The Gold Road Chapter – which includes the Scribing system – and Update 42 is now available to test on the PTS! You can read the latest patch notes here: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/656454/
Maintenance for the week of April 22:
• [COMPLETE] PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – April 22, 4:00AM EDT (08:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC)
• Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – April 24, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – April 24, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – April 22, 4:00AM EDT (08:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC)
• Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – April 24, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – April 24, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
The maintenance is complete, and the PTS is now back online and patch 10.0.1 is available.
Add a separate Deathmatch queue for Battlegrounds!
-
Eevee_42✭✭✭✭“Play how you want.” Unless you’re someone who plays battlegrounds...
Why don’t we have the freedom of choice here? This is a very simple request, it’s time to bring it back. I keep seeing this discussion pop up continuously over the past year, and radio silence for ZOS. Not a single word of acknowledgment. It’s no surprise that players are leaving in droves at this point.
Who’s ready for their next capture the relic game that ends in 3 minutes after hoping for some actual pvp?6 -
propertyOfUndefined✭✭✭✭✭I am in favor of eliminating the solo queue and bringing back the match type selection. Note that I never queue with a partner or group. I just think the system worked better before. The only advantage to the way things are these days is I never get falsely accused (in hateful tells) of running premades anymore.3 -
Amottica✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭xylena_lazarow wrote: »
There are a lot of purists who don't consider objectives to be "PvP" and will solely focus on player kills regardless of the game mode. This leads to a lot of frustration for both objective players and deathmatchers alike.I think those truly interested in PvP will not care about which match they get.
But it is PvP, purely and truly. Objective-based PvP is a player vs player competition by definition.0 -
Skoomah✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Why is there a segment of the player population that is against allowing people the choice to queue for what they want? What are you so afraid of?6 -
Amottica✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Why is there a segment of the player population that is against allowing people the choice to queue for what they want? What are you so afraid of?
I fear nothing. I seriously doubt anyone else is trembling in fear. I do respect the choice Zenimax made in keeping queues lengths palatable and with that, I prefer having the choice to queue solo or as a group over choosing a specific type of match.2 -
Arcanasx✭✭✭✭✭Why is there a segment of the player population that is against allowing people the choice to queue for what they want? What are you so afraid of?
I fear nothing. I seriously doubt anyone else is trembling in fear. I do respect the choice Zenimax made in keeping queues lengths palatable and with that, I prefer having the choice to queue solo or as a group over choosing a specific type of match.
I'm pretty sure the queue times for people choosing DM wouldn't be too bad; in fact it would bring back players who have currently stopped playing BG's because they can no longer choose DM. Its the people who prefer objective modes who would have to wait longer because back then when you were able to choose what match type you wanted, DM was by far the most popular mode, and queue times for specifically choosing objective modes took way longer than DM.6 -
Amottica✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Why is there a segment of the player population that is against allowing people the choice to queue for what they want? What are you so afraid of?
I fear nothing. I seriously doubt anyone else is trembling in fear. I do respect the choice Zenimax made in keeping queues lengths palatable and with that, I prefer having the choice to queue solo or as a group over choosing a specific type of match.
I'm pretty sure the queue times for people choosing DM wouldn't be too bad; in fact it would bring back players who have currently stopped playing BG's because they can no longer choose DM. Its the people who prefer objective modes who would have to wait longer because back then when you were able to choose what match type you wanted, DM was by far the most popular mode, and queue times for specifically choosing objective modes took way longer than DM.
We can speculate about how many players may have left the game because they cannot queue for DM only, but we are merely speculating if we are talking more than just the small circle we run with. Further, it would be the players who are interested in mixing it up, not being selective, that would be filling up the groups for DM queues. As such they would not be doing random as they chose. As such the current design is superior.
Further, I am going to lean on Zenimax for queue time projections as they have the real information to base their decisions on.1 -
exeeter702✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭TheEndBringer wrote: »exeeter702 wrote: »TheEndBringer wrote: »TheEndBringer wrote: »Important to note I'm talking about the RANDOM QUEUE. You have to have a random queue.
Bro what? I think you're confused. W/e you're talking about is not necessary, you're just clogging up the conversation. If the system was reverted to what we previously had and players could choose their most preferred game mode(s), then the Random Queue just fills games that need filling when other people are choosing their mode. It wouldn't put 12 Random queuers into an actual "random match".TheEndBringer wrote: »Then yes, let people manually choose from those three just like you used to.
This is all we need to know. Thanks for your support.
The random queue is rubbish right now specifically because of the percentages. So yes, I suggested a solution in a thread about BGs which also couple let people select modes.
It was a common understanding that this thread was specifically talking about having a specific deathmatch queue option, which by the nature of the question, completely omits it from random queue.
Those that want to grind out DM dont actually care about getting a game mode they dont want to play for the random queue because its random and that is the deal. The issue is explicitly about having the choice for those that simply want to BG and are not just in it for the random queue bonus. Trying to come up with a balanced solution for an even distribution of game modes is wasted energy in a discussion about wanting specfic game mode choice returned.
You are suggesting that random queue will be the only option and that a compromise should be made to make the game mode selection "fair". Which is essentially dismissing the original point of the thread.
I say it again, leave the random queue alone. It's not rrubbish. Its random. Give player choice back in terms of game mode and let the random queue populate naturally. Random queue will be deathmatch 9 times out of 10. And the majority of those participating in battlegrounds will be happy. Those that are in the minority and want to play objective mode, get to deal with one DM a day for their daily bonus and then get to sit in long queues for their capture the flag nonsense.
People have the audacity to suggest zos artificially inflate unpopular game modes by forcing random on everyone and then, in your case, try to come up with some kind of match making formula that causes the system to have an equal level of game modes pop so everyone is forced to be only mildly happy.
I wont get political here but I'll let you think about the comparison that could be made with certain types of government :wink
You can have both a random queue AND a choice in game modes JUST like it used to be. This isn't an either/or situation. You have to have a random queue for the daily XP and having a random queue benefits the system.
This may come to a shock to some but there are people who prefer to random queue.
Meanwhile you can also let people also choose between the same game modes.
I really don't see what the big deal is. There will always be a random queue so it's important to talk about having one while also letting people choose. Again, just like it used to be.
Read what was said again please. You are missing the point entirely.1 -
Skoomah✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Why is there a segment of the player population that is against allowing people the choice to queue for what they want? What are you so afraid of?
I fear nothing. I seriously doubt anyone else is trembling in fear. I do respect the choice Zenimax made in keeping queues lengths palatable and with that, I prefer having the choice to queue solo or as a group over choosing a specific type of match.
I'm pretty sure the queue times for people choosing DM wouldn't be too bad; in fact it would bring back players who have currently stopped playing BG's because they can no longer choose DM. Its the people who prefer objective modes who would have to wait longer because back then when you were able to choose what match type you wanted, DM was by far the most popular mode, and queue times for specifically choosing objective modes took way longer than DM.
We can speculate about how many players may have left the game because they cannot queue for DM only, but we are merely speculating if we are talking more than just the small circle we run with. Further, it would be the players who are interested in mixing it up, not being selective, that would be filling up the groups for DM queues. As such they would not be doing random as they chose. As such the current design is superior.
Further, I am going to lean on Zenimax for queue time projections as they have the real information to base their decisions on.
Still not making any sense to me...2 -
Amottica✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Why is there a segment of the player population that is against allowing people the choice to queue for what they want? What are you so afraid of?
I fear nothing. I seriously doubt anyone else is trembling in fear. I do respect the choice Zenimax made in keeping queues lengths palatable and with that, I prefer having the choice to queue solo or as a group over choosing a specific type of match.
I'm pretty sure the queue times for people choosing DM wouldn't be too bad; in fact it would bring back players who have currently stopped playing BG's because they can no longer choose DM. Its the people who prefer objective modes who would have to wait longer because back then when you were able to choose what match type you wanted, DM was by far the most popular mode, and queue times for specifically choosing objective modes took way longer than DM.
We can speculate about how many players may have left the game because they cannot queue for DM only, but we are merely speculating if we are talking more than just the small circle we run with. Further, it would be the players who are interested in mixing it up, not being selective, that would be filling up the groups for DM queues. As such they would not be doing random as they chose. As such the current design is superior.
Further, I am going to lean on Zenimax for queue time projections as they have the real information to base their decisions on.
Still not making any sense to me...
I respect that since my comments do run contrary to the suggestion and use some solid reasoning.
Regardless, I have nothing else to add. Have a good day.0 -
Arcanasx✭✭✭✭✭Why is there a segment of the player population that is against allowing people the choice to queue for what they want? What are you so afraid of?
I fear nothing. I seriously doubt anyone else is trembling in fear. I do respect the choice Zenimax made in keeping queues lengths palatable and with that, I prefer having the choice to queue solo or as a group over choosing a specific type of match.
I'm pretty sure the queue times for people choosing DM wouldn't be too bad; in fact it would bring back players who have currently stopped playing BG's because they can no longer choose DM. Its the people who prefer objective modes who would have to wait longer because back then when you were able to choose what match type you wanted, DM was by far the most popular mode, and queue times for specifically choosing objective modes took way longer than DM.
We can speculate about how many players may have left the game because they cannot queue for DM only, but we are merely speculating if we are talking more than just the small circle we run with. Further, it would be the players who are interested in mixing it up, not being selective, that would be filling up the groups for DM queues. As such they would not be doing random as they chose. As such the current design is superior.
Further, I am going to lean on Zenimax for queue time projections as they have the real information to base their decisions on.
So why would the players who prefer to "mix it up" still end up filling the groups for DM queues over the other objective game modes? Because there would be more players specifically queueing for DM than any other mode. And how many of these players who prefer to mix it up were there back then when you could choose which mode you wanted? You'd have to speculate how many there actually were compared to the players who just preferred DM. Also, these players who would have preferred mixing it up still had the choice to specifically queue whichever mode they felt like playing at the moment. The random only queue change screws over the population that preferred DM (most likely the majority among the BG regulars before the change) far more than any other group.
On speculation, I don't think it has mostly to do with "queue time projections," but rather them catering towards and incentivizing the more casual/inexperienced/PvE focused players to queue for BGs who will have a greater chance of not coming in last place playing objective modes to get their random BG daily exp/transmutes/motifs/achievements etc, who would otherwise absolutely get stomped on in the far more frequent DM games that used to occur.Edited by Arcanasx on August 2, 2021 4:47AM4 -
Amottica✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Why is there a segment of the player population that is against allowing people the choice to queue for what they want? What are you so afraid of?
I fear nothing. I seriously doubt anyone else is trembling in fear. I do respect the choice Zenimax made in keeping queues lengths palatable and with that, I prefer having the choice to queue solo or as a group over choosing a specific type of match.
I'm pretty sure the queue times for people choosing DM wouldn't be too bad; in fact it would bring back players who have currently stopped playing BG's because they can no longer choose DM. Its the people who prefer objective modes who would have to wait longer because back then when you were able to choose what match type you wanted, DM was by far the most popular mode, and queue times for specifically choosing objective modes took way longer than DM.
We can speculate about how many players may have left the game because they cannot queue for DM only, but we are merely speculating if we are talking more than just the small circle we run with. Further, it would be the players who are interested in mixing it up, not being selective, that would be filling up the groups for DM queues. As such they would not be doing random as they chose. As such the current design is superior.
Further, I am going to lean on Zenimax for queue time projections as they have the real information to base their decisions on.
So why would the players who prefer to "mix it up" still end up filling the groups for DM queues over the other objective game modes? Because there would be more players specifically queueing for DM than any other mode.And how many of these players who prefer to mix it up were there back then when you could choose which mode you wanted? You'd have to speculate how many there actually were compared to the players who just preferred DM. Also, these players who would have preferred mixing it up still had the choice to specifically queue whichever mode they felt like playing at the moment. The random only queue change screws over the population that preferred DM (most likely the majority among the BG regulars before the change) far more than any other group.
On speculation, I don't think it has mostly to do with "queue time projections," but rather them catering towards and incentivizing the more casual/inexperienced/PvE focused players to queue for BGs who will have a greater chance of not coming in last place playing objective modes to get their random BG daily exp/transmutes/motifs/achievements etc, who would otherwise absolutely get stomped on in the far more frequent DM games that used to occur.
How many, or even what percentage of players queued specifically for DM is pure speculation unless Zos has provided specific numbers. Even if DMs had a higher frequency back in the day it does not mean all those players, or even most, queued specifically for DM. The vacant spaces are filled by players who did not select a specific BG mode. Someone or a group queues for a DM then the game has to match them with someone.
That also answers the question as to why players who prefer to "mix it up" would end up filling the vacant spaces of DM matches. Even if a group of four queues together the game needs to find eight more players to match them with. It can easily be eight more players who did not choose a specific BG type.
The same thing happens when someone queues solo for a random dungeon. It does not mean they will get a random dungeon as they can get a very specific dungeon someone else queued for. This is how the group finder works.0 -
MashmalloMan✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Why is there a segment of the player population that is against allowing people the choice to queue for what they want? What are you so afraid of?
I fear nothing. I seriously doubt anyone else is trembling in fear. I do respect the choice Zenimax made in keeping queues lengths palatable and with that, I prefer having the choice to queue solo or as a group over choosing a specific type of match.
I'm pretty sure the queue times for people choosing DM wouldn't be too bad; in fact it would bring back players who have currently stopped playing BG's because they can no longer choose DM. Its the people who prefer objective modes who would have to wait longer because back then when you were able to choose what match type you wanted, DM was by far the most popular mode, and queue times for specifically choosing objective modes took way longer than DM.
We can speculate about how many players may have left the game because they cannot queue for DM only, but we are merely speculating if we are talking more than just the small circle we run with. Further, it would be the players who are interested in mixing it up, not being selective, that would be filling up the groups for DM queues. As such they would not be doing random as they chose. As such the current design is superior.
Further, I am going to lean on Zenimax for queue time projections as they have the real information to base their decisions on.
So why would the players who prefer to "mix it up" still end up filling the groups for DM queues over the other objective game modes? Because there would be more players specifically queueing for DM than any other mode. And how many of these players who prefer to mix it up were there back then when you could choose which mode you wanted? You'd have to speculate how many there actually were compared to the players who just preferred DM. Also, these players who would have preferred mixing it up still had the choice to specifically queue whichever mode they felt like playing at the moment. The random only queue change screws over the population that preferred DM (most likely the majority among the BG regulars before the change) far more than any other group.
On speculation, I don't think it has mostly to do with "queue time projections," but rather them catering towards and incentivizing the more casual/inexperienced/PvE focused players to queue for BGs who will have a greater chance of not coming in last place playing objective modes to get their random BG daily exp/transmutes/motifs/achievements etc, who would otherwise absolutely get stomped on in the far more frequent DM games that used to occur.
I feel like it's far less sinister. The state of BG right now is because of a domino effect of 1 bad change after another. Rather than a deliberate choice by the devs from the beginning.
The main 2 objectives throughout all the changes was lowering queue times, while splitting premades from solo players.
Pre Update 25:- CTF/Chaosball (group or solo)
- Domination/Moving Domination(whatever it's called - group or solo)
- Team Deathmatch (group or solo)
- Random (group or solo)
Random queue was much more tolerable. Since you could choose, naturally, DM ended up having the most people queuing for it as it's the most simplistic, easy to pick up and usually the most fun game mode for casuals or competitive players alike. Kill or be killed.
Random queue now gives you a 20% chance to fill any of the 5 game modes, while before it would fill any lobby that needed immediate players.. thus random back then felt like it gave you DM a lot more often.
Then.. they listened to the community's cries against premades.. of course, no one thought they would completely remove the option, but they did.
Update 25:This is a big change to Battlegrounds matchmaking which we are executing partially in response to player feedback and partially as an experiment. We recognize the change will prevent players from being able to reliably team up with friends in Battlegrounds, but it should also improve both the speed of matchmaking and the competitiveness of PvP matches. As part of the change, we are resetting the matchmaking rating (MMR) of all players, so going forward, the system more properly evaluates individuals based on their performance in the solo queue. We’ll be closely monitoring both player feedback and the impact of these changes on the system.- CTF/Chaosball (solo)
- Domination/Moving Domination(whatever it's called - solo)
- Team Deathmatch (solo)
- Random (solo)
During the PTS and for the months after, constant cries to bring group play back as predicted.. "ESO is an MMO, yet you're telling me I can't play BG's with my friends? Whats the point?"
Tons of people threatened quitting, others loved it. The playerbase was devided, but most people could agree.. We should have the OPTION.
Update 28 to current:In this update, we are testing the re-addition of group queuing to Battlegrounds, where players of group sizes up to 4 can join the queue together and be placed on the same team. Solo players can join this queue, or they can join the solo queue to be matched exclusively with other solo players. With this change, we have also removed specific game types to help promote overall queue health. We’ve also made additional improvements to Battleground matchmaking to help promote better long-term match making.- Random (group + solo)
- Random (solo)
Now people are begging for DM queues because the lack of choice like update 25 is driving people away from the game. So in an effort to "promote queue health" they're actually hurting it Even if the queue is 20% faster, it feels like there is 50% less players. Why would you choose less players over slightly longer queues? I don't understand why anyone would argue against that.
What they haven't tried before they completely removed specific queuing is combining the objective modes into 1.
My proposal:- Objective (solo + group)
- DM (solo + group)
- DM (solo)
- Random (anything)
Why no random solo? If you're pressing random, then odds are you're just in it for the extra loot and random implies you just want the fastest queue possible so you're happy to play anything, objective, dm, group or solo. This is how random was handled before update 25 and it worked perfectly fine. You can't complain you fought a premade or get no DM's when you picked the "I want to play right now, anything available please" option.
Why no objective solo? This queue is the definition of play as a team, it doesn't really make sense to throw a bunch of solo players into a mode that works best with people working off of each other, the objective is a little more complicated than kill or be killed. Sometimes this game type on solo queue (live) just feels like 9 children running around with their heads cut off while 1 person from each team tries to carry them. It ends up being a 500 - 45 - 0 split amongst the teams rather than something like 500 - 400 - 400 of an actual competitive and balanced match.
But hey, if objective solo queue sounds like a good idea, add it in, but it sounds like flawed game design and just further pushes the queue pool apart. It seems like it would be the lowest common denominator all things considered.
3 queues, instead of 2. Random works better because it populates whatever is available. DM is back, option for solo or group + solo remains. It's the best I can think to cover everyones issues, while keeping the queues small by providing minimal options.
Edited by MashmalloMan on August 2, 2021 6:37AMPC Beta - 1900+ CP
Stam Sorc Khajiit PvE/PVP Main || Stam Sorc Dark Elf PvP ||
Stam Templar Dark Elf || Stam Warden Wood Elf || Stam DK Nord || Stam Necro Orc || Stam Blade Khajiit
Mag Sorc High Elf || Mag Templar High Elf || Mag Warden Breton || Mag Necro Khajiit || Mag Blade Khajiit6 -
Starpulsechic✭✭✭So @ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_KevinO has this thread shown enough feedback to outline that DM que needs to be brought back?
Edited by Starpulsechic on August 2, 2021 9:28AM8 -
Viewsfrom6ix✭✭✭✭✭MashmalloMan wrote: »Why is there a segment of the player population that is against allowing people the choice to queue for what they want? What are you so afraid of?
I fear nothing. I seriously doubt anyone else is trembling in fear. I do respect the choice Zenimax made in keeping queues lengths palatable and with that, I prefer having the choice to queue solo or as a group over choosing a specific type of match.
I'm pretty sure the queue times for people choosing DM wouldn't be too bad; in fact it would bring back players who have currently stopped playing BG's because they can no longer choose DM. Its the people who prefer objective modes who would have to wait longer because back then when you were able to choose what match type you wanted, DM was by far the most popular mode, and queue times for specifically choosing objective modes took way longer than DM.
We can speculate about how many players may have left the game because they cannot queue for DM only, but we are merely speculating if we are talking more than just the small circle we run with. Further, it would be the players who are interested in mixing it up, not being selective, that would be filling up the groups for DM queues. As such they would not be doing random as they chose. As such the current design is superior.
Further, I am going to lean on Zenimax for queue time projections as they have the real information to base their decisions on.
So why would the players who prefer to "mix it up" still end up filling the groups for DM queues over the other objective game modes? Because there would be more players specifically queueing for DM than any other mode. And how many of these players who prefer to mix it up were there back then when you could choose which mode you wanted? You'd have to speculate how many there actually were compared to the players who just preferred DM. Also, these players who would have preferred mixing it up still had the choice to specifically queue whichever mode they felt like playing at the moment. The random only queue change screws over the population that preferred DM (most likely the majority among the BG regulars before the change) far more than any other group.
On speculation, I don't think it has mostly to do with "queue time projections," but rather them catering towards and incentivizing the more casual/inexperienced/PvE focused players to queue for BGs who will have a greater chance of not coming in last place playing objective modes to get their random BG daily exp/transmutes/motifs/achievements etc, who would otherwise absolutely get stomped on in the far more frequent DM games that used to occur.
I feel like it's far less sinister. The state of BG right now is because of a domino effect of 1 bad change after another. Rather than a deliberate choice by the devs from the beginning.
The main 2 objectives throughout all the changes was lowering queue times, while splitting premades from solo players.
Pre Update 25:- CTF/Chaosball (group or solo)
- Domination/Moving Domination(whatever it's called - group or solo)
- Team Deathmatch (group or solo)
- Random (group or solo)
Random queue was much more tolerable. Since you could choose, naturally, DM ended up having the most people queuing for it as it's the most simplistic, easy to pick up and usually the most fun game mode for casuals or competitive players alike. Kill or be killed.
Random queue now gives you a 20% chance to fill any of the 5 game modes, while before it would fill any lobby that needed immediate players.. thus random back then felt like it gave you DM a lot more often.
Then.. they listened to the community's cries against premades.. of course, no one thought they would completely remove the option, but they did.
Update 25:This is a big change to Battlegrounds matchmaking which we are executing partially in response to player feedback and partially as an experiment. We recognize the change will prevent players from being able to reliably team up with friends in Battlegrounds, but it should also improve both the speed of matchmaking and the competitiveness of PvP matches. As part of the change, we are resetting the matchmaking rating (MMR) of all players, so going forward, the system more properly evaluates individuals based on their performance in the solo queue. We’ll be closely monitoring both player feedback and the impact of these changes on the system.- CTF/Chaosball (solo)
- Domination/Moving Domination(whatever it's called - solo)
- Team Deathmatch (solo)
- Random (solo)
During the PTS and for the months after, constant cries to bring group play back as predicted.. "ESO is an MMO, yet you're telling me I can't play BG's with my friends? Whats the point?"
Tons of people threatened quitting, others loved it. The playerbase was devided, but most people could agree.. We should have the OPTION.
Update 28 to current:In this update, we are testing the re-addition of group queuing to Battlegrounds, where players of group sizes up to 4 can join the queue together and be placed on the same team. Solo players can join this queue, or they can join the solo queue to be matched exclusively with other solo players. With this change, we have also removed specific game types to help promote overall queue health. We’ve also made additional improvements to Battleground matchmaking to help promote better long-term match making.- Random (group + solo)
- Random (solo)
Now people are begging for DM queues because the lack of choice like update 25 is driving people away from the game. So in an effort to "promote queue health" they're actually hurting it Even if the queue is 20% faster, it feels like there is 50% less players. Why would you choose less players over slightly longer queues? I don't understand why anyone would argue against that.
What they haven't tried before they completely removed specific queuing is combining the objective modes into 1.
My proposal:- Objective (solo + group)
- DM (solo + group)
- DM (solo)
- Random (anything)
Why no random solo? If you're pressing random, then odds are you're just in it for the extra loot and random implies you just want the fastest queue possible so you're happy to play anything, objective, dm, group or solo. This is how random was handled before update 25 and it worked perfectly fine. You can't complain you fought a premade or get no DM's when you picked the "I want to play right now, anything available please" option.
Why no objective solo? This queue is the definition of play as a team, it doesn't really make sense to throw a bunch of solo players into a mode that works best with people working off of each other, the objective is a little more complicated than kill or be killed. Sometimes this game type on solo queue (live) just feels like 9 children running around with their heads cut off while 1 person from each team tries to carry them. It ends up being a 500 - 45 - 0 split amongst the teams rather than something like 500 - 400 - 400 of an actual competitive and balanced match.
But hey, if objective solo queue sounds like a good idea, add it in, but it sounds like flawed game design and just further pushes the queue pool apart. It seems like it would be the lowest common denominator all things considered.
3 queues, instead of 2. Random works better because it populates whatever is available. DM is back, option for solo or group + solo remains. It's the best I can think to cover everyones issues, while keeping the queues small by providing minimal options.
I really like this solution! It adds the specific modes back and with good logic to prevent queue dilution.3 -
Arcanasx✭✭✭✭✭MashmalloMan wrote: »Why is there a segment of the player population that is against allowing people the choice to queue for what they want? What are you so afraid of?
I fear nothing. I seriously doubt anyone else is trembling in fear. I do respect the choice Zenimax made in keeping queues lengths palatable and with that, I prefer having the choice to queue solo or as a group over choosing a specific type of match.
I'm pretty sure the queue times for people choosing DM wouldn't be too bad; in fact it would bring back players who have currently stopped playing BG's because they can no longer choose DM. Its the people who prefer objective modes who would have to wait longer because back then when you were able to choose what match type you wanted, DM was by far the most popular mode, and queue times for specifically choosing objective modes took way longer than DM.
We can speculate about how many players may have left the game because they cannot queue for DM only, but we are merely speculating if we are talking more than just the small circle we run with. Further, it would be the players who are interested in mixing it up, not being selective, that would be filling up the groups for DM queues. As such they would not be doing random as they chose. As such the current design is superior.
Further, I am going to lean on Zenimax for queue time projections as they have the real information to base their decisions on.
So why would the players who prefer to "mix it up" still end up filling the groups for DM queues over the other objective game modes? Because there would be more players specifically queueing for DM than any other mode. And how many of these players who prefer to mix it up were there back then when you could choose which mode you wanted? You'd have to speculate how many there actually were compared to the players who just preferred DM. Also, these players who would have preferred mixing it up still had the choice to specifically queue whichever mode they felt like playing at the moment. The random only queue change screws over the population that preferred DM (most likely the majority among the BG regulars before the change) far more than any other group.
On speculation, I don't think it has mostly to do with "queue time projections," but rather them catering towards and incentivizing the more casual/inexperienced/PvE focused players to queue for BGs who will have a greater chance of not coming in last place playing objective modes to get their random BG daily exp/transmutes/motifs/achievements etc, who would otherwise absolutely get stomped on in the far more frequent DM games that used to occur.
I feel like it's far less sinister. The state of BG right now is because of a domino effect of 1 bad change after another. Rather than a deliberate choice by the devs from the beginning.
The main 2 objectives throughout all the changes was lowering queue times, while splitting premades from solo players.
Pre Update 25:- CTF/Chaosball (group or solo)
- Domination/Moving Domination(whatever it's called - group or solo)
- Team Deathmatch (group or solo)
- Random (group or solo)
Random queue was much more tolerable. Since you could choose, naturally, DM ended up having the most people queuing for it as it's the most simplistic, easy to pick up and usually the most fun game mode for casuals or competitive players alike. Kill or be killed.
Random queue now gives you a 20% chance to fill any of the 5 game modes, while before it would fill any lobby that needed immediate players.. thus random back then felt like it gave you DM a lot more often.
Then.. they listened to the community's cries against premades.. of course, no one thought they would completely remove the option, but they did.
Update 25:This is a big change to Battlegrounds matchmaking which we are executing partially in response to player feedback and partially as an experiment. We recognize the change will prevent players from being able to reliably team up with friends in Battlegrounds, but it should also improve both the speed of matchmaking and the competitiveness of PvP matches. As part of the change, we are resetting the matchmaking rating (MMR) of all players, so going forward, the system more properly evaluates individuals based on their performance in the solo queue. We’ll be closely monitoring both player feedback and the impact of these changes on the system.- CTF/Chaosball (solo)
- Domination/Moving Domination(whatever it's called - solo)
- Team Deathmatch (solo)
- Random (solo)
During the PTS and for the months after, constant cries to bring group play back as predicted.. "ESO is an MMO, yet you're telling me I can't play BG's with my friends? Whats the point?"
Tons of people threatened quitting, others loved it. The playerbase was devided, but most people could agree.. We should have the OPTION.
Update 28 to current:In this update, we are testing the re-addition of group queuing to Battlegrounds, where players of group sizes up to 4 can join the queue together and be placed on the same team. Solo players can join this queue, or they can join the solo queue to be matched exclusively with other solo players. With this change, we have also removed specific game types to help promote overall queue health. We’ve also made additional improvements to Battleground matchmaking to help promote better long-term match making.- Random (group + solo)
- Random (solo)
Now people are begging for DM queues because the lack of choice like update 25 is driving people away from the game. So in an effort to "promote queue health" they're actually hurting it Even if the queue is 20% faster, it feels like there is 50% less players. Why would you choose less players over slightly longer queues? I don't understand why anyone would argue against that.
What they haven't tried before they completely removed specific queuing is combining the objective modes into 1.
My proposal:- Objective (solo + group)
- DM (solo + group)
- DM (solo)
- Random (anything)
Why no random solo? If you're pressing random, then odds are you're just in it for the extra loot and random implies you just want the fastest queue possible so you're happy to play anything, objective, dm, group or solo. This is how random was handled before update 25 and it worked perfectly fine. You can't complain you fought a premade or get no DM's when you picked the "I want to play right now, anything available please" option.
Why no objective solo? This queue is the definition of play as a team, it doesn't really make sense to throw a bunch of solo players into a mode that works best with people working off of each other, the objective is a little more complicated than kill or be killed. Sometimes this game type on solo queue (live) just feels like 9 children running around with their heads cut off while 1 person from each team tries to carry them. It ends up being a 500 - 45 - 0 split amongst the teams rather than something like 500 - 400 - 400 of an actual competitive and balanced match.
But hey, if objective solo queue sounds like a good idea, add it in, but it sounds like flawed game design and just further pushes the queue pool apart. It seems like it would be the lowest common denominator all things considered.
3 queues, instead of 2. Random works better because it populates whatever is available. DM is back, option for solo or group + solo remains. It's the best I can think to cover everyones issues, while keeping the queues small by providing minimal options.
Agreed, I think this proposal could work nicely.3 -
SyfyreSoul ShrivenMy take is too limit group que sizes at 2 people for bg's and make an Objective and DM mode.
2 people does still give you an edge, but it won't be as ridiculous as 4 people vs randoms. You can still however play with someone and if you got many people, split them into their own groups. Ignoring objectives is super common, and I hate not going on death match. I'm looking for simple pvp, no running around to uncontested points (capture the flag sucks imo) or dealing with a random que group of tanks, because that's what you'd get for objective games, and then they become fodder if they get deathmatch. I however also think the que types shouldn't exceed 2, find the most popular ones and make them. Having 3 or 4 que's I feel would just spread people out.
Also, another valid point I saw, don't make the freaking group que the default que if you are going that route. Put it at the bottom, as people always que for the top one, so they get (often unknowingly) put into BG's with groups. It is true that the first que type you put will be the one that will have the most people no matter what, and putting the first que as group over solo que being first is dumb.My, the sky is beautiful. Wouldn't it just be a shame if someone morphed it, like me.3 -
gariondavey✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭PC NA @gariondavey, BG, IC & Cyrodiil Focused Since October 2017 Stamplar (main), Magplar, Magsorc, Stamsorc, StamDK, MagDK, Stamblade, Magblade, Magden, Stamden5 -
Parasaurolophus✭✭✭✭✭
✭My take is too limit group que sizes at 2 people for bg's and make an Objective and DM mode.
2 people does still give you an edge, but it won't be as ridiculous as 4 people vs randoms. You can still however play with someone and if you got many people, split them into their own groups. Ignoring objectives is super common, and I hate not going on death match. I'm looking for simple pvp, no running around to uncontested points (capture the flag sucks imo) or dealing with a random que group of tanks, because that's what you'd get for objective games, and then they become fodder if they get deathmatch. I however also think the que types shouldn't exceed 2, find the most popular ones and make them. Having 3 or 4 que's I feel would just spread people out.
Also, another valid point I saw, don't make the freaking group que the default que if you are going that route. Put it at the bottom, as people always que for the top one, so they get (often unknowingly) put into BG's with groups. It is true that the first que type you put will be the one that will have the most people no matter what, and putting the first que as group over solo que being first is dumb.
Now imagine that you are a nightblade and one manaplar falls into your team. And against you is a group of two wardens and two necromancers. Can you kill anyone? Will your opponents be able to kill the other team themselves?
The number of players is also calculated based on the balance.Edited by Parasaurolophus on August 3, 2021 1:12AMPC/EU0 -
tomofhyrule✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭gariondavey wrote: »Solo - random
Group - dm
So simple. Please make it so.
I don't know if it's that simple - a poster above said it best:MashmalloMan wrote: »Why no objective solo? This queue is the definition of play as a team, it doesn't really make sense to throw a bunch of solo players into a mode that works best with people working off of each other, the objective is a little more complicated than kill or be killed. Sometimes this game type on solo queue (live) just feels like 9 children running around with their heads cut off while 1 person from each team tries to carry them. It ends up being a 500 - 45 - 0 split amongst the teams rather than something like 500 - 400 - 400 of an actual competitive and balanced match.
Whenever I've done BGs with groupmates, I know we spend a lot more time discussing and organizing on objectives than deathmatch. In objective, we make sure we're buffing each other, staying close, keeping tabs on where the objectives vs. the other players are, calling out to each other the whole time to update on positions. When we get DM, it's pretty much 'find the squishies. Get them. The end.' I'd argue that Solo DM and Group Objective would be more appropriate for the game... maybe not favorable for the players, but definitely making it better for gameplay.
A DM only queue basically is the same as a non-DLC dungeon queue for randoms in PvE - a thing that a vast majority of the players would love, but something that would screw over other populations. For the dungeons, it's the people trying to farm DLC gear. For BGs, it's the people going for objective style pages/achievements. I know for the non-PvP crowd, DM is the most daunting game mode, so many of them only would play BGs in objective mode. If they start to have fun (read: a welcoming playerbase), maybe they'll stick around and keep doing BGs, which means the population of PvP goes up. But if all they get is hour-long queues, or if they get stuck getting their butts handed to them in nonstop deathmatches, they're not going to join. As a result, there are fewer PvP players.
So yes, DM-only queue seems attractive to the BG community. But it does have the potential of raising the barrier to entry for others, turning others away, and in general closing off the community. I know a lot of people on the forum already complain about PvP getting no love since the playerbase is so small... is it really a good idea to try to make it so that no new players want to join?
And on that note, yes. Absolutely.Also, another valid point I saw, don't make the freaking group que the default que if you are going that route. Put it at the bottom, as people always que for the top one, so they get (often unknowingly) put into BG's with groups. It is true that the first que type you put will be the one that will have the most people no matter what, and putting the first que as group over solo que being first is dumb.
0 -
Amottica✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭gariondavey wrote: »Solo - random
Group - dm
So simple. Please make it so.
Or maybe
Solo - DM
Group or Solo - Random
It would not be favorable to force players interested in all types of PvP with BGs to queue solo because some players want to be able to queue for DM specifically. It would clearly become punitive for them to be flexible and enjoy more than one dimension of PvP play.
Those that truly want DM should have less of an issue having to queue solo so they can get only DM matches.1 -
Skoomah✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭It’s very simple ZOS. Give us 3 options.
Solo Random
Group Random
Group Deathmatch
This way, Deathmatch players have a place to go and objective players are completely unaffected. Let the market dictate what does and doesn’t get enough play.6 -
gariondavey✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭It’s very simple ZOS. Give us 3 options.
Solo Random
Group Random
Group Deathmatch
This way, Deathmatch players have a place to go and objective players are completely unaffected. Let the market dictate what does and doesn’t get enough play.
That's probably bestPC NA @gariondavey, BG, IC & Cyrodiil Focused Since October 2017 Stamplar (main), Magplar, Magsorc, Stamsorc, StamDK, MagDK, Stamblade, Magblade, Magden, Stamden4 -
MurderMostFoul✭✭✭✭✭
✭It’s very simple ZOS. Give us 3 options.
Solo Random
Group Random
Group Deathmatch
This way, Deathmatch players have a place to go and objective players are completely unaffected. Let the market dictate what does and doesn’t get enough play.
Perfect with one slight edit:
Solo Random (daily bonus eligible)
Group Random
Group Deathmatch
Drive casual people just dropping in toward the solo random mode to help populate it, and give them a lower likelihood of getting shredded by dedicated Deathmatch players.“There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.”0 -
Amottica✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭MurderMostFoul wrote: »It’s very simple ZOS. Give us 3 options.
Solo Random
Group Random
Group Deathmatch
This way, Deathmatch players have a place to go and objective players are completely unaffected. Let the market dictate what does and doesn’t get enough play.
Perfect with one slight edit:
Solo Random (daily bonus eligible)
Group Random
Group Deathmatch
Drive casual people just dropping in toward the solo random mode to help populate it, and give them a lower likelihood of getting shredded by dedicated Deathmatch players.
Unless the DM queue was completely separated from the random queue then the suggestion would skew matches to DM as the other queues would essentially fill the DM matches for when players request it.0 -
Skoomah✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭MurderMostFoul wrote: »It’s very simple ZOS. Give us 3 options.
Solo Random
Group Random
Group Deathmatch
This way, Deathmatch players have a place to go and objective players are completely unaffected. Let the market dictate what does and doesn’t get enough play.
Perfect with one slight edit:
Solo Random (daily bonus eligible)
Group Random
Group Deathmatch
Drive casual people just dropping in toward the solo random mode to help populate it, and give them a lower likelihood of getting shredded by dedicated Deathmatch players.
Unless the DM queue was completely separated from the random queue then the suggestion would skew matches to DM as the other queues would essentially fill the DM matches for when players request it.
Dude, what is your problem... seriously? Then just remove DM as an option for the first two options then.
Deathmatch players want nothing to do with Objective players.Edited by Skoomah on August 3, 2021 9:23PM4 -
DrSlaughtr✭✭✭✭✭
✭MurderMostFoul wrote: »It’s very simple ZOS. Give us 3 options.
Solo Random
Group Random
Group Deathmatch
This way, Deathmatch players have a place to go and objective players are completely unaffected. Let the market dictate what does and doesn’t get enough play.
Perfect with one slight edit:
Solo Random (daily bonus eligible)
Group Random
Group Deathmatch
Drive casual people just dropping in toward the solo random mode to help populate it, and give them a lower likelihood of getting shredded by dedicated Deathmatch players.
Unless the DM queue was completely separated from the random queue then the suggestion would skew matches to DM as the other queues would essentially fill the DM matches for when players request it.
Dude, what is your problem... seriously? Then just remove DM as an option for the first two options then.
Deathmatch players want nothing to do with Objective players.
You can't just cater to DM only players by having a super special queue just for them. You have to have a random queue that includes death match because, and this may be shocking, players actually like most of not all the modes.
I support rolling back pre update 25. If anything you can see from this thread that there's no pleasing everybody.I drink and I stream things.
Twitch: DrSlaughtr
YouTube: DrSlaughtr
Facebook: DrSlaughtr
Twitter: DrSlaughtr
TikTok: DrSlaughtr0 -
Skoomah✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭TheEndBringer wrote: »MurderMostFoul wrote: »It’s very simple ZOS. Give us 3 options.
Solo Random
Group Random
Group Deathmatch
This way, Deathmatch players have a place to go and objective players are completely unaffected. Let the market dictate what does and doesn’t get enough play.
Perfect with one slight edit:
Solo Random (daily bonus eligible)
Group Random
Group Deathmatch
Drive casual people just dropping in toward the solo random mode to help populate it, and give them a lower likelihood of getting shredded by dedicated Deathmatch players.
Unless the DM queue was completely separated from the random queue then the suggestion would skew matches to DM as the other queues would essentially fill the DM matches for when players request it.
Dude, what is your problem... seriously? Then just remove DM as an option for the first two options then.
Deathmatch players want nothing to do with Objective players.
You can't just cater to DM only players by having a super special queue just for them. You have to have a random queue that includes death match because, and this may be shocking, players actually like most of not all the modes.
I support rolling back pre update 25. If anything you can see from this thread that there's no pleasing everybody.
Every game I’m in... it’s 10 people trying to DM while 2 people are ignoring fights and doing objectives. So how is this fair? 10 people catering to 2 people.
And every time we try to put forth a sensible solution, all we get from the vocal minority is a big fat NO.
No wonder the DM community has built up so much resentment for the OBJ players.Edited by Skoomah on August 3, 2021 9:36PM9
