Maintenance for the week of December 23:
• NA megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
• EU megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 14:00 UTC (9:00AM EST)
• NA megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
• EU megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 14:00 UTC (9:00AM EST)
Upcoming Changes to Battleground Queues
-
trackdemon5512✭✭✭✭✭
✭thesarahandcompany wrote: »ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »Hi everyone, thanks so much for your participation, patience and feedback while we experimented with only having the Deathmatch game mode available. It was important for us to run this for a few weeks to ensure we had an accurate representation of overall involvement and interest in Battlegrounds during this time.
First, it’s valuable to note the general feedback on this test was quite polarizing. While there were certainly a lot of players that liked only having Deathmatch available, there were just as many that didn’t enjoy it. A frequent complaint we saw, though, was the disappointment that we removed something that is ultimately at the core of our game: the freedom of choice. And in the case of this test, the data appeared to back that up as well. Although we initially saw a very slight bump in participation, it quickly declined and has left Battleground populations in a fairly unhealthy state.
Starting with the launch of Update 32 (November 1 for PC/Mac/Stadia and November 16 for consoles), we’ll be giving you more choices to decide which game mode to queue into depending on if you are playing solo or with a group. These will include:- Solo Deathmatch
- Solo Random Battleground
- Group Deathmatch
- Group Random Battleground
We’ll continue to monitor the sentiment and participation rates with Battlegrounds once this rolls out next month, and we’ll let you know if we plan for any additional changes. Thanks again for posting all your thoughts during this time!
Thanks for the update. I would pushback on the idea that BGs were in an unhealthy state, depending on what that means.
If we're thinking population of BGs as health/he unhealthy, I believe that the test has been too short and that New World has carved into EVERY aspect of the game. As such, I still support extending the DM only queue until the new year and next DLC chapter release once the New World hype cools off.
The test covered PC, XBOX, and PS. New World is just a PC game. With that said it’s highly unlikely players, particularly BG players, all jumped ship to play such a game. For console players it’s even more unlikely as many players don’t play on multiple platforms.
The number of players that already abandoned the new BG DM only queue must have been drastic for so short a test. Enough that extending the test would have either hurt appreciation for the mode or provided so few players that their engagement is meaningless.
Most importantly, even in light of New World coming out it’s ZOS’s goal to increase overall player engagement with Battlegrounds and other in-game activities. If the majority of BG players dropped out because of NW that means that their test isn’t addressing that issue. Their test would only concern a small selective population of unique BG die hards and any data gleaned from them is of no real help.
I personally said from the get go that this test was flawed. It sought to combat an issue (players treating all BG game modes as DMs) by giving a problematic group exactly what they had been clambering for. They got it, they briefly enjoyed it at the expensive of the more casual players or those that wanted flag games who the left.
And then the DM only players left the mode. Appeasement was temporary and BGs is worse as a format than where it was when the test started. Now ZOS has to attract players back into the mode to even get a proper sample to help inform them because as of now the players remaining are die hards and not the casuals desired.
Oh and there is still no answer to dealing with players that treat all BG modes as Deathmatches.2 -
propertyOfUndefined✭✭✭✭✭trackdemon5512 wrote: »Sooooo what happens when the queue for Deathmatches only plummets like it did with this test? Are those players just gonna sit in queue for hours possibly or will they join the random queue, hope for a deathmatch, and then continue the kill everything and ignore the objective for flag games when they come up?
I'm part of a pretty big, very active pvp guild where the vast majority of members are only interested in Death Match Battlegrounds. Worst case scenario for the DM queue is it becomes dominated by my guildies. Not necessarily a bad thing... I doubt the death match queue will lose its audience if only for this reason.
This is a win as far as I'm concerned.
0 -
xDeusEJRx✭✭✭✭✭
✭.ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »Hi everyone, thanks so much for your participation, patience and feedback while we experimented with only having the Deathmatch game mode available. It was important for us to run this for a few weeks to ensure we had an accurate representation of overall involvement and interest in Battlegrounds during this time.
First, it’s valuable to note the general feedback on this test was quite polarizing. While there were certainly a lot of players that liked only having Deathmatch available, there were just as many that didn’t enjoy it. A frequent complaint we saw, though, was the disappointment that we removed something that is ultimately at the core of our game: the freedom of choice. And in the case of this test, the data appeared to back that up as well. Although we initially saw a very slight bump in participation, it quickly declined and has left Battleground populations in a fairly unhealthy state.
Starting with the launch of Update 32 (November 1 for PC/Mac/Stadia and November 16 for consoles), we’ll be giving you more choices to decide which game mode to queue into depending on if you are playing solo or with a group. These will include:- Solo Deathmatch
- Solo Random Battleground
- Group Deathmatch
- Group Random Battleground
We’ll continue to monitor the sentiment and participation rates with Battlegrounds once this rolls out next month, and we’ll let you know if we plan for any additional changes. Thanks again for posting all your thoughts during this time!
I just want to understand why they even took away specific queues in the first place. You could queue originally however you wanted to and bgs even enabled CP back in the day and Zos just one day decided they wanted to take away all of that. I just think it's kind of goofy how it even got to this point when BGs options were fine originally anyways.Solo PvP'er PS5 NA player
90% of my body is made of Magblade0 -
jaws343✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭.ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »Hi everyone, thanks so much for your participation, patience and feedback while we experimented with only having the Deathmatch game mode available. It was important for us to run this for a few weeks to ensure we had an accurate representation of overall involvement and interest in Battlegrounds during this time.
First, it’s valuable to note the general feedback on this test was quite polarizing. While there were certainly a lot of players that liked only having Deathmatch available, there were just as many that didn’t enjoy it. A frequent complaint we saw, though, was the disappointment that we removed something that is ultimately at the core of our game: the freedom of choice. And in the case of this test, the data appeared to back that up as well. Although we initially saw a very slight bump in participation, it quickly declined and has left Battleground populations in a fairly unhealthy state.
Starting with the launch of Update 32 (November 1 for PC/Mac/Stadia and November 16 for consoles), we’ll be giving you more choices to decide which game mode to queue into depending on if you are playing solo or with a group. These will include:- Solo Deathmatch
- Solo Random Battleground
- Group Deathmatch
- Group Random Battleground
We’ll continue to monitor the sentiment and participation rates with Battlegrounds once this rolls out next month, and we’ll let you know if we plan for any additional changes. Thanks again for posting all your thoughts during this time!
I just want to understand why they even took away specific queues in the first place. You could queue originally however you wanted to and bgs even enabled CP back in the day and Zos just one day decided they wanted to take away all of that. I just think it's kind of goofy how it even got to this point when BGs options were fine originally anyways.
Back in the day BGs were incredibly unbalanced and unhealthy because solo and teams were all in the same queues. It made running solo in the queue a complete nightmare. They removed individual queues to simplify the queue system after splitting to a group and solo queue.
Honestly, had they weighted DM differently in the random queues I think things would be fine. But keeping DM at a 1 in 5 chance to show up was a mistake since DM is the only non objective mode. It should have a 50% chance to get DM and a 50% chance to get one of the other 4 objective modes.
0 -
MreeBiPolar✭✭✭✭✭ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »Starting with the launch of Update 32 (November 1 for PC/Mac/Stadia and November 16 for consoles), we’ll be giving you more choices to decide which game mode to queue into depending on if you are playing solo or with a group. These will include:
- Solo Deathmatch
- Solo Random Battleground
- Group Deathmatch
- Group Random Battleground
Can you also remove the deserter penalty for leaving Deathmatch if getting it by queuing for Random?
(Only half joking.)
Edit: Seriously, won't it have been much better (even for testing the interest) to make it kinda like the dungeon finder, with checkboxes for which modes you wanna queue to?Edited by MreeBiPolar on October 16, 2021 12:06PM2 -
TROJAN_KNIGHTSoul ShrivenZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »
- Solo Deathmatch
- Solo Random Battleground
- Group Deathmatch
- Group Random Battleground
Why add Deathmatch to the Random Battleground if it has its own queue. Keep Random with just the other game modes and Deathmatch apart. In the past Deathmatch queued up alot in the Random Battleground, more than any other mode, most of the time, I found my self before the load screen popped up hoping the next match was not Deathmatch but something different.4 -
the1andonlyskwex✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭TROJAN_KNIGHT wrote: »ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »- Solo Deathmatch
- Solo Random Battleground
- Group Deathmatch
- Group Random Battleground
Why add Deathmatch to the Random Battleground if it has its own queue. Keep Random with just the other game modes and Deathmatch apart. In the past Deathmatch queued up alot in the Random Battleground, more than any other mode, most of the time, I found my self before the load screen popped up hoping the next match was not Deathmatch but something different.
While I share your sentiment about the old random queue popping deathmatch more than I'd like, I'm sure the reasoning for the semi-combined queue is to help people get into matches more quickly. For example, if there are 2 people in the DM queue and 10 in the random queue, that's enough to pop a deathmatch if the queues are semi-combined, but not enough to pop anything if the queues are totally separate.0 -
trackdemon5512✭✭✭✭✭
✭propertyOfUndefined wrote: »trackdemon5512 wrote: »Sooooo what happens when the queue for Deathmatches only plummets like it did with this test? Are those players just gonna sit in queue for hours possibly or will they join the random queue, hope for a deathmatch, and then continue the kill everything and ignore the objective for flag games when they come up?
I'm part of a pretty big, very active pvp guild where the vast majority of members are only interested in Death Match Battlegrounds. Worst case scenario for the DM queue is it becomes dominated by my guildies. Not necessarily a bad thing... I doubt the death match queue will lose its audience if only for this reason.
This is a win as far as I'm concerned.
That’s great.
BUT, that’s at max 500 players on a single platform who can’t be on at all times. And even if they were constantly on it means BG matches would consistently find you against the same names due to how small the population currently is. It was that way before the test when the population was slightly healthier.
I believe the goal is have BGs as popular as a dungeon queue or entering Cyrodiil. Enough players around so that you aren’t questing/PvPing with the same individuals all the time? In those two modes you do of course see many of the same names from time to time. In Cyrodiil the most vociferous make themselves known in Zone chat. But there are enough players to always see new people.
BGs hasn’t been like that for years. You queue up on a weekend for a random, you get several ppl you’ve seen before and possibly some open spots. You repeatedly queue one after another and those same names keep coming up. Those gaps in teams with absent members keep appearing.
That’s not healthy. It’s like looking at the wild population of an endangered or nearly extinct species in the real world. And as in both efforts must be taken to shore up that population to a point where they function well on their own without active intervention.0 -
xDeusEJRx✭✭✭✭✭
✭.ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »Hi everyone, thanks so much for your participation, patience and feedback while we experimented with only having the Deathmatch game mode available. It was important for us to run this for a few weeks to ensure we had an accurate representation of overall involvement and interest in Battlegrounds during this time.
First, it’s valuable to note the general feedback on this test was quite polarizing. While there were certainly a lot of players that liked only having Deathmatch available, there were just as many that didn’t enjoy it. A frequent complaint we saw, though, was the disappointment that we removed something that is ultimately at the core of our game: the freedom of choice. And in the case of this test, the data appeared to back that up as well. Although we initially saw a very slight bump in participation, it quickly declined and has left Battleground populations in a fairly unhealthy state.
Starting with the launch of Update 32 (November 1 for PC/Mac/Stadia and November 16 for consoles), we’ll be giving you more choices to decide which game mode to queue into depending on if you are playing solo or with a group. These will include:- Solo Deathmatch
- Solo Random Battleground
- Group Deathmatch
- Group Random Battleground
We’ll continue to monitor the sentiment and participation rates with Battlegrounds once this rolls out next month, and we’ll let you know if we plan for any additional changes. Thanks again for posting all your thoughts during this time!
I just want to understand why they even took away specific queues in the first place. You could queue originally however you wanted to and bgs even enabled CP back in the day and Zos just one day decided they wanted to take away all of that. I just think it's kind of goofy how it even got to this point when BGs options were fine originally anyways.
Back in the day BGs were incredibly unbalanced and unhealthy because solo and teams were all in the same queues. It made running solo in the queue a complete nightmare. They removed individual queues to simplify the queue system after splitting to a group and solo queue.
Honestly, had they weighted DM differently in the random queues I think things would be fine. But keeping DM at a 1 in 5 chance to show up was a mistake since DM is the only non objective mode. It should have a 50% chance to get DM and a 50% chance to get one of the other 4 objective modes.
All they had to do was implement a MMR system, which they ended up doing anyways. Nowadays if your MMR is high enough you will get paired up against a premade group anyways. That would've solved problems instead of constantly taking away options from BGsSolo PvP'er PS5 NA player
90% of my body is made of Magblade0 -
jaws343✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭.ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »Hi everyone, thanks so much for your participation, patience and feedback while we experimented with only having the Deathmatch game mode available. It was important for us to run this for a few weeks to ensure we had an accurate representation of overall involvement and interest in Battlegrounds during this time.
First, it’s valuable to note the general feedback on this test was quite polarizing. While there were certainly a lot of players that liked only having Deathmatch available, there were just as many that didn’t enjoy it. A frequent complaint we saw, though, was the disappointment that we removed something that is ultimately at the core of our game: the freedom of choice. And in the case of this test, the data appeared to back that up as well. Although we initially saw a very slight bump in participation, it quickly declined and has left Battleground populations in a fairly unhealthy state.
Starting with the launch of Update 32 (November 1 for PC/Mac/Stadia and November 16 for consoles), we’ll be giving you more choices to decide which game mode to queue into depending on if you are playing solo or with a group. These will include:- Solo Deathmatch
- Solo Random Battleground
- Group Deathmatch
- Group Random Battleground
We’ll continue to monitor the sentiment and participation rates with Battlegrounds once this rolls out next month, and we’ll let you know if we plan for any additional changes. Thanks again for posting all your thoughts during this time!
I just want to understand why they even took away specific queues in the first place. You could queue originally however you wanted to and bgs even enabled CP back in the day and Zos just one day decided they wanted to take away all of that. I just think it's kind of goofy how it even got to this point when BGs options were fine originally anyways.
Back in the day BGs were incredibly unbalanced and unhealthy because solo and teams were all in the same queues. It made running solo in the queue a complete nightmare. They removed individual queues to simplify the queue system after splitting to a group and solo queue.
Honestly, had they weighted DM differently in the random queues I think things would be fine. But keeping DM at a 1 in 5 chance to show up was a mistake since DM is the only non objective mode. It should have a 50% chance to get DM and a 50% chance to get one of the other 4 objective modes.
All they had to do was implement a MMR system, which they ended up doing anyways. Nowadays if your MMR is high enough you will get paired up against a premade group anyways. That would've solved problems instead of constantly taking away options from BGs
If you join the solo queue you will never face a premade group, no matter the mmr. And that is a good thing.1 -
Destai✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »Hi everyone, thanks so much for your participation, patience and feedback while we experimented with only having the Deathmatch game mode available. It was important for us to run this for a few weeks to ensure we had an accurate representation of overall involvement and interest in Battlegrounds during this time.
First, it’s valuable to note the general feedback on this test was quite polarizing. While there were certainly a lot of players that liked only having Deathmatch available, there were just as many that didn’t enjoy it. A frequent complaint we saw, though, was the disappointment that we removed something that is ultimately at the core of our game: the freedom of choice. And in the case of this test, the data appeared to back that up as well. Although we initially saw a very slight bump in participation, it quickly declined and has left Battleground populations in a fairly unhealthy state.
Starting with the launch of Update 32 (November 1 for PC/Mac/Stadia and November 16 for consoles), we’ll be giving you more choices to decide which game mode to queue into depending on if you are playing solo or with a group. These will include:- Solo Deathmatch
- Solo Random Battleground
- Group Deathmatch
- Group Random Battleground
We’ll continue to monitor the sentiment and participation rates with Battlegrounds once this rolls out next month, and we’ll let you know if we plan for any additional changes. Thanks again for posting all your thoughts during this time!
Good information, thanks! I think overall, you need to better incentivize battlegrounds and let people choose their mode - even as experiment to see which one people like better.
Update 32 looks like it's going to really rock btw.Edited by Destai on October 17, 2021 3:33PM1 -
TROJAN_KNIGHTSoul ShrivenDestai wrote:
Good information, thanks! I think overall, you need to better incentivize battlegrounds and let people choose their mode - even as experiment to see which one people like better.
Update 32 looks like it's going to really rock btw.
I agree with you on incentives, they are lacking, most incentives are the same gear set items you already have, you get more exp in open world in 10 to 15 minutes than in BG, you might get 1 to 4 transmute crystals every 12 to 15 games, not much gold. So if the time you put in the game is more rewarding in other activities, you will see a low player count in this game mode, some players might like BG, but some might feel that the time they have to play is not rewarding enough to play BG.
I've never been really happy with the rewards, you can buy sets, no need to farm, in the time you get 10 transmute crystals on 1 toon you can do 3 daily dungeons on 3 toons and you'll have 30 transmute crystals and more gold. I play BG for fun, because I don't expect much reward for the time I play in BG, except for the occasional motif.
And for game mode, do something like the shooter games that have two options when you go into a pre-match lobby, and after everybody's already selected, if they leave and they don't like what was chosen by their group then they get penalized, which is fair, have team deathmatch and the other modes, the one that's chosen is the next match by majority.
example,
load players > lock in players (standing in respective zones) > choose mode (Deathmatch or Chaos Ball) > result (Deathmatch (3) / Chaos Ball (9) ) > next match Chaos Ball.
you can put this choice at the 30 seconds wait when players are standing each in there zones. that way no double load screens.
put this as a test and see if it works.
You can even add a carryover system which would carry over the 12 players to the next match without having to choose from the menu again to join a match and if it ends up in a tie verdict just put the game mode that was not played in the last match. And since at the end of a match you have the option to leave it wouldn't be an issue, the remaining players will carry over and the system will fill the empty spots with anybody trying to join a random. if the game mode is a solo queue just mix up all the players for the next match, that way in solo queue mode you always play with new players on each match.Edited by TROJAN_KNIGHT on October 17, 2021 5:07PM0 -
zack723_ESO✭✭✭ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »Hi everyone, thanks so much for your participation, patience and feedback while we experimented with only having the Deathmatch game mode available. It was important for us to run this for a few weeks to ensure we had an accurate representation of overall involvement and interest in Battlegrounds during this time.
First, it’s valuable to note the general feedback on this test was quite polarizing. While there were certainly a lot of players that liked only having Deathmatch available, there were just as many that didn’t enjoy it. A frequent complaint we saw, though, was the disappointment that we removed something that is ultimately at the core of our game: the freedom of choice. And in the case of this test, the data appeared to back that up as well. Although we initially saw a very slight bump in participation, it quickly declined and has left Battleground populations in a fairly unhealthy state.
Starting with the launch of Update 32 (November 1 for PC/Mac/Stadia and November 16 for consoles), we’ll be giving you more choices to decide which game mode to queue into depending on if you are playing solo or with a group. These will include:- Solo Deathmatch
- Solo Random Battleground
- Group Deathmatch
- Group Random Battleground
We’ll continue to monitor the sentiment and participation rates with Battlegrounds once this rolls out next month, and we’ll let you know if we plan for any additional changes. Thanks again for posting all your thoughts during this time!
if choice is so important than shouldn't we be able to chose witch mode we want to queue for i like flag games and dont care much for the others i would love to be able to just choose flag games solo or group? i get that death match is more pop but choice is the spice of life3 -
renne✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »Hi everyone, thanks so much for your participation, patience and feedback while we experimented with only having the Deathmatch game mode available. It was important for us to run this for a few weeks to ensure we had an accurate representation of overall involvement and interest in Battlegrounds during this time.
First, it’s valuable to note the general feedback on this test was quite polarizing. While there were certainly a lot of players that liked only having Deathmatch available, there were just as many that didn’t enjoy it. A frequent complaint we saw, though, was the disappointment that we removed something that is ultimately at the core of our game: the freedom of choice. And in the case of this test, the data appeared to back that up as well. Although we initially saw a very slight bump in participation, it quickly declined and has left Battleground populations in a fairly unhealthy state.
Starting with the launch of Update 32 (November 1 for PC/Mac/Stadia and November 16 for consoles), we’ll be giving you more choices to decide which game mode to queue into depending on if you are playing solo or with a group. These will include:- Solo Deathmatch
- Solo Random Battleground
- Group Deathmatch
- Group Random Battleground
We’ll continue to monitor the sentiment and participation rates with Battlegrounds once this rolls out next month, and we’ll let you know if we plan for any additional changes. Thanks again for posting all your thoughts during this time!
Yeah, you know why you saw a quick decline in people playing BGs? Because you did this test at the same time you released the insanely broken Dark Convergence and Hrothgar's Chill sets, which made the mode incredibly, INCREDIBLY unfun to play.
My group, we wanted to play DMs, but we stopped playing DM because those sets were so broken it wasn't fun to be constantly ping ponged around by the pull of 7 different people dropping a DC on you.2 -
Cirantille✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Very good call indeed, giving people the choice so they can play the way they want
Hopefully zos will do the same with no proc, no cp campaign and give us the option to play our sets in no cp once again0 -
Kelinmiriel✭✭✭✭I can understand the reasoning behind not splitting up the queue into solo/group and also each individual game, because of a concern for long wait times. So, given that, may I toss out two possible solutions that could be better for a lot more players.
Option 1: Same number of queues (4)
- Solo deathmatch
- Group deathmatch
- Solo non-deathmatch (random among all other games)
- Group non-deathmatch (random among all other games)
Option 2: 6 queues instead of 4
Same as Option 1, plus
- Solo random
- Group random
I believe either of these two options would be a better choice, because it seems that most battleground players are clearly split into either deathmatch, or objectives. I'm sure there are some who are willing to do either, though.
One of the advantages of Option 2 over the system that's about to be implemented, involves the probabilities that have already been pointed out. If a completely random queue does indeed end up putting someone in deathmatches more than they'd care for, they'd have a choice to opt out of it when they get tired of deathmatches and want to do something different, by going into the non-deathmatch queue.Event Tracker addon (PC NA/EU)
Helps you keep track of your Event Tickets, so you don't miss any. Double XP on events is PASSIVE now!!3 -
Franchise408✭✭✭✭✭ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »Hi everyone, thanks so much for your participation, patience and feedback while we experimented with only having the Deathmatch game mode available. It was important for us to run this for a few weeks to ensure we had an accurate representation of overall involvement and interest in Battlegrounds during this time.
First, it’s valuable to note the general feedback on this test was quite polarizing. While there were certainly a lot of players that liked only having Deathmatch available, there were just as many that didn’t enjoy it. A frequent complaint we saw, though, was the disappointment that we removed something that is ultimately at the core of our game: the freedom of choice. And in the case of this test, the data appeared to back that up as well. Although we initially saw a very slight bump in participation, it quickly declined and has left Battleground populations in a fairly unhealthy state.
Starting with the launch of Update 32 (November 1 for PC/Mac/Stadia and November 16 for consoles), we’ll be giving you more choices to decide which game mode to queue into depending on if you are playing solo or with a group. These will include:- Solo Deathmatch
- Solo Random Battleground
- Group Deathmatch
- Group Random Battleground
We’ll continue to monitor the sentiment and participation rates with Battlegrounds once this rolls out next month, and we’ll let you know if we plan for any additional changes. Thanks again for posting all your thoughts during this time!
Why can't we get an objectives queue too?3 -
renne✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Ulfhethinn wrote: »Random queues should not include Deathmatch.
You're not going to get deathmatch, you're just going to get 5 capture the relic games in a row and then maybe one flag objective.0 -
Minyassa✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭I don't understand why they've decided to include Deathmatch in with the random queue. Instead of Deathmatch/Random why not have Deathmatch/Objectives? If we wanted to play Deathmatch we'd be in the Deathmatch queue. How about just making it so we can choose between Deathmatch and objective games?5 -
Rex-Umbra✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭I only want to play objective. Won't play deathmatch I'd play a fps if I wanted that too feel like $hit.Xbox GT: Rex Umbrah
GM of IMPERIUM since 2015.1 -
Franchise408✭✭✭✭✭Ulfhethinn wrote: »Random queues should not include Deathmatch.
You're not going to get deathmatch, you're just going to get 5 capture the relic games in a row and then maybe one flag objective.
You absolutely can get Deathmatch.
This current setup means DM players can always play their preferred mode 100% of the time, but non-DM players cannot.
It's not an equitable system5 -
axi✭✭✭✭✭StarOfElyon wrote: »Although we initially saw a very slight bump in participation, it quickly declined and has left Battleground populations in a fairly unhealthy state.
Two words: DARK CONVERGENCE!
This excatly. Seriously if they think DM only mode had bigger impact on dwindling BG population then dark convergence then they really havn't learned their lesson. Lots of people stopped to participate in BGs or reduced their playtime just to 1-2BG per day simply because dark convergence turned that place into completly unhealthy mess.Edited by axi on October 21, 2021 2:40AM1 -
renne✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Franchise408 wrote: »Ulfhethinn wrote: »Random queues should not include Deathmatch.
You're not going to get deathmatch, you're just going to get 5 capture the relic games in a row and then maybe one flag objective.
You absolutely can get Deathmatch.
This current setup means DM players can always play their preferred mode 100% of the time, but non-DM players cannot.
It's not an equitable system
I was talking about the random queue, which before the current set up, the moon and stars had to be in perfect alignment to ever get a deathmatch, but what is sarcasm, we just don't know.0 -
CuriousChrisKSoul ShrivenFor me personally when I first got into BGs I loved the aspect of all the different games and being able to choose.
Over the years of playing I've dipped in and out of BGs and I think we should be allowed to choose what game or type of game to queue for.
Reason being is I am not a huge fan of Deathmatch whereas I've always loved Crazy King & Domination because they are fun and decent objective to target. I like Capture the Relic & Chaos Ball because they give you a bit of both (objective & PvP).
Deathmatch for me is a huge hit and miss especially if a solo player. It's total roulette on who you get teamed up with and even if the teams are full. I'll admit I'm not a great PvP player but I do enjoy it. It is fun.
Give us the choice of which game/game type to queue for please.I miss the days of being able to climb the Leaderboards for certain games. If not, Take Deathmatch out of the Random Queue please. It will make life easier for those who don't enjoy Deathmatch.0 -
Merforum✭✭✭✭✭CyberOnEso wrote: »I think this is a good change, I don't think it fixes the issue as to why so few players take part in battlegrounds to begin with but it is a good idea.
However, with the random queue queuing you up for all modes, this sort of merges the queues together, and this is very intentional and kind of smart so kudos to whomever came up with this idea, as it will help keep queue times down.
However, let us say 11 people are in the 'Random Battleground' queue, and then a 12th person, of similar MMR, queues in, but into the 'Deathmatch Only' queue. The queue coordinator will match all 12 of these people together into a Deathmatch battleground because the queue coordinator wants to put people into games as soon as possible. Due to this there is a good chance that nearly every single game will be in Deathmatch mode, simply because the queue coordinator wants to create matches as soon as possible and more than 1 out of every 12 people will probably choose 'Deathmatch Only', resulting in every match being Deathmatch only.
If any additional logic has been introduced behind the scenes to help lessen this effect I would love to hear about it, but I am worried that due to sheer probability and the way the queue coordinator presumably works nearly all matches will be Deathmatch, regardless of what queue you join.
If this is the way that the queue coordinator works, puts 12 people into a valid battleground as soon as possible. Then if 30% of people choose 'Deathmatch only' then 98.96% of games will be Deathmatches. As you need 12 people to queue into the 'Random Battlegrounds' queue to make a match that has a 75% chance of being a non- deathmatch battleground.(1-0.3)^12 = The probability that 12 people queue into the 'Random Battlegrounds' queue without anyone else queuing into the 'Deathmatch only' mode, presuming 30% of people choose 'Deathmatch only'
*0.75 Because even if that happens it's only a 75% chance that it will be a non- deathmatch mode.
98.96% = 1-(((1-0.3)^12)*0.75)
Maybe there are additional behind-the-scenes stuff going on to prevent this, but if the queue finder wants to make games as fast as possible the fastest way to put 12 people into a bg is to make them all Deathmatches.
Exactly, without LOGIC to limit random from DMs, this is a very bad idea to merge the random with the deathmatch only. (And doesn't make sense, because as people keep saying the deathmatch only is so popular why does it need to be backfilled.) (Although this test proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that deathmatch is NOT as popular as the super loud 20-30 people who play it all day and spam the forums say it is).
Without LOGIC as you say this is just trying to trick non-DMers to come back but get put into DMs only EVERY TIME. Ideally the queues should NOT BE MERGED, let them live or die on their own. But if the have to be merged they should ONLY backfill the DM queue from the random queue when 3 or less people are required, meaning there should always be at least 9 people who queued specifically for DM before anyone from random queue gets stuck with them.
Or here is another way the logic can work, after backfilling the DM only queue one time the system should specifically NOT backfill it again until at least 24 people have cycled through the random queue, this way only 1/3 of the time would the random queue get stuck in with the sweaty DM only Q.1 -
Merforum✭✭✭✭✭trackdemon5512 wrote: »So looking back at this debacle:
- a poorly thought out test yielded results that we expected.
- Few players actually engaged in BGs when they were DM only
- Listening to the loudest voices on the forum was clearly a mistake
- A specialized choice (randoms vs DM) queue is coming
- All of this IN NO WAY has remotely addressed players playing every flag game like a DM.
That last point is more important as it was the reasoning behind the test in the first place. While the developers are now making it easy to split the population, they missed the fundamental point of incentivizing combatants to play for an objective rather than to just kill everyone in Flag Games.
Exactly correct, as many of us said, this was a bad test and will only show exactly what we have said, a super loud 20-30 people who play DMs all day and spam the forums will be the only ones playing DM only and BGs will die in a week. NAILED IT.
And you are also correct, this did NOT address anything regarding the whiners who play all modes as DM, but is actually rewarding them AGAIN. If the random Q is backfilling the DM only with out some kind of logic, random will just be a trick to try to get people to come back while forcing them to play DM only all the time. Random should NOT backfill DM only or have logic to make it only happen 1/5 or 1/3 of the time.1 -
jaws343✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭trackdemon5512 wrote: »So looking back at this debacle:
- a poorly thought out test yielded results that we expected.
- Few players actually engaged in BGs when they were DM only
- Listening to the loudest voices on the forum was clearly a mistake
- A specialized choice (randoms vs DM) queue is coming
- All of this IN NO WAY has remotely addressed players playing every flag game like a DM.
That last point is more important as it was the reasoning behind the test in the first place. While the developers are now making it easy to split the population, they missed the fundamental point of incentivizing combatants to play for an objective rather than to just kill everyone in Flag Games.
Exactly correct, as many of us said, this was a bad test and will only show exactly what we have said, a super loud 20-30 people who play DMs all day and spam the forums will be the only ones playing DM only and BGs will die in a week. NAILED IT.
And you are also correct, this did NOT address anything regarding the whiners who play all modes as DM, but is actually rewarding them AGAIN. If the random Q is backfilling the DM only with out some kind of logic, random will just be a trick to try to get people to come back while forcing them to play DM only all the time. Random should NOT backfill DM only or have logic to make it only happen 1/5 or 1/3 of the time.
But wouldn't the opposite be true actually?
If it is only a small minority of players, then the DM games will fill up with those DM players, and maybe a few from the random queue, and most of the objective players will have the random queue to themselves most of the time.
The reality is though, as we literally saw before they removed the individual queues in the first place, more people prefer DM game mode than objective mode, which is why we always saw DM game mode in the random queue more often back in the day. Actual pvpers prefer it.0 -
Merforum✭✭✭✭✭trackdemon5512 wrote: »So looking back at this debacle:
- a poorly thought out test yielded results that we expected.
- Few players actually engaged in BGs when they were DM only
- Listening to the loudest voices on the forum was clearly a mistake
- A specialized choice (randoms vs DM) queue is coming
- All of this IN NO WAY has remotely addressed players playing every flag game like a DM.
That last point is more important as it was the reasoning behind the test in the first place. While the developers are now making it easy to split the population, they missed the fundamental point of incentivizing combatants to play for an objective rather than to just kill everyone in Flag Games.
Exactly correct, as many of us said, this was a bad test and will only show exactly what we have said, a super loud 20-30 people who play DMs all day and spam the forums will be the only ones playing DM only and BGs will die in a week. NAILED IT.
And you are also correct, this did NOT address anything regarding the whiners who play all modes as DM, but is actually rewarding them AGAIN. If the random Q is backfilling the DM only with out some kind of logic, random will just be a trick to try to get people to come back while forcing them to play DM only all the time. Random should NOT backfill DM only or have logic to make it only happen 1/5 or 1/3 of the time.
But wouldn't the opposite be true actually?
If it is only a small minority of players, then the DM games will fill up with those DM players, and maybe a few from the random queue, and most of the objective players will have the random queue to themselves most of the time.
The reality is though, as we literally saw before they removed the individual queues in the first place, more people prefer DM game mode than objective mode, which is why we always saw DM game mode in the random queue more often back in the day. Actual pvpers prefer it.
Yeah you 20-30 DMer/posters keep saying that but we found unequivocally from this test, that DM is only popular to 20-30 people not 100-300 who like other games or more options. As I stated 20-30 people playing DM or posting forums 20-30 times a day, is not the same as the 200-300 people who only do it 1 or 2 times a day. 20x20 does not equal 200x2.
But the fact remains if the random queue is automatically going to always backfill DM only then all queues will be DM only, unless 12 people can queue for random before even 1 person queues for DM, how often will that happen. Queues should be separate or make random NON-DM only. Or add logic to make backfilling rare.
BTW they should make the daily random reward for BGs the same as daily dungeons if they wanted to increase the pop.3