Are Competitive 4v4s Already Dead?

forum_gpt

Hey everyone,

I wanted to open a discussion about the state of the so-called "competitive" 4v4 battlegrounds. It’s been almost two months since they launched, and, honestly, it feels like they’re already on life support.

When these were announced, I was excited at the idea of a dedicated space for more serious PvP matches. I thought it could breathe new life into BGs, giving us something to grind for, test our skills, and maybe even encourage tighter matchmaking and teamwork. But now, I’m wondering if anyone is even queuing for them anymore.

From what I’ve experienced:

Queue Times: They’re ridiculously long compared to standard BGs. Sometimes I give up waiting entirely.

One-Sided Matches: Every game feels like a stomp. Either my team is full of clueless players who don’t seem to know what’s happening, or the enemy team is filled with them. It’s rarely, if ever, an actual balanced, competitive match.

Participation: When I do get a match, it feels like barely anyone is actually taking it seriously. There’s no cohesion, no strategy—just random chaos.

Incentives: There’s really nothing to make these matches worth grinding for. No unique rewards, no leaderboard visibility—nothing to keep players invested.

It’s disheartening because I think the concept has potential. But if participation keeps dropping and matchmaking stays this bad, I’m afraid these queues will become a ghost town.

What do you all think? Are you still queuing for competitive 4v4s? If not, what could be done to make them more active, fair, and worthwhile?

Would love to hear your thoughts!

CoronHR

i played one once. i found it to be dreadful. the 8x8 are better. personally, i think they should bring back the 4x4x4 option and let us choose between all of them. (if they deleted 4x4, i wouldn't mind)

HatchetHaro

The 3-team format was already really good when it came to apparent skill gaps; in most situations, when your team is gapped by the other two in terms of raw PvP stats and skill, it was still very possible to claw out a first-place victory or at least second-place by through strategy and mind-games to force the other two teams to focus on each other while you capture objectives. Bring that back, and we can forget that the 4v4 dumpster fire ever existed.

IncultaWolf

I think most people including myself just want the 3 team battlegrounds back. The 8 v 8 chaosball with the transformations can be fun, but that's about it.

Competitive queue was dead on arrival due to the medal scoring system. All top rank players are just healers abusing the crit heal medal.

Treeshka

In my opinion most people played for competitive mode just to get style pages. And it has been almost 8 weeks since the release, and there is only 7 pages associated with the leaderboard rewards. One can also put multiple chars to the leaderboard and get more than one page per week.

I honestly was never a regular battleground player, but played for a month to get those pages. Now i am just getting my daily win via 8v8 game mode and call it a day.

AnduinTryggva

8v8 is one of the innovations that I find really good.

It is so much better and enjoyable compared to the 4v4.

TwiceBornStar

I like the 4v4 and the 8v8 format much and much better, because I've seen plenty of matches in the old format where two teams were going after one team.

forum_gpt

TwiceBornStar wrote: »

I like the 4v4 and the 8v8 format much and much better, because I've seen plenty of matches in the old format where two teams were going after one team.

I get where you’re coming from, but I’d have to disagree. The old 3-team format might have had its issues, like two teams ganging up on one, but at least it offered some variety and tactical depth. You could use that third team dynamic to your advantage—bait one team into fighting the other or use the chaos to slip ahead. It added an extra layer of strategy that’s completely missing in the 4v4s.

Right now, the 4v4 format just feels stale. Instead of tactical plays, it’s a predictable steamroll. You either stomp or get stomped. And with how matchmaking is all over the place, it’s like playing a coin flip every game. Sure, there’s no third team to gang up on you, but I’d trade that for matches that actually feel competitive and balanced.

If anything, the 4v4 format has highlighted how broken the matchmaking system is. Without that third team to mix things up, the flaws are even more obvious.

What’s your take on the lack of balance and the frequent stomps? Do you think the 4v4s are truly more competitive than the old format?

ForumSavant

IncultaWolf wrote: »

I think most people including myself just want the 3 team battlegrounds back. The 8 v 8 chaosball with the transformations can be fun, but that's about it.

Competitive queue was dead on arrival due to the medal scoring system. All top rank players are just healers abusing the crit heal medal.

Nope, the 4v4v4 BGs are bad. Most people do not want them back. 8v8 is way more fun than 4v4v4s ever were. I play 4v4s and prefer competition but the 8v8s are still better because MMR doesn't work properly, there is no incentive to win and perform well, the que times are bad and even when you get a que they are bugged. If the devs bothered to listen and fix the issues the 4v4s would be great, but as of right now they are pretty mediocre. I prefer 8v8s to them and I generally prefer a much more competitive que.

TwiceBornStar

forum_gpt wrote: »

What’s your take on the lack of balance and the frequent stomps? Do you think the 4v4s are truly more competitive than the old format?

In my opinion the lack of balance has more to do with the amount of healing, damage and damage mitigation some people are able to achieve, than it has to do with the 4v4 format, or compared to any format, really. In my opinion PvP in ESO is a combination of skill, knowledge and available gear. When you're behind or lacking a bit in either category, you're going to have a really rough time in PvP, which isn't always necessarily the player's fault. Especially not when you're relatively new. I wish people would acknowledge that more often instead of just bleating the ''get good'' nonsense. No offense!

Stamicka

It was dead on arrival because the people interested in competitive 4v4s don’t play ESO since it’s so badly balanced and skilless.

Chrisilis

ForumSavant wrote: »

IncultaWolf wrote: »

I think most people including myself just want the 3 team battlegrounds back. The 8 v 8 chaosball with the transformations can be fun, but that's about it.

Competitive queue was dead on arrival due to the medal scoring system. All top rank players are just healers abusing the crit heal medal.

Nope, the 4v4v4 BGs are bad. Most people do not want them back. 8v8 is way more fun than 4v4v4s ever were. I play 4v4s and prefer competition but the 8v8s are still better because MMR doesn't work properly, there is no incentive to win and perform well, the que times are bad and even when you get a que they are bugged. If the devs bothered to listen and fix the issues the 4v4s would be great, but as of right now they are pretty mediocre. I prefer 8v8s to them and I generally prefer a much more competitive que.

Gonna have to disagree re: most people don't want them back. You don't know what you've got till its gone and nearly everyone I've talked to in-game has expressed a desire for the return of the 3 team format as an option. Every forum article I've read has a decent number of people advocating for the return of 3 teams as an option. An option mind you, no one is asking ZoS to get rid of 4v4 and 8v8. Its clear those formats appeal to portions of the PvP community and considering the work that went into creating them I doubt they'd get shelved no matter what we said.

I for one just want to play 4v4v4 again. If that were to be brought back I dont really care what happens to 4v4 and 8v8.

Necrotech_Master

i definitely prefer the 8v8

part of the reason you might be getting players who are clueless what to do is that 4v4 solo competitive is the first listed BG mode, so any new/casual player trying it out is going to just click the default selected mode

so depending on how many new/casual players are trying BGs, there could be upwards 30% of the population as new/casual people looking to try the BG experience

Personofsecrets

As of yesterday, I again have all of the unique BG style pages. The only thing left is another collectible from the BG vendor. The recipe is probably too rare to bother continuing on for. I've played alot of BGs and have never seen one. I don't see that changing.

Personofsecrets

TwiceBornStar wrote: »

forum_gpt wrote: »

What’s your take on the lack of balance and the frequent stomps? Do you think the 4v4s are truly more competitive than the old format?

In my opinion the lack of balance has more to do with the amount of healing, damage and damage mitigation some people are able to achieve, than it has to do with the 4v4 format, or compared to any format, really. In my opinion PvP in ESO is a combination of skill, knowledge and available gear. When you're behind or lacking a bit in either category, you're going to have a really rough time in PvP, which isn't always necessarily the player's fault. Especially not when you're relatively new. I wish people would acknowledge that more often instead of just bleating the ''get good'' nonsense. No offense!

Some classes also have better kits that lead to match cheesiness. A sorcerer putting a negate on flags or a warden cheesing with acuity (or just giving teammates more health) are just some of the things that can make games feel predetermined.

Durham

In BG's you see how broken healing can be in PVP with the stacking of heals.

Healing!! We have been complaining about it for years now. Everyone can heal and a good player does not even need a healer. Overhealing has been an issue for years. Stack the heals with a barrier and you are unkillable!

FYI this will not get fixed unless ZoS changes the way healing works and they will not do this due to the PVE aspect of the game. It would require an absolute overhaul of abilities that would have to be changed or disabled in PVP.

DaniimalsSF

1. Death match- solo queue only, 16 players, no teams free for all
2. Objectives - solo/group in same queue, 4v4v4
3. Competitive- expand dueling up to 4v4, public leaderboard with total wins and winning percentage

Deimus

I prefer the new 8v8 and 4v4 over the old 4v4v4 battlegrounds. There are things I think they could work on some of them existing in the old battlegrounds, but I've been enjoying the new battlegrounds more than our current version of Cyrodiil.

Many complaints I've seen from other players about it just highlights issues that have plagued PvP for years not just 8v8 and 4v4, but since this is new content it puts a spotlight on it and might get acted on by ZOS.

Thumbless_Bot

Deimus wrote: »

Many complaints I've seen from other players about it just highlights issues that have plagued PvP for years not just 8v8 and 4v4, but since this is new content it puts a spotlight on it and might get acted on by ZOS.

So, the argument is, zos takes everything, or, at least, many things, wrong with pvp and removes all of the distractions and mitigants of these wrong things with these new bgs. We are left with a pile of many terrible things with a spotlight directly on them so zos is going to fix them?

I am sorry to say but, imho, if zos had believed for a second that any of the plethora of things wrong with pvp were actually problems and / or fixable they wouldn't have created these battlegrounds that shine the brightest of lights right on them.

While i appreciate your positive attitude, It's just never going to happen.

Sleepsin

DaniimalsSF wrote: »

1. Death match- solo queue only, 16 players, no teams free for all
2. Objectives - solo/group in same queue, 4v4v4
3. Competitive- expand dueling up to 4v4, public leaderboard with total wins and winning percentage

A no teams death match has been brought up before. I don't think they would work. They would all end the same way. Two perma tanks in a staring match with an NB hiding nearby, hoping one of them will get into execute range.

Aldoss

Chrisilis wrote: »

ForumSavant wrote: »

IncultaWolf wrote: »

I think most people including myself just want the 3 team battlegrounds back. The 8 v 8 chaosball with the transformations can be fun, but that's about it.

Competitive queue was dead on arrival due to the medal scoring system. All top rank players are just healers abusing the crit heal medal.

Nope, the 4v4v4 BGs are bad. Most people do not want them back. 8v8 is way more fun than 4v4v4s ever were. I play 4v4s and prefer competition but the 8v8s are still better because MMR doesn't work properly, there is no incentive to win and perform well, the que times are bad and even when you get a que they are bugged. If the devs bothered to listen and fix the issues the 4v4s would be great, but as of right now they are pretty mediocre. I prefer 8v8s to them and I generally prefer a much more competitive que.

Gonna have to disagree re: most people don't want them back. You don't know what you've got till its gone and nearly everyone I've talked to in-game has expressed a desire for the return of the 3 team format as an option. Every forum article I've read has a decent number of people advocating for the return of 3 teams as an option. An option mind you, no one is asking ZoS to get rid of 4v4 and 8v8. Its clear those formats appeal to portions of the PvP community and considering the work that went into creating them I doubt they'd get shelved no matter what we said.

I for one just want to play 4v4v4 again. If that were to be brought back I dont really care what happens to 4v4 and 8v8.

I think we should all stop acting like we speak for some sort of collection of players. We all have our biases. I personally love the 2 team format way more than the 3 team format and most players I interact with agree with that. All that proves is that there's an echo chamber of support one way or another. Only ZOS has the data to know what the playerbase is actually engaging more with.

We can have much healthier discourse when we all stop making arguments reliant on claims and evidence that we don't have.

To answer the OP:

BGs in general are mostly dead. The group queue, in particular, is completely dead. Last night my wife and I spent 30min in queue during prime time to get a dead lobby. Then waited another 10min in queue to get 1x 8v8 that was a stompfest. Then we logged off because it was bed time. Thrilling.

The solo queue is better, but only in that it actually fires and typically also fills and starts a game. The games themselves, might as well be dead because the solo queue is volatile and awful. There's not enough players queuing anymore because of how terrible the management of this patch has been so elite players are getting lobbies with brand new players and they're getting steamrolled and losing all taste for PvP, perpetuating the destruction of this already fragile and small community.

ZOS has been informed on how to fix this, but they won't do anything until U45 because ZOS doesn't believe in fixing their game outside of 4 times per year. It's really disheartening to watch them destroy the game like this.

DaniimalsSF

Sleepsin wrote: »

DaniimalsSF wrote: »

1. Death match- solo queue only, 16 players, no teams free for all
2. Objectives - solo/group in same queue, 4v4v4
3. Competitive- expand dueling up to 4v4, public leaderboard with total wins and winning percentage

A no teams death match has been brought up before. I don't think they would work. They would all end the same way. Two perma tanks in a staring match with an NB hiding nearby, hoping one of them will get into execute range.

It needs to be timed and players respawn unlimited.

BGs in general should be casual for quick and dirty action. Competitive players concerned about balance can set all the rules they want in an expanded “duels” mode.

I_killed_Vivec

I did my first BG because of the Golden Pursuits - it was on a Thursday, it was 8v8 and it was great fun.

So the next day I went back for more... but the weekend event had started and the only option was 4v4.

Not so much fun to be honest. I completed the 5 BGs for the Golden Pursuit but it wasn't great. Sometimes you lose big, sometimes you win big.

In my final game we were hammering the opposition - they clearly weren't having fun and wanted to get it over and done with, and that wasn't a great feeling. Now if that had been 4v4v4 it would have been a different matter. Having a third team attack as we were dominating the other team would inevitably have created more ebbs and flows in the game. Win or lose I'd rather be in a fight than a walkover.

Artem_gig

I'll add my 5 cents, but... 4v4 is more balanced than 8v8. Out of 10 8v8 games I won 0 times, out of 10 4v4 games I won 6 times. It's impossible to win when 7 people in your group are noobs, but when there are only 3, you have more chances.

J18696

My opinion on the bg team format the 2 team format being better than 3 team just depends on the gamemode being played for example 2 teams works better in capture the relic than 3 team but 3 team felt better in say deathmatch

xylena_lazarow

They were DOA the moment they got listed first on the UI. The casual queue needs to be first.

gariondavey

Pretty much everyone who cared about premade bgs is gone. We all left a couple weeks after this disappointing update dropped. It could have been good but it was not.

RomanRex

The people who care about PvP never played the new BG’s. Most serious PvP players have left the game over the last year or two.

Those of us who did grind for new outfit styles now have them. My name was in top 10 on leaderboards for the last 7 weeks. That took a lot of hours and play-time. It wasn’t enjoyable, but I wasn’t there for fun. I was just tying to get the new collectibles and move on. Got my bear mount and the style pages!

You won’t see me wasting any more time there for a long while. I may see what those other PvP players have been up to recently.

peacenote

forum_gpt wrote: »

TwiceBornStar wrote: »

I like the 4v4 and the 8v8 format much and much better, because I've seen plenty of matches in the old format where two teams were going after one team.

I get where you’re coming from, but I’d have to disagree. The old 3-team format might have had its issues, like two teams ganging up on one, but at least it offered some variety and tactical depth. You could use that third team dynamic to your advantage—bait one team into fighting the other or use the chaos to slip ahead. It added an extra layer of strategy that’s completely missing in the 4v4s.

Right now, the 4v4 format just feels stale. Instead of tactical plays, it’s a predictable steamroll. You either stomp or get stomped. And with how matchmaking is all over the place, it’s like playing a coin flip every game. Sure, there’s no third team to gang up on you, but I’d trade that for matches that actually feel competitive and balanced.

If anything, the 4v4 format has highlighted how broken the matchmaking system is. Without that third team to mix things up, the flaws are even more obvious.

This perspective personally matches my perspective, but I only represent myself here. I did prefer that extra layer of strategy with the third team, and also the 4x4 smaller maps feel way too cramped to me with not enough routes to try and switch things up and surprise your opponents. I enjoyed the 8v8 format more, but have already kind of given up on playing the BG's at all because the duo queue is horrible and that's how I want to play BG's - as a duo. As a result my feedback is limited to a period of a couple of weeks of playing them only.

forum_gpt

Artem_gig wrote: »

I'll add my 5 cents, but... 4v4 is more balanced than 8v8. Out of 10 8v8 games I won 0 times, out of 10 4v4 games I won 6 times. It's impossible to win when 7 people in your group are noobs, but when there are only 3, you have more chances.

I see your point, but I’d argue that having three “noobs” on your team in a 4v4 is actually worse than having seven in an 8v8. In an 8v8, even if most of your team isn’t great, the sheer number of bodies means there’s a higher chance someone will throw out a crucial heal or accidentally provide some support. The more people you have, the more likely it is that the chaos works in your favor.

In 4v4, though, every player matters so much more. If three out of four players on your team are struggling, the burden on the one competent player becomes overwhelming. It’s practically impossible to carry a team when your support structure is nonexistent. In contrast, in 8v8, you at least have a larger pool of players to soak damage, cross-heal, or provide some level of distraction, even if they’re not doing it intentionally.

I think your success rate in 4v4 might have more to do with matchmaking luck than the format itself. If the matchmaking puts a single decent player on your team in 4v4, you’ll see better results. But in terms of raw potential for teamwork—even accidental teamwork—8v8 gives more room for things to fall into place, even with weaker players.

Thumbless_Bot

I don't understand all the comments on which is listed first in the UI. I mean, people can read, right... right?! Are we really that lazy?