Should being able to queue as a group of 2, 3, or 4 players be reintroduced to Battlegrounds?

RivenEsq

*Disclaimer:* This is a controversial issue, and I understand a poll on these forums can have heavy confirmation bias. This is for the purpose of gauging the opinion of the forumgoers on these boards and nothing more. I don't intend to construe any results of this poll as being representative of all ESO players.

Answering "Yes" should be for if you think that queuing as a group (2, 3, or 4 players) should be allowed in any capacity, even if that means the matchmaking needs to be adjusted to prefer matching groups against other groups (i.e. if you are a 3 player group, you will match with a solo player and be more likely to be placed against other 2 or 3 player groups within your matchmaking range, or a pre-made group of 4 will be more like to be matched against other groups of 4 or 3 players, even if that meant slightly longer queues to accomplish). A "Yes" answer does not have to mean that you want 4-stack teams to match against teams of solo players for the purposes of pubstomping.

Answering "No" means that you oppose having any form of group queues in Battlegrounds, and feel the system is better when you are only allowed to solo queue.

Please share comments you have in favor of, or opposed to, the current system, and try to keep things civil. Thanks for sharing your opinion.

wheem_ESO

The poll needs to be much more granular. If I were going to vote in this version of it, I'd pick "No," even though I'd actually be 100% fine with a premades-only queue, and even an experiment with allowing duo and solo queued players to face off against each other (with proper tweaks to matchmaking, at least). But I refuse to have my answer offer any vindication whatsoever to those who want the old system back so that they can feel like superior players as their group of tryhards beats up on teams of 2 or 3 solo players.

RivenEsq

Yes

Sorry for the double comment, but I didn't want to put my opinion in the poll post so that it could be phrased somewhat neutrally.

Truth be told, I haven't played a Battleground match in months since the queues were locked to being for solo players only, which effectively has meant that I haven't played very much ESO at all. I am a primarily PvP player, and I have played with the same group of friends for years in ESO and prior to ESO. We don't have the numbers that we used to, often with only 2, 3, or 4 of us online at any one time. These small numbers make doing anything meaningful in Cyrodiil very difficult, but we still want to be able to PvP together. We used to have that option.

Battlegrounds provided a great avenue for us to experience PvP in an environment with equal numbers and normalized stats. We are probably slightly above average, so when we queued, we were by no means stomping our typical opponents. I just want to be able to play PvP with my friends in an environment where we aren't going to get ganked by 15 players for spending too long taking Resource Camps surrounding a Keep while trying to find an equal fight.

It has been upsetting to me that it feels there is no longer a way for me to play a game that is supposed to be an MMO with a couple friends. I voted "Yes" because I don't see why there cannot be alterations to the matchmaking that are less restrictive on the players than the current system. I would like for group queues to return to Battlegrounds, and believe that matchmaking preference to try and match players with other groups and to match players with others inside their skill range would be an effective solution.

No one wants to get stomped by a group of organized players who are more skilled than you to begin with while you, yourself, were put on a team with less skilled players who are also queued solo, and I am not advocating for that. However, locking Battlegrounds to solo queue only feels like a blunt instrument when something more fine-tuned and surgical would be more appropriate.

I would propose that group queues be re-enabled with the caveat that pre-made groups of 2, 3, or 4 players be more likely to face other groups of 2, 3, or 4 players, and that the matchmaking also take personal rating into account. They could even have a sliding scale where you have a higher matchmaking rating when you are grouped as 3 or 4 players so that if you do play against two groups of 2, or a group of 2, and two solos, those players would have a higher individual skill than you in order to compensate for the fact you are in a group and have the advantage of composition selection and communication.

There are many options here that would be a great improvement over solo queue locking in Battlegrounds, and I would like to start a constructive dialogue so that we can hopefully find a better solution here. Currently, not being able to play PvP without an experience I have no interest in (solo play) is not the solution for me.

VaranisArano

I prefer to allow groups, but it doesn't matter. ZOS has already said they intend to continue with the solo-only queue.

RivenEsq

Yes

wheem_ESO wrote: »

The poll needs to be much more granular. If I were going to vote in this version of it, I'd pick "No," even though I'd actually be 100% fine with a premades-only queue, and even an experiment with allowing duo and solo queued players to face off against each other (with proper tweaks to matchmaking, at least). But I refuse to have my answer offer any vindication whatsoever to those who want the old system back so that they can feel like superior players as their group of tryhards beats up on teams of 2 or 3 solo players.

It really is a yes or no question, though. Yes, we can discuss the nuance, which is what the poll description was for. Currently, the issue is whether group queues can be enabled in any capacity, or if it should be solo queues forever. We can discuss how to implement group queues better, which I have tried to do in my post above, but I don't want to overly complicate a poll that is really about whether solos should stay, or if there is a better alternative out there.

VaranisArano wrote: »

I prefer to allow groups, but it doesn't matter. ZOS has already said they intend to continue with the solo-only queue.

I understand their current stance, and maybe we can help them find a better solution. There has to be something that can best serve the interests of all players. This is an MMO. It defies logic that there would be no way to play Battlegrounds with a pre-made group of any number. There are options like I have mentioned above; there is the option to have a ranked ladder that is solo queue only. There is the option that pre-mades of 4 players will only ever play against other pre-mades of 4 (or it is strongly preferred while placing them occasionally against teams with a group of 3 and a solo).

wheem_ESO

RivenEsq wrote: »

wheem_ESO wrote: »

The poll needs to be much more granular. If I were going to vote in this version of it, I'd pick "No," even though I'd actually be 100% fine with a premades-only queue, and even an experiment with allowing duo and solo queued players to face off against each other (with proper tweaks to matchmaking, at least). But I refuse to have my answer offer any vindication whatsoever to those who want the old system back so that they can feel like superior players as their group of tryhards beats up on teams of 2 or 3 solo players.

It really is a yes or no question, though. Yes, we can discuss the nuance, which is what the poll description was for. Currently, the issue is whether group queues can be enabled in any capacity, or if it should be solo queues forever. We can discuss how to implement group queues better, which I have tried to do in my post above, but I don't want to overly complicate a poll that is really about whether solos should stay, or if there is a better alternative out there.

Without being at least somewhat more granular, the poll simply cannot be useful in any capacity. Except perhaps to offer ammunition to certain posters (not you) that are constantly creating strawmen arguments about how everyone who's against premade-vs-solo queues is actually anti-social and wants every single area of the game to be solo only, and how chat should be disabled, and blah blah blah.

Going by your "rules," my vote would be indistinguishable from those who desperately want to bring back the old system so they could run tryhard premades against random solo queued players who don't even have full teams. So if I do vote in the current iteration of the poll, it would be a protest vote, even though I'm actually OK with premade-vs-premade, and potentially duo + solo in the same queue (with proper matchmaking tweaks). The current situation isn't perfect, but I find it more acceptable than what we had before.

MurderMostFoul

RivenEsq wrote: »

I would propose that group queues be re-enabled with the caveat that pre-made groups of 2, 3, or 4 players be more likely to face other groups of 2, 3, or 4 players, and that the matchmaking also take personal rating into account. They could even have a sliding scale where you have a higher matchmaking rating when you are grouped as 3 or 4 players so that if you do play against two groups of 2, or a group of 2, and two solos, those players would have a higher individual skill than you in order to compensate for the fact you are in a group and have the advantage of composition selection and communication.

This is how it functioned before solo queue only.

RivenEsq

Yes

MurderMostFoul wrote: »

This is how it functioned before solo queue only.

If that is true, I could see the problem. However, having seen other posts on this board regarding matchmaking on skill being woefully insufficient, even for solo queues, I am inclined to think that the matchmaker is just poorly designed, and that it only became more obvious when pre-made 4s were playing against teams that were not fully pre-made.

As these complaints continue, it becomes more apparent that solo queues has only served as a sloppy band-aid to cover up for the deficiencies in the skill-based matchmaking system that could become more apparent when exploited by a pre-made group of 4 talented PvP players. ZOS needs to fix their skill-based matchmaking system rather than forcing us to play alone, without our friends, in an MMO.

MurderMostFoul

RivenEsq wrote: »

MurderMostFoul wrote: »

This is how it functioned before solo queue only.

If that is true, I could see the problem. However, having seen other posts on this board regarding matchmaking on skill being woefully insufficient, even for solo queues, I am inclined to think that the matchmaker is just poorly designed, and that it only became more obvious when pre-made 4s were playing against teams that were not fully pre-made.

As these complaints continue, it becomes more apparent that solo queues has only served as a sloppy band-aid to cover up for the deficiencies in the skill-based matchmaking system that could become more apparent when exploited by a pre-made group of 4 talented PvP players. ZOS needs to fix their skill-based matchmaking system rather than forcing us to play alone, without our friends, in an MMO.

Previously, if you were in a group that queued for BGs, matchmaking would inflate your MMRs to try to match you against more skilled players (to try to account for the advantage of being in a group). Additionally, the more people in your group (2 -> 3 -> 4) would caused the inflation to be more significant. Thus, 4 man premades would have much higher MMRs than if those same players were put on a team together randomly.

Ideally, with the inflation, a premade would be facing randoms that were strong enough to compete with them. Or, the premade would get matched against other premades (who got their MMRs inflated as well).

In reality, the inflation just made the queue time very long. And eventually, it would just match the the premade against higher MMR solo queuers . Against dous, and sometimes trios, this wasn't tooooo bad, but most organized 4 man premades would still have no problem against 4 high MMR solo queuers.

All of this was made even more difficult by the fact that Matchmaking was trying to form 3 teams. I believe the main reason ZOS removed any group queuing was to make Matchmaking a simple as possible.

RivenEsq

Yes

MurderMostFoul wrote: »

Previously, if you were in a group that queued for BGs, matchmaking would inflate your MMRs to try to match you against more skilled players (to try to account for the advantage of being in a group). Additionally, the more people in your group (2 -> 3 -> 4) would caused the inflation to be more significant. Thus, 4 man premades would have much higher MMRs than if those same players were put on a team together randomly.

Ideally, with the inflation, a premade would be facing randoms that were strong enough to compete with them. Or, the premade would get matched against other premades (who got their MMRs inflated as well).

In reality, the inflation just made the queue time very long. And eventually, it would just match the the premade against higher MMR solo queuers . Against dous, and sometimes trios, this wasn't tooooo bad, but most organized 4 man premades would still have no problem against 4 high MMR solo queuers.

All of this was made even more difficult by the fact that Matchmaking was trying to form 3 teams. I believe the main reason ZOS removed any group queuing was to make Matchmaking a simple as possible.

That's fair. I have seen complaints that simplifying matchmaking in this manner is insufficient for actually resulting in fair teams, which would make it seem that the intended result has not been realized.

I also think that their system should eliminate any possibility of a full team of solo queue players being placed against a full pre-made team, inflated MMR or not. ZOS trying to oversimplify the system seems like laziness when the reality is that they are unwilling to fix their matchmaking algorithms, and instead assume that passing the buck with solo queue only will mitigate some of the poor matchmaking instances that they are unwilling (or unable) to fix.

As I said above, there are certainly less restrictive means of accomplishing their goal of good matchmaking here, but they seem unwilling to accomplish such a task. It is the inverse of searching for a dungeon: when you solo queue for a dungeon it can take a long time. It takes less time the more players you have. Similarly, why is it not okay for a PvP match to take longer to find a match for a 4-stack of players if that means a better experience for everyone? 4-stacks get the option to play together, and solo queue players get the assurance of faster queue times without the risk of getting stomped by a stack of four players. Removing the ability of a solo queue player to match against a 4-stack entirely with the exception of filling the 4th spot on a team of three players would be an appropriate solution, I think.

Sure, there are logistical hurdles here, but I don't think that those are enough justification to stop players from grouping with other players in an MMO...

MurderMostFoul

RivenEsq wrote: »

MurderMostFoul wrote: »

Previously, if you were in a group that queued for BGs, matchmaking would inflate your MMRs to try to match you against more skilled players (to try to account for the advantage of being in a group). Additionally, the more people in your group (2 -> 3 -> 4) would caused the inflation to be more significant. Thus, 4 man premades would have much higher MMRs than if those same players were put on a team together randomly.

Ideally, with the inflation, a premade would be facing randoms that were strong enough to compete with them. Or, the premade would get matched against other premades (who got their MMRs inflated as well).

In reality, the inflation just made the queue time very long. And eventually, it would just match the the premade against higher MMR solo queuers . Against dous, and sometimes trios, this wasn't tooooo bad, but most organized 4 man premades would still have no problem against 4 high MMR solo queuers.

All of this was made even more difficult by the fact that Matchmaking was trying to form 3 teams. I believe the main reason ZOS removed any group queuing was to make Matchmaking a simple as possible.

That's fair. I have seen complaints that simplifying matchmaking in this manner is insufficient for actually resulting in fair teams, which would make it seem that the intended result has not been realized.

I also think that their system should eliminate any possibility of a full team of solo queue players being placed against a full pre-made team, inflated MMR or not. ZOS trying to oversimplify the system seems like laziness when the reality is that they are unwilling to fix their matchmaking algorithms, and instead assume that passing the buck with solo queue only will mitigate some of the poor matchmaking instances that they are unwilling (or unable) to fix.

As I said above, there are certainly less restrictive means of accomplishing their goal of good matchmaking here, but they seem unwilling to accomplish such a task. It is the inverse of searching for a dungeon: when you solo queue for a dungeon it can take a long time. It takes less time the more players you have. Similarly, why is it not okay for a PvP match to take longer to find a match for a 4-stack of players if that means a better experience for everyone? 4-stacks get the option to play together, and solo queue players get the assurance of faster queue times without the risk of getting stomped by a stack of four players. Removing the ability of a solo queue player to match against a 4-stack entirely with the exception of filling the 4th spot on a team of three players would be an appropriate solution, I think.

Sure, there are logistical hurdles here, but I don't think that those are enough justification to stop players from grouping with other players in an MMO...

Yeah, by going solo queue only, ZOS seems to have taken the easy way out with improving matchmaking. I don't even think the quality of the matches was their primary concern. I think they were just trying to make it easier to get full games with reasonable queue times.

Jeremy

RivenEsq wrote: »

*Disclaimer:* This is a controversial issue, and I understand a poll on these forums can have heavy confirmation bias. This is for the purpose of gauging the opinion of the forumgoers on these boards and nothing more. I don't intend to construe any results of this poll as being representative of all ESO players.

Answering "Yes" should be for if you think that queuing as a group (2, 3, or 4 players) should be allowed in any capacity, even if that means the matchmaking needs to be adjusted to prefer matching groups against other groups (i.e. if you are a 3 player group, you will match with a solo player and be more likely to be placed against other 2 or 3 player groups within your matchmaking range, or a pre-made group of 4 will be more like to be matched against other groups of 4 or 3 players, even if that meant slightly longer queues to accomplish). A "Yes" answer does not have to mean that you want 4-stack teams to match against teams of solo players for the purposes of pubstomping.

Answering "No" means that you oppose having any form of group queues in Battlegrounds, and feel the system is better when you are only allowed to solo queue.

Please share comments you have in favor of, or opposed to, the current system, and try to keep things civil. Thanks for sharing your opinion.

In this game's current PvP state - premades would be hilarious to watch. It's already instant death outside of Mist Form. I literally have to put up a damage shield and make myself immune to stuns just to be able to buy myself a second of not dying to get off a single heavy attack - and even then it's risky and sometimes I still die in less than a second before I even get it off. And did I mention that's with over 50k health, 32k resist, impenetrable on everything... oh, and Blood Lord Monster Set.

So part of me does hope they bring back premades. Coordinated attacks would be so ridiculous right now and pulverize pugs into such dust it might wake the developers up into realizing just how absurd their PvP has become.

Rewans

Yes

If I want to play without my friends I play single player games.

If I want to play with my friends I play online games. As far as I know ESO is a online game.

Mixing this 3 alliance - One Tamriel world with an idea to remove group que makes it impossible to a lot of people to play with a friend cos of the different fraction. The developers rly should think about this. You created a game where a lot of people can become friends from different fractions, and now you remove the option for em to play together. VERY BAD. Cyrodiil kind of places are not BG, its masses vs masses no individual skill, and its just not fun for a lot of people... its just an open world in an open world. If you keep this decision it makes the full 1 Tamriel world system illogical, it makes the BG system garbage, and the developers do this cos of absolute no reason. Why do you bite the hand what feeds you? Find mid way solutions like DUO que only, or separate group que, or something. Its not "balancing" if you make the world less, and less.

Alomar

Yes

Removing the group aspect of a group feature without adding a separate que of some sort in an mmo was one of the most incompetent things I've ever seen a dev do, and I've played over 50 mmo's.

Alomar

Yes

RivenEsq wrote: »

MurderMostFoul wrote: »

This is how it functioned before solo queue only.

If that is true, I could see the problem. However, having seen other posts on this board regarding matchmaking on skill being woefully insufficient, even for solo queues, I am inclined to think that the matchmaker is just poorly designed, and that it only became more obvious when pre-made 4s were playing against teams that were not fully pre-made.

As these complaints continue, it becomes more apparent that solo queues has only served as a sloppy band-aid to cover up for the deficiencies in the skill-based matchmaking system that could become more apparent when exploited by a pre-made group of 4 talented PvP players. ZOS needs to fix their skill-based matchmaking system rather than forcing us to play alone, without our friends, in an MMO.

Playing with 4 people in a group feature was/never will be an exploit, it's that type of naïve thinking that's allowed this Band-Aid fix to stand. The matchmaking system you describe is called mmr, and it is probably the worst I've ever seen between mmo's and lobby games alike. ZOS has had nothing but trouble with it in both battlegrounds and dungeons since the day it came out. They even had a dedicated performance improvement for it that failed and made things worse/added new bugs for several months. The solo only que options for bg's was even stated by ZOS as intended to improve performance rather than appeal to solo'ers vs. groups. In the end, this was a quick and easy way out of actually solving the problem that alienated significant portion of the feature's playerbase and removed grouping in a group feature with an "mmo."

RivenEsq

Yes

Alomar wrote: »

Playing with 4 people in a group feature was/never will be an exploit, it's that type of naïve thinking that's allowed this Band-Aid fix to stand. The matchmaking system you describe is called mmr, and it is probably the worst I've ever seen between mmo's and lobby games alike. ZOS has had nothing but trouble with it in both battlegrounds and dungeons since the day it came out. They even had a dedicated performance improvement for it that failed and made things worse/added new bugs for several months. The solo only que options for bg's was even stated by ZOS as intended to improve performance rather than appeal to solo'ers vs. groups. In the end, this was a quick and easy way out of actually solving the problem that alienated significant portion of the feature's playerbase and removed grouping in a group feature with an "mmo."

You misunderstand me, brother. I'll clarify. When I say exploit I'm not referring to it like you would an exploit for infinite gold. Rather, you exploit someone being out of position in a fight, or by heavy attacking an off-balance target. I mean it only to the extent that a coordinated group of good players are in the best position to take advantage of a poor matchmaking system that doesn't effectively match them against other groups, or players of similar skill level (and that certainly doesn't do both at the same time).

I think I have been clear throughout the rest of my points that I do not believe that the "issues" claimed with pre-mades are resolved by the removal of them, or that the issue lies with pre-mades at all. The ability for a pre-made to potentially excel is only the symptom of the larger problem where the MMR matchmaking is systemically bad and inadequate, which persists even with the removal of pre-mades.

I pay a subscription, and it is not an acceptable solution to reduce the ways in which I am able to play the game because of the technical failings of systems implemented by the developers. The system needs to be fixed, and not by taking away player choice.

Rewans

Yes

Alomar wrote: »

Removing the group aspect of a group feature without adding a separate que of some sort in an mmo was one of the most incompetent things I've ever seen a dev do, and I've played over 50 mmo's.

100% Agree

Lorkhan

No

No!

Rewans

Yes

Lorkhan wrote: »

No!

Would you mind saying a few word why do you think that way? Why do you think fully removing group que options is a valid idea in a online game where friends, and families are supposed to play TOGETHER? Cyrodiil, and Imp city is simple not designed that way. Its not BG, its masses vs masses, its just an open world in a open world, totally not enjoyable, and its not even working cos of the different alliances. Why would it hurt you if for example DUO que would be allowed, or if there would be separated group que?

There is a lot - lot of reason, or alternative solution above what can make this game enjoyable for those who have friends, and family. I rly would like to know why is it hurt somebody that much if others want to play with friends in a online game (ridiculous).

Foto1

No

Rewans wrote: »

Lorkhan wrote: »

No!

Would you mind saying a few word why do you think that way? Why do you think fully removing group que options is a valid idea in a online game where friends, and families are supposed to play TOGETHER? Cyrodiil, and Imp city is simple not designed that way. Its not BG, its masses vs masses, its just an open world in a open world, totally not enjoyable, and its not even working cos of the different alliances. Why would it hurt you if for example DUO que would be allowed, or if there would be separated group que?

There is a lot - lot of reason, or alternative solution above what can make this game enjoyable for those who have friends, and family. I rly would like to know why is it hurt somebody that much if others want to play with friends in a online game (ridiculous).

can i answer for him? groups should have a separate queue, but there is no such option in the survey

Rewans

Yes

As above:

wheem_ESO wrote: »

The poll needs to be much more granular. If I were going to vote in this version of it, I'd pick "No," even though I'd actually be 100% fine with a premades-only queue, and even an experiment with allowing duo and solo queued players to face off against each other (with proper tweaks to matchmaking, at least). But I refuse to have my answer offer any vindication whatsoever to those who want the old system back so that they can feel like superior players as their group of tryhards beats up on teams of 2 or 3 solo players.

And now:

Foto1 wrote: »

Rewans wrote: »

Lorkhan wrote: »

No!

can i answer for him? groups should have a separate queue, but there is no such option in the survey

As I see the survey maybe laks the option what would be a fine mid way for "both team". I also agree with wheem_ESO about the DUO only experiment phase with a fair matchmaking system like maximum 1 duo group/team. Or if there is 1 team with a DUO team, and the other 2 team is all solo than simple put the lower rating/cp players together with the DUO as a "balance". There is a lot of option, and possibility... I hope the developers will do something to fix this issue, cos 1 thing is clear: This BG system is not MMO friendly.

Rewans

Yes

There was some problem with the "Quote" above, sorry. The last Quote parts are my toughs.

Chilly-McFreeze

Rewans wrote: »

Lorkhan wrote: »

No!

I rly would like to know why is it hurt somebody that much if others want to play with friends in a online game (ridiculous).

Foto1 wrote: »

Rewans wrote: »

Lorkhan wrote: »

No!

Would you mind saying a few word why do you think that way? Why do you think fully removing group que options is a valid idea in a online game where friends, and families are supposed to play TOGETHER? Cyrodiil, and Imp city is simple not designed that way. Its not BG, its masses vs masses, its just an open world in a open world, totally not enjoyable, and its not even working cos of the different alliances. Why would it hurt you if for example DUO que would be allowed, or if there would be separated group que?

There is a lot - lot of reason, or alternative solution above what can make this game enjoyable for those who have friends, and family. I rly would like to know why is it hurt somebody that much if others want to play with friends in a online game (ridiculous).

can i answer for him? groups should have a separate queue, but there is no such option in the survey

Pretty much this. Same answer as in every other thread about this topic.

A few questions we must consider, @Rewans , like rightfully already mentioned. For many it's up to those answers if they want group queues back:

To sum up: If Zeni allows solo, duo, 3 and 4 people to que which consquences would that have?

• Could a group of 2 Duos vs complete pug happen? Could very well be disabled from the start, so only 1 Duo per team.
  
• A full premade vs complete pug? That caused issues for many solo players before and unless your Epeen get's the better of you, you wouldn't want that faceroll back.
  
• How do a 3person premade fit in? It would have to be filled up with a solo. So we're about to be back to the scenario above: queue as solo, get thrown in vs a premade.
  
• For the 4p premades, would they be strictly thrown against other full premades? Or would it be fine to have 4p vs 3+1, 2+1+1 or 2+2?
  
• Where would you draw the line? Does solo mean solo only? Will duos slip in the solo queue or only in the group queue?

RivenEsq

Yes

Chilly-McFreeze wrote: »

Pretty much this. Same answer as in every other thread about this topic.

A few questions we must consider, @Rewans , like rightfully already mentioned. For many it's up to those answers if they want group queues back:

To sum up: If Zeni allows solo, duo, 3 and 4 people to que which consquences would that have?

• Could a group of 2 Duos vs complete pug happen? Could very well be disabled from the start, so only 1 Duo per team.
  
• A full premade vs complete pug? That caused issues for many solo players before and unless your Epeen get's the better of you, you wouldn't want that faceroll back.
  
• How do a 3person premade fit in? It would have to be filled up with a solo. So we're about to be back to the scenario above: queue as solo, get thrown in vs a premade.
  
• For the 4p premades, would they be strictly thrown against other full premades? Or would it be fine to have 4p vs 3+1, 2+1+1 or 2+2?
  
• Where would you draw the line? Does solo mean solo only? Will duos slip in the solo queue or only in the group queue?

These are all fair questions. For clarity, I phrased the poll how I did because it isn't about whether there is a better way to implement group queues than what was in the game before they were removed. The answer is an obvious, simple, and emphatic "yes." Of course there is a better way for group queues to be implemented. The poll is about whether the community wants groups to be able to play together (which is a feature of--and I don't think I am exaggerating here--every other MMO on the market) or if they think that solo queue only is the ultimate solution for Battlegrounds. Once it is established that the community would prefer that there be groups with changes to the matchmaking system and MMR to improve the experience, we can move on to what those changes would actually need to be. However, we aren't talking about how to better group queues at the moment, we're talking about whether they could and should be brought back, and if doing that could, in some iteration, be better than solo queues.

My argument is plainly that, yes, it would be better than solo queue to bring back group queues with changes for balancing.

Those that think that is true should vote yes in the poll. I've tried to make it as clear as I can that this isn't about reinforcing a status quo of 4-man pre-mades stomping a pub group of 4 solo players.

To answer your questions: One duo on a team against a full team of solo players is unlikely to be a bad experience if players are being matched properly on skill. With a proper remake of the MMR system, this should be a non-issue. 2+1+1 vs. 1+1+1+1 would probably be fine.

For a 3-man pre-made, I do not see how playing with a solo is necessarily a problem. Potentially, there could be a "solo only" queue, and then a normal queue allowing groups if this was really an issue. They could even tie solo only to a ranked rating ladder if they wanted (which is common in other games to have ranked play be tied to solo queueing). In my view, playing against a pre-made is only really a problem if you do not have a pre-made team of your own. With proper MMR, a 3+1 team against another 3+1 team is a fair fight. I'd also argue that a 3+1 vs. a 2+2 or 2+1+1 would probably be pretty fair also. I think it is a slippery slope to fall into the trap that ZOS has already committed to that it is somehow unfair that players play PvP in a group or that solo players have to face an opposing group if they have a group of their own on their team(as above, literally every single MMO has groups in PvP, including arenas). Again, many of this comes down to a proper MMR system, and not the kind where your MMR can only ever go up once you have player a lot of games like the one we had.

A full pre-made vs. a complete pug should never happen. If you choose to do a full pre-made, you should only match against other full pre-mades, and have matchmaking expand to allowing a 3+1 team to face you after your queue has gone long enough. Full pre-mades should potentially have a more aggressive MMR inflation for matchmaking than what was in the game previously, on top of these team composition restrictions, to compensate for the fact that any 3-man team they play against is going to have a player that they didn't choose, and who will probably have a more difficult time coordinating with them or communicating. I don't think that a full pre-made vs. a 2+2 would be fair without an even more aggressive MMR inflation than the one used to match a 4-man with a 3+1, but if queue times were a real issue, something like that could be implemented.

The whole premise here is that group queue is not the issue, it is the MMR and the matchmaking system, and removing group queues to avoid addressing the real systemic issues in the matchmaking smacks of laziness. There are plenty of viable solutions, ZOS has just chosen to take the one requiring the least work. With proper MMR assessment and scaling/inflation when matching a team with a larger pre-made group against a team with a smaller pre-made group or a combination or smaller pre-made groups, all of the team combinations I suggested above would probably be an enjoyable experience.

Prospero_ESO

Can´t say Yes or No, imo it is not a question of black and white. Imo groups should be able to queue as do soloplayers, but each should be matched against a somewhat equal opponent. The question is what do you consider a premade, there are a lot of different opinions about that. For me, I would be ok with duo queueing and be matched against people solo queueing. But I would definitely not be ok with 3 people queuing and matched against solo´s. Matchmaking should then work that way that duo´s should be distributed among the 3 factions for example. Also they should implement proper mmr where you earn and loose mmr based on your performance and not the amount of time played.

RivenEsq

Yes

Prospero_ESO wrote: »

Can´t say Yes or No, imo it is not a question of black and white. Imo groups should be able to queue as do soloplayers, but each should be matched against a somewhat equal opponent. The question is what do you consider a premade, there are a lot of different opinions about that. For me, I would be ok with duo queueing and be matched against people solo queueing. But I would definitely not be ok with 3 people queuing and matched against solo´s. Matchmaking should then work that way that duo´s should be distributed among the 3 factions for example. Also they should implement proper mmr where you earn and loose mmr based on your performance and not the amount of time played.

This is the discussion that I am trying to cultivate here. "Pre-mades" are basically any group that queues together going into a match, whether 2, 3, or 4 players. If you want groups back, but with changes, you can answer yes. The poll is about whether groups should return in some capacity over solos, not necessarily about all of the permutations of group play that could exist. It's really a "do you prefer groups be allowed, or not?" with the caveat that matchmaking can be balanced if the developers are willing to put the time into it.

wheem_ESO

RivenEsq wrote: »

My argument is plainly that, yes, it would be better than solo queue to bring back group queues with changes for balancing.

Those that think that is true should vote yes in the poll. I've tried to make it as clear as I can that this isn't about reinforcing a status quo of 4-man pre-mades stomping a pub group of 4 solo players.

It would be made much more clear if the poll options actually reflected your opinion. As I told you before, your "yes" answer is 100% indistinguishable from those who are chomping at the bit to have their tryhard premade back so that they can roll teams of 2-3 solo players (but leave the match and stop queueing if they lose a fight or two against another premade).

I will personally never vote yes in the above poll, even if by your "rules" I should. It will only serve to give ammunition to those who want the old system back, because there simply isn't enough granularity involved. Are all forum goers, including ZOS employees and/or class representatives, supposed to keep track of each and every poster's qualified "yes" vote? What about the people that don't take the time to write a post, and simply vote yes because they want a separate 4v4v4 premades-only queue? Or an experiment where duos are allowed to be in the queue with solo players? With your current poll, there is simply no way to differentiate between those opinions, or any others.

Why are you so dead-set against offering a larger number of options available for people to vote on? I get that it can be difficult to make an option for every single opinion, but it can certainly be improved over what's up there now. Just spit-balling a few things off the top of my heal:
1: Keep the queue system as it is now - solo only, no exceptions.
2: Bring back the old queue system where solos and all group sizes were thrown together.
3: Leave the solo queue as it is now, but implement a separate group queue as well.
4: Allow duos to participate in the solo queue, along with some tweaks to matchmaking.

Obviously there's room to be even more granular, especially with option 3 and the specifics of "tweaks" alluded to in option 4. It would be much easier to hash those particulars out in the thread's comments, rather than having the poll lump every single "voting bloc" together, outside of those that want option 1.

Prospero_ESO

wheem_ESO wrote: »

I will personally never vote yes in the above poll, even if by your "rules" I should. It will only serve to give ammunition to those who want the old system back, because there simply isn't enough granularity involved.

Yes, I can 100% sign that. The issue is far more complex and a simple "yes" would not reflect the granularity needed.

RivenEsq

Yes

wheem_ESO wrote: »

Snip

As I've explained, the purpose of this poll isn't for what specific solution should be put in place for group queues. It is "Are solo queues the best possible implementation of PvP in this game, better than any option involving groups?"

This is only about whether the general consensus is "groups = good" or "groups = bad". I understand the desire for granularity, but I just don't find it necessary at this stage until we can have the opportunity to see if the voters in this poll tend to support solo play or group play. Objectively, even the players that want the old system back would likely still prefer to have groups in some capacity (even if it meant they wouldn't get their pubstomping back) as opposed to it being only solo queues.

If faced with the choice of better MMR and matchmaking so that everyone can enjoy the game more compared with pubstomping that make many games unenjoyable for solo players, I would hope that ZOS has the sense to choose the former. ZOS isn't stupid, even if I believe them to have made the wrong decision by locking things to being solo.

There are only, really, two sides to this. The side that thinks groups being allowed is the right choice has enough common ground that any rational person could concede to allow improvements or limitations to the system as long as they can play as a group. Those that want solo only are probably going to continue to want solo only, even if I believe that to be an excessively selfish viewpoint. However, I imagine that even some of the people that voted for solos would be in favor of groups if there was a good re-work of the system put forth by ZOS.

This poll is about opening the conversation about groups returning, and showing the thoughts of at least some sample of visitors on this board. The comments are for debating the form of those groups returning, but if it is clear to people that there is a pathway to a better PvP experience in group play than solo play, they should vote as such. I haven't seen anyone arguing for pubstomps, so I think your fear regarding that or what your vote may be characterized as is misplaced. Most of us just want to play with our friends, and have no opposition to the matchmaker doing what it has to (in terms of queue times, and opponents) in order to make even teams for fun games.

Elsonso

No

I can't vote Yes, so I have to vote No.

Only groups of 4 players should be accepted. No 2's or 3's.

wheem_ESO

RivenEsq wrote: »

There are only, really, two sides to this.

Gross oversimplification. To the point that it becomes incorrect.

RivenEsq wrote: »

However, I imagine that even some of the people that voted for solos would be in favor of groups if there was a good re-work of the system put forth by ZOS.

RivenEsq wrote: »

I haven't seen anyone arguing for pubstomps, so I think your fear regarding that or what your vote may be characterized as is misplaced.

It's too bad you set the poll up in such a way that it's unable to inform us on these things...