Objective players, you should be fighting for an improved queue system

SkaraMinoc

In a few months (Update 33) we will see a return to the old BG queue system. This means

• A non-trivial amount of players in any given BG will completely ignore objectives and will deathmatch instead
• Many players will spawn camp and prevent players from playing the objectives
• A return to arguing and toxicity in BG chat, namely 1) stop playing objectives because it will end the game, versus 2) stop deathmatching so we can play objectives and win
• No end to the many forum posts complaining about the queues

Please speak up and fight for an improved queue system. Now is your chance.

SkaraMinoc

Given the low BG population, I selected the "combine queues with mode preference" option.

Rocket League had a similar mode preference option in the early days before they went mainstream. It allowed players to queue for specific game modes with a fallback to non-preferred modes and also enabled Psyonix to collect data about which modes were most popular. It worked very well during off hours. ZOS should do something similar.

Game Modes
[x] Team Deathmatch
[ ] Capture the Relic
[x] Chaosball
[ ] Domination
[ ] Crazy King

[x] Play any mode if waiting longer than [15 minutes]

Maps
[x] Ald Carac
[ ] Arcane University
[x] Ularra
[x] Foyada Quarry
[x] Mor Khazgur
[x] Deeping Drome
[ ] Istirus Outpost Arena
[ ] Eld Angavar

[x] Play any map if waiting longer than [10 minutes]

Necrotech_Master

i personally prefer the purely random option (equal chance for any game)

but i also think that they should have a completely separate queue for the modes so that players can queue for those, if you are working on achievements for say flag games, every other game mode is going to be a waste of time for you

the best solution that i could imagine to make everyone happy would be

• completely separate deathmatch only queue (you queue for this you are only queuing with people who use this mode)
• random (equal chance for all games, will not pull from deathmatch queue, but can pull from specific objective mode queues, can still have a chance for deathmatch though)
• individual objective queues (either full granular, one for each mode, or grouped like original system such as flag games or land grabs, if what people say is true and these are lesser used modes, they can still use same pool as random)

the separate deathmatch queue could essentially be the "ranked" mode where more competitive people play and random/objective would be better for casual play, as this seems to be where the contentions stand (casual vs competitive), as deathmatch seems to be more competitive

going along with this, you could even take away the leaderboards for all modes except the "ranked" deathmatch mode, i personally dont care about leaderboard rewards (they arent great anyway), but having the leaderboard makes more sense for a "ranked" mode (there isnt a leaderboard for random dungeons, or really any dungeons, just trials and arenas which you cant queue for)

if really think the DM only queue would take too long then, could add an option to be put into the random bucket after X amount of time, maybe after a prompt asking to switch, doing that would not unbalance random being random, but still keep queue moving as random would be a catch all mode

Amottica

SkaraMinoc wrote: »

Given the low BG population, I selected the "combine queues with mode preference" option.

I think the first part of this statement speaks to the real problem, the low BG population. I think the first goal for Zenimax is to find a way to increase interest in BGs, and PvP as a whole. ofc, for Cyrodiil that requires fixing performance at its core, but I digress.

If Zenimax made a combined queue where we can choose our preference and no preference outweighs another then we are back to where DM-only players are in objective-based matches and they will care less about the purpose of the match and only care about what they want to do. So this would be a waste of time for Zenimax to try to develop unless they find a way to punish players who ignore the objectives in a way that matters.

We currently have combined queues where one group gets to do what they prefer and another group gets to do what the first group prefers much of the time. That is not balanced by any measure and clearly not a means to attract players.

The only option in the poll that could lead to attracting more players is truly separate queues for objective and DM BGs. If one group has to wait longer then so be it, it was their choice but their choice should not affect someone else's. That is waht we have now and it is clearly not satisfactory, made obvious by the uproar that players still ended up in DM matches most of the time.

Even the OP has recently stated that solo random players have less than a 1% chance to get something other than a DM match with the current system. That means the current design is only working for one group and pretty much ignores the interest of the other group.

Dem_kitkats1

I think because the population is so low at the moment that splitting the queues entirely would make for too long of que times. Players will not want to wait 1/2 hr or longer to get into a match, even if it's for the mode they want. I do believe that players should have some choice as to what mode they would like to que for and since there seems to be a good number of players for either Objectives or DM the votes could swing either way under a mode preference system. In GW2 this type of system works very well and is pretty fair I would say for the time being. Yes, players are going to ignore the objectives, but that's going to happen regardless at this point now. At least if players get to vote for their mode preference, Objective and DM players will feel less like they are being completely ignored.
I do think that if the population grows, then DM needs to be its own thing entirely with ranked and unranked modes.

_adhyffbjjjf12

agreed ^^

The population is low, so cannot split, therefore the logical conclusion is exactly what is done in other games like GW2, select game mode randomly after a group of 8 is formed, each player selects their own preference. Once formed roll a dice, and proportionally represent the chance of getting a game mode based on the selections made by the players. Job done - I could write that code in a couple of hours, its not that complex.

SkaraMinoc

_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »

agreed ^^

The population is low, so cannot split, therefore the logical conclusion is exactly what is done in other games like GW2, select game mode randomly after a group of 8 is formed, each player selects their own preference. Once formed roll a dice, and proportionally represent the chance of getting a game mode based on the selections made by the players. Job done - I could write that code in a couple of hours, its not that complex.

Some sort of mode preference is probably the best solution at this point. From start to finish it's probably 4 weeks after design, client and server code, and testing/fixes.

Parasaurolophus

All BG`s modes need to be reworked. There is no point in changing queues if the mode is so bad that it causes so much drama in the community. Objective players dislike DMs due to poor balance and design. DM players don't like objective mode because combat often needs to be avoided. Simply changing queues is too lazy and not enough to improve BG`s gaming experience.
In fairness, ZoS has repeatedly said that, and we ourselves see it, that the pvp population is too small. We constantly see the same people at BG`s and there is nothing to discuss. A random queue is at least some kind of solution and it is unlikely that it can be done better. Stop clinging to this bad pvp in eso. Big and general changes are needed to make pvp better.

Amottica

SkaraMinoc wrote: »

_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »

agreed ^^

The population is low, so cannot split, therefore the logical conclusion is exactly what is done in other games like GW2, select game mode randomly after a group of 8 is formed, each player selects their own preference. Once formed roll a dice, and proportionally represent the chance of getting a game mode based on the selections made by the players. Job done - I could write that code in a couple of hours, its not that complex.

Some sort of mode preference is probably the best solution at this point. From start to finish it's probably 4 weeks after design, client and server code, and testing/fixes.

We have that but it is skewed to DM and as you stated in the OP and Zenimax has noted, DM players seem to treat every BG as a DM by willingly ignoring the objectives when they are in an objective match. So a true "preference" where DM players will end up in objective matches with any regularity will be pretty much as though there was no real preference. It would also lengthen the queue time since it will require the queue to give a short period of time for other players interested in joining the objective or DM queue. After the short period of time it will finally form the group with what is available.

I will note that it should also be weighted to who is queueing. If most of the players are queueing for DM then that is clearly the preference and it would be the BG that forms. If the greater preference is an objective match then that is what will be formed.

With this, if a player drops from a match after it has been formed their entire account will have a 15-20 minute lockout from the start of forming the group. If they drop X times they will have an hour lockout. This would be to prevent those who do not like the match they got from dropping. In the same token, if a player is not earning points for playing the objectives they will receive the same lockout.

gariondavey

Nice post, skara. Not an objective player but they need their own queue. Or zos needs to make objectives 2 teams or rework objectives they encourage pvp.

Amottica

gariondavey wrote: »

Nice post, skara. Not an objective player but they need their own queue. Or zos needs to make objectives 2 teams or rework objectives they encourage pvp.

I think the three-team design leads to a very poor BG design overall regardless of DM or objective. I also agree that the objective match design leads to more running around than attacking and defending in capture the flag type matches leading to an awkward-looking PvP scenario. It needs to be slower and more defined so that players would defend a flag or point instead of just running to the next.

I have seen instances PvP capture the points type of match with epic battles but have never seen such a situation in ESO.
Capture the flag here is the weirdest PvP I have ever seen.

But I digress as this is not about specific BG designs.

_adhyffbjjjf12

SkaraMinoc wrote: »

_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »

agreed ^^

The population is low, so cannot split, therefore the logical conclusion is exactly what is done in other games like GW2, select game mode randomly after a group of 8 is formed, each player selects their own preference. Once formed roll a dice, and proportionally represent the chance of getting a game mode based on the selections made by the players. Job done - I could write that code in a couple of hours, its not that complex.

Some sort of mode preference is probably the best solution at this point. From start to finish it's probably 4 weeks after design, client and server code, and testing/fixes.

Even at 4 weeks its a no brainer. Even if the code is a mess and it takes longer, its a solution that is proven and works, and certainly better than amateur trial and error.

OBJnoob

Honestly people deathmatching in objective modes isn’t the worst thing in the world for the team trying to win. And complaining is never going to go away.

Some of these aren’t game problems they’re just people problems. If there’s a death match mode it should only give you desthmatch. If there’s an objective mode it should only give objective matches. If there’s a random it should be perfectly random.

So I guess I’m saying I’ll be happy with what they’re doing and I don’t need anything else to satisfy me. Just need to be able to que for what I want and actually get it. I’ll handle the rest.

exeeter702

Necrotech_Master wrote: »

i personally prefer the purely random option (equal chance for any game)

but i also think that they should have a completely separate queue for the modes so that players can queue for those, if you are working on achievements for say flag games, every other game mode is going to be a waste of time for you

the best solution that i could imagine to make everyone happy would be

• completely separate deathmatch only queue (you queue for this you are only queuing with people who use this mode)
• random (equal chance for all games, will not pull from deathmatch queue, but can pull from specific objective mode queues, can still have a chance for deathmatch though)
• individual objective queues (either full granular, one for each mode, or grouped like original system such as flag games or land grabs, if what people say is true and these are lesser used modes, they can still use same pool as random)

the separate deathmatch queue could essentially be the "ranked" mode where more competitive people play and random/objective would be better for casual play, as this seems to be where the contentions stand (casual vs competitive), as deathmatch seems to be more competitive

going along with this, you could even take away the leaderboards for all modes except the "ranked" deathmatch mode, i personally dont care about leaderboard rewards (they arent great anyway), but having the leaderboard makes more sense for a "ranked" mode (there isnt a leaderboard for random dungeons, or really any dungeons, just trials and arenas which you cant queue for)

if really think the DM only queue would take too long then, could add an option to be put into the random bucket after X amount of time, maybe after a prompt asking to switch, doing that would not unbalance random being random, but still keep queue moving as random would be a catch all mode

There is nothing even remotely close to being competitive In a 4v4v4 tdm mode. People prefer it because there is simply no nonsense that gets in the way of enjoyable team fights.

exeeter702

Dem_kitkats1 wrote: »

I think because the population is so low at the moment that splitting the queues entirely would make for too long of que times. Players will not want to wait 1/2 hr or longer to get into a match, even if it's for the mode they want. I do believe that players should have some choice as to what mode they would like to que for and since there seems to be a good number of players for either Objectives or DM the votes could swing either way under a mode preference system. In GW2 this type of system works very well and is pretty fair I would say for the time being. Yes, players are going to ignore the objectives, but that's going to happen regardless at this point now. At least if players get to vote for their mode preference, Objective and DM players will feel less like they are being completely ignored.
I do think that if the population grows, then DM needs to be its own thing entirely with ranked and unranked modes.

Sorry but simply put, when choice of mode existed before. DM queues popped within minutes and objective modes.... not so much.

Frankly, if given the option again, and objextive mode players have to wait 30 minutes for a game, that is simply natural selection taking shape. This is the crux of the issue.

Zos ostensibly feels that the only solution is to arbitrarily populate objective mode bgs by throwing everything into a random queue and calling it a day. This solves nothing. DM players will treat every game mode like DM because they actually WANT to pvp and zos is forcing them into game modes they dont want and objective mode players will complain that DM focused players are ruining their giga brain super deep strategic objective mode (not)pvp while doing random queue which is only DM 1/4th of the time.

The fact of the matter is BGs as a whole from a fundamental design point are poorly designed and have been since their introduction in MW with many glaring issues that are explicitly causing this divided discourse. Focusing on the game mode grouping and queue pool is a surface level attempted bandaid fix, and it seems to be the approach taken because the alternative would require actual tangible development time and resources for something that ultimatley draws in a minority of the overall player base. The irony being that it was the design flaws to begin with that helped establish bgs as a niche activity among an already minority group of eso players.

Solariken

The current structure with 2 queues (DM & objective) is best by a wide margin. Most of the BG regulars only want deathmatch, so ZOS should provide a DM only queue

_adhyffbjjjf12

hardly when 80% of the content type does not proc.

Its a solved problem where low pops are involved, and is implemented in many other MMORPG. 1 queue that is random, but weight the options based on participating player preference.

Dem_kitkats1

exeeter702 wrote: »

Sorry but simply put, when choice of mode existed before. DM queues popped within minutes and objective modes.... not so much.

Frankly, if given the option again, and objextive mode players have to wait 30 minutes for a game, that is simply natural selection taking shape. This is the crux of the issue.

Zos ostensibly feels that the only solution is to arbitrarily populate objective mode bgs by throwing everything into a random queue and calling it a day. This solves nothing. DM players will treat every game mode like DM because they actually WANT to pvp and zos is forcing them into game modes they dont want and objective mode players will complain that DM focused players are ruining their giga brain super deep strategic objective mode (not)pvp while doing random queue which is only DM 1/4th of the time.

The fact of the matter is BGs as a whole from a fundamental design point are poorly designed and have been since their introduction in MW with many glaring issues that are explicitly causing this divided discourse. Focusing on the game mode grouping and queue pool is a surface level attempted bandaid fix, and it seems to be the approach taken because the alternative would require actual tangible development time and resources for something that ultimatley draws in a minority of the overall player base. The irony being that it was the design flaws to begin with that helped establish bgs as a niche activity among an already minority group of eso players.

The problem is that the entire population of BGs is low right now and I fear that it will continue to suffer as it is unknown how long it will take to re-architect the servers and for performance to be improved. Because of the uncertainty of future performance, the que changes, and other new PvPcentric games coming out the population has changed dramatically and will continue to do so. To the point where I don't think that DM only queues would be exempt from longer wait times. Even now, unless you're playing during "prime time", you still have to wait for solo DM queues to pop and if you que for group it's at least a 20 min wait most of the time, and that's from pulling from both of the DM and Objective populations. Que times are worse in lowbies which means that fewer new players are coming to replace the population that has left, which is a bad sign in trying to grow a population that is already low. DM queues may not be bad now, but with the population dwindling as it is, in time it will be. And longer que times will simply discourage players from participating at all.

At least by having the entire population pooled into one you won't have que times becoming an issue on top of the ones that are already there. If the DM population is as large as others claim it is then under a preferential voting system, DM will be the ultimate winner most of the time anyway. Objective players or those who just want a change of pace will not be punished with long que waits for wanting to participate in modes other than DM.

The main issue now is to get the population to grow in order to give devs a push to implement changes in BGs. New players and casuals don't like DM simple as that. The learning curb is steep and overwhelming for many new players, and basically forcing them into an environment like that so they can get some play time will cause many of them to become frustrated and quit. So catering to DM and screwing everyone else with long que times will not help with that. A preference voting system is the fairest way to give everyone what they want in regards to what we're working with.

I agree Objective modes are flawed and need to be reworked, and DM needs to be it's own mode, separate from objectives. However, with the magnitude of the work that is required to fix performance, I doubt those changes will be a priority for a few years. So we need a fix that will work for how the modes are now and the foreseeable future.

propertyOfUndefined

I got tired of waiting and decided to put the game on hold. Haven’t signed on in over a month… Might pick it up again if Thursday’s announcement is promising.

Amottica

Solariken wrote: »

The current structure with 2 queues (DM & objective) is best by a wide margin. Most of the BG regulars only want deathmatch, so ZOS should provide a DM only queue

While we do not really know what percentage of regular BG matches are players that want DM matches, we do have a DM-only queue so those that only want DMs have what you are asking for. The only issue is it draws heavily from those with a broader interest by pulling from the random queue to fill the DM matches when someone has queued for a DM match.

Vecro

We shouldn't be fighting for anything.

I saw a number of DM wanters being needlessly rude about the topic, to that i say: karma.

Ill end by saying that any game mode can be played like a DM, but DM cant be played like the other game modes. I never cried about people DMing in OBJ. Go ahead. While you do that ima be winning, lol.

SkaraMinoc

Vecro wrote: »

While you do that ima be winning, lol.

Not when you can't leave your spawn. Maybe in low MMR Solo Random you can get away with objectives but in high MMR Group Random you'll just get spawn camped by premade deathmatch groups.

It literally happens every other game.

Mythgard1967

I just want to be able to get battle Runner style items......I think its silly to lock something up like that...and maybe there is a way to get other BG awards other than DM...but I havent figured it out.

PhoenixGrey

They are getting what they want so why improve it?

Of course it will be super toxic as DM regulars like me will run the most busted builds to spawn camp these objective players. What else is there to do ?

OBJnoob

PhoenixGrey wrote: »

They are getting what they want so why improve it?

Of course it will be super toxic as DM regulars like me will run the most busted builds to spawn camp these objective players. What else is there to do ?

Maybe I’m not exactly sure what the change is going to be. When they say “like we had before” what are they saying? There won’t be a deathmatch que anymore?

And I mean what’s the exact point of farming the enemy spawn in an objective mode? Why not just farm the objective locations? Is that some kind of form of protest? Like a conscious decision to have fun in the least beneficial way when the beneficial way would be so similar?

Dem_kitkats1

PhoenixGrey wrote: »

They are getting what they want so why improve it?

Of course it will be super toxic as DM regulars like me will run the most busted builds to spawn camp these objective players. What else is there to do ?

I mean....without separate ques, or any ability to chose their preferred mode, no one gets what they want. DM players are forced to play modes that don't encourage the pure PvP experience that they want, and now Objective players are forced to play with and against people who are salty about it and refuse to do anything but DM. So no one gets what they want and no one gets to enjoy the mode that they prefer when they actually get it. I'm not sure what being toxic is going to do other than discourage the growth in the BG population. If you want to keep fighting the same 30 players in high MMR matches, at least farm players on the objectives!

_adhyffbjjjf12

PhoenixGrey wrote: »

They are getting what they want so why improve it?

Of course it will be super toxic as DM regulars like me will run the most busted builds to spawn camp these objective players. What else is there to do ?

not 'it' will be super toxic, 'you' will be super toxic. Most decent players understand the concept of random and adapt to the game format and tactical goals.

The reason for this toxicity is that some players who want to exclusively play DM feel as if DM should get special treatment in a random queue environment. in reality DM is only 1 of many BG types, and its not DM versus Objective based BG, its DM versus each of the other individual map types individually. If the randomness was weighted based on the preference selected for the attending players there wouldn't be a problem.

Aldoss

_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »

The reason for this toxicity is that some players who want to exclusively play DM feel as if DM should get special treatment in a random queue environment.

Wrong. We feel wronged by ZOS who debuted BGs with only 3 modes, giving players the ability to understand the extreme differences between what happens in a death match and what happens in capture the relic or domination, and then switched the queue options down the road to allow us to queue for the modes that we preferred (overwhelmingly death match).

After a large growth spree, mostly surrounding the death match mode, ZOS removed the choice from these players and reverted back to a true random queue, but this time with 5 total modes, causing the most popular mode to occur less than 20% of the time.

We don't want special treatment. We want for ZOS to realize how toxic it is to allow a community to grow based on specific pretenses, only for them to remove those pretenses and force us to play with a community that doesn't want us.

We have no where to go. Cyrodiil is laggier than ever these days and just constant zerg fests. Imperial City is a gank fest and empty. We're here because we fell in love with BG combat. Removing the mode that spurs the most of that type of combat does not remove our love for the combat.

We all should be screaming at ZOS in unison at how ludicrous this change is.

_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »

in reality DM is only 1 of many BG types, and its not DM versus Objective based BG, its DM versus each of the other individual map types individually. If the randomness was weighted based on the preference selected for the attending players there wouldn't be a problem.

You don't want this. What you just proposed is pretty much what we just had and it resulted in 99% death match. In all likelihood, a system you're proposing will still result in a majority of death matches and won't guarantee for you that if an objective mode is chosen, you won't get some combat lovers in your lobby that will find joy in spawn camping you.

If anything, ZOS has (fortunately or unfortunately) proven that the "Every Match is Death Match" methodology is effective at eventually getting ZOS' attention and causing a change. Them reverting back to the last queue system makes this strategy the most obvious choice to get their attention to try a different solution.

_adhyffbjjjf12

Aldoss wrote: »

_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »

The reason for this toxicity is that some players who want to exclusively play DM feel as if DM should get special treatment in a random queue environment.

snip..

We all should be screaming at ZOS in unison at how ludicrous this change is.

_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »

in reality DM is only 1 of many BG types, and its not DM versus Objective based BG, its DM versus each of the other individual map types individually. If the randomness was weighted based on the preference selected for the attending players there wouldn't be a problem.

You don't want this. What you just proposed is pretty much what we just had and it resulted in 99% death match. In all likelihood, a system you're proposing will still result in a majority of death matches and won't guarantee for you that if an objective mode is chosen, you won't get some combat lovers in your lobby that will find joy in spawn camping you.

If anything, ZOS has (fortunately or unfortunately) proven that the "Every Match is Death Match" methodology is effective at eventually getting ZOS' attention and causing a change. Them reverting back to the last queue system makes this strategy the most obvious choice to get their attention to try a different solution.

No you didn't read properly, I referred to weighted random. I'm talking about the model used successfully in other AAA mmorpg right now that works with low and high pop. Il give the example:

1. Wait until 8 people in random queue
2. When 8 arrives, form a group then ask each player what their preference is (note its after a group is formed, that's important)
3. The game randomly selects the mode based on user selection. So if 3 select DM, 2 select chaos ball and a mix after that then there is a 37.%% chance of DM, 25% chance of chaos ball, and a mixture of probabilities based on other selections.

Its a well proven model that has been running for many years and very fair. No need for buckets, no preference for 1 player over another and the ability to overlay with a MMR based solution if the population is high enough.

PhoenixGrey

_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »

PhoenixGrey wrote: »

They are getting what they want so why improve it?

Of course it will be super toxic as DM regulars like me will run the most busted builds to spawn camp these objective players. What else is there to do ?

not 'it' will be super toxic, 'you' will be super toxic. Most decent players understand the concept of random and adapt to the game format and tactical goals.

The reason for this toxicity is that some players who want to exclusively play DM feel as if DM should get special treatment in a random queue environment. in reality DM is only 1 of many BG types, and its not DM versus Objective based BG, its DM versus each of the other individual map types individually. If the randomness was weighted based on the preference selected for the attending players there wouldn't be a problem.

The reason for toxicity is not being able to play a DM.

Merforum

SkaraMinoc wrote: »

Given the low BG population, I selected the "combine queues with mode preference" option.

Rocket League had a similar mode preference option in the early days before they went mainstream. It allowed players to queue for specific game modes with a fallback to non-preferred modes and also enabled Psyonix to collect data about which modes were most popular. It worked very well during off hours. ZOS should do something similar.

Game Modes
[x] Team Deathmatch
[ ] Capture the Relic
[x] Chaosball
[ ] Domination
[ ] Crazy King

[x] Play any mode if waiting longer than [15 minutes]

Maps
[x] Ald Carac
[ ] Arcane University
[x] Ularra
[x] Foyada Quarry
[x] Mor Khazgur
[x] Deeping Drome
[ ] Istirus Outpost Arena
[ ] Eld Angavar

[x] Play any map if waiting longer than [10 minutes]

This check box solution is great, just need a checkbox for solo or group too. The choosing maps might be asking too much though. Also maybe have one 100% random check box that allows you to get the daily rewards.

BTW I notice you addressing the title to objective players, but they are not to blame in any way for any of this. DMers and ZOS created this mess all by themselves.

BTW when I first proposed this I was relentlessly attacked and call stupid by the very DMers who now realize this is a good idea, your welcome.