ZOS quietly responded to "fakes" roles in Feb.

spartaxoxo

They updated their Knowledge Support Database back in February to address role selection.



They described it as players being inaccurate in their assessment of their roles rather than calling them fakes, but this is clearly meant to address this concern.

VaranisArano

Nice find! Did they revert the whole "you can only queue for one role" mechanic?

I must've missed the patch notes...

wolfie1.0.

VaranisArano wrote: »

Nice find! Did they revert the whole "you can only queue for one role" mechanic?

I must've missed the patch notes...

Now why would they do such a simple and sane thing like that?

spartaxoxo

VaranisArano wrote: »

Nice find! Did they revert the whole "you can only queue for one role" mechanic?

I must've missed the patch notes...

I think it's just the support page that got updated? I'm actually seeing a bunch of stuff from Feb-April that was updated, guessing this database got worked on back then. I'm kind poking through to see if anything else notable got added. I know it used to be the case you could pick all three. And the video they direct you towards is severely out of date, it still tells you that you can queue for Cyrodiil lol.

oldbobdude

The problem isn’t people who aren’t accurately assessing their own capability. It’s people who queue in one role while intending to play in another. Tanks with no taunts and healers with no heals. That’s pretty common.

Dojohoda

You can pick all three?

Xenite

oldbobdude wrote: »

The problem isn’t people who aren’t accurately accessing their own capability. It’s people who queue in one role while intending to play in another. Tanks with no taunts and healers with no heals. That’s pretty common.

Yup and it has absolutely nothing to do with people assessing their abilities. It's about selfish people not wanting to wait in que and expecting the rest of the group to pick up the slack when they fail to do the role they selected.

The arbitrary rules system was kinda laughable. WoW has had a simple gear/spec system in place for over a decade now. Absolutely nothing wrong with it making sure people have the basic necessities to fill a role they are in que for.

FluffyReachWitch

It would be interesting to pick all three and bring the appropriate build options for whatever you end up filling in for.

However, I have just checked, and it is still impossible to select more than one role.

VaranisArano

Dojohoda wrote: »

You can pick all three?

You used to be able to. ZOS changed it to try to cut down on fake roles - I guess with the idea that people wouldn't select a role they had no intention of doing - and to cut down on times where you'd accidentally get two people who were prepared to tank.

I, uh, may have learned the hard way to check which role I was instead of assuming there was no way I'd be DD when I'd also queued as tank or healer.

Looks like FluffyReachWitch checked and we still can't queue for more than one, which makes Support's advice incorrect.

spartaxoxo

VaranisArano wrote: »

Looks like FluffyReachWitch checked and we still can't queue for more than one, which makes Support's advice incorrect.

The video they point you towards is from 8 years ago too.

I think all they did was add the paragraph about people being inaccurate in their assessments, without deleting the old information. Unfortunately, that old information is no longer accurate.

ETA:

Here's the video

https://youtu.be/vUYFFvZogN8

Jaimeh

I think Support is using outdated information, but it's weird because the change to one role selection happened a long time ago.

spartaxoxo

One thing I find interesting in that video link (around 2:13) is that define the roles here in a way that is helpful to players, and that refuse to do in-game itself. They instead using wishy-washy language in-game, and I do think that creates confusion.

virtus753

I'm not sure that update date is accurate.

There are still official "help" posts supposedly updated that same date (Feb. 22, 2022) that refer to leveling your "Veteran Rank" using xp boosters and only being able to open boxes purchased in Imperial City "at the right Veteran Rank" (https://help.elderscrollsonline.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/30957/). If those had been updated this February, why do they still refer to "Veteran Rank" as if that's a current thing?

TaSheen

I find it really difficult to determine what is actual with the help information, as opposed to what's been there forever, and/or stealth edited so the date is "new" but the info is.... not.

That's just not a good thing when it comes to a game IP providing real solid information to its players. Sloppy, ZOS. Seriously.

Lapin_Logic

Xenite wrote: »

oldbobdude wrote: »

The problem isn’t people who aren’t accurately accessing their own capability. It’s people who queue in one role while intending to play in another. Tanks with no taunts and healers with no heals. That’s pretty common.

Yup and it has absolutely nothing to do with people assessing their abilities. It's about selfish people not wanting to wait in que and expecting the rest of the group to pick up the slack when they fail to do the role they selected.

The arbitrary rules system was kinda laughable. WoW has had a simple gear/spec system in place for over a decade now. Absolutely nothing wrong with it making sure people have the basic necessities to fill a role they are in que for.

Just add them to blacklist and leave

MidniteOwl1913

What gets me is the number of people boldly asserting that they are "fake" and then expecting no one to call them on it. I see it here in the forums. I should start a poll, "When you fake queue as a tank or healer to shorten your wait time, what excuse do you use?"

1) It's a normal dungeon nobody needs a real tank or healer but useless noobs

2) My DPS is so high they are lucky to have me as a tank even without taunt

3) Everybody should just use the ring of the Pale order like me, healers are useless

4) I need to just speed thru this for the rewards, I queue for a support role, but everybody will be fine, this is an easy run

5) I deserve to have fun, why do the other three people matter? I don't want to wait. Don't I deserve to play the way I want?

That's all I can think of off the top of my head, so feel free to add. I'm sure there are some I missed... ;-)

jtm1018

MidniteOwl1913 wrote: »

What gets me is the number of people boldly asserting that they are "fake" and then expecting no one to call them on it. I see it here in the forums. I should start a poll, "When you fake queue as a tank or healer to shorten your wait time, what excuse do you use?"

1) It's a normal dungeon nobody needs a real tank or healer but useless noobs

2) My DPS is so high they are lucky to have me as a tank even without taunt

3) Everybody should just use the ring of the Pale order like me, healers are useless

4) I need to just speed thru this for the rewards, I queue for a support role, but everybody will be fine, this is an easy run

5) I deserve to have fun, why do the other three people matter? I don't want to wait. Don't I deserve to play the way I want?

That's all I can think of off the top of my head, so feel free to add. I'm sure there are some I missed... ;-)

1. Totally agree.
2. Your lucky if I am of any help, me low dps fool.
3. Healing are for wussies.
4. Totally agree. Again.
5. My point exactly, only my funnage matter.

Sarannah

The problem with fake roles isn't players being inaccurate in the assessment of their own skills, it is flat out players (ab)using different roles to cut in line for a role they have no intention of performing.

The problem with communities is you need to cut out the ways of abuse for anything. Not everyone in reallife is a burglar, but we all have locks on our doors because some select few are. Anything is like that, you need to cut out the ways of abuse. The dungeonfinder is no different, ZOS should prevent ways of abuse.

You can't expect the entire community to behave respectfully, and as long as nothing is done with fake roles, more and more players will abuse the dungeonfinder roles. Making the new player experience worse and worse, for existing players as well. For the sake of playerretention, ZOS needs to fix this. How can you expect new players to keep playing, when their first experiences are horrible? Not to mention, if you want new players to spend money on the game.

Celephantsylvius_Bornasfinmo

There aren't enough players to fill the prefixed roles, hence no pre game filter.

This is my conclusion to this issue as nothing was ever implemented.

PrimusTiberius

This isn't really a big deal when running "normal" content

zaria

PrimusTiberius wrote: »

This isn't really a big deal when running "normal" content

This, getting the mechanic is main problem in normal dlc unless dps is idiotic low.
In guild runs we tend to run none role for RND (random normal dungeon).You select role at the start so you don't end up with an tank running as DD while an DD is fake tanking but if none we just ask for some to select the missing.
It works.
For baseline vet dungeons yes you fake if group is decent but the cp 200 DD who don't know the mechanics will be dead all the time because no healer.

VaranisArano

PrimusTiberius wrote: »

This isn't really a big deal when running "normal" content

It's not a big deal for the fake role, no.

For the correctly-queued players who now have to pick up their slack, it can be pretty annoying.

MidniteOwl1913

VaranisArano wrote: »

PrimusTiberius wrote: »

This isn't really a big deal when running "normal" content

It's not a big deal for the fake role, no.

For the correctly-queued players who now have to pick up their slack, it can be pretty annoying.

Yeah, I agree. It's literally excuse number one from 3 posts up... I had to laugh...

peacenote

Wow, I was so excited for one second... and now I'm extra disappointed. I personally think that restoring the ability to pick multiple roles would help with the "fake role" problem as it would increase the amount of people willing and able to legitimately tank and heal, even if they are hybrids or need to say.. hang on, let me change my build real quick.

But a stance on the topic that refers to an extremely old feature that's been eliminated? Such a bummer.