I would like to note there is a nearly 200 post thread on this issue already, in addition to numerous other posts with dozens of posts. Not everyone will check back here to voice their opinion, I suspect. I think that ZOS is aware and hopefully will read that too. Thank you for starting an official thread to collate all of these posts in one place, Gina!

I think it is an incredibly bad idea to go live with a chance that restricted queuing to ONLY solo players. Many of us are only playing ESO to pay PvP with our friends, and in many cases, that means duoing for BGs or the like. Many of us are willing to play other premades, we don't care - we just want to play together. I recently got a small group of friends into ESO and all will surely revaluate playing the game if this change goes live without some kind of plan for when we can group in BGs again. Cyrodil and IC are not solutions for the kind of PvP we enjoy.

It is also unclear exactly why this change is being implemented in its current form, and what the long term goals are for BGs. It is not clear if this is explicitly a temporary situation, or if this a test of a permanent systems change. It is not clear how long this 'experiment' is for, and what exact data is valuable during it.

It is a very bad idea to remove an existing PvP mode/option from players that has been in the game for years now. I understand and sympathesize with the frustration of fighting premades, primarily because there are broken tanky healer builds that make it not fun, but many of us are not at high MMRs and simply enjoy playing with a friend in BGs. I understand why players would want to play single queue, but it seems unfair to prohibit what some of us actually bought this game for, and what the game has had for several years, because the system is unable to match premades with other premades.

Implementing a group queue at the same time as a solo queue may result in too few players for either mode, but would provide MUCH more valuable data than a solo queue alone. I get there may not be enough players for both - but we wouldn't know that until both are active. Why not try both?

Optimally, I would like a "quick play" casual queue for solo-only players, and a "competitive mode" for all others, including groups of all sizes, just as it is now.

Wing wrote: »

great change.

just a bunch of pre made 4 stacks mad they cant stomp pugs.

never queued with 3 other people and I don't stomp pugs when I duo...

some of us play MMORPGs for BG-type content and do so to hang out with friends and be social. that doesn't require we "pug stomp."

edit: and if that was what we really wanted to do, why would all of us be asking for an alternative solution like a second queue?

Merge duo/solo queue together, make a queue for 4 man premades (premade vs premade vs premade) and it would make BG actually much more enjoyable.

solo que only is a very healthy new direction for the pvp population growth of this game. It fosters more fair and balanced matches and allows all players an equal opportunity to play structured pvp on equal footing. This in turn will foster more pvp participation and population.

For all players, solo que also removes the ability to blame one's own ineptitude on "tryhard premades". And this is good. People will always take the path of least resistance when assessing their own performance. If there is even the slightest perception that an inequity/imbalance exists (i.e. premades vs pugs, regardless of whether your opponents are actually one) then people are much more likely to blame their inadequacies on the perceived premade inequity vs. their own ability/skill.

Recognizing the battleground is an equal opportunity format for solo que's only, it helps to force players to admit that their performance is due largely to their own skill... and this admission can lead to more attempts to improve instead of immediately quitting due to perceived imbalance from premades vs pugs.

That said, many players do enjoy playing with their friends in a group format. While Cyrodiil and Imperial City offer unstructured group combat, this proposed change to battlegrounds would currently eliminate the ability to create structured group coordinated combat. That needs to be rectified. Group coordinated combat against other like minded coordinated groups offers some of the best pvp in the entire game. Metas are formed from this level of pvp. There is good reason why these matches are labeled "tryhard sweaties" and this should not be eliminated from the game.

As has been recommended, a custom group vs group lobby needs to be implemented in addition to solo que. This is necessary in order to not eliminate the very important group v group combat that some enjoy.

Olupajmibanan wrote: »

The biggest problem is that even split queue can't be implemented properly. When you have solo-only queue and a group queue(2-4) a number of problems would occur. Solo players are restricted from group queue, thus group of 3 would never have the last one to fill the team restricting these groups entirely. .

I like your idea @Olupajmibanan of a solo/duo queue + a 4 person premade queue. This would allow for casual players to ply with their friends/loved ones in the normal queue, and for a "tryhard sweaty" queue as Mursie put it... That said, I did want to add to the above, if instead of changing the current queue in terms of who can queue for it, they just added a "Solo Only Queue", players could still queue for the current queue as solo and get into a 3 person team, or could choose to queue for solo-only. Alternatively, they could just only allow 2 and 4 person teams to queue for a group queue.

Regardless, implementing only a solo queue will be net detrimental outside of high MMR BGs I think, because a lot of the more casual people queue with a friend for fun, and not to be optimized pugstompers.

I cannot help but to just laught about it... When you cannot repair something *cought*activity finder*cought*, lets just remove some of major features. And thats from someone who queues in solo 98% times and BGs are his #1 thing to enjoy.

Seperated solo, group(2-3) and full premade. "This is the way". With option for solo, to opt in to be "filled" to 2 or 3 premades. As suggested by @Olupajmibanan 's comment.

Also it is a step closer to ranked BGs system (which if done properly might generete money income to ZOS through tournaments) with seasons (can be DLC time or smaller like quartal updates). Unique rewards for top % of players(account based not char) maybe mount or skin just worth the time enough to care and tryhard, some complainers just needs to remember, that they are fighting against an actual players with brains, not coded mechanics which is much more unforgiving.

"Pre-mades vs pugs" is all on the pugs. Entirely on them. There is *nothing* stopping you from going and getting three other people and forming a pre-made yourself, except just plain not being willing to go to the effort. People shouldn't expect standards to be lowered to accommodate their own lack of motivation. This is just "we want everything to be free and easy" with a different mask on.

I can see both sides of this argument. I have been roughed up by what were perceived to be pre-made groups. I also have a son that lives in another city and him and I play BGs for an activity together. We usually don’t have too much time, so the quick small scale fights are perfect. IC and Cyrodiil are not solutions for us as IC is basically PvE for the most part and Cyrodiil most of the time is spent riding from one place to the other.

I’m sorry to say that if I can’t queue up for BGs with my boy anymore it will add yet another frustration to a game that has frustrated me to the point that I don’t want to play anymore already. If ZOS, by some miracle, does fix performance, it’ll be for nothing from my point of view. I play this game to play with my son.

I think the main problem with this game is bad players, if the players were better they would play more often, because better players dont die as much, therefor they arent upset as much. If everyone were good, we would have a lot more players, the logic is flawless, dont question it.

ChunkyCat wrote: »

Catering to the casual gamer that doesn’t have a dedicated group of friends to play with (yet) is more lucrative than catering to customers that they already know will keep playing anyway. Even if they lose a few dedicated players, the influx of new ones would be a worthwhile gamble..

I'm not really sure if this change actually benefits "casual" players more. Most of the more causal PvPers I know only PvP with friends...

I guess I put my feedback in the wrong place. I'll link to it, instead.

I'm actually devastated right now. The fact that this was even allowed to land in PTS in its current form is ... idk. I'm really losing faith in the direction of things. I don't have a lot of time to play so unless NONE of my friends are online, I always choose content we can do together. Battlegrounds used to be one of these options. Now, it won't be. This will result in less people queuing for BG's, and less ways for me to stay engaged in the game. This is a good thing, how, exactly??

All of the comments here did a much better job than I have raising alternate suggestions so all I will say is... did people actually, specifically demand that BG's be converted to solo queue only? Or did the player feedback simply ask that something be done about the fact that pre-mades can ruin the experience of a BG when they are matched with solo queue players? Because those are two very, very different requests and I highly doubt that most people explicitly demanded or even suggested the former. Just the fact that pre-mades existed at all should have made it blatantly obvious that many people enjoyed queuing as a group for BG's.

This makes me want to cancel my subscription and forget about purchasing Greymoor. If I can't queue as a duo or trio in BG's it's a pointless feature for me. Why should I support a game that's actively REMOVING significant functionality? This isn't a philosophical "balance" change. This is the complete gutting of a mode of play for anyone who used it besides the people who prefer to queue solo. Really, really disappointing.

I don't do BG's on the regular. I did them for a time to grind thru solo queue'ing simply for the costume gear. I DO however enjoy cyrodiil. But the point I wanna make is that the Dev note said this was kind of an "experiment" as well.

So it gets me thinking that Cyro, and maybe ALL of PvP will become solo queue (AkA no more groups, period). If that happens, balance will finally come to this game because PvP will be done. The servers will shut down for lack of players (tons already left, and I'm taking a break myself) so that means no more PvP vs PvE balance problems.This change doesn't impact me personally for now. But if it goes further, then obviously it will =/

The third team is and always will be the problem, not premades. Three teams exacerbates every single possible issue with matchmaking to a much greater extent than two because the most skilled team always has the potential advantage of using a third team to turn every pvp situation into a numbers advantage for them.

This is not going to bring players back or encourage people to queue more. Players don't queue for BGs because they aren't fun, not because they lose to premades. Most people don't care if they lose if they have fun. Most players don't have fun getting rear-ended while in an even fight. I've never, ever seen any MMO outright ban all premades, even duos. This is a first, and the major difference here between ESO and every other MMO is the third team. Three teams leads to messy, directionless, disorganized matches where you're either outnumbered, outnumbering your opponents, or ignoring pvp altogether to do objectives while the other two teams pvp. None of these scenarios have any sort of direct appeal to players.

Winning doesn't feel good, because you probably did it by taking advantage of superior numbers by rear-ending another team, stealing kills, or standing on a flag while everyone else did some pvp. Losing especially doesn't feel good because you often lose when people steal your kills, or when you decide to pvp, which you're penalized for because the third team is then allowed to take objectives without any sort of confrontation. It sucks and it isn't fun. You don't ever win by directly engaging in pvp, you win by waiting to jump someone about to die, or avoiding pvp as much as you possibly can.

No matter what balance changes or changes to queueing are made, the third team will always make BGs a miserable gameplay experience for just about everyone involved. Scrap the whole system and just copy WoW or Rift and implement normal 8v8 BGs with bigger maps and no deathmatch. Make the max premade group size 4, match premade groups up against premade groups with pugs on both sides, and you'll finally have (mostly) balanced, fun pvp.

Minyassa wrote: »

"Pre-mades vs pugs" is all on the pugs. Entirely on them. There is *nothing* stopping you from going and getting three other people and forming a pre-made yourself, except just plain not being willing to go to the effort. People shouldn't expect standards to be lowered to accommodate their own lack of motivation. This is just "we want everything to be free and easy" with a different mask on.

ESO would be the outlier here, since basically every game in existence doesn't allow you to form a full premade and queue up against pugs. Why? Because while people don't mind losing half the time (as is the outcome of most matchmaking systems), they do mind not having a chance to win at all. Implementing the requirement that you get three of your friends in voice chat to have any chance of enjoying an instanced match is the quickest way to make sure just about everyone stops queueing for those matches. People who want to pvp in an organized premade are 1% of the player base. The players you think want everything to be "free and easy" are the other 99%, and they're the ones who make the game possible in the first place.