@MincMincMinc do you see any problem with the way Capture the Relic could be revamped to encourage fighting? Don't know if you realized, but it would basically be a variation of Deathmatch guaranteed to never stalemate, since the relic's debuff eventually shuts down any form of healing.
MincMincMinc wrote: »@MincMincMinc do you see any problem with the way Capture the Relic could be revamped to encourage fighting? Don't know if you realized, but it would basically be a variation of Deathmatch guaranteed to never stalemate, since the relic's debuff eventually shuts down any form of healing.
No that could work. It kinda makes me think of a protect the VIP gamemode from older games.
I think an inverse game mode of capture the relic would work better in the two sided team format. For instance imagine if your teams have bombs that spawn and you have to deliver it to the enemy's base. This way instead of hiding and camping afk, you actually force teams into each other. Or a single bomb in the middle of the map spawns an you have to walk it slowly to the enemy base. Think of something like Sabatoge from old Modern Warfare.
Really its just that you need gamemodes that entice people to actually fight, with current game modes it boils down to who runs away and avoids fighting.
- Chaos ball rewards players who grab the ball and AFK at base
- CTF rewards players who avoid fighting and sprint flags all game
- Crazy king rewards players who avoid fighting and run to the flags uncontested.
- Deathmatch is the only gamemode where fighting puts you undeniably at an advantage.....because it literally is the gamemode.
Assuming Zenimax ever decides to spend the time (maybe two weeks?) it would take to revamp all of the three-sided objective modes, and we're granted these incredible gifts:
Chaosball >> Deathmatch with chaosball.
Crazy King >> Deathmatch with flags.
Domination >> Deathmatch all around, probably the closest we can get to a free for all.
Capture the Relic >> Deathmatch with training wheels.
Do you honestly believe anyone would still choose to play two-teams?
xylena_lazarow wrote: »Even if I'm not a fan of 3s myself, I'm glad to see ZOS considering a persistent PvPer demand.
Sure they do, they're the ones that loved being third-party rats or easy reward 2nd-placers. There's also a handful of sweats nostalgic for 15min 135-15-0 ball group stare-downs. So let them see it again without the rose glasses.I'm not, because people don't even know what they're asking for.
Unholy_Holywarrior wrote: »i just tire of the other team instantly spawn camping, where youre dead before you hit the ground when you drop down the ledge... last match, the match began and within 5 seconds the entire enemy team of invisible lightning guys spamming AOE at our spawn before we even had a chance to group and move out... it was chaos ball, and the entire enemy team ignored the balls and tried to lock us in the spawn area... domination is not much different... im at the point any time it happens, i just drop the match, switch characters, and wait the 20 minute queue all over again... im starting to think the daily BG reward just is not worth the frustration anymore...
Unholy_Holywarrior wrote: »i just tire of the other team instantly spawn camping, where youre dead before you hit the ground when you drop down the ledge... last match, the match began and within 5 seconds the entire enemy team of invisible lightning guys spamming AOE at our spawn before we even had a chance to group and move out... it was chaos ball, and the entire enemy team ignored the balls and tried to lock us in the spawn area... domination is not much different... im at the point any time it happens, i just drop the match, switch characters, and wait the 20 minute queue all over again... im starting to think the daily BG reward just is not worth the frustration anymore...
The problem with this is... many players do NOT want deathmatch at all. Which is why one or two years ago the deathmatch only BG's test failed, too few players queue'd up for those. Add to that the fact that most casuals now have a hard time getting the daily BG exp(two teams), and have no fun getting that daily bonus(spawn camping/instant-deaths/etc), and we have a recipe for empty BG's again. Tactics are a part of PvP as well, yet this tactics part always seems to get stripped away from PvP due to 'PvPers' who only want to combat other players without any distractions or thought behind it.Assuming Zenimax ever decides to spend the time (maybe two weeks?) it would take to revamp all of the three-sided objective modes, and we're granted these incredible gifts:
Chaosball >> Deathmatch with chaosball.
Crazy King >> Deathmatch with flags.
Domination >> Deathmatch all around, probably the closest we can get to a free for all.
Capture the Relic >> Deathmatch with training wheels.
In practically any other (MMO)-game players can jump in and PvP at ANY point while still being competitive, as their PvP modes are basically about skill alone and there are no major gaps in power or survivability between players. ESO's PvP needs to be like that for it to ever be able to hold a large enough population of regular players to sustain BGs!
Above all, BGs need to be fun for everyone!
MincMincMinc wrote: »
In practically any other (MMO)-game players can jump in and PvP at ANY point while still being competitive, as their PvP modes are basically about skill alone and there are no major gaps in power or survivability between players. ESO's PvP needs to be like that for it to ever be able to hold a large enough population of regular players to sustain BGs!
Above all, BGs need to be fun for everyone!
This is kind of a big issue with horizontal progression and lack of power creep foresight. Everytime the game balances maybe you reign things in. However, every system you add only increases your possible workload. At the same time, continuing to add choices can further add to stats.
Look at a stat like movement speed, which in any game should not be allowed to endlessly power creep. From the start there should be an average speed in mind based on skill ranges, map size, player model size, etc. Look now adays we have way more choices to grab movement speed, but they never toned down other choices.
If before we had 100% up to say 130% if you make 2 possible choices
Say we now have 4 possible choices.....we should still only reach that 130% mark
Say we now have 6 possible choices.....we should still only reach that 130% mark
Instead zos keeps expanding the power difference so those 6 choices now bring you closer to the 190% mark (rough example, we can do the actual math if anyone really cares)
MincMincMinc wrote: »
In practically any other (MMO)-game players can jump in and PvP at ANY point while still being competitive, as their PvP modes are basically about skill alone and there are no major gaps in power or survivability between players. ESO's PvP needs to be like that for it to ever be able to hold a large enough population of regular players to sustain BGs!
Above all, BGs need to be fun for everyone!
This is kind of a big issue with horizontal progression and lack of power creep foresight. Everytime the game balances maybe you reign things in. However, every system you add only increases your possible workload. At the same time, continuing to add choices can further add to stats.
Look at a stat like movement speed, which in any game should not be allowed to endlessly power creep. From the start there should be an average speed in mind based on skill ranges, map size, player model size, etc. Look now adays we have way more choices to grab movement speed, but they never toned down other choices.
If before we had 100% up to say 130% if you make 2 possible choices
Say we now have 4 possible choices.....we should still only reach that 130% mark
Say we now have 6 possible choices.....we should still only reach that 130% mark
Instead zos keeps expanding the power difference so those 6 choices now bring you closer to the 190% mark (rough example, we can do the actual math if anyone really cares)
Revamping MMR will work but I also think it will prolong the inevitable. Once your lower MMR stat players start to reach the skilled / cheese players then the mechanical differences will become evident to the player again; almost like there’s going to be a cliff out there somewhere.
In order for this to work long term we have to do some thing about the metas because as is, once a player reaches that point in MMR their choice will simply be to either respec to the meta or lose.
At that point it’s just “matches of metas” which kills build diversity.
I agree, ZoS should make the MMR adjustment but there more they’re going to need to do past that.
Green: 1,2,3,5,6
Orange: 1,2,3,4
Assigning each of these players to a team of newcomers in 3-sided BGs: Unpredictable and fun for everyone.
Doing the exact same thing in 2-sided BGs: Disaster.
Why?
1. Since you can't use one team against another anymore, its difficult for BG regulars to engage each other without discarding everything they know about positioning and target selection.
3. Spawncamping is encouraged by the two-sided format itself in every gamemode.
4. People just give up a lot sooner because they can no longer fight for second place.´
Assuming Zenimax ever decides to spend the time (maybe two weeks?) it would take to revamp all of the three-sided objective modes, and we're granted these incredible gifts:
Chaosball >> Deathmatch with chaosball.
Crazy King >> Deathmatch with flags.
Domination >> Deathmatch all around, probably the closest we can get to a free for all.
Capture the Relic >> Deathmatch with training wheels.
Assuming Zenimax ever decides to spend the time (maybe two weeks?) it would take to revamp all of the three-sided objective modes, and we're granted these incredible gifts:
Chaosball >> Deathmatch with chaosball.
Crazy King >> Deathmatch with flags.
Domination >> Deathmatch all around, probably the closest we can get to a free for all.
Capture the Relic >> Deathmatch with training wheels.
@Haki_7, two weeks or more?
Assuming Zenimax ever decides to spend the time (maybe two weeks?) it would take to revamp all of the three-sided objective modes, and we're granted these incredible gifts:
Chaosball >> Deathmatch with chaosball.
Crazy King >> Deathmatch with flags.
Domination >> Deathmatch all around, probably the closest we can get to a free for all.
Capture the Relic >> Deathmatch with training wheels.
@Haki_7, two weeks or more?
If they are informed about all the cheesy spots and that coliseum map is removed from the Chaosball rotation, maybe. No idea how long it would take to sort out CTF though.
MincMincMinc wrote: »MincMincMinc wrote: »
In practically any other (MMO)-game players can jump in and PvP at ANY point while still being competitive, as their PvP modes are basically about skill alone and there are no major gaps in power or survivability between players. ESO's PvP needs to be like that for it to ever be able to hold a large enough population of regular players to sustain BGs!
Above all, BGs need to be fun for everyone!
This is kind of a big issue with horizontal progression and lack of power creep foresight. Everytime the game balances maybe you reign things in. However, every system you add only increases your possible workload. At the same time, continuing to add choices can further add to stats.
Look at a stat like movement speed, which in any game should not be allowed to endlessly power creep. From the start there should be an average speed in mind based on skill ranges, map size, player model size, etc. Look now adays we have way more choices to grab movement speed, but they never toned down other choices.
If before we had 100% up to say 130% if you make 2 possible choices
Say we now have 4 possible choices.....we should still only reach that 130% mark
Say we now have 6 possible choices.....we should still only reach that 130% mark
Instead zos keeps expanding the power difference so those 6 choices now bring you closer to the 190% mark (rough example, we can do the actual math if anyone really cares)
Revamping MMR will work but I also think it will prolong the inevitable. Once your lower MMR stat players start to reach the skilled / cheese players then the mechanical differences will become evident to the player again; almost like there’s going to be a cliff out there somewhere.
In order for this to work long term we have to do some thing about the metas because as is, once a player reaches that point in MMR their choice will simply be to either respec to the meta or lose.
At that point it’s just “matches of metas” which kills build diversity.
I agree, ZoS should make the MMR adjustment but there more they’re going to need to do past that.
Ok you picked up on an important thing, is this bad or a good thing?
So a constant running mmr would split the playerbase in the following way:
Noob...................Vet PvPer......................Meta VetPvPer
So yes a vet pvper will lose and be below meta vet pvpers on the ladder. Is this necessarily a bad thing? Not really, it could be more beneficial in fact. If I prefer to stay out of the meta soup, I would stay fighting more similar players that fight how I prefer as well. Maybe I enjoy the meta pvp setups and dont mind going cheese for cheese to reach for the top.
Interesting response, considering how quickly you backed down when targeted by a PvPer.Disregarding the handful of individuals that can't handle being targeted by pvpers
xylena_lazarow wrote: »Interesting response, considering how quickly you backed down when targeted by a PvPer.Disregarding the handful of individuals that can't handle being targeted by pvpers
Your energy would be better put towards a dedicated DM queue.
Proper matchmaking is supposedly one of the hardest problems for game devs to solve. In the absence, splitting into an objective queue and a DM queue would effectively be a casual/sweaty split, a crude imperfect solution, but you can't tell me the DM queue wouldn't immediately get a rep as the sweatlord queue.Either way, both of these issues would be solved by a proper MMR system.
xylena_lazarow wrote: »Interesting response, considering how quickly you backed down when targeted by a PvPer.Disregarding the handful of individuals that can't handle being targeted by pvpers
Your energy would be better put towards a dedicated DM queue.
Some individuals just leave the BGs when they get targeted by PvPers, happens a lot over on EU. Others I suspect don't even play PvP, or atleast no one has seen/heard about them until they visit the forums.
Either way, both of these issues would be solved by a proper MMR system.
xylena_lazarow wrote: »Interesting response, considering how quickly you backed down when targeted by a PvPer.Disregarding the handful of individuals that can't handle being targeted by pvpers
Your energy would be better put towards a dedicated DM queue.
Some individuals just leave the BGs when they get targeted by PvPers, happens a lot over on EU. Others I suspect don't even play PvP, or atleast no one has seen/heard about them until they visit the forums.
Either way, both of these issues would be solved by a proper MMR system.
Can you undelete a video from your channel? I'd like to show @MincMincMinc what has been happening on PC EU so he can explain to me how 8v8 can be allowed to exist. I want to see the light going out of his eyes when he realizes the inevitable. Here is the link:
But ZOS makes PVP changes once every 10 years, lets see if ESO is still around in 10 years time for the next changes.
But seriously, they need to sort out the latency issues first before they continue tweaking game modes. Its horrendous most days.
The other issue is poor match making. 3 teams of 4 players had closer outcomes than 8v8. I have played hundreds of BGs and in the past 3 months I have only seen half a dozen that were close and only won in the last minute. A few draws with CTR but mostly 1 sided wins and spawn camping "yaawn"