PTS Update 25 - Feedback Thread for Battlegrounds Solo Queuing

wylievc

Merge solo/duo queue together and merge 3/4 person groups into another queue. Implement backend logic to pair those two with eachother. Leave the queue button the same. Now you have priority to group against similar sized groups when you click play.

I am very disappointed in the proposed change. You should be able to play with your friend(s) in an online game.

Melivar

As a predominantly solo player and mostly forum lurker myself I can see both sides of the discussions. In the end the best thing would certainly be to have a multi que option so everyone can be happy.

The logistics and complications to that system may be extremely difficult to implement or just not feasible due to numbers of players. Only ZOS really has that information and we can all debate our individual or groups stance until we are blue in the face but that won't change. Healthy debate and feedback should still continue either way.

I think the biggest issue we players particularly normal forum uses face is we see a lot of people with the same or opposing view point as us but in the end that is still an extremely low end of the game population as a whole. The typical poll on this forum will have 100 votes on the small side and perhaps around 1000 votes on the upper end of the average. When I watched the Dark Heart of Skyrim reveal event on twitch there were 60,000 plus viewers for NA alone based on the viewer count. If only 5% of those people have sent in an in game complaint or question that's potentially 3x more than the number of people regularly looking/using the forums for data.

My personal experience from BG's is likely someplace in the middle. I play them almost daily on at least one character for the bonus XP and skill point gain for getting my CP up to 810, so while winning is always more fun even if my team is second I still accomplish my goals and at best that normally takes 2-3 games but more often than not with the 1st BG. Deathmatch games are always the worst for meeting that end goal particularly when you have a premade group on the other end or just an extremely good 1v xer.

Now the best games are the ones that are extremely close across the board and when I get a BG like that I am very likely to just que right back up for another even when my team finishes 1st or 2nd and I have gotten my bonus XP as the experience was great. Now if it is game that's is completely lopsided and I feel like I am simply wasting my time jumping off the respawn zone I might simply not even try a BG for a few days. if this happens again when I do try the next time might be a few more though I always do come back because the bonus XP is just to great to pass up. Once that goal of 810 CP is achieved after a few bad days I might just not come back who knows. Most long time players are likely in this 810CP + category as I have been here just over a year with this being my primary game for about 8 months.

Whether this change ultimately makes BG's more fun as there are way more close exciting games or not remains to be seen but as they said it is an experiment. While it would most definitely suck to be someone who has a particular person they played with every day if this experiment, ultimately brings more people into or back into BG's then it allows ZOS to consider putting fourth more resources to open more options for different ques as have been discussed.

Perhaps it even leads to the option of more maps or game types if the percentage of players increases enough.

Olupajmibanan

Melivar wrote: »

Whether this change ultimately makes BG's more fun as there are way more close exciting games or not remains to be seen but as they said it is an experiment. While it would most definitely suck to be someone who has a particular person they played with every day if this experiment, ultimately brings more people into or back into BG's then it allows ZOS to consider putting fourth more resources to open more options for different ques as have been discussed.

Perhaps it even leads to the option of more maps or game types if the percentage of players increases enough.

My guess is that more players (particulary the pairs) stop playing BGs entirely. It is true that old soloists and possibly some new players come, but it is up to wind if this will be enough to surpass the loss of all these pairs. The more of us stop playing, the sooner this experiment ends.

precambria

It's a MMO there should be grouping, most people solo Q anyway for me that is half the fun seeing who I get and if my build is adaptable, BUT there should be a premade vs premade division I see no reason why not it adds so much to group comp builds ect the whole game is pretty much balanced around that, you already know what is going to happen to support players when this goes live... It's going to be triggering to have to play with low MMR people who think it's OK to RP as a sneeeky assassin in a BG where your team relies on you.

Lucious90

Ive been roughed up by premades and Ive roughed up pugs.

Punishing premades because people refuse (by this point in time its not inability) to group up in a grouped aspec of the game is not right.

Someone said it a page or 2 back, pvp is about the tactics and skill of your comp. It doesnt solve anything and will still outline an underlining factor. I make a tanky build that can 1vX you have people that can do it as we all have seen the videos, you're going to get the same results as now but this time its going to be the guy with the tankiest build leading the BG. welcome to 1 build meta.

A better solution which has been pretty much implemented since launch:
2 different ques
ranked and unranked. Unranked is per usual, no premade groups same awards etc. ranked is premades only with the tiered reward system similar to Cyrodiil. So you could make 7 day or 30 day seasons and reward gold, motifs, pvp sets etc based on your tier. Even make it the same drops you get from Cyro.

Now a few general changes I would actually make to the BG regardless. I'd get rid of the 4v4v4. Make it either 4v4 or 5v5. this should actually cut down on the matchmaking time. Dont worry about roles in terms of match making especially in Solo ques as I foresee people building more rounded kits vs a premade group that can be more focused. id adjust MM to group according to MMR within a certain % so teams are more evenly matched based off MMR. Id toy around with set Arena teams in group premades that give a collective MMR to the team for placement and awards. Do 1k gold buy in for a team for a season. For solo ques you can have BG dailies, Kill x players, cap x flags, do x damage etc.

My last jab, for those who keep crying about level playing field, the only way to acheive a 'level playing field' is to disable your stats and set bonus while in BGs and I dont want or advocate for that lol

Karmanorway

Great change ive waited for this a long time. But i suggest one more queue for group vs group since some ppl want to play with their friends ☺️

A lot of my friends will come back for this, finally No more getting chased away from BGs because of premades! 🖤

mav1234

Karmanorway wrote: »

Great change ive waited for this a long time. But i suggest one more queue for group vs group since some ppl want to play with their friends ☺️

A lot of my friends will come back for this, finally No more getting chased away from BGs because of premades! 🖤

There are times I like solo queuing... and times I like group queuing. I don't begrudge people that want to solo queue, and I understand it can be frustrating to face organized 4 stacks consistently when you do. I prefer, especially lately in ESO, to play with a friend so I rarely solo queue save to try new builds etc.

But if I am really into a game, I'll solo queue more often, because I'm testing more things etc. So at least for me, this change will drive me away from BGs. I know it will drive away my friends I hve recently gotten into the game, as well. One hasn't even logged in since the PTS since he is used to test server changes in games going live as-is.

[Edited for Quoted Content that has been removed]

MicahMahaffey

Hello ZOS, I appreciate you opening a thread and looking closely at our responses.

I'm new to the Forum, this will be my first ever post.

I joined the Forum because I needed to say something on this matter.

If this goes through, It will be game breaking for me and my fiance.

I'm primarily a solo player in BGs but when she gets on this is our primary outlet.

We've been playing for years and have over 5000 hours in game combined. If this change goes through it'll be the first time we'll be forced to play something else.

We got into ESO to play together, this is an MMO after all. Taking away the ability to queue with friends will be detrimental to the actual communities surrounding BGs as well as the individuals who just like playing with their friends.

Forcing players to solo queue for a group activity is not in the spirit of an MMO.

Cyrodil and imperial city do not offer the experience we've gotten accustomed to and I believe this change will do far worse for BGs than pre mades.

From the perspective of someone who primarily queues solo, pre mades aren't that big of an issue, skilled players and healers are. But that shouldn't be looked at as bad, rather a goal to be reached.

I can't tell you how many times I've been accused of running a pre made just because I'm an above average player.

To close, as a LONG time fan of ESO this will quite literally force me to look somewhere else for the gameplay experience I've gotten used too. Which saddens me, ESO Is my favorite game and I can't imagine I'll stop playing altogether, but for PVP, I'll be forced to move on.

Please consider the harm this causes before pushing it to live.. I wouldn't even mind sitting in a longer group queue. But pushing solo only will immediately kill my favorite aspect of the game. An entire patch cycle is way too long.

I feel this change only applies to those that don't play battlegrounds that often. I do not believe this change would result in more players but would instead have an adverse effect.

Thank you for listening and hearing us all out.

Pdoherty4637_ESO

I agree with all the points @mav1234 has brought up in this post and in other similar threads. Literally all of my time in this game is dedicated to playing battlegrounds. I only play PVE to farm gear from dungeons or arenas to use in BGs, I go into the imperial city to get alchemy resources to fuel my time in BGs, I have maintained ESO+ subscriptioin for the benefits to accomodate my 14 character's storage needs and gain access to DLC sets that are fun to use in BGs. Me and my 2 friends from university have been playing this game since beta and now live thousands of miles apart, and playing casual BGs is how we stay in contact and socialize, and generally we only have a few spare hours a week, and its usually difficult to have all 3 of us on at once so most of the time I duo queue. I play solo semi-often when they are not available, to test new builds or changes to builds after a patch change, but my primary reason I log on is to duo and occasionaly trio-queue for battlegrounds.

I am certainly not unique in this regard. I have seen many posts accross reddit, facebook, twitter, and the official forums all from players who just want to play casually in PVP with their friends, roomates, husband, wife, or guildmates in a semi-balanced PVP environment and that is the only reason some of them even play the game.

At the bare minimum I think duo queues should be implemented this patch instead of strictly solo queue. I have seen it suggested that seperate queues may be too difficult to build into the game (from a development standpoint) within the allotted PTS cycle timeframe. However, going forward there really should be a seperated solo queue from group queue. If both of my friends are on and I need to manually find a 4th player to queue for "4-man only" matches through guilds, friends list, or even zone chat, thats perfectly fine by me, and would encourage more community engagement.

tarbrys

Gravord
January 21 edited January 21 in General ESO Discussion

3 types of q for Battlegrounds:
1. Solo q only, fast matches
2. Any group size q, slightly slower matches, teams of 2-3-4 take priority and solo players filling up the gaps to complete full 4 man setup
3. Premade vs premade in 4vs4 arena, deathmatch only. Slowest pop rate but highest competition level. Could be additionally implemented with option of guild vs guild challenge as many other games have.

Solo player you can q for nr 1 or 2 or both to speed up your q.
Group of 2-3 can choose only option 2.
Full premade option 2 and 3.

Simple, effective, not penalizing ppl putting effort to organize themselves in a frikin multiplayer game yet giving solo q fair playing field.

“Quote”

ChunkyCat

if you people would just stop having friends, this new solo BG queue wouldn’t be such a big deal

Baharoth77

Well I am not subbed any more, but my friends were talking about coming back to duo and trio que bgs. I completely disagree with making solo que the only option for bgs in an MMO. This is a horrid idea.

ecru

Woodoochill wrote: »

ecru wrote: »

The third team is and always will be the problem, not premades. Three teams exacerbates every single possible issue with matchmaking to a much greater extent than two because the most skilled team always has the potential advantage of using a third team to turn every pvp situation into a numbers advantage for them.

This is not going to bring players back or encourage people to queue more. Players don't queue for BGs because they aren't fun, not because they lose to premades. Most people don't care if they lose if they have fun. Most players don't have fun getting rear-ended while in an even fight. I've never, ever seen any MMO outright ban all premades, even duos. This is a first, and the major difference here between ESO and every other MMO is the third team. Three teams leads to messy, directionless, disorganized matches where you're either outnumbered, outnumbering your opponents, or ignoring pvp altogether to do objectives while the other two teams pvp. None of these scenarios have any sort of direct appeal to players.

Winning doesn't feel good, because you probably did it by taking advantage of superior numbers by rear-ending another team, stealing kills, or standing on a flag while everyone else did some pvp. Losing especially doesn't feel good because you often lose when people steal your kills, or when you decide to pvp, which you're penalized for because the third team is then allowed to take objectives without any sort of confrontation. It sucks and it isn't fun. You don't ever win by directly engaging in pvp, you win by waiting to jump someone about to die, or avoiding pvp as much as you possibly can.

No matter what balance changes or changes to queueing are made, the third team will always make BGs a miserable gameplay experience for just about everyone involved. Scrap the whole system and just copy WoW or Rift and implement normal 8v8 BGs with bigger maps and no deathmatch. Make the max premade group size 4, match premade groups up against premade groups with pugs on both sides, and you'll finally have (mostly) balanced, fun pvp.

Minyassa wrote: »

"Pre-mades vs pugs" is all on the pugs. Entirely on them. There is *nothing* stopping you from going and getting three other people and forming a pre-made yourself, except just plain not being willing to go to the effort. People shouldn't expect standards to be lowered to accommodate their own lack of motivation. This is just "we want everything to be free and easy" with a different mask on.

ESO would be the outlier here, since basically every game in existence doesn't allow you to form a full premade and queue up against pugs. Why? Because while people don't mind losing half the time (as is the outcome of most matchmaking systems), they do mind not having a chance to win at all. Implementing the requirement that you get three of your friends in voice chat to have any chance of enjoying an instanced match is the quickest way to make sure just about everyone stops queueing for those matches. People who want to pvp in an organized premade are 1% of the player base. The players you think want everything to be "free and easy" are the other 99%, and they're the ones who make the game possible in the first place.

Of course when you rush in to 8 players you die. This 3 team is about using your brain just as your hand to press keys. If you overextend, you die, If you hide and wait, you will lose for being uneffective. This 3 team fights are like deadly tango, you move forward, other team moves back, 3rd team moves sideways, to later attack your back so you change your focus to them, then 2nd team moves forward pushing you back and turning 3rd team to them... This is not some coded PVE where you can turn your brain off. If you personaly die to situations like you described than its bad news for you - lack of positional awareness and lack of planning.

When you keep being attacked from both sides you and only you is the cause of such situations since it can be prevented in almost any cases.

And it also fullfills the initial trailer of 3 aliance heros waiting for other 2 to make the first move so they can exploit it.

I can't make much sense of this post. Is the suggestion you're making here that you don't have to use your brain to pvp against one team? I suppose every other game in existence, which has only one team against one other team, is uh.. brainless and simple, because there's no third team? That BGs in ESO have created some sort of pvp situation never before realized in every other game by putting a third team in an instanced match? Think about this for awhile and get back to me with your thoughts. Maybe you can explain how BGs in ESO require more strategy and thought than something like OWL or ranked in WoW, with it's hilariously easy, brainless two team system.

I have to admit, strategies such as, "wait until the other two teams are pvping and then go stand on a flag" are quite deep and require a lot of thinking outside the box. The same goes for the "wait until the other two teams are pvping and then spam mage's wrath on the person with the lowest health". Again, very deep strategy there. My favorite though is the "wait until the other two teams are pvping, and then grab the relic from one of those two teams". It took me months to figure that one out.

Mojomonkeyman

@Alcast
You are applying a lot of double standards here. How long would Hodor continue to exist if trials were soloQ only? Would they survive the 3 months "experiment" with maximum insecurity for future plans? I'd bet you would be pushing a very different agenda if your content was on the line. You are coming from a very privileged position, your group content is not in danger AND you have your personal social bubble via stream.

@mursie
Similar issue like Alcast, I feel you are pushing your personal agenda a lot more than being focused on the overall well-being of the BG communities. You stated several times on your stream that the social factor of streaming - to share YOUR gameplay experience with somewhat like-minded individuals, to talk to them, etc. - is one of the main factors motivating you to still play. The average non-streaming (BG-) player gets all of that interaction via grouping and chatting with friends, making builds together, testing them in team envrionment and so on, all of that via ingame tools.
You are not losing much when the "experiment" will go live. Most of us bg-enthusiasts lose our entire, naturally grown ecosystem. We are losing the social aspect that motivated us to keep playing.

@ZOS
It is very concerning that you are showing a trend of creating barriers, implementing systems that promote exclusion instead of being inclusive. Faction lock is one example, your current experiment the newest example.
Are you aware of the social impact your experiment will have? Are you aware that there are bg guilds dedicated to grouping up against and with each other with way more than 100 members? Those guilds exist on all platforms, include all skill levels and are generally speaking some of the most active, friendly and helpful communities I've experienced in ESO. BGs being group content has a huge social aspect to it, you (ZOS) managed (even with minimal efforts) to create a framework for all sorts of social activities that has naturally evolved to the current state within 3 years (!).

Are you really willing to destroy all that just to push an "experiment"? Are you still wondering why many players feel you are entirely disconnected from the player base? Are you even valueing your communities?

gurgamel

tarbrys wrote: »

Gravord
January 21 edited January 21 in General ESO Discussion

3 types of q for Battlegrounds:
1. Solo q only, fast matches
2. Any group size q, slightly slower matches, teams of 2-3-4 take priority and solo players filling up the gaps to complete full 4 man setup
3. Premade vs premade in 4vs4 arena, deathmatch only. Slowest pop rate but highest competition level. Could be additionally implemented with option of guild vs guild challenge as many other games have.

Solo player you can q for nr 1 or 2 or both to speed up your q.
Group of 2-3 can choose only option 2.
Full premade option 2 and 3.

Simple, effective, not penalizing ppl putting effort to organize themselves in a frikin multiplayer game yet giving solo q fair playing field.

“Quote”

Agreeing here

Olupajmibanan

tarbrys wrote: »

Gravord
January 21 edited January 21 in General ESO Discussion

3 types of q for Battlegrounds:
1. Solo q only, fast matches
2. Any group size q, slightly slower matches, teams of 2-3-4 take priority and solo players filling up the gaps to complete full 4 man setup
3. Premade vs premade in 4vs4 arena, deathmatch only. Slowest pop rate but highest competition level. Could be additionally implemented with option of guild vs guild challenge as many other games have.

Solo player you can q for nr 1 or 2 or both to speed up your q.
Group of 2-3 can choose only option 2.
Full premade option 2 and 3.

Simple, effective, not penalizing ppl putting effort to organize themselves in a frikin multiplayer game yet giving solo q fair playing field.

“Quote”

How do you prevent 4-premade facing two duos or a duo + 2 solos? Because this kind of match will most likely be the very same pugstomp like 4 solos against 4-premade (the reason why all of this madness is happening right now).

gurgamel

Olupajmibanan wrote: »

tarbrys wrote: »

Gravord
January 21 edited January 21 in General ESO Discussion

3 types of q for Battlegrounds:
1. Solo q only, fast matches
2. Any group size q, slightly slower matches, teams of 2-3-4 take priority and solo players filling up the gaps to complete full 4 man setup
3. Premade vs premade in 4vs4 arena, deathmatch only. Slowest pop rate but highest competition level. Could be additionally implemented with option of guild vs guild challenge as many other games have.

Solo player you can q for nr 1 or 2 or both to speed up your q.
Group of 2-3 can choose only option 2.
Full premade option 2 and 3.

Simple, effective, not penalizing ppl putting effort to organize themselves in a frikin multiplayer game yet giving solo q fair playing field.

“Quote”

How do you prevent 4-premade facing two duos or a duo + 2 solos? Because this kind of match will most likely be the very same pugstomp like 4 solos against 4-premade (the reason why all of this madness is happening right now).

"4 mans get prioritized to 4vs4 deathmach which require just 2 teams and have high chance of popping. 4 man vs 2 duos isnt perfect balance but its as close as it gets without insane q times for everyone. Duos vs trios wouldnt be balanced either so you cant make system to please everyone at same time equally. Those duos are allowed to go solo game mode only where they will meet only other solo players if they wish so." //Gravord

Olupajmibanan

gurgamel wrote: »

Olupajmibanan wrote: »

tarbrys wrote: »

Gravord
January 21 edited January 21 in General ESO Discussion

3 types of q for Battlegrounds:
1. Solo q only, fast matches
2. Any group size q, slightly slower matches, teams of 2-3-4 take priority and solo players filling up the gaps to complete full 4 man setup
3. Premade vs premade in 4vs4 arena, deathmatch only. Slowest pop rate but highest competition level. Could be additionally implemented with option of guild vs guild challenge as many other games have.

Solo player you can q for nr 1 or 2 or both to speed up your q.
Group of 2-3 can choose only option 2.
Full premade option 2 and 3.

Simple, effective, not penalizing ppl putting effort to organize themselves in a frikin multiplayer game yet giving solo q fair playing field.

“Quote”

How do you prevent 4-premade facing two duos or a duo + 2 solos? Because this kind of match will most likely be the very same pugstomp like 4 solos against 4-premade (the reason why all of this madness is happening right now).

"4 mans get prioritized to 4vs4 deathmach which require just 2 teams and have high chance of popping. 4 man vs 2 duos isnt perfect balance but its as close as it gets without insane q times for everyone. Duos vs trios wouldnt be balanced either so you cant make system to please everyone at same time equally. Those duos are allowed to go solo game mode only where they will meet only other solo players if they wish so." //Gravord

But wouldn't you agree that 4-premade vs two duos is much more imbalanced than let's say 4 solos against a duo + 2 solos? Hence merging solos and duos into one separate queu is much closer to perfect balance. A restriction added to matchmaking that only one pair can appear in a team at a time would solve everything.

gurgamel

Olupajmibanan wrote: »

gurgamel wrote: »

Olupajmibanan wrote: »

tarbrys wrote: »

Gravord
January 21 edited January 21 in General ESO Discussion

3 types of q for Battlegrounds:
1. Solo q only, fast matches
2. Any group size q, slightly slower matches, teams of 2-3-4 take priority and solo players filling up the gaps to complete full 4 man setup
3. Premade vs premade in 4vs4 arena, deathmatch only. Slowest pop rate but highest competition level. Could be additionally implemented with option of guild vs guild challenge as many other games have.

Solo player you can q for nr 1 or 2 or both to speed up your q.
Group of 2-3 can choose only option 2.
Full premade option 2 and 3.

Simple, effective, not penalizing ppl putting effort to organize themselves in a frikin multiplayer game yet giving solo q fair playing field.

“Quote”

How do you prevent 4-premade facing two duos or a duo + 2 solos? Because this kind of match will most likely be the very same pugstomp like 4 solos against 4-premade (the reason why all of this madness is happening right now).

"4 mans get prioritized to 4vs4 deathmach which require just 2 teams and have high chance of popping. 4 man vs 2 duos isnt perfect balance but its as close as it gets without insane q times for everyone. Duos vs trios wouldnt be balanced either so you cant make system to please everyone at same time equally. Those duos are allowed to go solo game mode only where they will meet only other solo players if they wish so." //Gravord

But wouldn't you agree that 4-premade vs two duos is much more imbalanced than let's say 4 solos against a duo + 2 solos? Hence merging solos and duos into one separate queu is much closer to perfect balance. A restriction added to matchmaking that only one pair can appear in a team at a time would solve everything.

"You need to keep in mind that not any 4 players in q together are actually good and will produce results. Higher quality players can win in strong duo vs 4 ppl quite often. Anyone at any time can solo q vs only other solo q if he wants to, q solo vs any setups, as a filler to 2 man, 3 man, meeting other 2-3-4 man teams. Full 4 man premades will most of time be put into fight vs other 4 man premades, and if they happen to land vs not other full 4 man teams, wasnt whole 3 faction system designed to counter that issue? 2 weaker teams can band up and strike 4 man premade from two sides at same time with not much effort." //Gravord

Olupajmibanan

gurgamel wrote: »

Olupajmibanan wrote: »

gurgamel wrote: »

Olupajmibanan wrote: »

tarbrys wrote: »

Gravord
January 21 edited January 21 in General ESO Discussion

3 types of q for Battlegrounds:
1. Solo q only, fast matches
2. Any group size q, slightly slower matches, teams of 2-3-4 take priority and solo players filling up the gaps to complete full 4 man setup
3. Premade vs premade in 4vs4 arena, deathmatch only. Slowest pop rate but highest competition level. Could be additionally implemented with option of guild vs guild challenge as many other games have.

Solo player you can q for nr 1 or 2 or both to speed up your q.
Group of 2-3 can choose only option 2.
Full premade option 2 and 3.

Simple, effective, not penalizing ppl putting effort to organize themselves in a frikin multiplayer game yet giving solo q fair playing field.

“Quote”

How do you prevent 4-premade facing two duos or a duo + 2 solos? Because this kind of match will most likely be the very same pugstomp like 4 solos against 4-premade (the reason why all of this madness is happening right now).

"4 mans get prioritized to 4vs4 deathmach which require just 2 teams and have high chance of popping. 4 man vs 2 duos isnt perfect balance but its as close as it gets without insane q times for everyone. Duos vs trios wouldnt be balanced either so you cant make system to please everyone at same time equally. Those duos are allowed to go solo game mode only where they will meet only other solo players if they wish so." //Gravord

But wouldn't you agree that 4-premade vs two duos is much more imbalanced than let's say 4 solos against a duo + 2 solos? Hence merging solos and duos into one separate queu is much closer to perfect balance. A restriction added to matchmaking that only one pair can appear in a team at a time would solve everything.

"You need to keep in mind that not any 4 players in q together are actually good and will produce results. Higher quality players can win in strong duo vs 4 ppl quite often. Anyone at any time can solo q vs only other solo q if he wants to, q solo vs any setups, as a filler to 2 man, 3 man, meeting other 2-3-4 man teams. Full 4 man premades will most of time be put into fight vs other 4 man premades, and if they happen to land vs not other full 4 man teams, wasnt whole 3 faction system designed to counter that issue? 2 weaker teams can band up and strike 4 man premade from two sides at same time with not much effort." //Gravord

Differing opinions but we can both agree (and a lot of us are with us) that solo queue as the only option isn't acceptable even as a temporary experiment and shouldn't make it to live.

gurgamel

I understand the need for a reset with a new horizon (feel bad for beginers starting over with pros) but i feel like the pvp is not taken seriously, surely pvp is to kill other players and feel good about it, and of course with that we want a ranked system to se how good at it we are.

Love the battlegrounds and how the different modes and maps make different char good and bad. I think all we need is what we had, normal queing, with friends or not does not matter NORMAL QUE based only on group mmr (from every member of party or queing individual). An mmr based on performance that goes up and down to help match players right, basic.

Then a ranked mode with two sepperate ques and seperate "ranked mmr", based soley on ones competetiv rank match togheter as closy as possible, party members can expand gap. First is just basic solo que possible with one party member. Second is Group que for partys of 2 and 4 (sry 3 guys).
Personaly i think competetvi should have all the maps and game mods at random like normal que just to give it more depth.

Wish list!
1. ranked que solo /dou, own seperet visibly mmr
2. ranked group que /partys of 2 or 4), another own seperet visbly mmr.

gurgamel

gurgamel wrote: »

I understand the need for a reset with a new horizon (feel bad for beginers starting over with pros) but i feel like the pvp is not taken seriously, surely pvp is to kill other players and feel good about it, and of course with that we want a ranked system to se how good at it we are.

Love the battlegrounds and how the different modes and maps make different char good and bad. I think all we need is what we had, normal queing, with friends or not does not matter NORMAL QUE based only on group mmr (from every member of party or queing individual). An mmr based on performance that goes up and down to help match players right, basic.

Then a ranked mode with two sepperate ques and seperate "ranked mmr", based soley on ones competetiv rank match togheter as closy as possible, party members can expand gap. First is just basic solo que possible with one party member. Second is Group que for partys of 2 and 4 (sry 3 guys).
Personaly i think competetvi should have all the maps and game mods at random like normal que just to give it more depth.

Wish list!
1. ranked que solo /dou, own seperet visibly mmr
2. ranked group que /partys of 2 or 4), another own seperet visbly mmr.

Adding to my own Wish list:
3. Bigger battlegrounds with 12v12v12 (personly have bad connection and with the limited plays in bg its alot better then cyrodil)

Note: like the 4v4v4, can be realy balanced if groups challange the wining team but often not when plays focus on daily rewards aquired by second place. Ok in normal but in ranked only wining should be aim for to help balance out the power with 3 teams.

mandricus

I'm all in for this change and can't wait for it to land on Live.

I spend 90% of my game time doing battlegrounds on various alts. I'm not very good, I think that on most of my toons I'm just a little above the MMR average of a casual player. Well, after a certain time ( late in the evening), on PC-EU i get matched always and only against the same premades: highly coordinated groups with complimentary sets / buffs / debuffs and skill. Those groups makes Battlegrounds a miserable experience for the solo / duo queuers. You just don't have any chance against them unless you are a premade group too.

While I agree that in the long term the ideal solution will be separate queues for solo/duo players and full premades teams, I'm very curious to check how this experiment will transform the battleground experience for the majority of the player base.

As I side note: I think that a lot of people will now finally realize that most of the time, group acting like premades are really not "true premades". They are are just people that are able to coordinate each other on the battlefield without even talking, just staying focused on the dynamics and the visuals of the fight. People maybe will finally stop complaining about premades (because now they will be 100% sure that they won't be facing one), and maybe start to focus on what are they doing wrong when they will be stomped from an highly coordinated group of experienced solo players.

ecru

Olupajmibanan wrote: »

tarbrys wrote: »

Gravord
January 21 edited January 21 in General ESO Discussion

3 types of q for Battlegrounds:
1. Solo q only, fast matches
2. Any group size q, slightly slower matches, teams of 2-3-4 take priority and solo players filling up the gaps to complete full 4 man setup
3. Premade vs premade in 4vs4 arena, deathmatch only. Slowest pop rate but highest competition level. Could be additionally implemented with option of guild vs guild challenge as many other games have.

Solo player you can q for nr 1 or 2 or both to speed up your q.
Group of 2-3 can choose only option 2.
Full premade option 2 and 3.

Simple, effective, not penalizing ppl putting effort to organize themselves in a frikin multiplayer game yet giving solo q fair playing field.

“Quote”

How do you prevent 4-premade facing two duos or a duo + 2 solos? Because this kind of match will most likely be the very same pugstomp like 4 solos against 4-premade (the reason why all of this madness is happening right now).

You can't, which is why a team size of 4 was a very bad idea in the first place. You generally can't queue into a game that small in any MMO unless it's some sort of ranked queue because developers learned a long time ago that small teams leads to more imbalanced matches due to the possibility of one or two skilled players tilting the balance too much in their team's direction. The small team size is just another part of why the 4v4v4 system is bad because one player can make or break your team. If it was just 8v8, if you're down 7v8 or you have a few potatoes on your team it isn't a big deal. If you're 3v4v4, or two of your teammates are terrible, you're completely screwed.

Alcast

@Mojomonkeyman

Not everyone has to have the same opinion, not everyone plays the game the same way as you and I (and we both also play it differently). It is even more important to communicate to ZOS via feedback if you dislike this change and explain why. Having feedback both for and against the change is important for evaluation.

Olupajmibanan

Alcast wrote: »

@Mojomonkeyman

Not everyone has to have the same opinion, not everyone plays the game the same way as you and I (and we both also play it differently). It is even more important to communicate to ZOS via feedback if you dislike this change and explain why. Having feedback both for and against the change is important for evaluation.

If communication is so important, and I believe it is, why ZoS did not give us any statements on split queues? They surely thought about that and for some reason decided to not go this way, but why not giving any explanation? Communication must work on both sides. This an ultimate failure on ZoS side, but I am not surprised, they do this everytime.

Mojomonkeyman

Alcast wrote: »

@Mojomonkeyman

Not everyone has to have the same opinion, not everyone plays the game the same way as you and I (and we both also play it differently). It is even more important to communicate to ZOS via feedback if you dislike this change and explain why. Having feedback both for and against the change is important for evaluation.

My point stands, you wont see me coming into trial threads and suggest a 3 months soloQ only experiment would be a good idea - because 1) I am not part of the raiding community and consequently 2) my opinion wouldnt be very educated and in total disregard of raiding community efforts.

You are not part of the (sub-)community that is being targeted here, you dont even rely on ingame tools to get your social interaction out of the game. Get off your high horse, accept that your feedback has very little value for this discussion (just like mine would have in raiding environments) and let people contribute who actually use the tools that we are going to lose.

Waiting time of 20-30min is what high mmr players have dealt with for 3 years now. It is a problem, indeed. But you know what's even more frustrating? Playing with and against players way above or below your own skill level. Or being a support player and randomly getting mixed in with a bunch of stealthy bow people or even more healers on your team.

Can you imagine getting soloQed into a trial with 9 healers and 2 snipe spamming stealthblades? Bg groups are just as non-functional when theres not a baseline/framework for playable group compositions.

Your comments are taking none of this into account, they cannot - because you dont play the content. And you seem to be unwilling to properly reflect on how detrimental and impactful those changes are - if they would hit your content.

Weesacs

It's been hypothesized many times that the reason why we don't have separate queues is that there wouldn't be enough players for the group queue. Well, looking at the amount of feedback on the forums it appears to me the group queue would do rather well. Let's get a group queue set up ZoS along with the solo queue. 👍

Sanguinor2

As someone that played only solo in high MMR bgs until around 2 months ago I can understand why solo Players get frustrated from getting matched against organised Groups. Allthough the Problem wasnt as bad in high MMR, while it was more likely you would loose as 4 randoms against 4 premades you usually had a somewhat decent Chance and it wasnt a onesided stompfest most of the time.

That being said, solo Queue only is not the solution. At the very least there should be some Option for People to Play together, be it a duo Queue Option included in solo or a solo Queue with a sepparate Group Queue.

mav1234

Mojomonkeyman wrote: »

Alcast wrote: »

@Mojomonkeyman

Not everyone has to have the same opinion, not everyone plays the game the same way as you and I (and we both also play it differently). It is even more important to communicate to ZOS via feedback if you dislike this change and explain why. Having feedback both for and against the change is important for evaluation.

My point stands, you wont see me coming into trial threads and suggest a 3 months soloQ only experiment would be a good idea - because 1) I am not part of the raiding community and consequently 2) my opinion wouldnt be very educated and in total disregard of raiding community efforts.

You are not part of the (sub-)community that is being targeted here, you dont even rely on ingame tools to get your social interaction out of the game. Get off your high horse, accept that your feedback has very little value for this discussion (just like mine would have in raiding environments) and let people contribute who actually use the tools that we are going to lose.

Waiting time of 20-30min is what high mmr players have dealt with for 3 years now. It is a problem, indeed. But you know what's even more frustrating? Playing with and against players way above or below your own skill level. Or being a support player and randomly getting mixed in with a bunch of stealthy bow people or even more healers on your team.

Can you imagine getting soloQed into a trial with 9 healers and 2 snipe spamming stealthblades? Bg groups are just as non-functional when theres not a baseline/framework for playable group compositions.

Your comments are taking none of this into account, they cannot - because you dont play the content. And you seem to be unwilling to properly reflect on how detrimental and impactful those changes are - if they would hit your content.

Alcast may not do BGs as often as you (no idea there), but he does do them. Ive seen his streams once in a while and video content where he does them. You and I both strongly disagree with him but I think it is important to note Alcast has a perspective based on his experiences - that said, I vehemently disagree with a big part of his stance (that this change going live as-is wouldn't be a massive problem).

Also worth noting: I am firmly against this change but there is a key difference between forcing a solo trial queue and a solo bg queue: Premades in bgs are 4 people and can ruin the experience for the other 8 if they aren't also organized, while a premade trial group ruins nothing for anyone.

One question I ask is how would all the solo players feel if they had to find a group for BG?