Future of Battlegrounds

NxJoeyD · August 25

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

So if the matchmaking search had to expand enough it would still put players of vastly different skill levels in the same matches, right?

Yes, (...) Even if the population of bgs collapsed to say 30 people, the MMR system would still function, but in these more niche scenarios you would then start leaning on other mechanics to prevent issues.

I do believe population is small enough that your mmr system would need to constantly grab players of vastly different skill levels, so let's lean on other mechanics.

There’s plenty of people in BG’s. I play on both PCNA & XBNA and there’s a consistent population.

As for skilled vs non skilled; that’s really not the cause of our issues.

The problems with BG’s right now are not because “experienced” players are being matched with “inexperienced” ones, that’s not the trend in BG match data we’re seeing.

The problems are mechanical based not experience based.

ruskiii · August 25

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Did zos ever publish what plays into MMR? Or are we just assuming it is scoreboard based just adding up until reset?

So about how MMR is calculated: yes, Brian Wheeler has said publicly they determine MMR by measuring your wins vs losses. On U44 PTS the first week you could see the MMR number, and it would go up or down after each game depending on your result. There is a hidden multiplier that is tied to the max alliance rank character you have on your whole account, so someone brand new to the game will spend longer in the lowest MMR than someone with a 5 star who is playing a new character. This is demonstrably true, as with a max level character on your account, your new character will only spend 1 or 2 games in the lowest MMR before you start seeing names you recognise.

They also said that the medal score has nothing to do with MMR climb, and I do think I believe them on this. I think high medal scores on a healer driving MMR is conflated with the fact that a high medal scoring healer was probably on the winning team. I have seen a high medal scoring healer lose games to me playing pure DD no cross heals in 4v4, my MMR has gone up to the point I'm not getting games, and they still are able to play. So I take Wheeler on his word that scoreboard is unrelated.

Which brings me onto the next point: unfortunately with MMR resets, there isn't time for people to gain enough MMR to populate the highest tier that used to be the really sweaty lobbies. Now you only really reach it by no-lifing 4v4 on one character for a week, and then because the game has no one to match you with, it puts you in "MMR hell" where you queue time balloons up to 40+ minutes per game.

MincMincMinc wrote: »

I just bring up the next step because once you fix the reset issue, the problem is that the scoreboard scored still wont split up between someone who is a diehard PvP player who plays only a few matches a week vs someone who farms their daily matches every day. Actually the way it is set up I am willing to bet the daily objective farmer will net more per match in "MMR"

This is a valid point. Once the games can start and MMR stops getting reset, that will return us to ESO's status quo, which was always this. The sweat lobbies will be 10 players who know what they are doing, 1 random guy who got boosted from playing too many BGs trying to get good and is now out of his depth, and the 1 guy who spends the whole game crying about flags and calling everyone cheaters. It wasn't perfect but the MMR resets really made me appreciate what we had lol.

Having some margin of error for making the perfect lobbies is healthy for the game imo. When I was new if I didn't get matched against better players because I was playing a lot, I never would have learned anything. In this scenario, the way it used to be, only people who were in someway dedicated to either getting better or getting something would be matched against high MMR players.

What we have right now is unhealthy, brand new players are being thrown into the meat grinder like male chicks at an egg farm, and it's not just for 1 or 2 games while someone levels a new character, it is consistently happening to them for weeks on end.

That being said, I am still optimistic that this apparent change of direction towards a more player-focused experience in BGs is going to be good for the game.

MincMincMinc · August 25

NxJoeyD wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

So if the matchmaking search had to expand enough it would still put players of vastly different skill levels in the same matches, right?

Yes, (...) Even if the population of bgs collapsed to say 30 people, the MMR system would still function, but in these more niche scenarios you would then start leaning on other mechanics to prevent issues.

I do believe population is small enough that your mmr system would need to constantly grab players of vastly different skill levels, so let's lean on other mechanics.

There’s plenty of people in BG’s. I play on both PCNA & XBNA and there’s a consistent population.

As for skilled vs non skilled; that’s really not the cause of our issues.

The problems with BG’s right now are not because “experienced” players are being matched with “inexperienced” ones, that’s not the trend in BG match data we’re seeing.

The problems are mechanical based not experience based.

Well considering it seems Ruskii, moon, and I are somewhat on the same page. What issues do you believe are currently in BGs?

pugstomping?
Spawncamping?
AFK players?

ruskiii · August 25

NxJoeyD wrote: »

As for skilled vs non skilled; that’s really not the cause of our issues.

The problems with BG’s right now are not because “experienced” players are being matched with “inexperienced” ones, that’s not the trend in BG match data we’re seeing.

The problems are mechanical based not experience based.

Man, your opinion is diametrically opposed to my own observations of 2-team BGs. Would you be able to elaborate on what exactly is going wrong mechanically, that can't be explained by them mixing the noobs and the sweats together?

NxJoeyD · August 26

ruskiii wrote: »

NxJoeyD wrote: »

As for skilled vs non skilled; that’s really not the cause of our issues.

The problems with BG’s right now are not because “experienced” players are being matched with “inexperienced” ones, that’s not the trend in BG match data we’re seeing.

The problems are mechanical based not experience based.

Man, your opinion is diametrically opposed to my own observations of 2-team BGs. Would you be able to elaborate on what exactly is going wrong mechanically, that can't be explained by them mixing the noobs and the sweats together?

Mixing experienced players and new players will always have a disparity in gameplay and that’s to be expected.

But what I’m talking about are the HEAVY imbalances in BG result trends, specifically, post subclassing.

We’re still seeing matches whereby a select two or three players far outpace the group average or trend in KDA, and that’s accounting for experienced players being on both sides of the field in matches.

I’m citing mechanics because the trend has gotten worse since SC and it’s not as if all of a sudden players got immensely more experience or out of nowhere we got in influx of noobs.

The state of BG’s has worsened, and more significantly recently. It’s unrealistic for any of us to assume that there have been drastic changes in the skill levels of players that is resulting in a consistent mis match of “super experienced” players versus “noobs” on a regular basis. There have always been a mix of experience bases in BG’s, that’s not new.

So that leaves mechanics.

And that makes sense when you do a deeper dive looking at feedback from these official forms, plus what’s contributed on Steam & Reddit, and other platforms.

Players are quickly figuring out which combination of build mechanics result in the least amount of counterplay and THAT is what’s making BG’s worse.

ruskiii · August 26

NxJoeyD wrote: »

ruskiii wrote: »

NxJoeyD wrote: »

As for skilled vs non skilled; that’s really not the cause of our issues.

The problems with BG’s right now are not because “experienced” players are being matched with “inexperienced” ones, that’s not the trend in BG match data we’re seeing.

The problems are mechanical based not experience based.

Man, your opinion is diametrically opposed to my own observations of 2-team BGs. Would you be able to elaborate on what exactly is going wrong mechanically, that can't be explained by them mixing the noobs and the sweats together?

Mixing experienced players and new players will always have a disparity in gameplay and that’s to be expected.

But what I’m talking about are the HEAVY imbalances in BG result trends, specifically, post subclassing.

We’re still seeing matches whereby a select two or three players far outpace the group average or trend in KDA, and that’s accounting for experienced players being on both sides of the field in matches.

I’m citing mechanics because the trend has gotten worse since SC and it’s not as if all of a sudden players got immensely more experience or out of nowhere we got in influx of noobs.

The state of BG’s has worsened, and more significantly recently. It’s unrealistic for any of us to assume that there have been drastic changes in the skill levels of players that is resulting in a consistent mis match of “super experienced” players versus “noobs” on a regular basis. There have always been a mix of experience bases in BG’s, that’s not new.

So that leaves mechanics.

And that makes sense when you do a deeper dive looking at feedback from these official forms, plus what’s contributed on Steam & Reddit, and other platforms.

Players are quickly figuring out which combination of build mechanics result in the least amount of counterplay and THAT is what’s making BG’s worse.

Thanks for elaborating. I understand more clearly where you're coming from now. I agree the game always did mix players of different skill levels in some respects because the MMR system isn't perfect. People who play a lot will get a higher MMR rating than their actual skill level would suggest, and sometimes during off hours there was a little mixing of the MMR brackets to make sure games pop. This is healthy for the game. This is the kind of scenario that inspires a player to get better. Being mostly amongst players of a similar level, but having an experience with players that remind you there is still a ways to go.

The thing I think you're missing is that pre-U44 (so a while before subclassings shift to a crit damage meta), there was a lower band of MMR, that you as an experienced BG player, would only compete in for maybe one or two games on a new character. In that sense the pool of people you would come into contact with has grown to regularly include players who are pretty much new to the game, at least the PVP side of the game.

What would you consider to be uncounterable gameplay? I can't say I recognise your name from PCNA, so I'm not sure of your specific playstyle etc.

NxJoeyD · August 26

ruskiii wrote: »

NxJoeyD wrote: »

ruskiii wrote: »

NxJoeyD wrote: »

As for skilled vs non skilled; that’s really not the cause of our issues.

The problems with BG’s right now are not because “experienced” players are being matched with “inexperienced” ones, that’s not the trend in BG match data we’re seeing.

The problems are mechanical based not experience based.

Man, your opinion is diametrically opposed to my own observations of 2-team BGs. Would you be able to elaborate on what exactly is going wrong mechanically, that can't be explained by them mixing the noobs and the sweats together?

Mixing experienced players and new players will always have a disparity in gameplay and that’s to be expected.

But what I’m talking about are the HEAVY imbalances in BG result trends, specifically, post subclassing.

We’re still seeing matches whereby a select two or three players far outpace the group average or trend in KDA, and that’s accounting for experienced players being on both sides of the field in matches.

I’m citing mechanics because the trend has gotten worse since SC and it’s not as if all of a sudden players got immensely more experience or out of nowhere we got in influx of noobs.

The state of BG’s has worsened, and more significantly recently. It’s unrealistic for any of us to assume that there have been drastic changes in the skill levels of players that is resulting in a consistent mis match of “super experienced” players versus “noobs” on a regular basis. There have always been a mix of experience bases in BG’s, that’s not new.

So that leaves mechanics.

And that makes sense when you do a deeper dive looking at feedback from these official forms, plus what’s contributed on Steam & Reddit, and other platforms.

Players are quickly figuring out which combination of build mechanics result in the least amount of counterplay and THAT is what’s making BG’s worse.

Thanks for elaborating. I understand more clearly where you're coming from now. I agree the game always did mix players of different skill levels in some respects because the MMR system isn't perfect. People who play a lot will get a higher MMR rating than their actual skill level would suggest, and sometimes during off hours there was a little mixing of the MMR brackets to make sure games pop. This is healthy for the game. This is the kind of scenario that inspires a player to get better. Being mostly amongst players of a similar level, but having an experience with players that remind you there is still a ways to go.

The thing I think you're missing is that pre-U44 (so a while before subclassings shift to a crit damage meta), there was a lower band of MMR, that you as an experienced BG player, would only compete in for maybe one or two games on a new character. In that sense the pool of people you would come into contact with has grown to regularly include players who are pretty much new to the game, at least the PVP side of the game.

What would you consider to be uncounterable gameplay? I can't say I recognise your name from PCNA, so I'm not sure of your specific playstyle etc.

Agreed. A mix of player experience in PvP is healthy and I don’t have an issue with that because, as you say, it helps improve those learning the game.

I get what you mean about MMR, but at the same time are we really seeing such an influx of new players that the disparity between “high experience” and “very low experience” among the population is that high?

I’m seeing essentially the same mix of players that I’ve always seen. And I know BG’s have been a long standing criticism of the game and for good reason; but I’m not seeing a significant change in the groups of players I’m in BG’s with, however, I am seeing changes in their gameplay or they’ve created toons to better take advantage of subclass mixing; I’ve seen a lot of that.

You won’t see me on PCNA much, for PC I typically only log in when I want to capture more detailed data in the PTE. My primary gameplay characters are on XBNA. I will play somewhat on PCNA but the lions share is XB.

As for the lack of counter play that has to do with the mixing of mechanics. Prior to SC, each class had aspects of risk versus reward in the nature of how their abilities were built. That’s not to say that any one class was meant for any particular role, but let’s take NB, for example. This class has always had hugh burst damage potential and crit enhancement enabling a lot of single target burst damage. The counter play to this was a degree of stealth detection paired with the fact that NB’s had less durability & utility; a NB (played properly) needed to try and avoid damage, this was the counter play. But now, NB’s can slot durability & utility like Crit Surge, Hardened Ward, Vibrant Shroud, or Sun Shield. Now these builds don’t have to have much of a care about avoiding damage, they can just take it because they’ve got an on demand source of strong mitigation & healing as well as some significant passives. This kills counter play because the by-design mechanics to combat NB have been filled in; and only the niche-est of builds can attempt to address that, and even then. It’s not as if, for example, a Warden is going to get as significant of a damage increase from slotting any other class skill line as what NB can achieve in durability so we have a disparity there.

World skills have been a thing with scribing and have been heavily used but they have balancing drawbacks; for example, not all scripts can be combined and AoEs have a more limited range, etc. Subclassing dials PvP imbalances up to 11 because not all skill lines are going to fill in the counter play elements the way some others do.

And it’s not just direct abilities & passives; set slots play a huge role here. Previously a build might have to allocate a 5 piece set to achieve a particular benefit which was fair because a whole 5 piece is a pretty big allocation, now, with additional access to abilities, passives, and buffs; the balance restriction some players had in having to rock a full 5 piece to get essential attributes is also gone.

IMO the metas have confined now; sure it’s crit based but it’s not just that they’re crit based, it’s how the ceiling has been raised on durability in PvP that’s souring the milk. Not all abilites behave the same way, mechanically. Those mechanical differences added to the give and take of PvP before.

ruskiii · August 26

NxJoeyD wrote: »

I get what you mean about MMR, but at the same time are we really seeing such an influx of new players that the disparity between “high experience” and “very low experience” among the population is that high?

Yes and no. Yes, there has been a huge influx of new and returning players due to the Oblivion remake and subclassing respectively, but that isn't what we are talking about here. The disparity was always there, just now you are being exposed to it constantly, rather than the people with the least experience being matched against each other for the most part. It's easy to underestimate how many people were populating that lowest level of MMR.

NxJoeyD wrote: »

As for the lack of counter play that has to do with the mixing of mechanics. Prior to SC, each class had aspects of risk versus reward in the nature of how their abilities were built. That’s not to say that any one class was meant for any particular role, but let’s take NB, for example. This class has always had hugh burst damage potential and crit enhancement enabling a lot of single target burst damage. The counter play to this was a degree of stealth detection paired with the fact that NB’s had less durability & utility; a NB (played properly) needed to try and avoid damage, this was the counter play. But now, NB’s can slot durability & utility like Crit Surge, Hardened Ward, Vibrant Shroud, or Sun Shield. Now these builds don’t have to have much of a care about avoiding damage, they can just take it because they’ve got an on demand source of strong mitigation & healing as well as some significant passives. This kills counter play because the by-design mechanics to combat NB have been filled in; and only the niche-est of builds can attempt to address that, and even then. It’s not as if, for example, a Warden is going to get as significant of a damage increase from slotting any other class skill line as what NB can achieve in durability so we have a disparity there.

I'm not sure who you are fighting over on Xbox, but I can say pretty confidently I'm yet to see an NB pick up Deadric Summoning thru subclassing. Not even sorcs are running hardened ward anymore. NB is far more likely to pick up Aedric Spear, Animal Companions, Storm Calling or Grave Lord. Across the board we've seen people running a lot of damage lines and all of these players, while pumping out a lot of damage themselves, are equally susceptible to getting hit hard.

Off the top of my head the only play style with little counter-play at the moment is pairing warden class charm with RoA, but even in that niche case, you have options: immovability pots, focusing the player, avoiding stacking until they expose themself etc etc.

Haki_7 · August 26

Team got bombed once (only succeeded due to damage sigil) and promptly gave up. Three or four players immediately started sacrificing themselves over and over without even drawing weapons. Imagine giving up on a three-sided DM after a single death.

''4. People just give up a lot sooner because they can no longer fight for second place.''

ruskiii · August 26

Haki_7 wrote: »

Team got bombed once (only succeeded due to damage sigil) and promptly gave up. Three or four players immediately started to sacrifice themselves without even drawing weapons. Imagine giving up on a three-sided DM after a single wipe.

''4. People just give up a lot sooner because they can no longer fight for second place.''

In 3-team BGs they would have sat in spawn while the two better teams fought below them, picking them off if they decided to jump down or step to close to the edge.

Half the players you get on your team at this time of day don't even know what the sigils are unfortunately. The amount of times I've held a power sigil for teammates and they run past me is honestly wild.

I know if me and you are on the same team 9/10 times we have a very good game. It just sucks that the lobbies are all mixed up right now, and playing one character too much gets you in MMR hell.

I don't think this is an issue of there being two teams instead of three. If anything two teams has lead to far more combat and interesting gameplay, especially when the teams are somewhat even.

MincMincMinc · August 26

Haki_7 wrote: »

Team got bombed once (only succeeded due to damage sigil) and promptly gave up. Three or four players immediately started to sacrifice themselves without even drawing weapons. Imagine giving up on a three-sided DM after a single wipe.

''4. People just give up a lot sooner because they can no longer fight for second place.''

Yeah, but if the match was far more even, we probably wouldnt see people give up anyways. The 3 sided vs 2 sided argument is just a bandaid on a bullet wound.

NxJoeyD wrote: »

ruskiii wrote: »

NxJoeyD wrote: »

ruskiii wrote: »

NxJoeyD wrote: »

As for skilled vs non skilled; that’s really not the cause of our issues.

The problems with BG’s right now are not because “experienced” players are being matched with “inexperienced” ones, that’s not the trend in BG match data we’re seeing.

The problems are mechanical based not experience based.

Man, your opinion is diametrically opposed to my own observations of 2-team BGs. Would you be able to elaborate on what exactly is going wrong mechanically, that can't be explained by them mixing the noobs and the sweats together?

Mixing experienced players and new players will always have a disparity in gameplay and that’s to be expected.

But what I’m talking about are the HEAVY imbalances in BG result trends, specifically, post subclassing.

We’re still seeing matches whereby a select two or three players far outpace the group average or trend in KDA, and that’s accounting for experienced players being on both sides of the field in matches.

I’m citing mechanics because the trend has gotten worse since SC and it’s not as if all of a sudden players got immensely more experience or out of nowhere we got in influx of noobs.

The state of BG’s has worsened, and more significantly recently. It’s unrealistic for any of us to assume that there have been drastic changes in the skill levels of players that is resulting in a consistent mis match of “super experienced” players versus “noobs” on a regular basis. There have always been a mix of experience bases in BG’s, that’s not new.

So that leaves mechanics.

And that makes sense when you do a deeper dive looking at feedback from these official forms, plus what’s contributed on Steam & Reddit, and other platforms.

Players are quickly figuring out which combination of build mechanics result in the least amount of counterplay and THAT is what’s making BG’s worse.

Thanks for elaborating. I understand more clearly where you're coming from now. I agree the game always did mix players of different skill levels in some respects because the MMR system isn't perfect. People who play a lot will get a higher MMR rating than their actual skill level would suggest, and sometimes during off hours there was a little mixing of the MMR brackets to make sure games pop. This is healthy for the game. This is the kind of scenario that inspires a player to get better. Being mostly amongst players of a similar level, but having an experience with players that remind you there is still a ways to go.

The thing I think you're missing is that pre-U44 (so a while before subclassings shift to a crit damage meta), there was a lower band of MMR, that you as an experienced BG player, would only compete in for maybe one or two games on a new character. In that sense the pool of people you would come into contact with has grown to regularly include players who are pretty much new to the game, at least the PVP side of the game.

What would you consider to be uncounterable gameplay? I can't say I recognise your name from PCNA, so I'm not sure of your specific playstyle etc.

Agreed. A mix of player experience in PvP is healthy and I don’t have an issue with that because, as you say, it helps improve those learning the game.

I get what you mean about MMR, but at the same time are we really seeing such an influx of new players that the disparity between “high experience” and “very low experience” among the population is that high?
.
.
IMO the metas have confined now; sure it’s crit based but it’s not just that they’re crit based, it’s how the ceiling has been raised on durability in PvP that’s souring the milk. Not all abilites behave the same way, mechanically. Those mechanical differences added to the give and take of PvP before.

Well to a degree, a mix is a good thing. However as you seem to already understand the problem becomes when the skill OR build ceiling gets too high that newer players can't fathom fighting back. We actually have a good comparison with vengeance here so lets use it.

On live the great disparity happens with the build system due to power creep. Skills have 3x the effects on them. Certain enchants are more efficient than the standard. Certain mundus stones are more efficient. Certain traits are more efficient. Certain armor types are more efficient now.......Even down to certain stats being too easy to obtain, while others are completely useless. Live's build system and resulting combat system are such a mess that new players have no chance at starting to participate without having their hand held through the build process. Subclassing just had a multiplier effect where there are so many wrong choices to make for any build.

Vengeance lets us remove that for example, kinda works out for this discussion. In vengeance there is no build disparity, combat was purely dependent on player skill and technical mechanics. (This is why you hear alot of people whining that they want their proc sets back. Practically anyone who thought combat boiled down to just light attacks just doesn't technically understand the combat system. So imagine earlier in ESO's career, we used to be anywhere inbetween. In a way there is a sweetspot for both where you could have some level of build disparity between new and vet players, while at the same time having the same skill disparity.

How does this tie back into the bg discussion. Well once again the only answer at this point is an MMR system (assuming zos maintains live and doesnt implement the vengeance skills for another year or two). The above disparities CAN make newer players strive to improve, but once they are so far blown out of reach every person has a point where they give up. With the current state of the build system, that point is exceedingly low. I could make a build for a brand new player and throw them up against another brand new player and the fight will be a no contest every time. The MMR system would ideally try to get people only fighting other within that disparity window. Such that they know getting better is possible, without immediately wanting to quit.

NxJoeyD · August 26

ruskiii wrote: »

NxJoeyD wrote: »

I get what you mean about MMR, but at the same time are we really seeing such an influx of new players that the disparity between “high experience” and “very low experience” among the population is that high?

Yes and no. Yes, there has been a huge influx of new and returning players due to the Oblivion remake and subclassing respectively, but that isn't what we are talking about here. The disparity was always there, just now you are being exposed to it constantly, rather than the people with the least experience being matched against each other for the most part. It's easy to underestimate how many people were populating that lowest level of MMR.

NxJoeyD wrote: »

As for the lack of counter play that has to do with the mixing of mechanics. Prior to SC, each class had aspects of risk versus reward in the nature of how their abilities were built. That’s not to say that any one class was meant for any particular role, but let’s take NB, for example. This class has always had hugh burst damage potential and crit enhancement enabling a lot of single target burst damage. The counter play to this was a degree of stealth detection paired with the fact that NB’s had less durability & utility; a NB (played properly) needed to try and avoid damage, this was the counter play. But now, NB’s can slot durability & utility like Crit Surge, Hardened Ward, Vibrant Shroud, or Sun Shield. Now these builds don’t have to have much of a care about avoiding damage, they can just take it because they’ve got an on demand source of strong mitigation & healing as well as some significant passives. This kills counter play because the by-design mechanics to combat NB have been filled in; and only the niche-est of builds can attempt to address that, and even then. It’s not as if, for example, a Warden is going to get as significant of a damage increase from slotting any other class skill line as what NB can achieve in durability so we have a disparity there.

I'm not sure who you are fighting over on Xbox, but I can say pretty confidently I'm yet to see an NB pick up Deadric Summoning thru subclassing. Not even sorcs are running hardened ward anymore. NB is far more likely to pick up Aedric Spear, Animal Companions, Storm Calling or Grave Lord. Across the board we've seen people running a lot of damage lines and all of these players, while pumping out a lot of damage themselves, are equally susceptible to getting hit hard.

Off the top of my head the only play style with little counter-play at the moment is pairing warden class charm with RoA, but even in that niche case, you have options: immovability pots, focusing the player, avoiding stacking until they expose themself etc etc.

Oh then I can tell you XB is significantly different from what you’re seeing on PCNA …. EVERYBODY is running HW over here! Storm calling has some pickup on this platform but it’s minor, the VAST majority of builds are slotting either Assassination or Aedric Spear.

Right now, on XBNA your NB & Templars have the least amount of counterplay. Their offense is incredibly strong and their exposure is now incredibly minimal. Those classes aren’t susceptible to getting hit hard because they’re able to change gear sets and slot benefits that give them mitigation they didn’t previously have access to IF they wanted to maintain their damage output; now, they can maintain the damage and have the mitigation.

Right now we’ve got some meta builds that are actively maintaining their offense while being blasted with 60k, 70k, 80k base points of damage … now if they’re actively attacking during that kind of damage allocation that means they aren’t blocking, they aren’t running, they literally are passively mitigating THAT much damage to the point that they aren’t concerned with the concept of combat mechanics, offense versus defense. That’s a major problem.

There have been conversations addressing the mitigation concerns with ESO before and what I’m seeing now, subclassing had made that far worse and that’s the larger contributor to what I’m seeing in BG match outcomes.

I’m still playing the game names I’ve seen for the last 2 years, sure there’s a few new ones here and there but you get used to seeing people and there’s a solid consistency here. The difference is in the outcomes, not who I’m seeing playing in matches.

This might be a good example of population spread difference between platforms. When it comes to testing or collecting data I like to use environments that have the most consistency across the board. IMO XB has more of that as the hardware & software swings are much less of a factor in results.

NxJoeyD · August 26

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Haki_7 wrote: »

Team got bombed once (only succeeded due to damage sigil) and promptly gave up. Three or four players immediately started to sacrifice themselves without even drawing weapons. Imagine giving up on a three-sided DM after a single wipe.

''4. People just give up a lot sooner because they can no longer fight for second place.''

Yeah, but if the match was far more even, we probably wouldnt see people give up anyways. The 3 sided vs 2 sided argument is just a bandaid on a bullet wound.

NxJoeyD wrote: »

ruskiii wrote: »

NxJoeyD wrote: »

ruskiii wrote: »

NxJoeyD wrote: »

As for skilled vs non skilled; that’s really not the cause of our issues.

The problems with BG’s right now are not because “experienced” players are being matched with “inexperienced” ones, that’s not the trend in BG match data we’re seeing.

The problems are mechanical based not experience based.

Man, your opinion is diametrically opposed to my own observations of 2-team BGs. Would you be able to elaborate on what exactly is going wrong mechanically, that can't be explained by them mixing the noobs and the sweats together?

Mixing experienced players and new players will always have a disparity in gameplay and that’s to be expected.

But what I’m talking about are the HEAVY imbalances in BG result trends, specifically, post subclassing.

We’re still seeing matches whereby a select two or three players far outpace the group average or trend in KDA, and that’s accounting for experienced players being on both sides of the field in matches.

I’m citing mechanics because the trend has gotten worse since SC and it’s not as if all of a sudden players got immensely more experience or out of nowhere we got in influx of noobs.

The state of BG’s has worsened, and more significantly recently. It’s unrealistic for any of us to assume that there have been drastic changes in the skill levels of players that is resulting in a consistent mis match of “super experienced” players versus “noobs” on a regular basis. There have always been a mix of experience bases in BG’s, that’s not new.

So that leaves mechanics.

And that makes sense when you do a deeper dive looking at feedback from these official forms, plus what’s contributed on Steam & Reddit, and other platforms.

Players are quickly figuring out which combination of build mechanics result in the least amount of counterplay and THAT is what’s making BG’s worse.

Thanks for elaborating. I understand more clearly where you're coming from now. I agree the game always did mix players of different skill levels in some respects because the MMR system isn't perfect. People who play a lot will get a higher MMR rating than their actual skill level would suggest, and sometimes during off hours there was a little mixing of the MMR brackets to make sure games pop. This is healthy for the game. This is the kind of scenario that inspires a player to get better. Being mostly amongst players of a similar level, but having an experience with players that remind you there is still a ways to go.

The thing I think you're missing is that pre-U44 (so a while before subclassings shift to a crit damage meta), there was a lower band of MMR, that you as an experienced BG player, would only compete in for maybe one or two games on a new character. In that sense the pool of people you would come into contact with has grown to regularly include players who are pretty much new to the game, at least the PVP side of the game.

What would you consider to be uncounterable gameplay? I can't say I recognise your name from PCNA, so I'm not sure of your specific playstyle etc.

Agreed. A mix of player experience in PvP is healthy and I don’t have an issue with that because, as you say, it helps improve those learning the game.

I get what you mean about MMR, but at the same time are we really seeing such an influx of new players that the disparity between “high experience” and “very low experience” among the population is that high?
.
.
IMO the metas have confined now; sure it’s crit based but it’s not just that they’re crit based, it’s how the ceiling has been raised on durability in PvP that’s souring the milk. Not all abilites behave the same way, mechanically. Those mechanical differences added to the give and take of PvP before.

Well to a degree, a mix is a good thing. However as you seem to already understand the problem becomes when the skill OR build ceiling gets too high that newer players can't fathom fighting back. We actually have a good comparison with vengeance here so lets use it.

On live the great disparity happens with the build system due to power creep. Skills have 3x the effects on them. Certain enchants are more efficient than the standard. Certain mundus stones are more efficient. Certain traits are more efficient. Certain armor types are more efficient now.......Even down to certain stats being too easy to obtain, while others are completely useless. Live's build system and resulting combat system are such a mess that new players have no chance at starting to participate without having their hand held through the build process. Subclassing just had a multiplier effect where there are so many wrong choices to make for any build.

Vengeance lets us remove that for example, kinda works out for this discussion. In vengeance there is no build disparity, combat was purely dependent on player skill and technical mechanics. (This is why you hear alot of people whining that they want their proc sets back. Practically anyone who thought combat boiled down to just light attacks just doesn't technically understand the combat system. So imagine earlier in ESO's career, we used to be anywhere inbetween. In a way there is a sweetspot for both where you could have some level of build disparity between new and vet players, while at the same time having the same skill disparity.

How does this tie back into the bg discussion. Well once again the only answer at this point is an MMR system (assuming zos maintains live and doesnt implement the vengeance skills for another year or two). The above disparities CAN make newer players strive to improve, but once they are so far blown out of reach every person has a point where they give up. With the current state of the build system, that point is exceedingly low. I could make a build for a brand new player and throw them up against another brand new player and the fight will be a no contest every time. The MMR system would ideally try to get people only fighting other within that disparity window. Such that they know getting better is possible, without immediately wanting to quit.

I feel that … so in reality, an adjusted MMR as you’re suggesting wouldn’t just sort new players away from experienced players; it could potentially sort the power raised metas builds away from the other builds in matches?

If ZoS were to use a non-resetting MMR structure for this how would we keep players who do end up improving away from the metas … like, one presumes there’s a middle ground area in the data where those two sides would overlap and we’d still have problems … I’m just not certain how big that overlap would be.

reazea · August 26

Can't speak to the future of battlegrounds, but I can say for certain I will never play another 2 team BG.

ruskiii · August 26

NxJoeyD wrote: »

ruskiii wrote: »

NxJoeyD wrote: »

I get what you mean about MMR, but at the same time are we really seeing such an influx of new players that the disparity between “high experience” and “very low experience” among the population is that high?

Yes and no. Yes, there has been a huge influx of new and returning players due to the Oblivion remake and subclassing respectively, but that isn't what we are talking about here. The disparity was always there, just now you are being exposed to it constantly, rather than the people with the least experience being matched against each other for the most part. It's easy to underestimate how many people were populating that lowest level of MMR.

NxJoeyD wrote: »

As for the lack of counter play that has to do with the mixing of mechanics. Prior to SC, each class had aspects of risk versus reward in the nature of how their abilities were built. That’s not to say that any one class was meant for any particular role, but let’s take NB, for example. This class has always had hugh burst damage potential and crit enhancement enabling a lot of single target burst damage. The counter play to this was a degree of stealth detection paired with the fact that NB’s had less durability & utility; a NB (played properly) needed to try and avoid damage, this was the counter play. But now, NB’s can slot durability & utility like Crit Surge, Hardened Ward, Vibrant Shroud, or Sun Shield. Now these builds don’t have to have much of a care about avoiding damage, they can just take it because they’ve got an on demand source of strong mitigation & healing as well as some significant passives. This kills counter play because the by-design mechanics to combat NB have been filled in; and only the niche-est of builds can attempt to address that, and even then. It’s not as if, for example, a Warden is going to get as significant of a damage increase from slotting any other class skill line as what NB can achieve in durability so we have a disparity there.

I'm not sure who you are fighting over on Xbox, but I can say pretty confidently I'm yet to see an NB pick up Deadric Summoning thru subclassing. Not even sorcs are running hardened ward anymore. NB is far more likely to pick up Aedric Spear, Animal Companions, Storm Calling or Grave Lord. Across the board we've seen people running a lot of damage lines and all of these players, while pumping out a lot of damage themselves, are equally susceptible to getting hit hard.

Off the top of my head the only play style with little counter-play at the moment is pairing warden class charm with RoA, but even in that niche case, you have options: immovability pots, focusing the player, avoiding stacking until they expose themself etc etc.

Oh then I can tell you XB is significantly different from what you’re seeing on PCNA …. EVERYBODY is running HW over here! Storm calling has some pickup on this platform but it’s minor, the VAST majority of builds are slotting either Assassination or Aedric Spear.

Right now, on XBNA your NB & Templars have the least amount of counterplay. Their offense is incredibly strong and their exposure is now incredibly minimal. Those classes aren’t susceptible to getting hit hard because they’re able to change gear sets and slot benefits that give them mitigation they didn’t previously have access to IF they wanted to maintain their damage output; now, they can maintain the damage and have the mitigation.

Right now we’ve got some meta builds that are actively maintaining their offense while being blasted with 60k, 70k, 80k base points of damage … now if they’re actively attacking during that kind of damage allocation that means they aren’t blocking, they aren’t running, they literally are passively mitigating THAT much damage to the point that they aren’t concerned with the concept of combat mechanics, offense versus defense. That’s a major problem.

There have been conversations addressing the mitigation concerns with ESO before and what I’m seeing now, subclassing had made that far worse and that’s the larger contributor to what I’m seeing in BG match outcomes.

I’m still playing the game names I’ve seen for the last 2 years, sure there’s a few new ones here and there but you get used to seeing people and there’s a solid consistency here. The difference is in the outcomes, not who I’m seeing playing in matches.

This might be a good example of population spread difference between platforms. When it comes to testing or collecting data I like to use environments that have the most consistency across the board. IMO XB has more of that as the hardware & software swings are much less of a factor in results.

I still cant grasp people actually using daedric summoning on XB lol. Not just one guy either, but it actually being popular. Such a mid skill line and ward really not worth it since the nerf. I don't suppose you have any gameplay of these BGs? Would be generally curious to see whats going on.

Obviously we have some tanky dds and tanky healers and even straight up tanks on PC, but I wouldnt consider any of the current meta builds "uncounterable".

If you have some clips I'd love to see them

Haki_7 · August 26

ruskiii wrote: »

Haki_7 wrote: »

Team got bombed once (only succeeded due to damage sigil) and promptly gave up. Three or four players immediately started to sacrifice themselves without even drawing weapons. Imagine giving up on a three-sided DM after a single wipe.

''4. People just give up a lot sooner because they can no longer fight for second place.''

In 3-team BGs they would have sat in spawn while the two better teams fought below them, picking them off if they decided to jump down or step to close to the edge.

Or I could have just healed their way out of the sandwich, thus forcing enemy teams to occupy the same space if they chose to pursue us (using one team against the other).
''1. Since you can't use one team against another anymore, (...)''

MincMincMinc · August 26

NxJoeyD wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Haki_7 wrote: »

Team got bombed once (only succeeded due to damage sigil) and promptly gave up. Three or four players immediately started to sacrifice themselves without even drawing weapons. Imagine giving up on a three-sided DM after a single wipe.

''4. People just give up a lot sooner because they can no longer fight for second place.''

Yeah, but if the match was far more even, we probably wouldnt see people give up anyways. The 3 sided vs 2 sided argument is just a bandaid on a bullet wound.

NxJoeyD wrote: »

ruskiii wrote: »

NxJoeyD wrote: »

ruskiii wrote: »

NxJoeyD wrote: »

As for skilled vs non skilled; that’s really not the cause of our issues.

The problems with BG’s right now are not because “experienced” players are being matched with “inexperienced” ones, that’s not the trend in BG match data we’re seeing.

The problems are mechanical based not experience based.

Man, your opinion is diametrically opposed to my own observations of 2-team BGs. Would you be able to elaborate on what exactly is going wrong mechanically, that can't be explained by them mixing the noobs and the sweats together?

Mixing experienced players and new players will always have a disparity in gameplay and that’s to be expected.

But what I’m talking about are the HEAVY imbalances in BG result trends, specifically, post subclassing.

We’re still seeing matches whereby a select two or three players far outpace the group average or trend in KDA, and that’s accounting for experienced players being on both sides of the field in matches.

I’m citing mechanics because the trend has gotten worse since SC and it’s not as if all of a sudden players got immensely more experience or out of nowhere we got in influx of noobs.

The state of BG’s has worsened, and more significantly recently. It’s unrealistic for any of us to assume that there have been drastic changes in the skill levels of players that is resulting in a consistent mis match of “super experienced” players versus “noobs” on a regular basis. There have always been a mix of experience bases in BG’s, that’s not new.

So that leaves mechanics.

And that makes sense when you do a deeper dive looking at feedback from these official forms, plus what’s contributed on Steam & Reddit, and other platforms.

Players are quickly figuring out which combination of build mechanics result in the least amount of counterplay and THAT is what’s making BG’s worse.

Thanks for elaborating. I understand more clearly where you're coming from now. I agree the game always did mix players of different skill levels in some respects because the MMR system isn't perfect. People who play a lot will get a higher MMR rating than their actual skill level would suggest, and sometimes during off hours there was a little mixing of the MMR brackets to make sure games pop. This is healthy for the game. This is the kind of scenario that inspires a player to get better. Being mostly amongst players of a similar level, but having an experience with players that remind you there is still a ways to go.

The thing I think you're missing is that pre-U44 (so a while before subclassings shift to a crit damage meta), there was a lower band of MMR, that you as an experienced BG player, would only compete in for maybe one or two games on a new character. In that sense the pool of people you would come into contact with has grown to regularly include players who are pretty much new to the game, at least the PVP side of the game.

What would you consider to be uncounterable gameplay? I can't say I recognise your name from PCNA, so I'm not sure of your specific playstyle etc.

Agreed. A mix of player experience in PvP is healthy and I don’t have an issue with that because, as you say, it helps improve those learning the game.

I get what you mean about MMR, but at the same time are we really seeing such an influx of new players that the disparity between “high experience” and “very low experience” among the population is that high?
.
.
IMO the metas have confined now; sure it’s crit based but it’s not just that they’re crit based, it’s how the ceiling has been raised on durability in PvP that’s souring the milk. Not all abilites behave the same way, mechanically. Those mechanical differences added to the give and take of PvP before.

Well to a degree, a mix is a good thing. However as you seem to already understand the problem becomes when the skill OR build ceiling gets too high that newer players can't fathom fighting back. We actually have a good comparison with vengeance here so lets use it.

On live the great disparity happens with the build system due to power creep. Skills have 3x the effects on them. Certain enchants are more efficient than the standard. Certain mundus stones are more efficient. Certain traits are more efficient. Certain armor types are more efficient now.......Even down to certain stats being too easy to obtain, while others are completely useless. Live's build system and resulting combat system are such a mess that new players have no chance at starting to participate without having their hand held through the build process. Subclassing just had a multiplier effect where there are so many wrong choices to make for any build.

Vengeance lets us remove that for example, kinda works out for this discussion. In vengeance there is no build disparity, combat was purely dependent on player skill and technical mechanics. (This is why you hear alot of people whining that they want their proc sets back. Practically anyone who thought combat boiled down to just light attacks just doesn't technically understand the combat system. So imagine earlier in ESO's career, we used to be anywhere inbetween. In a way there is a sweetspot for both where you could have some level of build disparity between new and vet players, while at the same time having the same skill disparity.

How does this tie back into the bg discussion. Well once again the only answer at this point is an MMR system (assuming zos maintains live and doesnt implement the vengeance skills for another year or two). The above disparities CAN make newer players strive to improve, but once they are so far blown out of reach every person has a point where they give up. With the current state of the build system, that point is exceedingly low. I could make a build for a brand new player and throw them up against another brand new player and the fight will be a no contest every time. The MMR system would ideally try to get people only fighting other within that disparity window. Such that they know getting better is possible, without immediately wanting to quit.

I feel that … so in reality, an adjusted MMR as you’re suggesting wouldn’t just sort new players away from experienced players; it could potentially sort the power raised metas builds away from the other builds in matches?

If ZoS were to use a non-resetting MMR structure for this how would we keep players who do end up improving away from the metas … like, one presumes there’s a middle ground area in the data where those two sides would overlap and we’d still have problems … I’m just not certain how big that overlap would be.

Nice that would have been alot of retyping explanations lol.

Well a non resetting account wide MMR is just that. You climb to your spot on the ladder. At a certain point you start going even KDA and healing wise with the others in your lobby. If you improve as a player or learn more build theory that lets you improve, then you could potentially move up the ladder. If a meta comes in to be that you are weak to or dont participate, those players effectively are stronger than you and you would move down the ladder to players with your same output, keeping the matches more even.

It really comes down to power creep. On one hand we could go to a template pvp like any fighting game. Stats and building dont play into combat and its all technical/mechanical skill. Or we go to live's extreme build power creep where what matters most is the horizontal progression in the game where what matters most is build theory and collectibles like sets, unlocks, dlc.

There was probably a golden era in eso somewhere around 2017-2018 where we hit that sweetspot between the two. Where the build system had the right amount of choices and tension available across the various stats. My usual example of what stat tension is and why choices can hurt it is reflected in movement speed. Lets say damage one patch gets 2x'd well we can just power creep the boss hp up to match and nobody tells the difference right? Does that work for certain stats like movement speed? No, we cant just scale the world up in size. The movement speed of any game should remain relatively the same. If they want more choices, the choices have to add up to the same value. The major/minor system was intended to stop too much growth while giving zos the ability to make new sets or choices available.

NxJoeyD · August 26

ruskiii wrote: »

NxJoeyD wrote: »

ruskiii wrote: »

NxJoeyD wrote: »

I get what you mean about MMR, but at the same time are we really seeing such an influx of new players that the disparity between “high experience” and “very low experience” among the population is that high?

Yes and no. Yes, there has been a huge influx of new and returning players due to the Oblivion remake and subclassing respectively, but that isn't what we are talking about here. The disparity was always there, just now you are being exposed to it constantly, rather than the people with the least experience being matched against each other for the most part. It's easy to underestimate how many people were populating that lowest level of MMR.

NxJoeyD wrote: »

As for the lack of counter play that has to do with the mixing of mechanics. Prior to SC, each class had aspects of risk versus reward in the nature of how their abilities were built. That’s not to say that any one class was meant for any particular role, but let’s take NB, for example. This class has always had hugh burst damage potential and crit enhancement enabling a lot of single target burst damage. The counter play to this was a degree of stealth detection paired with the fact that NB’s had less durability & utility; a NB (played properly) needed to try and avoid damage, this was the counter play. But now, NB’s can slot durability & utility like Crit Surge, Hardened Ward, Vibrant Shroud, or Sun Shield. Now these builds don’t have to have much of a care about avoiding damage, they can just take it because they’ve got an on demand source of strong mitigation & healing as well as some significant passives. This kills counter play because the by-design mechanics to combat NB have been filled in; and only the niche-est of builds can attempt to address that, and even then. It’s not as if, for example, a Warden is going to get as significant of a damage increase from slotting any other class skill line as what NB can achieve in durability so we have a disparity there.

I'm not sure who you are fighting over on Xbox, but I can say pretty confidently I'm yet to see an NB pick up Deadric Summoning thru subclassing. Not even sorcs are running hardened ward anymore. NB is far more likely to pick up Aedric Spear, Animal Companions, Storm Calling or Grave Lord. Across the board we've seen people running a lot of damage lines and all of these players, while pumping out a lot of damage themselves, are equally susceptible to getting hit hard.

Off the top of my head the only play style with little counter-play at the moment is pairing warden class charm with RoA, but even in that niche case, you have options: immovability pots, focusing the player, avoiding stacking until they expose themself etc etc.

Oh then I can tell you XB is significantly different from what you’re seeing on PCNA …. EVERYBODY is running HW over here! Storm calling has some pickup on this platform but it’s minor, the VAST majority of builds are slotting either Assassination or Aedric Spear.

Right now, on XBNA your NB & Templars have the least amount of counterplay. Their offense is incredibly strong and their exposure is now incredibly minimal. Those classes aren’t susceptible to getting hit hard because they’re able to change gear sets and slot benefits that give them mitigation they didn’t previously have access to IF they wanted to maintain their damage output; now, they can maintain the damage and have the mitigation.

Right now we’ve got some meta builds that are actively maintaining their offense while being blasted with 60k, 70k, 80k base points of damage … now if they’re actively attacking during that kind of damage allocation that means they aren’t blocking, they aren’t running, they literally are passively mitigating THAT much damage to the point that they aren’t concerned with the concept of combat mechanics, offense versus defense. That’s a major problem.

There have been conversations addressing the mitigation concerns with ESO before and what I’m seeing now, subclassing had made that far worse and that’s the larger contributor to what I’m seeing in BG match outcomes.

I’m still playing the game names I’ve seen for the last 2 years, sure there’s a few new ones here and there but you get used to seeing people and there’s a solid consistency here. The difference is in the outcomes, not who I’m seeing playing in matches.

This might be a good example of population spread difference between platforms. When it comes to testing or collecting data I like to use environments that have the most consistency across the board. IMO XB has more of that as the hardware & software swings are much less of a factor in results.

I still cant grasp people actually using daedric summoning on XB lol. Not just one guy either, but it actually being popular. Such a mid skill line and ward really not worth it since the nerf. I don't suppose you have any gameplay of these BGs? Would be generally curious to see whats going on.

Obviously we have some tanky dds and tanky healers and even straight up tanks on PC, but I wouldnt consider any of the current meta builds "uncounterable".

If you have some clips I'd love to see them

It’s really only for Ward, even without the heal it’s one of the strongest damage shields in PvP, hence why people are leaning on it. It’s not as as popular as the Aedric or Assassin lines but there’s a ton of people here running DS just for that shield. They can either shield stack or if they’d been running a 5 piece to previously get a shield that strong they now have access to Ward which they can keep a more consistent uptime and all for the low cost of one bar slot, rather than 5 pieces of gear and a lower proc rate. To a class base that wasn’t designed to have that easy of access to additional mitigation that’s a big deal.

Another crazy popular one here is Temps Toppling Charge. A lot of people liked to complain about Streak, but mechanically, TC deals as much damage and provides the same stun as Streak but with the added benefits of SIGNIFICANTLY better follow up potential and big minor buff. Two abilities similar on the surface but the difference in mechanics makes a big difference in damage output depending on whom has it. Put Streak on a NB and it’s mid, put TC on a NB and it’s a health chunk.

I’ve got Sorcs & Templars out here running Merciless Resolve that’s landing for 15k crits against high resistances and with Battle Spirit active; two classes, one with an already descent crit factor and another whom was already heavy attack crit focused; we’re seeing them slot an ability that yeilds a persistent passive buff and Ult level of damage from 28m away with no telegraph and no Ult cost barrier. When NB had this it was conceivable to block; but not when half the lobby has it. We’ll be in BG matches and all you hear are the “clicks” from Merci arrows flying all over the place. Now, our metas with the stupid high mitigation can take that; but sorry everybody else, you’re body meat.

The broader access to CC abilites combined with the fact that CC immunity isn’t global, it’s type specific, already reduces the counter play effectiveness of immo pots. We can’t keep citing the same old instruments as counter play solutions anymore. Yes, immo pots are a thing, yes they still work, but, we’d be remiss if we didn’t recognize just how much more CC types are being spammed in PvP due to greater access than before. So when we talk about counter play options there’s what’s on paper versus what works in genuine gameplay.

As for the mitigation increases, I will try and grab some clips, that won’t be hard to do. In some of them I’m going to intentionally make plays that might not be the most strategic but you’ll be able to see what I’m talking about mechanics-wise; specifically the mitigation vs damage output potential.

I have always maintained that in any form of PvP combat, a build should have to make choices in order to achieve higher tier outcomes: for example, if one wants to deal stupid high damage, fine, they can, but the resource allocation cost should make them unable to be as durable. That’s play & counter play. I’m afraid what I’m seeing is LESS of that than what we had before.

This will make even unskilled players look like superstars in BG’s. Yeah we saw this before in the people who wanted to run Rush of Agony & Vicious Death and pull you into the Pestilent Colossus (ugh the amount of times I’d seen that play over and over) .. but it was clear to us who was inexperienced leaning on cheese to cop kills. There was counter play to even that, I run Nibenay monster set and was able to counter play those bombers and even though the vast majority couldn’t rock Nibenay at least there was a counter play available.

But when you have players doling out crazy crits all while laughing off heavy bursts of damage, well, the viable counter plays start to disappear.

I’ll take some clips and post for the group.

Haki_7 · August 26

Destruction of Battlegrounds Chapter 90: Waiting 15 minutes for a lopsided match (Solo 8v8 PC/NA)

https://youtu.be/CjoKp0r22g8

ruskiii · August 27

Haki_7 wrote: »

ruskiii wrote: »

Haki_7 wrote: »

Team got bombed once (only succeeded due to damage sigil) and promptly gave up. Three or four players immediately started to sacrifice themselves without even drawing weapons. Imagine giving up on a three-sided DM after a single wipe.

''4. People just give up a lot sooner because they can no longer fight for second place.''

In 3-team BGs they would have sat in spawn while the two better teams fought below them, picking them off if they decided to jump down or step to close to the edge.

Or I could have just healed their way out of the sandwich, thus forcing enemy teams to occupy the same space if they chose to pursue us (using one team against the other).
''1. Since you can't use one team against another anymore, (...)''

In my imagined BG you are on my team, not theirs. You have to heal me while we spawn camp them.

Moonspawn · August 27

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

So if the matchmaking search had to expand enough it would still put players of vastly different skill levels in the same matches, right?

Yes, (...) Even if the population of bgs collapsed to say 30 people, the MMR system would still function, but in these more niche scenarios you would then start leaning on other mechanics to prevent issues.

Ok so assuming that mixing high and low MMR players is inevitable, we need to find ways to make the three-sided objective modes fun for everyone, regardless of skill level.

Here's how I'd fix Domination and Crazy King:

Reduce the amount of points each flag gives per tick. Domination from 8 to 4, Crazy King from 8 to 6.
Modify flags to require a minimum of two players to be fully captured. Solo players would still be able to hinder the opponents' progress by turning them white, but running around without even drawing weapons would no longer be the ultimate winning strategy.

Even in the worst case scenario (two teams fight while the third flips all remaining flags uncontested), it would be impossible to end any of these matches in less than 10 minutes.
@MincMincMinc Do you see any problem with these changes?

MincMincMinc · August 27

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

So if the matchmaking search had to expand enough it would still put players of vastly different skill levels in the same matches, right?

Yes, (...) Even if the population of bgs collapsed to say 30 people, the MMR system would still function, but in these more niche scenarios you would then start leaning on other mechanics to prevent issues.

Ok so assuming that mixing high and low MMR players is inevitable, we need to find ways to make the three-sided objective modes fun for everyone, regardless of skill level.

Here's how I'd fix Domination and Crazy King:
Reduce the amount of points each flag gives per tick. Domination from 8 to 4, Crazy King from 8 to 6.

Modify flags to require a minimum of two players to be fully captured. Solo players would still be able to hinder the opponents' progress by turning them white, but running around without even drawing weapons would no longer be the ultimate winning strategy.

Even in the worst case scenario (two teams fight while the third flips all remaining flags uncontested), it would be impossible to end any of these matches in less than 10 minutes.
@MincMincMinc Do you see any problem with these changes?

No that makes sense. Really its more like zos just needs to tune the games to be a standard duration. No matter the game mode you shouldnt be able to end it objectively in 2 mins, when other games are 15mins full duration.

Things like chaos ball being held at spawn, why not make it only held in a designated area so they are more prone to actually fighting over it?

3 team CTF is probably the hardest to deal with. Nothing to stop the third team from running 5 flags uncontested within a minute if they really wanted to. Youd probably have to require them to capture both enemy flags in order to gain points. CTF is really more of a two sided gamemode.

Crazy king also shouldn't be spamming uncontested flags all over the place, incentivizing people to not pvp

Moonspawn · August 27

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

So if the matchmaking search had to expand enough it would still put players of vastly different skill levels in the same matches, right?

Yes, (...) Even if the population of bgs collapsed to say 30 people, the MMR system would still function, but in these more niche scenarios you would then start leaning on other mechanics to prevent issues.

Ok so assuming that mixing high and low MMR players is inevitable, we need to find ways to make the three-sided objective modes fun for everyone, regardless of skill level.

Here's how I'd fix Domination and Crazy King:
Reduce the amount of points each flag gives per tick. Domination from 8 to 4, Crazy King from 8 to 6.

Modify flags to require a minimum of two players to be fully captured. Solo players would still be able to hinder the opponents' progress by turning them white, but running around without even drawing weapons would no longer be the ultimate winning strategy.

Even in the worst case scenario (two teams fight while the third flips all remaining flags uncontested), it would be impossible to end any of these matches in less than 10 minutes.
@MincMincMinc Do you see any problem with these changes?

No that makes sense. Really its more like zos just needs to tune the games to be a standard duration. No matter the game mode you shouldnt be able to end it objectively in 2 mins, when other games are 15mins full duration.

Things like chaos ball being held at spawn, why not make it only held in a designated area so they are more prone to actually fighting over it?

3 team CTF is probably the hardest to deal with. Nothing to stop the third team from running 5 flags uncontested within a minute if they really wanted to. Youd probably have to require them to capture both enemy flags in order to gain points. CTF is really more of a two sided gamemode.

Crazy king also shouldn't be spamming uncontested flags all over the place, incentivizing people to not pvp

Two objective modes down, two to go. I'm leaving CTR for last, but there is a plan for that too.

Chaosball

PROBLEMS

Ball carrier could move around the map at high speed. Would be all but impossible to catch.
Players could take the ball to cheesy places where they couldn't be damaged OR where you had to give up your life to damage them.

SOLUTIONS

Reduce ball carrier speed by 30%
Fix cheesy places.

Anything missing?

MincMincMinc · August 27

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

So if the matchmaking search had to expand enough it would still put players of vastly different skill levels in the same matches, right?

Yes, (...) Even if the population of bgs collapsed to say 30 people, the MMR system would still function, but in these more niche scenarios you would then start leaning on other mechanics to prevent issues.

Ok so assuming that mixing high and low MMR players is inevitable, we need to find ways to make the three-sided objective modes fun for everyone, regardless of skill level.

Here's how I'd fix Domination and Crazy King:
Reduce the amount of points each flag gives per tick. Domination from 8 to 4, Crazy King from 8 to 6.

Modify flags to require a minimum of two players to be fully captured. Solo players would still be able to hinder the opponents' progress by turning them white, but running around without even drawing weapons would no longer be the ultimate winning strategy.

Even in the worst case scenario (two teams fight while the third flips all remaining flags uncontested), it would be impossible to end any of these matches in less than 10 minutes.
@MincMincMinc Do you see any problem with these changes?

No that makes sense. Really its more like zos just needs to tune the games to be a standard duration. No matter the game mode you shouldnt be able to end it objectively in 2 mins, when other games are 15mins full duration.

Things like chaos ball being held at spawn, why not make it only held in a designated area so they are more prone to actually fighting over it?

3 team CTF is probably the hardest to deal with. Nothing to stop the third team from running 5 flags uncontested within a minute if they really wanted to. Youd probably have to require them to capture both enemy flags in order to gain points. CTF is really more of a two sided gamemode.

Crazy king also shouldn't be spamming uncontested flags all over the place, incentivizing people to not pvp

Two objective modes down, two to go. I'm leaving CTF for last, but there is a plan for that too.

Chaosball

PROBLEMS
Ball carrier could move around the map at high speed. Would be all but impossible to catch.

Players could take the ball to cheesy places where they couldn't be damaged OR where you had to give up your life to damage them.

SOLUTIONS
Reduce ball carrier speed by 30%

Fix cheesy places.

Anything missing?

To fix cheesy places I think you are better off suggesting to make a delivery location or a general location on the map to hold the chaos ball to get points.

Being able to hold the ball under your own spawn is an issue and leads to players just standing around instead of actually fighting.

Moonspawn · August 27

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

So if the matchmaking search had to expand enough it would still put players of vastly different skill levels in the same matches, right?

Yes, (...) Even if the population of bgs collapsed to say 30 people, the MMR system would still function, but in these more niche scenarios you would then start leaning on other mechanics to prevent issues.

Ok so assuming that mixing high and low MMR players is inevitable, we need to find ways to make the three-sided objective modes fun for everyone, regardless of skill level.

Here's how I'd fix Domination and Crazy King:
Reduce the amount of points each flag gives per tick. Domination from 8 to 4, Crazy King from 8 to 6.

Modify flags to require a minimum of two players to be fully captured. Solo players would still be able to hinder the opponents' progress by turning them white, but running around without even drawing weapons would no longer be the ultimate winning strategy.

Even in the worst case scenario (two teams fight while the third flips all remaining flags uncontested), it would be impossible to end any of these matches in less than 10 minutes.
@MincMincMinc Do you see any problem with these changes?

No that makes sense. Really its more like zos just needs to tune the games to be a standard duration. No matter the game mode you shouldnt be able to end it objectively in 2 mins, when other games are 15mins full duration.

Things like chaos ball being held at spawn, why not make it only held in a designated area so they are more prone to actually fighting over it?

3 team CTF is probably the hardest to deal with. Nothing to stop the third team from running 5 flags uncontested within a minute if they really wanted to. Youd probably have to require them to capture both enemy flags in order to gain points. CTF is really more of a two sided gamemode.

Crazy king also shouldn't be spamming uncontested flags all over the place, incentivizing people to not pvp

Two objective modes down, two to go. I'm leaving CTF for last, but there is a plan for that too.

Chaosball

PROBLEMS
Ball carrier could move around the map at high speed. Would be all but impossible to catch.

Players could take the ball to cheesy places where they couldn't be damaged OR where you had to give up your life to damage them.

SOLUTIONS
Reduce ball carrier speed by 30%

Fix cheesy places.

Anything missing?

To fix cheesy places I think you are better off suggesting to make a delivery location or a general location on the map to hold the chaos ball to get points.

Being able to hold the ball under your own spawn is an issue and leads to players just standing around instead of actually fighting.

Wouldn't it be better for the ball carrier to move slowly around the map instead of staying still? Haki mentioned something similar earlier. By moving away in a 3-sided fight he could force the other two teams into the same space, where they would be vulnerable to ult dumps AND to each other.

MincMincMinc · August 27

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

So if the matchmaking search had to expand enough it would still put players of vastly different skill levels in the same matches, right?

Yes, (...) Even if the population of bgs collapsed to say 30 people, the MMR system would still function, but in these more niche scenarios you would then start leaning on other mechanics to prevent issues.

Ok so assuming that mixing high and low MMR players is inevitable, we need to find ways to make the three-sided objective modes fun for everyone, regardless of skill level.

Here's how I'd fix Domination and Crazy King:
Reduce the amount of points each flag gives per tick. Domination from 8 to 4, Crazy King from 8 to 6.

Modify flags to require a minimum of two players to be fully captured. Solo players would still be able to hinder the opponents' progress by turning them white, but running around without even drawing weapons would no longer be the ultimate winning strategy.

Even in the worst case scenario (two teams fight while the third flips all remaining flags uncontested), it would be impossible to end any of these matches in less than 10 minutes.
@MincMincMinc Do you see any problem with these changes?

No that makes sense. Really its more like zos just needs to tune the games to be a standard duration. No matter the game mode you shouldnt be able to end it objectively in 2 mins, when other games are 15mins full duration.

Things like chaos ball being held at spawn, why not make it only held in a designated area so they are more prone to actually fighting over it?

3 team CTF is probably the hardest to deal with. Nothing to stop the third team from running 5 flags uncontested within a minute if they really wanted to. Youd probably have to require them to capture both enemy flags in order to gain points. CTF is really more of a two sided gamemode.

Crazy king also shouldn't be spamming uncontested flags all over the place, incentivizing people to not pvp

Two objective modes down, two to go. I'm leaving CTF for last, but there is a plan for that too.

Chaosball

PROBLEMS
Ball carrier could move around the map at high speed. Would be all but impossible to catch.

Players could take the ball to cheesy places where they couldn't be damaged OR where you had to give up your life to damage them.

SOLUTIONS
Reduce ball carrier speed by 30%

Fix cheesy places.

Anything missing?

To fix cheesy places I think you are better off suggesting to make a delivery location or a general location on the map to hold the chaos ball to get points.

Being able to hold the ball under your own spawn is an issue and leads to players just standing around instead of actually fighting.

Wouldn't it be better for the ball carrier to move slowly around the map instead of staying still? Haki mentioned something similar earlier. By moving away in a 3-sided fight he could force the other two teams into the same space, where they would be vulnerable to ult dumps AND to each other.

Well the movement speed reduction is fine. Honestly if they saw they should prevent streak.....they should prevent any movement bonuses like major/minor or any other speed buff from the base movement speed. Then you wouldn't need the fake snare.

But what im suggesting is to prevent players from just holding under their own spawn in a heavily advantageous position. Make them have to hold the chaos ball in the center of the map where it can be contested. Or make checkpoints you have to walk through to obtain points with the ball, so you literally can't cheese certain corners or ledges for points.

Moonspawn · August 27

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

So if the matchmaking search had to expand enough it would still put players of vastly different skill levels in the same matches, right?

Yes, (...) Even if the population of bgs collapsed to say 30 people, the MMR system would still function, but in these more niche scenarios you would then start leaning on other mechanics to prevent issues.

Ok so assuming that mixing high and low MMR players is inevitable, we need to find ways to make the three-sided objective modes fun for everyone, regardless of skill level.

Here's how I'd fix Domination and Crazy King:
Reduce the amount of points each flag gives per tick. Domination from 8 to 4, Crazy King from 8 to 6.

Modify flags to require a minimum of two players to be fully captured. Solo players would still be able to hinder the opponents' progress by turning them white, but running around without even drawing weapons would no longer be the ultimate winning strategy.

Even in the worst case scenario (two teams fight while the third flips all remaining flags uncontested), it would be impossible to end any of these matches in less than 10 minutes.
@MincMincMinc Do you see any problem with these changes?

No that makes sense. Really its more like zos just needs to tune the games to be a standard duration. No matter the game mode you shouldnt be able to end it objectively in 2 mins, when other games are 15mins full duration.

Things like chaos ball being held at spawn, why not make it only held in a designated area so they are more prone to actually fighting over it?

3 team CTF is probably the hardest to deal with. Nothing to stop the third team from running 5 flags uncontested within a minute if they really wanted to. Youd probably have to require them to capture both enemy flags in order to gain points. CTF is really more of a two sided gamemode.

Crazy king also shouldn't be spamming uncontested flags all over the place, incentivizing people to not pvp

Two objective modes down, two to go. I'm leaving CTF for last, but there is a plan for that too.

Chaosball

PROBLEMS
Ball carrier could move around the map at high speed. Would be all but impossible to catch.

Players could take the ball to cheesy places where they couldn't be damaged OR where you had to give up your life to damage them.

SOLUTIONS
Reduce ball carrier speed by 30%

Fix cheesy places.

Anything missing?

To fix cheesy places I think you are better off suggesting to make a delivery location or a general location on the map to hold the chaos ball to get points.

Being able to hold the ball under your own spawn is an issue and leads to players just standing around instead of actually fighting.

Wouldn't it be better for the ball carrier to move slowly around the map instead of staying still? Haki mentioned something similar earlier. By moving away in a 3-sided fight he could force the other two teams into the same space, where they would be vulnerable to ult dumps AND to each other.

Well the movement speed reduction is fine. Honestly if they saw they should prevent streak.....they should prevent any movement bonuses like major/minor or any other speed buff from the base movement speed. Then you wouldn't need the fake snare.

But what im suggesting is to prevent players from just holding under their own spawn in a heavily advantageous position. Make them have to hold the chaos ball in the center of the map where it can be contested. Or make checkpoints you have to walk through to obtain points with the ball, so you literally can't cheese certain corners or ledges for points.

Yes bringing the ball to spawn was a valid strategy depending on the circumstances, but it was one that made the carriers sitting ducks for the other teams. Anyway, time for the most problematic mode of all.

Capture the Relic

PROBLEMS

Standing around guarding a relic is boring.
Pointlessly parsing a tank who is guarding a relic is boring.
Having your relic stolen through the wall, or because the grabbing animation didn't play correctly is boring.

My solution was inspired by the most fun situation the mode was capable of producing. This one:

A player from each team would be randomly selected as the ''relic holder'', and the goal of the match would be to kill the other teams' holder while protecting your own. When this player died the relic would choose a new vessel and transfer to them after 30 seconds. (This player would obviously need to be ejected from spawn after a period of time.)
The game mode would function like an extremely high level Deathmatch from the olden days, but with training wheels. Imagine a 3 teams DM with the softest target of every team being indicated by the relic. In the worst possible scenario, the two stronger teams would be compelled to fight in the spawn of the softer team, but because of the relic's debuff, this fight would never stalemate to the point of not being worth it. They would fight, relic holders would die, transfer to other players, and the new holders would die too. It would be impossible to trap the softer team.

Haki_7 · August 28

God forbid we're given the amazing situation above as Capture the Relic. No, let's just throw people here instead:

Chrisilis · August 28

If you haven't already done so please check this thread out, ZoS Kevin took the time to answer some questions about recent Battleground changes and responded to a few players questions as well.

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/682460/what-is-the-point-of-having-patch-notes-if-massive-changes-go-undocumented#latest

MincMincMinc · August 28

Chrisilis wrote: »

If you haven't already done so please check this thread out, ZoS Kevin took the time to answer some questions about recent Battleground changes and responded to a few players questions as well.

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/682460/what-is-the-point-of-having-patch-notes-if-massive-changes-go-undocumented#latest

Yes that was fantastic to see, at least someone is poking the team on the issue. Even though they were forgotten in the patch notes, it is nice to see bgs is still being worked on in parallel with cyrodil. Considering BGs is the only entry to pvp for most new pvpers.

GH has no hope of attracting new players in its current ballgroup and guild group meta.