BGs matchmaking needs... a lot of work

CaffeinatedMayhem

I've started battlegrounds again, for the lead. Not getting the lead easily, so I'm stuck doing tons of matches. There seem to be a 3 types:

1. Get put in a half finished deathmatch on the team with only 3 people (who are losing)
2. Get put in any other game and lose 500-0-0
3. Get put in any game and win 500-0-0

It takes about 10 matches to win 3, and it's usually a shutout if you do win. Honestly, I don't find any of these fun. I don't like stomping on people for 5 mins, nor do I like being stomped on for 5 mins. And being stuck into half finished games on the team that's short 1 is always a loss.

Devs, if you're wondering why BGs aren't popular... this is why. It's not that we hate queueing solo (which most of us do), it's that the games aren't evenly matched!

Sarannah

There is also starting a game with just three on your team... which means a very high chance of losing. Sometimes it takes a few tries to even get the daily BG bonus exp done.

Solo queueing is actually a good thing, otherwise some teams would outmatch anything they would be put up against. Right now anyone can have a good team, and anyone can have a bad team. Getting many bad teams in a row is basically impossible because of it. Whereas with team-queueing, some players would keep getting put against the same premade. Causing them to lose non-stop. This is why in my opinion solo queueing is alot better.

I also do not get MMR: the better you do, the more horrible your team will become, and the stronger your opponents(so the more you'll start losing)?... just remove MMR and make it all random, this would be most fair.

And yeah, personally I never do the BG quests, all except for the 1000 points one is horrible. Would love to see the three win and 5 games ones replaced. Replaced with easier ones: Kill 5 players, capture a flag(+95% chance of CTF BG), hold the chaosball for a minimum of 10 points(+95% chance to get a chaosball BG), stuff like that. Easy to do, but you still have to do it.

PS: I'm just speaking about below-50's BG's.

CaffeinatedMayhem

Oh I'm not saying that we should go back to the old queue at all. Honestly, I wouldn't mind a pre-made groups queue for those who wish to, because having coordinated teams with discord vs. random pugs was awful.

I still get about 2x as many "bad" teams as good ones. Usually a "bad" team is just people who are new to BGs and don't get the different games, people who think every game is deathmatch, and people who hide in a corner so they don't die... plus 1-2 players trying to score for that game.

A "good" team is 4 players with PvP builds who know the game. That's it. Except that one team of 3 DKs in Elfbane + grothdarr and a templar. That was just ridiculous.

Karmanorway

Yes its very unbalanced. When i go there im expecting to lose beforehand, but still better AP from that then being zerged by yellow and red ballgroups working together in Cyrodiil 😂

dhboy123

Battlegrounds are broken, no point playing them.

Don't see ZOS fixing this in the future, many people have mentioned how bad they are with no reply.

ForeverJenn

You get 3 people in your BG team?! I usually get 2! Lol that's a bit of an exaggeration but it would be awesome to have a competitive system for premades too.

Karmanorway

I got 3 cp10 - 50s stamblade snipers and a magblade here the other day, we were put up against 3 Grand Overlords and the rest was a mix of earthgore stacking full cp necros and wardens... Yeah try to imagine how disastrous that fight turned out

prof-dracko

I usually get a three-teamer. If I have the 1000 point or play 5 then I roll with it, but there's practically no chance of winning. One time I ws dropped into a two-team. Me and the other person both decided it wasn't worth our time and bounced. It's preposterous.