Please just revert battlegrounds to 3 teams.

Danse_Mayhem

Honestly this can’t be a new thing to bring up?

Every…Single…Game is always the same; There’s a small fight at the very start, one team overpowers the other, and then they get spawn camped for the remainder of the game. No exceptions this is how every game goes.

If a team got spawn camped in 4v4v4, the 3rd team could either come mix things up or just hit the objective and break the cycle. Now that isn’t possible and the game is over after that first fight.

If you’re on the losing side of this, it sucks. You’re just spawning in to a fed up team of quitters who have already just gone afk, or you’re trying to jump down to a 4v1 or 8v1.

Isn’t much more fun on the winning team either - Waiting at a spawn point whilst your full team of kill hungry players are just waiting to mob someone the second they hit the floor? Might as well just go join a Zerg in cyrodil and pick on solo players.

As a day 1 player I LOVED the old battlegrounds. What was so wrong with that, which needed to be changed to this total mess with 2 teams??

I havent met a single person who likes this version, and almost every game I join, the teams are in text chat saying how it’s awful how.

Even the new maps are bad compared to the 3 teams versions.

Please tell me there’s something being considered with BG improvements at some stage??

React

Agree the old format was better, especially compared to the 4v4s.

The 8v8s are sometimes okay, but still more than 75% of the games ive played have just ended up as a spawn camp simulator for 10+ minutes. Insanely boring regardless of which side you're on.

Unfortunately, I doubt we'll ever get the old bgs back. Despite the vocal majority agreeing about the old ones being better, zenimax put too much time into designing these new ones to ever admit they were wrong.

reazea

Yep, two team BG's have not worked out at all. Time to revert back to the more popular 3 teams system. I think keeping 8 member teams would be ok, but there has to be 3 teams or the match balance is almost always horrible.

CameraBeardThePirate

React wrote: »

Agree the old format was better, especially compared to the 4v4s.

The 8v8s are sometimes okay, but still more than 75% of the games ive played have just ended up as a spawn camp simulator for 10+ minutes. Insanely boring regardless of which side you're on.

Unfortunately, I doubt we'll ever get the old bgs back. Despite the vocal majority agreeing about the old ones being better, zenimax put too much time into designing these new ones to ever admit they were wrong.

It honestly boggles my mind they completely scrapped the old format even to this day.

The entire BG community begged ZOS to slightly tweak the game modes to better encourage fights rather than running from objective to objective, even offering up plenty of solutions here, on reddit, and in video form.

What did ZOS do? "Hey let's scrap it entirely and introduce a new system that we won't test before deploying, and not ask any of our players what they think about it!"

Just wild.

El_Borracho

@CameraBeardThePirate Could not agree more. Yes, it was annoying when you would get stuck on the 3 man team versus two 4 man teams, but the current version is much worse. I don't even consider playing BGs unless its some sort of event that I need tickets from

LunaFlora

i love 2 team Battlegrounds.
having both with separate queues would be fine, why remove either?

Radiate77

LunaFlora wrote: »

i love 2 team Battlegrounds.
having both with separate queues would be fine, why remove either?

It’s probably a spite thing. Tbh

I have seen more participation with 2 team BGs than I ever have with 3 team, and for those complaining about lopsided games now; they were much worse before. The only difference is that you can’t hide for the entire match now, or go after the 2nd or 3rd place team.

karthrag_inak

please return 3 team bgs

Radiate77

karthrag_inak wrote: »

please return 3 team bgs

ZOS would benefit from having both.
Let 4v4v4 be a party mode.

karthrag_inak

Radiate77 wrote: »

karthrag_inak wrote: »

please return 3 team bgs

ZOS would benefit from having both.
Let 4v4v4 be a party mode.

Sure!

In fact, Khajiit thinks they need even more combinations - imagine the variations they could have!

Why not a 12 person free-for-all? All Red All The Time! That would be a blast!

4 teams of 2!

1 fox vs 3 hounds, where fox gets bonuses to sneakiness and speed, and who fox is changes like crazy king.

React

Radiate77 wrote: »

LunaFlora wrote: »

i love 2 team Battlegrounds.
having both with separate queues would be fine, why remove either?

It’s probably a spite thing. Tbh

I have seen more participation with 2 team BGs than I ever have with 3 team, and for those complaining about lopsided games now; they were much worse before. The only difference is that you can’t hide for the entire match now, or go after the 2nd or 3rd place team.

The problem with more queues is the lack of population to support them. Spreading what little BG population exists even further will degrade the experience more than it already has been.

The lopsided games absolutely were not anywhere near as bad with the 3 team format. If one team was disproportionately strong or choosing to spawncamp, they were prone to being 3rd partied or having the 3rd team take objectives uncontested. Further in TDM, youd have the counterplay of "stealing" killing blows from the overly dominant team, which is obviously not possible with two teams.

Nihilr

3 team BG's were awful. Talking about lopsided matches when I've seen 2 teams gang up and camp base on the third team, guaranteeing a loss for them even if they were good. This was solo BG's too, not sure how/why they were able to do this, but it definitely takes away the fun.

I will suggest that there be random spawn locations on map if too many enemies camp base...

i11ionward

Dear @ZOS_GregoryV ,

As you can see, players are still very concerned about the future of Battlegrounds, and the previous thread — Future of Battlegrounds — clearly has not “run its course.”

Many players feel that the switch to two teams made the BG experience worse, and that it would be worth reconsidering bringing back the three-team format — or at least giving us some mode selection options. I would really appreciate if ZOS could open a more active discussion about the future of Battlegrounds, not just close threads, but truly listen to the community’s feedback.

Thumbless_Bot

i11ionward wrote: »

Dear @ZOS_GregoryV ,

As you can see, players are still very concerned about the future of Battlegrounds, and the previous thread — Future of Battlegrounds — clearly has not “run its course.”

Many players feel that the switch to two teams made the BG experience worse, and that it would be worth reconsidering bringing back the three-team format — or at least giving us some mode selection options. I would really appreciate if ZOS could open a more active discussion about the future of Battlegrounds, not just close threads, but truly listen to the community’s feedback.

If they listened to community feedback they never would have created the abomination that is two team bgs. They do not want OUR feedback. They want to draw people from other pvp games here and this is their brain child to get there. They failed, miserably.

Major_Mangle

i11ionward wrote: »

Dear @ZOS_GregoryV ,

As you can see, players are still very concerned about the future of Battlegrounds, and the previous thread — Future of Battlegrounds — clearly has not “run its course.”

Many players feel that the switch to two teams made the BG experience worse, and that it would be worth reconsidering bringing back the three-team format — or at least giving us some mode selection options. I would really appreciate if ZOS could open a more active discussion about the future of Battlegrounds, not just close threads, but truly listen to the community’s feedback.

Except that thread was just 2 people acting like bots spamming the same 2-3 sentences for 600+ comments, avoiding any proper arguments, doing weird mental gymnastics back and forth and twisting other people´s words in a way that wasn´t constructive.

ToddIngram

Radiate77 wrote: »

LunaFlora wrote: »

i love 2 team Battlegrounds.
having both with separate queues would be fine, why remove either?

It’s probably a spite thing. Tbh

I have seen more participation with 2 team BGs than I ever have with 3 team, and for those complaining about lopsided games now; they were much worse before. The only difference is that you can’t hide for the entire match now, or go after the 2nd or 3rd place team.

Except participation in BG's has tanked since two teams became the only option. There was FAR more participation with 3 team BG's. Plus, the three team maps were exponentially larger, so much more ability to take advantage of terrain and line of sight in fights.

3 team BG's are much more dynamic and more fun and far more balanced than 2 team BG's.

ToddIngram

Nihilr wrote: »

3 team BG's were awful. Talking about lopsided matches when I've seen 2 teams gang up and camp base on the third team, guaranteeing a loss for them even if they were good. This was solo BG's too, not sure how/why they were able to do this, but it definitely takes away the fun.

I will suggest that there be random spawn locations on map if too many enemies camp base...

2 team BG's are way worse than the 3 team was. I played 3 team BG's pretty regularly. After about 10 2 team matches I'm never going back unless ZOS reverts to 3 team. And I know a lot of other PvP mains who feel the same way. More than half of 2 team BG's end up with one team being steamrolled over and over again. That very rarely happened with 3 team BG's. Plus, why are the 2 team BG maps so tiny? The 2 team BG is just bad design and implementation.