Battleground Feature Testing - Deathmatch versus Objectives - I solved it!

Icyfire369

Hey guys!

I made a four-minute video discussing an idea I had after reading the Week 5 PTS Patch Notes for Update 35. The intent was to propose a solution to the Deathmatch vs Objective PvPer problem within BGs.

I'll leave a link to the video at the end of the post.

--- What is the problem currently? ---

Deathmatchers = they play all game modes like a Deathmatch. As a result, in the objective modes, they tend to end in under five minutes because two teams are fighting their hearts out while the 3rd team ends the game uninterrupted.

Objective players = have no intent on actually fighting players.

Both of these scenarios are not fun for anyone, and we need a way to split them up IF the actual game modes are not being updated.

--- Summary of Video ---

Thanks to the new Battleground Feature technology ZOS is adding, they now have the capability to turn on/off game modes at their convenience.

I proposed three example schedules (from bad to good) on how this can be structured during the week.

Example One - "Biased and Unfair" - https://imgur.com/14VT9mO
This one favors the Objective Games Modes. I gave each mode a day then repeated that cycle for the following weeks. Not recommended.

Example Two - "Progressive" - https://imgur.com/6PqVFWz
I divided them into two groups of three. A little better but still biased towards the Objective Game Modes. Again, not recommended.

Example Three - Thanos, "Balanced in all things." - https://imgur.com/dOqJ15z
This one promotes alternating each day between Deathmatch and X Objective. Each Objective Mode is on an eight-day rotation. If you see the image, Domination is on Monday this week, then Tuesday the next, Wednesday after that, etc etc.

Example Three is the recommended option for three reasons.
1) This solves the DM vs Objective problem. If I want to Deathmatch today, but it's actually an objective day, not a big deal. I can do something else or have a day off and come back tomorrow to PvP. Likewise for the Objective folks.

2) It promotes build diversity. You can actually have a Chaos Ball build and run it exclusively when Chaos Ball is available. Eliminating the risk of you getting in a game mode that is NOT Chaos Ball.

3) Achievements. This is for the achievement hunters out there. You can just wait for the day you want and get it done. It's a pain right now where I'm trying to get certain achievements and there's an 80% chance, I get the wrong mode and even worse when my team is counterproductive to helping me succeed.

There's a little more detail in the video, if you'd like to give it a watch.

Otherwise, I'd like to know what you guys think!

Link to the video:
https://youtu.be/bnkVcwe2xcQ

gariondavey

Option 3 seems pretty solid
@ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_Kevin please check this out

_adhyffbjjjf12

your theory is based on false assumptions:

1. Deathmatchers = they play all game modes like a Deathmatch. As a result, in the objective modes, they tend to end in under five minutes because two teams are fighting their hearts out while the 3rd team ends the game uninterrupted.

2. Objective players = have no intent on actually fighting players.

Both of the above are generalisations, especially the 2nd which is a passive aggressive slur applied by a certain minority. Objective players want great fights to win objectives, not just fight for the sake of fighting and not all DMers play all modes lIke DM. Also some players like both DM and Objective modes.

That aside, none of the above address the core issues that make PVP in ESO so flawed (see other threads or other AAA MMORPG) they are just slicing and dicing an already diminished player base. You can spin and split the queue in a million ways but its not going to make the game healthy or inviting to new players, which is the real problem.

Icyfire369

_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »

That aside, none of the above address the core issues that make PVP in ESO so flawed (see other threads or other AAA MMORPG) they are just slicing and dicing an already diminished player base. You can spin and split the queue in a million ways but its not going to make the game healthy or inviting to new players, which is the real problem.

We appreciate your support and thanks for your comment!

We're not necessarily making new queues. There's always going to be a Solo queue and Group queue. We're just splitting the actual game modes based on day, so they are guarantees instead of random chance.

And I agree, there's no denying that PvP in ESO has fundamental issues.

And it is very noble of you to suggest fixing the ROOT of the issues. I'd wager that would be the BEST solution in almost every outcome.

However, if I may be so bold, that is a tall order you're asking for. Given the resources ZOS has at their disposal, I don't think it's on their agenda to fix the CORE of PvP at this time. And instead, they rather apply short term fixes to placate the community. Just my guess, and I'm okay with that.

Because of that, I think implementing an experimental change as I suggested in my post, would be a new and fun idea. At least, to entertain the idea for a few months and see what the data shows.

_adhyffbjjjf12

I'm not having a go at you here, what i'm saying is slicing and dicing queues (over time) doesn't fix anything and further diminish the player pool. I.e people play when they want to play, not when a scheduled dictates they can play. If you want to solve this with a tactical fix until ZOS get their act together, you do what is successfully done in other games (i.e you learn from success in the given industry industry), for example, i've seen this in GW2 working for over a decade:

1. Two teams is selected to form a BG.

2. After selection, each person is asked which BG format they prefer out of a small rotating subset. This doesn't include DM as its unpopular, but it could if there was demand for it as per ESO (DM is off-season in GW2)

3. The game proportionally applies a chance to get the selected format and spins the spinner (a visual spinner so players see what's happening) If everyone bar 1 picks DM then there's a 90% chance you get DM and 10% chance of the other. In this way the majority gets what they want more often or not, but the minority also get a chance, which is fair.

This works for low pop and high pop and dynamically adapts to whatever is the preferred BG format of the day and you only ever need 1 queue although GW2 happily supports a ranked and unranked queue that does the above. GW2 has had this implemented for 10 years and in all that time I think the longest i've had to wait is 2 minutes.

lonnml

_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »

This doesn't include DM as its unpopular

I think you’re pretty mistaken about that lol

Unified_Gaming

Icyfire369 wrote: »

Hey guys!

I made a four-minute video discussing an idea I had after reading the Week 5 PTS Patch Notes for Update 35. The intent was to propose a solution to the Deathmatch vs Objective PvPer problem within BGs.

I'll leave a link to the video at the end of the post.

--- What is the problem currently? ---

Deathmatchers = they play all game modes like a Deathmatch. As a result, in the objective modes, they tend to end in under five minutes because two teams are fighting their hearts out while the 3rd team ends the game uninterrupted.

Objective players = have no intent on actually fighting players.

Both of these scenarios are not fun for anyone, and we need a way to split them up IF the actual game modes are not being updated.

--- Summary of Video ---

Thanks to the new Battleground Feature technology ZOS is adding, they now have the capability to turn on/off game modes at their convenience.

I proposed three example schedules (from bad to good) on how this can be structured during the week.

Example One - "Biased and Unfair" - https://imgur.com/14VT9mO
This one favors the Objective Games Modes. I gave each mode a day then repeated that cycle for the following weeks. Not recommended.

Example Two - "Progressive" - https://imgur.com/6PqVFWz
I divided them into two groups of three. A little better but still biased towards the Objective Game Modes. Again, not recommended.

Example Three - Thanos, "Balanced in all things." - https://imgur.com/dOqJ15z
This one promotes alternating each day between Deathmatch and X Objective. Each Objective Mode is on an eight-day rotation. If you see the image, Domination is on Monday this week, then Tuesday the next, Wednesday after that, etc etc.

Example Three is the recommended option for three reasons.
1) This solves the DM vs Objective problem. If I want to Deathmatch today, but it's actually an objective day, not a big deal. I can do something else or have a day off and come back tomorrow to PvP. Likewise for the Objective folks.

2) It promotes build diversity. You can actually have a Chaos Ball build and run it exclusively when Chaos Ball is available. Eliminating the risk of you getting in a game mode that is NOT Chaos Ball.

3) Achievements. This is for the achievement hunters out there. You can just wait for the day you want and get it done. It's a pain right now where I'm trying to get certain achievements and there's an 80% chance, I get the wrong mode and even worse when my team is counterproductive to helping me succeed.

There's a little more detail in the video, if you'd like to give it a watch.

Otherwise, I'd like to know what you guys think!

Link to the video:
https://youtu.be/bnkVcwe2xcQ

The issue isn't the pvp modes but more how the scoring works. The scoring doesn't encourage people to kill others and still meet the objective. Awarding points to kills whilst doing the objective would help people play the mode more appropriately. Some modes currently disencourage killing by having to run to flags I.e. domination.

The issue with a rotar system is that people will just skip those days - I know many 'pvp' players did not play when they trialed non death match for a patch and battlegrounds lost a lot of the population.

To solve some of the woes id suggest they change the scoring to reflect active combat and encourage playing the objective more. I've also taken this moment to outline some new pvp modes too.


Death match - stays the same but change kill credit. Kill credit is given to the person who did the most damage within 5 seconds of death. Execute skill damage is ignored from this i.e. whirling blade, mages wrath, executioner etc. This would avoid mages wrath / radient beam kill steals or nightblades coming to aoe execute. The player who did the 2nd highest amount of damage within 5 seconds gets an assist medal - execute damage counts.


Capture the relic - killing somone holding a relic awards +20 to score. Killing an enemy near a relic spawn point awards +10 to score I.e. attacking/defending (note killing the same person near the same relic spawn within 30s awards 0 to prevent farming). Relics no longer return and have to be manually returned. Returning a relic awards +20 score. Capturing a relic awards +100 - you need your relic to do so. To win keep max score at 500 but change if needed.


Chaos ball - holding the chaos ball awards 5 score every 10 seconds. Killing the chaos ball carrier awards +10 score. Picking the ball up awards +20 score (encourage people to pick up). Killing an enemy near the chaos ball awards +5 score I.e. attacking/defending. Chaos ball returns to central spawn after 15s of not being held. Picking up the ball takes 2s (same as relic time). To win keep max score at 500 but change if needed.


Domination - 4 flags (1 near each spawn and 1 central one). Flag points generate 5 score every 10 seconds. Capturing a point awards +10 points instantly. Killing an enemy by a flag awards +5 points i.e. attacking/defending. Controlling all flags at once awards +10 points every 10 seconds. To win keep max score at 500 but change if needed.


Crazy king - 3 flags maximum. Points generate 5 score every 10 seconds. Flags have 60 second life time. A new flag spawns every 30 seconds. Capturing a flag awards 10 score instantly. Killing an enemy near a flag awards +5 points I.e attacking/defending. To win keep score at 500 but change if needed.



New pvp mode - king of the hill.

King of the hill. A central spot spawns and lasts 60 seconds (use same spawn points as domination). After 60s a new spawn hill is generated closest to the team with the lowest score. To capture the hill you need to have the most players in it. Hill charges like a flag point. Once owned your team can earn score points by Killing players from within the hill (you have to be in the hill to get score kills but can kill enemies both in and outside of it as long as you're inside.) +5 score for Killing an enemy whilst your team owns the hill. Whilst your team owns the heal, your team's respawn timer is increased by 100%. Capturing the hill awards +10 score. 500 points to win.


New pvp mode - free for all. 12 players.

Killing a player awards +20 points. Kill is awarded for the person who did the most damage within 5 seconds of death excluding execute abilities. The person who did the 2nd highest amount of damage before death is awarded an assist +5 points. The top 4 players with the highest score have increased respawn times (1st +100%, 2nd +75%, 3rd +50% and 4th +25%). 500 points to win.



New pvp mode - emperor's crown. Free for all / team death match.

The emperor's crown has fallen into battlegrounds. Once picked up the carrier receives emperor buffs (partly to let other people experience this as many don't). Carrying the crown and killing people awards +10 score. Every 10 seconds you carry the crown your resource regeneration is reduced by 5% stacking up to 100%. Picking up the crown takes 2 seconds and instantly heals the carrier, restores all resources and makes them invaluable to damage for 3 seconds. Upon holding it a large crown is shown overheard and all players get a crown icon added to their compass and map.
---> If team based then make it so that the team that holds the crown has a +100% respawn timer and other teams have -50% respawn timer. Also make it so that whilst holding the crown, healing from others is reduced by 50%.


I feel this would add more variety which pvp lacks and encourage 'correct objective' gameplay people seem to want. Feedback welcomed!


PS
I'd love a new pvp mode to be done that is basically a copy of outpost rush from new world but adapted to 3 way fights. 3 keeps with a cental one. Owning them awards points. Have 3 powers you charge (could be dadric princes) by giving resources you can get in the match i.e. souls, mundane resources, boss timer/event. 1 could freeze enemy scores. 1 could Summon oblvion monsters to help your team at owned keeps. 1 could Summon oblivion monsters at enemy keeps that are friendly to you.

_adhyffbjjjf12

lonnml wrote: »

_adhyffbjjjf12 wrote: »

This doesn't include DM as its unpopular

I think you’re pretty mistaken about that lol

no i think you will find DM is in fact almost never part of ranked or unranked during a season in GW2, and furthermore its the least popular in the other big AAA mmorpg as well. If you had has also read my thread properly you will have seen that I added a caveat for ESO in any case, if its popular, add it. It would be an interesting piece of analysis to understand why the player base is skewed 50/50 in PVP, in ESO but we ofc know new players are staying away, and most new players are casual, which means the numbers are almost certainly badly skewed in a way that goes against the market.

Example, current season, 2 queues both offer a number of conquest maps and a moba style map. Notice no option to filter on DM because DM is not played. https://ibb.co/DkjzScR

_adhyffbjjjf12

This is how you offer a fair roll of the dice with a population than can be small or large. 1 ranked queue, each time group formed they are offered a subset of the maps and they pick what they want.

1: 2 teams selected and asked to pick from a rotating set of maps.

https://ibb.co/xsLk1Vm

2: the game spins the wheel and 1 map wins

https://ibb.co/nmFqxbc

fair and simple to both the minority and majority with no split player base and has MMR. Notice here 1 player picked 1 BG type on his own and he came up lucky - no-one complained. everyone happily played, no drama - because the mechanism is transparent and not skewed.

There's a saying often used in Software development - Don't reinvent the wheel.

Icyfire369

Unified_Gaming wrote: »

Death match - stays the same but change kill credit. Kill credit is given to the person who did the most damage within 5 seconds of death. Execute skill damage is ignored from this i.e. whirling blade, mages wrath, executioner etc. This would avoid mages wrath / radient beam kill steals or nightblades coming to aoe execute. The player who did the 2nd highest amount of damage within 5 seconds gets an assist medal - execute damage counts.

Capture the relic - killing somone holding a relic awards +20 to score. Killing an enemy near a relic spawn point awards +10 to score I.e. attacking/defending (note killing the same person near the same relic spawn within 30s awards 0 to prevent farming). Relics no longer return and have to be manually returned. Returning a relic awards +20 score. Capturing a relic awards +100 - you need your relic to do so. To win keep max score at 500 but change if needed.

Chaos ball - holding the chaos ball awards 5 score every 10 seconds. Killing the chaos ball carrier awards +10 score. Picking the ball up awards +20 score (encourage people to pick up). Killing an enemy near the chaos ball awards +5 score I.e. attacking/defending. Chaos ball returns to central spawn after 15s of not being held. Picking up the ball takes 2s (same as relic time). To win keep max score at 500 but change if needed.

Domination - 4 flags (1 near each spawn and 1 central one). Flag points generate 5 score every 10 seconds. Capturing a point awards +10 points instantly. Killing an enemy by a flag awards +5 points i.e. attacking/defending. Controlling all flags at once awards +10 points every 10 seconds. To win keep max score at 500 but change if needed.

Crazy king - 3 flags maximum. Points generate 5 score every 10 seconds. Flags have 60 second life time. A new flag spawns every 30 seconds. Capturing a flag awards 10 score instantly. Killing an enemy near a flag awards +5 points I.e attacking/defending. To win keep score at 500 but change if needed.

I like the suggestions for Deathmatch and Domination!

Only thing I'd change is Chaosball, Capture the Relic and Crazy King.

Crazy King - Only ONE flag is present in the game mode. Starting at the center of the map for X duration. It will respawn at a different location. Encouraging everyone to fight at central location.

Chaos Ball - put a stacking snare the further you run away from the center of the map (where you picked up the ball).

Capture the Relic - There is only ONE Relic available in this game mode. It always spawns at the center of the map. You have to capture it and return it to your base. This will encourage everyone to fight at a central location and if successful, capture the relic and return it.

I'm no game designer BUT I do agree with your sentiment of, "If they update the game modes to make sense where everyone naturally ENJOYS playing them, then we won't be having all these issues."

You got my vote!

OBJnoob

^—————— my problem with the above is that you’re just basically turning them all into deathmatch. Forcing the chaos ball carrier to stay within a certain vicinity ( I’m not disagreeing that the runners are a problem mind you,) and having only one flag in crazy king is basically making the two game modes the same. Okay so we can fight over a flag or a ball. Is that really a difference? Or do we just have 12 people standing within 30 feet of each other deathmatching until the winning deathmatch team (because the team best at killing is gonna end up with the ball under these circumstances,) amasses enough chaos ball score. Anyway… yeah, all these changes sound pretty deathmatchy to me so I wouldn’t expect many obj players to like it. In fact I’d suspect most obj players like it more or less how it is. These are complaints from deathmatchers to make obj more palatable for them. Which is, yknow, not a very equal perspective, and really just another way of coloring the same problem we already have.

Similarly…. Returning to the original post… I don’t much like suggestion 3 because now we play deathmatch half the time and any other mode like… I dunno how many are there… 20% of the time? Another clearly one-sided “compromise,” to which I say no thanks.

gariondavey

@Magio_ has already proven many times in other threads, @_adhyffbjjjf12 , that deathmatch has historically been far more popular than any mode (going back years when queues were available for flag, dm, etc).

It doesn't matter what guild wars 2 or hello kitty island adventure does, in eso the player base has historically preferred deathmatch. By a significant margin.

DrNukenstein

Just make kills count for 3-5 points in objective modes.

Now death matchers are being objectively productive (even though they already are when they neut flags and keep the other teams down a member)

And objective players can snowball their victories harder by winning the team fights for objectives.

If one team wants to close it out while the other two duke it out, the other two can fight for second place.

Problem solved, and every one wins. Just one extra rule for objective game modes.

_adhyffbjjjf12

gariondavey wrote: »

@Magio_ has already proven many times in other threads, @_adhyffbjjjf12 , that deathmatch has historically been far more popular than any mode (going back years when queues were available for flag, dm, etc).

It doesn't matter what guild wars 2 or hello kitty island adventure does, in eso the player base has historically preferred deathmatch. By a significant margin.

Not quite, if I recall the developers said it was more 50/50. That aside statistically in MMORPG's, objective based PVP is far far more popular, especially with casual and new players - who are much needed to keep the game thriving long term. However because of the severe gameplay issues with ESO and how it impacts BG, it has rotted away to the point that the population is so low it can barely support any format, and you see disproportional numbers like 50/50 which should be a red flag to anyone that understands the genre.