ruskiii wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

is it possible the MMR of 3-sided had been resetting weekly with the leaderboards all along?

Did you even play 4v4v4? The MMR was very noticeable. Especially making a new character with fresh MMR your first few lobbies would be filled with players new to BGs, and then eventually you would rank up and get back into the lobbies with the same 30 guys over and over again. Almost my entire friends list is people I met playing high MMR BGs, you get to know each other after playing with/against each other on a daily basis. Once your character reached high MMR there was a very slow degradation, like you could not log into a character for months and months but it would retain its MMR.

To be honest, the more I read your posts, the more it seems like you never really played BGs that much.

I don't know, ruskii. The MMR in 3-sided resetting with the weekly leaderboards would explain why queue times were so much shorter back then. It would explain why I didn't have to play multiple characters across different servers just to avoid getting skipped by the matchmaking.

ruskiii wrote: »

I can only speak for myself but I would be more than happy to sacrifice good queue times on my main characters while the higher MMR ranks are filled.

I haven't played my main character in over a year.

Deathmatch, no risk of winning:
Chaosball, no risk of losing. Even though this time we were hindered by all 3 balls, the match still degenerated into the exact same staring contest with ball carriers that happens when we only get two:
Domination, no risk of losing. Half of opponent team left. Fourth flaw:
Crazy King, no risk of losing. Running around flags trying to end the nightmare while my teammates spawncamp. Third critical flaw of 2-sided:
Relic 1,2 and 3, no risk of losing:
Destruction of Battlegrounds Chapter 177: Waiting 20 minutes for a lopsided match (Solo 8v8 PC/EU)

@ruskiii wrote:

Haki, you seriously think that once a week your MMR reset and put you in the bottom tier of MMR that everyone else only experienced on brand new characters?

I'm not adept at sensing the minute changes in MMR levels. Truth be told, they all look the same to me.

Moonspawn wrote: »

@ruskiii wrote:

Moonspawn wrote: »

ruskiii wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

Are you certain?

Yes.

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/665758/pts-patch-notes-v10-2-0

That's a very interesting choice of words there by Kevin. Why would they go to all the trouble of creating two-sided BGs, only to set them up to fail like that, with these monthly MMR resets?

Ive been asking myself the same question everyday for like 18 months. Unfortunately at this point it does seem that the mismanagement of BGs could be intentional. I wouldnt be suprised if ZOS announce Vengeance for BGs before trying the very obvious and very simple fixes we have been suggesting since U44 PTS.

Maybe they didn't spend years developing two-sided BGs just to set them up to fail in the most perplexing way imaginable. Considering their obsession with leaderboards, and a different interpretation of Kevin's words, is it possible the MMR of 3-sided had been resetting weekly with the leaderboards all along?

It would also explain why they said they may bring back 3-sided BGs permanently, but still remain unwilling to increase the time between MMR resets. Not even as a last-ditch effort to save 2-sided. To me, it only makes sense if the latter has already been tried before. Maybe it has.

Destruction of Battlegrounds Chapter 178: Waiting 19 minutes for a lopsided match (Solo 8v8 PC/EU)
Relic 1 and 2, no way to lose. Running relics in a desperate hope to end the lopsided snoozefest while my team spawncamps some newcomers:
Domination, no way to lose: They couldn't even reach the flags. The same happened to us in the Crazy King below:
Crazy King, no way to win:
Deathmatch 1 & 2, no way to lose. First critical flaw of 2-sided:
Chaosball, no way to lose. Another soul gazing session with ball carriers:

3 sided BGs went on for a while and I definitely remember them playing around with MMR and que times a few passes. Que times were good sometimes, but other patches I remember regularly waiting 40+ mins for a max MMR que. Just to get forced against a premade 4 man comp group. It wasn't exactly peachy back then.

I would say que times are faster now adays......but again my MMR keeps resetting so there's hundreds of new players zos is forcing me to grief until they quit playing.

Haki_7 wrote: »

It's weird that this is hidden away in a dark corner of the ''known issues'' section of some PTS notes. Is there anything important about MMR or matchmaking in the patch notes of update 44?

Here's the link: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/667797/pc-mac-patch-notes-v10-02-5-update-44

Nothing about the resets or the 7-day decay, but the word ''MMR'' is mentioned several times.

4v4v4 Domination is confirmed for this week, it will replace all queuing for 8v8 matches:

Well the other thing we can add to our discussion is that some gamemodes are going to be inherently better for 4v4 and some gamemodes will be better for 4v4v4. Some gamemodes will probably function fine on both

---

Two team has the spawncamping issue but avoids objective runners. Three team has the objective runners issue, but avoids spawncamping issues. At this point why not just have both gamemodes, which may even help zos with the quetime issues if the matchmaking system can help pair up two team and three teams at whim.

"3-sided BGs were more balanced" "3-sided BGs didn't have spawncamping"

Meanwhile:
Who would've thought, most of the BGs are still extremely one-sided, or one team is getting absolutely bullied out of existence... it's almost like someone has been saying this for months/years.

Bring back solo and group queue dm 4v4v4

Maybe from your perspective

Here are the three game-breaking problems of 3-sided Battlegrounds:

1- Forcing people who only wanted to play deathmatch into the objective modes. Recipe for disaster.
SOLUTION: Separate Deathmatch from the objectives queue.

2- It was far too easy for the third team to complete the objective uncontested.
SOLUTION: Minor adjustments to all the 3-sided objective modes, except Capture the Relic. That one needs a bit more work.

3- Rewards did not include endeavors, golden pursuits, tokens or obscene amounts of transmutation crystals.

Moonspawn wrote: »

Haki_7 wrote: »

I have updated one of my previous comments with some 2-sided Relic matches for comparison. They're just below the 8v8 Deathmatch scoreboards.

That's nice. Mind if I link it in the original post?

Go right ahead. Everyone should have easy access to the truth about 2-sided Battlegrounds. I'll put it in my signature too, if I can figure out how to create one.

Deathmatch 1 & 2, 0% chance of losing.First critical flaw of 2-sided:
Domination, 0% chance of losing. Almost half of them left:
Chaosball, 0% chance of losing. Enemy team couldn't grab even one of the three chaosballs:
Destruction of Battlegrounds Chapter 183: Waiting 26 minutes for a lopsided match (Solo 8v8 PC/EU)
Crazy King, 0% chance of losing. Opponents were unable to reach the flags. Wasn't even that lopsided, but they were still spawncamped like crazy. Exactly as dictated by the third critical flaw of 2-sided:
Relic 1, 0% chance of losing:
Relic 2, 0% chance of winning:

Haki_7 wrote: »

@ruskiii , Wheeler's Vengeance is closing in on all of us, and I'm still unclear on the plan: Say we finally get them to stop resetting the MMR. If the number of matches like the ones I've been posting remains infinitely higher than it ever was in 3-sided, what would be the next move?

I think this is the plan: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/8437020/#Comment_8437020

@MincMincMinc wrote:

Again in order zos needs to target

1. Stop resetting MMR
2. Implement skill based MMR to make matches more fair, a KDA system would be fine to start. This takes out an exponential factor making team balance seem broken.
3. Then look into team balancing methods like evaluating which accounts play support or healer based on average previous match healing/assist values. Preventing one team from having players going 20/0 while the other team is all 0/20.
4. Then look into map/gamemode changes like lowering the spawn walls to prevent teams from getting spawn camped. Change spawns to be at ground level with a defensive turret mechanic (slaughterfish for the enemy team)
5. Then look into gametype changes like bringing back 2 team+3 team. Things like chaos ball seemed to work better in 3 team because it was harder to camp at your own spawn with the ball. Things like capture the flag works better on 2 team because a third party cant just run flags while the other teams fought.
6. Eventually a bracketed rank system like Bronze/Silver/Gold could lay the groundwork for achievements and replay-ability driving players to participate and learn to rank up.

The thing is you really shouldn't be making these changes out of order. You could waste all your time trying to make gamemode changes like how spawns work, but then if MMR gets fixed down the line players may hate that change because its nolonger needed or people simply play differently when matches are more fair.

Haki_7 wrote: »

Moonspawn wrote: »

Two-sided Battlegrounds are too difficult to balance

I don't understand why some people cling to the lie that 3-sided Battlegrounds were just as unbalanced as 2-sided. Does anyone know?

I loved them.

It felt much more dynamic than 2-sided battlegrounds.

3 teams felt fun and engaging after almost two decades of playing WoW's 2 factions.

I raved about how fun 3-sided BGs in ESO were. For years. I got quite a few players from other MMOs to jump to ESO simply because it had 3-way battlegrounds.

This is from the perspective of a solo player.
I wish we at least had the option to only sign up for 3-way battlegrounds. I'd rather go gather / quest/ etc and wait longer for a 3-way match.

There is ALWAYS going to be disbalance in PvP. There are always going to be some jerks who AFK in a match. One team will be better players than another team.

I remember how much FUN I had in 3-way matches, even as a solo player not knowing anyone else. I miss that.
I miss paying attention to where the enemy was and if they were engaged with the other team, leading teams to fight each other, etc. It was DYNAMIC, and that was the fun part.

ESO should give us the option for 2-way or 3-way BGs. That way, everyone is happy.
If there aren't enough participants, buff the rewards. Players will go BG when there are appropriate incentives.
Throw in more gold, furniture mats, better furnishings, etc. Battlegrounds aren't flooded because the rewards are meh.
Why BG when you can go to a vet dungeon and have the chance at a 1.3 million gold mask dropping?

0% chance of this thread doing anything to improve BGs

I still think we should try to solve the ''7 Day Decay'' riddle before moving on to discussing the matchmaking. The more I think about it, the more it seems like a remnant from the time of 3-sided. It's almost like they saw right away how terrible 2-sided BGs would be, so they attempted to balance them by increasing the time between MMR resets from weekly to monthly. If they couldn't fully commit to the change, that would explain why the 7 day decay was added simultaneously.

Destruction of Battlegrounds Chapter 185: Waiting 16 minutes for a lopsided match (Solo 8v8 PC/EU)
Deathmatch 1 & 2, zero chance of losing. Even on the winning team, the target order still doesn't leave the newcomers. First critical flaw of 2-sided:
Relic, zero chance of losing:
Chaosball, zero chance of winning. We almost did because they were too busy farming us to bother with the objective:
Domination 1 & 2, zero chance of losing. Running around trying to end the nightmare while my team spawncamps. Third critical flaw of 2-sided:
Crazy King, zero chance of losing: