Solo Random Battleground queue is a Joke

trackdemon5512

GetAgrippa wrote: »

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

How We Got Here:



2) ZOS tests only Deathmatches as a solution on the Live Servers. The consequences of this move are huge. It not only decimated the overall BG population but got anyone who didn’t want Deathmatches to abandon the mode and/or possibly the game.

How can we be sure that BG population was decimated because of DM only queue when it coincided with the most broken set ever released in pvp, Dark Conversion? I know many people who were excited about dm queue only to quit again because of Dark Conversion spam.

Because EVERY update has a broken set or build. This is what happens when you don’t standardize and balance load outs like every other competitive game out there. Sloads, a million werewolf builds, hrothgars, Deadlands Assassin, Venomous, Crimson, vampires, deadly strikes, witch-knight, dragon wings, rune cage, Templar jabs, shalks. I’ve seen every single thing on that list, plus more called out as broken and the reason for the death of battlegrounds for the last four years.

If Dark Conversion was a cause it was the final nail following the other 50 or so already put into the coffin.

This game weathers sets and builds when they’re broken. It’s resilient like that. What it clearly could not weather was shutting down 4/5ths of battleground games and leaving just Deathmatch.

As for New World, for what it’s worth the game seems dead now. Any media reports about it are about a failed economy, grinding, lack of content, bad PvP, and an experience that while pretty is substantially lacking. That it’s only on PC only further hurts that argument because you would be hard pressed to find a significant number of console players that would both drop a game and then move to an entirely different platform at high cost. The hardcore might do that but the casual won’t.

GetAgrippa

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

[

Because EVERY update has a broken set or build. This is what happens when you don’t standardize and balance load outs like every other competitive game out there. Sloads, a million werewolf builds, hrothgars, Deadlands Assassin, Venomous, Crimson, vampires, deadly strikes, witch-knight, dragon wings, rune cage, Templar jabs, shalks. I’ve seen every single thing on that list, plus more called out as broken and the reason for the death of battlegrounds for the last four years.

I played through all those things and not a single one of those things were as aggravating and game breaking as Dark Conversion. So you're making just as many assumptions as anyone else. And I don't know why you mention Hrothgar's when that was released right along with Dark Conversion.

trackdemon5512

GetAgrippa wrote: »

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

[

Because EVERY update has a broken set or build. This is what happens when you don’t standardize and balance load outs like every other competitive game out there. Sloads, a million werewolf builds, hrothgars, Deadlands Assassin, Venomous, Crimson, vampires, deadly strikes, witch-knight, dragon wings, rune cage, Templar jabs, shalks. I’ve seen every single thing on that list, plus more called out as broken and the reason for the death of battlegrounds for the last four years.

I played through all those things and not a single one of those things were as aggravating and game breaking as Dark Conversion. So you're making just as many assumptions as anyone else. And I don't know why you mention Hrothgar's when that was released right along with Dark Conversion.

4 years. Each of those and Dark Conversions all called out as “killing battlegrounds”. It’s hard to believe one set ended BGs when the forums have cried wolf regarding sets virtually every patch.

It’s not a specific set. It’s the fact that ZOS allows thousands of set combinations and clearly doesn’t care about the consequences when they break BGs every time. And every time it’s called out the BGers respond the same way each time: “ It’s allowable, you just need to learn to play”. That hardcore and ZOS abhor proper balancing by simplifying it seems.

GypsyKing22

To be fair on pc eu i get matches pretty fast and while i definitely see the same faces somewhat regularly, I also see new names almost every single match.

Also I'm a DM only guy, so I'm really happy that theres a DM queue, and I personally wouldn't play the other game modes, but it definitely would be nice to let others enjoy the objective game modes by separating the queues entirely. Someone mentioned a weekly rotation of objective games, I think that would be fun.

HiImRex

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

GetAgrippa wrote: »

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

How We Got Here:



2) ZOS tests only Deathmatches as a solution on the Live Servers. The consequences of this move are huge. It not only decimated the overall BG population but got anyone who didn’t want Deathmatches to abandon the mode and/or possibly the game.

How can we be sure that BG population was decimated because of DM only queue when it coincided with the most broken set ever released in pvp, Dark Conversion? I know many people who were excited about dm queue only to quit again because of Dark Conversion spam.

Because EVERY update has a broken set or build. This is what happens when you don’t standardize and balance load outs like every other competitive game out there. Sloads, a million werewolf builds, hrothgars, Deadlands Assassin, Venomous, Crimson, vampires, deadly strikes, witch-knight, dragon wings, rune cage, Templar jabs, shalks. I’ve seen every single thing on that list, plus more called out as broken and the reason for the death of battlegrounds for the last four years.

If Dark Conversion was a cause it was the final nail following the other 50 or so already put into the coffin.

This game weathers sets and builds when they’re broken. It’s resilient like that. What it clearly could not weather was shutting down 4/5ths of battleground games and leaving just Deathmatch.

As for New World, for what it’s worth the game seems dead now. Any media reports about it are about a failed economy, grinding, lack of content, bad PvP, and an experience that while pretty is substantially lacking. That it’s only on PC only further hurts that argument because you would be hard pressed to find a significant number of console players that would both drop a game and then move to an entirely different platform at high cost. The hardcore might do that but the casual won’t.

You’re arguing in generalities but you’re wrong because of the specifics.

First of all, regardless of how hard it is for you to believe, the truth is that Dark Convergence was much more damaging to the enjoyment of BGs than any of the other specific “broken” things you named. This has to do with the specific way DC was broken which is unique to the list of broken sets. Namely, its very presence would force everyone to play every match in the most boring way possible and remove one of the most interesting aspects of this game, positioning and timing.

Cheap one-shot builds with guaranteed CCs does this to a lesser degree (the reason why DK and Sorcs are almost always meta in BGs) but you can build to mitigate or heal through damage, allowing you to restore game balance to a somewhat enjoyable state on your own.

DC absolutely forced everyone in the BG to constantly make nonsensical positioning decisions and the timing aspect of the game was reduced purely to “dodge the DC prepare for the next one”. And there’s no way to build it away.

Second, New World had one million people actively playing on steam charts for the first several weeks of launch. That number went down but the game still held many hundreds of thousands of players all through out the DM only test. By the way, the vast majority of the people that held on and kept playing NW are the dedicated pvp players who stayed for the NW BGs once the open world pvp dried up.

NW is pretty much as direct a competition as ESO pvp is going to have in terms of the target demigraphic. If you don’t think there’s a significant connection here based solely on these facts (numbers + demographic) alone, I don’t know what to tell you.

I hope you get your objective only queues. But misrepresenting events is not going to make anything better for anyone in the long run.

trackdemon5512

]

HiImRex wrote: »

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

GetAgrippa wrote: »

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

How We Got Here:



2) ZOS tests only Deathmatches as a solution on the Live Servers. The consequences of this move are huge. It not only decimated the overall BG population but got anyone who didn’t want Deathmatches to abandon the mode and/or possibly the game.

How can we be sure that BG population was decimated because of DM only queue when it coincided with the most broken set ever released in pvp, Dark Conversion? I know many people who were excited about dm queue only to quit again because of Dark Conversion spam.

Because EVERY update has a broken set or build. This is what happens when you don’t standardize and balance load outs like every other competitive game out there. Sloads, a million werewolf builds, hrothgars, Deadlands Assassin, Venomous, Crimson, vampires, deadly strikes, witch-knight, dragon wings, rune cage, Templar jabs, shalks. I’ve seen every single thing on that list, plus more called out as broken and the reason for the death of battlegrounds for the last four years.

If Dark Conversion was a cause it was the final nail following the other 50 or so already put into the coffin.

This game weathers sets and builds when they’re broken. It’s resilient like that. What it clearly could not weather was shutting down 4/5ths of battleground games and leaving just Deathmatch.

As for New World, for what it’s worth the game seems dead now. Any media reports about it are about a failed economy, grinding, lack of content, bad PvP, and an experience that while pretty is substantially lacking. That it’s only on PC only further hurts that argument because you would be hard pressed to find a significant number of console players that would both drop a game and then move to an entirely different platform at high cost. The hardcore might do that but the casual won’t.

You’re arguing in generalities but you’re wrong because of the specifics.

First of all, regardless of how hard it is for you to believe, the truth is that Dark Convergence was much more damaging to the enjoyment of BGs than any of the other specific “broken” things you named. This has to do with the specific way DC was broken which is unique to the list of broken sets. Namely, its very presence would force everyone to play every match in the most boring way possible and remove one of the most interesting aspects of this game, positioning and timing.

Cheap one-shot builds with guaranteed CCs does this to a lesser degree (the reason why DK and Sorcs are almost always meta in BGs) but you can build to mitigate or heal through damage, allowing you to restore game balance to a somewhat enjoyable state on your own.

DC absolutely forced everyone in the BG to constantly make nonsensical positioning decisions and the timing aspect of the game was reduced purely to “dodge the DC prepare for the next one”. And there’s no way to build it away.

Second, New World had one million people actively playing on steam charts for the first several weeks of launch. That number went down but the game still held many hundreds of thousands of players all through out the DM only test. By the way, the vast majority of the people that held on and kept playing NW are the dedicated pvp players who stayed for the NW BGs once the open world pvp dried up.

NW is pretty much as direct a competition as ESO pvp is going to have in terms of the target demigraphic. If you don’t think there’s a significant connection here based solely on these facts (numbers + demographic) alone, I don’t know what to tell you.

I hope you get your objective only queues. But misrepresenting events is not going to make anything better for anyone in the long run.

Y’all can blame Dark Convergence all y’all want but the only way people were getting the set is if they either played endless amounts of battlegrounds or endless amounts of Cyrodiil. Reward of the Worthy coffers. Getting 5 pieces wasn’t easy or cheap. An effective barrier to entry.

How does this factor? Casuals. If you’re casual there is no way you had a full dark convergence set quickly. The hardcore had dark convergence. They were using it in both Cyrodiil and BGs but the hardcore really. So what doesn’t this tell us?

That by the time Dark Convergence was added the battlegrounds populations were already precipitously low. Clearly from years of broken sets and/or BG players going against objectives. https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/578325/teammates-ignore-objectives-and-deathmatch-mindlessly

The BG population wasn’t decimated overnight by Dark Convergence. If that kind of thinking were true then it would have been wiped out when the original Sloads was introduced in all of its broken glory allowing for instant kills.

A single set won’t have that kind of effect unless you’ve whittled down the population to have such little diversity that what remains is either easily susceptible to such a thing. It’s like having an autoimmune disease. Will a virus or infection ultimately be your demise? Likely. But at the same time your body was already decimated and unable to weather such a thing. The infection may have gotten ya but ultimately it was a complication in which if you were healthy in the first place you would have been fine.

BGs have been anything but healthy, hemorrhaging players for years while failing to get them to really come back. The hardcore maybe but definitely not the casuals.

Dark Convergence isn’t as toxic as ppl make it out to be because if it were and everything else were fine the BG population should have magically reset itself with the update. New World is no longer as popular and Dark Convergence got tweaked. That doesn’t look to be the case.

GetAgrippa

Writing a dissertation doesn't mean you're operating with any more concrete knowledge than the rest of us.

Aldoss

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

Dark Convergence isn’t as toxic as ppl make it out to be because if it were and everything else were fine the BG population should have magically reset itself with the update. New World is no longer as popular and Dark Convergence got tweaked. That doesn’t look to be the case.

This is the exact opposite of current reality.

DC was the most game breaking set in the history of the game. More than Viper's, more than Venomous, more than Sload's, and more than any other meta we've ever experienced. The sets you mentioned were 100% overtuned when they were released, but they were not "broken" nor "game breaking" in any sense of the terms.

Do a search for forum posts about those sets around the time they were released and the only set that comes close to the public outcry of DC was Sload's.

Did Venomous pull opponents through walls?

Did Sload's pull opponents off their seige?

Did Viper's pull opponents off walls?

Did ANY of these sets one shot players who were pulled into the center during the 2nd pull?

Game breaking in every sense of the term.

DC has since been fixed and BGs are popping like they were during the DM-Only test. The magic of NW is over and now people are either happy with the end-game experience, or are realizing that NW wasn't living up to some of its promises and have come back to play ESO while they wait to see what the devs do with NW.

The longest I've waited in a queue this last week was 5.5 minutes. A few weeks before the patch, the queue was ~10min and two weeks prior to the patch I don't know because I (and many others) stopped queueing because of how unenjoyable DC made them.

Ye_Olde_Crowe

Please, no more DM in Random. Currently it's DM exclusively, no matter if you queue solo or as a group. I thought I could do it, but I just can't stomach four DM rounds in a row. Blech

Aldoss

mandricus wrote: »

At the moment there is no point in queueing for a random, you are going to end in a deathmatch anyway.

Missed this comment before. Quoting it now just to remind everyone what happened for the last year...

Deathmatch, the most popular BG game mode, was put into the queue system as a non-weighted mode against 4 other modes with completely counter combat styles. As a result, DM popped less than 10% of the time. Sure, more than what's happening currently with objective modes, but many PvPers could recount numerous days of BG sessions that were absent of the mode entirely. Hours of playtime with 0 DM BGs. I once got 10 Domination rounds (my most hated mode) in a row over the course of 4 hours.

They kept queueing.

Sure, it ultimately resulted in the "Every Mode is DM" counter-culture that sent people flooding the forums with complaints, but they kept queueing.

After over a year, ZOS finally made an adjustment and DMers are happy.

If you like BGs, then you have something to queue for.

If you stop queuing, all you're doing is reaffirming for ZOS that the random queue doesn't matter. If a truly random queue is what you want, the best way to make that a reality is to keep queuing for the random and be an active part of the change. By all means, still come to the forums and let them know this is what you're doing and it isn't okay.

Show ZOS that you deserve your own queue. It took DMers a year to get their wishes turned into a reality. I bet you can make it happen faster.

Or, join the lot of us asking for ZOS to do better and make BG modes that bridge the TDM vs Objective player divide. What we have now is so far from the best they can do.

luen79rwb17_ESO

Current match making system is totally broken and leans heavily towards DM VERY heavily.

This weekend I managed to be in a capture relic match. Our team won. And I got the weekly leaderboard rewards LOL. With only one friggin' match.

This is beyond pathetic and unacceptable for a AAA game.

trackdemon5512

Aldoss wrote: »

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

Dark Convergence isn’t as toxic as ppl make it out to be because if it were and everything else were fine the BG population should have magically reset itself with the update. New World is no longer as popular and Dark Convergence got tweaked. That doesn’t look to be the case.

This is the exact opposite of current reality.

DC was the most game breaking set in the history of the game. More than Viper's, more than Venomous, more than Sload's, and more than any other meta we've ever experienced. The sets you mentioned were 100% overtuned when they were released, but they were not "broken" nor "game breaking" in any sense of the terms.

Do a search for forum posts about those sets around the time they were released and the only set that comes close to the public outcry of DC was Sload's.

Did Venomous pull opponents through walls?

Did Sload's pull opponents off their seige?

Did Viper's pull opponents off walls?

Did ANY of these sets one shot players who were pulled into the center during the 2nd pull?

Game breaking in every sense of the term.

DC has since been fixed and BGs are popping like they were during the DM-Only test. The magic of NW is over and now people are either happy with the end-game experience, or are realizing that NW wasn't living up to some of its promises and have come back to play ESO while they wait to see what the devs do with NW.

The longest I've waited in a queue this last week was 5.5 minutes. A few weeks before the patch, the queue was ~10min and two weeks prior to the patch I don't know because I (and many others) stopped queueing because of how unenjoyable DC made them.

Explain to me how Bash Bone Goliath wasn’t somehow worse than DC. Last I checked there weren’t walls or siege equipment to be pulled from in BGs. And seeing as you could bash for 20k dmg twice per second you would wipe entire zergs in both BGs and Cyrodiil in a second.

See here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E5ckU1MtZ-4

Tell me how this wasn’t far far more broken. And if it was (it clearly was) then why didn’t the entire population of BGs and Cyrodiil quit? Because I remember 3 months of screams about “pay to win” being locked behind a chapter with stam colossi/Goliath/fear totems dominating the modes.

GetAgrippa

Dude bashcro was not as broken as DC. For one, you actually HAD TO BE A NECRO. Not any random toon could be a bashcro. Any random toon could put on dc. Bashcro, while very frustrating, had more counterplay. You roll dodge away and kite until the transformation was over. There weren't 6 different bashcro players at any given time that you were trying to avoid, unlike DC users. The cooldown on the transformation is of course much longer than DC. Lastly, Bashcro DIDN'T PULL YOU IN TWICE (sometimes when you're not even in the aoe) AND STUN YOU.

So, again, you're making an assumption that you're stating as a fact that's simply not a fact. This is a conversation I've had with several BGers actually. We all agree that DC was worse than the bashcro meta. It's actually more comparable to the WW single target dots meta. And that also saw a pretty hefty decline in BG dm populations. I know because I was there.

We don't need to convince you. You won't convince us. You're convinced of your own argument. That's fine. At this point a dead horse is being beaten.

trackdemon5512

GetAgrippa wrote: »

Dude bashcro was not as broken as DC. For one, you actually HAD TO BE A NECRO. Not any random toon could be a bashcro. Any random toon could put on dc. Bashcro, while very frustrating, had more counterplay. You roll dodge away and kite until the transformation was over. There weren't 6 different bashcro players at any given time that you were trying to avoid, unlike DC users. The cooldown on the transformation is of course much longer than DC. Lastly, Bashcro DIDN'T PULL YOU IN TWICE (sometimes when you're not even in the aoe) AND STUN YOU.

So, again, you're making an assumption that you're stating as a fact that's simply not a fact. This is a conversation I've had with several BGers actually. We all agree that DC was worse than the bashcro meta. It's actually more comparable to the WW single target dots meta. And that also saw a pretty hefty decline in BG dm populations. I know because I was there.

We don't need to convince you. You won't convince us. You're convinced of your own argument. That's fine. At this point a dead horse is being beaten.

Two plus months of transformations and instant kills. During which if you were lucky enough to run away because another player wasn’t running permafrost (with its then super snare) you were shooed off flags or any other objective. In BGs you would spend most of the match running away. Then when you went to kill said Goliath after the transformation wore off it became apparent that they were literally a fully functioning tank who could kill while transformed.

Totem, soul absorb, pots. You can quickly get your full ultimate back and then transform again into a OHKO Goliath.

No, not everyone could become a necro, hence the screams of “Pay-to-Win”. That said it wasn’t like they weren’t everywhere. The barrier to entry was minimal, like farming for 5 pieces of DC.

I obviously won’t convince you or several others here. That doesn’t mean I’m wrong about how broken things constantly show up in BGs and over 5 years have never led to the functional collapse of the BG population. Is it more likely that DC just happens to be the outlier case OR that a test that shut out everyone who didn’t want to always play Deathmatch is the cause? Seems more like the latter.

HiImRex

trackdemon5512 wrote: »

GetAgrippa wrote: »

Dude bashcro was not as broken as DC. For one, you actually HAD TO BE A NECRO. Not any random toon could be a bashcro. Any random toon could put on dc. Bashcro, while very frustrating, had more counterplay. You roll dodge away and kite until the transformation was over. There weren't 6 different bashcro players at any given time that you were trying to avoid, unlike DC users. The cooldown on the transformation is of course much longer than DC. Lastly, Bashcro DIDN'T PULL YOU IN TWICE (sometimes when you're not even in the aoe) AND STUN YOU.

So, again, you're making an assumption that you're stating as a fact that's simply not a fact. This is a conversation I've had with several BGers actually. We all agree that DC was worse than the bashcro meta. It's actually more comparable to the WW single target dots meta. And that also saw a pretty hefty decline in BG dm populations. I know because I was there.

We don't need to convince you. You won't convince us. You're convinced of your own argument. That's fine. At this point a dead horse is being beaten.

Two plus months of transformations and instant kills. During which if you were lucky enough to run away because another player wasn’t running permafrost (with its then super snare) you were shooed off flags or any other objective. In BGs you would spend most of the match running away. Then when you went to kill said Goliath after the transformation wore off it became apparent that they were literally a fully functioning tank who could kill while transformed.

Totem, soul absorb, pots. You can quickly get your full ultimate back and then transform again into a OHKO Goliath.

No, not everyone could become a necro, hence the screams of “Pay-to-Win”. That said it wasn’t like they weren’t everywhere. The barrier to entry was minimal, like farming for 5 pieces of DC.

I obviously won’t convince you or several others here. That doesn’t mean I’m wrong about how broken things constantly show up in BGs and over 5 years have never led to the functional collapse of the BG population. Is it more likely that DC just happens to be the outlier case OR that a test that shut out everyone who didn’t want to always play Deathmatch is the cause? Seems more like the latter.

As I strongly alluded to in my earlier reply, it’s a combination of many different factors.

Sounds to me like you’re hand waving away or outright ignoring many factors for the BG collapse at the end of Waking Flames so that you can force your one pet peeve the true cause.

First factor you’re actively ignoring (while ironically relying on constantly as part of your argument) is time. Video games have a life cycle and as a game winds down in popularity its ability to absorb bad patch cycles diminish. You think those "five years" you keep citing helps prove that DC should have been no different than Viper, Sloads, or Bashcro, but over those five years ESO has been getting smaller and less appealing for the general gaming population as new games come out and old games get.. well, old.

So let's take the actual example you elaborated upon--which is Bashcro vs. DC. Taking timing into account:

Bashcro hitting ESO BGs was like a 45 yr old man getting a heart attack and then recovering for the most part without long term complications.

DC hitting ESO BGs at the time that it did was like a 65 yr old man going through chemo for stage 4 cancer while his lungs are collapsing from a severe case of covid19.

Bashcros are a perfect example of broken things that you COULD build and play around, and still preserve a large part of what made PVP enjoyable. For one, there was a large cooldown between uses of the bashcro transformation. In the time it took for a necro to build up to one bashcro transformation, you give up two potential team-wipes with a conventional blastbone / DB comebo, or two uses of the shield wall to survive pressure from enemy teams. And another thing was the opportunity cost of giving up other, cheaper ults that are no less powerful when used correctly since what was broken WAS an ultimate ability.

This means you could actually trade 2 of your ults for a bashcro transformation and come out ahead in the ulti economy. You could attempt a burst with a cheap ult like DB, Crescent, Incap, Overload, etc. and then still negate the Goliath push with a resto ulti. But you actually didn't have to, because you could build heals, speed, mobility/snare-cleanse and just outrun the Bashcro during its transformation.

Was it broken? Yes. But it had a low uptime (roughly 80 seconds to get a Goliath from 0 without investment into ulti gen), and you could make meaningful decisions to circumvent it and outplay it. Of course, you're maybe thinking about all those times you didn't learn how to build or react properly to it, but the possibility was there. Like I said, it was broken and needed to be fixed.

One final note is that you didn't have a game launch during Goliath-patch that sucked up 1 million active pvp mmorpg players for a solid month. I really think you're underestimating the significance of that number. The portion of the gaming population that is even INTERESTED in mmorpg pvp is normally a tiny fraction of that number.

Now let's compare that to Dark Convergence. Dark Convergence is a 5-piece set bonus with a 15 second CD. Immediately, you see the difference. A Dark Convergence will hit the battleground roughly 4 times in the same time that Goliath hits the bg once. Actually, this is not a fair comparison. DC lasts for 4 seconds once placed, leaving it with a true CD of 11 seconds. You will have to play around Dark Convergence SEVEN TIMES in the time it takes for one necro to transform a single time.

It covered a relatively large area, made worse by the fact that BG maps are generally very small and even the larger ones are full of choke points where the combat actually takes place. A single DC would often completely shut down any meaningful decision making in a fight for 4 seconds, then you have only 11 seconds to actually play the game before you have to play the "react to DC" mini-game.

Speaking of "react to DC" mini-game, because it's a 5-piece and not an ultimate, there was NO way to trade optimally into DC short of just ganking the guy wearing the DC in the 11 second window. DC would often warrant use of a defensive ulti to survive, which meant you are going to lose the next exchange since you traded one of your ulti for a free proc that will proc agian before you have ulti again--and your enemies still have their ultis in their pocket for the next one.

Because of the snare and 2 pulls, along with its immense kill potential, as well as its insane uptime all on a 5-piece proc (basically free) DC actually completely shut down any and all positioning and timing decisions you could make in the game.

With a Bashcro, you had roughly 80 seconds to force him to waste his ulti on a cheaper defensive or outright kill him. If he did transform, you could simply scatter or trade UP TO 2 defensive ultimates and still come out even in the ulti economy. An average bashcro could probably shut down 2-3 badly built, unprepared players. A single DC on an average player could shut down the whole match for all 15 people.

But now let's scale up... 2 bashcros lock two players to an expensive ulti with a 20 second window to get enough kills to make up for 80 seconds of being at a disadvatnage. 2 Dark Convergences, NOT EVEN STACKED and one two different teams, absolutely shut down the match. The match degenerates into half the BG dying instantly every 15 seconds, the other half of the BG randomly scattering into different directions and desperately healing every 15 seconds and waiting for their teammates to respawn so they can just die again instantly to a DC every 15 seconds.

Hope this will help you to see the difference. Most of all, I hope you see this isn't about you vs. me. This is about us trying to get the best outcome for a hobby we enjoy. And subjecting your reason to emotion and zealously defending bad arguments isn't going to accomplish that.

I hope you get the objective mode. Or really, I hope we all get a proper two-team mode that combines team fighting and objectives to create a truly interesting and varied instanced PVP game mode. Take care.

Aldoss

I'm confused. Are you insinuating that that player popping Goliath is the same as ANYONE AoE pulling people (through walls) to them, stunning them, snaring them, AoE pulling a 2nd time (sometimes outside of the pull radius), and then damaging them for 20-40k damage, every 15 seconds for the cost of ANY aoe skill?

Bash goliath was overtuned when it was released. 100% and it deserved the nerf that it got. Most sets/abilities have an interestingly common tendency to be overtuned when they're originally released. But bash goliath wasn't game breaking. Nothing stopped you, nor currently stopping you (since it's back), from roll dodging and running from anyone who suddenly becomes twice their normal size for 20 seconds. You can literally make them waste an entire ultimate by simply running.

If that video weren't a bashcro but was a magblade bomber, would you also use it to suggest that DC wasn't game breaking?

If running from a bashcro weren't such an effective counter, people wouldn't be instantly inundating someone with hate tells about being a runner when you do it. It's hilarious watching someone invest everything into this one specific mechanic and really only be viable for a precious 20 seconds and the frustration they feel when you make those 20 seconds futile is real. I'm sorry, but it's a stretch to say that someone choosing their class, morphing their ult, changing all their jewelry enchants, on top of wearing 2 sets that buff bash damage is the same as putting on one set that literally anyone could use and make the lives of everyone in a BG instantly terrible.

I pray this to be the last time I say that this set was the single worst decision, at the worst possible time, for ZOS to release. Everything else I've ever complained about was put into perspective. Maybe I'll be wrong and ZOS will make another decision that's twice as terrible, I don't know. What I do know is that I stopped queueing for BGs entirely despite LOVING the DM only test because the DC meta was the most unenjoyable nonsense I've ever experienced in a video game.

Lauranae

thesarahandcompany wrote: »

Rakdos wrote: »

I had 5 solo random queue last night, all deadmatch...

I feel like even there 6 player queue random and another player queue DM, the system will still tend to pick DM, it just have higher periority.

The DM lover may be happy with this but this is not healthy in the long run. The system discourage the objective pvper to participate. after 1-2 weeks the game will returning to that "same 12 people fighting each other" again.

I disagree. There are players who haven't logged on in months I've seen returned because of the queue changes.

i can only smile to your comment. You totally forget this : only those loving DM went back. The others, tried, and are leaving again and soon you will too complain that there is not enough players for BG.

I used to play each day at least 5 matchs, 3 obj and 2 dm. Since the change, i hate absolutely to have to do BG to get stones and endure 5 DM.

Perhaps you could just revise your comment. Its not only your fun that count, but everyone deserve to have some even in BG.

Aldoss

Lauranae wrote: »

I used to play each day at least 5 matchs, 3 obj and 2 dm.

How was this possible when the queue was random for the last year?

auz

If all of the objective players stop playing it will be all DM all the time.
I am not seeing the threat here.

Lauranae

Aldoss wrote: »

Lauranae wrote: »

I used to play each day at least 5 matchs, 3 obj and 2 dm.

How was this possible when the queue was random for the last year?

I am playing since start. So yes before this stupid year, i was playing objectives and dm. I have still achievements started from that time that now are totally irrelevant.

Contos

auz wrote: »

If all of the objective players stop playing it will be all DM all the time.
I am not seeing the threat here.

Not really. It's all DM anyways. So objective players leaving would actually have zero impact what is funny because if they are really the wast minority then why create a queue system ridiculously favoring DMs? It like a bad joke.

propertyOfUndefined

It's been about 48 hours since the leaderboards reset. Looking at the image below, there are only 24 players in the Land Grab leaderboard. Given there are 12 players per match, that means there have been 2 land grab matches in the last 2 days! If this is "by design", then I'm sorry to say, but it's a really poor design...

Dem_kitkats1

Lauranae wrote: »

thesarahandcompany wrote: »

Rakdos wrote: »

I had 5 solo random queue last night, all deadmatch...

I feel like even there 6 player queue random and another player queue DM, the system will still tend to pick DM, it just have higher periority.

The DM lover may be happy with this but this is not healthy in the long run. The system discourage the objective pvper to participate. after 1-2 weeks the game will returning to that "same 12 people fighting each other" again.

I disagree. There are players who haven't logged on in months I've seen returned because of the queue changes.

i can only smile to your comment. You totally forget this : only those loving DM went back. The others, tried, and are leaving again and soon you will too complain that there is not enough players for BG.

I used to play each day at least 5 matchs, 3 obj and 2 dm. Since the change, i hate absolutely to have to do BG to get stones and endure 5 DM.

Perhaps you could just revise your comment. Its not only your fun that count, but everyone deserve to have some even in BG.

Those are impressive odds. Before the que changes I used to get about %60 CtR and Chaosball, %30 Flag and Land Grab, %10 DM. I understand that people really enjoyed playing the objective modes, but the rate of DMs was way too low for a PVP mode. I do agree though, that ZOS should have separated the Objective modes from DMs. Let there be a longer que time if that is what gives everyone what they want. Then we can move on from the que debate and focus on how the the actual modes could be improved for all.

auz

Contos wrote: »

auz wrote: »

If all of the objective players stop playing it will be all DM all the time.
I am not seeing the threat here.

Not really. It's all DM anyways. So objective players leaving would actually have zero impact what is funny because if they are really the wast minority then why create a queue system ridiculously favoring DMs? It like a bad joke.

Pretty well nailing my point here.
If objective players are the minority, wouldn't a system weighted to DM make sense?
The real issue here is the fracturing of the pvp community. Zos doesn't believe an objective mode and a DM mode can exist separately. I think they should at least give the objective people a chance to show they can support their own queue short term. And improve rewards to entice more players to both modes. Long term there should be adjustments to make the objective modes more pvp oriented. Increase the conflict and introduce a competitive aspect.

Wicked_Wolf

Rewards need to be adjusted. Right now it seems there’s no possible way to get the rewards that are specific to Non DM BG’s?

Contos

auz wrote: »

Contos wrote: »

auz wrote: »

If all of the objective players stop playing it will be all DM all the time.
I am not seeing the threat here.

Not really. It's all DM anyways. So objective players leaving would actually have zero impact what is funny because if they are really the wast minority then why create a queue system ridiculously favoring DMs? It like a bad joke.

Pretty well nailing my point here.
If objective players are the minority, wouldn't a system weighted to DM make sense?
The real issue here is the fracturing of the pvp community. Zos doesn't believe an objective mode and a DM mode can exist separately. I think they should at least give the objective people a chance to show they can support their own queue short term. And improve rewards to entice more players to both modes. Long term there should be adjustments to make the objective modes more pvp oriented. Increase the conflict and introduce a competitive aspect.

I may misunderstand you sorry for that, but no, it wouldn't make sense. If the objective playerbase is the minority you don't need a queue weightened for dm, thats called an overkill. And thats what happening now. In a theoritical queue system driven by popularity, you don't need to weighten things stupidly like right now.
As I stated in other threads, we don't need a sytem BASED on popularity, but DRIVEN by it.
And what I mean is ZOS took the fact or assumption that DM players are the majority and created a system where you "mostly" get DM. The problem is, if things were to change, and random queue wd spike in popularity. We wd still get predominantly DMs, since it is weightened, and based on a fact that at one point DM was the majority. It's a static system that can't change, and can only be changed by the devs every single patch to match the current popularity. But they probably won't need to do that since the system is also dangerous, it forcefully surpresses OBJ modes to a point that people will leave since they can't get these modes, it doesn't allow OBJ population to grow, since people will get bored of all DM and just leave, new ones may come but leave too after a while.
A dynamic system is not much to ask and It could be effective for both the devs and the playerbase.
There are several ways it could work, in theory ofc.
For example the simpliest I can think of is a precentage based random queue, you can choose what gamemode you want, then you will randomly be matched with other players (based on an actually working MMR system maybe?) Everyone will get a ticket just like now. But if there are 6 dm tickets and 4 objective ones, that means 60% chance to get dm and 40% to objective. In contrast to what we have now (in theory), what is 6 Dm tickets and 4 Obj ones means always Dm, not a higher chance. The higher wins, and thats cuz we have a DM only queue ofc, what needs to be, well, always DM. Take that away, we don't need it, if lets say DM players are majority. Let them show it. They don't need a system that babysits them.
This way objective players can have a real chance to play their modes, even if rarely (i'm 100% sure that way more often than now). And they can also have a chance to grow in number.
I personally think, after a proper system they can start to reworking obj modes, and make them more appealing, cuz ofc there is a reason why they are not that popular. You can argue that they shd be reworked ASAP or replaced. But there is no reason to do that until we have this ridiculous system. And yeah even better these things can be done at the same time, in the same patch.

Finwaell

I think how it is now is unacceptable.

It's been over two months and I didn't get a SINGLE non DM match on PC EU.

Here's what I think would definitely make it better.

Just separate the queues. DM only; and the rest ONLY. people who want to play other modes will be able to and since the DM crowd seems to be sure that there's more people playing Deathmatch than the others combined (well queuing for anyway) they won't be affected in the slightest.

I don't mind waiting longer for BG if it means I get something else as well. It can't be worse than waiting for dungeon as a DPS.

What I think is BIG ISSUE though is that the "Solo Deathmatch" is a DEFAULT.

I really doubt most people even notice the option and do not or forget to change it. Maybe let us pick our preferred mode and let it stick? So that we don't have to adjust that before every match? If you want DM you sure don't have to but that isn't very fair, is it? I think that would definitely raise the number of people queuing for other modes.

Anyway, you have to do SOMETHING, since like this you locked people out of a way to get those BG ACHIEVEMENT REWARDS

So either award them to everyone and stop pretending like there's a choice or do something.

Seriously it was much better before all these shenanigans, maybe you should stop pampering to all the griefers, they are not your whole paying customer base. (in fact I am pretty sure most of them plays for free).

For majority of normal people playing this game this HAS to feel extremely boring. I finally managed to get my good friend to play, he subscribed as well and he quit shortly after because he found the constant deathmatch boring. I had a group of irl friends playing (and subscribing) and having a BG premade team and they all quit as well. You are bleeding people like this.

I am only staying because I love other aspects of the game, not just the pvp, but it needs a serious fix in this field like yesterday.

And just a side-note to all those claiming how imbalanced the pvp sets are... Really? You named like 13 different sets that "are a problem". That is not imbalance, that is variety. I for one don't use a single one of those (DC is over hyped as hell by the way, tried it out to see what the fuss is about and not a fan) and consistently am in the top 3 players in BGs with my 2 main toons and win like 70% of the games I am in. Still want those other modes back though.

_adhyffbjjjf12

propertyOfUndefined wrote: »

It's been about 48 hours since the leaderboards reset. Looking at the image below, there are only 24 players in the Land Grab leaderboard. Given there are 12 players per match, that means there have been 2 land grab matches in the last 2 days! If this is "by design", then I'm sorry to say, but it's a really poor design...

if you look at AAA mmorpg across the entire industry objective based PVP is universally popular, and as ESO is extremely casual friendly with capped Gear it should be heaving with players wanting to play PVP. If the problem is not a broken 'random' algorithm then the answer is the gameplay style, so they should be speaking to the casual community, not setting up their queues to kill off objective based pvp. Personally I think its a mixture of the differential between optimised builds and non optimised builds and animation cancelling and non animation cancelling and the insane spamming it creates. In PVP 5 - 10% difference turns you into fodder.

My fix would be do what ive seen successful elsewhere. Normalise the fight, so its skill that matter only:

- BG have a fixed set of curated armor sets you can select and automatically equip
- No food
- BG have a fixed set of potions you can select and automatically equip
- Where necessary apply PVP only modifications to skills

Much improved rewards system with reward tracks with nice visualisations.

Ratharel

thesarahandcompany wrote: »

It just goes back to what I said in other posts. Deathmatch players are the majority. There's no scenario where 1 player out of 12 is the only one queueing for deathmatch. Most players queue deathmatch. A lot of players have returned recently because deathmatch is available.

This is a good change for ESO BGs because it's prioritizing the backbone of the already small PvP community.

It's time to move past the queue issues. They've done enough. Let's move onto getting new content in PvP and end this silly, age-old debate about BG queues and leave them the way they are.

ZOS, DON'T CHANGE ANYTHING PLEASE.

That's just your point of view. I quit PvP because of this change which is basically bruteforcing deathmatches. If DM were as popular as you say than would be no problem to queue for DM-only queue and there would be no reason to introduce this change.
I queued for 20+ random games and ALL were deathmatches. Not a single one game of other type. That's not what random means. Why have separate queues anyway if all we can get is DM?
And DM battlegrounds are dull as hell, no strategy other than make a 4-man mini-zerg and stick with it.

ZOS PLEASE FIX THIS! I WANT TO PLAY OTHER MODES THAN DEATHMATCHES!

RedTalon

Yup it is after 2 weeks of queing randoms only nothing but dms.

At the start of the new change use to get at-least one different match or two a week, now its none stop dms.