Two-Team battlegrounds were a mistake

ketsparrowhawk

Two team battlegrounds were a mistake. Please bring back 4v4v4 permanently. Thank you.

Syiccal

100% nearly game match ends with players refusing to come down and fight..I've done it myself just out of frustration and almost protest that it's ridiculous. As soon as your team is pinned in your dead before even hitting the ground in a lot of occasion's. Further if you have bots on your team heavy attacking or sniping from the top and refuse to come down it's a guaranteed loss as well.

Major_Mangle

The concept of two teams in ESO is fine, but the problem is that the modern PvP population are made up of mostly "PvP tourists" that isn´t interested in actual PvP. Hell, you even have threads on the forum complaining that they actually have to PvP to get PvP rewards (and want to get the daily exp bonus for just participating). If you had introduced a two team system during patches like Elsweyr/Blackwood etc it would´ve worked fine because the amount of actual PvP players were at a healthy level.

reazea

ketsparrowhawk wrote: »

Two team battlegrounds were a mistake. Please bring back 4v4v4 permanently. Thank you.

They sure were. They took away a third team, and made the maps practically microscopic. I stopped playing BG's after just a few 2 team BG's. They 2 team format doesn't work. It's not dynamic enough.

Goldie

ketsparrowhawk wrote: »

Two team battlegrounds were a mistake. Please bring back 4v4v4 permanently. Thank you.

I think this ties back into how Zenimax and ESO have reinvented game systems over and over instead of improving on what they had in the first place. This has been repeated with nearly every system in the game. It started with Veteran Levels becoming Champion Points and the same practice has been used in numerous areas from PvP to Overland.

The folks in charge think that they need to re-invent the wheel, instead of just putting new tires on the wheels we already have.

ketsparrowhawk

Major_Mangle wrote: »

The concept of two teams in ESO is fine, but the problem is that the modern PvP population are made up of mostly "PvP tourists" that isn´t interested in actual PvP. Hell, you even have threads on the forum complaining that they actually have to PvP to get PvP rewards (and want to get the daily exp bonus for just participating). If you had introduced a two team system during patches like Elsweyr/Blackwood etc it would´ve worked fine because the amount of actual PvP players were at a healthy level.

Those PvP tourists have always been here. It was just much easier to deal with when there were 3 teams due to the "enemy of my enemy" dynamic. I can recall many times when I had 3 complete duds on my team but I was still able to have a good time by playing smart. Not really a possibility with 2 teams. If you have bad teammates now you're just SOL.

Tonturri

ketsparrowhawk wrote: »

Major_Mangle wrote: »

The concept of two teams in ESO is fine, but the problem is that the modern PvP population are made up of mostly "PvP tourists" that isn´t interested in actual PvP. Hell, you even have threads on the forum complaining that they actually have to PvP to get PvP rewards (and want to get the daily exp bonus for just participating). If you had introduced a two team system during patches like Elsweyr/Blackwood etc it would´ve worked fine because the amount of actual PvP players were at a healthy level.

Those PvP tourists have always been here. It was just much easier to deal with when there were 3 teams due to the "enemy of my enemy" dynamic. I can recall many times when I had 3 complete duds on my team but I was still able to have a good time by playing smart. Not really a possibility with 2 teams. If you have bad teammates now you're just SOL.

+1 to this. Losing when there's two teams feels like a pointless struggle against the inevitable. I did 3 BGs today and lost all three (still think the frickn daily random reward should be given just after 2 bgs or something, battlegrounds can be 'failed' while the random dungeon reward is *really* hard to 'fail'). I don't mind losing but it's so much harder to get a good fight - I just got mobbed every time I came out of spawn and there was no way to get around it.

Luneca

Tonturri wrote: »

ketsparrowhawk wrote: »

Major_Mangle wrote: »

The concept of two teams in ESO is fine, but the problem is that the modern PvP population are made up of mostly "PvP tourists" that isn´t interested in actual PvP. Hell, you even have threads on the forum complaining that they actually have to PvP to get PvP rewards (and want to get the daily exp bonus for just participating). If you had introduced a two team system during patches like Elsweyr/Blackwood etc it would´ve worked fine because the amount of actual PvP players were at a healthy level.

Those PvP tourists have always been here. It was just much easier to deal with when there were 3 teams due to the "enemy of my enemy" dynamic. I can recall many times when I had 3 complete duds on my team but I was still able to have a good time by playing smart. Not really a possibility with 2 teams. If you have bad teammates now you're just SOL.

+1 to this. Losing when there's two teams feels like a pointless struggle against the inevitable. I did 3 BGs today and lost all three (still think the frickn daily random reward should be given just after 2 bgs or something, battlegrounds can be 'failed' while the random dungeon reward is *really* hard to 'fail'). I don't mind losing but it's so much harder to get a good fight - I just got mobbed every time I came out of spawn and there was no way to get around it.

With how difficult it is to even get into a BG, the amount of cheese there is at lower level BGs, etc. they should remove the victory requirement because it actually does more harm than good.

Add into that how unbalanced the relative power between builds are, and even classes themselves, and you have an experience that is possible to be one-sided the entire time you are participating.

And just like what was said about Vengeance, players play games to have an effect on the world and the overall outcome of the system they are participating in. When you enter a BG and nothing you do matters, and you see that repeatedly, why would you keep participating?

The reward of maybe getting a rare style isn't really enough. The exp stopped mattering a long time ago. And AP can be found elsewhere. What's the point?

I also fail to understand how guaranteeing at least the EXP portion after completing a BG would be detrimental. We're playing a game, not competing in real life. Yet the consequences follow, in that if you lose, you gain nothing and lose the opportunity with time to have gained more.

The system does not have to be setup like this. ZOS controls it, and someone continues to think it is a good idea to push engagement. But it's ultimately deterimental to the game and we see it with engagement waning at every space in PvE and PvP where it's possible to lose (and lose time). We even saw it with the Night Market.

One would think with the "new direction" some are glazing about things would be better and ZOS would address and improve QoL and player experience, since we aren't getting much content. And it seems that isn't the case and they continue to ignore a significant amount of issues that are piling up like snow on a leaning tree.

And of course there will be someone to argue otherwise because it's a forum. And many of the people on the forums like to argue and push bait. But even if they do, they know everything posted is true.

ketsparrowhawk

Luneca wrote: »

Tonturri wrote: »

ketsparrowhawk wrote: »

Major_Mangle wrote: »

The concept of two teams in ESO is fine, but the problem is that the modern PvP population are made up of mostly "PvP tourists" that isn´t interested in actual PvP. Hell, you even have threads on the forum complaining that they actually have to PvP to get PvP rewards (and want to get the daily exp bonus for just participating). If you had introduced a two team system during patches like Elsweyr/Blackwood etc it would´ve worked fine because the amount of actual PvP players were at a healthy level.

Those PvP tourists have always been here. It was just much easier to deal with when there were 3 teams due to the "enemy of my enemy" dynamic. I can recall many times when I had 3 complete duds on my team but I was still able to have a good time by playing smart. Not really a possibility with 2 teams. If you have bad teammates now you're just SOL.

+1 to this. Losing when there's two teams feels like a pointless struggle against the inevitable. I did 3 BGs today and lost all three (still think the frickn daily random reward should be given just after 2 bgs or something, battlegrounds can be 'failed' while the random dungeon reward is *really* hard to 'fail'). I don't mind losing but it's so much harder to get a good fight - I just got mobbed every time I came out of spawn and there was no way to get around it.

With how difficult it is to even get into a BG, the amount of cheese there is at lower level BGs, etc. they should remove the victory requirement because it actually does more harm than good.

Add into that how unbalanced the relative power between builds are, and even classes themselves, and you have an experience that is possible to be one-sided the entire time you are participating.

And just like what was said about Vengeance, players play games to have an effect on the world and the overall outcome of the system they are participating in. When you enter a BG and nothing you do matters, and you see that repeatedly, why would you keep participating?

The reward of maybe getting a rare style isn't really enough. The exp stopped mattering a long time ago. And AP can be found elsewhere. What's the point?

I also fail to understand how guaranteeing at least the EXP portion after completing a BG would be detrimental. We're playing a game, not competing in real life. Yet the consequences follow, in that if you lose, you gain nothing and lose the opportunity with time to have gained more.

The system does not have to be setup like this. ZOS controls it, and someone continues to think it is a good idea to push engagement. But it's ultimately deterimental to the game and we see it with engagement waning at every space in PvE and PvP where it's possible to lose (and lose time). We even saw it with the Night Market.

One would think with the "new direction" some are glazing about things would be better and ZOS would address and improve QoL and player experience, since we aren't getting much content. And it seems that isn't the case and they continue to ignore a significant amount of issues that are piling up like snow on a leaning tree.

And of course there will be someone to argue otherwise because it's a forum. And many of the people on the forums like to argue and push bait. But even if they do, they know everything posted is true.

Please make a new thread for whatever this is. We are discussing the validity of 2-team vs 3-team battlegrounds in this thread.

ketsparrowhawk

Loving the three-team Crazy King event. I sure have missed my favorite game mode: 3-team Battlegrounds. Almost hard to enjoy it knowing that 2-team will be back next week (a far, far inferior version of Battlegrounds). My once-active BG-focused guild is active once more, for a week at least, until 3-team BG's are taken away again. Then they'll go back to Palworld or w/e.

Best thing about 3-teams imo is that you are not punished nearly as harshly for having a weak team. Most matches you can have a good time and be successful by playing smart, regardless of your team comp. Several times during this event I've had 3 bad teammates (10+ deaths each) but I still managed to have a blast because there are TWO other teams which means I'm not getting focused the whole time. In 2-team BG's, getting a weak team means it's time to go AFK because there is simply nothing you can do.

Please consider bringing back 3-team Battlegrounds permanently. If you don't want to waste the effort put into the 2-team format, make THOSE the temporary events alongside permanent 3-team Battlegrounds. Have a nice day.