maps are actually designed. More than once in 8v8 deathmatch, I’ve noticed situations where at the start of the match, the teams can be roughly even, around 100-100. Then, one team manages to break through the other, and after that, one team just traps the other at their spawn, ending the match with a score like 100-500. This is yet another example of how poorly the maps and spawn points are designed.

Even though 4v4v4 maps don’t fully solve the spawn camping problem, in 4v4v4 it’s not as oppressive. Sooner or later, the third team rushes in, and the team being farmed at the spawn has to respond, which gives the first team a chance to regroup safely.

So yes, ZOS, bring back our 4v4v4 deathmatch!

What can we expect when they make spawns designed to disadvantage the already losing team
The losing team is always up on the wall, so they know they didnt win the first engagement

Then there is a good chance they are down a player because one of their guys escaped and is running around so they are maybe 6-7 vs 8.

Then they have to make the commitment to jump down and nobody wants to be the first penguin off the iceberg

Then as they are falling one by one they have to endure 2-3s of enemy attacks before they can even land and cast

Then they all have to spend 10s or more going defensive to recover and regroup.....maybe setting them back minutes at a time because they are forced to use their ults defensively

Then they can finally try fighting the 6 or 7v8 against enemies that already beat them in an 8v8

Spawns on the maps should be at level with the ground which would entice hesitant group members to stay balled up with their team as they leave. Then zos just needs to make a one way wall so enemies cant go hard into the spawn. Zos could go a step further and have a two tiered system where there is the one way wall hard safe spawn that forces players out after a 10s timer(enough time to buff up while safe) Then you get pushed out into a soft spawn area where enemies would take a dot damage like slaughterfish if they entered.

Honestly I think having more of a timed spawn regroup mechanic would help the newer players too, to atleast force them to respawn together and have a better chance of staying grouped up

100%, this.

The Devs could fix this by creating respawn attribute points at random spaces all over the map.

When a player revives the game will revive them in any one of the established random respawn pads.

There’s a handful of different logics they could use to help determine which one(s); but other games have had similar mechanics.

It would break up spawn camping because an entire squad couldn’t sit on singular, known, spawn and camp the other team.

This is ESPECIALLY bobbins now with subclassing and MRR where we way too often see one side with healers and the other side without; setting up the spawn camp before the match even starts.

Well for 10-20-maybe even 30 years of gaming these game modes have been developed. There is the Call of duty approach where respawn points bias away from the enemy team. Spawn camping involves holding more choke points on the map.

Then there are the Moba style games like LoL or Dota where you have the directional maps which have more simple spawns that try to group teams up for more team oriented combat. IMO the eso combat system or BG layout would fit more into this aspect instead of the random spawn method.
For the healing balance all you need to do is save the last match's variable on each character for their healing score. Then every new bg match just tries to pair up and balance out the values.

Exactly! Holding an objective point takes some coordination and that’s supposed to be a factor in PvP.

Muti-point spawns would provide the opposing team an opportunity to turn the tide of combat through regrouping and proper cooperative strategy; which should be the point. But that can’t happen with the structure they have now.

Eh, the healing is the lipstick on the pig here.

One of my concerns is that if they don’t address the self healing aspect we could potentially see fewer and fewer healing builds in PvP.

My thought has always been some form of “competitive indexing”, whereby the game assigns a numerical score (index) which goes up or down based on the choices a player makes in their build.

You could simply use the index to better match make .. OR .. you could take it a step further to balance performance by adjusting ability values based on choices in the build. … so for example if a build is super tanky or has multiple above average heal abilities slotted then damage tooltip output is reduced as a balance. … the player would have the durability they wanted but they’re going to have to work harder and smarter on the damage end. Conversely a player that’s built with crazy high damage output could see healing abilities or resistances adjusted downward to balance; creating a counterplay aspect to every build.

I just go off the notion that zos needs a simple and functional system. You can spend months developing a complex system and have it just not work or go obsolete. For instance what is a healer choice? Oh they slotted 4 heal skills and maybe only one damage skill so they must be a healer......except my stamsorc literally only has one damage skill but has 3 or 4 healing abilities. There are too many possible niches. We already have a healing value that represents a healers output, just use that.

Its far easier to make complex systems ontop of simple systems. Like look at how much overwatch can complicate their system. It is because they have flat values expected per character(build) where that dynamic doesn't exist in eso.

There’s already baseline logics for something like this; ZoS wouldn’t need to reinvent the wheel to do this.

To your example, let’s say you do have a Stam Sorc that has 4 heal abilities slotted and one damage ability. The system wouldn’t need to label you as a “healer” but it would prioritize your healing & utility aspects because you chose to make those the majority of your build so they would be untouched, hence a reduced damage output would be the counter play in this point. The amount of the adjustment to damage would be based on the heals you slotted; if you had 4 mid heals then it wouldn’t adjust much at all but 4 S-tier heals then it would adjust more. This makes sense because a Stam Sorc with 4 S-tier heals slotted wouldn’t be a primary damage focus anyway, and that’s the point.

The idea is that every build should have a play and counter play element but subclassing has reduced that. An indexing system is just one suggestion; one other is simply adjusting self healing & a block cost cap as these tend to be the two most broad mechanics used to avoid proper counter play.

It’s not simply in “what ability is what” or how much in numbers a tool tip has, it’s also about the mechanics of how these attributes all go together.

Subclassing allows players to pair mechanics that, previously, were unavailable because of the lack of proper counter play.

An index would still leave each unique build to feel unique due to the mechanics of how they operate and would require each player to more strategically slot and use their build rather than leaning on the clutch spams that we’re seeing now.

Because you still want to keep diversity among builds you don’t want to kill the underlying mechanics themselves so an index adjustment to values makes sense. This way, builds don’t all become “the same but just reskinned”, rather it’s more about executing the mechanics with balanced values that determines the combat.

Currently we just have spamming mechanics with incredibly imbalanced values. When it comes to mechanics healing and block cost are the two most broad, non specific, mechanics you can look at to produce a better sense of balance without killing diversity in builds.

Haki_7 · August 20

I'm glad DM weekend is over. Now we can go back to the fun game modes.

The fun game modes:

NxJoeyD · August 20

Haki_7 wrote: »

I'm glad DM weekend is over. Now we can go back to the fun game modes.

The fun game modes:

Clearly the Fire team had a healer and the Pits didn’t so this match was over before it started but the damage spread is telling.

Even with a healer most all of the players are in a reasonable ballpark damage output wise except for the one … who based on the numbers I’m guessing was spam bombing … whether the Pit team was a legit Zerg, I doubt that; more likely the one player with the damage that high was running everyone’s favorite set pair: Vicious Death & Rush of Agony to create their own group to bomb .. and with the healer who’s going to stop them.

MincMincMinc · August 20

NxJoeyD wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

NxJoeyD wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

NxJoeyD wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

i11ionward wrote: »

By the way, I also want to point out the issue with spawn camping and how poorly the maps are actually designed. More than once in 8v8 deathmatch, I’ve noticed situations where at the start of the match, the teams can be roughly even, around 100-100. Then, one team manages to break through the other, and after that, one team just traps the other at their spawn, ending the match with a score like 100-500. This is yet another example of how poorly the maps and spawn points are designed.

Even though 4v4v4 maps don’t fully solve the spawn camping problem, in 4v4v4 it’s not as oppressive. Sooner or later, the third team rushes in, and the team being farmed at the spawn has to respond, which gives the first team a chance to regroup safely.

So yes, ZOS, bring back our 4v4v4 deathmatch!

What can we expect when they make spawns designed to disadvantage the already losing team
The losing team is always up on the wall, so they know they didnt win the first engagement

Then there is a good chance they are down a player because one of their guys escaped and is running around so they are maybe 6-7 vs 8.

Then they have to make the commitment to jump down and nobody wants to be the first penguin off the iceberg

Then as they are falling one by one they have to endure 2-3s of enemy attacks before they can even land and cast

Then they all have to spend 10s or more going defensive to recover and regroup.....maybe setting them back minutes at a time because they are forced to use their ults defensively

Then they can finally try fighting the 6 or 7v8 against enemies that already beat them in an 8v8

Spawns on the maps should be at level with the ground which would entice hesitant group members to stay balled up with their team as they leave. Then zos just needs to make a one way wall so enemies cant go hard into the spawn. Zos could go a step further and have a two tiered system where there is the one way wall hard safe spawn that forces players out after a 10s timer(enough time to buff up while safe) Then you get pushed out into a soft spawn area where enemies would take a dot damage like slaughterfish if they entered.

Honestly I think having more of a timed spawn regroup mechanic would help the newer players too, to atleast force them to respawn together and have a better chance of staying grouped up

100%, this.

The Devs could fix this by creating respawn attribute points at random spaces all over the map.

When a player revives the game will revive them in any one of the established random respawn pads.

There’s a handful of different logics they could use to help determine which one(s); but other games have had similar mechanics.

It would break up spawn camping because an entire squad couldn’t sit on singular, known, spawn and camp the other team.

This is ESPECIALLY bobbins now with subclassing and MRR where we way too often see one side with healers and the other side without; setting up the spawn camp before the match even starts.

Well for 10-20-maybe even 30 years of gaming these game modes have been developed. There is the Call of duty approach where respawn points bias away from the enemy team. Spawn camping involves holding more choke points on the map.

Then there are the Moba style games like LoL or Dota where you have the directional maps which have more simple spawns that try to group teams up for more team oriented combat. IMO the eso combat system or BG layout would fit more into this aspect instead of the random spawn method.
For the healing balance all you need to do is save the last match's variable on each character for their healing score. Then every new bg match just tries to pair up and balance out the values.

Exactly! Holding an objective point takes some coordination and that’s supposed to be a factor in PvP.

Muti-point spawns would provide the opposing team an opportunity to turn the tide of combat through regrouping and proper cooperative strategy; which should be the point. But that can’t happen with the structure they have now.

Eh, the healing is the lipstick on the pig here.

One of my concerns is that if they don’t address the self healing aspect we could potentially see fewer and fewer healing builds in PvP.

My thought has always been some form of “competitive indexing”, whereby the game assigns a numerical score (index) which goes up or down based on the choices a player makes in their build.

You could simply use the index to better match make .. OR .. you could take it a step further to balance performance by adjusting ability values based on choices in the build. … so for example if a build is super tanky or has multiple above average heal abilities slotted then damage tooltip output is reduced as a balance. … the player would have the durability they wanted but they’re going to have to work harder and smarter on the damage end. Conversely a player that’s built with crazy high damage output could see healing abilities or resistances adjusted downward to balance; creating a counterplay aspect to every build.

I just go off the notion that zos needs a simple and functional system. You can spend months developing a complex system and have it just not work or go obsolete. For instance what is a healer choice? Oh they slotted 4 heal skills and maybe only one damage skill so they must be a healer......except my stamsorc literally only has one damage skill but has 3 or 4 healing abilities. There are too many possible niches. We already have a healing value that represents a healers output, just use that.

Its far easier to make complex systems ontop of simple systems. Like look at how much overwatch can complicate their system. It is because they have flat values expected per character(build) where that dynamic doesn't exist in eso.

There’s already baseline logics for something like this; ZoS wouldn’t need to reinvent the wheel to do this.

To your example, let’s say you do have a Stam Sorc that has 4 heal abilities slotted and one damage ability. The system wouldn’t need to label you as a “healer” but it would prioritize your healing & utility aspects because you chose to make those the majority of your build so they would be untouched, hence a reduced damage output would be the counter play in this point. The amount of the adjustment to damage would be based on the heals you slotted; if you had 4 mid heals then it wouldn’t adjust much at all but 4 S-tier heals then it would adjust more. This makes sense because a Stam Sorc with 4 S-tier heals slotted wouldn’t be a primary damage focus anyway, and that’s the point.

The idea is that every build should have a play and counter play element but subclassing has reduced that. An indexing system is just one suggestion; one other is simply adjusting self healing & a block cost cap as these tend to be the two most broad mechanics used to avoid proper counter play.

It’s not simply in “what ability is what” or how much in numbers a tool tip has, it’s also about the mechanics of how these attributes all go together.

Subclassing allows players to pair mechanics that, previously, were unavailable because of the lack of proper counter play.

An index would still leave each unique build to feel unique due to the mechanics of how they operate and would require each player to more strategically slot and use their build rather than leaning on the clutch spams that we’re seeing now.

Because you still want to keep diversity among builds you don’t want to kill the underlying mechanics themselves so an index adjustment to values makes sense. This way, builds don’t all become “the same but just reskinned”, rather it’s more about executing the mechanics with balanced values that determines the combat.

Currently we just have spamming mechanics with incredibly imbalanced values. When it comes to mechanics healing and block cost are the two most broad, non specific, mechanics you can look at to produce a better sense of balance without killing diversity in builds.

Wait what are we talking about now? You want to implement some sort of extra battlespirit for some reason? We should stick to talking about BGs and the mmr system. This system makes no sense and is pointless. The game already has build mechanics which accomplish this. Even with my stamsorc example I hardly do 1/10 the healing that actual heal builds can accomplish.

Again you are thinking of a far to complicated system on a system that will just add another layer onto an already complicated system. These rules are already baked into the choices available in the game, you dont need blanket debuffs put in place, they are pointless.

Moonspawn · August 20

MincMincMinc wrote: »

NxJoeyD wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

NxJoeyD wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

NxJoeyD wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

i11ionward wrote: »

By the way, I also want to point out the issue with spawn camping and how poorly the maps are actually designed. More than once in 8v8 deathmatch, I’ve noticed situations where at the start of the match, the teams can be roughly even, around 100-100. Then, one team manages to break through the other, and after that, one team just traps the other at their spawn, ending the match with a score like 100-500. This is yet another example of how poorly the maps and spawn points are designed.

Even though 4v4v4 maps don’t fully solve the spawn camping problem, in 4v4v4 it’s not as oppressive. Sooner or later, the third team rushes in, and the team being farmed at the spawn has to respond, which gives the first team a chance to regroup safely.

So yes, ZOS, bring back our 4v4v4 deathmatch!

What can we expect when they make spawns designed to disadvantage the already losing team
The losing team is always up on the wall, so they know they didnt win the first engagement

Then there is a good chance they are down a player because one of their guys escaped and is running around so they are maybe 6-7 vs 8.

Then they have to make the commitment to jump down and nobody wants to be the first penguin off the iceberg

Then as they are falling one by one they have to endure 2-3s of enemy attacks before they can even land and cast

Then they all have to spend 10s or more going defensive to recover and regroup.....maybe setting them back minutes at a time because they are forced to use their ults defensively

Then they can finally try fighting the 6 or 7v8 against enemies that already beat them in an 8v8

Spawns on the maps should be at level with the ground which would entice hesitant group members to stay balled up with their team as they leave. Then zos just needs to make a one way wall so enemies cant go hard into the spawn. Zos could go a step further and have a two tiered system where there is the one way wall hard safe spawn that forces players out after a 10s timer(enough time to buff up while safe) Then you get pushed out into a soft spawn area where enemies would take a dot damage like slaughterfish if they entered.

Honestly I think having more of a timed spawn regroup mechanic would help the newer players too, to atleast force them to respawn together and have a better chance of staying grouped up

100%, this.

The Devs could fix this by creating respawn attribute points at random spaces all over the map.

When a player revives the game will revive them in any one of the established random respawn pads.

There’s a handful of different logics they could use to help determine which one(s); but other games have had similar mechanics.

It would break up spawn camping because an entire squad couldn’t sit on singular, known, spawn and camp the other team.

This is ESPECIALLY bobbins now with subclassing and MRR where we way too often see one side with healers and the other side without; setting up the spawn camp before the match even starts.

Well for 10-20-maybe even 30 years of gaming these game modes have been developed. There is the Call of duty approach where respawn points bias away from the enemy team. Spawn camping involves holding more choke points on the map.

Then there are the Moba style games like LoL or Dota where you have the directional maps which have more simple spawns that try to group teams up for more team oriented combat. IMO the eso combat system or BG layout would fit more into this aspect instead of the random spawn method.
For the healing balance all you need to do is save the last match's variable on each character for their healing score. Then every new bg match just tries to pair up and balance out the values.

Exactly! Holding an objective point takes some coordination and that’s supposed to be a factor in PvP.

Muti-point spawns would provide the opposing team an opportunity to turn the tide of combat through regrouping and proper cooperative strategy; which should be the point. But that can’t happen with the structure they have now.

Eh, the healing is the lipstick on the pig here.

One of my concerns is that if they don’t address the self healing aspect we could potentially see fewer and fewer healing builds in PvP.

My thought has always been some form of “competitive indexing”, whereby the game assigns a numerical score (index) which goes up or down based on the choices a player makes in their build.

You could simply use the index to better match make .. OR .. you could take it a step further to balance performance by adjusting ability values based on choices in the build. … so for example if a build is super tanky or has multiple above average heal abilities slotted then damage tooltip output is reduced as a balance. … the player would have the durability they wanted but they’re going to have to work harder and smarter on the damage end. Conversely a player that’s built with crazy high damage output could see healing abilities or resistances adjusted downward to balance; creating a counterplay aspect to every build.

I just go off the notion that zos needs a simple and functional system. You can spend months developing a complex system and have it just not work or go obsolete. For instance what is a healer choice? Oh they slotted 4 heal skills and maybe only one damage skill so they must be a healer......except my stamsorc literally only has one damage skill but has 3 or 4 healing abilities. There are too many possible niches. We already have a healing value that represents a healers output, just use that.

Its far easier to make complex systems ontop of simple systems. Like look at how much overwatch can complicate their system. It is because they have flat values expected per character(build) where that dynamic doesn't exist in eso.

There’s already baseline logics for something like this; ZoS wouldn’t need to reinvent the wheel to do this.

To your example, let’s say you do have a Stam Sorc that has 4 heal abilities slotted and one damage ability. The system wouldn’t need to label you as a “healer” but it would prioritize your healing & utility aspects because you chose to make those the majority of your build so they would be untouched, hence a reduced damage output would be the counter play in this point. The amount of the adjustment to damage would be based on the heals you slotted; if you had 4 mid heals then it wouldn’t adjust much at all but 4 S-tier heals then it would adjust more. This makes sense because a Stam Sorc with 4 S-tier heals slotted wouldn’t be a primary damage focus anyway, and that’s the point.

The idea is that every build should have a play and counter play element but subclassing has reduced that. An indexing system is just one suggestion; one other is simply adjusting self healing & a block cost cap as these tend to be the two most broad mechanics used to avoid proper counter play.

It’s not simply in “what ability is what” or how much in numbers a tool tip has, it’s also about the mechanics of how these attributes all go together.

Subclassing allows players to pair mechanics that, previously, were unavailable because of the lack of proper counter play.

An index would still leave each unique build to feel unique due to the mechanics of how they operate and would require each player to more strategically slot and use their build rather than leaning on the clutch spams that we’re seeing now.

Because you still want to keep diversity among builds you don’t want to kill the underlying mechanics themselves so an index adjustment to values makes sense. This way, builds don’t all become “the same but just reskinned”, rather it’s more about executing the mechanics with balanced values that determines the combat.

Currently we just have spamming mechanics with incredibly imbalanced values. When it comes to mechanics healing and block cost are the two most broad, non specific, mechanics you can look at to produce a better sense of balance without killing diversity in builds.

Wait what are we talking about now? You want to implement some sort of extra battlespirit for some reason? We should stick to talking about BGs and the mmr system. This system makes no sense and is pointless. The game already has build mechanics which accomplish this. Even with my stamsorc example I hardly do 1/10 the healing that actual heal builds can accomplish.

Again you are thinking of a far to complicated system on a system that will just add another layer onto an already complicated system. These rules are already baked into the choices available in the game, you dont need blanket debuffs put in place, they are pointless.

Here's an even simpler system:

Each player marked with a white star can serve as the core of a team with up to 3 newcomers in a 3-sided match. @MincMincMinc do you see any problem with this matchmaking? It would function even with a small population.

MincMincMinc · August 20

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

NxJoeyD wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

NxJoeyD wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

NxJoeyD wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

i11ionward wrote: »

By the way, I also want to point out the issue with spawn camping and how poorly the maps are actually designed. More than once in 8v8 deathmatch, I’ve noticed situations where at the start of the match, the teams can be roughly even, around 100-100. Then, one team manages to break through the other, and after that, one team just traps the other at their spawn, ending the match with a score like 100-500. This is yet another example of how poorly the maps and spawn points are designed.

Even though 4v4v4 maps don’t fully solve the spawn camping problem, in 4v4v4 it’s not as oppressive. Sooner or later, the third team rushes in, and the team being farmed at the spawn has to respond, which gives the first team a chance to regroup safely.

So yes, ZOS, bring back our 4v4v4 deathmatch!

What can we expect when they make spawns designed to disadvantage the already losing team
The losing team is always up on the wall, so they know they didnt win the first engagement

Then there is a good chance they are down a player because one of their guys escaped and is running around so they are maybe 6-7 vs 8.

Then they have to make the commitment to jump down and nobody wants to be the first penguin off the iceberg

Then as they are falling one by one they have to endure 2-3s of enemy attacks before they can even land and cast

Then they all have to spend 10s or more going defensive to recover and regroup.....maybe setting them back minutes at a time because they are forced to use their ults defensively

Then they can finally try fighting the 6 or 7v8 against enemies that already beat them in an 8v8

Spawns on the maps should be at level with the ground which would entice hesitant group members to stay balled up with their team as they leave. Then zos just needs to make a one way wall so enemies cant go hard into the spawn. Zos could go a step further and have a two tiered system where there is the one way wall hard safe spawn that forces players out after a 10s timer(enough time to buff up while safe) Then you get pushed out into a soft spawn area where enemies would take a dot damage like slaughterfish if they entered.

Honestly I think having more of a timed spawn regroup mechanic would help the newer players too, to atleast force them to respawn together and have a better chance of staying grouped up

100%, this.

The Devs could fix this by creating respawn attribute points at random spaces all over the map.

When a player revives the game will revive them in any one of the established random respawn pads.

There’s a handful of different logics they could use to help determine which one(s); but other games have had similar mechanics.

It would break up spawn camping because an entire squad couldn’t sit on singular, known, spawn and camp the other team.

This is ESPECIALLY bobbins now with subclassing and MRR where we way too often see one side with healers and the other side without; setting up the spawn camp before the match even starts.

Well for 10-20-maybe even 30 years of gaming these game modes have been developed. There is the Call of duty approach where respawn points bias away from the enemy team. Spawn camping involves holding more choke points on the map.

Then there are the Moba style games like LoL or Dota where you have the directional maps which have more simple spawns that try to group teams up for more team oriented combat. IMO the eso combat system or BG layout would fit more into this aspect instead of the random spawn method.
For the healing balance all you need to do is save the last match's variable on each character for their healing score. Then every new bg match just tries to pair up and balance out the values.

Exactly! Holding an objective point takes some coordination and that’s supposed to be a factor in PvP.

Muti-point spawns would provide the opposing team an opportunity to turn the tide of combat through regrouping and proper cooperative strategy; which should be the point. But that can’t happen with the structure they have now.

Eh, the healing is the lipstick on the pig here.

One of my concerns is that if they don’t address the self healing aspect we could potentially see fewer and fewer healing builds in PvP.

My thought has always been some form of “competitive indexing”, whereby the game assigns a numerical score (index) which goes up or down based on the choices a player makes in their build.

You could simply use the index to better match make .. OR .. you could take it a step further to balance performance by adjusting ability values based on choices in the build. … so for example if a build is super tanky or has multiple above average heal abilities slotted then damage tooltip output is reduced as a balance. … the player would have the durability they wanted but they’re going to have to work harder and smarter on the damage end. Conversely a player that’s built with crazy high damage output could see healing abilities or resistances adjusted downward to balance; creating a counterplay aspect to every build.

I just go off the notion that zos needs a simple and functional system. You can spend months developing a complex system and have it just not work or go obsolete. For instance what is a healer choice? Oh they slotted 4 heal skills and maybe only one damage skill so they must be a healer......except my stamsorc literally only has one damage skill but has 3 or 4 healing abilities. There are too many possible niches. We already have a healing value that represents a healers output, just use that.

Its far easier to make complex systems ontop of simple systems. Like look at how much overwatch can complicate their system. It is because they have flat values expected per character(build) where that dynamic doesn't exist in eso.

There’s already baseline logics for something like this; ZoS wouldn’t need to reinvent the wheel to do this.

To your example, let’s say you do have a Stam Sorc that has 4 heal abilities slotted and one damage ability. The system wouldn’t need to label you as a “healer” but it would prioritize your healing & utility aspects because you chose to make those the majority of your build so they would be untouched, hence a reduced damage output would be the counter play in this point. The amount of the adjustment to damage would be based on the heals you slotted; if you had 4 mid heals then it wouldn’t adjust much at all but 4 S-tier heals then it would adjust more. This makes sense because a Stam Sorc with 4 S-tier heals slotted wouldn’t be a primary damage focus anyway, and that’s the point.

The idea is that every build should have a play and counter play element but subclassing has reduced that. An indexing system is just one suggestion; one other is simply adjusting self healing & a block cost cap as these tend to be the two most broad mechanics used to avoid proper counter play.

It’s not simply in “what ability is what” or how much in numbers a tool tip has, it’s also about the mechanics of how these attributes all go together.

Subclassing allows players to pair mechanics that, previously, were unavailable because of the lack of proper counter play.

An index would still leave each unique build to feel unique due to the mechanics of how they operate and would require each player to more strategically slot and use their build rather than leaning on the clutch spams that we’re seeing now.

Because you still want to keep diversity among builds you don’t want to kill the underlying mechanics themselves so an index adjustment to values makes sense. This way, builds don’t all become “the same but just reskinned”, rather it’s more about executing the mechanics with balanced values that determines the combat.

Currently we just have spamming mechanics with incredibly imbalanced values. When it comes to mechanics healing and block cost are the two most broad, non specific, mechanics you can look at to produce a better sense of balance without killing diversity in builds.

Wait what are we talking about now? You want to implement some sort of extra battlespirit for some reason? We should stick to talking about BGs and the mmr system. This system makes no sense and is pointless. The game already has build mechanics which accomplish this. Even with my stamsorc example I hardly do 1/10 the healing that actual heal builds can accomplish.

Again you are thinking of a far to complicated system on a system that will just add another layer onto an already complicated system. These rules are already baked into the choices available in the game, you dont need blanket debuffs put in place, they are pointless.

Here's an even simpler system:

Each player marked by a white star can act as a core for a team of up to 3 newcomers in a 3-teams BG. @MincMincMinc do you see any problem with this matchmaking? It could function even with a small population.

Just to be honest, you need to really iron out whatever your idea is and do a write up in a concise way if you want people to understand. Trying to be genuinely helpful here, but you obviously have an idea of a system in your head. Your posts keep hinting at how something might connect and make sense......but nobody else but you knows the made up system in your head. In all seriousness maybe try putting your idea through chatgpt to help summarize and think it through to be easier to explain. A lot of people have this issue on the forums and their ideas make sense in their mind, but in reality for other people they just see one off statements spread out across 30x posts.

Like with my KDA and healing system you seem to have understood it and you starred the 3 players that should move up in MMR.

Also, sure other game modes like 4v4v4 or 3v3 or 2v2 and 1v1 could be introduced at some point once you iron out a functional mmr system. 1v1 and 2v2 que would be a simple mmr leaderboard system though.

Moonspawn · August 20

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Just to be honest, you need to really iron out whatever your idea is and do a write up in a concise way if you want people to understand. Trying to be genuinely helpful here, but you obviously have an idea of a system in your head. Your posts keep hinting at how something might connect and make sense......but nobody else but you knows the made up system in your head. In all seriousness maybe try putting your idea through chatgpt to help summarize and think it through to be easier to explain. A lot of people have this issue on the forums and their ideas make sense in their mind, but in reality for other people they just see one off statements spread out across 30x posts.

You must be confusing me with someone else. I'm mostly asking questions, not making statements.

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Like with my KDA and healing system you seem to have understood it and you starred the 3 players that should move up in MMR.

What I used was: Healers and high damage players can be the core of teams in 3-sided BGs. Simple and non-restrictive. Lightning fast queues and balanced matches. Without thinking about 2-sided BGs OR your own KDA suggestion, can you think of any problems with this system?

NxJoeyD · August 20

MincMincMinc wrote: »

NxJoeyD wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

NxJoeyD wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

NxJoeyD wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

i11ionward wrote: »

By the way, I also want to point out the issue with spawn camping and how poorly the maps are actually designed. More than once in 8v8 deathmatch, I’ve noticed situations where at the start of the match, the teams can be roughly even, around 100-100. Then, one team manages to break through the other, and after that, one team just traps the other at their spawn, ending the match with a score like 100-500. This is yet another example of how poorly the maps and spawn points are designed.

Even though 4v4v4 maps don’t fully solve the spawn camping problem, in 4v4v4 it’s not as oppressive. Sooner or later, the third team rushes in, and the team being farmed at the spawn has to respond, which gives the first team a chance to regroup safely.

So yes, ZOS, bring back our 4v4v4 deathmatch!

What can we expect when they make spawns designed to disadvantage the already losing team
The losing team is always up on the wall, so they know they didnt win the first engagement

Then there is a good chance they are down a player because one of their guys escaped and is running around so they are maybe 6-7 vs 8.

Then they have to make the commitment to jump down and nobody wants to be the first penguin off the iceberg

Then as they are falling one by one they have to endure 2-3s of enemy attacks before they can even land and cast

Then they all have to spend 10s or more going defensive to recover and regroup.....maybe setting them back minutes at a time because they are forced to use their ults defensively

Then they can finally try fighting the 6 or 7v8 against enemies that already beat them in an 8v8

Spawns on the maps should be at level with the ground which would entice hesitant group members to stay balled up with their team as they leave. Then zos just needs to make a one way wall so enemies cant go hard into the spawn. Zos could go a step further and have a two tiered system where there is the one way wall hard safe spawn that forces players out after a 10s timer(enough time to buff up while safe) Then you get pushed out into a soft spawn area where enemies would take a dot damage like slaughterfish if they entered.

Honestly I think having more of a timed spawn regroup mechanic would help the newer players too, to atleast force them to respawn together and have a better chance of staying grouped up

100%, this.

The Devs could fix this by creating respawn attribute points at random spaces all over the map.

When a player revives the game will revive them in any one of the established random respawn pads.

There’s a handful of different logics they could use to help determine which one(s); but other games have had similar mechanics.

It would break up spawn camping because an entire squad couldn’t sit on singular, known, spawn and camp the other team.

This is ESPECIALLY bobbins now with subclassing and MRR where we way too often see one side with healers and the other side without; setting up the spawn camp before the match even starts.

Well for 10-20-maybe even 30 years of gaming these game modes have been developed. There is the Call of duty approach where respawn points bias away from the enemy team. Spawn camping involves holding more choke points on the map.

Then there are the Moba style games like LoL or Dota where you have the directional maps which have more simple spawns that try to group teams up for more team oriented combat. IMO the eso combat system or BG layout would fit more into this aspect instead of the random spawn method.
For the healing balance all you need to do is save the last match's variable on each character for their healing score. Then every new bg match just tries to pair up and balance out the values.

Exactly! Holding an objective point takes some coordination and that’s supposed to be a factor in PvP.

Muti-point spawns would provide the opposing team an opportunity to turn the tide of combat through regrouping and proper cooperative strategy; which should be the point. But that can’t happen with the structure they have now.

Eh, the healing is the lipstick on the pig here.

One of my concerns is that if they don’t address the self healing aspect we could potentially see fewer and fewer healing builds in PvP.

My thought has always been some form of “competitive indexing”, whereby the game assigns a numerical score (index) which goes up or down based on the choices a player makes in their build.

You could simply use the index to better match make .. OR .. you could take it a step further to balance performance by adjusting ability values based on choices in the build. … so for example if a build is super tanky or has multiple above average heal abilities slotted then damage tooltip output is reduced as a balance. … the player would have the durability they wanted but they’re going to have to work harder and smarter on the damage end. Conversely a player that’s built with crazy high damage output could see healing abilities or resistances adjusted downward to balance; creating a counterplay aspect to every build.

I just go off the notion that zos needs a simple and functional system. You can spend months developing a complex system and have it just not work or go obsolete. For instance what is a healer choice? Oh they slotted 4 heal skills and maybe only one damage skill so they must be a healer......except my stamsorc literally only has one damage skill but has 3 or 4 healing abilities. There are too many possible niches. We already have a healing value that represents a healers output, just use that.

Its far easier to make complex systems ontop of simple systems. Like look at how much overwatch can complicate their system. It is because they have flat values expected per character(build) where that dynamic doesn't exist in eso.

There’s already baseline logics for something like this; ZoS wouldn’t need to reinvent the wheel to do this.

To your example, let’s say you do have a Stam Sorc that has 4 heal abilities slotted and one damage ability. The system wouldn’t need to label you as a “healer” but it would prioritize your healing & utility aspects because you chose to make those the majority of your build so they would be untouched, hence a reduced damage output would be the counter play in this point. The amount of the adjustment to damage would be based on the heals you slotted; if you had 4 mid heals then it wouldn’t adjust much at all but 4 S-tier heals then it would adjust more. This makes sense because a Stam Sorc with 4 S-tier heals slotted wouldn’t be a primary damage focus anyway, and that’s the point.

The idea is that every build should have a play and counter play element but subclassing has reduced that. An indexing system is just one suggestion; one other is simply adjusting self healing & a block cost cap as these tend to be the two most broad mechanics used to avoid proper counter play.

It’s not simply in “what ability is what” or how much in numbers a tool tip has, it’s also about the mechanics of how these attributes all go together.

Subclassing allows players to pair mechanics that, previously, were unavailable because of the lack of proper counter play.

An index would still leave each unique build to feel unique due to the mechanics of how they operate and would require each player to more strategically slot and use their build rather than leaning on the clutch spams that we’re seeing now.

Because you still want to keep diversity among builds you don’t want to kill the underlying mechanics themselves so an index adjustment to values makes sense. This way, builds don’t all become “the same but just reskinned”, rather it’s more about executing the mechanics with balanced values that determines the combat.

Currently we just have spamming mechanics with incredibly imbalanced values. When it comes to mechanics healing and block cost are the two most broad, non specific, mechanics you can look at to produce a better sense of balance without killing diversity in builds.

Wait what are we talking about now? You want to implement some sort of extra battlespirit for some reason? We should stick to talking about BGs and the mmr system. This system makes no sense and is pointless. The game already has build mechanics which accomplish this. Even with my stamsorc example I hardly do 1/10 the healing that actual heal builds can accomplish.

Again you are thinking of a far to complicated system on a system that will just add another layer onto an already complicated system. These rules are already baked into the choices available in the game, you dont need blanket debuffs put in place, they are pointless.

No, I think you need to go back and re-read. I suggested that the Devs could take one of two paths to adjust the poor state of PVP right now.

I never said anything about implementing a NEW Battle Spirit system, I said that my suggestions would only be in effect when Battle Spirit is active. That’s because the recommendations would only affect PvP not PvE.

As for MRR, this topic is about the future of Battlegrounds, not just MRR.

Currently, no; the game has NO mechanic to accomplish what I’m talking about, which, in a nutshell is to address the additional mechanical imbalances that subclassing has made worse in PvP.

I don’t know anything about your Stam Sorc and that’s not the point; as I said before, it’s not whether your character build is a “healer” or not, it’s what a person adds to a build, overall, that determines if it’s imbalanced or not. It’s the combination of mechanics now that’s leading to near un-killable builds because of the lack of counter play.

PvP doesn’t need excessive self burst healing or ridiculously cheap block costs anymore.

The reason I cite those two mechanics is because they’re global mechanics not specific to any particular class or build.

We could talk all day about how to balance individual abilities and that would be slightly more work, albeit it’s been done in gaming before so I don’t know what you’re on about that it’s too much to do.

The long & short is the Devs could solve a lot of issues in PvP by doing either one of two things that are easy to do: 1) install an indexing system for builds OR 2) adjusting self healing and place a hard cap on block cost reduction.

Easy. Tbh option two would be the quickest and easiest to do.