Battlegrounds objectives

WillyOneBlood

Why do 9/10 players never do the objectives in bg's. Nobody defends the relic. Nobody gets the ball. I don't understand it.

dinokstrunz

Because people want to PvP not run from point a to b. This is why people groan when they see any other game mode other than Deathmatch. If it was worth playing objectives then sure people would probably do so but the rewards are pretty much non existent.

WillyOneBlood

But the whole point of Battlegrounds is to play the objectives as a team. It's a different type of PvP. They should go to Cyrodiil if they just want deathmatch.

dinokstrunz

WillyOneBlood wrote: »

But the whole point of Battlegrounds is to play the objectives as a team. It's a different type of PvP. They should go to Cyrodiil if they just want deathmatch.

Play the way you want. Cyrodiil is dead or unplayable and IC is dead outside event hours.

Viewsfrom6ix

WillyOneBlood wrote: »

But the whole point of Battlegrounds is to play the objectives as a team. It's a different type of PvP. They should go to Cyrodiil if they just want deathmatch.

80% of the time, Cyrodil is a horse riding simulator.

IC is dead when there are no events.

BG is the only arena style of environment for fast paced action.

The BG community has been asking to split DM and objective queues for so long, but nothing so far.

WillyOneBlood

Doesn't matter if it's a horse simulator, when you go to Cyrodill you get the resources, take the keeps etc is the objectives of Cyrodiil. You're ruining bg's for the players that actually want to play what the mode was intended for.

alberichtano

Viewsfrom6ix wrote: »

WillyOneBlood wrote: »

But the whole point of Battlegrounds is to play the objectives as a team. It's a different type of PvP. They should go to Cyrodiil if they just want deathmatch.

80% of the time, Cyrodil is a horse riding simulator.

IC is dead when there are no events.

BG is the only arena style of environment for fast paced action.

The BG community has been asking to split DM and objective queues for so long, but nothing so far.

Interesting that... IC is dead, you say. Well of course it is if people are doing Battlegrounds wrong instead. :-/

alberichtano

Maybe they should just remove deathmatches all together. Make pure hack'n'slash "unprofitable" in battlegrounds. Maybe more people would go back to IC then.

WillyOneBlood

alberichtano wrote: »

Maybe they should just remove deathmatches all together. Make pure hack'n'slash "unprofitable" in battlegrounds. Maybe more people would go back to IC then.

100% agree. It would probably lower the player count in bg's but those players that stay mint actually play the way it was intended.

divnyi

alberichtano wrote: »

Maybe they should just remove deathmatches all together. Make pure hack'n'slash "unprofitable" in battlegrounds. Maybe more people would go back to IC then.

It will turn all the game modes into deathmatch mode.

IC is not a substitute for BGs. IC is open-world, so party size matters, unlike BGs with equal party sizes. IC players don't like to party because it ruins rewards. IC is PvPvE, and not pure PvP. Lastly, IC mechanics are hitting on players nerves more, when death is not just a regular thing, but also is a resource lost.

BGs need deathmatch queue. It is that simple.

xylena_lazarow

We gotta keep demanding separate queues for objectives and deathmatch. I generally enjoy objective based PvP but have to admit that it's pretty lame the way CTR and Crazy King actively reward you for avoiding fighting players, and actively punish you on the scoreboard for sticking around to finish fights. The current system is unfair and frustrating to objective players and deathmatchers alike. More people would play BGs if they could just choose the game mode they like.

Eevee_42

This is never going to be solved until a deathmatch queue is implemented. Deathmatch is pure pvp and objectives promote avoiding pvp and running around, so the conflict of interest is clear. Cyrodiil and IC are not viable alternatives either, BGs provide a unique deathmatch experience. The game mode will become much more enjoyable for both player types with separate queues.

Dakkx

WillyOneBlood wrote: »

But the whole point of Battlegrounds is to play the objectives as a team. It's a different type of PvP. They should go to Cyrodiil if they just want deathmatch.

There used to be a queue for deathmatch and there was never this much whining on this topic……. I wonder what changed

divnyi

Dakkx wrote: »

WillyOneBlood wrote: »

But the whole point of Battlegrounds is to play the objectives as a team. It's a different type of PvP. They should go to Cyrodiil if they just want deathmatch.

There used to be a queue for deathmatch and there was never this much whining on this topic……. I wonder what changed

They first removed the ability to join as a group because solo players were torn apart by organized 4man teams. But then people complained that they can't play BGs with their friends, so they made soloQ and groupQ, removing the option to select queue type (deathmatch, flags, capture).

Since deathmatch is the most popular (we had dozens of votes on the forums and it was prevalent if you just random queue) and people are tired to play modes they don't like, they treat all modes as a deathmatch because why not.

Dakkx

divnyi wrote: »

Dakkx wrote: »

WillyOneBlood wrote: »

But the whole point of Battlegrounds is to play the objectives as a team. It's a different type of PvP. They should go to Cyrodiil if they just want deathmatch.

There used to be a queue for deathmatch and there was never this much whining on this topic……. I wonder what changed

They first removed the ability to join as a group because solo players were torn apart by organized 4man teams. But then people complained that they can't play BGs with their friends, so they made soloQ and groupQ, removing the option to select queue type (deathmatch, flags, capture).

Since deathmatch is the most popular (we had dozens of votes on the forums and it was prevalent if you just random queue) and people are tired to play modes they don't like, they treat all modes as a deathmatch because why not.

That was a sarcastic response lol

Waffennacht

Because DM is more enjoyable, esp if you only have enough time for 1 or 2 matches

Daggerlock

just to reply to the first commenter. YES I protect the relic ...and I get so many kills when I do so. The relic become a kill zone lol.

As for the Ball chase ...its hard ....but if you follow the ball that's were the kill zone is ...common sense.

BRING BACK THESE CHALLENGES BACK AND MAKE MORE IF POSSIBLE ...I love them.

As regards the rest of the PVP...it needs some tweaking just to increase the momentum ..but its fun as a whole. Best PVP out there in my opinion but, as everything else on planet earth ....it always require mutation for the better.

But please, dont leave BG as Deathmatch more ..its boring. defending the relic was fabulous

exeeter702

WillyOneBlood wrote: »

alberichtano wrote: »

Maybe they should just remove deathmatches all together. Make pure hack'n'slash "unprofitable" in battlegrounds. Maybe more people would go back to IC then.

100% agree. It would probably lower the player count in bg's but those players that stay mint actually play the way it was intended.

Or, you know, give people that actually like to pvp without any of the superfluous nonsense an option to queue directly for deathmatch.

Then you will quickly see just how interested people are in playing your capture the flag mode.
Just dont come back here complaining about 30+ minute queues.

We have already done this song and dance before. Be thankful you have actual heads populating your Bg matches in the first place.

WillyOneBlood

You can still PvP while doing objectives. Capture the relic (most frustrating mode) can teach you you how to be more defensive by defending your relic. Chaos Ball can teach you how to inc

exeeter702 wrote: »

WillyOneBlood wrote: »

alberichtano wrote: »

Maybe they should just remove deathmatches all together. Make pure hack'n'slash "unprofitable" in battlegrounds. Maybe more people would go back to IC then.

100% agree. It would probably lower the player count in bg's but those players that stay mint actually play the way it was intended.

Or, you know, give people that actually like to pvp without any of the superfluous nonsense an option to queue directly for deathmatch.

Then you will quickly see just how interested people are in playing your capture the flag mode.
Just dont come back here complaining about 30+ minute queues.

We have already done this song and dance before. Be thankful you have actual heads populating your Bg matches in the first place.

You're missing the point entirely. Some people like to play flag games and ball games, hence why they qué for Battlegrounds. If you only want to play deathmatch go to Cyrodill and stop wasting your teams time by ignoring bg's objectives. You're the typical selfish player.

exeeter702

WillyOneBlood wrote: »

You can still PvP while doing objectives. Capture the relic (most frustrating mode) can teach you you how to be more defensive by defending your relic. Chaos Ball can teach you how to inc

exeeter702 wrote: »

WillyOneBlood wrote: »

alberichtano wrote: »

Maybe they should just remove deathmatches all together. Make pure hack'n'slash "unprofitable" in battlegrounds. Maybe more people would go back to IC then.

100% agree. It would probably lower the player count in bg's but those players that stay mint actually play the way it was intended.

Or, you know, give people that actually like to pvp without any of the superfluous nonsense an option to queue directly for deathmatch.

Then you will quickly see just how interested people are in playing your capture the flag mode.
Just dont come back here complaining about 30+ minute queues.

We have already done this song and dance before. Be thankful you have actual heads populating your Bg matches in the first place.

You're missing the point entirely. Some people like to play flag games and ball games, hence why they qué for Battlegrounds. If you only want to play deathmatch go to Cyrodill and stop wasting your teams time by ignoring bg's objectives. You're the typical selfish player.

I'm not missing any point whatsoever. I know full well there is a minority of players that participate in bgs that prefer objective modes.

I'm just trying to help you understand that most dont care those modes because of how terrible they are.

Have people in your matches "ruin" the game because they are ignoring the objectives or sit down and take your dead queues because given the choice, hardly anyone would actually bother intentionally queuing for objective mode bgs.

And if the source of the umbrage is simply the daily reward for the random bg being jeopardized, then to that I say such a selfish position to take is unreasonable. You have one bg daily and are on your way, meanwhile those that actually like to participate in instanced fast paced pvp regardless of the reward incentive are saddled with having to endure countless bg matches a day with gimmicky objectives that just get in the way and at worst actively incentivize avoiding fighting altogether.

The only actual solution is to give players the option to chose which mode they want and let natrual selection take its course, as it did in the past when 90 percent of the time a random bg queue was death match and objective modes were 10 times the wait time for a game to pop.

So frankly, be happy that you are getting bg pops at all. You stated that you would want them tone able to separate the game modes sonthe players in your matches actually cared about the objective, well that existed at one point and you had people on these very forums complaining to zos to fix their matchmaking because objective mode queues were taking forever, until the hard pipe of reality had to be laid down that the matchmaking was working as intended, just that no one queued for those modes. The issue only truly being pronounced in higher mmr.

moo_2021

Simple, the maps are not designed in a way to encourage engagement in objective modes.


I have - and probably many others from FPS background too, played plenty of CTFs and attack/defense where fighting is far more intense than DM.

Put two sides, either 4vs4 on a small map with single route/direction or 16vs16 on a bigger one with at most 2-3 routes. It wouldn't matter what strategy you use - If you want to go out or reach the objective, you have to fight for it and push forward inch by inch as a team, with respawn timer set like 10s max.

There are no 1vs1 fights but almost always XvsX, which reduce the unkillable situations greatly. Also there can be columns or spots for LOS, ranged / snipers, room for stealth to sneak through. What you cannot have, unlike the current BG maps, is to go somewhere that nobody can encounter you or vice versa.

Of course the server performance would need to be improved a lot for this to happen, or disable lagging sources: certain proc sets, ground effects, limit CC usage, etc.

exeeter702

moo_2021 wrote: »

Simple, the maps are not designed in a way to encourage engagement in objective modes.


I have - and probably many others from FPS background too, played plenty of CTFs and attack/defense where fighting is far more intense than DM.

Put two sides, either 4vs4 on a small map with single route/direction or 16vs16 on a bigger one with at most 2-3 routes. It wouldn't matter what strategy you use - If you want to go out or reach the objective, you have to fight for it and push forward inch by inch as a team, with respawn timer set like 10s max.

There are no 1vs1 fights but almost always XvsX, which reduce the unkillable situations greatly. Also there can be columns or spots for LOS, ranged / snipers, room for stealth to sneak through. What you cannot have, unlike the current BG maps, is to go somewhere that nobody can encounter you or vice versa.

Of course the server performance would need to be improved a lot for this to happen, or disable lagging sources: certain proc sets, ground effects, limit CC usage, etc.

You touch on an important issue that many completely disregard and one that many mmo devs knew well enough to avoid in other games that contain objective based battlegrounds.

Zos' major flaw here is that they tried to create one size fits all maps to accommodate various different types of game modes, and while they have attempted to band aid this issue by altering the topography/geography of the maps depending on the game mode that is rolled, it is just that, a band aid fix.

They should have never tried to go overboard with these game modes and I would further suggest as I have since the days before bgs were added and since day one when wheeler announced them on eso live, they should have never been 3 team affairs. Full stop.

Creat well designed maps that are built specifically for a particular objective based game mode, wherein the objective needs to be acknowledged and through the layout of the map, pvp encounters are garunteed and cant be avoided and lastly, said objective mandates that teams split up. Do this with a clean 8v8 format and you eliminate any criticisms of "8v8 would just be a zerg fest" and "objective modes dont encourage pvp". Add to this a meaningful reward structure that creates an actual incentive to win and you had a winning formula for bgs in ESO.

Instead, in their absolute fear of bgs not being casual enough, they made it into what we have today.

WillyOneBlood

moo_2021 wrote: »

Simple, the maps are not designed in a way to encourage engagement in objective modes.


I have - and probably many others from FPS background too, played plenty of CTFs and attack/defense where fighting is far more intense than DM.

Put two sides, either 4vs4 on a small map with single route/direction or 16vs16 on a bigger one with at most 2-3 routes. It wouldn't matter what strategy you use - If you want to go out or reach the objective, you have to fight for it and push forward inch by inch as a team, with respawn timer set like 10s max.

There are no 1vs1 fights but almost always XvsX, which reduce the unkillable situations greatly. Also there can be columns or spots for LOS, ranged / snipers, room for stealth to sneak through. What you cannot have, unlike the current BG maps, is to go somewhere that nobody can encounter you or vice versa.

Of course the server performance would need to be improved a lot for this to happen, or disable lagging sources: certain proc sets, ground effects, limit CC usage, etc.

Then don't play bg's and go to Cyrodill

moo_2021

WillyOneBlood wrote: »

Then don't play bg's and go to Cyrodill

And waste my time riding? No thanks. Still training my horses...

moo_2021

exeeter702 wrote: »

Creat well designed maps that are built specifically for a particular objective based game mode, wherein the objective needs to be acknowledged and through the layout of the map, pvp encounters are garunteed and cant be avoided and lastly, said objective mandates that teams split up. Do this with a clean 8v8 format and you eliminate any criticisms of "8v8 would just be a zerg fest" and "objective modes dont encourage pvp". Add to this a meaningful reward structure that creates an actual incentive to win and you had a winning formula for bgs in ESO.

They can allow community maps, and a map vote at the end of each game. Zero workload for them and we'll start seeing people staying in BG for hours.

xDeusEJRx

WillyOneBlood wrote: »

Why do 9/10 players never do the objectives in bg's. Nobody defends the relic. Nobody gets the ball. I don't understand it.

1. People want to play PVP
2. Deathmatch queue didn't exist in the game until they just now changed it so it's DM only in battlegrounds
3. People don't like horse riding in cyrodiil. Why should I go riding open world cyrodiil for 5 minutes to get to a fight that's already over, or search around for a fight when the map is dead? The only time cyrodiil is super action packed is when the hammer drops or someone just gets emperor and when that happens, it's only asking for lag because everyone is stacked on 1 keep.
4. There's very limited options for small scale pvp, sometimes I don't want to fight a zerg while taking a resource in cyrodiil and want to fight a small amount of people. Sure IC exists, but most people in IC are there to farm telvar, not many are there for small scale fights, which only leaves battlegrounds. (I don't count dueling because there's no actual dueling instance, there's no point waiting in towns to duel people since 90% of people in towns are there to do PVE stuff, not PVP.)
5. I don't want to have to siege keeps in order to fight people. If I don't siege in cyrodiil, chances are the enemy is just gonna sit inside their keep firing meatbags at me, with no incentive to come fight back

Need I say more?

WillyOneBlood

xDeusEJRx wrote: »

WillyOneBlood wrote: »

Why do 9/10 players never do the objectives in bg's. Nobody defends the relic. Nobody gets the ball. I don't understand it.

1. People want to play PVP
2. Deathmatch queue didn't exist in the game until they just now changed it so it's DM only in battlegrounds
3. People don't like horse riding in cyrodiil. Why should I go riding open world cyrodiil for 5 minutes to get to a fight that's already over, or search around for a fight when the map is dead? The only time cyrodiil is super action packed is when the hammer drops or someone just gets emperor and when that happens, it's only asking for lag because everyone is stacked on 1 keep.
4. There's very limited options for small scale pvp, sometimes I don't want to fight a zerg while taking a resource in cyrodiil and want to fight a small amount of people. Sure IC exists, but most people in IC are there to farm telvar, not many are there for small scale fights, which only leaves battlegrounds. (I don't count dueling because there's no actual dueling instance, there's no point waiting in towns to duel people since 90% of people in towns are there to do PVE stuff, not PVP.)
5. I don't want to have to siege keeps in order to fight people. If I don't siege in cyrodiil, chances are the enemy is just gonna sit inside their keep firing meatbags at me, with no incentive to come fight back

Need I say more?

If you want pure PvP go to Cyrodill instead of queing for a team based objectives mode. DM did exist but they took it out because of this exact reason. [snip]

[edited for rude/insulting comment]

jaws343

WillyOneBlood wrote: »

xDeusEJRx wrote: »

WillyOneBlood wrote: »

Why do 9/10 players never do the objectives in bg's. Nobody defends the relic. Nobody gets the ball. I don't understand it.

1. People want to play PVP
2. Deathmatch queue didn't exist in the game until they just now changed it so it's DM only in battlegrounds
3. People don't like horse riding in cyrodiil. Why should I go riding open world cyrodiil for 5 minutes to get to a fight that's already over, or search around for a fight when the map is dead? The only time cyrodiil is super action packed is when the hammer drops or someone just gets emperor and when that happens, it's only asking for lag because everyone is stacked on 1 keep.
4. There's very limited options for small scale pvp, sometimes I don't want to fight a zerg while taking a resource in cyrodiil and want to fight a small amount of people. Sure IC exists, but most people in IC are there to farm telvar, not many are there for small scale fights, which only leaves battlegrounds. (I don't count dueling because there's no actual dueling instance, there's no point waiting in towns to duel people since 90% of people in towns are there to do PVE stuff, not PVP.)
5. I don't want to have to siege keeps in order to fight people. If I don't siege in cyrodiil, chances are the enemy is just gonna sit inside their keep firing meatbags at me, with no incentive to come fight back

Need I say more?

If you want pure PvP go to Cyrodill instead of queing for a team based objectives mode. DM did exist but they took it out because of this exact reason. [snip]

They didn't take out DM. They took out all specific game mode queues.

Big difference.

The fact is, when there were specific game mode queues, DM was the most often recurring mode in the random queue. Why? Because more people queued directly for DM than the other game modes.

When they removed the individual queues, it had a negative, non player initiated, interaction with DM mode frequency. It went from DM being the most popular mode and the most frequent because players actually wanted to play it, to it being artificially pushed down due to math. When there are 5 game types, and 4 of the 5 are objective, it artificially favors the more unpopular game modes just due to the volume of modes to choose from. If DM were weighted better in the random queue to account for the 1 game mode being the only one of it's type against 4 objective modes, then it wouldn't be a problem. But with a 20% chance for the majority of players who actually play BGs for more than just their daily reward, 20% is almost nothing.

The way the queues were in the beginning clearly showed that DM was the most popular mode. And any kind of hand wringing you have to do to justify any arguments that DM is not liked is just that, hand wringing.

Also, BGs are PVP modes for smaller scale fights. Comparing to Cyrodil is just ridiculous and really shows a lack of understanding of what the purpose of BGs actually is. It is not a game mode for players to grind XP/AP without participating in actual PVP, it is a game mode meant to push teams into conflict far quicker than Cyrodil can ever do, on a much more even starting point.

[edited to remove quote]

WillyOneBlood

jaws343 wrote: »

WillyOneBlood wrote: »

xDeusEJRx wrote: »

WillyOneBlood wrote: »

Why do 9/10 players never do the objectives in bg's. Nobody defends the relic. Nobody gets the ball. I don't understand it.

1. People want to play PVP
2. Deathmatch queue didn't exist in the game until they just now changed it so it's DM only in battlegrounds
3. People don't like horse riding in cyrodiil. Why should I go riding open world cyrodiil for 5 minutes to get to a fight that's already over, or search around for a fight when the map is dead? The only time cyrodiil is super action packed is when the hammer drops or someone just gets emperor and when that happens, it's only asking for lag because everyone is stacked on 1 keep.
4. There's very limited options for small scale pvp, sometimes I don't want to fight a zerg while taking a resource in cyrodiil and want to fight a small amount of people. Sure IC exists, but most people in IC are there to farm telvar, not many are there for small scale fights, which only leaves battlegrounds. (I don't count dueling because there's no actual dueling instance, there's no point waiting in towns to duel people since 90% of people in towns are there to do PVE stuff, not PVP.)
5. I don't want to have to siege keeps in order to fight people. If I don't siege in cyrodiil, chances are the enemy is just gonna sit inside their keep firing meatbags at me, with no incentive to come fight back

Need I say more?

If you want pure PvP go to Cyrodill instead of queing for a team based objectives mode. DM did exist but they took it out because of this exact reason. [snip]

They didn't take out DM. They took out all specific game mode queues.

Big difference.

The fact is, when there were specific game mode queues, DM was the most often recurring mode in the random queue. Why? Because more people queued directly for DM than the other game modes.

When they removed the individual queues, it had a negative, non player initiated, interaction with DM mode frequency. It went from DM being the most popular mode and the most frequent because players actually wanted to play it, to it being artificially pushed down due to math. When there are 5 game types, and 4 of the 5 are objective, it artificially favors the more unpopular game modes just due to the volume of modes to choose from. If DM were weighted better in the random queue to account for the 1 game mode being the only one of it's type against 4 objective modes, then it wouldn't be a problem. But with a 20% chance for the majority of players who actually play BGs for more than just their daily reward, 20% is almost nothing.

The way the queues were in the beginning clearly showed that DM was the most popular mode. And any kind of hand wringing you have to do to justify any arguments that DM is not liked is just that, hand wringing.

Also, BGs are PVP modes for smaller scale fights. Comparing to Cyrodil is just ridiculous and really shows a lack of understanding of what the purpose of BGs actually is. It is not a game mode for players to grind XP/AP without participating in actual PVP, it is a game mode meant to push teams into conflict far quicker than Cyrodil can ever do, on a much more even starting point.

You just said they didn't take out DM but then literally in the sentence you said the took out all specific game modes. So either DM isn't a specific game mode or I'm missing something???? I stopped reading after that because you're comment started with a contradiction in its first two sentences.

[edited to remove quote]

jaws343

WillyOneBlood wrote: »

jaws343 wrote: »

WillyOneBlood wrote: »

xDeusEJRx wrote: »

WillyOneBlood wrote: »

Why do 9/10 players never do the objectives in bg's. Nobody defends the relic. Nobody gets the ball. I don't understand it.

1. People want to play PVP
2. Deathmatch queue didn't exist in the game until they just now changed it so it's DM only in battlegrounds
3. People don't like horse riding in cyrodiil. Why should I go riding open world cyrodiil for 5 minutes to get to a fight that's already over, or search around for a fight when the map is dead? The only time cyrodiil is super action packed is when the hammer drops or someone just gets emperor and when that happens, it's only asking for lag because everyone is stacked on 1 keep.
4. There's very limited options for small scale pvp, sometimes I don't want to fight a zerg while taking a resource in cyrodiil and want to fight a small amount of people. Sure IC exists, but most people in IC are there to farm telvar, not many are there for small scale fights, which only leaves battlegrounds. (I don't count dueling because there's no actual dueling instance, there's no point waiting in towns to duel people since 90% of people in towns are there to do PVE stuff, not PVP.)
5. I don't want to have to siege keeps in order to fight people. If I don't siege in cyrodiil, chances are the enemy is just gonna sit inside their keep firing meatbags at me, with no incentive to come fight back

Need I say more?

If you want pure PvP go to Cyrodill instead of queing for a team based objectives mode. DM did exist but they took it out because of this exact reason. [snip]

They didn't take out DM. They took out all specific game mode queues.

Big difference.

The fact is, when there were specific game mode queues, DM was the most often recurring mode in the random queue. Why? Because more people queued directly for DM than the other game modes.

When they removed the individual queues, it had a negative, non player initiated, interaction with DM mode frequency. It went from DM being the most popular mode and the most frequent because players actually wanted to play it, to it being artificially pushed down due to math. When there are 5 game types, and 4 of the 5 are objective, it artificially favors the more unpopular game modes just due to the volume of modes to choose from. If DM were weighted better in the random queue to account for the 1 game mode being the only one of it's type against 4 objective modes, then it wouldn't be a problem. But with a 20% chance for the majority of players who actually play BGs for more than just their daily reward, 20% is almost nothing.

The way the queues were in the beginning clearly showed that DM was the most popular mode. And any kind of hand wringing you have to do to justify any arguments that DM is not liked is just that, hand wringing.

Also, BGs are PVP modes for smaller scale fights. Comparing to Cyrodil is just ridiculous and really shows a lack of understanding of what the purpose of BGs actually is. It is not a game mode for players to grind XP/AP without participating in actual PVP, it is a game mode meant to push teams into conflict far quicker than Cyrodil can ever do, on a much more even starting point.

You just said they didn't take out DM but then literally in the sentence you said the took out all specific game modes. So either DM isn't a specific game mode or I'm missing something???? I stopped reading after that because you're comment started with a contradiction in its first two sentences.

DM was still in the game...

They didn't remove any game modes when they removed the individual queues. Not DM, not Chaosball, not domination. They just removed the ability to queue specifically for them. DM is still in the game, just mathematically disadvantaged.

[snip]
[edited for baiting & to remove quote]

WillyOneBlood

jaws343 wrote: »

WillyOneBlood wrote: »

jaws343 wrote: »

WillyOneBlood wrote: »

xDeusEJRx wrote: »

WillyOneBlood wrote: »

Why do 9/10 players never do the objectives in bg's. Nobody defends the relic. Nobody gets the ball. I don't understand it.

1. People want to play PVP
2. Deathmatch queue didn't exist in the game until they just now changed it so it's DM only in battlegrounds
3. People don't like horse riding in cyrodiil. Why should I go riding open world cyrodiil for 5 minutes to get to a fight that's already over, or search around for a fight when the map is dead? The only time cyrodiil is super action packed is when the hammer drops or someone just gets emperor and when that happens, it's only asking for lag because everyone is stacked on 1 keep.
4. There's very limited options for small scale pvp, sometimes I don't want to fight a zerg while taking a resource in cyrodiil and want to fight a small amount of people. Sure IC exists, but most people in IC are there to farm telvar, not many are there for small scale fights, which only leaves battlegrounds. (I don't count dueling because there's no actual dueling instance, there's no point waiting in towns to duel people since 90% of people in towns are there to do PVE stuff, not PVP.)
5. I don't want to have to siege keeps in order to fight people. If I don't siege in cyrodiil, chances are the enemy is just gonna sit inside their keep firing meatbags at me, with no incentive to come fight back

Need I say more?

If you want pure PvP go to Cyrodill instead of queing for a team based objectives mode. DM did exist but they took it out because of this exact reason. [snip]

They didn't take out DM. They took out all specific game mode queues.

Big difference.

The fact is, when there were specific game mode queues, DM was the most often recurring mode in the random queue. Why? Because more people queued directly for DM than the other game modes.

When they removed the individual queues, it had a negative, non player initiated, interaction with DM mode frequency. It went from DM being the most popular mode and the most frequent because players actually wanted to play it, to it being artificially pushed down due to math. When there are 5 game types, and 4 of the 5 are objective, it artificially favors the more unpopular game modes just due to the volume of modes to choose from. If DM were weighted better in the random queue to account for the 1 game mode being the only one of it's type against 4 objective modes, then it wouldn't be a problem. But with a 20% chance for the majority of players who actually play BGs for more than just their daily reward, 20% is almost nothing.

The way the queues were in the beginning clearly showed that DM was the most popular mode. And any kind of hand wringing you have to do to justify any arguments that DM is not liked is just that, hand wringing.

Also, BGs are PVP modes for smaller scale fights. Comparing to Cyrodil is just ridiculous and really shows a lack of understanding of what the purpose of BGs actually is. It is not a game mode for players to grind XP/AP without participating in actual PVP, it is a game mode meant to push teams into conflict far quicker than Cyrodil can ever do, on a much more even starting point.

You just said they didn't take out DM but then literally in the sentence you said the took out all specific game modes. So either DM isn't a specific game mode or I'm missing something???? I stopped reading after that because you're comment started with a contradiction in its first two sentences.

DM was still in the game...

They didn't remove any game modes when they removed the individual queues. Not DM, not Chaosball, not domination. They just removed the ability to queue specifically for them. DM is still in the game, just mathematically disadvantaged.

[snip]
[edited for baiting & to remove quote]

Nobody said they removed it from the game. [snip]

[edited for baiting]