Maintenance for the week of April 6:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
What's your opinion on Battlegrounds becoming solo queue only?
-
TheFM✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Its an awful decision, now if you are a healer you run the risk of getting 3 other healers on your team .2 -
Olupajmibanan✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Having solo queue is good.
Having solo queue as the only option is the worst idea they could had. You can't just prevent groups from participating in a group activity. This will drive 4-premades, which caused all of this, away and bring back some solo players. But it's duo players which are hurt the most (but caused little to no balance issues), and all of these will be driven away in the process as well. I highly doubt that number of returning solo players will surpass the number of duo players and 4-premades that will stop participating in BGs all along. That's my vision. Queue times will be even longer and noobs will get stomped just the way it was before.
If they don't significantly revamp matchmaking system and change MMR, nothing will change. MMR is fully cumulative now (an ESO phenomenon) which leads to imbalanced matches. If you play enough, sooner or later you will be matched against top tier players regardless of your skill. MMR should and must have the possibility of dropping in order to fulfill its purpose.Edited by Olupajmibanan on February 10, 2020 7:50AM3 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭I think it does not make sense to require solo queue for a group activity in an MMORPG. That just seems to be very backwards thinking.
Regardless, BGs will still happen and we need to find something else to blame for when we lose a BG match.5 -
Qbiken✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭I think it’s not bad.
In higher MMR it hardly matters, in lower MMR there are too many premades against new players and they dominate.
I've unironically never ever seen a team in low mmr games that I either knew was premade, or got the feeling they were premade (back when I used to level some PvP ranks on fresh lvl 50 characters). The majority of premades are in the high mmr tiers, not the other way around (can't speak for console but afaik console BG scene isn't really a thing compared to PC)
The problem with BG's isn't premade vs non premade, but the underlying issue is the horribly designed ranking- and MMR system.
The ranking and mmr system doesn't reflect how good you or your team is, only how many games you've played (and don't even get me started on the leaderboard rewards, where it doesn't matter if you end up as #1 or #99, you can get the same garbage rewards regardless).
Instead of wasting time with removing the option to queue together with others, ZOS should invest some time to rework the ranking and MMR system. If they're lazy they can just copy/paste what other MMO's have done, no reason to reinvent the wheel when it comes to propper ranking systems.
Removing group queue and resetting MMR is a classic band aid fix which doesn't solve the underlying issues of battlegrounds.
5 -
Sharee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭I think it’s not bad.
In higher MMR it hardly matters, in lower MMR there are too many premades against new players and they dominate.
I've unironically never ever seen a team in low mmr games that I either knew was premade, or got the feeling they were premade (back when I used to level some PvP ranks on fresh lvl 50 characters). The majority of premades are in the high mmr tiers, not the other way around (can't speak for console but afaik console BG scene isn't really a thing compared to PC)
The problem with BG's isn't premade vs non premade, but the underlying issue is the horribly designed ranking- and MMR system.
The ranking and mmr system doesn't reflect how good you or your team is, only how many games you've played (and don't even get me started on the leaderboard rewards, where it doesn't matter if you end up as #1 or #99, you can get the same garbage rewards regardless).
Instead of wasting time with removing the option to queue together with others, ZOS should invest some time to rework the ranking and MMR system. If they're lazy they can just copy/paste what other MMO's have done, no reason to reinvent the wheel when it comes to propper ranking systems.
Removing group queue and resetting MMR is a classic band aid fix which doesn't solve the underlying issues of battlegrounds.
There is only so much a MMR system can do.
If you have a couple dozen of players in the pool, and only four of them are in a high MMR premade, what do you do? Let them sit on their hands all night? Sooner or later, you have to let them play, and then they will proceed to wipe the floor with any pug they encounter.3 -
Qbiken✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭I think it’s not bad.
In higher MMR it hardly matters, in lower MMR there are too many premades against new players and they dominate.
I've unironically never ever seen a team in low mmr games that I either knew was premade, or got the feeling they were premade (back when I used to level some PvP ranks on fresh lvl 50 characters). The majority of premades are in the high mmr tiers, not the other way around (can't speak for console but afaik console BG scene isn't really a thing compared to PC)
The problem with BG's isn't premade vs non premade, but the underlying issue is the horribly designed ranking- and MMR system.
The ranking and mmr system doesn't reflect how good you or your team is, only how many games you've played (and don't even get me started on the leaderboard rewards, where it doesn't matter if you end up as #1 or #99, you can get the same garbage rewards regardless).
Instead of wasting time with removing the option to queue together with others, ZOS should invest some time to rework the ranking and MMR system. If they're lazy they can just copy/paste what other MMO's have done, no reason to reinvent the wheel when it comes to propper ranking systems.
Removing group queue and resetting MMR is a classic band aid fix which doesn't solve the underlying issues of battlegrounds.
There is only so much a MMR system can do.
If you have a couple dozen of players in the pool, and only four of them are in a high MMR premade, what do you do? Let them sit on their hands all night? Sooner or later, you have to let them play, and then they will proceed to wipe the floor with any pug they encounter.
I definitely think there should be some kind of "backup plan" if the system fails to find a game for a bunch of high mmr players. Currently I wait around 10-15 minutes on avarage for a game that isn't a deathmatch (two days ago I spend a total of 1,5h in BG queues, with resets, before I got into a game), which is far too long if you ask me. If you can't find a game vs the same tier, the system should check for players slightly above or below your own mmr. I don't think waiting absurd lengths for a BG (especially during weekends when cyrodil isnt playable) is a fair price to pay, just because people dislike to lose.
The best would ofc be to have propper rankings/leagues etc so that BG's held some prestige, but one ca wish.....1 -
Raisin✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭For me personally it just means no more BGs. I'm not good or invested enough to really do well in them. Running with a friend just for the fun of it was the only thing really drawing me in. The fact that they were a social thing means that even a loss could be fun, and IMO it's easier to get over some of the BS happening when you're sharing it with someone.
That said, I personally don't expect BGs to cater to someone as casual about them as me, so I don't consider this a priority. Whether it's a good change or not depends more about the effect on people who really value BGs.3 -
DemonDruaga✭✭✭✭I think it's lazy, to just have one or the other.
Really lazy and disapointing.Ardor // Dunkelsicht // Pakt1 -
Mayrael✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Everybody talks about MMR and stuff... But its not the main issue of fighting against premades. I'ts that they build team as a one organism, everyone fills certain role and with voice com they can act as one. With solo queues you can't build like that, because you don't know with who you will be grouped with, so in general the safest way is to have few build options but those can be adjusted slighthly during match. Another thing is comunication. Without voice com and preparation (playing together) its harder to dump all your ults etc. at once. In general solo queue solves many issues we had to deal with when facing premades vs randoms. Good players with time will adjust and will know eachothers playstyle, knowing what to do without words, but still its not the same
IMHO we should have solo BG queue, and group queue where you can sign in with 2 or 4 players (no 3 man groups because it would be impossible to make even teams), so when we have two 2-man groups they are joined into one 4-man group. Its always a choice ... oh and obiously both queues should be separated. I'm done with this game because of ZOS pushing us into Vengeance, because they don't know how to fix Cyrodiil.4 -
TheFM✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
At the end of the day it's a group activity. It'd be one thing if we had solo and group queue but this is just counterproductive, yeah the premades were frustrating, but this solution is anon starter.2 -
Iskiab✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭I think it’s not bad.
In higher MMR it hardly matters, in lower MMR there are too many premades against new players and they dominate.
I've unironically never ever seen a team in low mmr games that I either knew was premade, or got the feeling they were premade (back when I used to level some PvP ranks on fresh lvl 50 characters). The majority of premades are in the high mmr tiers, not the other way around (can't speak for console but afaik console BG scene isn't really a thing compared to PC)
The problem with BG's isn't premade vs non premade, but the underlying issue is the horribly designed ranking- and MMR system.
The ranking and mmr system doesn't reflect how good you or your team is, only how many games you've played (and don't even get me started on the leaderboard rewards, where it doesn't matter if you end up as #1 or #99, you can get the same garbage rewards regardless).
Instead of wasting time with removing the option to queue together with others, ZOS should invest some time to rework the ranking and MMR system. If they're lazy they can just copy/paste what other MMO's have done, no reason to reinvent the wheel when it comes to propper ranking systems.
Removing group queue and resetting MMR is a classic band aid fix which doesn't solve the underlying issues of battlegrounds.
There is only so much a MMR system can do.
If you have a couple dozen of players in the pool, and only four of them are in a high MMR premade, what do you do? Let them sit on their hands all night? Sooner or later, you have to let them play, and then they will proceed to wipe the floor with any pug they encounter.
This is what I’m seeing too. When less people are queuing I’ve had games against a premade with two under CP160s on my team. They did okay, but the point is it doesn’t work.Looking for any guildies I used to play with:
Havoc Warhammer - Alair
LoC EQ2 - Mayi and Iskiab
PRX and Tabula Rasa - Rift - Iskiab
Or anyone else I used to play games with in guilds I’ve forgotten1 -
HEBREWHAMMERRR✭✭✭✭✭I think it’s great. BG already offer the most competitive platform for PvP. Making it solo based only pushes this further for individual players without punishing a high MMR solo player against premades like the current state. Im excited to get playing.5
-
SORjosh✭✭✭CleymenZero wrote: »From what I understand, matchmaking had trouble putting only premades vs premades which led to solo queue players, which are probably the majority, left at the mercy of the matchmaking system.
Now I understand how problematic a tightly organized group could be but wasn't there a compromise somewhere that could be done?
Would it be possible to limit the number of players that can queue to 2? That way, you could still queue with a buddy from time to time and wouldn't introduce too much of an imbalance?
What are your thoughts?
As a player that ques solo a majority of the time, I'm here for it. I can also see why people that play BG's in premades have taken issue with it. Ultimately, I think they need to have 2 separate ques. This way the premade doesn't get to roffle stomp solo q's and everyone should be happy.0 -
Sharee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
At the end of the day it's a group activity. It'd be one thing if we had solo and group queue but this is just counterproductive, yeah the premades were frustrating, but this solution is anon starter.
Battlegrounds are a group activity regardless of how the group was formed. So that is no argument for allowing premades.
And yes, having two separate queues would be ideal, i'm just not sure there are enough players in the pool to support both.4 -
TheFM✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
At the end of the day it's a group activity. It'd be one thing if we had solo and group queue but this is just counterproductive, yeah the premades were frustrating, but this solution is anon starter.
Battlegrounds are a group activity regardless of how the group was formed. So that is no argument for allowing premades.
And yes, having two separate queues would be ideal, i'm just not sure there are enough players in the pool to support both.
Well alienating everyone that likes having a group CERTAINLY will not do anything to increase numbers. There are the numbers, hell cyro was locked on cp and no cp till midnight yesterday on pc eu. There are the numbers, but if you dont offer us something, why should we play? Its called build it and they will come, not tear it down and hope for the best.2 -
mav1234✭✭✭✭✭Battlegrounds are a group activity regardless of how the group was formed. So that is no argument for allowing premades.
And yes, having two separate queues would be ideal, i'm just not sure there are enough players in the pool to support both.
Battlegrounds were initially advertised as a group PvP option when Morrowind released. They heavily encourage coordination with objective-based gameplay. This coordination is obviously the hallmark of organized groups/'premades.' That may not be an explicit endorsement of group queue, but hell, that is how it has been since release *and* how they were advertised. Instanced PvP in most other MMOs has some kind of group queue option, even if it precludes an entire full group from queuing.
If there is not enough people to warrant 2 queues, won't driving a bunch of the out by refusing to let them queue with friend/significant other just reduce that number even more? Perhaps allowing duos would be the middle ground here that would satisfy the most people.
Changing now to a solo queue only with no plan moving forward - or at least none communicated to us - is frustrating and has already driven 3 of the new people I recruited to the game to quitting. if this goes live with no communication for future plans, I anticipate others will follow them out because no CP cyrodil is just dead outside prime time and convincing people at lower CPs to try CP PvP is... well, hell, I don't want to touch CP pvp either.Edited by mav1234 on February 10, 2020 6:44PM3 -
HowlKimchi✭✭✭✭✭
✭It's good for some people, bad for others.
They need a team queue. So two separate queues. When I'm solo I'll like the change, when I want some instant action with guild mates I'll miss it.
Add both, then go mad and add a team leaderboard / weekly etc. Make it competitive.
This so much. If BGs had a weekly/monthly leaderboard (MMR system) with decent rewards i'd go back to ESO fully. I love ESO's combat and buildcrafting but I hate how casual the PVP is.
Make BGs interesting and more rewarding so there are more people playing it making it easier to matchmake. But then again ZoS has no reason to do this since ESO is a casual mmo and doing this would have literally no effect on their moneymaking.Edited by HowlKimchi on February 10, 2020 6:47PM2 -
mav1234✭✭✭✭✭It's good for some people, bad for others.
They need a team queue. So two separate queues. When I'm solo I'll like the change, when I want some instant action with guild mates I'll miss it.
Add both, then go mad and add a team leaderboard / weekly etc. Make it competitive.
This so much. If BGs had a weekly/monthly leaderboard (MMR system) with decent rewards i'd go back to ESO fully. I love ESO's combat and buildcrafting but I hate how casual the PVP is.
I actually think adding a group queue (perhaps allowing solo queues into it if they are OK with being put vs premades), with good rewards, is more likely to bring more people back, too.
that's why I've advocated for:
solo/duo queue for current 'leaderboard'/daily rewards
group-allowed queue for a new competitive leaderboard (weekly/monthly) with good rewards.0 -
Aedrion✭✭✭✭✭This will change nothing. Noobs will still get crushed by better players and continue complaining.
This will only destroy fun for small-scale groups that tire of Cyro lag and log BG's. Instead, now they'll log off. I know I will.
Whoever designed this change either didn't consider the many alternatives or didn't care. I don't know which is worse.
5 -
oxygen_thief✭✭✭✭✭
✭think they need to have 2 separate ques. This way the premade doesn't get to roffle stomp solo q's and everyone should be happy.
you are right but not every one would be happy because a lot of premades are premade to stomp pugs. they dont need competition they just farm. you can meet such guys even in below 50 bgs1 -
Sharee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭If there is not enough people to warrant 2 queues, won't driving a bunch of the out by refusing to let them queue with friend/significant other just reduce that number even more? Perhaps allowing duos would be the middle ground here that would satisfy the most people.
That depends on whether there are more players who will now stop playing due to not being able to do a premade than the number of players who weren't playing before because premades were a thing.
Personally, i believe the net result will be more players (if the number of premade fans were that big, we wouldn't be in this mess in the firstplace because the group finder would find enough of them to put against each other, not against PUGs)
But yes, allowing duos does sound like a good compromise, as long as the system makes sure any duos queueing will be put against each other, not next to each other (it should be easier to achieve than doing the same with full groups).
1 -
mav1234✭✭✭✭✭If there is not enough people to warrant 2 queues, won't driving a bunch of the out by refusing to let them queue with friend/significant other just reduce that number even more? Perhaps allowing duos would be the middle ground here that would satisfy the most people.
That depends on whether there are more players who will now stop playing due to not being able to do a premade than the number of players who weren't playing before because premades were a thing.
Personally, i believe the net result will be more players (if the number of premade fans were that big, we wouldn't be in this mess in the firstplace because the group finder would find enough of them to put against each other, not against PUGs)
But yes, allowing duos does sound like a good compromise, as long as the system makes sure any duos queueing will be put against each other, not next to each other (it should be easier to achieve than doing the same with full groups).
Over the long term, I think what will happen is that people will realize a lot of their losses were to total RNG of having the other team have a healer and them not. They assume then it is a premade they are fighting, blame their loss on it, etc. This time they'll be confronted with the fact that the game's RNG of placing members together meant they didn't get a healer, and they got stomped for it.
I've seen this countless time on streams where a player / viewer assumes that there are premades in a game, only to have it become abundantly clear that everyone was solo queuing... that doesn't lessen the frustration, because ultimately, there is a problem with healing and tankiness in this game and no amount of removing groups will get rid of that.3 -
I'm completely done with Battlegrounds now.
Literally my favorite thing in game. I think im saddened far more than I should be, this is just a game after all. It was just my go too outlet for a PVP fix.
Even though I mostly play solo, losing the occasional times I get to play with a friend or my fiance makes it not worth sticking around for. I will not play in separate matches while we're both sitting next to each other, We got into ESO because its an MMO and MMO's are designed around letting people play with their friends.
It really really saddens be that I literally have to just play a different game now for a huge portion of time I would otherwise have spent in ESO..
This decision was in very poor taste and has really made rethink the long term plan here. Like ESO was an all in one game IMO, I could get every type of gaming experience I wanted from it, now.. I can't.. It's that simple.
This is an MMO and a solo only queue for a group activity is really really strange. Its honestly kinda game breaking for me, with sucks beyond belief. I love ESO..
5 -
Sharee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Over the long term, I think what will happen is that people will realize a lot of their losses were to total RNG of having the other team have a healer and them not. They assume then it is a premade they are fighting, blame their loss on it, etc. This time they'll be confronted with the fact that the game's RNG of placing members together meant they didn't get a healer, and they got stomped for it.
Maybe so, but will that realization make them stop playing? Why should it?I've seen this countless time on streams where a player / viewer assumes that there are premades in a game, only to have it become abundantly clear that everyone was solo queuing... that doesn't lessen the frustration, because ultimately, there is a problem with healing and tankiness in this game and no amount of removing groups will get rid of that.
Having the certainty that the enemy team has a good composition just because they got lucky, and knowing next match that great healer could be on your side instead of always having to face him as an enemy - that absolutely *does* lessen the frustration.3 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
At the end of the day it's a group activity. It'd be one thing if we had solo and group queue but this is just counterproductive, yeah the premades were frustrating, but this solution is anon starter.
Battlegrounds are a group activity regardless of how the group was formed. So that is no argument for allowing premades.
And yes, having two separate queues would be ideal, i'm just not sure there are enough players in the pool to support both.
You are correct that BGs are a group activity regardless of how the group is formed. However, there are two aspects you are ignoring.
First, Developing relationships in game and playing the game with those people goes a long way to players getting more enjoyment, improving their game play and sticking with the game longer. Zos is tossing that out.
With tossing that out as far as BGs are concerned we are lowering the bar and forcing you to play with who we say you will play with. Good player will be paired with very bad players. We already see what happens when average players get paired with not so good players in dungeons via the AF. Now we will have the good players that avoid the GF altogether getting paird with the average and not so good players. Imagine the toxicity in some of those matches.
Fortunately this is just an experiment. Hopefully Zos does not make their choice off sever performance alone, that they take note of the expected lowering of the bar of competition this will bring and how it is not such a good idea in the long run.3