Reports from the Field: Deathmatch ruined by Objective players

PhoenixGrey

DarthCuddlefluff wrote: »

PhoenixGrey wrote: »

OBJnoob wrote: »

SkaraMinoc wrote: »

OBJnoob wrote: »

RealLoveBVB wrote: »

So now I am asking the same question here as I did ingame: WHO is enjoying such matches?

[snip]

[snip]

[snip]

The only pvp game mode which involves combat is DM so yeah we are correct.

Even PVE has more combat compared to objective pvp.

[snip]

My friend I have no idea what you're talking about. There is so much combat in objective game modes.

That's because players like me literally treat every game like a DM. However if your goal is to win the objective, fighting is the most inefficient way.

[edited to remove quote]

_adhyffbjjjf12

its strange how in the other big AAA mmorpg Objective based PVP is by far the most popular and we don't have this odd DM elitism. I do wonder if the 3 team format is the root cause.

CameraBeardThePirate

_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »

its strange how in the other big AAA mmorpg Objective based PVP is by far the most popular and we don't have this odd DM elitism. I do wonder if the 3 team format is the root cause.

The root of the cause is the fact that the gamemodes are poorly balanced, that's it. In other Objective Based PvP games, there's almost always fewer objectives than there are teams. Look at TF2 or Overwatch; there's one payload, one hill, one active capture point. This means that teams are forced to engage on or near the objective.

The current objective modes (with the exception of Chaosball) in ESO don't do this; players aren't forced to engage (and are actually discouraged from doing so) because there's always going to be an empty or poorly guarded objective.

If, say, there were only 2 flags in Domination or Crazy King, teams would be forced to engage. Like musical chairs, one team would always be in danger of losing if they're not trying to fight the other team and gain the point.

For capture the relic, there should be 1 relic in the middle, like chaosball, and the objective should be to score with the relic by bringing it back to your spawn. Maybe have a requirement to keep the relic in your spawn for a certain amount of time before the score is counted to make it easier to counter by killing the relic holder.

Chaosball works in theory, but without a snare attached to the ball it's still possible to avoid engagement by building a max movespeed build, grabbing the ball, and running away the entire match. Additionally, many maps still have tons of places a ball holder can stand in and not be targetable by enemies - this also needs to go.

The beginning of Crazy King is probably the most balanced objective mode. There's 1 flag, and teams are forced to fight over it.

Ulfhethinn

helios777 wrote: »

Literally around 75% of the problems on the BG forums would go away if ZoS gave us back the Deathmatch only que option back lol

Only if there was true queue separation. Not the DM only and a queue that was both Objective + DM, because that just resulted in Objective players getting dragged into DM. The two queues need to be completely separate.

ZOS_Icy

Greetings,

We have recently removed some unnecessary back and forth from this thread. This is a reminder to keep the discussion civil and constructive. Please keep our Community Rules in mind moving forward.

Thank you for your understanding.

Tberg725

Everyone should be pushing for the deathmatch option to comeback even the players who do not like playing that mode in BG that’s all I played (when it was an option) BG stopped being fun when they took away the ability to solely que for it…

Now most of the time when you que for a BG you get into a game mode and a large portion of people are having a deathmatch anyways and leave the objectives alone and just fight each other which causes some to have a bad experience because they are not getting their teams help to do the objectives and the deathmatch peeps don’t like the objective based rounds

SIMPLE SOLUTION give us back the deathmatch only que and pull deathmatch from the random que for BG this is easy and everyone is happy

_adhyffbjjjf12

Your solution does not work as there is not enough of a population to support it. Its evident because this is the only reason why ZOS would not do it like a shot. If the games problems were resolved, and BG became inviting and rewarding then your solution works perfectly.

As for DM only, in every other AAA mmorpg it is unpopular and played far less than objective based modes for for various reasons (some of which is demonstrated by the toxic passive aggressiveness behind this thread) and as far as I can tell the human beings that play ESO are not a different species of man that plays in every other game.

Firstmep

Dont think there is a big enough bg playerbase to fracture it even further atm.
Any kind of separation would have to start with a drastic rework of bg rewards, rework of the most problematic game modes, and a proper mmr system that foesnt just take played games into account.
Overall changes need to happen to drum up interest in bgs, then we can start looking at some for of separation.

Ofc this shouldve happened all those years ago when Morrowimd came out..

Anyhow, without a significant increase in bg players, we will just end up running in circles again where zos separates players, and than have to walk it back due to objective modes having 30 minute queue times.

Supershutze

I'd still take this over players ignoring the objective in non-DM BG.

If you queue for BG, you are agreeing to play the objective of whatever gamemode comes up.

I hate crazy king with a passion. I still try to win.

If you ignore the objective, you're ruining the game for everyone else, and, frankly, should probably be banned as per the rules around toxic behaviour.

gariondavey

CameraBeardThePirate wrote: »

_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »

its strange how in the other big AAA mmorpg Objective based PVP is by far the most popular and we don't have this odd DM elitism. I do wonder if the 3 team format is the root cause.

The root of the cause is the fact that the gamemodes are poorly balanced, that's it. In other Objective Based PvP games, there's almost always fewer objectives than there are teams. Look at TF2 or Overwatch; there's one payload, one hill, one active capture point. This means that teams are forced to engage on or near the objective.

The current objective modes (with the exception of Chaosball) in ESO don't do this; players aren't forced to engage (and are actually discouraged from doing so) because there's always going to be an empty or poorly guarded objective.

If, say, there were only 2 flags in Domination or Crazy King, teams would be forced to engage. Like musical chairs, one team would always be in danger of losing if they're not trying to fight the other team and gain the point.

For capture the relic, there should be 1 relic in the middle, like chaosball, and the objective should be to score with the relic by bringing it back to your spawn. Maybe have a requirement to keep the relic in your spawn for a certain amount of time before the score is counted to make it easier to counter by killing the relic holder.

Chaosball works in theory, but without a snare attached to the ball it's still possible to avoid engagement by building a max movespeed build, grabbing the ball, and running away the entire match. Additionally, many maps still have tons of places a ball holder can stand in and not be targetable by enemies - this also needs to go.

The beginning of Crazy King is probably the most balanced objective mode. There's 1 flag, and teams are forced to fight over it.

Cam gets it

Sylosi

gariondavey wrote: »

"...there's almost always fewer objectives than there are teams"

Cam gets it

You don't need fewer objectives than teams, for example MOBAs often have many objectives, modes like conquest often have more objectives than teams (GW2 sPvP, Codex in Rift, etc ) and so on.

All you need is a well designed mode that makes running around in one group a failure of a strategy, so to win your team has to split to some degree and therefore you can have more objectives than the number of teams and still have fights forced to a good extent.

Incidentally, splitting the team (for at least some of the match) is something most PvP games do, even those with one objective (e.g - CS:GO). Because it makes for more varied, more entertaining PvP, plus significantly ups the skill cap, as splitting the team requires better communication, better map awareness, things like rotations come into play, more decision making, etc.

The biggest problem with ESO BG's is they are 3 teams which breaks the most fundamental rule of game design - risk vs reward (which isn't changed by having fewer objectives or by being DM). Then add the cheese factor is very, very high in this game so it doesn't take much for some balance change to make something obnoxious enough to essentially break a PvP mode, even if the modes were actually well designed and were two teams.

They also have way too many BG modes, you don't need that many, you just need one that is actually well designed, League of Legends got to millions and millions of players on basically one mode, even one map. They should have gone with one objective mode that actually forces fights to a reasonable degree, which would also mean 2 teams, not 3.

Even by the low standards of MMORPG PvP, ESO BGs are literally the worst PvP I've ever seen, Rift had better PvP... and that is saying something.