Maintenance for the week of November 25:
• PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – November 25, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 7:00AM EST (12:00 UTC)
• Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – November 27, 6:00AM EST (11:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
• PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – November 27, 6:00AM EST (11:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
• PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – November 25, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 7:00AM EST (12:00 UTC)
• Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – November 27, 6:00AM EST (11:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
• PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – November 27, 6:00AM EST (11:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
Battlegrounds: Engagement, MMR, Mode modifications; Other Ideas? Real talk.
McTaterskins
✭✭✭✭
Update 11/19:
I think we're possibly starting to see and identify as a general consensus what some definitive root problems are here pertaining to the mode vs mode and queue vs queue items.
One thing that seems to specifically stand out in wider agreement one way or another is that Objective modes need adjustments to be more engaging to gain a little more popularity. Between this thread and holding conversations in game in various guild chats, this seems to be a consensus amongst everyone. "DMers" and "Objective Players" alike.
Lets keep this rolling and get more people engaged in the thread. Keep the conversation focused on debating and possibly forming a consensus on what could bring more engagement to objective modes to a wider range of participants.
Update 11/22
The debate seems to have evolved into the discussion of what the proper level of engagement should be and how to get there. It also seems that a rather consistently agreed upon point would be that there needs to be a real MMR system in order to place any modifications that would help objective modes lead to more combat engagement.
Update 11/23
Retitled OP to reflect the core conversation item.
Interesting conversation point. - When separating queues, it seems there is a divide on whether or not DM should stay in the random queue. (Obviously this requires a different DM bucket.)
Through in game and forum conversations, another root cause or divide: With the exception of adamant DM only players, there's a large portion of the population that would prefer not to get repeats of the same game modes over and over. Whether it's death match or capture the relic. Its stale.
In conjunction with other discussion regarding MMR problems, it seems both the queue and match making system need an overhaul. Share if you agree, disagree, or have other ideas!
Share what you think would make objective modes or the random queue more popular or engaging for players as well!
What about this idea? (just spit-balling something that might get people to populate the random queue more often?)
"Random Queue" only or Split DM queue to on its own.
Random Queue = 3 game modes available:
DM: Consistent staple in available random modes.
Rotating Land Grab: Between Crazy King and Domination (Or just eliminate domination lolol)
Rotating Capture: Between Chaos Ball and Capture the Relic.
Allows for DMs in the random queue as well.
Allows for people to get achievements for the other modes.
Shakes things up. Different modes every month while the crowd favorite is still always available.
Random Queue will see more use as DM will be seen more often there as well.
My opinion:
While I do believe DM is the most popular across the board, I think it is underestimated as to how many players don't exactly want the same game mode every time. Just due to boredom or monotony. It doesn't change whether or not people think it's the best game mode. I myself would be 1,000% happy if I could manage DM, Crazy King, which are my two closest favorites, and every once in a while, a Capture the Relic. But that's my preference. Crazy King tends to funnel the fighting. Good matches really give that "king of the hill" feeling. Which is awesome.
Was I ok with all DM for a while? Sure was. I'm still "ok" with it, but that has become closer to "meh". Only due to just eventually getting bored with it. If 1 in 3 of my games were Crazy King, with the rest being DM? I'd never stop queueing up. But those are my preferences. Obviously can't speak for everyone else.
However, I still queue up for a couplefew matches every evening. Cuz I love it. I just find myself taking more breaks now or doing other odd things in between. So... not really the end of the world.
I just feel like there's a solution. Not saying the one I suggested. Just saying, there are several avenues that can be taken and one or more should be taken sooner rather than later.
Thoughts? We should discuss what actually could work. Lets really try and contribute here folks.
(This isn't intended to be an 'omg just do DM only cuz its the best / OMG DM sucks Objectives or else!' argument thread.)
Edited by McTaterskins on November 23, 2021 8:29PM I think we're possibly starting to see and identify as a general consensus what some definitive root problems are here pertaining to the mode vs mode and queue vs queue items.
One thing that seems to specifically stand out in wider agreement one way or another is that Objective modes need adjustments to be more engaging to gain a little more popularity. Between this thread and holding conversations in game in various guild chats, this seems to be a consensus amongst everyone. "DMers" and "Objective Players" alike.
Lets keep this rolling and get more people engaged in the thread. Keep the conversation focused on debating and possibly forming a consensus on what could bring more engagement to objective modes to a wider range of participants.
Update 11/22
The debate seems to have evolved into the discussion of what the proper level of engagement should be and how to get there. It also seems that a rather consistently agreed upon point would be that there needs to be a real MMR system in order to place any modifications that would help objective modes lead to more combat engagement.
Update 11/23
Retitled OP to reflect the core conversation item.
Interesting conversation point. - When separating queues, it seems there is a divide on whether or not DM should stay in the random queue. (Obviously this requires a different DM bucket.)
Through in game and forum conversations, another root cause or divide: With the exception of adamant DM only players, there's a large portion of the population that would prefer not to get repeats of the same game modes over and over. Whether it's death match or capture the relic. Its stale.
In conjunction with other discussion regarding MMR problems, it seems both the queue and match making system need an overhaul. Share if you agree, disagree, or have other ideas!
Share what you think would make objective modes or the random queue more popular or engaging for players as well!
What about this idea? (just spit-balling something that might get people to populate the random queue more often?)
"Random Queue" only or Split DM queue to on its own.
Random Queue = 3 game modes available:
DM: Consistent staple in available random modes.
Rotating Land Grab: Between Crazy King and Domination (Or just eliminate domination lolol)
Rotating Capture: Between Chaos Ball and Capture the Relic.
Allows for DMs in the random queue as well.
Allows for people to get achievements for the other modes.
Shakes things up. Different modes every month while the crowd favorite is still always available.
Random Queue will see more use as DM will be seen more often there as well.
My opinion:
While I do believe DM is the most popular across the board, I think it is underestimated as to how many players don't exactly want the same game mode every time. Just due to boredom or monotony. It doesn't change whether or not people think it's the best game mode. I myself would be 1,000% happy if I could manage DM, Crazy King, which are my two closest favorites, and every once in a while, a Capture the Relic. But that's my preference. Crazy King tends to funnel the fighting. Good matches really give that "king of the hill" feeling. Which is awesome.
Was I ok with all DM for a while? Sure was. I'm still "ok" with it, but that has become closer to "meh". Only due to just eventually getting bored with it. If 1 in 3 of my games were Crazy King, with the rest being DM? I'd never stop queueing up. But those are my preferences. Obviously can't speak for everyone else.
However, I still queue up for a couplefew matches every evening. Cuz I love it. I just find myself taking more breaks now or doing other odd things in between. So... not really the end of the world.
I just feel like there's a solution. Not saying the one I suggested. Just saying, there are several avenues that can be taken and one or more should be taken sooner rather than later.
Thoughts? We should discuss what actually could work. Lets really try and contribute here folks.
(This isn't intended to be an 'omg just do DM only cuz its the best / OMG DM sucks Objectives or else!' argument thread.)
1
-
Magio_✭✭✭✭I don't want "DM more often". I, and hundreds of the people I know, want to only DM all day everyday. So, please argue to get your queue back without trying to force us into your games.
Here's the deal. According to ZOS, as a community we can only have 2 of the following 3 options because of lack of population:
Group Queues
Solo Queues
Specific Queues for both DM and Objectives.
We've gone through all 3 combinations. We had Group + Specific Queues. Then Solo + Specific Queues. Then Group + Solo Queues (basically objective only). Now we're at Group + Solo (basically DM-only). At least the current system caters to the majority.
Imo, the yelling of "bUt yEr pReMaDe" was very often a coping mechanism from sore losers. The Hate-Tells channels on BG Discords I'm member of is full of screenshots of false accusations. So dropping Group queues for Solo queues was unnecessary, since there's not enough BG Population for both. It's literally impossible for any sore loser to know whether the enemy grouped up with certainty without a confession. Players that are good play as a team and make plays off of each other whether they grouped queued or not.
With that in mind, I believe the best avenue for objective gamers to get their specific queue(s) back, would be to campaign to bring back the original queue system of Group Queues + Specific Queues. Then adding a marker to people that queued in a group to the scoreboard which would be a great way to squash all the false accusations and excuses from sore losers. Then maybe they'll realize the enemy players are just better after all.
Example of a group marker in another game:
I've said this before. Solo queues can be turned off for now for the sake of game mode choice, then be brought back once ZOS steps in and does something to grow the BG population to the point it can sustain all 3 options. It's their responsibility.2 -
auz✭✭✭✭I disagree. Leave the queues as they are or make the random truly random. I don't want want to queue for group DM solo to get stuck with potatoes over and over against pre mades.
A better solution would be to adjust objective modes to be fun. Reduce the flag numbers in Domination and crazy king. Give more points for defending. Increase the damage done by the chaosball. Make it impossible to hold for longer than a set amount of time. Reduce the number of relics and increase points for defending.
Probably the most important thing is educate new players on how to pvp. Teach them about buffs and debuffs and active healing and defence.1 -
Magio_✭✭✭✭How do you know you're fighting premades?
If the MMR system wasn't garbage you wouldn't get stuck with potatoes on your team vs premades. Getting potatoes on your team vs teams full of good players happens even in the solo queue with the current system we have. Stop blaming the group queue for problems brought by the trash MMR system. Also, don't get me started on the 1vX culture this game's community fosters, which hurts the average BG team of randos vs a group. Solos, Duos, Trios and combinations of all beat full groups in MOBAs all the time.
ZOS copy-pasted rule sets for Head-to-Head objective arenas into their 3 team arena. As we are now, instead of paying someone to come up with 3 team arena rulesets that are good PvP, the easiest solution would be to scrap the 3 team system and just turn BGs into Head-to-Head arenas like every other game. ZOS tried to fix what wasn't broken.1 -
McTaterskins✭✭✭✭@Magio_ :
1. Your first paragraph/statement is confusing. Did you read the OP? It states in the beginning that putting DM queue on its own should be an option. I'm not sure who you think is trying to argue with you? Can you elaborate? As stated, I myself prefer DM over most of the game modes.
However, if you remember when, as you outlined, it was random only, there were hardly any DMs. Which I personally think was a cause for so much discussion and complaints about people DM'ing in objectives. I hated getting 5 capture the relics, 4 dominations, 2 crazy kings, and a chaos ball before seeing 1 DM. It was extremely annoying.
2. I'm not sure how group vs. solo is related? Could you elaborate as to why you think what you described is related and contributing to potential queue and/or population problems? Are you saying some folks don't like all DM because of group queue?
@auzI disagree. Leave the queues as they are or make the random truly random. I don't want want to queue for group DM solo to get stuck with potatoes over and over against pre mades.
A better solution would be to adjust objective modes to be fun. Reduce the flag numbers in Domination and crazy king. Give more points for defending. Increase the damage done by the chaosball. Make it impossible to hold for longer than a set amount of time. Reduce the number of relics and increase points for defending.
Probably the most important thing is educate new players on how to pvp. Teach them about buffs and debuffs and active healing and defence.
Nice. Personally I think the two pools should be separated. Regardless of the random queue most likely having a lower population. Agreed on the rest.Edited by McTaterskins on November 17, 2021 9:21PM1 -
trackdemon5512✭✭✭✭✭
✭I rather like what GTA has done. When you queue into PVP mini game modes the group is given a chance to choose the next mode. However after a single match the previously played stage or game type is disabled. Allows for group choice and keeps modes in a viable rotation.0 -
McTaterskins✭✭✭✭trackdemon5512 wrote: »I rather like what GTA has done. When you queue into PVP mini game modes the group is given a chance to choose the next mode. However after a single match the previously played stage or game type is disabled. Allows for group choice and keeps modes in a viable rotation.
This would be amazing.0 -
Magio_✭✭✭✭McTaterskins wrote: »2. I'm not sure how group vs. solo is related? Could you elaborate as to why you think what you described is related and contributing to potential queue and/or population problems? Are you saying some folks don't like all DM because of group queue?McTaterskins wrote: »Nice. Personally I think the two pools should be separated. Regardless of the random queue most likely having a lower population. Agreed on the rest.
Did you miss my breakdown? ZOS says we can't have what you're asking for because there's not enough population to sustain Solo and Group versions of DM and Objective queues.
So, Solo vs Group has a lot to do with people not having a specific queue for Objective Modes.
Seems like people don't understand what the issue is. According to ZOS, if the "Random Queue" we have now stopped backfilling some partially filled Deathmatch games from the DM-Only queue, there would be times it would NEVER pop. ZOS doesn't want that to happen, so they're making it backfill DM-Only queue matches so it always pops, even if that means the majority will be DM anyway, because that's what the vast majority want and have always wanted.
So as an objective gamer, do you want solo queues or to be able to queue only for Objective Modes?1 -
McTaterskins✭✭✭✭McTaterskins wrote: »2. I'm not sure how group vs. solo is related? Could you elaborate as to why you think what you described is related and contributing to potential queue and/or population problems? Are you saying some folks don't like all DM because of group queue?McTaterskins wrote: »Nice. Personally I think the two pools should be separated. Regardless of the random queue most likely having a lower population. Agreed on the rest.
Did you miss my breakdown? ZOS says we can't have what you're asking for because there's not enough population to sustain Solo and Group versions of DM and Objective queues.
So, Solo vs Group has a lot to do with people not having a specific queue for Objective Modes.
Seems like people don't understand what the issue is. According to ZOS, if the "Random Queue" we have now stopped backfilling some partially filled Deathmatch games from the DM-Only queue, there would be times it would NEVER pop. ZOS doesn't want that to happen, so they're making it backfill DM-Only queue matches so it always pops, even if that means the majority will be DM anyway, because that's what the vast majority want and have always wanted.
So as an objective gamer, do you want solo queues or to be able to queue only for Objective Modes?
[snip]
What would you, @magio_ , do to get more folks to queue in the random bucket, rather than any particular bucket.
The toxicity and confrontational notations being posted in the current running threads surrounding the subject are not productive in nature. No one here in this thread so far is an "objective gamer". Unless you're actually meaning, being objective to the issue. Then yes.
[edited for baiting]Edited by ZOS_Icy on November 26, 2021 11:37AM2 -
Magio_✭✭✭✭If you want to make Obj Modes good and have more people queue organically, I would drop the 3-Team idea from BGs. Head-to-head objectives like basically any competitive PvP game you can think of.
If you want to keep the 3-Team system we have, thus needing obj modes to be kept alive artificially, then I'd increase the rewards for queueing Random. Basically pay people to queue.3 -
McTaterskins✭✭✭✭If you want to make Obj Modes good and have more people queue organically, I would drop the 3-Team idea from BGs. Head-to-head objectives like basically any competitive PvP game you can think of.
If you want to keep the 3-Team system we have, thus needing obj modes to be kept alive artificially, then I'd increase the rewards for queueing Random. Basically pay people to queue.
Good points.
Tbh I feel like the daily reward for BG's is sub par to running a quick random normal dungeon. Fighting to make sure you're at least on the 2nd place team is a bit more involved than a quick 6 minute Fungal Grotto. When the 6 minute FG yields 10 crystals to the BG's 1.2 -
ealdwin✭✭✭✭✭
✭I disagree. Leave the queues as they are or make the random truly random. I don't want want to queue for group DM solo to get stuck with potatoes over and over against pre mades.
A better solution would be to adjust objective modes to be fun. Reduce the flag numbers in Domination and crazy king. Give more points for defending. Increase the damage done by the chaosball. Make it impossible to hold for longer than a set amount of time. Reduce the number of relics and increase points for defending.
Probably the most important thing is educate new players on how to pvp. Teach them about buffs and debuffs and active healing and defence.
I've voiced similar suggestions in another thread, so agree (generally). Domination should operate more like King of the Hill style matches, with one flag in the center. (And maybe one outer-ring flag). Crazy King should operate similarly with one/two flag(s) appearing randomly at one/two of several points. Chaosball damage should ignore resistances perhaps. Capture the Relic should have one relic in the center or one relic that appears at one of 4 points (3 outer ring mid-team, 1 center), and each capture is 50 points not 100.
They would be simple changes, and operate along the thought that there might be some difficulty in removing the 3-team system, but would ideally increase the amount of combat.
I also feel that ZOS should at least try what happens when they don't backfill the DM-only queue with the Random queue. Just try it for a patch and see if it has any effect. Merge the Group and Solo Random queues if they have to. Just try it. It's not like they're shy about running tests on live. (cough Cyrodiil cough).1 -
thesarahandcompany✭✭✭✭McTaterskins wrote: »What about this?
"Random Queue" only or Split DM queue to on its own.
Random Queue = 3 game modes available:
Always DM
Rotating Land Grab: Between Crazy King and Domination (Or just eliminate domination lolol)
Rotating Capture: Between Chaos Ball and Capture the Relic.
Allows for more DMs.
Allows for people to get achievements for the other modes.
Shakes things up. Different modes every month while the crowd favorite is still always available.
Random Queue will see more use as DM will be seen more often.
My opinion:
While I do believe DM is the most popular across the board, I think it is underestimated as to how many players don't exactly want the same game mode every time. Just due to boredom or monotony. It doesn't change whether or not people think it's the best game mode. I myself would be 1,000% happy if I could manage DM, Crazy King, which are my two closest favorites, and every once in a while, a Capture the Relic. But that's my preference. Crazy King tends to funnel the fighting. Good matches really give that "king of the hill" feeling. Which is awesome.
Was I ok with all DM for a while? Sure was. I'm still "ok" with it, but that has become closer to "meh". Only due to just eventually getting bored with it. If 1 in 3 of my games were Crazy King, with the rest being DM? I'd never stop queueing up. But those are my preferences. Obviously can't speak for everyone else.
However, I still queue up for a couplefew matches every evening. Cuz I love it. I just find myself taking more breaks now or doing other odd things in between. So... not really the end of the world.
I just feel like there's a solution. Not saying the one I suggested. Just saying, there are several avenues that can be taken and one or more should be taken sooner rather than later.
Thoughts? We should discuss what actually could work. Lets really try and contribute here folks.
(This isn't intended to be an 'omg just do DM only cuz its the best / OMG DM sucks Objectives or else!' argument thread.)
This doesn't get at the fundamental issue that objective modes are unengaging. The DM community has been pretty consistent with its views that we need to quit talking about queues and trying fifty-million-and-one ways to redo the queues, and instead need to talk about ways to make objective modes more engaging and eliminating the three team structure.
We play deathmatch because it's the most engaging form for BG pvp. It's time to move on from endless debate about queues that are just fighting for crumbs in the end.
ZOS needs to deliver new, engaging content. We haven't had a serious PVP update in forever besides some new sets that are never tested appropriately that a barebones mmo released and caused the BG community to die out mostly.
I'd rather just delete objective modes before changing the queue here as you suggest.Sarahandcompany
She/Her/Hers0 -
auz✭✭✭✭How do you know you're fighting premades?
If the MMR system wasn't garbage you wouldn't get stuck with potatoes on your team vs premades. Getting potatoes on your team vs teams full of good players happens even in the solo queue with the current system we have. Stop blaming the group queue for problems brought by the trash MMR system. Also, don't get me started on the 1vX culture this game's community fosters, which hurts the average BG team of randos vs a group. Solos, Duos, Trios and combinations of all beat full groups in MOBAs all the time.
ZOS copy-pasted rule sets for Head-to-Head objective arenas into their 3 team arena. As we are now, instead of paying someone to come up with 3 team arena rulesets that are good PvP, the easiest solution would be to scrap the 3 team system and just turn BGs into Head-to-Head arenas like every other game. ZOS tried to fix what wasn't broken.
Can usually have a pretty good guess when fighting against a coordinated group. Fighting against the same team 4 bgs in a row also makes me suspicious.Edited by auz on November 17, 2021 11:09PM2 -
McTaterskins✭✭✭✭@thesarahandcompanythesarahandcompany wrote: »
This doesn't get at the fundamental issue that objective modes are unengaging. The DM community has been pretty consistent with its views that we need to quit talking about queues and trying fifty-million-and-one ways to redo the queues, and instead need to talk about ways to make objective modes more engaging and eliminating the three team structure.
We play deathmatch because it's the most engaging form for BG pvp. It's time to move on from endless debate about queues that are just fighting for crumbs in the end.
ZOS needs to deliver new, engaging content. We haven't had a serious PVP update in forever besides some new sets that are never tested appropriately that a barebones mmo released and caused the BG community to die out mostly.
I'd rather just delete objective modes before changing the queue here as you suggest.
What are your thoughts on making the other modes more engaging? Its not so much about redoing the queues again as to how to get more people to queue in the random bucket. Imo, such a thing as you've touched on here would result in populating the random queue.
@ealdwinI also feel that ZOS should at least try what happens when they don't backfill the DM-only queue with the Random queue. Just try it for a patch and see if it has any effect. Merge the Group and Solo Random queues if they have to. Just try it. It's not like they're shy about running tests on live. (cough Cyrodiil cough).
Agreed. Imo couldn't hurt any more than any of the other things that have been endured.1 -
Magio_✭✭✭✭
You queue solo and go up against a premade 4 BGs in a row? Do you get 25+ minute queues as a solo queuer?Can usually have a pretty good guess when fighting against a coordinated group. First against the same team 4 bgs in a row also makes me suspicious.
Low MMR premade? Something doesn't add up lol.
Either way, assumptions. Idky adding a marker that shows whether ppl are grouped or not would be a bad idea anyway. Wouldn't you like to know for certain if it's an actual problem?Edited by Magio_ on November 17, 2021 10:59PM0 -
auz✭✭✭✭I queue both most of the time. Group and solo because solo takes a long time pop sometimes.
And yeah, fighting the same pre made over and over happens. But that is a time zone thing more than an MMR. Getting stuck with potatoes all the time is probably some semblance of mmr.
I really think the conversation of queues should be changed to how to make bgs more engaging, rewarding, competitive and improve the population. With a larger population more options are possible. People can have the game modes they want.
I like the idea of 2 team competitive modes, as an addition. I don't think the 3 team mode should be thrown out. It just needs tweaking to be more engaging and rewarding.
I come from a fps background. ESO pvp is the most fun I have played. And I know a lot of people think the same. With a million different methods and build set ups that can be made to work to suit individual wants. It just needs to be pushed and promoted more by Zos.0 -
Magio_✭✭✭✭The problem with just adding more PvP Modes without scrapping the current ones is the population is already too low. Some DMers might stay in 3 way DM, others will move to the more competitive head-to-head modes. Both are would then be stuck with unhealthy populations.
Would also not do anything to help/solve the fact that the 3-team obj modes don't have enough people queueing for them. If anything it would also make it worse.
I'm sorry man, what you're proposing is a pipe dream imo.0 -
GypsyKing22✭✭✭Also, don't get me started on the 1vX culture this game's community fosters, which hurts the average BG team of randos vs a group.
You have no idea how happy I am someone calls this out. Eveey time I see 1vx build or 1vx pvp-er I cringe a bit since 1vx by design just doesn't work vs other equally competent players. It's only ever gonna be a reality vs potatoes or severely underlevelled players. And ESO pvp isn't deep enough to allow for such skill discrepancies once you reach a certain skill level.1 -
auz✭✭✭✭GypsyKing22 wrote: »Also, don't get me started on the 1vX culture this game's community fosters, which hurts the average BG team of randos vs a group.
You have no idea how happy I am someone calls this out. Eveey time I see 1vx build or 1vx pvp-er I cringe a bit since 1vx by design just doesn't work vs other equally competent players. It's only ever gonna be a reality vs potatoes or severely underlevelled players. And ESO pvp isn't deep enough to allow for such skill discrepancies once you reach a certain skill level.
That's part of the fun though isn't it? I shouldn't be able to do this but I just did. I am a trash level pvper. But I have beat groups I shouldn't have been able to, and I have had my [Snip] handed to me by potatoes. There are just so many variables, and I understand when you get to a certain level you can reduce the number of them, but [snip] happens and the challenge is the fun of it. Keep running in a group if you want. You will learn more faster on your own and/ or fighting out numbered.
[Edited for minor profanity bypass]Edited by ZOS_Icy on November 26, 2021 11:38AM0 -
thesarahandcompany✭✭✭✭McTaterskins wrote: »@thesarahandcompanythesarahandcompany wrote: »
This doesn't get at the fundamental issue that objective modes are unengaging. The DM community has been pretty consistent with its views that we need to quit talking about queues and trying fifty-million-and-one ways to redo the queues, and instead need to talk about ways to make objective modes more engaging and eliminating the three team structure.
We play deathmatch because it's the most engaging form for BG pvp. It's time to move on from endless debate about queues that are just fighting for crumbs in the end.
ZOS needs to deliver new, engaging content. We haven't had a serious PVP update in forever besides some new sets that are never tested appropriately that a barebones mmo released and caused the BG community to die out mostly.
I'd rather just delete objective modes before changing the queue here as you suggest.
What are your thoughts on making the other modes more engaging? Its not so much about redoing the queues again as to how to get more people to queue in the random bucket. Imo, such a thing as you've touched on here would result in populating the random queue.
@ealdwinI also feel that ZOS should at least try what happens when they don't backfill the DM-only queue with the Random queue. Just try it for a patch and see if it has any effect. Merge the Group and Solo Random queues if they have to. Just try it. It's not like they're shy about running tests on live. (cough Cyrodiil cough).
Agreed. Imo couldn't hurt any more than any of the other things that have been endured.
1. Reduce the number of teams in all battleground modes down to two. Make the matches 6v6. In a hypothetical matchup, that would allow for one of every class to be potentially represented in a 6v6 matchup.
2. Improve guard, shields and other tank skills to be useful in BGs, and add a new reported stat in the final BG stats for shielded damage that reports how much damage you shielded an ally from with a shield, set that shields, maims, and guard skill. Add minor evasion to propelling shield. This would give tanks a more viable role in PVP than just holding block and add some semblance of range vs. melee back into the game.
3. Reduce the number of flags in domination down to ONE flag. Reduce the number of flags in crazy king down to ONE flag, though allow the flag to move around the map. Reduce the number of relics down to one, at the center stage similar to chaos ball. Apply a snare and major defile to people holding the chaos ball or a relic. Decrease the number of points holding the chaos ball awards. Chaos ball has a 15 second delay or so until damage starts ticking.Sarahandcompany
She/Her/Hers2 -
trackdemon5512✭✭✭✭✭
✭thesarahandcompany wrote: »3. Reduce the number of flags in domination down to ONE flag. Reduce the number of flags in crazy king down to ONE flag, though allow the flag to move around the map. Reduce the number of relics down to one, at the center stage similar to chaos ball. Apply a snare and major defile to people holding the chaos ball or a relic. Decrease the number of points holding the chaos ball awards. Chaos ball has a 15 second delay or so until damage starts ticking.
All of this is just Deathmatch with barely an extra rule attached. A team overpowers and they literally sit on one thing. Players hate it when a guild uses it to farm AP from keeps like Bleakers in Cyrodiil. Why would anyone tired of Deathmatch engage in this?3 -
McTaterskins✭✭✭✭@thesarahandcompany @trackdemon5512
In regard to Domination:
What if flag number was reduced to 3 and they are placed in positions similar to current capture the relic positions? Wouldn't that cause more fighting and also add the challenge of trying to overpower someone's spawn area? (There are multiple directions you can leave your spawn from so would still be able to flank anyway)
In regard to Crazy King:
Doesn't this get up to 3-4 flags currently? Reduce to 2 but not until 2nd half of game timer? I like this one right up until there are too many flags. But that's just me.
What about adding scored points for KB's inside of flag/capture point radii? Would this perhaps cause more fight engagement over objectives?Edited by McTaterskins on November 18, 2021 3:24PM0 -
trackdemon5512✭✭✭✭✭
✭McTaterskins wrote: »@thesarahandcompany @trackdemon5512
In regard to Domination:
What if flag number was reduced to 3 and they are placed in positions similar to current capture the relic positions? Wouldn't that cause more fighting and also add the challenge of trying to overpower someone's spawn area? (There are multiple directions you can leave your spawn from so would still be able to flank anyway)
In regard to Crazy King:
Doesn't this get up to 3-4 flags currently? Reduce to 2 but not until 2nd half of game timer? I like this one right up until there are too many flags. But that's just me.
What about adding scored points for KB's inside of flag/capture point radii? Would this perhaps cause more fight engagement over objectives?
DOMINATION: Flag number should be increased from 4 to 5. This actually always encourages individuals to be on the offensive looking to get the 5th flag. At the same time it spreads teams thin weakening defense. Battlefield/COD has long played its maps this way. You can’t have all flags without serious compromise. It makes for incredibly engaging matchups for both veterans and regular players.
One flag is the same as having a Deathmatch and then slapping a flag in the middle where everyone battles. Essentially a King of the Hill. The problem there is as we’ve seen it becomes stale when unbalanced teams or meta builds hold.
CRAZY KING: Crazy King is perfect. It starts off as King of the Hill and then devolves as more flags are added and switched around. It’s a constant debate of whether to defend or advance. The addition and removal of flags in random locations is a great touch. I would not change Crazy King.
Domination and Crazy King are the most balanced out of the PVP BG modes. Theyre all player versus player but demand tactical strategy that isn’t demanding. If you play to the the rules you can win, veteran or amateur. Builds and coordinated teams can give you an advantage BUT not one that overshadows the game mode itself
What also needs to be considered is that Kills in modes besides Deathmatch do not count toward the point win. That can’t change because as soon as it does the BG becomes about who kills the most.
All BGs are inherently objective games. Deathmatch is most kills. Domination and Crazy King are most time in the respective zones coupled with the most people. Relic is simply capture. You shouldn’t be able to win relic if you just kill attackers all day. Chaosball is possession and evade.
Chaosball’s issue is that it very much mirrors the “One Flag” type of Domination advocated above but on the move. We see what happens in that player get frustrated when they can’t make any headway. An individual in all speed gear that can’t be caught or a team with unkillable tanks. Just like a blowout Deathmatch is disheartening, so is a Chaosball game where opposing teams never touch the ball and serve as fodder.
These are practical matters of any fair competitive game. Rules and limitations in place that are strictly adhered to in order to maintain the spirit and purpose of the game. You can’t claim you’re the best figure skater in the world by physically taking your opponents out of the competition and assuming the position by default. That’s not the goal of it all.Edited by trackdemon5512 on November 18, 2021 4:03PM2 -
thesarahandcompany✭✭✭✭trackdemon5512 wrote: »thesarahandcompany wrote: »3. Reduce the number of flags in domination down to ONE flag. Reduce the number of flags in crazy king down to ONE flag, though allow the flag to move around the map. Reduce the number of relics down to one, at the center stage similar to chaos ball. Apply a snare and major defile to people holding the chaos ball or a relic. Decrease the number of points holding the chaos ball awards. Chaos ball has a 15 second delay or so until damage starts ticking.
All of this is just Deathmatch with barely an extra rule attached. A team overpowers and they literally sit on one thing. Players hate it when a guild uses it to farm AP from keeps like Bleakers in Cyrodiil. Why would anyone tired of Deathmatch engage in this?
The way objective modes are right now is unengaging. This is how you make them engaging. It's pvp. There's supposed to be fighting and overpowering. It loses its purpose when u can just avoid fights all match.Sarahandcompany
She/Her/Hers1 -
trackdemon5512✭✭✭✭✭
✭thesarahandcompany wrote: »trackdemon5512 wrote: »thesarahandcompany wrote: »3. Reduce the number of flags in domination down to ONE flag. Reduce the number of flags in crazy king down to ONE flag, though allow the flag to move around the map. Reduce the number of relics down to one, at the center stage similar to chaos ball. Apply a snare and major defile to people holding the chaos ball or a relic. Decrease the number of points holding the chaos ball awards. Chaos ball has a 15 second delay or so until damage starts ticking.
All of this is just Deathmatch with barely an extra rule attached. A team overpowers and they literally sit on one thing. Players hate it when a guild uses it to farm AP from keeps like Bleakers in Cyrodiil. Why would anyone tired of Deathmatch engage in this?
The way objective modes are right now is unengaging. This is how you make them engaging. It's pvp. There's supposed to be fighting and overpowering. It loses its purpose when u can just avoid fights all match.
That’s engaging to Deathmatchers as it caters to what they’re already doing. It’s most certainly not engaging to those who are adverse to Deathmatch but want PVP.
There are a solid number of players in Cyrodiil who run around the map looking to just kill. Groups of several who sit on a resource and wait for people to come in so they can be farmed or kited around the towers. These players build strategies to do just this on end, put up camps, return ad nauseam.
Yes that play is fun for them but it’s extremely not fun for anyone else. What usually happens is players stop engaging and move elsewhere while that group stays to entice more in. In Cyrodiil you can move onto the true objective: capture keeps, accumulate points, get scrolls, etc. by disengaging. In BGs you cannot.
1 flag DOMINATION and CRAZY KING would just be a repeat of tower kiting. Except in this case players cannot go elsewhere and they quit. Deathmatch is for killing. The other modes are for playing to their specific objectives. BGs are supposed to be about focus on a task. If every game is at heart Deathmatch then there really is no reason for the other objectives.3 -
Dem_kitkats1✭✭✭✭trackdemon5512 wrote: »thesarahandcompany wrote: »trackdemon5512 wrote: »thesarahandcompany wrote: »3. Reduce the number of flags in domination down to ONE flag. Reduce the number of flags in crazy king down to ONE flag, though allow the flag to move around the map. Reduce the number of relics down to one, at the center stage similar to chaos ball. Apply a snare and major defile to people holding the chaos ball or a relic. Decrease the number of points holding the chaos ball awards. Chaos ball has a 15 second delay or so until damage starts ticking.
All of this is just Deathmatch with barely an extra rule attached. A team overpowers and they literally sit on one thing. Players hate it when a guild uses it to farm AP from keeps like Bleakers in Cyrodiil. Why would anyone tired of Deathmatch engage in this?
The way objective modes are right now is unengaging. This is how you make them engaging. It's pvp. There's supposed to be fighting and overpowering. It loses its purpose when u can just avoid fights all match.
That’s engaging to Deathmatchers as it caters to what they’re already doing. It’s most certainly not engaging to those who are adverse to Deathmatch but want PVP.
There are a solid number of players in Cyrodiil who run around the map looking to just kill. Groups of several who sit on a resource and wait for people to come in so they can be farmed or kited around the towers. These players build strategies to do just this on end, put up camps, return ad nauseam.
Yes that play is fun for them but it’s extremely not fun for anyone else. What usually happens is players stop engaging and move elsewhere while that group stays to entice more in. In Cyrodiil you can move onto the true objective: capture keeps, accumulate points, get scrolls, etc. by disengaging. In BGs you cannot.
1 flag DOMINATION and CRAZY KING would just be a repeat of tower kiting. Except in this case players cannot go elsewhere and they quit. Deathmatch is for killing. The other modes are for playing to their specific objectives. BGs are supposed to be about focus on a task. If every game is at heart Deathmatch then there really is no reason for the other objectives.
I think you proved a lot of people's points. The point of BGs is to be in a fast paced, action packed, small scale PvP environment. It seems like you can't disengage from combat because you're not supposed to be able to. BGs is meant for people to be in small competitive skirmishes together whether it be just for for kills or to get points from an objective. Otherwise, what is the point of the smaller maps, a short time limit, and team play if you're just supposed to run around and avoid eachother to get the objective?
And like you said, if you don't want to be locked in combat all of the time, but still want some PvP or want to earn some points for getting objectives, then by all means head to Cyro and IC.Edited by Dem_kitkats1 on November 18, 2021 8:57PM3 -
trackdemon5512✭✭✭✭✭
✭Dem_kitkats1 wrote: »trackdemon5512 wrote: »thesarahandcompany wrote: »trackdemon5512 wrote: »thesarahandcompany wrote: »3. Reduce the number of flags in domination down to ONE flag. Reduce the number of flags in crazy king down to ONE flag, though allow the flag to move around the map. Reduce the number of relics down to one, at the center stage similar to chaos ball. Apply a snare and major defile to people holding the chaos ball or a relic. Decrease the number of points holding the chaos ball awards. Chaos ball has a 15 second delay or so until damage starts ticking.
All of this is just Deathmatch with barely an extra rule attached. A team overpowers and they literally sit on one thing. Players hate it when a guild uses it to farm AP from keeps like Bleakers in Cyrodiil. Why would anyone tired of Deathmatch engage in this?
The way objective modes are right now is unengaging. This is how you make them engaging. It's pvp. There's supposed to be fighting and overpowering. It loses its purpose when u can just avoid fights all match.
That’s engaging to Deathmatchers as it caters to what they’re already doing. It’s most certainly not engaging to those who are adverse to Deathmatch but want PVP.
There are a solid number of players in Cyrodiil who run around the map looking to just kill. Groups of several who sit on a resource and wait for people to come in so they can be farmed or kited around the towers. These players build strategies to do just this on end, put up camps, return ad nauseam.
Yes that play is fun for them but it’s extremely not fun for anyone else. What usually happens is players stop engaging and move elsewhere while that group stays to entice more in. In Cyrodiil you can move onto the true objective: capture keeps, accumulate points, get scrolls, etc. by disengaging. In BGs you cannot.
1 flag DOMINATION and CRAZY KING would just be a repeat of tower kiting. Except in this case players cannot go elsewhere and they quit. Deathmatch is for killing. The other modes are for playing to their specific objectives. BGs are supposed to be about focus on a task. If every game is at heart Deathmatch then there really is no reason for the other objectives.
I think you proved a lot of people's points. The point of BGs is to be in a fast paced, action packed, small scale PvP environment. It seems like you can't disengage from combat because you're not supposed to be able to. BGs is meant for people to be in small competitive skirmishes together whether it be just for for kills or to get points from an objective. Otherwise, what is the point of the smaller maps and team play if you're just supposed to run around and avoid eachother to get the objective?
And like you said, if you don't want to be locked in combat all of the time, but still want some PvP or want to earn some points for getting objectives, then by all means head to Cyro and IC.
Where is the intelligence in two groups of 4 battling over a single objective when there are three objectives left unguarded? I’m able to employ such a strategy in BGs precisely because DMers don’t care. And yet they get frustrated when they lose. That’s on them. Just like in Cyrodiil where a faction can try to assault the final keep to get emperor. What is the point for the other factions to defend that single keep when they can diffuse the threat by going where forces aren’t concentrated? Go to another keep on the circle and take it while someone defends.
The DM crowd in BGs currently is extremely single minded. Small skirmishes of all the players stacking on top of one another. 90% of the map unused despite 12 players in there (if you even fill these days). Stack, synergize, kill. This is what DMers want for every mode because it caters to what they like and what they’re built for.
I have no problem with a group of four that can cover all four flags in a Domination match. That takes coordination when you have 8 other players seeking to take them away. But the DM advocates here seem to want to roll that back and remove strategy. Power wins out no matter what. And then it becomes a meta race. It’s boring and the majority of people quit. Those who don’t like Deathmatch quit and those who do like Deathmatch but get sick of a singular playstyle quit.4 -
Aldoss✭✭✭✭✭
✭trackdemon5512 wrote: »Where is the intelligence in two groups of 4 battling over a single objective when there are three objectives left unguarded? I’m able to employ such a strategy in BGs precisely because DMers don’t care. And yet they get frustrated when they lose. That’s on them.
There is no intelligence. That's the point. The "smartest" thing to do is to disengage, but that doesn't make it fun.
DMers don't care about the objectives, as they are presented currently, because it rewards purposefully disengaging from the content that they're there for: combat. If the modes were reworked to not only be objectives, but to also incorporate the content that gets players to queue for the thing in the first place, you'd see a lot more engagement.
Also, no "DMer" cares that they lose in objective modes. They got frustrated with being neglected by ZOS and being forced to queue for a BG that was almost guaranteed to not be the most popular game mode, waited sometimes 20 minutes for the queue to pop, only for the match to be over in less than 5 minutes with barely any combat, because objectives could be captured without it.
4 -
trackdemon5512✭✭✭✭✭
✭trackdemon5512 wrote: »Where is the intelligence in two groups of 4 battling over a single objective when there are three objectives left unguarded? I’m able to employ such a strategy in BGs precisely because DMers don’t care. And yet they get frustrated when they lose. That’s on them.
There is no intelligence. That's the point. The "smartest" thing to do is to disengage, but that doesn't make it fun.
DMers don't care about the objectives, as they are presented currently, because it rewards purposefully disengaging from the content that they're there for: combat. If the modes were reworked to not only be objectives, but to also incorporate the content that gets players to queue for the thing in the first place, you'd see a lot more engagement.
Also, no "DMer" cares that they lose in objective modes. They got frustrated with being neglected by ZOS and being forced to queue for a BG that was almost guaranteed to not be the most popular game mode, waited sometimes 20 minutes for the queue to pop, only for the match to be over in less than 5 minutes with barely any combat, because objectives could be captured without it.
I understand DMers want more combat/killing in the objective modes. It’s their bread and butter. The problem I see is that while it may bring back some DMers into the fold, it likely won’t be many. Definitely not enough to account for the casuals turned off by showing up into BGs looking for a match.
And those DMers may shrug it off and say “That’s tough” for them. But at the same time those casuals are needed. ZOS isn’t going to add or adjust content that only a sparse few play. They already weren’t touching BGs when the populations were stronger and all game modes were available. Why would they put significant time and effort into a mode the majority of players won’t play?
Before DMers get anything like that, the casuals have to be brought back. No question about it because otherwise it’s a waste of time and money. The DMers want new content? They have to make that concession and it’s clearly in a direction they don’t want to go. Currently BGs are not competitive. It’s the same dying population. I’ve seen it before with Battlefield 1943. Sure a core contingent of players will stay but the numbers will keep dropping. To the point where queues either take forever to pop or just don’t unless at prime time.2 -
auz✭✭✭✭trackdemon5512 wrote: »McTaterskins wrote: »@thesarahandcompany @trackdemon5512
In regard to Domination:
What if flag number was reduced to 3 and they are placed in positions similar to current capture the relic positions? Wouldn't that cause more fighting and also add the challenge of trying to overpower someone's spawn area? (There are multiple directions you can leave your spawn from so would still be able to flank anyway)
In regard to Crazy King:
Doesn't this get up to 3-4 flags currently? Reduce to 2 but not until 2nd half of game timer? I like this one right up until there are too many flags. But that's just me.
What about adding scored points for KB's inside of flag/capture point radii? Would this perhaps cause more fight engagement over objectives?
DOMINATION: Flag number should be increased from 4 to 5. This actually always encourages individuals to be on the offensive looking to get the 5th flag. At the same time it spreads teams thin weakening defense. Battlefield/COD has long played its maps this way. You can’t have all flags without serious compromise. It makes for incredibly engaging matchups for both veterans and regular players.
One flag is the same as having a Deathmatch and then slapping a flag in the middle where everyone battles. Essentially a King of the Hill. The problem there is as we’ve seen it becomes stale when unbalanced teams or meta builds hold.
CRAZY KING: Crazy King is perfect. It starts off as King of the Hill and then devolves as more flags are added and switched around. It’s a constant debate of whether to defend or advance. The addition and removal of flags in random locations is a great touch. I would not change Crazy King.
Domination and Crazy King are the most balanced out of the PVP BG modes. Theyre all player versus player but demand tactical strategy that isn’t demanding. If you play to the the rules you can win, veteran or amateur. Builds and coordinated teams can give you an advantage BUT not one that overshadows the game mode itself
What also needs to be considered is that Kills in modes besides Deathmatch do not count toward the point win. That can’t change because as soon as it does the BG becomes about who kills the most.
All BGs are inherently objective games. Deathmatch is most kills. Domination and Crazy King are most time in the respective zones coupled with the most people. Relic is simply capture. You shouldn’t be able to win relic if you just kill attackers all day. Chaosball is possession and evade.
Chaosball’s issue is that it very much mirrors the “One Flag” type of Domination advocated above but on the move. We see what happens in that player get frustrated when they can’t make any headway. An individual in all speed gear that can’t be caught or a team with unkillable tanks. Just like a blowout Deathmatch is disheartening, so is a Chaosball game where opposing teams never touch the ball and serve as fodder.
These are practical matters of any fair competitive game. Rules and limitations in place that are strictly adhered to in order to maintain the spirit and purpose of the game. You can’t claim you’re the best figure skater in the world by physically taking your opponents out of the competition and assuming the position by default. That’s not the goal of it all.
I can't see 5 flags improving Domination. It is already a game of running in circles. Extra flags just means more places to run. And there is never a debate about whether to defend the flag or move to the next one in crazy King. Just move to the next white flag as quick as you can. It is not a battleground. It is a foot race. But it is how you win.
Bgs that don't promote conflict and battles are just not well designed. The game should be funnelling players into each other. COD and battlefield do it very well. Being able to run around the outside of a map in a circle to cap empty flags is not how they do it. If I wanted to run as fast as I can from flag to flag and not fight people, I would play sonic at the Olympics.
6