Moonspawn wrote: »

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?

Ok well its coming across like you have another system in mind. Like if you are disregarding a skill based mmr system like the KDA metric......how are you getting your balanced matches? Or are you just fine having completely random matches pairing players of any skill level together. a cp160 and a cp3600 10 year pvp player together is ok?

---

@NxJoeyD What sort of unkillable builds are you talking about? Mid and High MMR matches hardly have any issues TTK wise. The game right now is in an insanely high damage meta with no counter to it. Crit meta is the largest issue since monomyth and subclassing passives brought so many stacking sources that hard powercrept nearly everyone by 50% crit damage

Previously the game with 7impen had you at 3k crit resists or 45% mit.......fighting against enemies outputting MAYBE 50-75% crit damage if they built into it somewhat. So a resulting 5-30% bonus damage occasionally.

Now adays 6 impen and rallyingcry get you to 3762 or 57% crit mit...........Fighting enemies with up to 150% to even 170%+ crit damage. Which is a resulting 93-113% if rallying is even procced fully. Otherwise you are talking up to the 125% cap. regularly

• Block cost is hardly an issue, block tanks are so few and far between.....maybe 1 out of 1k players. Blocking isn't hard stalling duels in any tourney at least pcna.
• the only burst healing issue is that healing soul should not have major vitality on it and the warden charm on it. This is the only factor that actually is stalling out fights and duels.
• If anything we should be blaming Monomyth for being far too overtuned AND pairing perfectly into the tank backbar and full damage frontbar meta.

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

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?

Ok well its coming across like you have another system in mind. Like if you are disregarding a skill based mmr system like the KDA metric......how are you getting your balanced matches? Or are you just fine having completely random matches pairing players of any skill level together. a cp160 and a cp3600 10 year pvp player together is ok?

---

@NxJoeyD What sort of unkillable builds are you talking about? Mid and High MMR matches hardly have any issues TTK wise. The game right now is in an insanely high damage meta with no counter to it. Crit meta is the largest issue since monomyth and subclassing passives brought so many stacking sources that hard powercrept nearly everyone by 50% crit damage

Previously the game with 7impen had you at 3k crit resists or 45% mit.......fighting against enemies outputting MAYBE 50-75% crit damage if they built into it somewhat. So a resulting 5-30% bonus damage occasionally.

Now adays 6 impen and rallyingcry get you to 3762 or 57% crit mit...........Fighting enemies with up to 150% to even 170%+ crit damage. Which is a resulting 93-113% if rallying is even procced fully. Otherwise you are talking up to the 125% cap. regularly

• Block cost is hardly an issue, block tanks are so few and far between.....maybe 1 out of 1k players. Blocking isn't hard stalling duels in any tourney at least pcna.
• the only burst healing issue is that healing soul should not have major vitality on it and the warden charm on it. This is the only factor that actually is stalling out fights and duels.
• If anything we should be blaming Monomyth for being far too overtuned AND pairing perfectly into the tank backbar and full damage frontbar meta.

No, I’m not proposing a whole new system I’m proposing changes to fundamental PvP mechanics that aren’t class specific.

MRR isn’t necessarily skill based matchmaking, it’s result based. Now that would translate into a skill based system if skills alone were the largest factor in outcome but we all know that’s not the case. Skill is a factor, yes, but a variable depending on how the matches are built to begin with and the nature of the builds at play.

IMO TTK isn’t the sole or only metric to cite when looking at balancing matches; it’s also about the HOW the kills occur rather than just the time it takes.

As for crit, that’s not really new. We’ve seen PvP builds running 150% to 170% for a while now. What’s changed with subclassing is that MORE people can now hit it. There are counter plays to crit damage itself so I don’t see broader access to high crit builds alone being an issue.

If the issue was simply high crit damage then what we’d be seeing are more players with higher kill counts; and even though I agree more players are hitting higher crit values, that’s not the result we’re seeing; rather we’re seeing a handful of players with kill counts higher than the rest of the field.

The problem is when high damage (including crits) meets high durability, now your counter play options are limited or gone.

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Or are you just fine having completely random matches pairing players of any skill level together. a cp160 and a cp3600 10 year pvp player together is ok?

You are right that mixing players from different skill levels in the same match is a Very Bad Idea... but that only applies to two-teams BGs, I'll see if Haki can bring us more examples.

No it applies to any matchmaking setup. Even a three team gamemode like 4v4v4 needs it.
Say there is one pugstomp and 2 pug teams, well the two just get rolled
Say there is two pugstomp and 1 pug team, well these two just camp and fight infront of the pug team to prevent them from ending early with objectives.

Its the same issues as with 2 team bgs. Spawn camping still existed before. The only difference was with 3 team bgs it was harder for a SINGLE player to pugstomp and camp the entire enemy team considering there are two different spawns on opposite sides of the map.

Matches would be more fun and higher quality if an mmr system functioned though and you avoid these scenarios 90% of the time easily.

4v4v4 was terrible and is always terrible but was put in because DAoC and they wanted to relive glory days of a game that no one really liked because three teams is easier to exploit than 2v2. Even WoW PvP beat out DAoC and had bigger overworld fights randomly on PvP servers.

Battlegrounds has always been friends solo queuing together and getting in and seeing what team they were on and then 2v1ing the team that had the least amount of friends on it because two teams got rewards.

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

In my opinion, there’s a much simpler solution. As already mentioned in the discussion, it’s enough to just make players on spawn invulnerable, especially since a similar mechanic is already used in IC. You could go further and make the invulnerability last for 5 more seconds after a player leaves the spawn, but it should instantly disable if the player engages in combat. I think 5 seconds is more than enough to get down from the spawn and take a good position.

i11ionward 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

In my opinion, there’s a much simpler solution. As already mentioned in the discussion, it’s enough to just make players on spawn invulnerable, especially since a similar mechanic is already used in IC. You could go further and make the invulnerability last for 5 more seconds after a player leaves the spawn, but it should instantly disable if the player engages in combat. I think 5 seconds is more than enough to get down from the spawn and take a good position.

Or just make spawns level with the ground with a one way wall and be done with the issue. Teams spawn in waves every 20s or so to help group them up. After 20s you are forced out of spawn. If you get forced out of spawn too many times you are removed from the bg and get a que penalty. Once through the one way wall you could have a soft spawn protection where the enemies CAN enter, but would start taking slaughterfish damage for example.

Its not hard, just look at any other competitive game for how its done. BG matches aren't a new concept. You probably dont even need the one way wall. Just make it so you spawn with an anti slaughterfish buff for 15s.

MincMincMinc wrote: »

i11ionward 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

In my opinion, there’s a much simpler solution. As already mentioned in the discussion, it’s enough to just make players on spawn invulnerable, especially since a similar mechanic is already used in IC. You could go further and make the invulnerability last for 5 more seconds after a player leaves the spawn, but it should instantly disable if the player engages in combat. I think 5 seconds is more than enough to get down from the spawn and take a good position.

Or just make spawns level with the ground with a one way wall and be done with the issue. Teams spawn in waves every 20s or so to help group them up. After 20s you are forced out of spawn. If you get forced out of spawn too many times you are removed from the bg and get a que penalty. Once through the one way wall you could have a soft spawn protection where the enemies CAN enter, but would start taking slaughterfish damage for example.

Its not hard, just look at any other competitive game for how its done. BG matches aren't a new concept. You probably dont even need the one way wall. Just make it so you spawn with an anti slaughterfish buff for 15s.

FWIW, you DO spawn in waves of 20s. The problem is that you have to hit release or you won't get put into the countdown. They need to make releasing automatic, because let's be real - unless someone drops a Necro ult, no one is getting rezzed in a BG.

@ZOS_Kevin , be honest—did you guys change something with the BG queue and forget to put it in the patch notes? Playing tonight on PC EU, it really felt like matches started faster than before.

In the previous patch, once both teams had 8 players (you could see all 16 on the scoreboard), the waiting timer switched to 10 seconds, and then the 45-second match countdown began.
Now the 10-second timer shows up even before both teams reach 8 players. For example, the scoreboard might only show 15 people, but the match timer still starts. It feels like the countdown now triggers when the last player clicks “confirm,” not when they actually load in and join the group. Hope that makes sense.

Maybe I’m wrong, or maybe there are just more players online after the new patch—but can you confirm if my guess is correct?

Spawncamping some newcomers in a 3-sided match meant leaving your teammates outnumbered against the third team. Doing the same thing in 2-sided gives your own team the numerical advantage.

@MincMincMinc Do you see how the removal of the third team made spawncamping more useful?

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

Spawncamping some newcomers in a 3-sided match meant leaving your teammates outnumbered against the third team. Doing the same thing in 2-sided gives your own team the numerical advantage.

@MincMincMinc Do you see how the removal of the third team made spawncamping more useful?

Yeah, but even so you could eliminate the problem all together if matches were more evenly skill based with an mmr system. 2 team or 3 team doesnt matter

And if pvpers on both sides consider it ''useful'', do you see how it's a lot easier to spawncamp the newcomers on the opponent team than it is to fight against the pvpers spawncamping your own?

Decimus wrote: »

i11ionward wrote: »

@ZOS_Kevin , be honest—did you guys change something with the BG queue and forget to put it in the patch notes? Playing tonight on PC EU, it really felt like matches started faster than before.

In the previous patch, once both teams had 8 players (you could see all 16 on the scoreboard), the waiting timer switched to 10 seconds, and then the 45-second match countdown began.
Now the 10-second timer shows up even before both teams reach 8 players. For example, the scoreboard might only show 15 people, but the match timer still starts. It feels like the countdown now triggers when the last player clicks “confirm,” not when they actually load in and join the group. Hope that makes sense.

Maybe I’m wrong, or maybe there are just more players online after the new patch—but can you confirm if my guess is correct?

Noticed this as well - it's a very welcome change. They also fixed the giant lag spike from chaosball werewolf using the stomp ability.


Now if only they could put a bit more effort into score system and introduced proper MMR & visible ranks/scores...

I would also like to point out an issue with the Domination mode on maps that have 5 flags. On these maps, teams accumulate points very quickly — sometimes the match can last only about 3 minutes. Such short matches can be a bit frustrating, especially during the Domination Weekend PvP event, where you can easily end up spending more total time searching for matches than actually playing them.

The likely reason is that each flag tick gives the same number of points regardless of whether there are 3 flags or 5, which results in almost twice the scoring speed on 5-flag maps. For example, if each tick gives 1 point per second, then on a 3-flag map the maximum is 3 points per second, but on a 5-flag map it becomes 5 points per second. I think this makes the issue clear.

To me, it seems obvious that point accumulation on maps with 5 flags should be slower.

Moonspawn wrote: »

Three-teams BGs rewards

I don't follow. Big Soda never paid me to drink Crystal Pepsi.

Destruction of Battlegrounds Chapter 89: Waiting 17 minutes for a lopsided match (Solo 8v8 PC/NA)

https://youtu.be/pImOfREYEww

MRR alone isn’t the issue here. That’s because there’s ZERO possible way to build any kind of reliable MRR with the way ESO is setup due to the build disparities.

You COULD do that if skill factor was the largest contributor in match outcomes but it isn’t. Plain and simple. MRR is results based so it will always be skewed in the current play environment.

Not all builds have to be the “same” but they need a semblance of balance, an element of risk vs reward or play vs counter-play and it’s just not there.

The metas deal high damage AND have strong / persistent self healing. That should never happen in an MMO PvP.

So unless your idea of MRR is to take the metas and just match them together separate from everyone else we don’t have a prayer of ever seeing viable MRR; not unless the Devs do something about the current state of the combination of build mechanics.

Here's a good example to show how the target order never leaves the squishiest players in 8v8. They respawn and come back before the damage ever reaches the others, which creates an extremely unpleasant situation for everyone involved: Eight people being forced to focus the same two or three players over and over again. The only solution I see is to go back to 4v4v4.