Update on LFG System

Ashtaris

Defilted wrote: »

So ZOS communicates something to us and the first comments are all insults. Players ask over and over again for more communication. Why would they when people make crappy statements as soon as it happens.

You misunderstand. We appreciate the communications, we really do. But whenever the communication is the same story told almost since launch and yet nothing ever gets really fixed with the LFG tool, you tend to get a bit cynical. I wish I could get excited and say “Hooray!, the LFG tool is being fixed!!”, but I find it hard to do so

Rozyn

I have played this game with friends off and on since beta, and this has continued to be the reason we stop playing. This is an MMO, it's an online game, having a functioning LFG tool is essential. If you can't handle that, make it so that the queue rewards can at least be picked up from a questgiver and we'll form our own pre-mades and manually enter the dungeons. My husband has been trying to run his daily to level his new necro that he just bought the expansion for and he's just given up on that nice boost of xp and fun. It kills our desire to play, much less subscribe. Even when we have 3/4 people ready to go, we can't depend on the queue working. Sorry if we don't feel like spending 10 minutes clicking a button repeatedly to even get in the queue to then wait some more.

I basically asked my friends and spouse to start playing this game, enjoy the expansion together, and now I feel bad having them shell out money for a game that's STILL BROKEN with the same issues we ran into years ago! If I'm embarrassed by this, ZOS should be downright ashamed.

Giraffon

Please add Trials functionality to Group Finder. Like any PUG, some are going to fail, but think this function needs to be there.

CaffeinatedMayhem

Thank you for the clear communication.

Blinkin8r

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

We do want to note this isn’t a hardware issue, but is tied to server load; the more people that try to use it, the less stable it becomes, which is counterintuitive to how it should be functioning.

I don't know much about servers and am definitely no IT nerd. But if your server can't handle the load... does that not mean you need better hardware? I'm sure the coding for the lfg tool is absolute dookey as well though so I feel for whoever is gonna lead re-building this thing and look forward to all the hilarious game breaking bugs they introduce in the process.

PocketAces13xb

What a joke. You guys have such potential in front of you but can't figure out how to do it right. Fire the people that can't do their jobs and hire people who can.

everlastingodeb17_ESO

PocketAces13xb wrote: »

What a joke. You guys have such potential in front of you but can't figure out how to do it right. Fire the people that can't do their jobs and hire people who can.

I believe they have capable people, the problem lies somewhere between Matt Frior and the investors, they don't want to put the money needed to adress the ongoing problems, they rathet drink pinacoladas under the caribbean sun.

Cążki

in big wide


1.Battlegrounds

split to random and team

-random group off
-team group on

for each category rating system which will swap together players or teams on same level

-make BG tournamnets

-make more BG maps or give to players ability to creating maps !

-make kind of 5 mins option to reenter to BG after bug or dc !


2. Group forming and entering

-when team is 1/4,2/4.3/4 or 4/4 no matter how big, just one click to find team or dungeon. no need to click 999+times to enter to dungeon like "somenone deciline invitations bug"


3. Referesh and delete AF bugs

-group forming bugs like sometimes even team is 4/4 sometimes game only tp 3/4 players to bg or dg
-100% bug there - when team is 4/4 and already all click "f" to find Battlegroud match if someone teleports to other city when system is finding match this person stays in this city and rest of group is teleported to battleground with out this person


x.why not make raid finder ?

to be continued...

FangOfTheTwoMoons

You would think with all the people leaving WoW and coming here ZoS would focus all their recourses into fixing this problem and creating a polished game for newer players to enjoy so they stay. The investors probably don't care. Just have people join during the new expansion with all the hype.

Spend stuff on fancy crown store stuff.
Leave cause servers are bad.
Server population is back to "normal."
Long term invested players stay.
Cycle continues all the while promises are being made by some poor schmuck who's gotta fall on their own sword.

ClawOfTheTwoMoons

Giraffon wrote: »

Please add Trials functionality to Group Finder. Like any PUG, some are going to fail, but think this function needs to be there.

This. Also for stuff like Dragon Star.

Sergykid

vgabor wrote: »

I hope you guys considered the potential dead-lock situations in the dungeon queue with this: When the queue full no new tank will be able to enqueue and if there is no tank at that point already in the queue then the queue not getting shorter and unlocked.

i'm sure they capped the queue based on roles, a cap for who joins as tank, a cap for who joins as healer, a cap for who joins as dd

Sergykid

in a way, i am glad that so many people play dungeons that it flooded the queue. Does this mean a large number of players or a very weak queue system?

RMerlin

Blinkin8r wrote: »

I don't know much about servers and am definitely no IT nerd. But if your server can't handle the load... does that not mean you need better hardware?

Depends how the code is designed. Badly written code might possibly be unusable unless you had a CPU that won't exist for the next 5 years, as the CPU requirement can start to grow exponentially as more entries are made in the queue.

I have a feeling that a lot of (hopefully former and no longer currently employed!) programmers at ZOS are truly horrible at writing code that scales properly as the number of users increases. When the CPU requirement increases linearly (with well written code), then yes, a server upgrade can resolve issues. But when it grows exponentially, you'd need a time traveling machine to find the hardware that can handle it.

Also, some of the bugs can be related to the original code having a fixed limit of allowed entries in the queue. When the queue is filled or you run out of space, then the queue starts to fail working properly. That might be why we are getting spammed with "someone has rejected the check" errors rather than simply having the queue work more slowly.

All of this is just speculation based on my own knowledge on software engineering tho, I don't know if these are the actual issues ZOS are faced with. Just wanted to point out that yes, there can be a scenario where a hardware upgrade cannot help with badly written code that fails to handle a large number of entries.

daedalusAI

In essence ZOS is lying to their paying customers that "They will really fix it", but I've been reading the same thing with similar wording when I left ESO 2 years ago.

Delparis

Compared to FF14 who they add new servers to improve the game
https://fr.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodestone/topics/detail/90fa177bec19ccc468d6ec94a1980b38456abf54

Zenimax don't care about players they only care about cash and as Todd Howard said 10:20

https://youtu.be/PMYUeB9xUvw?t=618

Cążki

Delparis wrote: »

Compared to FF14 who they add new servers to improve the game
https://fr.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodestone/topics/detail/90fa177bec19ccc468d6ec94a1980b38456abf54

Zenimax don't care about players they only care about cash and as Todd Howard said 10:20

https://youtu.be/PMYUeB9xUvw?t=618

10:20

muahahhahahahhahahahhaaa

Zorgon_The_Revenged

Delparis wrote: »

Compared to FF14 who they add new servers to improve the game
https://fr.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodestone/topics/detail/90fa177bec19ccc468d6ec94a1980b38456abf54

Well I didn't play much in the first week of their last update, "Stormblood", so can't comment on actual server performance (ESO is the worst performing MMO I've played amongst its competitors).
Then again, I was mostly stuck in a 3000+ queue for the first week, 1400+ for the second week and 300+ for a week or two after that.

Delparis

Zorgon_The_Revenged wrote: »

Delparis wrote: »

Compared to FF14 who they add new servers to improve the game
https://fr.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodestone/topics/detail/90fa177bec19ccc468d6ec94a1980b38456abf54

Well I didn't play much in the first week of their last update, "Stormblood", so can't comment on actual server performance (ESO is the worst performing MMO I've played amongst its competitors).
Then again, I was mostly stuck in a 3000+ queue for the first week, 1400+ for the second week and 300+ for a week or two after that.

I'm playing ESO and FF14 atm.

Being in queue for about 20 min now. I've already finished my FF14 daily dungeon

Weper

Great news!
Can you guys also make a Premade Group Finder like in WoW? It would be cool.

What is a Premade Group Finder? You can make a dedicated group, you can give it a name, you can decide if someone joins to your group or not. And you can also join to those groups. (Sorry for my English.)

Delparis

Weper wrote: »

Great news!
Can you guys also make a Premade Group Finder like in WoW? It would be cool.

What is a Premade Group Finder? You can make a dedicated group, you can give it a name, you can decide if someone joins to your group or not. And you can also join to those groups. (Sorry for my English.)

Dude looks like you just landed on this forum. Don't expect any change or improvement. It's been for years that this BS is on and will continue many other years since players pay for the BS that Zenimax sell.

duncan_cougarpreeb18_ESO

duncan_cougarpreeb18_ESO wrote: »

As counterintuitive as it might seem, if the LFG system has issues when there are too many players available, it seems that the problem has more to do with it trying to find the 'perfect match' instead of just any match and/or bad programming.

Let's put some numbers to that above statement (no idea if that is the real problem, just a guess here):

If we call T the number of tanks in the queue, H the number of healers and D the number of DPS, if the server tries to match all of them up by considering each and every combination then it needs to perform T*H*D*(D-1) matching operations (MOP)

That sort of thing can become a serious issue for any type of hardware (cause it is bad programming or an ill stated problem)
Let's say your H/W can do 10000 MOP/S: With 5 Tanks, 10 Healers and 20 DPS in the queue you are done in about 1.9 seconds. With 50, 100 and 200 however, that perfect match making - and for just one group! - will take 19'900 seconds!

Clearly that sort of thing is bad no matter the H/W. Your problem can grow faster than your H/W could ever hope for.

Now here a suggestion how to improve that (even if above example is not the actual problem, something like that is clearly wrong with the current system), i.e. make that above problem into a linear one, e.g. by finding a good (enough) match but maybe not the perfect one.

(1) Ensure that folks grouping for a specific role actually meet the minimal prerequisite of that role: i.e. a Tank should have at least one taunt ability slotted, a Healer should have at least one ability slotted, which can heal others.

Sure for optimal set-ups, you really want more 'dedication', but in the end it really is up to the players "how they wanna play" and if they can complete the content by just light attacking, who cares. If they can't, they can be educated by the other group members (which will be good for everyone in the long run) or kicked.
On a side note: this also allows for pre-made 4"D" groups. Just have one slot a taunt, another a heal others and you are ready to queue (and can naturally slot something else once you are in the dungeon)

For the implementation, if someone queues for T or H without meeting the absolute minimum pre-requisite: decline the queuing and provide some information why


(2) Filter for T, H and D, which dungeons they are eligible for.
This is already done for the non-vet dungeons and low(er) level players, however at least one additional rules should apply, i.e. you need to have done the content on non-vet at least once, before even being (able to) queue for the vet content.
This is to ensure that folks on vet have a basic understanding of the content and know (some of) the basic mechanics already.
Even if you have done this hundred times on another character unless your new character is a 1:1 copy, some things will be different in play-style and doing ONE non-vet run before going to vet should be a non-issue, really.

It might also be worthwhile to have some of the harder veteran dungeons only unlock after having achieved some general achievements, like Dungeon Blocker/Marauder/Healer to be achieved before being able to run vet for those dungeons given by Glirion the Redbeard, and Greater Dungeon Blocker/Marauder/Healer required for those dungeons given by Urgarlag to become available in veteran. Obviously, non-vet is open for all veterans.
This mostly to ensure that folks which have fast-tracked an alt to level 50, can't just jump into any of the harder vet dungeons without having the basic skills leveled as well and/or the skill points spent or even skill lines unlocked.


(3) Availability of hard-mode: Only those who have completed the 'normal vet mode' at least once, should be eligible to activate hard mode in veteran content. (So if they got a great group, they can do it even the first time around for some of them, but not accidentally with a group that already struggled with fighting the trash mobs before, because someone just wanted to read 'that' book, whatever )

For some (if not all) dungeons, it might be even an idea to lock this behind further requirements, like having unlocked certain achievements for that specific dungeon (slayer, i.e. having done this a couple of times / lots of times already, or speed challenge for D's, i.e. having the DPS to do this quickly in non-hard mode, come to mind), as well as any who have done it already once in hard-mode (death challenge completed).


All of this would just improve the in-game experience of running the dungeons, once you are there, but not solve the issue of getting there. This needs a bit of behind the scenes implementation, i.e. think "Tetris" with blue and green squares (T & H) and red L's (D) forming a line on a match. The idea is to match up quickly and make room for new blocks coming in, fast!
and that for each individual dungeon (aka simultaneous multi-screen Tetris)

• Implement dedicated 'consumer' queues for each dungeon instance (non-vet, vet).
• Implement dedicated 'provider' queues for T, H, and Ds
• On enlist and with (1) checked, place T, H, and Ds in their respective queue and set a timer (max waiting time, like 1 min)
• With (2) implemented, place each T, H, and D 'on enlist' into whichever dungeon queue they are eligible for or opted for, i.e. those who queue for specific dungeons only end up in those queues.
• Now starting from the actual dailies and then from hardest to easiest dungeon loop through the list of dungeons
• Pick T, H, and 2 Ds, remove their listing from all the other dungeons (easily implemented with pointer lists) and send the group into this dungeon. Prefer pre-made groups (instant sent) or semi-groups, pick a missing role from the respective queue.
• If no group is available due to complete lack of eligible players go to the next dungeon
• If more than one T or one H or two Ds are available, try to pick a valid "good enough" combination, prefer those who have waited longest.

The goal of this good enough combination should be that only a minimum amount of inexperienced players, i.e. those who haven't done this content before, is placed into any group if possible.

For the good enough combination one could implement something like the following merit function

• 0 points if never done it before (inexperienced)
• 1 point if completed already at least once (casual)
• 1.5 points if completed veteran in hard mode at least once (experienced)
• when evaluating the merit function for each player add (waited/60 seconds) points, but limited to +1 if longer than 60s

A group is valid if merit function is > 3. If current pick is not valid, move to next available player in the queues (..., H, D, T, D, ... )

With let's say a normal setting 1 experienced, 2 casuals and 1 inexperienced, that group is good to go (3.5) right away, the same for 4 casuals (4). With 3 casuals and 1 inexperienced, they are good to go after 25 seconds of waiting (each)
If there are only inexperienced around, like e.g. with a new dungeon, they are still good to go after 1 minute of waiting (each)
If three inexperienced are waiting, they can only be grouped if at least one casual joins and they waited for 1 minute or longer. The wait can be shorter if an experienced player joins / is available. It still can be very long if no players are available at all though.

All of this can be done fast and in linear time (loop through dungeon queue, with a loop through enqueued available players for each dungeon, which will be removed from queue if a match is found)

This is just a suggestion, so certainly other different implementations are possible.

Another point to add: In case only DPS but no healers or tanks are available (or any similar situation, only healers, etc.) it might be worthwhile to add a notification like: missing healer / tank / DPS to make a decent group for this dungeon, please consider changing your skill and setup to ...
Bonus point for just sending that message only to those DPS in heavy armor (for tanks) and DPS with area heals, that queued as DPS anyway, etc.

Bevik

Don't even think doing a new GF tool without adding trials, arenas and PvP to it.

Delparis

I'm sure this won't happen, we'll never get a fix for this queue issue.

Why ? because Zenimax is not able to fix it. They clearely lack the programmation skills needed for that.

So till an average dev shows up and fix this, Zenimax will continue its mediocrity

Navras

Sergykid wrote: »

i'm sure they capped the queue based on roles, a cap for who joins as tank, a cap for who joins as healer, a cap for who joins as dd

I'm very sure they didn't. During peak hours I always get the message even if I'm queueing with my tank. Then I'll instantly get into a group as soon as I pass the "Cannot queue at this time" stage. It makes me think the actual "Queue of the queue" is based on overall numbers more than roles

D0PAMINE

1. @ZOS_GinaBruno Thank you for the post. You are very sweet and relay as much info as you are allowed to.
2. I don't expect LFG to ever improve without rebuilding the game to fix the other issues as well.
3. I hope I am wrong.

JiDul

But if too many people are in queue then why do battlegrounds matches start with teams like 2v3v4?

npuk

Players should be removed from the LFG queue when they travel (wayshrine/tp) or while they are dueling.

Also, there is a really frustrating bug where when a group completes a final boss and someone leaves the group they can then re-queue and if you are unlucky enough to be put in one of these groups you then have to way 13mins before you can queue again, I waisted a fair few 150% xp scrolls leveling up my necro last week because of this.

Jayman1000

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

When you see the message that you’re unable to queue, please just keep trying until you enter the queue...

Why do WE need to keep trying? Why cant the game simply automatically "keep trying" on our behalf? Why does it need to throw us this crap "unable to" and then we have to sit and keep clicking join.... It should be such a simple thing for you to just program our game to click that join button for us until we join.

teladoy

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

When you see the message that you’re unable to queue, please just keep trying until you enter the queue. We understand this situation is far from ideal, but it does at least cycle people through the

Thanks GOD I stop playing this game. This people don't feel ashamed anymore

Evito

ZOS: "We can't promise we'll try, but we'll try to try".