I played the ranked mode again and was reminded of how bad the que timer is.

Personofsecrets

I think that the que time is a problem. There is even a TOT endeavor today.

Amottica

The population is likely the problem. If there are not many players interested in TOT, the queue will be slow to pop. The same goes for BGs.

spartaxoxo

I haven't noticed an issue with queue times. I had a quick queue today. Usually not instant or anything but shorter than say the DPS dungeon queue.

Personofsecrets

My perspective is that if the designers really want to value peoples time since, afterall, time waiting is part of the experience, then they should take a more wholistic approach.

They've hypothetically made one new Patron to increase game speed and buffed Sorcerer-King cards. And even if those things help at all, then there is much more that could be done to assist the issue.

- Reworking "slow" strategies
- Make animations faster
- Let players play their cards and make game choices while animations are playing
- Make the power generating starter cards instead make gold
- Add a Tavern spot
- Rework more cards that don't grant power to grant a single power (while keeping balance in mind)
- Add more incentives for playing
- Diminish disincentive for playing
- Remove the casual ladder
- Add a real tournament
- Make TOT an identity similar to dungeoneers, traders, raiders, pvpers, etc

spartaxoxo

They remove the casual ladder and I (probably) many others quit. I would rather quit the game than spend too much time in ranked.

Personofsecrets

spartaxoxo wrote: »

They remove the casual ladder and I (probably) many others quit. I would rather quit the game than spend too much time in ranked.

If there were enough people playing one single game mode, then each person could hypothetically play at the level best suited to them. It was a mistake for there to be these multiple game modes from the start since now there is this type of perception.

spartaxoxo

Personofsecrets wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

They remove the casual ladder and I (probably) many others quit. I would rather quit the game than spend too much time in ranked.

If there were enough people playing one single game mode, then each person could hypothetically play at the level best suited to them. It was a mistake for there to be these multiple game modes from the start since now there is this type of perception.

It's got nothing to do with that.

Ranked is a completely different mindset. It's not a casual game mindset, it is okay seriously. It's competitive. It's caring about your rank. I don't want to do that with a game designed like this one.

And then there's the additional problem of the ranking system in this game being busted and frustrating.

The only reason I am willing to play it for more serious opponents is because casual exists for when I want to play more casually, which is the vast majority of the time because Tales was not designed and is not suited for esports.

Personofsecrets

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

They remove the casual ladder and I (probably) many others quit. I would rather quit the game than spend too much time in ranked.

If there were enough people playing one single game mode, then each person could hypothetically play at the level best suited to them. It was a mistake for there to be these multiple game modes from the start since now there is this type of perception.

It's got nothing to do with that.

Ranked is a completely different mindset. It's not a casual game mindset, it is okay seriously. It's competitive. It's caring about your rank. I don't want to do that with a game designed like this one.

And then there's the additional problem of the ranking system in this game being busted and frustrating.

The only reason I am willing to play it for more serious opponents is because casual exists for when I want to play more casually, which is the vast majority of the time because Tales was not designed and is not suited for esports.

Yes it does, if there were enough people playing one game mode, then there would more likely be someone of the appropriate skill level for any individual player to play. I have this issue too. There are very few people on the ranked ladder that I should actually be matched against. Because the ladder is impoverished, I end up playing people who I shouldn't play.

And an irony of the above is that it makes me go to casual, where the que times are less and were I definitely don't belong, so it's actually in the best interest of everyone, even casual players, for there to only be one game mode.

Players with a casual mindset would coalesce around a casual rank and end up playing each other. Just because you don't want to care about your rank doesn't mean that you would have to care about your rank if you were forced to play a game mode with a ranked score system. Just ignore it and carry on.

As it is now, population is low, it's partly low because it is artificially split, and therefore casual players get to play against me and lose 90% of the time. That's not a good experience for anyone. This is way more obviously a frustrating system because I have what starting to be 2 handfulls of people who concede against me as soon as we start playing. They have been unfairly beatdown so many times that they just quit. They would be better off queing up in ranked mode!

If the populations were combined and the total player count sill stayed too low to create enough stratification in the system as to make casual players mostly play against each other, then this suggestion that I make could cause damage to the scene. That said, it isn't obvious that such thing would happen and it's especially not obvious if the other suggestions that I make were taken into account. Again, they are meant to be viewed as a whole, not piecemeal.

RomanRex

Amottica wrote: »

The population is likely the problem. If there are not many players interested in TOT, the queue will be slow to pop. The same goes for BGs.

Agreed.

spartaxoxo

If I am going to be ranked, I would care about it. That's the nature of a competitive mindset. It's the entire reason most PvP games have two different modes.

I can't just not care. So, I'd just not bother at all. Because Tales isn't designed for eSports.

Personofsecrets

spartaxoxo wrote: »

If I am going to be ranked, I would care about it. That's the nature of a competitive mindset. It's the entire reason most PvP games have two different modes.

I can't just not care. So, I'd just not bother at all. Because Tales isn't designed for eSports.

If the TOT design is part of the problem, then again, I have suggestions for that. It's an entire picture. Not just one thing. The big obvious flaw is simply that the designers aren't going to fix balance problems, but they aren't going to do any of the other stuff either. This is just all theorizing.

And since that is the case, I will carry on the reality of making casual as miserable as possible of an experience for the people who i play against over and over. That has been the natural development of the game being designed the way that it is currently.

ESO_player123

I'm with @spartaxoxo. Absolutely NO to removing the casual gameplay. If that was done, I would either diminish my time playing to fulfilling endeavors and getting new motifs or quit altogether.

I played competitive at the beginning to get some 100 transmute coffers for storing them above the limit. Cared too much where I am in the ranking system. I still play at the start of each month to get the initial rewards. But that is it.

ESO_player123

Personofsecrets wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

If I am going to be ranked, I would care about it. That's the nature of a competitive mindset. It's the entire reason most PvP games have two different modes.

I can't just not care. So, I'd just not bother at all. Because Tales isn't designed for eSports.

If the TOT design is part of the problem, then again, I have suggestions for that. It's an entire picture. Not just one thing. The big obvious flaw is simply that the designers aren't going to fix balance problems, but they aren't going to do any of the other stuff either. This is just all theorizing.

And since that is the case, I will carry on the reality of making casual as miserable as possible of an experience for the people who i play against over and over. That has been the natural development of the game being designed the way that it is currently.

And their experience of playing against you would be less miserable if they were forced into the competitive mode because the casual would be removed? I doubt that. If anything people would be stressed more. Why force people into a mode so just you could have more opponents?

Personofsecrets

ESO_player123 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

If I am going to be ranked, I would care about it. That's the nature of a competitive mindset. It's the entire reason most PvP games have two different modes.

I can't just not care. So, I'd just not bother at all. Because Tales isn't designed for eSports.

If the TOT design is part of the problem, then again, I have suggestions for that. It's an entire picture. Not just one thing. The big obvious flaw is simply that the designers aren't going to fix balance problems, but they aren't going to do any of the other stuff either. This is just all theorizing.

And since that is the case, I will carry on the reality of making casual as miserable as possible of an experience for the people who i play against over and over. That has been the natural development of the game being designed the way that it is currently.

And their experience of playing against you would be less miserable if they were forced into the competitive mode because the casual would be removed? I doubt that. If anything people would be stressed more. Why force people into a mode so just you could have more opponents?

I've already said this a couple of times, so I think that the idea isn't getting through.

If the game mode had a greater population, then the following thing would happen.

There would be more players throughout the ranking system at different ranks.

By there being more players at different ranks, then it becomes easier for any individual player to only end up in games where they are matched against players of a similar rank.

Therefore, with a greater population in one ranked mode, it could be the case that all players are benefited by playing more often against players who are in their league.

I hope that this idea has been elaborated enough now. The whole point is that players who are more competitive like me would more likely be playing me. Players who aren't as competitive and don't care would be match made against their contemporaries.

It should be abundantly clear that the ranked and unranked modes are not doing what they are intended to do.

Lastly, I don't necessarily think that anyone is wrong for feeling pressure by seeing a rank number even if the number shouldn't matter to them. That said, if the game could genuinely be better by having everyone in one single game mode, then I think that those who have a problem with being ranked should do their best to ignore the number. Afterall, it's not like they care anyhow, they just get this psychological pressure that needs to be redirected.

It could also be the case that rank is just hidden until the end of the season. Maybe that could help alleviate this symptom of feeling bad because of being ranked. But really, I would hope that people could see past that.

It could also be the case that the pre-rubedite ranks could be removed. I've played plenty of great players in those ranks who then disappear. It's really weird. Just have one system.

I want to have only opponents that are of similar skill level to myself. The game isn't doing this with the current ranked and unranked modes. You personally are the recipient of crappy matchmaking exactly because I play in the unranked mode for the purpose of not having a 5 to 8 minute que time.

Should my irrational feelings matter? I don't like waiting 5 to 8 minutes to start a game. I get anxious waiting around. Does that matter?

ESO_player123

Personofsecrets wrote: »

ESO_player123 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

If I am going to be ranked, I would care about it. That's the nature of a competitive mindset. It's the entire reason most PvP games have two different modes.

I can't just not care. So, I'd just not bother at all. Because Tales isn't designed for eSports.

If the TOT design is part of the problem, then again, I have suggestions for that. It's an entire picture. Not just one thing. The big obvious flaw is simply that the designers aren't going to fix balance problems, but they aren't going to do any of the other stuff either. This is just all theorizing.

And since that is the case, I will carry on the reality of making casual as miserable as possible of an experience for the people who i play against over and over. That has been the natural development of the game being designed the way that it is currently.

And their experience of playing against you would be less miserable if they were forced into the competitive mode because the casual would be removed? I doubt that. If anything people would be stressed more. Why force people into a mode so just you could have more opponents?

I've already said this a couple of times, so I think that the idea isn't getting through.

If the game mode had a greater population, then the following thing would happen.

There would be more players throughout the ranking system at different ranks.

By there being more players at different ranks, then it becomes easier for any individual player to only end up in games where they are matched against players of a similar rank.

Therefore, with a greater population in one ranked mode, it could be the case that all players are benefited by playing more often against players who are in their league.

I hope that this idea has been elaborated enough now. The whole point is that players who are more competitive like me would more likely be playing me. Players who aren't as competitive and don't care would be match made against their contemporaries.

It should be abundantly clear that the ranked and unranked modes are not doing what they are intended to do.

Lastly, I don't necessarily think that anyone is wrong for feeling pressure by seeing a rank number even if the number shouldn't matter to them. That said, if the game could genuinely be better by having everyone in one single game mode, then I think that those who have a problem with being ranked should do their best to ignore the number. Afterall, it's not like they care anyhow, they just get this psychological pressure that needs to be redirected.

It could also be the case that rank is just hidden until the end of the season. Maybe that could help alleviate this symptom of feeling bad because of being ranked. But really, I would hope that people could see past that.

It could also be the case that the pre-rubedite ranks could be removed. I've played plenty of great players in those ranks who then disappear. It's really weird. Just have one system.

I want to have only opponents that are of similar skill level to myself. The game isn't doing this with the current ranked and unranked modes. You personally are the recipient of crappy matchmaking exactly because I play in the unranked mode for the purpose of not having a 5 to 8 minute que time.

Should my irrational feelings matter? I don't like waiting 5 to 8 minutes to start a game. I get anxious waiting around. Does that matter?

Your point is very clear, and you ideas are getting through. That said, I do not want to play ranked all the time. If I get matched against you once in a blue moon, that it fine. There is always the option to concede and do something else while waiting for the penalty to expire (or log in on another toon). I wish that there was no penalty for conceding, but it's safe to say it's not going anywhere.

spartaxoxo

If the only purpose is to get a better MMR and the ranks aren't supposed to matter, then I don't know why it wouldn't be ranked that was eliminated. The only point of ranked is to have a number that tells you where you are in relation to others. You use that number to try to be the best player you can be by defeating opponents. Casual mode should already have a hidden matchmaker if it doesn't already.

Personofsecrets

The purpose that I aim for with my suggestions is consistent and timely matchmaking. Based on my experiences, I play all kinds of players in unranked, so I don't think that there is a hidden rank in unranked mode. And just to be clear; some players don't even make writs, some sacrifice all of their cards to delmene, some buy only contracts. I'm quite sure that these players should have a poor hidden matchmaking score if there is one in unranked.

spartaxoxo

Personofsecrets wrote: »

The purpose that I aim for with my suggestions is consistent and timely matchmaking. Based on my experiences, I play all kinds of players in unranked, so I don't think that there is a hidden rank in unranked mode. And just to be clear; some players don't even make writs, some sacrifice all of their cards to delmene, some buy only contracts. I'm quite sure that these players should have a poor hidden matchmaking score if there is one in unranked.

To clarify, I don't think there is one now. But there should be. If they were to merge the queues, it should eliminate rank and add a hidden MMR to casual IMO. I've seen casual games set up like that and it works. But telling top ranked players to play ranked without at all caring about their placement doesn't work because caring about that is the point of a competitive mode.

Personofsecrets

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

The purpose that I aim for with my suggestions is consistent and timely matchmaking. Based on my experiences, I play all kinds of players in unranked, so I don't think that there is a hidden rank in unranked mode. And just to be clear; some players don't even make writs, some sacrifice all of their cards to delmene, some buy only contracts. I'm quite sure that these players should have a poor hidden matchmaking score if there is one in unranked.

To clarify, I don't think there is one now. But there should be. If they were to merge the queues, it should eliminate rank and add a hidden MMR to casual IMO. I've seen casual games set up like that and it works. But telling top ranked players to play ranked without at all caring about their placement doesn't work because caring about that is the point of a competitive mode.

I'd be perfectly happy with the second part. It might even be a better way than showing score since there are a bunch of players who try to game the score system by getting at least 1 single point above the person in second place and then not playing any more games.

Personofsecrets

Design that makes tools to fix slow gameplay, but passively allows a slow que timer as well as "non-game" blowouts is an incomplete design to a fault.

notyuu

No amount of tweaking the design or changing card balance or bolstering rewards is going to solve the queue time problem for the Simple reason that 99% of the players hear about ToT and respond with a "I didn't come to eso to play a [snip] Card game, I'll pass"

[edited for profanity bypass]

Personofsecrets

notyuu wrote: »

No amount of tweaking the design or changing card balance or bolstering rewards is going to solve the queue time problem for the Simple reason that 99% of the players hear about ToT and respond with a "I didn't come to eso to play a [snip] Card game, I'll pass"

That's is incorrect.

Free ESO Plus for the top 10 TOT finishers each season.

Boom.

[edited to remove quote]

ESO_player123

Personofsecrets wrote: »

notyuu wrote: »

No amount of tweaking the design or changing card balance or bolstering rewards is going to solve the queue time problem for the Simple reason that 99% of the players hear about ToT and respond with a "I didn't come to eso to play a [snip] Card game, I'll pass"

That's is incorrect.

Free ESO Plus for the top 10 TOT finishers each season.

Boom.

I doubt it will be a BOOM as you expect it to be. At first, more people will try it for sure, but in the end roughly the same 10 people will occupy the 10 top spots. Besides, reaching (or trying to reach) the top ranks will be (as it is now) a sizable time investment. The time many players who say "I did not come to ESO to play a card game" will simply not be willing to invest. Definitely not every season.

Also, the probability of ZOS offering 10 free ESO every month is close to 0 IMHO.

[edited to remove quote]

Personofsecrets

ESO_player123 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

notyuu wrote: »

No amount of tweaking the design or changing card balance or bolstering rewards is going to solve the queue time problem for the Simple reason that 99% of the players hear about ToT and respond with a "I didn't come to eso to play a [snip] Card game, I'll pass"

That's is incorrect.

Free ESO Plus for the top 10 TOT finishers each season.

Boom.

I doubt it will be a BOOM as you expect it to be. At first, more people will try it for sure, but in the end roughly the same 10 people will occupy the 10 top spots. Besides, reaching (or trying to reach) the top ranks will be (as it is now) a sizable time investment. The time many players who say "I did not come to ESO to play a card game" will simply not be willing to invest. Definitely not every season.

Also, the probability of ZOS offering 10 free ESO every month is close to 0 IMHO.

There is zero reason to counter the idea of the designers trying to give out bigger and better rewards.

Just understand the thought experiment. You could hypothetically say there is a problem with whatever reward I say and it's silly. Let's say the designers give someone in 1st place a quadrillion dollars.

Again, zero reason. Sill thing to try and split hairs over.

[edited to remove quote]

ESO_player123

Personofsecrets wrote: »

ESO_player123 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

notyuu wrote: »

No amount of tweaking the design or changing card balance or bolstering rewards is going to solve the queue time problem for the Simple reason that 99% of the players hear about ToT and respond with a "I didn't come to eso to play a [snip] Card game, I'll pass"

That's is incorrect.

Free ESO Plus for the top 10 TOT finishers each season.

Boom.

I doubt it will be a BOOM as you expect it to be. At first, more people will try it for sure, but in the end roughly the same 10 people will occupy the 10 top spots. Besides, reaching (or trying to reach) the top ranks will be (as it is now) a sizable time investment. The time many players who say "I did not come to ESO to play a card game" will simply not be willing to invest. Definitely not every season.

Also, the probability of ZOS offering 10 free ESO every month is close to 0 IMHO.

There is zero reason to counter the idea of the designers trying to give out bigger and better rewards.

Just understand the thought experiment. You could hypothetically say there is a problem with whatever reward I say and it's silly. Let's say the designers give someone in 1st place a quadrillion dollars.

Again, zero reason. Sill thing to try and split hairs over.

What is the point of suggesting unrealistic rewards if you are trying to give serious suggestions on how to improve the game? I'm all for better rewards for the ranked playing, but suggestions should be something that have a reasonable chance of being implemented. You make well thought out posts about ToT, and, from what I see, genuinely want it to improve. So, why suggest something like that?

[edited to remove quote]

Personofsecrets

ESO_player123 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

ESO_player123 wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

notyuu wrote: »

No amount of tweaking the design or changing card balance or bolstering rewards is going to solve the queue time problem for the Simple reason that 99% of the players hear about ToT and respond with a "I didn't come to eso to play a [snip] Card game, I'll pass"

That's is incorrect.

Free ESO Plus for the top 10 TOT finishers each season.

Boom.

I doubt it will be a BOOM as you expect it to be. At first, more people will try it for sure, but in the end roughly the same 10 people will occupy the 10 top spots. Besides, reaching (or trying to reach) the top ranks will be (as it is now) a sizable time investment. The time many players who say "I did not come to ESO to play a card game" will simply not be willing to invest. Definitely not every season.

Also, the probability of ZOS offering 10 free ESO every month is close to 0 IMHO.

There is zero reason to counter the idea of the designers trying to give out bigger and better rewards.

Just understand the thought experiment. You could hypothetically say there is a problem with whatever reward I say and it's silly. Let's say the designers give someone in 1st place a quadrillion dollars.

Again, zero reason. Sill thing to try and split hairs over.

What is the point of suggesting unrealistic rewards if you are trying to give serious suggestions on how to improve the game? I'm all for better rewards for the ranked playing, but suggestions should be something that have a reasonable chance of being implemented. You make well thought out posts about ToT, and, from what I see, genuinely want it to improve. So, why suggest something like that?

The point of suggesting rewards period is to get people thinking about how TOT could get more population. I can even say that this is the point of "unrealistic" rewards. How do we know what is and isn't unrealistic?

The interesting thing about the reward that I suggested is that maybe it isn't unrealistic. Go back to patch 1.6 and many things that are in the game would have seemed unrealistic at the time. ESO has improved to a tremendous degree. There are also a number of mechanical changes that have happened to the game and I have a hunch that it is because of some of the writing that has been done here in this forum.

f you are for greater rewards as you say, then hop on the bandwaggon. A number of people post here about how the TOT rewards aren't that great. And let's say that you are one hundred percent correct in that eso plus is an unrealistic reward or wouldn't encourage players enough. At that point, let's go back to the thought experiment.

What is the hypothetical reward that is definitely realistic and would encourage population? Seals of Endeavor? Gold Mats? Again, we could discuss this point all day. There hypothetically is such reward that meets all criteria.

[edited to remove quote]

spartaxoxo

Any rewards would have to be untied from your final ranking in order to draw people in. Not because top ranked players shouldn't get rewards, but because the average player of any PVP game isn't going to be top ranked by definition. And most of them also won't have a desire to be. It's the elite few that reach those positions.

Personofsecrets

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Any rewards would have to be untied from your final ranking in order to draw people in. Not because top ranked players shouldn't get rewards, but because the average player of any PVP game isn't going to be top ranked by definition. And most of them also won't have a desire to be. It's the elite few that reach those positions.

There could be both. There could even be random rewards for people who play 10 games during the season or something.

ESO_player123

As an average player I do not care what is offered to the top 10. I know I'll never be there, so changing those rewards will not draw me back to ranked playing. And if the random rewards are like the ones we have now in the golden coffers, I'd rather stay with casual: motifs dropped too often, heartwood became very rare (at least for me), good furnishing plans are even rarer.

I cannot talk for everyone, but much better chances of furnishing plans and expensive mats like heartwood, ancient sandstone, may be even nice furniture pieces might make me go back to ranked. After all, I started playing ranked only because I learned that there were furnishings to be had for advancing the rank (the trophies).

notyuu

Personofsecrets wrote: »

notyuu wrote: »

No amount of tweaking the design or changing card balance or bolstering rewards is going to solve the queue time problem for the Simple reason that 99% of the players hear about ToT and respond with a "I didn't come to eso to play a [snip] Card game, I'll pass"

That's is incorrect.

Free ESO Plus for the top 10 TOT finishers each season.

Boom.

not even that would be enough as the people who are into ESO enough to know that ToT even exsists already have ESO+ on top of that as player123 said, you'd end up with the same 10 people getting the reward every month so it wouldn't really work...

plus the literal cost zos would have to take on via that is not something they would be willing to do as the "return on investment" would be little more than a tiny uptick on a statically unpopular side activity, thus not viable

[edited to remove quote]

Personofsecrets

notyuu wrote: »

Personofsecrets wrote: »

notyuu wrote: »

No amount of tweaking the design or changing card balance or bolstering rewards is going to solve the queue time problem for the Simple reason that 99% of the players hear about ToT and respond with a "I didn't come to eso to play a [snip] Card game, I'll pass"

That's is incorrect.

Free ESO Plus for the top 10 TOT finishers each season.

Boom.

not even that would be enough as the people who are into ESO enough to know that ToT even exsists already have ESO+ on top of that as player123 said, you'd end up with the same 10 people getting the reward every month so it wouldn't really work...

plus the literal cost zos would have to take on via that is not something they would be willing to do as the "return on investment" would be little more than a tiny uptick on a statically unpopular side activity, thus not viable

I was given $2,000 usd for playing the now maintenance mode game The Elder Scrolls Legends. Several players were given that. One player got $20,000 usd.

Not only that, but 3 different development teams that are known of were comissioned to create 3 different clients for that game. I cannot imagine what that cost was.

So the money for a card game could hypothetically be there. One credit to what you are saying is that TESL also seemed to have population problems unless a new expansion set had come out. It's hard to tell though how many people were turned off from that game due to incremental additions that were poorly balanced.

A game for everyone sometimes can be a game that people end up disinterested in exactly because they are looking for a certain type of niche gameplay that suits their card gaming interests.

[edited to remove quote]