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

Haki_7 wrote: »

What does ''7 day Decay'' mean? That it goes from 100 to 0 in 7 days, or that it starts to decay after 7 days?

It's hard to say. In any other context I would guess that ''7 day Decay'' means going from 100 to zero in 7 days, but why would they do that if it's already resetting every month?

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 Keep in mind you could probably mix up the order of things after my 3rd point there.

0% chance of this thread doing anything to improve BGs

Moonspawn wrote: »

Not necessarily. Looks 50/50 to me, could be either one.

Nah definitely 51/49.

Okay seriously, literally no discourse about the 3-sided weekend event, on the thread literally titled "three-sided-deathmatch", by the most prolific posters about the topic.

What, didn't get very many good screenshots of close matches because it suffered from the PvP powercreep and mixed MMR the same way 2-sided does?

Why aren't you gushing about these matches, great time to do so.

Only benefit is that with three-teams it's hard for a single team to spawn camp. But when I've played it's just the same old: there's either players that are going to stomp, or everyone is kind of equally bad/squishy. (Also I like never get on a team that has a healer this time around it's odd).

Haki_7 wrote: »

As far as I can tell, bringing back 3-sided with its third flaw resolved has resulted in near-instant queue times for both PC/NA and PC/EU. Is everyone experiencing the same?

Far as I can tell a slight decrease in queue speed, sometimes instant, but not really any meaningful match quality improvements, which is what I've thought you've been chasing all the time with your various Lopsided this, unwinnable that commentary. (and the uptick in queue may simply be from nostalgia and/or a mode with significant gameplay changes)

Were your instant queue matches good quality or not, or are you going to provide zero actionable feedback about the thing you want?

[snip]
[edited for baiting]

Haki_7 wrote: »

The longest I had to wait was just over 3 minutes. Was it the same for you? I bet I could have even played my main character during the event. Now that 3-sided is gone again, it's back to this:

*shrugs* I'm not an uber-sweat and have the benefit of PC NA population, 3 min is the standard 8v8 queue for me after work hours.

I'm not against 4v4v4. Love the variety, and love that the old maps and dynamics generally succeed in preventing chokepoints. (AKA in 8v8 spawncamping).

Sometimes it did become a walk-fest to objectives since it's always possible for the two other teams to be preoccupied with each other instead of the objectives.

A few matches were against meta builds that just stomped the entire lobby.

Though I too still like the larger moshpit of 8v8, neither addresses buildcrafting/MMR issues. But to be honest it's going to be a cluster with all the class reworks in the next few years.

Would have loved to see some data points from you two about that 4v4v4 weekend but whatever. I am simply going to presume you cherry-pick your data.

@Moonspawn
Regarding the 4 flaws of 2-sided:`
1. What has changed about positioning and target selection? You still want to try and focus down on those that seem like they take more damage than the rest, CC healers, layer burst, rushdown squishies or backline archers while being sure to be mindful of where you're at so as to not get swarmed and focused (unless built for it).
2. While a larger bucket can hold more socially engineered players, a smaller bucket lets fewer impact a team more greatly.
3. Multiple entry points from spawn (as in, like middle of the map/side of map teleport point) rather than a single drop-down platform can help alleviate the chokepoint issue.
4. The only point I won't contest.

As far as your critique of 3-sided and your solutions:
1. A separate deathmatch queue could be interesting, but if it's structured like the current 4v4 Deathmatch that's not good. Just punishes teams with squishy players eventually leading to an even more perpetualy tanky/brawler meta.
2. The irony that you are annoyed by players utilizing movement and positioning on objectives is not lost on me when you criticized 8v8 for lacking such things. I'm all for reducing map cheese, but with flags, taking advantage of an enemy's absence is a viable strategy. Your VIP gamemode suggestion for Relic capture is horrendous, especially envisioning it prioritizing the squishiest players to be burst, and for example not counting the chance that the chosen relic holder is one of those unkillable parse tanks, all of this handled by RNG.
3. Rewards are now here as noted.

Ok lets clear a few things up! (I am speaking of 4v4 and 4v4v4 teams not 8v8, I personally think that's the worst iteration of BGS in the history of BGS)
2 Team BGS and 3 Team BGS both have their flaws.
I personally advocate for 3 Team for one simple reason. They ARE in generally more balanced AND give even new players a chance to flex a bit in PVP.
However, I see the appeal of 2 Team BGS. If both teams are matched well they can be a lot of fun.
So Here Are my pros and cons, and I'm just gonna hit the hi-lights, for both I'll start with 4v4v4

4v4v4 Pros
Easy entry level
Supported learning
No team is instantly ahead
Larger maps
Better LOS

Cons
Not always enough people
"features" that break the game (CB most notably with zero damage ball carries or base jumping etc)
Not enough onus on the match type (Teams camping other teams trying to DM)
Players queing then leaving to give another team the advantage
Base spawners that afk.

Now Ill address what I know is coming, the statement that 3 team BGS are more balanced overall and the RAGE lol
I keep seeing these posts where you show me 4 v2 v2 or 4v4v4 that's a blow out. BUT you fail to show the 4v4 scorecards that are 500-0 where one team was pinned in a base by 2 people and couldn't get out and it happens more often than not. For the MOST and I stress most part 3 team BGS allow for a more enjoyable, Learning, Teaching and group environment.

4v4 Pros
When Balanced SO much fun
easier to reach an objective
promotes a more PVP based environment

Cons
Team imbalance
Spawn camping 90% of the time
Unwelcoming to new players
Meta Driven

So Now Ill address the people who are going to argue that 4v4 is supposed to be "Competitive" and 8v8 is where new players or daily seekers should go.

First 8v8 is not fun its not relaxed and it shouldn't even be a thing.(My Opinion)
The people telling you 4v4 is supposed to be Competitive are also the ones that are dominating 95% of the matches and the ones that cry and rage quit when they are losing and you all know who you are. So reply at your own peril.
Telling a new player or a Daily seeker they should go to 8v8 and stop queing for 4v4 is not only not your place but detrimental to a healthy PVP environment.
As a community we need to be helping supporting and encouraging new players. Bring them into the fold, turn them to the Dark side lol. I'm not suggesting share ALL your secrets but don't drive them out and give GOOD advice so we can deepen the field.

Now My Take on Competitive vs fun
There are only 3 modes that should even come close to be considered Competitive. Chaos Ball, Crazy King, and of course Death Match. They are the only 3 that promote TRUE PVP.
Cap the Relic and Domination are more the fun lets play around games.
To that end We need to add points for kills and assists to the three Competitive games
And Add Healing points to the other two

In Summary
No one group is going to win this argument so there are some clear things that could be done.

First Lets get a Que system that works in regards to what people want. Lets Have a Competitive que that incorporates the PVP games and a fun game that has the others and you could even add CK or CB to that que so both have 3 options.

Have a system that includes both 2 team and 3 team BGS

OR Make a BG house where two groups of four can wage was, this would give the DM teams that are trying to parse against one another a pace to go and not deter people in BGS.

But Most importantly we need to be welcoming and supportive of new players and less tolerant of the people that want to ruin what we as a PVP GROUP love.