8v8 no longer includes the smaller Huntsman's Fortress and Mota-ka maps

SkaraMinoc · December 2

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

2-Sided Battlegrounds
Battlegrounds in the 8v8 queues will no longer include the Huntsman’s Fortress and Mota-ka maps.

When both teams were evenly matched, the smaller 8v8 maps were more fun to me than the larger maps. I'm disappointed they were removed. I really liked them.

Moonspawn · December 2

SkaraMinoc wrote: »

Yes, I realize the smaller 8v8 maps can lead to one-sided matches that end quickly. But I feel like there are ways to fix this.

Ways to fix the one-sided matches? What ways?

SkaraMinoc · December 2

Moonspawn wrote: »

SkaraMinoc wrote: »

Yes, I realize the smaller 8v8 maps can lead to one-sided matches that end quickly. But I feel like there are ways to fix this.

Ways to fix the one-sided matches? What ways?

I edited this out because I didn't want to go down that rabbit hole, but since you quoted me...

1) Players should be invulnerable in spawn and also be unable to attack from spawn
2) Add catch up mechanics like powerups for the losing team, but only if the score difference is great enough
3) Priority backfill using higher MMR if the losing team has quitters

Probably some other stuff you can do to help even things out.

chessalavakia_ESO · December 2

I think this really highlights how the deathmatch/objective split is still an issue.

As I'm more on the objective side I'm really not a huge fan of the smaller maps being in 8 v 8.

I found too many of my games looked like the below picture:

SkaraMinoc · December 2

chessalavakia_ESO wrote: »

I think this really highlights how the deathmatch/objective split is still an issue.

As I'm more on the objective side I'm really not a huge fan of the smaller maps being in 8 v 8.

I found too many of my games looked like the below picture:

Let's just sweep the issue under the rug by removing these maps from 8v8.

Moonspawn · December 2

SkaraMinoc wrote: »

I edited this out because I didn't want to go down that rabbit hole, but since you quoted me...

1) Players should be invulnerable in spawn and also be unable to attack from spawn
2) Add catch up mechanics like powerups for the losing team, but only if the score difference is great enough
3) Priority backfill using higher MMR if the losing team has quitters

Probably some other stuff you can do to help even things out.

1) I find it strange that some maps already have this and others don't. Maybe devs know something we don't.
2) Good in theory. Not sure how it would work in practice, considering most players are only there for the daily and don't really try to win until the very end. Plus cases like the one below would muddle things even further.
3) I have participated in matches where my team was being spawncamped with almost zero points, 4 players left one at a time, there was a backfill, and suddenly we were the ones spawncamping the other team. A true torture from start to finish, the quintessential 2-teams battleground experience.

I don't want to go down any rabbit hole either. But I just waited 19 minutes (plus the time to fill) for a domination that lasted 2 minutes and 40 seconds. I'm curious as to what your opinion is on bringing back the old bgs to replace the dead 8v8 group queue. There should be no harm in trading one dead queue for another, right?

SkaraMinoc · December 2

Moonspawn wrote: »

But I just waited 19 minutes (plus the time to fill) for a domination that lasted 2 minutes and 40 seconds.

This happens too frequently and is a serious issue that needs to be addressed.

Moonspawn wrote: »

I'm curious as to your opinion is on bringing back the old bgs to replace the dead 8v8 group queue. There should be no harm in trading one dead queue for another, right?

There's a lot to consider with the queues. If one of them has low population then they'll probably want to make some adjustment. If they introduce 2-team and 3-team BGs side-by-side then there may be longer wait times for all.

3 queues is probably the sweet spot. There's not enough BG players to fill 4 queues in reasonable time.

Also they need to modify the base game UI to allow for multiple queues at once. You can do this with an addon and it greatly speeds up the queue time. I usually queue for Solo 4v4 and Solo 8v8 at the same time.

Thumbless_Bot · December 2

Moonspawn wrote: »

SkaraMinoc wrote: »

I edited this out because I didn't want to go down that rabbit hole, but since you quoted me...

1) Players should be invulnerable in spawn and also be unable to attack from spawn
2) Add catch up mechanics like powerups for the losing team, but only if the score difference is great enough
3) Priority backfill using higher MMR if the losing team has quitters

Probably some other stuff you can do to help even things out.

1) I find it strange that some maps already have this and others don't. Maybe devs know something we don't.
2) Good in theory. Not sure how it would work in practice, considering most players are only there for the daily and don't really try to win until the very end. Plus cases like the one below would muddle things even further.
3) I have participated in matches where my team was being spawncamped with almost zero points, 4 players left one at a time, there was a backfill, and suddenly we were the ones spawncamping the other team. A true torture from start to finish, the quintessential 2-teams battleground experience.

I don't want to go down any rabbit hole either. But I just waited 19 minutes (plus the time to fill) for a domination that lasted 2 minutes and 40 seconds. I'm curious as to what your opinion is on bringing back the old bgs to replace the dead 8v8 group queue. There should be no harm in trading one dead queue for another, right?

I really think the devs threw these variables out there to see how they go. While testing things on live is not usually a good thing, this is a video game and not a system responsible for, say, routing wire transfers, no really no harm in it beyond some frustrated end users (us).

We will likely continue to see tweaks to the bgs as we go. Hopefully they will consolidate some or most of our feedback and make positive changes. We shall see.

Aldoss · December 2

Moonspawn wrote: »

I'm curious as to what your opinion is on bringing back the old bgs to replace the dead 8v8 group queue. There should be no harm in trading one dead queue for another, right?

Throwing my opinion out there that I don't want 4v4v4 to come back, because I don't want queue times any worse than they already are, but that I also want to see the 8v8 be one queue that only allows solos and duos - no 3's or 4's.

4v4 should no longer be "BGs" and instead should be arenas - 1 life to live, best of 3 rounds - and have a solo and group option.

This split would allow them to focus on tweaks that work independently from each other. 8v8 would continue to have the objective modes, but with tweaks that can help alleviate the disparity between queue times and play times. Domination is a huge issue. It's just simply a bad mode that is 100% outclassed by Crazy King.

All of the above is icing on the cake to what I believe is the true issue causing the group queue to be more dead than it was pre-U44 - Matchmaking Logic.

ZOS needs to hotfix this immediately to save BGs and stop hemorrhaging players. The queuing system must work the same as the group dungeon finder (except for roles) where the game issues ready checks and only creates a lobby when all 16 players have said they were ready. It's completely absurd to create a waiting system that holds players hostage for upwards of 6min. It's a massive waste of time and a huge gamble, especially for people who have limited game time, to risk twiddling their thumbs hoping for a match to actually fill and happen. This cannot wait until U45 and must be asap.

Moonspawn · December 2

Seems like we have the solution then:
4v4v4 solo queue
4v4 team queue
8v8 solos and duos

Pleases everyone, yes?

Necrotech_Master · December 2

Aldoss wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

I'm curious as to what your opinion is on bringing back the old bgs to replace the dead 8v8 group queue. There should be no harm in trading one dead queue for another, right?

Throwing my opinion out there that I don't want 4v4v4 to come back, because I don't want queue times any worse than they already are, but that I also want to see the 8v8 be one queue that only allows solos and duos - no 3's or 4's.

4v4 should no longer be "BGs" and instead should be arenas - 1 life to live, best of 3 rounds - and have a solo and group option.

This split would allow them to focus on tweaks that work independently from each other. 8v8 would continue to have the objective modes, but with tweaks that can help alleviate the disparity between queue times and play times. Domination is a huge issue. It's just simply a bad mode that is 100% outclassed by Crazy King.

All of the above is icing on the cake to what I believe is the true issue causing the group queue to be more dead than it was pre-U44 - Matchmaking Logic.

ZOS needs to hotfix this immediately to save BGs and stop hemorrhaging players. The queuing system must work the same as the group dungeon finder (except for roles) where the game issues ready checks and only creates a lobby when all 16 players have said they were ready. It's completely absurd to create a waiting system that holds players hostage for upwards of 6min. It's a massive waste of time and a huge gamble, especially for people who have limited game time, to risk twiddling their thumbs hoping for a match to actually fill and happen. This cannot wait until U45 and must be asap.

i dont think the problem is BGs hemorrhaging players, the problem with BGs is their population was fairly small to begin with even pre-update

with the new changes sure some people might have dipped back into them, but how many new regular BGers stuck around, probably few, so the overall BG population probably is still about the same to slightly higher than it was pre update

SkaraMinoc · December 2

Moonspawn wrote: »

Seems like we have the solution then:
4v4v4 solo queue
4v4 team queue
8v8 solos and duos

Pleases everyone, yes?

4v4- If they turned this into an actual Arena game mode (deathmatch only) with a leaderboard based on win/loss, then I wouldn't care if 4v4 had both solo and groups in the same queue. MMR would naturally place most groups higher than solo players, so they shouldn't get matched too often. In theory, that's how it should work.

xylena_lazarow · December 4

Moonspawn wrote: »

8v8 solos and duos

No duos in 8v8 casual, sweaty optimized pug stomping gets exponentially worse even with only 2.

The small maps enabled the ball group strat to dominate the entire field, no incentive to split, good riddance.

gariondavey · December 6

Aldoss wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

I'm curious as to what your opinion is on bringing back the old bgs to replace the dead 8v8 group queue. There should be no harm in trading one dead queue for another, right?

Throwing my opinion out there that I don't want 4v4v4 to come back, because I don't want queue times any worse than they already are, but that I also want to see the 8v8 be one queue that only allows solos and duos - no 3's or 4's.

4v4 should no longer be "BGs" and instead should be arenas - 1 life to live, best of 3 rounds - and have a solo and group option.

This split would allow them to focus on tweaks that work independently from each other. 8v8 would continue to have the objective modes, but with tweaks that can help alleviate the disparity between queue times and play times. Domination is a huge issue. It's just simply a bad mode that is 100% outclassed by Crazy King.

All of the above is icing on the cake to what I believe is the true issue causing the group queue to be more dead than it was pre-U44 - Matchmaking Logic.

ZOS needs to hotfix this immediately to save BGs and stop hemorrhaging players. The queuing system must work the same as the group dungeon finder (except for roles) where the game issues ready checks and only creates a lobby when all 16 players have said they were ready. It's completely absurd to create a waiting system that holds players hostage for upwards of 6min. It's a massive waste of time and a huge gamble, especially for people who have limited game time, to risk twiddling their thumbs hoping for a match to actually fill and happen. This cannot wait until U45 and must be asap.

Myself and 20 or so friends (all bg vets) have left for new world. Zos is too slow to respond to needs, and doesn't listen to feedback from the people who understand the game on extremely deep levels.
We stuck around for years waiting for a pvp update and when one finally came it fell flat.

The_Meathead · December 6

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

8v8 solos and duos

No duos in 8v8 casual, sweaty optimized pug stomping gets exponentially worse even with only 2.

The small maps enabled the ball group strat to dominate the entire field, no incentive to split, good riddance.

Yeah, I agree here.

While some/a lot of duos might just be a husband and wife or a couple buddies running their solo-PvP builds together, it will invariably wind up being a (very) mini-sized version of a Ball Group for plenty of others and a massive advantage against a team without a similar duo. Even the innate cooperation and communication of a paired twosome is a significant boost over an opponent team of all solos.

I guess it sucks to limit running BGs with any friends at all, but if it's a Solo Queue it needs to stay fully Solo.

tsaescishoeshiner · December 6

I agree that I've had fun 8v8s on these maps. Especially Huntsman's Fortress, which is bigger than it seems and spreads players out more because of the walls, slaughterfish pool, and bridge. I think it's one of the better maps from the new battlegrounds, especially for its size. Mota-ka makes everyone clump in one spot and get camped quickly because the bases are so close.

Both maps make it hard to exit the base via safe route and regroup with allies, making them very campable for 8v8 where enemies can cover all your exits more easily than 4v4 (where spawn camping still happens lol, especially on Mota-Ka). A second exit, maybe with a powerup exclusive to your team, could help.

While the mushrooms and line-of-sight should make Mota-ka a more dynamic map, it's one where your enemies can see you and reach you more quickly than any other map, making it one of my least favorites, win or lose (despite liking the Murkmire style).