Playing Battlegrounds is not a fun experience.

Synaptic · July 30

I tried starting this thread in the Battlegrounds section but couldn't, not sure why that is, maybe I'm doing something wrong.

So I've been away from the game for a couple of years and while 2 teams instead 3 teams in battlegrounds is an improvement battlegrounds are still not great.

I've seen talk about an MMR system but after playing for a considerable amount of time in 4v4 competitive solo I've seen zero evidence of any MMR based matchmaking.

I'll forgo discussing people running PvE builds in battlegrounds because we're in the middle of a PvP event and people are after rewards/tickets so that's to be expected.

However it seems like 1 out of 3 matches has someone that is afk the entire time or simply leaves the match after they get absolutely smashed a couple of times and I'm not even exaggerating. Also, most (and by most I mean 95% of matches) are very one-sided, one team will win the initial engagement and proceed to farm the other team, some teams give up entirely and let themselves be killed so the match ends quicker. In fact I had a game where we all sat on the bridge in the middle of the map and farmed the enemy team in their spawn for a solid 4-5minutes because it was Crazy King and those take the longest to end and there was literally no way for the enemy team to even avoid us at that point, they'd just spawn and die on their platform, it was rough to watch.

Perhaps this has been discussed before so forgive my ignorance, but since I've been away from the game a while I'd really like to know if there is in fact an MMR based matchmaking system and how it works because "4 vs 4 Competitive" does not feel competitive at all.

Oh, and while queueing for 4vs4 Competitive Solo I feel like I've run into teams of two multiple times, unless that's just bad luck or coincidence. What's up with that?

CameraBeardThePirate · July 30

It's because the MMR is based on Medal Score, which is a nonsensical system.

You can have players at the top of their game, single handedly spawn camping the enemy team the whole match (winning the match for their team) and they get jumped on the leaderboard + in MMR by the enemy they just mollywhopped because somehow the enemy team had more medal score despite losing the game.

This isn't hyperbole - it happens:

The team that won this match got less MMR increase and went up the leaderboard less than the team they not only beat via the objective, but utterly dominated in terms of kills

Medal Score is a terrible system, and leads to awful matches because players are given arbitrary increases/decreases to their MMR.

Additionally, the MMR resets constantly, and is further brought down by being character based and not account based.

fakingfocused · July 30

CameraBeardThePirate wrote: »

It's because the MMR is based on Medal Score, which is a nonsensical system.

You can have players at the top of their game, single handedly spawn camping the enemy team the whole match (winning the match for their team) and they get jumped on the leaderboard + in MMR by the enemy they just mollywhopped because somehow the enemy team had more medal score despite losing the game.

This isn't hyperbole - it happens:

The team that won this match got less MMR increase and went up the leaderboard less than the team they not only beat via the objective, but utterly dominated in terms of kills

Medal Score is a terrible system, and leads to awful matches because players are given arbitrary increases/decreases to their MMR.

Additionally, the MMR resets constantly, and is further brought down by being character based and not account based.

Yes this is a perfect example of my frustrations. There should be more weight given to actually winning the matches.

Xarc · July 30

The medal system simply needs to be improved.
There should be new medals, for example:
- Medal for damage dealt
- Medal for damage blocked

The problem is that I think ZOS allows healers to make big score gains precisely to favor healer builds, in order to balance groups.
But this raises another issue: there are sometimes groups without healers, and groups with two healers.

The system needs to be reviewed.

Thumbless_Bot · July 30

Xarc wrote: »

The medal system simply needs to be improved.
There should be new medals, for example:
- Medal for damage dealt
- Medal for damage blocked

The problem is that I think ZOS allows healers to make big score gains precisely to favor healer builds, in order to balance groups.
But this raises another issue: there are sometimes groups without healers, and groups with two healers.

The system needs to be reviewed.

The medal score is the least of the problems with bgs.

Funny how these, air quotes, more popular bgs, keep generating threads like this. It's a mystery (gotta say it like Chris farley).

These bgs should be better than the old ones and they are surely not.

Synaptic · July 30

CameraBeardThePirate wrote: »

Additionally, the MMR resets constantly, and is further brought down by being character based and not account based.

Oh wow, okay.

So does the MMR reset once a week same as with leaderboard score? I mean I get wanting to re-shuffle players in the matchmaking system but if that's the case having it reset that often kinda renders it pointless.

Xarc wrote: »

The medal system simply needs to be improved.
There should be new medals, for example:
- Medal for damage dealt
- Medal for damage blocked

The problem is that I think ZOS allows healers to make big score gains precisely to favor healer builds, in order to balance groups.
But this raises another issue: there are sometimes groups without healers, and groups with two healers.

The system needs to be reviewed.

So if the medal score is so heavily skewed in favor of healing then that explains why I've seen people pretty much just running around or even standing on their platform, allowing themselves to get hit and spamming heals even tho they get dunked on repeatedly when they jump off.

Synaptic · July 30

Thumbless_Bot wrote: »

Xarc wrote: »

The medal system simply needs to be improved.
There should be new medals, for example:
- Medal for damage dealt
- Medal for damage blocked

The problem is that I think ZOS allows healers to make big score gains precisely to favor healer builds, in order to balance groups.
But this raises another issue: there are sometimes groups without healers, and groups with two healers.

The system needs to be reviewed.

The medal score is the least of the problems with bgs.

Funny how these, air quotes, more popular bgs, keep generating threads like this. It's a mystery (gotta say it like Chris farley).

These bgs should be better than the old ones and they are surely not.

What do you think the problem with BGs is then?

Because constantly having one-sided matches either due to AFK'ers, leavers or bad matchmaking gets old quick and is not fun. And let's be real the rewards aren't that great so if they're not fun either then there's no incentive to play BGs.

Xarc · July 30

Synaptic wrote: »

that explains why I've seen people pretty much just running around or even standing on their platform, allowing themselves to get hit and spamming heals even tho they get dunked on repeatedly when they jump off.

lol no
I think these guys think they are living demigods and they want to prove it, they are not there for the objectives but want to be attacked to prove their invincibility

Cooperharley · July 30

Playing PvP in this game without an adequate population or a long term reward track/progression is also not fun lol. There's so much work to be done on PvP it's just crazy man

Thumbless_Bot · July 30

Synaptic wrote: »

Thumbless_Bot wrote: »

Xarc wrote: »

The medal system simply needs to be improved.
There should be new medals, for example:
- Medal for damage dealt
- Medal for damage blocked

The problem is that I think ZOS allows healers to make big score gains precisely to favor healer builds, in order to balance groups.
But this raises another issue: there are sometimes groups without healers, and groups with two healers.

The system needs to be reviewed.

The medal score is the least of the problems with bgs.

Funny how these, air quotes, more popular bgs, keep generating threads like this. It's a mystery (gotta say it like Chris farley).

These bgs should be better than the old ones and they are surely not.

What do you think the problem with BGs is then?

Because constantly having one-sided matches either due to AFK'ers, leavers or bad matchmaking gets old quick and is not fun. And let's be real the rewards aren't that great so if they're not fun either then there's no incentive to play BGs.

They arent fun because zos cant balance them. They cant balance anything pvp because the folks in charge of pvp combat apparently, very apparently, do not actually pvp.

Three teams needed improvements... period... they didn't need to be replaced. Zos shot a free throw over the backboard and into the third row of the stands with two team bgs. They are an absolute cluster-failure.

Three teams were more fun because they were one sided shart shows far less often. They were more competitve for both high and low mmr players because you were always against two teams and couldn't freely spawn camp as easily or get spawn camped. You could get second and still get your daily.

They align to all pvp in this game outside of duels. They align with everything eso is and 2 teams do not.

4v4 is the third worst thing zos ever introduced to the game only because roa and DC exist.

8v8 is not far behind

Zos shot an aaaaaaaaaair ball, and tried to cover themselves by adding in rewards to get people to play them so they could advertise increased participation.

Participation would have been up in three sided with new rewards too as bad as the rewards are.

There is nothing better or as good about two team bgs than three teams.

I could go on but I've done so on other threads here too often.

And the maps were thoughtfully designed in 4v4v4...

Chrisilis · July 31

I think MMR should be done away with entirely. Having teams made up completely at random almost couldn't be worse than what passes for MMR.

Synaptic wrote: What do you think the problem with BGs is then?
Because constantly having one-sided matches either due to AFK'ers, leavers or bad matchmaking gets old quick and is not fun. And let's be real the rewards aren't that great so if they're not fun either then there's no incentive to play BG

The incentive to play BG's back in the day was to get better, to compete, to progress in your pvp abilities, to show improvement, to become someone people were glad to see on their team, to refine your build until it was jussst right etc. etc.

That incentive, to get better isnt something you see as much anymore. Why bother right? Youre just one man in eight, it doesnt make that much difference if you suck. Right? You get the same reward as the guy that carried the team right? And you can keep getting that reward with almost zero effort. Thats not to say there arent still people who make the effort, but ZoS geared the new BG's so people do not have to. And it worked. Engagement went up. BG's went from a high ceiling activity to a low floor activity over night. I think what you mean is theres no incentive for people who want a high ceiling. Theres plenty of incentive for people who like a low floor. And Battlegrounds are still fun. Just not as fun as they used to be.

Id like to see what would happen if they got rid of MMR. Id like to see 8v8 leaderboards. 8v8 solo seems to be the most heavily utilized queue, adding in a leaderboard and rewards associated with that leaderboard would probably result in renewed interest from a lot of players. It would reward the high ceiling people with recognition for their contribution and give the low floor people something to work toward.

Kaelthorn_Nightbloom · July 31

CameraBeardThePirate wrote: »

It's because the MMR is based on Medal Score, which is a nonsensical system.

You can have players at the top of their game, single handedly spawn camping the enemy team the whole match (winning the match for their team) and they get jumped on the leaderboard + in MMR by the enemy they just mollywhopped because somehow the enemy team had more medal score despite losing the game.

This isn't hyperbole - it happens:

The team that won this match got less MMR increase and went up the leaderboard less than the team they not only beat via the objective, but utterly dominated in terms of kills

Medal Score is a terrible system, and leads to awful matches because players are given arbitrary increases/decreases to their MMR.

Additionally, the MMR resets constantly, and is further brought down by being character based and not account based.

@ZOS_BrianWheeler What are your thoughts on this?

Thumbless_Bot · July 31

Chrisilis wrote: »

I think MMR should be done away with entirely. Having teams made up completely at random almost couldn't be worse than what passes for MMR.

Synaptic wrote: What do you think the problem with BGs is then?
Because constantly having one-sided matches either due to AFK'ers, leavers or bad matchmaking gets old quick and is not fun. And let's be real the rewards aren't that great so if they're not fun either then there's no incentive to play BG

The incentive to play BG's back in the day was to get better, to compete, to progress in your pvp abilities, to show improvement, to become someone people were glad to see on their team, to refine your build until it was jussst right etc. etc.

That incentive, to get better isnt something you see as much anymore. Why bother right? Youre just one man in eight, it doesnt make that much difference if you suck. Right? You get the same reward as the guy that carried the team right? And you can keep getting that reward with almost zero effort. Thats not to say there arent still people who make the effort, but ZoS geared the new BG's so people do not have to. And it worked. Engagement went up. BG's went from a high ceiling activity to a low floor activity over night. I think what you mean is theres no incentive for people who want a high ceiling. Theres plenty of incentive for people who like a low floor. And Battlegrounds are still fun. Just not as fun as they used to be.

Id like to see what would happen if they got rid of MMR. Id like to see 8v8 leaderboards. 8v8 solo seems to be the most heavily utilized queue, adding in a leaderboard and rewards associated with that leaderboard would probably result in renewed interest from a lot of players. It would reward the high ceiling people with recognition for their contribution and give the low floor people something to work toward.

Very well said. Contribution, imho, is kda. Medal.score is warm garbage, as skara points out above.

IndigoDreams · August 13

Thumbless_Bot wrote: »

Xarc wrote: »

The medal system simply needs to be improved.
There should be new medals, for example:
- Medal for damage dealt
- Medal for damage blocked

The problem is that I think ZOS allows healers to make big score gains precisely to favor healer builds, in order to balance groups.
But this raises another issue: there are sometimes groups without healers, and groups with two healers.

The system needs to be reviewed.

The medal score is the least of the problems with bgs.

Funny how these, air quotes, more popular bgs, keep generating threads like this. It's a mystery (gotta say it like Chris farley).

These bgs should be better than the old ones and they are surely not.

for emphasis

These bgs should be better than the old ones and they are surely not.

100%

they might actually be worse.
i think they are anyway.

Araneae6537 · August 13

Between now and MMR and no CP — yeah, not fun. I’ve rarely played BGs once a character hits level 50. No more interesting fights and close matches. Just get obliterated. Not calling the grapes sour, I really wouldn’t like that even if I was the winning player. I much prefer interesting fights with other players of similar level and aren’t over one way or the other in a matter of seconds.

xylena_lazarow · August 13

Putting the 8v8 at the top of the list would help to an extent, the 4v4 is flat unviable. It's an inherently sweaty format, but variance is way too high without rigorous MMR, one weak player and the whole match goes to hell.

Given how many players behave as if it's a KDA free-for-all already and have for years, I'd bet my account that FFA BGs would be more successful than either 2-sided or 3-sided, both of which have been dysfunctional.

MincMincMinc · August 13

Araneae6537 wrote: »

Between now and MMR and no CP — yeah, not fun. I’ve rarely played BGs once a character hits level 50. No more interesting fights and close matches. Just get obliterated. Not calling the grapes sour, I really wouldn’t like that even if I was the winning player. I much prefer interesting fights with other players of similar level and aren’t over one way or the other in a matter of seconds.

Big problem is that most new players now a days don't even try or learn for good reason. The power creep in the game demands you fully setup characters, otherwise you are not even remotely competitive. IDK how else to explain it, but im sure you can understand. I suppose the pug to sweat ratio is so far heavily weighed towards the sweat that the game is a non starter.

It's just the issue when you have a game that needs to last 10+ years with quarterly quotas to release new content that is better than previous content. The only way to cut out the power creep is by making a new game.

Araneae6537 · August 14

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Araneae6537 wrote: »

Between now and MMR and no CP — yeah, not fun. I’ve rarely played BGs once a character hits level 50. No more interesting fights and close matches. Just get obliterated. Not calling the grapes sour, I really wouldn’t like that even if I was the winning player. I much prefer interesting fights with other players of similar level and aren’t over one way or the other in a matter of seconds.

Big problem is that most new players now a days don't even try or learn for good reason. The power creep in the game demands you fully setup characters, otherwise you are not even remotely competitive. IDK how else to explain it, but im sure you can understand. I suppose the pug to sweat ratio is so far heavily weighed towards the sweat that the game is a non starter.

It's just the issue when you have a game that needs to last 10+ years with quarterly quotas to release new content that is better than previous content. The only way to cut out the power creep is by making a new game.

Well, between optimizing a build for PvP and most of all, practice, I expect any serious PvPer to be way better than me! I just wish that matching was better so that I would be matched with people closer to my current ability. If I enjoy it, I’d play more, and with more evenly matched fights, I’d see ways to improve, and eventually move up. Maybe some people would not move up due to their playstyle, physical limitations, or other reasons, and that would be okay too. But as it is, yeah, for me it’s a non-starter.

MincMincMinc · August 14

Araneae6537 wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Araneae6537 wrote: »

Between now and MMR and no CP — yeah, not fun. I’ve rarely played BGs once a character hits level 50. No more interesting fights and close matches. Just get obliterated. Not calling the grapes sour, I really wouldn’t like that even if I was the winning player. I much prefer interesting fights with other players of similar level and aren’t over one way or the other in a matter of seconds.

Big problem is that most new players now a days don't even try or learn for good reason. The power creep in the game demands you fully setup characters, otherwise you are not even remotely competitive. IDK how else to explain it, but im sure you can understand. I suppose the pug to sweat ratio is so far heavily weighed towards the sweat that the game is a non starter.

It's just the issue when you have a game that needs to last 10+ years with quarterly quotas to release new content that is better than previous content. The only way to cut out the power creep is by making a new game.

Well, between optimizing a build for PvP and most of all, practice, I expect any serious PvPer to be way better than me! I just wish that matching was better so that I would be matched with people closer to my current ability. If I enjoy it, I’d play more, and with more evenly matched fights, I’d see ways to improve, and eventually move up. Maybe some people would not move up due to their playstyle, physical limitations, or other reasons, and that would be okay too. But as it is, yeah, for me it’s a non-starter.

Yeah, feel free to join the conversation on my BG pain points thread. It helps to consolidate so zos doesnt get lost. My first post I will keep updated, but practically in order everyone seems to agree that they need to fix the MMR system and stop resetting it just to have a leaderboard reset. I go into more detail and we can talk about it there, but mmr should solely depend on KDA and then a supplemental system that looks at healing per match can help team balance to prevent one team from having all the healers and winning by default.

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/681775/main-bg-pain-points#latest

In the old days we used to have 4x pop locked cyrodil like vengeance's population. Where newer players to pvp like yourself could zerg surf and pick and choose their battles and when to break away. Now your options are to either join a regimented ball zerg guild and lag out the server or play in bgs against people going 40/0 every match. (I am one of those people, and let me tell you, it is beyond boring)................ then we wonder why the game's population is dying?