shadowpass.4236 Posted May 12, 2018 Share Posted May 12, 2018 > @"Ithilwen.1529" said: > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > @"Chaith.8256" said: > > > @"Ithilwen.1529" , adding a participation prize would fatten up the demographic who PvP for the handouts, not PvP. > > > > > > @"Shadowfall.7148" , Two good players on a team will already dominate, imagine being allowed for queuing as 5, it will just be a few teams facerolling some high level solo/duo/trio queuers. It's objectively a worse idea than a community wide welfare reward pot... > > > > That's not me btw lol > > > > I just hate playing solo. If they introduce duos again, great. Solo que only is a terrible system. If they could figure out a way to make a separate team que system work, that would be cool too. > > This is an interesting admission. Thank you for the honesty. I should probably explain that a little further. Even when teams and duos were a thing, I still preferred playing alone. However, I still recognized how it was nearly impossible to carry your team in Conquest, regardless of how good of a player you may be. So, when I got fed up getting really bad teammates, I was content with the fact that I could simply find a friend (or a few) to play with to help ease the frustration of RNG matches. Now, after Anet stopped letting us play with our friends, we're forced to deal with teammates given to us by a roll of the dice. This is what I personally disagree with, as this decision also killed off basically every single PvP guild in the game shortly after. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ithilwen.1529 Posted May 12, 2018 Author Share Posted May 12, 2018 > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > @"Ithilwen.1529" said: > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > @"Chaith.8256" said: > > > > @"Ithilwen.1529" , adding a participation prize would fatten up the demographic who PvP for the handouts, not PvP. > > > > > > > > @"Shadowfall.7148" , Two good players on a team will already dominate, imagine being allowed for queuing as 5, it will just be a few teams facerolling some high level solo/duo/trio queuers. It's objectively a worse idea than a community wide welfare reward pot... > > > > > > That's not me btw lol > > > > > > I just hate playing solo. If they introduce duos again, great. Solo que only is a terrible system. If they could figure out a way to make a separate team que system work, that would be cool too. > > > > This is an interesting admission. Thank you for the honesty. > > I should probably explain that a little further. > > Even when teams and duos were a thing, I still preferred playing alone. However, I still recognized how it was nearly impossible to carry your team in Conquest, regardless of how good of a player you may be. So, when I got fed up getting really bad teammates, I was content with the fact that I could simply find a friend (or a few) to play with to help ease the frustration of RNG matches. > > Now, after Anet stopped letting us play with our friends, we're forced to deal with teammates given to us by a roll of the dice. This is what I personally disagree with, as this decision also killed off basically every single PvP guild in the game shortly after. I understand. The flip side of that argument is that things went too far in the other direction. Teams are too big an edge against solos. There does not appear to be enough population to support a separate team queue. So, teams would likely consistently stomp solos. This has been the situation in the past and it wasn't healthy for the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowpass.4236 Posted May 12, 2018 Share Posted May 12, 2018 > @"Ithilwen.1529" said: > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > @"Ithilwen.1529" said: > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > @"Chaith.8256" said: > > > > > @"Ithilwen.1529" , adding a participation prize would fatten up the demographic who PvP for the handouts, not PvP. > > > > > > > > > > @"Shadowfall.7148" , Two good players on a team will already dominate, imagine being allowed for queuing as 5, it will just be a few teams facerolling some high level solo/duo/trio queuers. It's objectively a worse idea than a community wide welfare reward pot... > > > > > > > > That's not me btw lol > > > > > > > > I just hate playing solo. If they introduce duos again, great. Solo que only is a terrible system. If they could figure out a way to make a separate team que system work, that would be cool too. > > > > > > This is an interesting admission. Thank you for the honesty. > > > > I should probably explain that a little further. > > > > Even when teams and duos were a thing, I still preferred playing alone. However, I still recognized how it was nearly impossible to carry your team in Conquest, regardless of how good of a player you may be. So, when I got fed up getting really bad teammates, I was content with the fact that I could simply find a friend (or a few) to play with to help ease the frustration of RNG matches. > > > > Now, after Anet stopped letting us play with our friends, we're forced to deal with teammates given to us by a roll of the dice. This is what I personally disagree with, as this decision also killed off basically every single PvP guild in the game shortly after. > > I understand. The flip side of that argument is that things went too far in the other direction. Teams are too big an edge against solos. There does not appear to be enough population to support a separate team queue. > > So, teams would likely consistently stomp solos. This has been the situation in the past and it wasn't healthy for the game. No, I'm pretty sure Anet confirmed that teams had less than a 50% win ratio against solos. So this is official data compared to your opinion. I also have to add that I have consistently maintained a 60% win ratio in PvP as solo player with thousands of games played even when team ques were a thing and I remember beating duos/5 mans countless times. So I wouldn't say teams would "consistently stomp solos." You have to remember that the only teams that would even have a shot at this are the HIGHEST skill teams. These would consist of players that win the monthlies/player hosted tournaments. 99% of the teams out there would just be regular players who don't have a massive skill gap between them and the next person. This is further reinforced by the ~50% win ratio they have against solos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ithilwen.1529 Posted May 12, 2018 Author Share Posted May 12, 2018 > @"Chaith.8256" said: > @"Ithilwen.1529" , adding a participation prize would fatten up the demographic who PvP for the handouts, not PvP. > Perhaps, but some percentage of those players would become PvPer's. The "Year of the Ascension" was at least partly based on the same idea. Unfortunately, there were things in the first couple of seasons that caused quite a few of those players to leave permanently. > @"Shadowfall.7148" , Two good players on a team will already dominate, imagine being allowed for queuing as 5, it will just be a few teams facerolling some high level solo/duo/trio queuers. Agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ithilwen.1529 Posted May 12, 2018 Author Share Posted May 12, 2018 > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > @"Ithilwen.1529" said: > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > @"Ithilwen.1529" said: > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > @"Chaith.8256" said: > > > > > > @"Ithilwen.1529" , adding a participation prize would fatten up the demographic who PvP for the handouts, not PvP. > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Shadowfall.7148" , Two good players on a team will already dominate, imagine being allowed for queuing as 5, it will just be a few teams facerolling some high level solo/duo/trio queuers. It's objectively a worse idea than a community wide welfare reward pot... > > > > > > > > > > That's not me btw lol > > > > > > > > > > I just hate playing solo. If they introduce duos again, great. Solo que only is a terrible system. If they could figure out a way to make a separate team que system work, that would be cool too. > > > > > > > > This is an interesting admission. Thank you for the honesty. > > > > > > I should probably explain that a little further. > > > > > > Even when teams and duos were a thing, I still preferred playing alone. However, I still recognized how it was nearly impossible to carry your team in Conquest, regardless of how good of a player you may be. So, when I got fed up getting really bad teammates, I was content with the fact that I could simply find a friend (or a few) to play with to help ease the frustration of RNG matches. > > > > > > Now, after Anet stopped letting us play with our friends, we're forced to deal with teammates given to us by a roll of the dice. This is what I personally disagree with, as this decision also killed off basically every single PvP guild in the game shortly after. > > > > I understand. The flip side of that argument is that things went too far in the other direction. Teams are too big an edge against solos. There does not appear to be enough population to support a separate team queue. > > > > So, teams would likely consistently stomp solos. This has been the situation in the past and it wasn't healthy for the game. > > No, I'm pretty sure Anet confirmed that teams had less than a 50% win ratio against solos. > > So this is official data compared to your opinion. > > I also have to add that I have consistently maintained a 60% win ratio in PvP as solo player even when team ques were a thing and I remember beating duos/5 mans countless times. So I wouldn't say teams would "consistently stomp solos." > > You have to remember that the only teams that would even have a shot at this are the HIGHEST skill teams. These would consist of players that win the monthlies/player hosted tournaments. 99% of the teams out there would just be regular players who don't have a massive skill gap between them and the next person. This is further reinforced by the ~50% win ratio they have against solos. I am not certain that statistic is accurate. Be that as it may, there is certainly a *perception* that teams create an unfair advantage. You yourself stated that you teamed up to counter what you considered bad matches. **In other words, you teamed up to get an advantage.** In this case, perception is as strong as reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowpass.4236 Posted May 12, 2018 Share Posted May 12, 2018 > @"Ithilwen.1529" said: > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > @"Ithilwen.1529" said: > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > @"Ithilwen.1529" said: > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > @"Chaith.8256" said: > > > > > > > @"Ithilwen.1529" , adding a participation prize would fatten up the demographic who PvP for the handouts, not PvP. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Shadowfall.7148" , Two good players on a team will already dominate, imagine being allowed for queuing as 5, it will just be a few teams facerolling some high level solo/duo/trio queuers. It's objectively a worse idea than a community wide welfare reward pot... > > > > > > > > > > > > That's not me btw lol > > > > > > > > > > > > I just hate playing solo. If they introduce duos again, great. Solo que only is a terrible system. If they could figure out a way to make a separate team que system work, that would be cool too. > > > > > > > > > > This is an interesting admission. Thank you for the honesty. > > > > > > > > I should probably explain that a little further. > > > > > > > > Even when teams and duos were a thing, I still preferred playing alone. However, I still recognized how it was nearly impossible to carry your team in Conquest, regardless of how good of a player you may be. So, when I got fed up getting really bad teammates, I was content with the fact that I could simply find a friend (or a few) to play with to help ease the frustration of RNG matches. > > > > > > > > Now, after Anet stopped letting us play with our friends, we're forced to deal with teammates given to us by a roll of the dice. This is what I personally disagree with, as this decision also killed off basically every single PvP guild in the game shortly after. > > > > > > I understand. The flip side of that argument is that things went too far in the other direction. Teams are too big an edge against solos. There does not appear to be enough population to support a separate team queue. > > > > > > So, teams would likely consistently stomp solos. This has been the situation in the past and it wasn't healthy for the game. > > > > No, I'm pretty sure Anet confirmed that teams had less than a 50% win ratio against solos. > > > > So this is official data compared to your opinion. > > > > I also have to add that I have consistently maintained a 60% win ratio in PvP as solo player even when team ques were a thing and I remember beating duos/5 mans countless times. So I wouldn't say teams would "consistently stomp solos." > > > > You have to remember that the only teams that would even have a shot at this are the HIGHEST skill teams. These would consist of players that win the monthlies/player hosted tournaments. 99% of the teams out there would just be regular players who don't have a massive skill gap between them and the next person. This is further reinforced by the ~50% win ratio they have against solos. > > I am not certain that statistic is accurate. > > Be that as it may, there is certainly a *perception* that teams create an unfair advantage. You yourself stated that you teamed up to counter what you considered bad matches. **In other words, you teamed up to get an advantage.** > > In this case, perception is as strong as reality. Why would Anet lie about that? Just because you perceive something doesn't mean its true. If there is a perception that teams create an unfair advantage leading to higher winrates, but this is specifically disproved by official data from the company that made the game, then this perception is incorrect. I think you also missed where I stated that even as a solo player, I still ended up beating 5 mans fairly consistently. I rarely EVER got pubstomped by an organized group, simply because communication doesn't always fill the gap between the differences in players' mechanical skill. In other words, they could call out what I was doing, but even if they rotated accordingly, I would still come out on top just because I was a better player. Just for the record, you sound a flat-earther. One of their main arguments is based off of empirical evidence. Basically, they say, "The Earth _looks_ flat, so it must _be_ flat!" Obviously, perception is not as strong as reality especially when the other side of the argument can be backed up by actual facts and research. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ithilwen.1529 Posted May 12, 2018 Author Share Posted May 12, 2018 > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > @"Ithilwen.1529" said: > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > @"Chaith.8256" said: > > > > @"Ithilwen.1529" , adding a participation prize would fatten up the demographic who PvP for the handouts, not PvP. > > > > > > > > @"Shadowfall.7148" , Two good players on a team will already dominate, imagine being allowed for queuing as 5, it will just be a few teams facerolling some high level solo/duo/trio queuers. It's objectively a worse idea than a community wide welfare reward pot... > > > > > > That's not me btw lol > > > > > > I just hate playing solo. If they introduce duos again, great. Solo que only is a terrible system. If they could figure out a way to make a separate team que system work, that would be cool too. > > > > This is an interesting admission. Thank you for the honesty. > > > > So, when I got fed up getting really bad teammates, I was content with the fact that I could simply find a friend (or a few) to play with to help ease the frustration of RNG matches. > > Now, after Anet stopped letting us play with our friends, we're forced to deal with teammates given to us by a roll of the dice. The quotes are snipped for clarity. **You make it clear that you teamed up to gain an advantage.** It doesn't make sense to now argue that teams are not an advantage. Again this is not about teams or non teams. I'm proposing making a common goal so that *everyone* is effectively on a team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowpass.4236 Posted May 12, 2018 Share Posted May 12, 2018 > @"Ithilwen.1529" said: > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > @"Ithilwen.1529" said: > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > @"Chaith.8256" said: > > > > > @"Ithilwen.1529" , adding a participation prize would fatten up the demographic who PvP for the handouts, not PvP. > > > > > > > > > > @"Shadowfall.7148" , Two good players on a team will already dominate, imagine being allowed for queuing as 5, it will just be a few teams facerolling some high level solo/duo/trio queuers. It's objectively a worse idea than a community wide welfare reward pot... > > > > > > > > That's not me btw lol > > > > > > > > I just hate playing solo. If they introduce duos again, great. Solo que only is a terrible system. If they could figure out a way to make a separate team que system work, that would be cool too. > > > > > > This is an interesting admission. Thank you for the honesty. > > > > > > > So, when I got fed up getting really bad teammates, I was content with the fact that I could simply find a friend (or a few) to play with to help ease the frustration of RNG matches. > > > > Now, after Anet stopped letting us play with our friends, we're forced to deal with teammates given to us by a roll of the dice. > > The quotes are snipped for clarity. **You make it clear that you teamed up to gain an advantage.** It doesn't make sense to now argue that teams are not an advantage. > > Again this is not about teams or non teams. I'm proposing making a common goal so that *everyone* is effectively on a team. > If teams give such a huge advantage then why did Anet state that they had less than a 50% win ratio against solo players? Wouldn't this statistic be closer to 100% if teams really did pubstomp solos all the time? What you're saying doesn't even make sense. You THINK people just want to play with teams to "pubstomp solos" (even though this wasn't the case). When in reality this is an online game and people want to have fun and compete with their friends. What you're suggesting prevents so many people from enjoying their time on this game simply because of your skewed perception that they will roflstomp everyone they come across with malicious intent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ithilwen.1529 Posted May 12, 2018 Author Share Posted May 12, 2018 > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > @"Ithilwen.1529" said: > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > @"Ithilwen.1529" said: > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > @"Chaith.8256" said: > > > > > > @"Ithilwen.1529" , adding a participation prize would fatten up the demographic who PvP for the handouts, not PvP. > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Shadowfall.7148" , Two good players on a team will already dominate, imagine being allowed for queuing as 5, it will just be a few teams facerolling some high level solo/duo/trio queuers. It's objectively a worse idea than a community wide welfare reward pot... > > > > > > > > > > That's not me btw lol > > > > > > > > > > I just hate playing solo. If they introduce duos again, great. Solo que only is a terrible system. If they could figure out a way to make a separate team que system work, that would be cool too. > > > > > > > > This is an interesting admission. Thank you for the honesty. > > > > > > > > > > So, when I got fed up getting really bad teammates, I was content with the fact that I could simply find a friend (or a few) to play with to help ease the frustration of RNG matches. > > > > > > Now, after Anet stopped letting us play with our friends, we're forced to deal with teammates given to us by a roll of the dice. > > > > The quotes are snipped for clarity. **You make it clear that you teamed up to gain an advantage.** It doesn't make sense to now argue that teams are not an advantage. > > > > Again this is not about teams or non teams. I'm proposing making a common goal so that *everyone* is effectively on a team. > > > > If teams give such a huge advantage then why did Anet state that they had less than a 50% win ratio against solo players? Wouldn't this statistic be closer to 100% if teams really did pubstomp solos all the time? > > What you're saying doesn't even make sense. > > You THINK people just want to play with teams to "pubstomp solos" (even though they didn't). When in reality this is an MMO and people want to have fun with their friends. They want to be able to compete with their friends as well. What you're suggesting prevents so many people from enjoying their time on this game simply because of your skewed perception that they will roflstomp everyone they come across. First, I pointed out that you personally stated that you teamed to gain an advantage. **Second, I advocate solo only queues, but this thread is not for that purpose.** Last, I suggest you scroll up to Chaith's post above with regard to the advantages teams have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowpass.4236 Posted May 12, 2018 Share Posted May 12, 2018 > @"Ithilwen.1529" said: > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > @"Ithilwen.1529" said: > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > @"Ithilwen.1529" said: > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > @"Chaith.8256" said: > > > > > > > @"Ithilwen.1529" , adding a participation prize would fatten up the demographic who PvP for the handouts, not PvP. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Shadowfall.7148" , Two good players on a team will already dominate, imagine being allowed for queuing as 5, it will just be a few teams facerolling some high level solo/duo/trio queuers. It's objectively a worse idea than a community wide welfare reward pot... > > > > > > > > > > > > That's not me btw lol > > > > > > > > > > > > I just hate playing solo. If they introduce duos again, great. Solo que only is a terrible system. If they could figure out a way to make a separate team que system work, that would be cool too. > > > > > > > > > > This is an interesting admission. Thank you for the honesty. > > > > > > > > > > > > > So, when I got fed up getting really bad teammates, I was content with the fact that I could simply find a friend (or a few) to play with to help ease the frustration of RNG matches. > > > > > > > > Now, after Anet stopped letting us play with our friends, we're forced to deal with teammates given to us by a roll of the dice. > > > > > > The quotes are snipped for clarity. **You make it clear that you teamed up to gain an advantage.** It doesn't make sense to now argue that teams are not an advantage. > > > > > > Again this is not about teams or non teams. I'm proposing making a common goal so that *everyone* is effectively on a team. > > > > > > > If teams give such a huge advantage then why did Anet state that they had less than a 50% win ratio against solo players? Wouldn't this statistic be closer to 100% if teams really did pubstomp solos all the time? > > > > What you're saying doesn't even make sense. > > > > You THINK people just want to play with teams to "pubstomp solos" (even though they didn't). When in reality this is an MMO and people want to have fun with their friends. They want to be able to compete with their friends as well. What you're suggesting prevents so many people from enjoying their time on this game simply because of your skewed perception that they will roflstomp everyone they come across. > > > First, I pointed out that you personally stated that you teamed to gain an advantage. > > **Second, I personally advocate solo only queues, but this thread is not for that purpose.** > > Last, I suggest you scroll up to Chaith's post above with regard to the advantages teams have. First, you're literally ignoring every single point I make and just restating the same things over and over again. Second, I pointed out that I won fairly often against 5 mans as a solo player. Third, did you even read what Chaith wrote? I suggest you look at it more carefully since it actually reinforces what I stated in my previous post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ithilwen.1529 Posted May 12, 2018 Author Share Posted May 12, 2018 > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > @"Ithilwen.1529" said: > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > @"Ithilwen.1529" said: > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > @"Ithilwen.1529" said: > > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > > @"Chaith.8256" said: > > > > > > > > @"Ithilwen.1529" , adding a participation prize would fatten up the demographic who PvP for the handouts, not PvP. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Shadowfall.7148" , Two good players on a team will already dominate, imagine being allowed for queuing as 5, it will just be a few teams facerolling some high level solo/duo/trio queuers. It's objectively a worse idea than a community wide welfare reward pot... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That's not me btw lol > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I just hate playing solo. If they introduce duos again, great. Solo que only is a terrible system. If they could figure out a way to make a separate team que system work, that would be cool too. > > > > > > > > > > > > This is an interesting admission. Thank you for the honesty. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So, when I got fed up getting really bad teammates, I was content with the fact that I could simply find a friend (or a few) to play with to help ease the frustration of RNG matches. > > > > > > > > > > Now, after Anet stopped letting us play with our friends, we're forced to deal with teammates given to us by a roll of the dice. > > > > > > > > The quotes are snipped for clarity. **You make it clear that you teamed up to gain an advantage.** It doesn't make sense to now argue that teams are not an advantage. > > > > > > > > Again this is not about teams or non teams. I'm proposing making a common goal so that *everyone* is effectively on a team. > > > > > > > > > > If teams give such a huge advantage then why did Anet state that they had less than a 50% win ratio against solo players? Wouldn't this statistic be closer to 100% if teams really did pubstomp solos all the time? > > > > > > What you're saying doesn't even make sense. > > > > > > You THINK people just want to play with teams to "pubstomp solos" (even though they didn't). When in reality this is an MMO and people want to have fun with their friends. They want to be able to compete with their friends as well. What you're suggesting prevents so many people from enjoying their time on this game simply because of your skewed perception that they will roflstomp everyone they come across. > > > > > > First, I pointed out that you personally stated that you teamed to gain an advantage. > > > > **Second, I personally advocate solo only queues, but this thread is not for that purpose.** > > > > Last, I suggest you scroll up to Chaith's post above with regard to the advantages teams have. > > First, you're literally ignoring every single point I make and just restating the same things over and over again. > > Second, I pointed out that I won fairly often against 5 mans as a solo player. > > Third, did you even read what Chaith wrote? I suggest you look at it more carefully since it actually reinforces what I stated in my previous post. This is no longer productive. **This post is not about teams or not teams.** I'll leave it at that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowpass.4236 Posted May 12, 2018 Share Posted May 12, 2018 > @"Ithilwen.1529" said: > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > @"Ithilwen.1529" said: > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > @"Ithilwen.1529" said: > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > @"Ithilwen.1529" said: > > > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Chaith.8256" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Ithilwen.1529" , adding a participation prize would fatten up the demographic who PvP for the handouts, not PvP. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Shadowfall.7148" , Two good players on a team will already dominate, imagine being allowed for queuing as 5, it will just be a few teams facerolling some high level solo/duo/trio queuers. It's objectively a worse idea than a community wide welfare reward pot... > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That's not me btw lol > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I just hate playing solo. If they introduce duos again, great. Solo que only is a terrible system. If they could figure out a way to make a separate team que system work, that would be cool too. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This is an interesting admission. Thank you for the honesty. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > So, when I got fed up getting really bad teammates, I was content with the fact that I could simply find a friend (or a few) to play with to help ease the frustration of RNG matches. > > > > > > > > > > > > Now, after Anet stopped letting us play with our friends, we're forced to deal with teammates given to us by a roll of the dice. > > > > > > > > > > The quotes are snipped for clarity. **You make it clear that you teamed up to gain an advantage.** It doesn't make sense to now argue that teams are not an advantage. > > > > > > > > > > Again this is not about teams or non teams. I'm proposing making a common goal so that *everyone* is effectively on a team. > > > > > > > > > > > > > If teams give such a huge advantage then why did Anet state that they had less than a 50% win ratio against solo players? Wouldn't this statistic be closer to 100% if teams really did pubstomp solos all the time? > > > > > > > > What you're saying doesn't even make sense. > > > > > > > > You THINK people just want to play with teams to "pubstomp solos" (even though they didn't). When in reality this is an MMO and people want to have fun with their friends. They want to be able to compete with their friends as well. What you're suggesting prevents so many people from enjoying their time on this game simply because of your skewed perception that they will roflstomp everyone they come across. > > > > > > > > > First, I pointed out that you personally stated that you teamed to gain an advantage. > > > > > > **Second, I personally advocate solo only queues, but this thread is not for that purpose.** > > > > > > Last, I suggest you scroll up to Chaith's post above with regard to the advantages teams have. > > > > First, you're literally ignoring every single point I make and just restating the same things over and over again. > > > > Second, I pointed out that I won fairly often against 5 mans as a solo player. > > > > Third, did you even read what Chaith wrote? I suggest you look at it more carefully since it actually reinforces what I stated in my previous post. > > This is no longer productive. **This post is not about teams or not teams.** I'll leave it at that. It would be much more productive if you were able to actually address the points I was making rather than repeating yourself like a broken tape recorder. Again, you should read what Chaith wrote a little more carefully. He said, "Two good players on a team will already dominate, imagine being allowed for queuing as 5, it will just be a few teams facerolling some high level solo/duo/trio queuers. It's objectively a worse idea than a community wide welfare reward pot..." The key words here are "a few teams." Just like I stated 2 posts ago, the ONLY teams that will be able to faceroll will consist of players who already have a massive skill difference between them and the average player in their division. It will NOT affect players like you in silver. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Math.5123 Posted May 12, 2018 Share Posted May 12, 2018 > @"Ithilwen.1529" said: > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > @"Ithilwen.1529" said: > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > @"Ithilwen.1529" said: > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > @"Chaith.8256" said: > > > > > > > @"Ithilwen.1529" , adding a participation prize would fatten up the demographic who PvP for the handouts, not PvP. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > @"Shadowfall.7148" , Two good players on a team will already dominate, imagine being allowed for queuing as 5, it will just be a few teams facerolling some high level solo/duo/trio queuers. It's objectively a worse idea than a community wide welfare reward pot... > > > > > > > > > > > > That's not me btw lol > > > > > > > > > > > > I just hate playing solo. If they introduce duos again, great. Solo que only is a terrible system. If they could figure out a way to make a separate team que system work, that would be cool too. > > > > > > > > > > This is an interesting admission. Thank you for the honesty. > > > > > > > > > > > > > So, when I got fed up getting really bad teammates, I was content with the fact that I could simply find a friend (or a few) to play with to help ease the frustration of RNG matches. > > > > > > > > Now, after Anet stopped letting us play with our friends, we're forced to deal with teammates given to us by a roll of the dice. > > > > > > The quotes are snipped for clarity. **You make it clear that you teamed up to gain an advantage.** It doesn't make sense to now argue that teams are not an advantage. > > > > > > Again this is not about teams or non teams. I'm proposing making a common goal so that *everyone* is effectively on a team. > > > > > > > If teams give such a huge advantage then why did Anet state that they had less than a 50% win ratio against solo players? Wouldn't this statistic be closer to 100% if teams really did pubstomp solos all the time? > > > > What you're saying doesn't even make sense. > > > > You THINK people just want to play with teams to "pubstomp solos" (even though they didn't). When in reality this is an MMO and people want to have fun with their friends. They want to be able to compete with their friends as well. What you're suggesting prevents so many people from enjoying their time on this game simply because of your skewed perception that they will roflstomp everyone they come across. > > > First, I pointed out that you personally stated that you teamed to gain an advantage. > > **Second, I advocate solo only queues, but this thread is not for that purpose.** > > Last, I suggest you scroll up to Chaith's post above with regard to the advantages teams have. Actually, he stated that he wanted to ease the frustration of rng matches. He never stated that he teamed to get an advantage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaith.8256 Posted May 12, 2018 Share Posted May 12, 2018 > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > Just like I stated 2 posts ago, the ONLY teams that will be able to faceroll will consist of players who already have a massive skill difference between them and the average player in their division. It will NOT affect players like you in silver. Yes, this is very true. The visible top of the leaderboard is what I was talking about, not the average or below average players. Platinum2 and up will just be 5-queue only players. Not queuing as 5 **even once** essentially handicaps your placement on leaderboards. Unless we have the population to make a 5q only, separate queue, for the sake of the top 100 leaderboard spots we can't mix 5q with solo. The reason why teams overall have a sub 50% winrate is because the majority are bronze/silver/gold/Plat1. When you group up, you'd better get on comms and use tryhard classes, cause' you'll be fighting in a whole division past your skill level. When platinum players group up, they break the matchmaker because they hit the ceiling and there aren't any legendary solo queuers to block their progress. To be honest, shadowfall, it seems apparent you want to group up with good Plat2 players, lose the handicap of PUGS, break the matchmaker and achieve 90% winrate instead of 65%. You're hiding behind the statistic that teams have a sub-50% win rate. It's not gonna grow gw2.. It's just what plat2 players want so they can stop being limited by pugs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowpass.4236 Posted May 12, 2018 Share Posted May 12, 2018 > @"Chaith.8256" said: > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > Just like I stated 2 posts ago, the ONLY teams that will be able to faceroll will consist of players who already have a massive skill difference between them and the average player in their division. It will NOT affect players like you in silver. > > Yes, this is very true. The visible top of the leaderboard is what I was talking about, not the average or below average players. Platinum2 and up will just be 5-queue only players. Not queuing as 5 **even once** essentially handicaps your placement on leaderboards. > > Unless we have the population to make a 5q only, separate queue, for the sake of the top 100 leaderboard spots we can't mix 5q with solo. > > The reason why teams overall have a sub 50% winrate is because the majority are bronze/silver/gold/Plat1. When you group up, you'd better get on comms and use tryhard classes, cause' you'll be fighting in a whole division past your skill level. > > When platinum players group up, they break the matchmaker because they hit the ceiling and there aren't any legendary solo queuers to block their progress. > > To be honest, shadowfall, it seems apparent you want to group up with good Plat2 players, lose the handicap of PUGS, break the matchmaker and achieve 90% winrate instead of 65%. You're hiding behind the statistic that teams have a sub-50% win rate. It's not gonna grow gw2.. It's just what plat2 players want so they can stop being limited by pugs. > Even if I did group up with other players, it wouldn't affect my rating on the leaderboards. And it's not like I care much anyways. Quing casually in ranked on meme builds let me climb to rank 16 after placing 1500 due to poor placement matches. If I actually tried harder in these matches like I've done in previous seasons, my win rate ends up much higher than 60% even without running meta builds. I just want to play with my friends and have fun rather than being frustrated playing alone with random teammates who can't even perform their roles properly in Plat 2. It's not fair that I (as well as you) get matched with incompetent teammates. I also understand that this issue is caused by the low population, but it could also be solved by letting us que with people we know. Even duo que would be better than the current system. Although yes, there will be some matches were the randoms get steamrolled, it doesn't happen as frequently nor is it as rampant of an issue as some people like the OP have been led to believe. In fact, the OP wouldn't have experienced these steamrolls anyways, as silver players lack the mechanical skill to properly snowball a map unless the other team completely gives up. As someone who has almost exclusively solo qued even when duos/5 mans were a thing, you'd expect my win rate to be much lower than 60% but this isn't the case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Za Shaloc.3908 Posted May 12, 2018 Share Posted May 12, 2018 Ithilwen, how would this proposal differ from the current pip system? It sounds to me like it would basically be like adding additional rewards to the chests, just in a different chest at the end of the season. I hope this doesn't come across as condescending. I am genuinely asking because I am having trouble understanding how this would be different than what we already have, beyond just increasing the quantity of rewards. Is the sliding scale aspect specifically in regards to the pooled reward chest, or would it also apply to what the individuals would receive (as in, some would get more than others depending on games played)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OriOri.8724 Posted May 12, 2018 Share Posted May 12, 2018 I'm not against this, but I don't see how it would reduce toxicity. What it _could_ do however, is bring more people into PvP, depending on the prize in question. And that is a good thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ithilwen.1529 Posted May 12, 2018 Author Share Posted May 12, 2018 > @"Pterikdactyl.7630" said: > Ithilwen, how would this proposal differ from the current pip system? It sounds to me like it would basically be like adding additional rewards to the chests, just in a different chest at the end of the season. > > I hope this doesn't come across as condescending. I am genuinely asking because I am having trouble understanding how this would be different than what we already have, beyond just increasing the quantity of rewards. Is the sliding scale aspect specifically in regards to the pooled reward chest, or would it also apply to what the individuals would receive (as in, some would get more than others depending on games played)? The idea I am proposing ties rewards to the performance of the PvP community as a whole rather than individual rewards. I hope this would create some feeling of solidarity, since everyone's performance would contribute to the outcome. So, yes, the sliding scale reward would be for games played by the entire PvP population. There could be some kind of announcement of total games played. This would be a recognition of those who contributed the most. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaldaRaric.6305 Posted May 12, 2018 Share Posted May 12, 2018 How is giving everyone rewards going to fix toxicity? Clearly it isn’t working right now because right now everyone gets rewards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ithilwen.1529 Posted May 12, 2018 Author Share Posted May 12, 2018 > @"CaldaRaric.6305" said: > How is giving everyone rewards going to fix toxicity? Clearly it isn’t working right now because right now everyone gets rewards. The point is that everyone works **together** toward a reward. This *may* reduce toxicity by essentially making everyone part of a large team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralkuth.1456 Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 I'm all for more rewards, since 90% of us consists of casual unranked and or average people floating in silver-gold-low plat and you win some, you lose some. There might be a lot of booze between friends, plenty of stupid meme builds, a few unlikely victories we'll brag for months to come, but this is all internal gratification and self-amusement, fairly adrift from the spirit of true PvP. This is what I believe casual PvP is about, there's no pressure, you take time to improve, take long breaks for failure, and you find the little things to keep you happy. [below is only my opinion on PvP "cooperation", since I don't entirely agree with that concept.] Still, I'd like to express my opinion that fostering the feeling of cooperation in a competitive aspect of the game like PvP is... a very open-minded approach about it. Sure, cooperation would be awesome in an office environment or anywhere you need to work together for long periods. Aside from issues of promotion people are encouraged to build friendship with one another. But if we look at serious PvP, or just the concept of pitting players against one another... It is about competition, about winning. Teams get together to win. Cooperation is secondary to the larger goal of winning. Would any competitive team shooting for the stars stay together after a painful string of consistent losses? Top players know they're good, and they want to prove to others that they are, and show people that their effort matters, and in glorious ways. They give themselves a lot of pressure to stay ahead of the crowd and stay in their team, and even the measure of "cooperation" or how well they can work with other people is viewed more as a personal quality than collective strength. Well, there are other factors like better synergy or family team or whatnot, but PvP does focus much more on individual ability and achievement. There's a lot of friction and tension but the victories that come about after putting one's everything into the game - that's what makes PvP such an exhilarating event to watch and learn from. Would it even make sense if there's only the exhibition match (no impact on career) but no league season (to prove yourself and achieve) in a sports event? Would there be a significant technological advance if not for the Space Race? I quote an article on balancing life: **"Too much ambition makes life miserable, too little makes it meaningless."** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ithilwen.1529 Posted May 21, 2018 Author Share Posted May 21, 2018 > @"Ralkuth.1456" said: > I'm all for more rewards, since 90% of us consists of casual unranked and or average people floating in silver-gold-low plat and you win some, you lose some. There might be a lot of booze between friends, plenty of stupid meme builds, a few unlikely victories we'll brag for months to come, but this is all internal gratification and self-amusement, fairly adrift from the spirit of true PvP. This is what I believe casual PvP is about, there's no pressure, you take time to improve, take long breaks for failure, and you find the little things to keep you happy. > > [below is only my opinion on PvP "cooperation", since I don't entirely agree with that concept.] > > Still, I'd like to express my opinion that fostering the feeling of cooperation in a competitive aspect of the game like PvP is... a very open-minded approach about it. Sure, cooperation would be awesome in an office environment or anywhere you need to work together for long periods. Aside from issues of promotion people are encouraged to build friendship with one another. > > But if we look at serious PvP, or just the concept of pitting players against one another... > > It is about competition, about winning. Teams get together to win. Cooperation is secondary to the larger goal of winning. Would any competitive team shooting for the stars stay together after a painful string of consistent losses? Top players know they're good, and they want to prove to others that they are, and show people that their effort matters, and in glorious ways. They give themselves a lot of pressure to stay ahead of the crowd and stay in their team, and even the measure of "cooperation" or how well they can work with other people is viewed more as a personal quality than collective strength. Well, there are other factors like better synergy or family team or whatnot, but PvP does focus much more on individual ability and achievement. There's a lot of friction and tension but the victories that come about after putting one's everything into the game - that's what makes PvP such an exhilarating event to watch and learn from. > > Would it even make sense if there's only the exhibition match (no impact on career) but no league season (to prove yourself and achieve) in a sports event? Would there be a significant technological advance if not for the Space Race? > > I quote an article on balancing life: **"Too much ambition makes life miserable, too little makes it meaningless."** Funny you should mention the space race. The United States and Russia made strong advancements, working together on multiple space station missions. My suggestion was really about having people "see" one another as fellow PvPer's, as opposed to targets for mockery or worse. I love to race in virtually any form, my adrenaline levels rise when I approach the starting line. **I'm all for competition. I'm not for the constant schoolyard bullying.** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ralkuth.1456 Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 I know you have good intentions. But any form of competition will have aspects of psychological warfare and vocal venting. Being able to find confidence and temper control within oneself is part of the game. Friends and I ran a team back in the core days, did the insults fly! Inside the team and outside the team, we would get very vocal about attacks on our abilities to play the game. We needed to have the absolute last word on the map chats, and we blamed losses on everything but ourselves. I would carry on that mentality and rage extremely hard for a while, until I realized all I really done kittened up was myself and myself alone. Nobody cares if I'm upset (I still find the entitlement amazing), and I have to deal with it like a proper person above an IQ of 64. Eventually, it (and other life experiences, not just this one, LOL) made me a better person, admitting to mistakes, and stop taking everything personally. So, I think cracking down on "bad behaviour" should only be done if it gets completely out of hand and life threatening. Otherwise it's a tool for self-empowerment. The short term solution is to not read the chat (flip to combat log), but even amongst the sewage you can maybe learn something. A new way to insult other people's intelligence, learning why a certain move is a bad idea, judge who actually made the right call, who's trash-talking but actually frustrated and angry... just have thick skin and an open mind, some of the comebacks are brilliant. There's only so much a person can take though (it does erode your good spirits), and in that case it's time to take a break. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
choovanski.5462 Posted May 21, 2018 Share Posted May 21, 2018 > @"Ithilwen.1529" said: > > @"CaldaRaric.6305" said: > > How is giving everyone rewards going to fix toxicity? Clearly it isn’t working right now because right now everyone gets rewards. > > The point is that everyone works **together** toward a reward. This *may* reduce toxicity by essentially making everyone part of a large team. I don't follow... sure introducing rewards based on how many games the community plays may get more people to play PvP- but that's not going to make the community any less toxic. it's not going to fix balance, matchmaking, afks or the frustrations of solo queue. it's just going to be just as toxic. people won't see this as all being on the same team- it will be seen as free loot. toxicity won't reduce, people will just get more loot. /// @"Chaith.8256" hey buddy. firstly want to say your scrapper gameplay of late is great. awesome to see you still around. but just wanna holla at you regarding team queue. you might think a lot of people want to game the system and rank highly, but that's not the reality. a ton of people just have more than one guildie they like to play with. I used to have a regular TRIO, but we've all quit after the ability for us to play as a group was removed. none of us want to sit in discord while solo queuing, so we play other games. in fact the removal of team queue plus WvW balance issues caused my whole 50+ man guild to quit... only one of us even logs in anymore. still PvP comes up in discord we miss it, but it's not worth playing alone. in fact I had this same discussion in another thread, and I wasnt the only one to see PvP guilds die and friends list become offline wastelands. we had over 300 people quitting in that thread alone. feel like the population impact of removing team queue, and the damages to potential growth need to be considered too. a ton of people really were just in it for the community, and didn't want those wins. it would be all those low rank teams you mentioned, the ones who lost to higher rank solos. we lost those players. would be nice to try and get em back. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now