Maintenance for the week of July 14:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – July 14
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – July 14
needed changes in Battlegrounds
BigES
✭✭✭✭✭
1. Ranking system is bad. Players should not be rewarded for how much they play, but rather the quality of their wins.
2. It should have never been 4v4v4. Grouping is problematic enough. 4v4 is more fair, and grouping would be smoother and easier.
3. Let players choose their game types so they can adapt unique builds to those game types (e.g. players can utilize the runner sets for flag capturing)
2. It should have never been 4v4v4. Grouping is problematic enough. 4v4 is more fair, and grouping would be smoother and easier.
3. Let players choose their game types so they can adapt unique builds to those game types (e.g. players can utilize the runner sets for flag capturing)
2
-
Morgul667✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭1. Ranking system is bad. Players should not be rewarded for how much they play, but rather the quality of their wins.
2. It should have never been 4v4v4. Grouping is problematic enough. 4v4 is more fair, and grouping would be smoother and easier.
3. Let players choose their game types so they can adapt unique builds to those game types (e.g. players can utilize the runner sets for flag capturing)
I think that : not knowing which type of BG we are going in, is good. It forces us to have builds adapted to all types of BG
Can you imagine a capture the flag with tanks only ?
Also I like the 3 team set-up, kind of messes up the "one team dominating the other one" for the rest of the roundEdited by Morgul667 on May 31, 2017 5:20AM1 -
Koensol✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
You can still use the dressing room addon and switch your spec according to what match type you get. So, your argument isn't really valid.1. Ranking system is bad. Players should not be rewarded for how much they play, but rather the quality of their wins.
2. It should have never been 4v4v4. Grouping is problematic enough. 4v4 is more fair, and grouping would be smoother and easier.
3. Let players choose their game types so they can adapt unique builds to those game types (e.g. players can utilize the runner sets for flag capturing)
I think that : not knowing which type of BG we are going in, is good. It forces us to have builds adapted to all types of BG
Can you imagine a capture the flag with tanks only ?
Also I like the 3 team set-up, kind of messes up the "one team dominating the other one" for the rest of the round
My main problem with BGs is that every game type has the same map, when some maps aren't really fit for cap the flag for example. They are waaay too small for cap the flag.
2 -
Morgul667✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
You can still use the dressing room addon and switch your spec according to what match type you get. So, your argument isn't really valid.1. Ranking system is bad. Players should not be rewarded for how much they play, but rather the quality of their wins.
2. It should have never been 4v4v4. Grouping is problematic enough. 4v4 is more fair, and grouping would be smoother and easier.
3. Let players choose their game types so they can adapt unique builds to those game types (e.g. players can utilize the runner sets for flag capturing)
I think that : not knowing which type of BG we are going in, is good. It forces us to have builds adapted to all types of BG
Can you imagine a capture the flag with tanks only ?
Also I like the 3 team set-up, kind of messes up the "one team dominating the other one" for the rest of the round
My main problem with BGs is that every game type has the same map, when some maps aren't really fit for cap the flag for example. They are waaay too small for cap the flag.
True there, my bad.
Wish we didnt have that possibility though, kinda takes some of the fun away :-)Edited by Morgul667 on May 31, 2017 5:32AM0 -
Koensol✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
Haha, it's one of my favorite addons
You can still use the dressing room addon and switch your spec according to what match type you get. So, your argument isn't really valid.1. Ranking system is bad. Players should not be rewarded for how much they play, but rather the quality of their wins.
2. It should have never been 4v4v4. Grouping is problematic enough. 4v4 is more fair, and grouping would be smoother and easier.
3. Let players choose their game types so they can adapt unique builds to those game types (e.g. players can utilize the runner sets for flag capturing)
I think that : not knowing which type of BG we are going in, is good. It forces us to have builds adapted to all types of BG
Can you imagine a capture the flag with tanks only ?
Also I like the 3 team set-up, kind of messes up the "one team dominating the other one" for the rest of the round
My main problem with BGs is that every game type has the same map, when some maps aren't really fit for cap the flag for example. They are waaay too small for cap the flag.
True there, my bad.
Wish we didnt have that possibility though, kinda takes some of the fun away :-)
makes it so much less tedious to switch abilities in Cyrodiil according to the situation or quickly slot in your rapid maneuvers.
2 -
IcyDeadPeople✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭3-way fights always seem to be the most fun, and they are kind of what people expect from ESO PVP at this point.
The leaderboard is the lowest priority IMO. Maybe they will add a ranked match queue in the future, but first they need to get enough people in the regular queue for the system to assign balanced teams. When new players log on and the teams are extremely unbalanced, they get turned off from battlegrounds.
In order to get lots of people in the queue, I think it's more urgent to boost the XP and AP rewards. It's fun enough that a lot of people want to play battlegrounds, but you only earn about 1/3 the AP compared to playing in Cyrodiil, and hardly any XP at all. This is not enough to level up new characters or buy monster helms / level up assault skill line.
Agree about being able to queue up for just deathmatch for example, or specific maps, but I think this likely will come further down the road after we get enough people participating.
Edited by IcyDeadPeople on May 31, 2017 6:04AM1 -
Morgul667✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
Haha, it's one of my favorite addons
You can still use the dressing room addon and switch your spec according to what match type you get. So, your argument isn't really valid.1. Ranking system is bad. Players should not be rewarded for how much they play, but rather the quality of their wins.
2. It should have never been 4v4v4. Grouping is problematic enough. 4v4 is more fair, and grouping would be smoother and easier.
3. Let players choose their game types so they can adapt unique builds to those game types (e.g. players can utilize the runner sets for flag capturing)
I think that : not knowing which type of BG we are going in, is good. It forces us to have builds adapted to all types of BG
Can you imagine a capture the flag with tanks only ?
Also I like the 3 team set-up, kind of messes up the "one team dominating the other one" for the rest of the round
My main problem with BGs is that every game type has the same map, when some maps aren't really fit for cap the flag for example. They are waaay too small for cap the flag.
True there, my bad.
Wish we didnt have that possibility though, kinda takes some of the fun away :-) makes it so much less tedious to switch abilities in Cyrodiil according to the situation or quickly slot in your rapid maneuvers.
I understand & also enjoy it in PVE :-) But for BG kinda seems too powerfull to switch gear to suits whats best :-) Anyway I dont see it going anywhere ;D0 -
kadar✭✭✭✭✭
✭2. It should have never been 4v4v4. Grouping is problematic enough. 4v4 is more fair, and grouping would be smoother and easier.
3. Let players choose their game types so they can adapt unique builds to those game types (e.g. players can utilize the runner sets for flag capturing)
2. 4V4V4 is much more fun than 4v4, IMO.
3. You can already adapt unique builds to certain game types with the 90 second prep time before BG start. But yea, choosing game types could be cool.1 -
BigES✭✭✭✭✭The_Outsider wrote: »2. It should have never been 4v4v4. Grouping is problematic enough. 4v4 is more fair, and grouping would be smoother and easier.
3. Let players choose their game types so they can adapt unique builds to those game types (e.g. players can utilize the runner sets for flag capturing)
2. 4V4V4 is much more fun than 4v4, IMO.
3. You can already adapt unique builds to certain game types with the 90 second prep time before BG start. But yea, choosing game types could be cool.
Yeah, I mean i see how its an interesting game mode. 4v4v4. But i prefer a more raw, balanced game mode. I guess I'm in the minority.
There's a lot of cliquish stuff that goes on in game. All it takes if for your group to run into a group of 4 people who know the other 4 people, and then you're immediately outnumbered.
0 -
Koensol✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
4v4v4 is often more balanced than 4v4. In 4v4 there is always one team that is better than the other. In 4v4v4 the two lesser teams can compensate by both being able to pressure the leading team. It's the entire premise for 3 faction pvpThe_Outsider wrote: »2. It should have never been 4v4v4. Grouping is problematic enough. 4v4 is more fair, and grouping would be smoother and easier.
3. Let players choose their game types so they can adapt unique builds to those game types (e.g. players can utilize the runner sets for flag capturing)
2. 4V4V4 is much more fun than 4v4, IMO.
3. You can already adapt unique builds to certain game types with the 90 second prep time before BG start. But yea, choosing game types could be cool.
Yeah, I mean i see how its an interesting game mode. 4v4v4. But i prefer a more raw, balanced game mode. I guess I'm in the minority.
There's a lot of cliquish stuff that goes on in game. All it takes if for your group to run into a group of 4 people who know the other 4 people, and then you're immediately outnumbered.
0 -
BigES✭✭✭✭✭
4v4v4 is often more balanced than 4v4. In 4v4 there is always one team that is better than the other. In 4v4v4 the two lesser teams can compensate by both being able to pressure the leading team. It's the entire premise for 3 faction pvpThe_Outsider wrote: »2. It should have never been 4v4v4. Grouping is problematic enough. 4v4 is more fair, and grouping would be smoother and easier.
3. Let players choose their game types so they can adapt unique builds to those game types (e.g. players can utilize the runner sets for flag capturing)
2. 4V4V4 is much more fun than 4v4, IMO.
3. You can already adapt unique builds to certain game types with the 90 second prep time before BG start. But yea, choosing game types could be cool.
Yeah, I mean i see how its an interesting game mode. 4v4v4. But i prefer a more raw, balanced game mode. I guess I'm in the minority.
There's a lot of cliquish stuff that goes on in game. All it takes if for your group to run into a group of 4 people who know the other 4 people, and then you're immediately outnumbered.
Ahhh, the ole' gang up on the skilled players balance. Yes.. Yes... Good (rubbing hand maniacally). Couldn't imagine an ESO game mode without that logic to some extent. Have to ease us into a balanced system. Its like a plane coming in for a landing.0 -
Koensol✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
Good argument, I suppose... Anyway I'd take 4v4v4 any day of the weak over a 4v4 where one team has no chance AT ALL. I've had my fair share of that in other MMO's.
4v4v4 is often more balanced than 4v4. In 4v4 there is always one team that is better than the other. In 4v4v4 the two lesser teams can compensate by both being able to pressure the leading team. It's the entire premise for 3 faction pvpThe_Outsider wrote: »2. It should have never been 4v4v4. Grouping is problematic enough. 4v4 is more fair, and grouping would be smoother and easier.
3. Let players choose their game types so they can adapt unique builds to those game types (e.g. players can utilize the runner sets for flag capturing)
2. 4V4V4 is much more fun than 4v4, IMO.
3. You can already adapt unique builds to certain game types with the 90 second prep time before BG start. But yea, choosing game types could be cool.
Yeah, I mean i see how its an interesting game mode. 4v4v4. But i prefer a more raw, balanced game mode. I guess I'm in the minority.
There's a lot of cliquish stuff that goes on in game. All it takes if for your group to run into a group of 4 people who know the other 4 people, and then you're immediately outnumbered.
Ahhh, the ole' gang up on the skilled players balance. Yes.. Yes... Good (rubbing hand maniacally). Couldn't imagine an ESO game mode without that logic to some extent. Have to ease us into a balanced system. Its like a plane coming in for a landing.
0 -
BigES✭✭✭✭✭
Good argument, I suppose... Anyway I'd take 4v4v4 any day of the weak over a 4v4 where one team has no chance AT ALL. I've had my fair share of that in other MMO's.
4v4v4 is often more balanced than 4v4. In 4v4 there is always one team that is better than the other. In 4v4v4 the two lesser teams can compensate by both being able to pressure the leading team. It's the entire premise for 3 faction pvpThe_Outsider wrote: »2. It should have never been 4v4v4. Grouping is problematic enough. 4v4 is more fair, and grouping would be smoother and easier.
3. Let players choose their game types so they can adapt unique builds to those game types (e.g. players can utilize the runner sets for flag capturing)
2. 4V4V4 is much more fun than 4v4, IMO.
3. You can already adapt unique builds to certain game types with the 90 second prep time before BG start. But yea, choosing game types could be cool.
Yeah, I mean i see how its an interesting game mode. 4v4v4. But i prefer a more raw, balanced game mode. I guess I'm in the minority.
There's a lot of cliquish stuff that goes on in game. All it takes if for your group to run into a group of 4 people who know the other 4 people, and then you're immediately outnumbered.
Ahhh, the ole' gang up on the skilled players balance. Yes.. Yes... Good (rubbing hand maniacally). Couldn't imagine an ESO game mode without that logic to some extent. Have to ease us into a balanced system. Its like a plane coming in for a landing.
Yeah, I get that. Its unique.
Anyways my major concerns are 1 and 3 for the most part. I can live with 4v4v4 if the community really likes it.
0 -
Magdalina✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Well it's almost never 4v4v4 anyway
Much more frequently it's 2v3v4 or 2v2v2 or something 
That aside I really wish we could choose modes. Also really really wish we could choose number of people, but suppose that'd enlarge the queue. Also would be really nice to be able to queue full premades - choosing both your team and enemies' teams. That one would be fun as a two sided battle too. Probably never gonna happen but a girl can dream
1
