Publius_Scipio wrote: »The reality is that "no CP" is like pulling the plug on a lot of the troll builds. It's really that simple, pulling the plug. Or at least greatly toning it down. Maybe one day CP will be very balanced. ZOS surely is capable of achieving that. But will that be the case when the buzzer sounds on June 6th?
LeifErickson wrote: »Are you seriously calling warden op before it's even out? How many times has this community been absolutely *** about balance in this game? I'm going to try to think of all the times that I remember: heavy armor (people wanted zos to revert the heavy armor changes because they felt it was a NERF), all weapon ults (everyone complained the stam ults were so op while the magicka ones were trash, especially destro ult and 2h ult), magicka sorc/shield change (lol), stam sorc (people, including Fengrush, thought Wrobel nerfed stam sorc instead of buffed them), Templar house (or was that one more of an inside joke?), rushed ceremony change, plus anything I missed.
Publius_Scipio wrote: »Fengrush made a very Bicepstacular point. Each "flavor" of PvP is a different animal. What works in open world definitely doesn't fly in duels more often than not. I would expect the same to be true with Battlegrounds. If no CP is the safe bet, then absolutely ZOS should go down that route. Either that or implement and ensure a serious balancing between the classes.
In open world Sribes for example would gank you, one second, it was over. But if you caught him and he couldn't escape he was pretty squishy. He'd rather backpedal and vanish than fight back. The flip side was when Sribes and his buddies had those crazy troll four-six person groups. The one where they all fed off each other and were many times almost impossible too take down without a much larger group.
Now take Sribes and his buddies, put them in battlegrounds, without serious balancing, CP, the whole nine yards. Take away the ability to have more of your alliance help take them down. Stuff all that into a small scale arena, and let's see how many will enjoy battlegrounds.
The reality is that "no CP" is like pulling the plug on a lot of the troll builds. It's really that simple, pulling the plug. Or at least greatly toning it down. Maybe one day CP will be very balanced. ZOS surely is capable of achieving that. But will that be the case when the buzzer sounds on June 6th?
Edit: Quite frankly I personally home Trueflame. The CP in open world feels ok to me, even with troll builds around. Issue with TF is game performance. That being said I would definitely prefer no CP dueling and if I were to make assumptions, I'd be in no CP battlegrounds.
paulsimonps wrote: »Publius_Scipio wrote: »Fengrush made a very Bicepstacular point. Each "flavor" of PvP is a different animal. What works in open world definitely doesn't fly in duels more often than not. I would expect the same to be true with Battlegrounds. If no CP is the safe bet, then absolutely ZOS should go down that route. Either that or implement and ensure a serious balancing between the classes.
In open world Sribes for example would gank you, one second, it was over. But if you caught him and he couldn't escape he was pretty squishy. He'd rather backpedal and vanish than fight back. The flip side was when Sribes and his buddies had those crazy troll four-six person groups. The one where they all fed off each other and were many times almost impossible too take down without a much larger group.
Now take Sribes and his buddies, put them in battlegrounds, without serious balancing, CP, the whole nine yards. Take away the ability to have more of your alliance help take them down. Stuff all that into a small scale arena, and let's see how many will enjoy battlegrounds.
The reality is that "no CP" is like pulling the plug on a lot of the troll builds. It's really that simple, pulling the plug. Or at least greatly toning it down. Maybe one day CP will be very balanced. ZOS surely is capable of achieving that. But will that be the case when the buzzer sounds on June 6th?
Edit: Quite frankly I personally home Trueflame. The CP in open world feels ok to me, even with troll builds around. Issue with TF is game performance. That being said I would definitely prefer no CP dueling and if I were to make assumptions, I'd be in no CP battlegrounds.
As someone that played Battlegrounds with and without CP I prefered noCP. You could actually kill people and the fights weren't 15min of only like 5 deaths total. That's just not any fun. But you could kill them and they could kill you and skill was more of a factor and you could get a clear winner at the end and not just a few points a team.
paulsimonps wrote: »As someone that played Battlegrounds with and without CP I prefered noCP. You could actually kill people and the fights weren't 15min of only like 5 deaths total. That's just not any fun. But you could kill them and they could kill you and skill was more of a factor and you could get a clear winner at the end and not just a few points a team.
IcyDeadPeople wrote: »paulsimonps wrote: »As someone that played Battlegrounds with and without CP I prefered noCP. You could actually kill people and the fights weren't 15min of only like 5 deaths total. That's just not any fun. But you could kill them and they could kill you and skill was more of a factor and you could get a clear winner at the end and not just a few points a team.
You mean at the PAX demo they gave you the option to queue for CP or non-CP match?
paulsimonps wrote: »IcyDeadPeople wrote: »paulsimonps wrote: »As someone that played Battlegrounds with and without CP I prefered noCP. You could actually kill people and the fights weren't 15min of only like 5 deaths total. That's just not any fun. But you could kill them and they could kill you and skill was more of a factor and you could get a clear winner at the end and not just a few points a team.
You mean at the PAX demo they gave you the option to queue for CP or non-CP match?
No I was one of the 12 people that got a visit to ZOS's office in Baltimore and playtested the warden, battlegrounds and the new trial. And we tested battlegrounds with and without CP
IcyDeadPeople wrote: »paulsimonps wrote: »IcyDeadPeople wrote: »paulsimonps wrote: »As someone that played Battlegrounds with and without CP I prefered noCP. You could actually kill people and the fights weren't 15min of only like 5 deaths total. That's just not any fun. But you could kill them and they could kill you and skill was more of a factor and you could get a clear winner at the end and not just a few points a team.
You mean at the PAX demo they gave you the option to queue for CP or non-CP match?
No I was one of the 12 people that got a visit to ZOS's office in Baltimore and playtested the warden, battlegrounds and the new trial. And we tested battlegrounds with and without CP
Nice! What did you think of the warden? If that is under NDA don't answer
Did they provide a lot of different armor sets for you to try your own build ideas?
Obviously this kind of *** is gonna be a problem though. You, I, and anyone with a brain can see it. Its not like cyrodiil where you can pick a different keep to fight at or zerg them down. I'm not advocating zerging, but let's face it, that's how PUGS compete with skilled players atm, in battlegrounds you can at most outnumber someone 2-1 and even then you have to worry about getting caught in aoe crossfire while trying to beat the more organized group.
Joy_Division wrote: »As much as forum-goers like to make fun of Wrobel and ZoS, the ESO community probably has been wrong more often than the devs.
Im not adamantly against Battlegrounds despite what the knee jerk fanboys presumably think. I was asking a legitimate question based on the current and known about the future state of things. I was genuinely curious whether players thought BG was a good idea given the issues already present in the game that i listed in my OP.
I stop talking about CP - like my question explicitly stated to take the CP factor out of the equation and look at the OTHER compounded issues facing small v small arena combat.
@Lexxypwns honestly lays out exactly what my concern is. maybe you all like his tone better than mine, but this is the truth in my eyes, whatever way you want to slice it:Obviously this kind of *** is gonna be a problem though. You, I, and anyone with a brain can see it. Its not like cyrodiil where you can pick a different keep to fight at or zerg them down. I'm not advocating zerging, but let's face it, that's how PUGS compete with skilled players atm, in battlegrounds you can at most outnumber someone 2-1 and even then you have to worry about getting caught in aoe crossfire while trying to beat the more organized group.
Im not adamantly against Battlegrounds despite what the knee jerk fanboys presumably think. I was asking a legitimate question based on the current and known about the future state of things. I was genuinely curious whether players thought BG was a good idea given the issues already present in the game that i listed in my OP.
I stop talking about CP - like my question explicitly stated to take the CP factor out of the equation and look at the OTHER compounded issues facing small v small arena combat.
@Lexxypwns honestly lays out exactly what my concern is. maybe you all like his tone better than mine, but this is the truth in my eyes, whatever way you want to slice it:Obviously this kind of *** is gonna be a problem though. You, I, and anyone with a brain can see it. Its not like cyrodiil where you can pick a different keep to fight at or zerg them down. I'm not advocating zerging, but let's face it, that's how PUGS compete with skilled players atm, in battlegrounds you can at most outnumber someone 2-1 and even then you have to worry about getting caught in aoe crossfire while trying to beat the more organized group.
I mean, realistically, if we just wanted to wreck pugs we could do that in cyro. There needs to be things to prevent a pre-made going up against 2 Pug groups AND we need the ability to set up custom matches.
Im not adamantly against Battlegrounds despite what the knee jerk fanboys presumably think. I was asking a legitimate question based on the current and known about the future state of things. I was genuinely curious whether players thought BG was a good idea given the issues already present in the game that i listed in my OP.
I stop talking about CP - like my question explicitly stated to take the CP factor out of the equation and look at the OTHER compounded issues facing small v small arena combat.
@Lexxypwns honestly lays out exactly what my concern is. maybe you all like his tone better than mine, but this is the truth in my eyes, whatever way you want to slice it:Obviously this kind of *** is gonna be a problem though. You, I, and anyone with a brain can see it. Its not like cyrodiil where you can pick a different keep to fight at or zerg them down. I'm not advocating zerging, but let's face it, that's how PUGS compete with skilled players atm, in battlegrounds you can at most outnumber someone 2-1 and even then you have to worry about getting caught in aoe crossfire while trying to beat the more organized group.
I mean, realistically, if we just wanted to wreck pugs we could do that in cyro. There needs to be things to prevent a pre-made going up against 2 Pug groups AND we need the ability to set up custom matches.
paulsimonps wrote: »As far as I know the system is going to do the best of its ability to put premade vs premade. Sometimes it won't happen but I have faith in that it will most of the time
paulsimonps wrote: »As far as I know the system is going to do the best of its ability to put premade vs premade. Sometimes it won't happen but I have faith in that it will most of the time
This statement right here sounds like blind fanboyism. Look i love ZOS and i love ESO. trust me i have 204 days logged on my character when i type /played
But we already have an example of ZOS capability when it comes to a queue system. DUNGEON FINDER.
and that was a mess for a long time and arguably still is.
so how the hell in good faith can you even make a statement like you did? we have examples of the broken systems and abuse by players i listed in my OP. we already have examples. why do you think on June 6th those problems and examples will become null and void?
paulsimonps wrote: »IcyDeadPeople wrote: »paulsimonps wrote: »As someone that played Battlegrounds with and without CP I prefered noCP. You could actually kill people and the fights weren't 15min of only like 5 deaths total. That's just not any fun. But you could kill them and they could kill you and skill was more of a factor and you could get a clear winner at the end and not just a few points a team.
You mean at the PAX demo they gave you the option to queue for CP or non-CP match?
No I was one of the 12 people that got a visit to ZOS's office in Baltimore and playtested the warden, battlegrounds and the new trial. And we tested battlegrounds with and without CP
Im not adamantly against Battlegrounds despite what the knee jerk fanboys presumably think. I was asking a legitimate question based on the current and known about the future state of things. I was genuinely curious whether players thought BG was a good idea given the issues already present in the game that i listed in my OP.
I stop talking about CP - like my question explicitly stated to take the CP factor out of the equation and look at the OTHER compounded issues facing small v small arena combat.
@Lexxypwns honestly lays out exactly what my concern is. maybe you all like his tone better than mine, but this is the truth in my eyes, whatever way you want to slice it:Obviously this kind of *** is gonna be a problem though. You, I, and anyone with a brain can see it. Its not like cyrodiil where you can pick a different keep to fight at or zerg them down. I'm not advocating zerging, but let's face it, that's how PUGS compete with skilled players atm, in battlegrounds you can at most outnumber someone 2-1 and even then you have to worry about getting caught in aoe crossfire while trying to beat the more organized group.
I mean, realistically, if we just wanted to wreck pugs we could do that in cyro. There needs to be things to prevent a pre-made going up against 2 Pug groups AND we need the ability to set up custom matches.
Given the skill disparity even in premade groups we need matchmaking for premades aswell.
From my personal experience what hurts battlegrounds the most is dedicated experienced groups destroying newly formed groups by interested but inexperienced players - because it´s a much steeper learning curve to l2p in a group than just to l2p a class alone.
CatchMeTrolling wrote: »Well in game's like Overwatch, PUG's get owned by organized groups. That's usually how it goes in any game, rarely see it executed perfectly.
Im not adamantly against Battlegrounds despite what the knee jerk fanboys presumably think. I was asking a legitimate question based on the current and known about the future state of things. I was genuinely curious whether players thought BG was a good idea given the issues already present in the game that i listed in my OP.
I stop talking about CP - like my question explicitly stated to take the CP factor out of the equation and look at the OTHER compounded issues facing small v small arena combat.
@Lexxypwns honestly lays out exactly what my concern is. maybe you all like his tone better than mine, but this is the truth in my eyes, whatever way you want to slice it:Obviously this kind of *** is gonna be a problem though. You, I, and anyone with a brain can see it. Its not like cyrodiil where you can pick a different keep to fight at or zerg them down. I'm not advocating zerging, but let's face it, that's how PUGS compete with skilled players atm, in battlegrounds you can at most outnumber someone 2-1 and even then you have to worry about getting caught in aoe crossfire while trying to beat the more organized group.
I mean, realistically, if we just wanted to wreck pugs we could do that in cyro. There needs to be things to prevent a pre-made going up against 2 Pug groups AND we need the ability to set up custom matches.
Given the skill disparity even in premade groups we need matchmaking for premades aswell.
From my personal experience what hurts battlegrounds the most is dedicated experienced groups destroying newly formed groups by interested but inexperienced players - because it´s a much steeper learning curve to l2p in a group than just to l2p a class alone.
100% agree, we need a good MMR, but even with the best MMR ever, putting 12 players of similar skill into a competition with 2 teams of pugs and 1 premade the premade should still completely stomp. The two things have to go hand in hand. I don't suggest inflating MMR based on being grouped though, just don't allow groups of 4 to fight solo que people.CatchMeTrolling wrote: »Well in game's like Overwatch, PUG's get owned by organized groups. That's usually how it goes in any game, rarely see it executed perfectly.
In overwatch you don't get 6 solo players matched up against pre-made 6 man teams in competitive. Furthermore, unlike ESO, overwatch has a big roster and a lot of them are capable of an individual carry against an opposing team of 6.
CatchMeTrolling wrote: »Im not adamantly against Battlegrounds despite what the knee jerk fanboys presumably think. I was asking a legitimate question based on the current and known about the future state of things. I was genuinely curious whether players thought BG was a good idea given the issues already present in the game that i listed in my OP.
I stop talking about CP - like my question explicitly stated to take the CP factor out of the equation and look at the OTHER compounded issues facing small v small arena combat.
@Lexxypwns honestly lays out exactly what my concern is. maybe you all like his tone better than mine, but this is the truth in my eyes, whatever way you want to slice it:Obviously this kind of *** is gonna be a problem though. You, I, and anyone with a brain can see it. Its not like cyrodiil where you can pick a different keep to fight at or zerg them down. I'm not advocating zerging, but let's face it, that's how PUGS compete with skilled players atm, in battlegrounds you can at most outnumber someone 2-1 and even then you have to worry about getting caught in aoe crossfire while trying to beat the more organized group.
I mean, realistically, if we just wanted to wreck pugs we could do that in cyro. There needs to be things to prevent a pre-made going up against 2 Pug groups AND we need the ability to set up custom matches.
Given the skill disparity even in premade groups we need matchmaking for premades aswell.
From my personal experience what hurts battlegrounds the most is dedicated experienced groups destroying newly formed groups by interested but inexperienced players - because it´s a much steeper learning curve to l2p in a group than just to l2p a class alone.
100% agree, we need a good MMR, but even with the best MMR ever, putting 12 players of similar skill into a competition with 2 teams of pugs and 1 premade the premade should still completely stomp. The two things have to go hand in hand. I don't suggest inflating MMR based on being grouped though, just don't allow groups of 4 to fight solo que people.CatchMeTrolling wrote: »Well in game's like Overwatch, PUG's get owned by organized groups. That's usually how it goes in any game, rarely see it executed perfectly.
In overwatch you don't get 6 solo players matched up against pre-made 6 man teams in competitive. Furthermore, unlike ESO, overwatch has a big roster and a lot of them are capable of an individual carry against an opposing team of 6.
You most certainly get matched up against groups or teams of solo player's. Not every group is made up of 6 , some consist of 4 maybe even just 3 and the game has to make up for that. It definitely isn't always group v group at all lol play competitive every day.
CatchMeTrolling wrote: »Im not adamantly against Battlegrounds despite what the knee jerk fanboys presumably think. I was asking a legitimate question based on the current and known about the future state of things. I was genuinely curious whether players thought BG was a good idea given the issues already present in the game that i listed in my OP.
I stop talking about CP - like my question explicitly stated to take the CP factor out of the equation and look at the OTHER compounded issues facing small v small arena combat.
@Lexxypwns honestly lays out exactly what my concern is. maybe you all like his tone better than mine, but this is the truth in my eyes, whatever way you want to slice it:Obviously this kind of *** is gonna be a problem though. You, I, and anyone with a brain can see it. Its not like cyrodiil where you can pick a different keep to fight at or zerg them down. I'm not advocating zerging, but let's face it, that's how PUGS compete with skilled players atm, in battlegrounds you can at most outnumber someone 2-1 and even then you have to worry about getting caught in aoe crossfire while trying to beat the more organized group.
I mean, realistically, if we just wanted to wreck pugs we could do that in cyro. There needs to be things to prevent a pre-made going up against 2 Pug groups AND we need the ability to set up custom matches.
Given the skill disparity even in premade groups we need matchmaking for premades aswell.
From my personal experience what hurts battlegrounds the most is dedicated experienced groups destroying newly formed groups by interested but inexperienced players - because it´s a much steeper learning curve to l2p in a group than just to l2p a class alone.
100% agree, we need a good MMR, but even with the best MMR ever, putting 12 players of similar skill into a competition with 2 teams of pugs and 1 premade the premade should still completely stomp. The two things have to go hand in hand. I don't suggest inflating MMR based on being grouped though, just don't allow groups of 4 to fight solo que people.CatchMeTrolling wrote: »Well in game's like Overwatch, PUG's get owned by organized groups. That's usually how it goes in any game, rarely see it executed perfectly.
In overwatch you don't get 6 solo players matched up against pre-made 6 man teams in competitive. Furthermore, unlike ESO, overwatch has a big roster and a lot of them are capable of an individual carry against an opposing team of 6.
You most certainly get matched up against groups or teams of solo player's. Not every group is made up of 6 , some consist of 4 maybe even just 3 and the game has to make up for that. It definitely isn't always group v group at all lol play competitive every day.
I've never faced a team of more than 3 players without at least a pre-made duo on my team. That being said, the strength of synergy on ESO is vastly more than on Overwatch. No two heroes have enough synergy to render an opposing team incapable of winning.
What tier do you play in? I'm plat on PC and gold Xbox.
CatchMeTrolling wrote: »CatchMeTrolling wrote: »Im not adamantly against Battlegrounds despite what the knee jerk fanboys presumably think. I was asking a legitimate question based on the current and known about the future state of things. I was genuinely curious whether players thought BG was a good idea given the issues already present in the game that i listed in my OP.
I stop talking about CP - like my question explicitly stated to take the CP factor out of the equation and look at the OTHER compounded issues facing small v small arena combat.
@Lexxypwns honestly lays out exactly what my concern is. maybe you all like his tone better than mine, but this is the truth in my eyes, whatever way you want to slice it:Obviously this kind of *** is gonna be a problem though. You, I, and anyone with a brain can see it. Its not like cyrodiil where you can pick a different keep to fight at or zerg them down. I'm not advocating zerging, but let's face it, that's how PUGS compete with skilled players atm, in battlegrounds you can at most outnumber someone 2-1 and even then you have to worry about getting caught in aoe crossfire while trying to beat the more organized group.
I mean, realistically, if we just wanted to wreck pugs we could do that in cyro. There needs to be things to prevent a pre-made going up against 2 Pug groups AND we need the ability to set up custom matches.
Given the skill disparity even in premade groups we need matchmaking for premades aswell.
From my personal experience what hurts battlegrounds the most is dedicated experienced groups destroying newly formed groups by interested but inexperienced players - because it´s a much steeper learning curve to l2p in a group than just to l2p a class alone.
100% agree, we need a good MMR, but even with the best MMR ever, putting 12 players of similar skill into a competition with 2 teams of pugs and 1 premade the premade should still completely stomp. The two things have to go hand in hand. I don't suggest inflating MMR based on being grouped though, just don't allow groups of 4 to fight solo que people.CatchMeTrolling wrote: »Well in game's like Overwatch, PUG's get owned by organized groups. That's usually how it goes in any game, rarely see it executed perfectly.
In overwatch you don't get 6 solo players matched up against pre-made 6 man teams in competitive. Furthermore, unlike ESO, overwatch has a big roster and a lot of them are capable of an individual carry against an opposing team of 6.
You most certainly get matched up against groups or teams of solo player's. Not every group is made up of 6 , some consist of 4 maybe even just 3 and the game has to make up for that. It definitely isn't always group v group at all lol play competitive every day.
I've never faced a team of more than 3 players without at least a pre-made duo on my team. That being said, the strength of synergy on ESO is vastly more than on Overwatch. No two heroes have enough synergy to render an opposing team incapable of winning.
What tier do you play in? I'm plat on PC and gold Xbox.
Almost plat, trying to work my way up "solo" but the game is more than just being a stat sheet filler. But at time's I've been placed in groups that obviously been playing together for awhile.
And I feel as though it's hard to carry 5 people against another 6 who knows what they're doing, though just the other day someone was trying to say it's normal.
I'm not advocating zerging, but let's face it, that's how PUGS compete with skilled players atm, in battlegrounds you can at most outnumber someone 2-1 and even then you have to worry about getting caught in aoe crossfire while trying to beat the more organized group.
paulsimonps wrote: »Im not adamantly against Battlegrounds despite what the knee jerk fanboys presumably think. I was asking a legitimate question based on the current and known about the future state of things. I was genuinely curious whether players thought BG was a good idea given the issues already present in the game that i listed in my OP.
I stop talking about CP - like my question explicitly stated to take the CP factor out of the equation and look at the OTHER compounded issues facing small v small arena combat.
@Lexxypwns honestly lays out exactly what my concern is. maybe you all like his tone better than mine, but this is the truth in my eyes, whatever way you want to slice it:Obviously this kind of *** is gonna be a problem though. You, I, and anyone with a brain can see it. Its not like cyrodiil where you can pick a different keep to fight at or zerg them down. I'm not advocating zerging, but let's face it, that's how PUGS compete with skilled players atm, in battlegrounds you can at most outnumber someone 2-1 and even then you have to worry about getting caught in aoe crossfire while trying to beat the more organized group.
I mean, realistically, if we just wanted to wreck pugs we could do that in cyro. There needs to be things to prevent a pre-made going up against 2 Pug groups AND we need the ability to set up custom matches.
As far as I know the system is going to do the best of its ability to put premade vs premade. Sometimes it won't happen but I have faith in that it will most of the time, depends on how much premades we get vs how much pugs we will get.
Also the custom games sounds terrible, UNLESS, you make them give no AP or Tokens. Cause otherwise its gonna be ripe for abuse. You could grind tokens all day just making premades custom games with your friends. I would rather it didn't exist at all
NightbladeMechanics wrote: »It's not delusional. The people who kept asking for Battlegrounds when they used to be a dream, are the same people who run in smaller groups in Cyrodiil every day looking for good fights only to get zerged at a resource or town.The funny thing is: everyone is AGREEING on my points of concern and then subsequently dismissing them.
its almost delusional.
Ahh, yes. These are they players who will 4v1 soloers till the cows come home then get salty when they get 16v4'd..
I think this is a pretty narrow comment. Most small scalers respect numbers and wouldn't do that unless they have beef with the person or are attacked first.
Or that player is tanky so you need 4 players to help burst then down.
Or you suspect them to be placing a camp (dead enemy's still on floor while one player running.)
arkansas_ESO wrote: »paulsimonps wrote: »Im not adamantly against Battlegrounds despite what the knee jerk fanboys presumably think. I was asking a legitimate question based on the current and known about the future state of things. I was genuinely curious whether players thought BG was a good idea given the issues already present in the game that i listed in my OP.
I stop talking about CP - like my question explicitly stated to take the CP factor out of the equation and look at the OTHER compounded issues facing small v small arena combat.
@Lexxypwns honestly lays out exactly what my concern is. maybe you all like his tone better than mine, but this is the truth in my eyes, whatever way you want to slice it:Obviously this kind of *** is gonna be a problem though. You, I, and anyone with a brain can see it. Its not like cyrodiil where you can pick a different keep to fight at or zerg them down. I'm not advocating zerging, but let's face it, that's how PUGS compete with skilled players atm, in battlegrounds you can at most outnumber someone 2-1 and even then you have to worry about getting caught in aoe crossfire while trying to beat the more organized group.
I mean, realistically, if we just wanted to wreck pugs we could do that in cyro. There needs to be things to prevent a pre-made going up against 2 Pug groups AND we need the ability to set up custom matches.
As far as I know the system is going to do the best of its ability to put premade vs premade. Sometimes it won't happen but I have faith in that it will most of the time, depends on how much premades we get vs how much pugs we will get.
Also the custom games sounds terrible, UNLESS, you make them give no AP or Tokens. Cause otherwise its gonna be ripe for abuse. You could grind tokens all day just making premades custom games with your friends. I would rather it didn't exist at all
@paulsimonps Did the devs talk about anything about matching groups of equal skill level together? From what I've heard so far it sounds like all premade groups are equal in the eyes of the matchmaking tool, which means you'll get premade groups of 4 casual players, all new to the game, running unoptimized builds and green quality gear, put up against good players in gold BIS gear with optimized builds. I can see that killing battlegrounds off very quickly.
arkansas_ESO wrote: »paulsimonps wrote: »Im not adamantly against Battlegrounds despite what the knee jerk fanboys presumably think. I was asking a legitimate question based on the current and known about the future state of things. I was genuinely curious whether players thought BG was a good idea given the issues already present in the game that i listed in my OP.
I stop talking about CP - like my question explicitly stated to take the CP factor out of the equation and look at the OTHER compounded issues facing small v small arena combat.
@Lexxypwns honestly lays out exactly what my concern is. maybe you all like his tone better than mine, but this is the truth in my eyes, whatever way you want to slice it:Obviously this kind of *** is gonna be a problem though. You, I, and anyone with a brain can see it. Its not like cyrodiil where you can pick a different keep to fight at or zerg them down. I'm not advocating zerging, but let's face it, that's how PUGS compete with skilled players atm, in battlegrounds you can at most outnumber someone 2-1 and even then you have to worry about getting caught in aoe crossfire while trying to beat the more organized group.
I mean, realistically, if we just wanted to wreck pugs we could do that in cyro. There needs to be things to prevent a pre-made going up against 2 Pug groups AND we need the ability to set up custom matches.
As far as I know the system is going to do the best of its ability to put premade vs premade. Sometimes it won't happen but I have faith in that it will most of the time, depends on how much premades we get vs how much pugs we will get.
Also the custom games sounds terrible, UNLESS, you make them give no AP or Tokens. Cause otherwise its gonna be ripe for abuse. You could grind tokens all day just making premades custom games with your friends. I would rather it didn't exist at all
@paulsimonps Did the devs talk about anything about matching groups of equal skill level together? From what I've heard so far it sounds like all premade groups are equal in the eyes of the matchmaking tool, which means you'll get premade groups of 4 casual players, all new to the game, running unoptimized builds and green quality gear, put up against good players in gold BIS gear with optimized builds. I can see that killing battlegrounds off very quickly.