Maintenance for the week of February 23:
· [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – February 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – February 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 17:00 UTC (12:00PM EST)
· [COMPLETE] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – February 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – February 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – February 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 17:00 UTC (12:00PM EST)
· [COMPLETE] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – February 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
Elder Solo Scrolls Massive Single Player
-
DrCanabis✭✭pauld1_ESO wrote: »Taking away group queues from battlegrounds defeats the purpose of an MMO. Casual players are still getting steamrolled in BGs even without premades. It fixed nothing. Only thing it did was divide the community. I prefer small scale PvP battles over large scale zerging. Being able to queue in BGs with friends from different alliances is what really brought people together. Every other MMO has the ability to queue with friends. People have quit over this change. And I notice when I queue. Takes a while to find a match and when I do find one a lot of times we don't have 4 people and they start the match anyways. The matchmaking is also just as unbalanced without premades. You could be in a team of 4 with no healer while an opposing team has 2 max geared spamjabplars. ESO turning into a single player game. This will kill the community.
The only way I would support this is if you only went up against other premades. Sadly this is not what the pro-premade crowd wants though, they want easy facerolls.....and you all know it.
One thing in the game being solo queued does not make it a single player game. Plenty of other group content.
And as I said before. Those players that were getting steamrolled and blamed it on premades, they're still getting steamrolled to this day. [snip]
[edited for baiting]Edited by ZOS_Lunar on August 26, 2020 1:10PM4 -
Augustus67✭✭✭MurderMostFoul wrote: »The removal of premades wasn't about stopping steamrolls. It was about preventing one group from steamrolling everyone else, game after game.
In high mmr, while groups could queue, it was not uncommon to sit for a BG session as a solo, and have 50% or more of your games be against the same, skilled premade. It was not fun to play 8 games and know at the start of 5 of them that you have almost no chance.
Now, everyone one starts every (full) match on much more equal footing. Steamrolls still happen, but now they can happen to anyone.
But there should be a way to play with friends. I think the most effective, fair way to do this is to allow solos and duos to queue.
And guess what? They're still getting steamrolled. What's the excuse now?
So would having 2 queues solve your problem? 1 for solo players and a different one for duos or groups.
I can get behind the 2 queue system.Most players want to go back to a 1 queue for groups and solos because they miss steamrolling pugs.0 -
soulferin✭✭✭Guys just admit that BGs are stupid and it's not worth to argue about them. There is completely no point to team up for them. Most ppl don't understand what's going on in pvp in general and blame sets/lags/other ppl it's endless and pointless discussion.
Edit: I forgot - it can't kill the community there is no real community.Edited by soulferin on August 24, 2020 6:26PM7 -
DrCanabis✭✭zergbase_ESO wrote: »Kiralyn2000 wrote: »Taking away group queues from battlegrounds defeats the purpose of an MMO.
Couple thoughts:
1. MMOs existed, in very multiplayer ways, before there were such things as "queues".
2. There's a lot more to the game than Battlegrounds, so the idea "Can't queue for BGs with friends = not an MMO / might as well be singleplayer", is a bit over the top.
Is it annoying that you can't do this? Sure (well, I presume so - I've got no friends, and I don't pvp at all
). But "MMO" and "Multiplayer" are a heck of a lot larger than Queueing For BGs With Friends.
Name another popular MMO that doesn't allow you to queue with friends. I'll wait.....
Honestly they need do what Blizzard does. If two people queue they are not put in a bg less there is another two people queueing to put them on other teams to level playing field. When 5 man queues it wont place them into BG till there is another 5 man. Or they can do only Premade vs Premade. I think the group queue removal was more of ZoS not wanting to add or fix it to be fair.
This coming from someone that barely pvps or doesn't care for it. There is a fix or solution just ZoS does not want spend money developing it.
You hit the nail on the head. I think ZoS would rather act like they fixed the matchmaking rather than actually listen. Matchmaking is still bad. Not only will it start a match with just 2 people on your team including yourself. You can have a full team but no healer and an opposing team has 2 templars. They took away premades and left matchmaking broken. Now less people to BGs0 -
DrCanabis✭✭alanmatillab16_ESO wrote: »alanmatillab16_ESO wrote: »Donny_Vito wrote: »Kiralyn2000 wrote: »
But if it's normal for an MMO to remove something that makes it an MMO, there should be other MMOs that also don't allow group queues. Still waiting....
You can Group Queue into Cyrodiil, so yes ESO has Group Queing for PvP. You can stop waiting now.
You need more than 4 people to queue for Cyrodil. If you didn't know, Cyrodil is just a zergfest. I have no interest in being in a zerg guild. Can you name another MMO that doesn't allow group queues though? I'll wait...
Using Cyrodil as an excuse still doesn't change the FACT group queues have been removed. Nice try though.
So basically you are just going to come up with some excuse if someone does name a game where you can't queue with friends with the backup plan of "I said popular mmo that one doesn't count."
FYI, being able to queue with 4 or 5 friends doesn't make it an mmo either.
What makes it an MMO is being able to queue with 1-3 friends with other online players. Still waiting on the name of that MMO that doesn't allow group queues....
So you consider COD or BF an mmo then? that explains a lot
So you can't name another MMO that does what ZoS does and remove group queues? Wonder why....2 -
DrCanabis✭✭pauld1_ESO wrote: »Taking away group queues from battlegrounds defeats the purpose of an MMO. Casual players are still getting steamrolled in BGs even without premades. It fixed nothing. Only thing it did was divide the community. I prefer small scale PvP battles over large scale zerging. Being able to queue in BGs with friends from different alliances is what really brought people together. Every other MMO has the ability to queue with friends. People have quit over this change. And I notice when I queue. Takes a while to find a match and when I do find one a lot of times we don't have 4 people and they start the match anyways. The matchmaking is also just as unbalanced without premades. You could be in a team of 4 with no healer while an opposing team has 2 max geared spamjabplars. ESO turning into a single player game. This will kill the community.
The only way I would support this is if you only went up against other premades. Sadly this is not what the pro-premade crowd wants though, they want easy facerolls.....and you all know it.
One thing in the game being solo queued does not make it a single player game. Plenty of other group content.
or you can get your guild mates and do the same thing? Ever thought of that? I queued solo and didn't complain when my team got steamrolled by premades. It's part of an MMO1 -
DrCanabis✭✭Augustus67 wrote: »MurderMostFoul wrote: »The removal of premades wasn't about stopping steamrolls. It was about preventing one group from steamrolling everyone else, game after game.
In high mmr, while groups could queue, it was not uncommon to sit for a BG session as a solo, and have 50% or more of your games be against the same, skilled premade. It was not fun to play 8 games and know at the start of 5 of them that you have almost no chance.
Now, everyone one starts every (full) match on much more equal footing. Steamrolls still happen, but now they can happen to anyone.
But there should be a way to play with friends. I think the most effective, fair way to do this is to allow solos and duos to queue.
And guess what? They're still getting steamrolled. What's the excuse now?
So would having 2 queues solve your problem? 1 for solo players and a different one for duos or groups.
I can get behind the 2 queue system.Most players want to go back to a 1 queue for groups and solos because they miss steamrolling pugs.
not enough players for both. Those players are still getting steamrolled in BGs even without premades. So I don't think premades was the problem.1 -
MurderMostFoul✭✭✭✭✭
✭MurderMostFoul wrote: »The removal of premades wasn't about stopping steamrolls. It was about preventing one group from steamrolling everyone else, game after game.
In high mmr, while groups could queue, it was not uncommon to sit for a BG session as a solo, and have 50% or more of your games be against the same, skilled premade. It was not fun to play 8 games and know at the start of 5 of them that you have almost no chance.
Now, everyone one starts every (full) match on much more equal footing. Steamrolls still happen, but now they can happen to anyone.
But there should be a way to play with friends. I think the most effective, fair way to do this is to allow solos and duos to queue.MurderMostFoul wrote: »The removal of premades wasn't about stopping steamrolls. It was about preventing one group from steamrolling everyone else, game after game.
In high mmr, while groups could queue, it was not uncommon to sit for a BG session as a solo, and have 50% or more of your games be against the same, skilled premade. It was not fun to play 8 games and know at the start of 5 of them that you have almost no chance.
Now, everyone one starts every (full) match on much more equal footing. Steamrolls still happen, but now they can happen to anyone.
But there should be a way to play with friends. I think the most effective, fair way to do this is to allow solos and duos to queue.
And guess what? They're still getting steamrolled. What's the excuse now?
@DrCanabis
I'm sorry, I'm not following you here.
I say: "Steamrolls still happen, but now they can happen to anyone."
You say: "And guess what? They're still getting steamrolled."
This seems like a non sequitur.
Then you say: "What's the excuse now?"
Are you saying what's my excuse? For what?
I'd like to respond, but I'm having a hard time making sense of your post.“There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.”8 -
MrGhosty✭✭✭✭✭I don't like they took away the ability for my wife and I to queue for bgs together. We enjoyed the more tightly focused pvp without ten minute horse rides only to be stun locked and wipe before getting to the fight. I would also like them to come up with a way for that to come back.
All that said, it's just silly to declare something is "not an mmo" simply because they changed queues. GW2 limits players to the competitive queue, I'm not sure if the count is the same or not as I left that game to come back to ESO. Their solution there is a free for all queue that lets any party size join while the more competitive playlist limits players for seasonal rankings. TBH I think setting up two queues like that would be the best solution but I don't know that there are enough players or staff to support such a move.
If people constantly default to being hyperbolic when expressing ideas or frustrations with the game, that opinion is less likely to be taken seriously as the core of the argument "not an mmo" is easily dismissed. If one part of the argument is easily knocked down, folk are less likely to consider the rest."It is a time of strife and unrest. Armies of revenants and dark spirits manifest in every corner of Tamriel. Winters grow colder and crops fail. Mystics are plagued by nightmares and portents of doom."7 -
MurderMostFoul✭✭✭✭✭
✭I don't like they took away the ability for my wife and I to queue for bgs together. We enjoyed the more tightly focused pvp without ten minute horse rides only to be stun locked and wipe before getting to the fight. I would also like them to come up with a way for that to come back.
All that said, it's just silly to declare something is "not an mmo" simply because they changed queues. GW2 limits players to the competitive queue, I'm not sure if the count is the same or not as I left that game to come back to ESO. Their solution there is a free for all queue that lets any party size join while the more competitive playlist limits players for seasonal rankings. TBH I think setting up two queues like that would be the best solution but I don't know that there are enough players or staff to support such a move.
If people constantly default to being hyperbolic when expressing ideas or frustrations with the game, that opinion is less likely to be taken seriously as the core of the argument "not an mmo" is easily dismissed. If one part of the argument is easily knocked down, folk are less likely to consider the rest.
Your situation is a perfect example as to why ZOS should allow duos to queue along with solos. It's a good compromise without player base splitting, queue time lengthening, or the game breaking power imbalance of 4 man premades.Edited by MurderMostFoul on August 25, 2020 11:16AM“There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.”1 -
Pr0Skygon✭✭✭✭✭Just think like this: Cyrodill is for group PvP, BG is for solo PvP. We've once had group BGs, and it was a nightmare for anyone who wasn't 4 stacking. You might get steamrolled now, but it was 10 times worse before, and you have no one else to blame but your own lack of skills (maybe probably the server).0 -
TequilaFire✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Cyrodiil is group PvP for now, but they are attacking that now too.
Edited by TequilaFire on August 24, 2020 8:45PM3 -
SpiderKnight✭✭✭✭✭
✭Donny_Vito wrote: »Kiralyn2000 wrote: »
But if it's normal for an MMO to remove something that makes it an MMO, there should be other MMOs that also don't allow group queues. Still waiting....
You can Group Queue into Cyrodiil, so yes ESO has Group Queing for PvP. You can stop waiting now.
You need more than 4 people to queue for Cyrodil. If you didn't know, Cyrodil is just a zergfest. I have no interest in being in a zerg guild. Can you name another MMO that doesn't allow group queues though? I'll wait...
Using Cyrodil as an excuse still doesn't change the FACT group queues have been removed. Nice try though.
No you don't, I see plenty of 2-4 man cheese spammers taking down large groups of players all the time. Why don't you and your groupies try it out there? That way you won't lose another BG match-that's what this and all the other posts are about isn't it? Not being able to have your 3 buddies help you kill a player.Edited by SpiderKnight on August 25, 2020 1:16AM6 -
SeaGtGruff✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭One of the Twitch streamers I watch said you can often get into a battleground with friends if you all queue at the same time.I've fought mudcrabs more fearsome than me!1 -
Tandor✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Kiralyn2000 wrote: »
But if it's normal for an MMO to remove something that makes it an MMO, there should be other MMOs that also don't allow group queues. Still waiting....
A MMO is an online game in which there are many players in the game at the same time. ESO meets that definition regardless of whether you queue with friends, queue with randoms, or don't even queue at all. There are currently 30,080 people in the game just through Steam alone. That's what makes it a MMO, not whether you can play Battlegrounds the way you want to play them.9 -
Wandering_Immigrant✭✭✭✭I would like a separate queue for premades. It could even be done as a ranked weekly campaign kind of thing.
Team leader could assign one of their guilds to register their team with. At the end of the week the guilds with the most points could win a special temporary furnishing to place in their guild halls. A useable wayshrine, a buffet table with infinite food buffs, things like that. Runners up could get more common things like transmute station or attainable mundus stones or crafting stations. Or maybe they could add a trader to Imperial City that goes to the winning guild. Every week the prizes would be removed from the previous winner and given to the new winner.
But if it has to be one or the other I think solo queue makes more sense. BGs to me are the casual PvPer's PvP mode where you get a lot of people still learning or trying out trying new builds.
If you just want to small-scale go to IC, people don't call it open world BG for nothing.1 -
Galwylin✭✭✭✭✭I'd like to point out the MMO stands for Massive multiplayer online. I don't think four people can be considered massive.3 -
barney2525✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Kiralyn2000 wrote: »
But if it's normal for an MMO to remove something that makes it an MMO, there should be other MMOs that also don't allow group queues. Still waiting....
4 players does not seem to be a particularly "massive" number to me. What you asked for originally is players from all alliances to be allowed to play on the same side. Which MMOs do that? I know you can't do that in Archeage. East is East and West is West and never the twain shall work side by side.
IMHO
0 -
idk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Kiralyn2000 wrote: »Taking away group queues from battlegrounds defeats the purpose of an MMO.
Couple thoughts:
1. MMOs existed, in very multiplayer ways, before there were such things as "queues".
@Kiralyn2000 maybe you can shed some light on how someone could join in on an ESO BG without using a queue. That would be interesting to know as I expect this comment above has some relevance to our ESO BG queues.1 -
kargen27✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Taking away group queues from battlegrounds defeats the purpose of an MMO. Casual players are still getting steamrolled in BGs even without premades. It fixed nothing. Only thing it did was divide the community. I prefer small scale PvP battles over large scale zerging. Being able to queue in BGs with friends from different alliances is what really brought people together. Every other MMO has the ability to queue with friends. People have quit over this change. And I notice when I queue. Takes a while to find a match and when I do find one a lot of times we don't have 4 people and they start the match anyways. The matchmaking is also just as unbalanced without premades. You could be in a team of 4 with no healer while an opposing team has 2 max geared spamjabplars. ESO turning into a single player game. This will kill the community.
If the queue works right in battlegrounds you have three teams of four. Doesn't matter if you can queue as groups or have to queue as solo you still end up with 12 people. The change has no effect on the MMO aspect of the game. Maybe a case could be made for removing one of the socializing aspects of the game?and then the parrot said, "must be the water mines green too."0 -
kaithuzar✭✭✭✭✭
✭Daemons_Bane wrote: »dinokstrunz wrote: »For people who heavily invest in PvP in this game, solo queue only BGs are terrible. Cyrodiil is too laggy to find any enjoyment and IC is empty most of the time. Battlegrounds need group or some kind of duo queue system back big time. It's still confusing to why the status of allowing singles only queue on such a feature remains considering it's widely disliked and mocked by those from the PvP community.
Well I would imagine it has something to do with the amount of complaining players being a lot larger than the amount of players wanting to keep it? Or maybe the idea that it really was a flawed system that gave huge advantages to a small group of players, allowing them to steamroll a very very large number of players?
You want a flawed system, how about the idea of 3 factions fighting....Member of:
Fantasia - osh kosh b-josh
Just Chill - Crown's house
GoldCloaks - Durruthy test server penga
Small Meme Guild - Mano's house
Former member of:
Legend - Siffer fan boy club
TKO (tamriel knight's order) - free bks
Deviance - Leonard's senche tiger
Purple - hamNchz is my hero
Eight Divines - myrlifax stop playing final fantasy
WKB (we kill bosses) - turd where you go?
Arcance Council - Klytz Kommander
World Boss - Mike & Chewy gone EP
M12 (majestic twelve) - cult of the loli zerg0 -
kaithuzar✭✭✭✭✭
✭At least on CONSOLE there are VOICE COMMS for your group, PC doesn't get that.
GG, who would've thought that actual verbal communication with your teammates is something people would want!?!?!
And NO ZOS, we don't want your broken voice chat on PC when we already have Discord, Teamspeak, ventrillo, zoom, webex, teams, skype, etc.. etc....Member of:
Fantasia - osh kosh b-josh
Just Chill - Crown's house
GoldCloaks - Durruthy test server penga
Small Meme Guild - Mano's house
Former member of:
Legend - Siffer fan boy club
TKO (tamriel knight's order) - free bks
Deviance - Leonard's senche tiger
Purple - hamNchz is my hero
Eight Divines - myrlifax stop playing final fantasy
WKB (we kill bosses) - turd where you go?
Arcance Council - Klytz Kommander
World Boss - Mike & Chewy gone EP
M12 (majestic twelve) - cult of the loli zerg1 -
Daemons_Bane✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Daemons_Bane wrote: »dinokstrunz wrote: »For people who heavily invest in PvP in this game, solo queue only BGs are terrible. Cyrodiil is too laggy to find any enjoyment and IC is empty most of the time. Battlegrounds need group or some kind of duo queue system back big time. It's still confusing to why the status of allowing singles only queue on such a feature remains considering it's widely disliked and mocked by those from the PvP community.
Well I would imagine it has something to do with the amount of complaining players being a lot larger than the amount of players wanting to keep it? Or maybe the idea that it really was a flawed system that gave huge advantages to a small group of players, allowing them to steamroll a very very large number of players?
You want a flawed system, how about the idea of 3 factions fighting....
I prefer the system as it is now, over what we had before2 -
Firstmep✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭We need a lot of improvements:
-Better rewards to attract more players
-more robust matchmaking, that doesn't just consider your number of matches
-separate solo/group queues
-fixes to long standing issues such as games starting with uneven numbers
0 -
Minyassa✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭It is beyond absurd that the response to people being unwilling to group and then complaining about people who *were* willing to group was to forbid anyone to group. "I don't feel like putting in the effort to do X so nobody else should get to have the benefits that come with that work." Pretty much guarantees that the biggest fans of the game's team sport meant for teams are people who hate teamwork. Just really a foolish way to deal with it, and has chased off a LOT of people who loved BGs as a team sport. There was so much talk of people "stomping" others as premades, and yet all of my duo friends who play with spouses reported getting beaten regularly but they didn't care because they were having fun with their significant other, or their best friend, or their guildies, or whatever. So the ONE PvP thing in this game that was tailor-made for close interpersonal socializing, the PvP version of 4-man dungeons, was destroyed for close interpersonal socializing because of the people who didn't want to bother getting a friend. That's the saddest possible outcome for a MMO.4 -
Minyassa✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Just think like this: Cyrodill is for group PvP, BG is for solo PvP. We've once had group BGs, and it was a nightmare for anyone who wasn't 4 stacking. You might get steamrolled now, but it was 10 times worse before, and you have no one else to blame but your own lack of skills (maybe probably the server).
BGs is a structured game with set teams and goals, meant to take some strategy and teamwork, also meant to be on a smaller and more intimate level. If BGs were meant to be solo they would not have *teams*, period. There's already a solo PvP feature--it's called "dueling". That's for soloing. BGs are for teams. Cyrodiil is for bigger teams, or troops, and it's somewhat of a free-for-all considering that anyone can join or leave at any time, team size is variable or nonexistent, and "matches" take longer.3 -
Galwylin✭✭✭✭✭The ideal situation to me has always been BGs would be formed two ways. Completely solo ques and only group ques with never mixing the two. You would have two distinct ques to choose from with one requiring a group to enter. That way the solo player doesn't face down the pre-made. Now they might not have done this because there just aren't enough people doing battlegrounds. Completely forbidden group ques is probably them hoping to save the complaints that would come in of ques taking too long. Its not a great solution but probably the best one they could have made. I don't see why a group would want to face four solo players that probably work together as well as oil and water. I like to think that. But really I think pre-made would probably like to be the only group in the entire BG. Some like a challenge but taking the least resistance has long been a thing in games.0
-
MurderMostFoul✭✭✭✭✭
✭It is beyond absurd that the response to people being unwilling to group and then complaining about people who *were* willing to group was to forbid anyone to group. "I don't feel like putting in the effort to do X so nobody else should get to have the benefits that come with that work." Pretty much guarantees that the biggest fans of the game's team sport meant for teams are people who hate teamwork. Just really a foolish way to deal with it, and has chased off a LOT of people who loved BGs as a team sport. There was so much talk of people "stomping" others as premades, and yet all of my duo friends who play with spouses reported getting beaten regularly but they didn't care because they were having fun with their significant other, or their best friend, or their guildies, or whatever. So the ONE PvP thing in this game that was tailor-made for close interpersonal socializing, the PvP version of 4-man dungeons, was destroyed for close interpersonal socializing because of the people who didn't want to bother getting a friend. That's the saddest possible outcome for a MMO.
The problem is that ESO is poorly balanced when it comes to premade teams. The way ESO's combat works, an organized premade will have an unjustifiably huge advantage over non-premades. Such a power disparity makes matches unfun for 2/3 of the participants. Most other games that allow premades versus solos don't carry such a huge power gap between solos and premades.
That being said, the power disparity introduced by duos in nowhere near as great. Solos would be at a slight disadvantage against solos+duo, but they would still have a good shot at victory. In order to permit social play, ZOS should allow solos and duos to queue.“There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.”2 -
_adhyffbjjjf12✭✭✭✭✭Kiralyn2000 wrote: »Taking away group queues from battlegrounds defeats the purpose of an MMO.
Couple thoughts:
1. MMOs existed, in very multiplayer ways, before there were such things as "queues".
2. There's a lot more to the game than Battlegrounds, so the idea "Can't queue for BGs with friends = not an MMO / might as well be singleplayer", is a bit over the top.
Is it annoying that you can't do this? Sure (well, I presume so - I've got no friends, and I don't pvp at all ). But "MMO" and "Multiplayer" are a heck of a lot larger than Queueing For BGs With Friends.
Name another popular MMO that doesn't allow you to queue with friends. I'll wait.....
Guild Wars 2 for the exact same reason, a PUG group versus a pre-made = slaughter for the PUG. Splitting the player base is detrimental to all unless queue times are not impacted for all BG types, and obviously that's not the case or they would have done it.
Edited by _adhyffbjjjf12 on August 26, 2020 1:13PM0
This discussion has been closed.