Should 4v4v4 (3 Teams) Battleground mode become permanent again?

Erickson9610 · April 24

We should get a button to queue for all available queues on the PC UI, like the gamepad UI has. This would reduce wait times if it was the default option.

heimdall14_9 · April 24

Erickson9610 wrote: »

We should get a button to queue for all available queues on the PC UI, like the gamepad UI has. This would reduce wait times if it was the default option.

really you cant que all and hope for the best on the PC UI ???? man thats half the fun sometimes not knowing what you may get

Jestir · April 24

At this point? Yes

Many points can be made and I personally enjoy the 8 vs 8 but even if just because it's easier to fill a 12 player lobby vs a 16 and it's easier to get rewards with a second place finish

Estin · April 24

Decimus wrote: »

Estin wrote: »

4v4v4s are definitely more balanced, there's no doubt about it. There's next to no spawn camping, and the team RNG is better because good and bad players are split between 3 teams rather than 2. 8v8s encourage too much spawn camping and zerging resulting in very unbalanced games the majority of the time, though they can be fun when you get the rare balanced match. Really the only thing the 2 sided BGs have going for it are the maps. They're designed well and don't have any environmental hazards outside of the 4v4 maps. I will say the 3 sided BGs have too many maps with fall damage hazards or falling off the side of the map from cheap javelin spammers. I would like to see new 4v4v4 maps be made that are similar to the 8v8 maps.

Wow, more balanced you say?

Sure, unless you're in that 33% (the worst team). I wonder if they had fun?

And no, not just an outlier... already got 10+ similar screenshots - this is majority of the 3-way battlegrounds.

Once the novelty wears off, maybe people can start remembering why almost everyone had stopped queueing for 3-way BGs by the end of 2024.

Once a matchmaking issue, always a matchmaking issue.

Yes, more balanced I said. I didn't say that it's not unbalanced. There's a difference between the two statements. Of course there are still going to be skewed matches, you can't do anything about that. But I'm going to take 3 sided BGs over being spawn camped by a zerg any day. At least you have a chance to make a comeback in 3 sided BGs. You have 0 chance of making a comeback once things go south in a 2 sided BG.

laniakea_0 · April 24

I didn't mind them introducing 2-sided battlegrounds back in the day. seemed like a fair addition to the game with potential for new game modes. but I absolutely hated that they got rid of the 3-sided ones in the process. I want them back.

Decimus · April 24

Estin wrote: »

Decimus wrote: »

Estin wrote: »

4v4v4s are definitely more balanced, there's no doubt about it. There's next to no spawn camping, and the team RNG is better because good and bad players are split between 3 teams rather than 2. 8v8s encourage too much spawn camping and zerging resulting in very unbalanced games the majority of the time, though they can be fun when you get the rare balanced match. Really the only thing the 2 sided BGs have going for it are the maps. They're designed well and don't have any environmental hazards outside of the 4v4 maps. I will say the 3 sided BGs have too many maps with fall damage hazards or falling off the side of the map from cheap javelin spammers. I would like to see new 4v4v4 maps be made that are similar to the 8v8 maps.

Wow, more balanced you say?

Sure, unless you're in that 33% (the worst team). I wonder if they had fun?

And no, not just an outlier... already got 10+ similar screenshots - this is majority of the 3-way battlegrounds.

Once the novelty wears off, maybe people can start remembering why almost everyone had stopped queueing for 3-way BGs by the end of 2024.

Once a matchmaking issue, always a matchmaking issue.

Yes, more balanced I said. I didn't say that it's not unbalanced. There's a difference between the two statements. Of course there are still going to be skewed matches, you can't do anything about that. But I'm going to take 3 sided BGs over being spawn camped by a zerg any day. At least you have a chance to make a comeback in 3 sided BGs. You have 0 chance of making a comeback once things go south in a 2 sided BG.

That's a perception issue; if that were true then everyone would average 50% win rate in team vs team BGs after enough games were played - yet if you're a good player you have the capability to swing a match in your favour and this can be proven by statistics. ESO is a game with a lot of individual agency.

The "spawn camping" boils down to a couple of problems in team vs team:

Lack of understanding on how to play against spawn camping. Jump off to the side, sprint to LOS, maybe to pick up a sigil... the problem is that most people get spawn camped because they refuse to leave the spawn. There are tactics against this that work, it's just lack of knowledge.
Map design. If you look at successful PvP formats in video games, spawns either have protection such as turrets (MOBAs are a good example of this), or simply aren't placed at the very back of a linear map, right next to the Relic or flag or whatever - spawns are often more away from those, closer to the middle where you have 360 degrees of directions where you can go to. One of the 3-way BG maps (Eld Angavar) actually kind of has this design.

You have much less of a chance if you get in the worst team in a 3-way BG, but atleast the people getting in second worst team can have a higher chance of a comeback I suppose. The worst team gets absolutely shafted and bullied in 3-way format, so if you get placed there then tough luck.

Statistically you are less likely to win (1/3 chance assuming no individual agency), but also less likely to have a miserable time (1/3 chance, unless both enemy teams get farmed).

NikoSquared · April 24

Decimus wrote: »

The "spawn camping" boils down to a couple of problems in team vs team:

[snip]

I would think the actual biggest issue in 2 teams is the build gap combined with the skill gap, sometimes very strong players get paired with newer players or players in PvE builds just trying to do their daily, those players will get one shot by pretty much anything, which effectively removes a player from the game, making it easier to spawn camp as the match goes on until they’re just sitting outside and nobody jumps down anymore

Decimus · April 24

NikoSquared wrote: »

Decimus wrote: »

The "spawn camping" boils down to a couple of problems in team vs team:

[snip]

I would think the actual biggest issue in 2 teams is the build gap combined with the skill gap, sometimes very strong players get paired with newer players or players in PvE builds just trying to do their daily, those players will get one shot by pretty much anything, which effectively removes a player from the game, making it easier to spawn camp as the match goes on until they’re just sitting outside and nobody jumps down anymore

Yes, that's the matchmaking issue I referred to earlier... happens all the time in 3-way BGs as well.

The spawn camping in 2-way BGs can be mitigated though, it's not like sprint, dodge roll, LOS etc work any differently for anyone.

The problem I keep witnessing in a lot of team vs team is that a lot of people think too linear: "I see enemy, I must jump down and fight enemy", when the correct answer is not to jump down to get slaughtered by stronger team, but to make a run for it and make them either chase and separate or be free from the "spawn camp". If part of opponents chase, now your team is outnumbering whoever is left and has better chances.

But yeah, obviously you can't expect people to know the correct answer to every situation; besides a functioning MMR system, a better map design would go a long way.

xylena · April 24

I don't think I'll ever get tired of posting this one.

2s or 3s don't matter, it's lopsided garbage until they fix the MMR.

Moonspawn · April 24

xylena wrote: »

I don't think I'll ever get tired of posting this one.

2s or 3s don't matter, it's lopsided garbage until they fix the MMR.

No matter how hard you try, the truth will prevail in the end.

gariondavey · April 24

Wish zos would make an actual well designed mmr system. You win, mmr goes up. You lose, mmr goes down. Mmr should be visible.

Balanced teams in a 4v4 fight is really fun, especially when doing guild events or gvgs.

4v4v4 dm with proper mmr would be amazing too. I've been in some absolute banger solo queue 4v4v4 dms where the teams were very balanced and people played like you normally would in a premade. Goated games.
4v4v4 dm premade games with balanced teams is amazing. The real essence of eso 3 way combat in it's perfected form.

In the end, 4v4v4 bgs should come back. The poll is pretty clear so far in the findings.

Thumbless_Bot · April 24

gariondavey wrote: »

Wish zos would make an actual well designed mmr system. You win, mmr goes up. You lose, mmr goes down. Mmr should be visible.

Balanced teams in a 4v4 fight is really fun, especially when doing guild events or gvgs.

4v4v4 dm with proper mmr would be amazing too. I've been in some absolute banger solo queue 4v4v4 dms where the teams were very balanced and people played like you normally would in a premade. Goated games.
4v4v4 dm premade games with balanced teams is amazing. The real essence of eso 3 way combat in it's perfected form.

In the end, 4v4v4 bgs should come back. The poll is pretty clear so far in the findings.

Every so often a 4v4 really shines.

I joined a 4v3 in progress the other night that was a slaughter and it then we ended up winning at the wire.

It was fun and exciting. It's just too rare and inconsistent.

xylena · April 24

Moonspawn wrote: »

No matter how hard you try

Funny phrasing from the guy spamming thousand word essays and page long lists from two accounts for almost two years now. Has it worked yet?

Radiate77 · April 24

Yeah; only been a weekend and we’re right back to solo queue infested by unkillable heal-bots, with teams completely unable to focus them down because of constantly getting third partied.

In 2 team, healers die.
They can go right ahead and vault this again.

Kelenan7368 · April 24

Absolutely Yes! All BG's should be permanent. And make more with other themes of BG's.

Thumbless_Bot · April 24

I started 3 team bgs again. They are so much FUN.

A lot of folks on this thread and these forums are talking about strategy, userbase, competitiveness, etc. Including myself from time to time.

I think a lot of us need to remember how much fun these bgs are. They a world's more fun than 2 teams.

Fun is so important. My god this is so refreshing.

MincMincMinc · April 24

I can agree, its good to have all the old content back. They should just bake the 4v4v4 and the 4v4 into a small man BG que.

Honestly getting rid of the "competitive" label would help populate the que more.....eso is not a competitive game. Atleast not until they make an actual functional MMR system

Calminayon · April 24

For every claim that 2 team BGs are (a lot!) less balanced than 3 team BGs, someone will pull out a screenshot of a 3 team BG steamroll, sure. You'll never balance PvP the way ESO is built, especially now that subclassing has increased the gap between min maxers and the less hardcore players even more.

In my and my BG friends' experience, however, the new 2 team BGs rarely last longer than five or so minutes.. We strongly dislike the forced change to 2 teams and would applaud any form of 3 team BGs (preferably deathmatch) being brought back.

I've read plenty of good ideas to provide permanent 3 team BGs without increasing the queue too much. Make it happen!

NikoSquared · April 24

Radiate77 wrote: »

Yeah; only been a weekend and we’re right back to solo queue infested by unkillable heal-bots, with teams completely unable to focus them down because of constantly getting third partied.

In 2 team, healers die.
They can go right ahead and vault this again.

This is a Domination gamemode problem, not a 3 Teams problem.

Players actually die easier in 3 teams because of the ability to get pincered between both teams 8v4, inherently reducing the power of Supports

lostineternity · April 25

Decimus wrote: »

lostineternity wrote: »

3 team bg is in DNA of ESO

look at the game logo
go and watch any cinematic of the game, there are always 3 side in this story
thats unique thing about ESO, this is what distinguishes ESO from other games

2 team bg are just generic and boring like in any other game with PVP mode

Oh, you mean those other games with massively higher player bases for their PvP modes? Not really a good argument.

ESO's BGs suffer from poor matchmaking and map design... and now (temporarily) also a format that allows people to win without doing any PvP.

If ZOS wanted to make BGs more popular and fun, they should just copy/pasta what WoW does & solo shuffle for ranked arenas.

Yeah sure, WoW has 10 millions subscribers because of 2 sides battlegrounds (stupidiest thing I've read here for a long time).
Actually what difference does it make to you which mode to play in with your puppets from twitch chat that follow any of your commands?

lostineternity · April 25

Decimus wrote: »

Estin wrote: »

4v4v4s are definitely more balanced, there's no doubt about it. There's next to no spawn camping, and the team RNG is better because good and bad players are split between 3 teams rather than 2. 8v8s encourage too much spawn camping and zerging resulting in very unbalanced games the majority of the time, though they can be fun when you get the rare balanced match. Really the only thing the 2 sided BGs have going for it are the maps. They're designed well and don't have any environmental hazards outside of the 4v4 maps. I will say the 3 sided BGs have too many maps with fall damage hazards or falling off the side of the map from cheap javelin spammers. I would like to see new 4v4v4 maps be made that are similar to the 8v8 maps.

Wow, more balanced you say?

Sure, unless you're in that 33% (the worst team). I wonder if they had fun?

And no, not just an outlier... already got 10+ similar screenshots - this is majority of the 3-way battlegrounds.

Once the novelty wears off, maybe people can start remembering why almost everyone had stopped queueing for 3-way BGs by the end of 2024.

Once a matchmaking issue, always a matchmaking issue.

Don't you want to elaborate how your watchers tend to quit match when play against you?
Or maybe how your watchers regs at the same time to get in the same team with you and assist you in solo queue or ruin/quit when in other teams?
Toxic people like you and your minions ruined pvp in ESO and not the balance.

NxJoeyD · April 25

The 3 team layout isn’t bad and I’d be all for keeping it if they addressed the additional server side latency we’re seeing with it.

The lag is horrendous since this BG event and that kills the prospect of having it at all.

The 3 team layout didn’t magically solve many of the pain points with BGs that people assumed it would but, overall, they’d be fine to keep if they get polished and made to work smoother.

Ruj · April 25

There are players who prefer 2v2.
There are players who prefer 3v3.

Buff the rewards for winning a BG and give players both options!

I loved 3v3 BG. Top tier peak combat gameplay fun I've ever had in ESO was in 3v3 BGs.
However, I hardly ever signed up for them because the rewards are so minimal for winning that it felt like I was throwing away any progress towards the things I wanted in ESO.

Why sign up for a BG when I can go to a vet dungeon and try a shot at a 1.3 million gold mask?

BGs need way better rewards for winning.
Make new BG-exclusive furniture that is not bound. PvP players would make a good bit of gold from selling them on traders.

There are so many furnishings that could come from BGs.

Shoe furniture like individual boots in various styles
Swords, daggers, bows, shields, etc. We need more individual weapon furnishings.
Jewelry furnishings
Folded clothes
Coats and shirts on hooks
Open pouches of gold
Bandages (both clean and bloody)

Pretty much anything an enemy is wearing/ carrying on them.

This would be a gold mine for PvP players. AND it would get way more people into BGs. Enough to fill up 2v2 and 3v3 options for BGs.

The current furniture from PvP is meh. 1/10. Bunch of ugly mugs, rugs, and random decor that most people don't want in their homes.

xylena · April 25

Ruj wrote: »

Why sign up for a BG when I can go to a vet dungeon and try a shot at a 1.3 million gold mask? BGs need way better rewards for winning.

Make new BG-exclusive furniture that is not bound. PvP players would make a good bit of gold from selling them on traders.

This could be a good way to attract new players, but I also don't think this is what motivates PvPers, who want to be PvPing, not collecting house items or playing capitalism sim. Personally I could PvP just fine with zero material rewards, the fights and the wins are the reward.

xylena · April 25

Radiate77 wrote: »

Yeah; only been a weekend and we’re right back to solo queue infested by unkillable heal-bots, with teams completely unable to focus them down because of constantly getting third partied. In 2 team, healers die.

NikoSquared wrote: »

Players actually die easier in 3 teams because of the ability to get pincered between both teams 8v4, inherently reducing the power of Supports

It plays out like Radiate says in stronger lobbies, and how Niko says in weaker lobbies. The average sweaty high MMR 3way DM is a staring contest between 3 ball groups that ends 195-150-75 because nobody wants to risk going all in just to focus down 1 healbot.

In low or nonfunctional MMR, you can easily 3rd party blindside engaged bad players the entire match for an easy 15-0-0, which I'm sure is why some players say they miss 3s.

Decimus · April 25

lostineternity wrote: »

Decimus wrote: »

Estin wrote: »

4v4v4s are definitely more balanced, there's no doubt about it. There's next to no spawn camping, and the team RNG is better because good and bad players are split between 3 teams rather than 2. 8v8s encourage too much spawn camping and zerging resulting in very unbalanced games the majority of the time, though they can be fun when you get the rare balanced match. Really the only thing the 2 sided BGs have going for it are the maps. They're designed well and don't have any environmental hazards outside of the 4v4 maps. I will say the 3 sided BGs have too many maps with fall damage hazards or falling off the side of the map from cheap javelin spammers. I would like to see new 4v4v4 maps be made that are similar to the 8v8 maps.

Wow, more balanced you say?

Sure, unless you're in that 33% (the worst team). I wonder if they had fun?

And no, not just an outlier... already got 10+ similar screenshots - this is majority of the 3-way battlegrounds.

Once the novelty wears off, maybe people can start remembering why almost everyone had stopped queueing for 3-way BGs by the end of 2024.

Once a matchmaking issue, always a matchmaking issue.

Don't you want to elaborate how your watchers tend to quit match when play against you?
Or maybe how your watchers regs at the same time to get in the same team with you and assist you in solo queue or ruin/quit when in other teams?
Toxic people like you and your minions ruined pvp in ESO and not the balance.

What are these hallucinations? It's not my "watchers" who quit the match when against me, it's the other "watchers" who do after getting farmed. Sorry not sorry if you identify in this latter category.

A lot of people watch my streams because people like watching top tier gameplay, or look for information. If you expect 100+ people to not be queueing for battlegrounds in order to do so, I don't know what to tell you - you're bound to get viewers in your lobbies.

Nobody nice is quitting when in opponent team, I actually make sure to make sure people I know and respect in opponent team can have fun in the BGs and I don't put them in any impossible fights by trying to Xv1 (outside of objective) or chase etc - that'd be beneath me.

But go ahead and call me toxic if that makes you feel better.

lostineternity wrote: »

Decimus wrote: »

lostineternity wrote: »

3 team bg is in DNA of ESO

look at the game logo
go and watch any cinematic of the game, there are always 3 side in this story
thats unique thing about ESO, this is what distinguishes ESO from other games

2 team bg are just generic and boring like in any other game with PVP mode

Oh, you mean those other games with massively higher player bases for their PvP modes? Not really a good argument.

ESO's BGs suffer from poor matchmaking and map design... and now (temporarily) also a format that allows people to win without doing any PvP.

If ZOS wanted to make BGs more popular and fun, they should just copy/pasta what WoW does & solo shuffle for ranked arenas.

Yeah sure, WoW has 10 millions subscribers because of 2 sides battlegrounds (stupidiest thing I've read here for a long time).
Actually what difference does it make to you which mode to play in with your puppets from twitch chat that follow any of your commands?

Yes, WoW has millions of subscribers in large part due to its excellent PvP formats, including team vs team BGs and team vs team arenas (which had literal e-sports competitions in BlizzCon). Pretty much every successful MMO with PvP follows this format for a reason.

If you want examples of other team vs team games: LoL, Counter-Strike, DOTA, soccer, basketball... list goes on.

It just works and is balanceable for competitive play that rewards skill over third partying or running to empty objectives to avoid skill-checks in order to "win".

ceruulean · April 25

4v4v4 is still mostly bad.

1) Unless things have changed, group queue doesn't function. The matchmaking algorithm takes exponentially longer for 3 teams.
2) If you get lost and separated from team, you get mowed down 2v1, it's basically the same as getting spawn camped.
3) If you die, it takes too long to return to the fight. Take the wrong portal or your team is too far and you get hunted down again.
4) Damage is so high that it's very easy to die in this subclassing meta, so you get the Cyrodiil problem where you are constantly dying and running to get back into the action. It's worse in 3 teams because the "safe territories" are not obvious and you can't see your teammates on compass or minimap unless you have addons.
5) It's more clear why you win a 2 team battle, at least when the game was better balanced (nowadays count the number of DKs). It's less clear in 4v4v4 which is mostly chaotic unbalanced battle royale. Sometimes its fun but it's random and you don't have that much control over winning or losing. Winning because you run around to flags and hope the other 2 teams are distracted, or there isn't some psycho hunting you down, is really unsatisfying and not winning.
5) Chaosball was terrible, people exploited terrain glitches to hide the ball and it devolved into a 2-team match.

Positives of 3 teams: I can see 3-teams working for exclusively Capture the Relic, I had the most interesting matches and victories there. Map designs for 3-teams are more interesting, more dedicated talent developed them at the time of Morrowind DLC.

xylena · April 25

ceruulean wrote: »

2) If you get lost and separated from team, you get mowed down 2v1, it's basically the same as getting spawn camped.
3) If you die, it takes too long to return to the fight. Take the wrong portal or your team is too far and you get hunted down again.

This is a particularly good point because it also shows how the horrendous spawn mechanics drag down every BGs format, 2s or 3s. Unreal Tournament had this problem solved in the 90s.

NikoSquared · April 25

NxJoeyD wrote: »

The 3 team layout isn’t bad and I’d be all for keeping it if they addressed the additional server side latency we’re seeing with it.

The lag is horrendous since this BG event and that kills the prospect of having it at all.

The 3 team layout didn’t magically solve many of the pain points with BGs that people assumed it would but, overall, they’d be fine to keep if they get polished and made to work smoother.

Yeah the only issue is I've noticed it's much laggier now which it wasn't before

Thumbless_Bot · April 25

NikoSquared wrote: »

Personally, I believe that 3 teams solves many issues that exist in the 2 teams game mode

Notably
- Less instances of spawn camping, as if a team spawn camps it is likely they will lose the objective or get third parties
- Less toxicity for casual players, as players only need to get in the top 2 out of 3 placement to complete the daily bonus
- More dynamic gameplay, as rather than two teams crashing into eachother for most of the match, 3 teams is more focused on positioning properly and not getting pincered by the other two teams
- A much higher chance of making a comeback, as the two other teams may get locked in conflict allowing the third team to claim a decisive victory via objective
- Unique map design, almost every map has a special mechanic that can be planned around for maximum effect (teleport pads, arena traps, foggy blizzards, dangerous lava pits, etc)

None of this is really present for 4v4 or 8v8, as 90% of the time the match is determined as soon as it starts based on player skill levels or build variety, strategy tends to have very little impact on the chances of winning, it just turns into “Who can spawn camp the enemy team harder” which leads to a lot of toxicity

It is incredibly clear that people want 3 teams back.

This is one of, if not the, most lopsided poll I have ever seen on these forums.