Etheri.5406 Posted August 7, 2018 Share Posted August 7, 2018 > @"BadMed.3846" said: > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > @"Lucentfir.7430" said: > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > @"LegendaVagyok.9132" said: > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > "We want to have fun matches with our friends." > > > > > > > > > > If playing with your friends important to you and the main goal here, then play in unraked or practice more and go for AT. Sometimes you'll face way better opponents, that's bad luck. The game in this current allows you to play with friends, even in ranked (sure only one until 1600), having the neccessary team skill and exp level is a different topic (through which you'll have fun with friends in AT for example). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > FUN > > > > > > > > FUN MATCHES > > > > > > > > ARE YOU PEOPLE BLIND > > > > > > > > UNRANKED IS NOT FUN MATCHES NEITHER ARE ATS > > > > > > Please define your version of a fun match, because there are many takes on what a fun match is. There are people that like having matches skewed in their favor to win, but like having a little more opposing resistance to play against. Others find fun matches to be equal playing fields against similar skilled players. What exactly is your take on a fun match? I'm curious. > > > > A match that plays out like an actual competitive game would. Solid fights and rotations from all (or most in the case of ranked) players. > > > > 500-0 stomps aren't fun. The enemy team just gives up and you spend the next 8 minutes sitting outside their spawn for the game to end. > > > > However this WON'T happen when Anet listens to people who wish to drive good players from the game. In fact, it makes it worse for them because they end up getting matched against good players more often because the matchmaker doesn't have enough to keep plat against plat. > > > > Those who are complaining about unbalanced matches are actually just making it worse for themselves by voting away duo/team que. > > This is seriously a joke. Makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Don't just throw in to the mix that your so called "good players" want duo queue. I'm sure we got plenty other good players and we won't miss the ones that moved on. That's for being part of the journey! He has a point tho. Many low-end scrubs constantly asking to make the game more designed for them, only to realise it bites them in the ass soon after. At the end of the day, development can't avoid L2P issues. Clearly you won't admit you miss the players that moved on; but you'll happily complain about the issues which are the direct result of them moving on without even realising it. Let's call it casual naïvity; casual enough to not have a clue about what's going on and how things interact with eachother, naive enough to think you're acting in your own self-interest when it's not even that. Still suprises me casual players who barely grasp the thing somehow are convinced they know what's best for it. It's funny how most of these players never encounter wintrading; but will use wintrade as an excuse for why they don't care about their silver rank. Having very few high-end players is very bad for your entire scene, most importantly the lower rated players who constantly have to deal with inbalanced matches with and against players way out of their league. But I guess that's all too convoluted to grasp. Having only 30 high-end players is insanely bad and only makes the NA scene decay even quicker. It's clear that the EU scene which had a significantly larger competitive group of players also still provides higher quality ranked matches not just at top 100 or top 50 ratings, but throughout high gold, low plat and so forth. Meanwhile on NA 400-500 rating differences in ranked matches aren't even abnormal... LUL. Bullying good players out of the game doesn't make the skill difference go away, it makes it more noticable which punishes BOTH sides. You'll learn one day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sylosi.6503 Posted August 7, 2018 Share Posted August 7, 2018 > @"pah.4931" said: > Even though Anet straight said teams had a worse win-rate than solo-q people? You do realize how team-q worked, right? It would pair your with solo players of higher skill. > > If you refuse to listen to facts, then there's not much we can do for you. You realise that "fact" was pretty meaningless, it was 5 man pre-mades vs solo had a very marginally lower win rate than the solo players, problem is that doesn't mean much by itself, which is why it doesn't tally with actual experiences of many players. For instance at low tier you would have not very good 5 mans made up of PvE players who were just having a bit of fun, doing a guild event, etc, this would then be "balanced" when they faced solo players by the solo players being somewhat better, the result of which it would often be an easy win for the solo players. Conversely at the other end if you had 5 "ESL" players queue as a pre-made, then in most cases if they faced solo/duo group then the result would only go one way. So that result of that simplified set of results is that overall you end up with around a 50 win rate for 5 mans vs solo, but in practice for an individual it can be a long way from that depending on what your MMR is. Same thing with when you play, if for example you worked shifts and played very late night back in season 1 then you might find that you would end up repeatedly against a certain group of "ESL" players (admittedly bad ones by "ESL" standards) who were trying to avoid the other teams by queuing at silly times of night, guess what, those solo players did not have a 50% win rate vs pre-mades. Then beyond all that you have that even if an individual does get a 50% win rate as a solo player that says nothing about the quality of the matches, Leeto was a fine example of this back when he used to stream, he had a decent MMR, so when he played ranked when he faced a team it was often a one sided loss, because it is hard to balance teams of better players against solo/duo players, if he switched to unranked and faced a team it was normally " ez win boyz", because he knew in unranked normally a 5 man premade meant they were not good players. So he may of had around a 50% win rate vs 5 man pre-made but most of his matches were one sided, trash tier quality. Which is why League of Legends even with tens of millions of players and a game much easier to balance teams in, had to bring back solo queue at higher MMR's because you can't balance solo players against a team in that situation. But anyway, beyond all that this a 6 year old MMORPG so on that alone you should only expect decline regardless of what Anet do, where most of the actual real PvP players left the game pre-HoT, you had a temporary boost in numbers from F2P and adding leageus/seasons (the novelty wears off) and it is back to decline, just like it was declining when the game had an actual team queue... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReaverKane.7598 Posted August 7, 2018 Share Posted August 7, 2018 Solo-duo obviously doesn't work, maybe it's time for them to give Team queue a chance again! That vote in the past was one of, and probably the **worse** management decision Arena Net ever made. PvP was thriving pre-Season 5. Even after surviving what was the **worse meta in gw2 history** Season 4 was pretty great. Then they decided to remove team queue, and well, results are evident. Pro play lasted one season after they removed team queue. The population has gone down so badly that matchmaker has to queue plats with bronzes... At this point, i think its too late to do anything about it. Bringing team queue back is only going to reduce the population further without any promise of bringing back the true competitive players, i mean it's been 2 years now. People who quit on the back of team queues being removed aren't likely to come back any more, and the loot farmers that replied "no" in this post would probably throw a tantrum and quit. So at this point there's no saving PvP without a complete rework of the whole system and a huge concerted PR campaign to bring people back. And it's doubtful that Arena Net has or will spend the resources needed for it. Also, there's the issue with balance. Without a proper balance schedule with proper competent balance decisions PvP will remain the stain that it became over the last couple years. It's sad, because it was once the thing that held the game together during the lengthy pre and Post HoT content droughts. Now it's the bane of the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Megametzler.5729 Posted August 7, 2018 Share Posted August 7, 2018 > @"Etheri.5406" said: > > @"BadMed.3846" said: > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > @"Lucentfir.7430" said: > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > @"LegendaVagyok.9132" said: > > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > "We want to have fun matches with our friends." > > > > > > > > > > > > If playing with your friends important to you and the main goal here, then play in unraked or practice more and go for AT. Sometimes you'll face way better opponents, that's bad luck. The game in this current allows you to play with friends, even in ranked (sure only one until 1600), having the neccessary team skill and exp level is a different topic (through which you'll have fun with friends in AT for example). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > FUN > > > > > > > > > > FUN MATCHES > > > > > > > > > > ARE YOU PEOPLE BLIND > > > > > > > > > > UNRANKED IS NOT FUN MATCHES NEITHER ARE ATS > > > > > > > > Please define your version of a fun match, because there are many takes on what a fun match is. There are people that like having matches skewed in their favor to win, but like having a little more opposing resistance to play against. Others find fun matches to be equal playing fields against similar skilled players. What exactly is your take on a fun match? I'm curious. > > > > > > A match that plays out like an actual competitive game would. Solid fights and rotations from all (or most in the case of ranked) players. > > > > > > 500-0 stomps aren't fun. The enemy team just gives up and you spend the next 8 minutes sitting outside their spawn for the game to end. > > > > > > However this WON'T happen when Anet listens to people who wish to drive good players from the game. In fact, it makes it worse for them because they end up getting matched against good players more often because the matchmaker doesn't have enough to keep plat against plat. > > > > > > Those who are complaining about unbalanced matches are actually just making it worse for themselves by voting away duo/team que. > > > > This is seriously a joke. Makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Don't just throw in to the mix that your so called "good players" want duo queue. I'm sure we got plenty other good players and we won't miss the ones that moved on. That's for being part of the journey! > > He has a point tho. Many low-end scrubs constantly asking to make the game more designed for them, only to realise it bites them in the kitten soon after. At the end of the day, development can't avoid L2P issues. Clearly you won't admit you miss the players that moved on; but you'll happily complain about the issues which are the direct result of them moving on without even realising it. > > Let's call it casual naïvity; casual enough to not have a clue about what's going on and how things interact with eachother, naive enough to think you're acting in your own self-interest when it's not even that. Still suprises me casual players who barely grasp the thing somehow are convinced they know what's best for it. > > It's funny how most of these players never encounter wintrading; but will use wintrade as an excuse for why they don't care about their silver rank. Having very few high-end players is very bad for your entire scene, most importantly the lower rated players who constantly have to deal with inbalanced matches with and against players way out of their league. But I guess that's all too convoluted to grasp. > > Having only 30 high-end players is insanely bad and only makes the NA scene decay even quicker. It's clear that the EU scene which had a significantly larger competitive group of players also still provides higher quality ranked matches not just at top 100 or top 50 ratings, but throughout high gold, low plat and so forth. Meanwhile on NA 400-500 rating differences in ranked matches aren't even abnormal... LUL. > > Bullying good players out of the game doesn't make the skill difference go away, it makes it more noticable which punishes BOTH sides. You'll learn one day. On the other hand, I don't have to play with the (self-proclaimed and smallish) elitist group and would prefer more casuals like me in the games instead of them. I don't need a competitive tournament scene to have fun with people at my skill level and my rate of investing time into it. _If_ I could trade these players with more (good) casuals, I would be happy. But that's unrealistic of course. :smile: Without that competitive scene, videos and streams, less people might become interested in PVP in total and all these side effects, so of course it has a bad influence on the whole PVP scene. I wouldn't know the perfect solution. Seperate leaderboards with these few people? Or the easy way they might try now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Etheri.5406 Posted August 7, 2018 Share Posted August 7, 2018 > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > @"Etheri.5406" said: > > > @"BadMed.3846" said: > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > @"Lucentfir.7430" said: > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > @"LegendaVagyok.9132" said: > > > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > > "We want to have fun matches with our friends." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If playing with your friends important to you and the main goal here, then play in unraked or practice more and go for AT. Sometimes you'll face way better opponents, that's bad luck. The game in this current allows you to play with friends, even in ranked (sure only one until 1600), having the neccessary team skill and exp level is a different topic (through which you'll have fun with friends in AT for example). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > FUN > > > > > > > > > > > > FUN MATCHES > > > > > > > > > > > > ARE YOU PEOPLE BLIND > > > > > > > > > > > > UNRANKED IS NOT FUN MATCHES NEITHER ARE ATS > > > > > > > > > > Please define your version of a fun match, because there are many takes on what a fun match is. There are people that like having matches skewed in their favor to win, but like having a little more opposing resistance to play against. Others find fun matches to be equal playing fields against similar skilled players. What exactly is your take on a fun match? I'm curious. > > > > > > > > A match that plays out like an actual competitive game would. Solid fights and rotations from all (or most in the case of ranked) players. > > > > > > > > 500-0 stomps aren't fun. The enemy team just gives up and you spend the next 8 minutes sitting outside their spawn for the game to end. > > > > > > > > However this WON'T happen when Anet listens to people who wish to drive good players from the game. In fact, it makes it worse for them because they end up getting matched against good players more often because the matchmaker doesn't have enough to keep plat against plat. > > > > > > > > Those who are complaining about unbalanced matches are actually just making it worse for themselves by voting away duo/team que. > > > > > > This is seriously a joke. Makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Don't just throw in to the mix that your so called "good players" want duo queue. I'm sure we got plenty other good players and we won't miss the ones that moved on. That's for being part of the journey! > > > > He has a point tho. Many low-end scrubs constantly asking to make the game more designed for them, only to realise it bites them in the kitten soon after. At the end of the day, development can't avoid L2P issues. Clearly you won't admit you miss the players that moved on; but you'll happily complain about the issues which are the direct result of them moving on without even realising it. > > > > Let's call it casual naïvity; casual enough to not have a clue about what's going on and how things interact with eachother, naive enough to think you're acting in your own self-interest when it's not even that. Still suprises me casual players who barely grasp the thing somehow are convinced they know what's best for it. > > > > It's funny how most of these players never encounter wintrading; but will use wintrade as an excuse for why they don't care about their silver rank. Having very few high-end players is very bad for your entire scene, most importantly the lower rated players who constantly have to deal with inbalanced matches with and against players way out of their league. But I guess that's all too convoluted to grasp. > > > > Having only 30 high-end players is insanely bad and only makes the NA scene decay even quicker. It's clear that the EU scene which had a significantly larger competitive group of players also still provides higher quality ranked matches not just at top 100 or top 50 ratings, but throughout high gold, low plat and so forth. Meanwhile on NA 400-500 rating differences in ranked matches aren't even abnormal... LUL. > > > > Bullying good players out of the game doesn't make the skill difference go away, it makes it more noticable which punishes BOTH sides. You'll learn one day. > > On the other hand, I don't have to play with the (self-proclaimed and smallish) elitist group and would prefer more casuals like me in the games instead of them. I don't need a competitive tournament scene to have fun with people at my skill level and my rate of investing time into it. _If_ I could trade these players with more (good) casuals, I would be happy. > > But that's unrealistic of course. :smile: Without that competitive scene, videos and streams, less people might become interested in PVP in total and all these side effects, so of course it has a bad influence on the whole PVP scene. > > I wouldn't know the perfect solution. Seperate leaderboards with these few people? Or the easy way they might try now... Actually, that's the whole fun part about not caring for the "elitist" group smaller and smaller. You literally do get forced to play with and against them, because they can't find matches against eachother anymore. Look around the forums to see dozens of threads crying about being matched with high-end players, especially from NA, at ranks as low as mid silver. Unless you can magically make all these "elitist" players go away, the result is just higher skill-gaps making "fair" matches between casual players less likely and more rare... Which will in turn have the same effect on the casual scene, as we already see : it also falls appart due to non-fun matches, snowball, reward-hungry players, ... You literally do need a competitive healthy scene to have fun with players "at your level". The concept of "players at your level" doesn't exist without a healthy, competitive scene which has sufficient "players at each level" to function. Without these players - which are required at the entire spectrum and not just the low end - producing "fair" games with players of similar skill isn't possible. Instead the game produces unfair games constantly, which aren't fun for either party, which leads to more people leaving / game not being as fun as it should / could be, which again makes the skill differences bigger and the issues themselves worse. You don't magically have all the top-end players quit on the same day. No, even if 5 or 30 or 10 or only 1 guy stays; they'll constantly be matched with other far less skilled players and ruin matches for them. Forever. But reversing and fixing this situation? Almost impossible, as training new players up to this level is nearly impossible without said competitive scene to begin with. The result? ... Decay of the PvP scene and its health. Aka literally what we've been seeing these last years. Imagine you're 1400 rated and chillin'. You suddenly get into a game with players whose rating goes from 1400 to 1800, including some of the top 10 players. You'll literally see players 1v3 succesfully on both teams, and the game won't be fun for ANYONE. It's fundamentally unfair and unbalanced and ... there's NOTHING anet can do about it at this point. Yet these games with 1400 to 1800 rating spread? Been happening on NA for more than a year and becoming more and more common during off-hours on EU too. There is no solution. Anet doesn't care about PvP enough to maintain the community it had. Now they'd have to invest extra to revitalize it, which obviously won't happen either. The result is continued decay. Slowly but surely things will only get worse. The same will happen for WvW and raids. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Megametzler.5729 Posted August 7, 2018 Share Posted August 7, 2018 > @"Etheri.5406" said: > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > @"Etheri.5406" said: > > > > @"BadMed.3846" said: > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > @"Lucentfir.7430" said: > > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > > @"LegendaVagyok.9132" said: > > > > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > > > "We want to have fun matches with our friends." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If playing with your friends important to you and the main goal here, then play in unraked or practice more and go for AT. Sometimes you'll face way better opponents, that's bad luck. The game in this current allows you to play with friends, even in ranked (sure only one until 1600), having the neccessary team skill and exp level is a different topic (through which you'll have fun with friends in AT for example). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > FUN > > > > > > > > > > > > > > FUN MATCHES > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ARE YOU PEOPLE BLIND > > > > > > > > > > > > > > UNRANKED IS NOT FUN MATCHES NEITHER ARE ATS > > > > > > > > > > > > Please define your version of a fun match, because there are many takes on what a fun match is. There are people that like having matches skewed in their favor to win, but like having a little more opposing resistance to play against. Others find fun matches to be equal playing fields against similar skilled players. What exactly is your take on a fun match? I'm curious. > > > > > > > > > > A match that plays out like an actual competitive game would. Solid fights and rotations from all (or most in the case of ranked) players. > > > > > > > > > > 500-0 stomps aren't fun. The enemy team just gives up and you spend the next 8 minutes sitting outside their spawn for the game to end. > > > > > > > > > > However this WON'T happen when Anet listens to people who wish to drive good players from the game. In fact, it makes it worse for them because they end up getting matched against good players more often because the matchmaker doesn't have enough to keep plat against plat. > > > > > > > > > > Those who are complaining about unbalanced matches are actually just making it worse for themselves by voting away duo/team que. > > > > > > > > This is seriously a joke. Makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Don't just throw in to the mix that your so called "good players" want duo queue. I'm sure we got plenty other good players and we won't miss the ones that moved on. That's for being part of the journey! > > > > > > He has a point tho. Many low-end scrubs constantly asking to make the game more designed for them, only to realise it bites them in the kitten soon after. At the end of the day, development can't avoid L2P issues. Clearly you won't admit you miss the players that moved on; but you'll happily complain about the issues which are the direct result of them moving on without even realising it. > > > > > > Let's call it casual naïvity; casual enough to not have a clue about what's going on and how things interact with eachother, naive enough to think you're acting in your own self-interest when it's not even that. Still suprises me casual players who barely grasp the thing somehow are convinced they know what's best for it. > > > > > > It's funny how most of these players never encounter wintrading; but will use wintrade as an excuse for why they don't care about their silver rank. Having very few high-end players is very bad for your entire scene, most importantly the lower rated players who constantly have to deal with inbalanced matches with and against players way out of their league. But I guess that's all too convoluted to grasp. > > > > > > Having only 30 high-end players is insanely bad and only makes the NA scene decay even quicker. It's clear that the EU scene which had a significantly larger competitive group of players also still provides higher quality ranked matches not just at top 100 or top 50 ratings, but throughout high gold, low plat and so forth. Meanwhile on NA 400-500 rating differences in ranked matches aren't even abnormal... LUL. > > > > > > Bullying good players out of the game doesn't make the skill difference go away, it makes it more noticable which punishes BOTH sides. You'll learn one day. > > > > On the other hand, I don't have to play with the (self-proclaimed and smallish) elitist group and would prefer more casuals like me in the games instead of them. I don't need a competitive tournament scene to have fun with people at my skill level and my rate of investing time into it. _If_ I could trade these players with more (good) casuals, I would be happy. > > > > But that's unrealistic of course. :smile: Without that competitive scene, videos and streams, less people might become interested in PVP in total and all these side effects, so of course it has a bad influence on the whole PVP scene. > > > > I wouldn't know the perfect solution. Seperate leaderboards with these few people? Or the easy way they might try now... > > Actually, that's the whole fun part about not caring for the "elitist" group smaller and smaller. You literally do get forced to play with and against them, because they can't find matches against eachother anymore. Look around the forums to see dozens of threads crying about being matched with high-end players, especially from NA, at ranks as low as mid silver. > > Unless you can magically make all these "elitist" players go away, the result is just higher skill-gaps making "fair" matches between casual players less likely and more rare... Which will in turn have the same effect on the casual scene, as we already see : it also falls appart due to non-fun matches, snowball, reward-hungry players, ... > > You literally do need a competitive healthy scene to have fun with players "at your level". The concept of "players at your level" doesn't exist without a healthy, competitive scene which has sufficient "players at each level" to function. Without these players - which are required at the entire spectrum and not just the low end - producing "fair" games with players of similar skill isn't possible. Instead the game produces unfair games constantly, which aren't fun for either party, which leads to more people leaving / game not being as fun as it should / could be, which again makes the skill differences bigger and the issues themselves worse. > > You don't magically have all the top-end players quit on the same day. No, even if 5 or 30 or 10 or only 1 guy stays; they'll constantly be matched with other far less skilled players and ruin matches for them. Forever. But reversing and fixing this situation? Almost impossible, as training new players up to this level is nearly impossible without said competitive scene to begin with. The result? ... Decay of the PvP scene and its health. > > Aka literally what we've been seeing these last years. > > Imagine you're 1400 rated and chillin'. You suddenly get into a game with players whose rating goes from 1400 to 1800, including some of the top 10 players. You'll literally see players 1v3 succesfully on both teams, and the game won't be fun for ANYONE. It's fundamentally unfair and unbalanced and ... there's NOTHING anet can do about it at this point. Yet these games with 1400 to 1800 rating spread? Been happening on NA for more than a year and becoming more and more common during off-hours on EU too. > > There is no solution. Anet doesn't care about PvP enough to maintain the community it had. Now they'd have to invest extra to revitalize it, which obviously won't happen either. The result is continued decay. Slowly but surely things will only get worse. The same will happen for WvW and raids. That's basically what I said. :wink: If (magically) I could transform the few elitist players to become casuals like me, I'd be happy without that tournament scene and everything. But of course, that's not realistic due to all the side effects. You're kinda depressing me with the last block though. Don't tell me that, I am still optimistic! :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Etheri.5406 Posted August 7, 2018 Share Posted August 7, 2018 > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > @"Etheri.5406" said: > > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > > @"Etheri.5406" said: > > > > > @"BadMed.3846" said: > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > @"Lucentfir.7430" said: > > > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > > > @"LegendaVagyok.9132" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > > > > "We want to have fun matches with our friends." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If playing with your friends important to you and the main goal here, then play in unraked or practice more and go for AT. Sometimes you'll face way better opponents, that's bad luck. The game in this current allows you to play with friends, even in ranked (sure only one until 1600), having the neccessary team skill and exp level is a different topic (through which you'll have fun with friends in AT for example). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > FUN > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > FUN MATCHES > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ARE YOU PEOPLE BLIND > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > UNRANKED IS NOT FUN MATCHES NEITHER ARE ATS > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please define your version of a fun match, because there are many takes on what a fun match is. There are people that like having matches skewed in their favor to win, but like having a little more opposing resistance to play against. Others find fun matches to be equal playing fields against similar skilled players. What exactly is your take on a fun match? I'm curious. > > > > > > > > > > > > A match that plays out like an actual competitive game would. Solid fights and rotations from all (or most in the case of ranked) players. > > > > > > > > > > > > 500-0 stomps aren't fun. The enemy team just gives up and you spend the next 8 minutes sitting outside their spawn for the game to end. > > > > > > > > > > > > However this WON'T happen when Anet listens to people who wish to drive good players from the game. In fact, it makes it worse for them because they end up getting matched against good players more often because the matchmaker doesn't have enough to keep plat against plat. > > > > > > > > > > > > Those who are complaining about unbalanced matches are actually just making it worse for themselves by voting away duo/team que. > > > > > > > > > > This is seriously a joke. Makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Don't just throw in to the mix that your so called "good players" want duo queue. I'm sure we got plenty other good players and we won't miss the ones that moved on. That's for being part of the journey! > > > > > > > > He has a point tho. Many low-end scrubs constantly asking to make the game more designed for them, only to realise it bites them in the kitten soon after. At the end of the day, development can't avoid L2P issues. Clearly you won't admit you miss the players that moved on; but you'll happily complain about the issues which are the direct result of them moving on without even realising it. > > > > > > > > Let's call it casual naïvity; casual enough to not have a clue about what's going on and how things interact with eachother, naive enough to think you're acting in your own self-interest when it's not even that. Still suprises me casual players who barely grasp the thing somehow are convinced they know what's best for it. > > > > > > > > It's funny how most of these players never encounter wintrading; but will use wintrade as an excuse for why they don't care about their silver rank. Having very few high-end players is very bad for your entire scene, most importantly the lower rated players who constantly have to deal with inbalanced matches with and against players way out of their league. But I guess that's all too convoluted to grasp. > > > > > > > > Having only 30 high-end players is insanely bad and only makes the NA scene decay even quicker. It's clear that the EU scene which had a significantly larger competitive group of players also still provides higher quality ranked matches not just at top 100 or top 50 ratings, but throughout high gold, low plat and so forth. Meanwhile on NA 400-500 rating differences in ranked matches aren't even abnormal... LUL. > > > > > > > > Bullying good players out of the game doesn't make the skill difference go away, it makes it more noticable which punishes BOTH sides. You'll learn one day. > > > > > > On the other hand, I don't have to play with the (self-proclaimed and smallish) elitist group and would prefer more casuals like me in the games instead of them. I don't need a competitive tournament scene to have fun with people at my skill level and my rate of investing time into it. _If_ I could trade these players with more (good) casuals, I would be happy. > > > > > > But that's unrealistic of course. :smile: Without that competitive scene, videos and streams, less people might become interested in PVP in total and all these side effects, so of course it has a bad influence on the whole PVP scene. > > > > > > I wouldn't know the perfect solution. Seperate leaderboards with these few people? Or the easy way they might try now... > > > > Actually, that's the whole fun part about not caring for the "elitist" group smaller and smaller. You literally do get forced to play with and against them, because they can't find matches against eachother anymore. Look around the forums to see dozens of threads crying about being matched with high-end players, especially from NA, at ranks as low as mid silver. > > > > Unless you can magically make all these "elitist" players go away, the result is just higher skill-gaps making "fair" matches between casual players less likely and more rare... Which will in turn have the same effect on the casual scene, as we already see : it also falls appart due to non-fun matches, snowball, reward-hungry players, ... > > > > You literally do need a competitive healthy scene to have fun with players "at your level". The concept of "players at your level" doesn't exist without a healthy, competitive scene which has sufficient "players at each level" to function. Without these players - which are required at the entire spectrum and not just the low end - producing "fair" games with players of similar skill isn't possible. Instead the game produces unfair games constantly, which aren't fun for either party, which leads to more people leaving / game not being as fun as it should / could be, which again makes the skill differences bigger and the issues themselves worse. > > > > You don't magically have all the top-end players quit on the same day. No, even if 5 or 30 or 10 or only 1 guy stays; they'll constantly be matched with other far less skilled players and ruin matches for them. Forever. But reversing and fixing this situation? Almost impossible, as training new players up to this level is nearly impossible without said competitive scene to begin with. The result? ... Decay of the PvP scene and its health. > > > > Aka literally what we've been seeing these last years. > > > > Imagine you're 1400 rated and chillin'. You suddenly get into a game with players whose rating goes from 1400 to 1800, including some of the top 10 players. You'll literally see players 1v3 succesfully on both teams, and the game won't be fun for ANYONE. It's fundamentally unfair and unbalanced and ... there's NOTHING anet can do about it at this point. Yet these games with 1400 to 1800 rating spread? Been happening on NA for more than a year and becoming more and more common during off-hours on EU too. > > > > There is no solution. Anet doesn't care about PvP enough to maintain the community it had. Now they'd have to invest extra to revitalize it, which obviously won't happen either. The result is continued decay. Slowly but surely things will only get worse. The same will happen for WvW and raids. > > That's basically what I said. :wink: If (magically) I could transform the few elitist players to become casuals like me, I'd be happy without that tournament scene and everything. But of course, that's not realistic due to all the side effects. > > You're kinda depressing me with the last block though. Don't tell me that, I am still optimistic! :lol: I admire your optimism. I've been looking out for any type of challenging or high-end gameplay on ANY gamemode for a long time, and I've seen anet miss the ball with these players so many times I know better than to be optimistic. It's not just anet's fault tho, the casual community demands these changes mostly because of shortsightedness. But at some point, optimistic just means naïve. PvP population in NA is too low to support consistent even matches above... gold? mid plat? And under that most players have too much L2P issues to even have consistent "even / fair" games, due to snowballing. In EU it's heavily declined as well but still significantly better. WvW populations on both has declined drastically throughout HoT, and is increasing again since late-HoT gliding + reward improvements yet the elitism, bandwagoning and population issues are only getting larger as the amount of casuals compared to the amount of veterans increases. I hear the raid and fractal aspects of the forums are very happy. If they're not they get bashed by some anet white knights :trollface: Except where every single static I know of is struggling with their permanent members getting bored due to constant content draughts and ignorance from anet. Sound familiar? Oh wait, WvW and PvP are used to it. There's only one aspect left to the game healthy for "long term" and it's living story. Everything else is on life support; and life support isn't actually enough to keep it alive. Just to keep it barely breathing for a little while longer. This is nothing towards the devs working on this content. It's not, in my opinion, their fault. We know the wvw / pvp / raid teams are more or less understaffed to produce enough content to keep things going. These are choices anet made, under influence of the community, and now both will live with the consequences. Even if they deny that influence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nova.3817 Posted August 7, 2018 Share Posted August 7, 2018 > @"Solidaris.5423" said: > > @"Nova.3817" said: > > > > just my thoughts on your points > > > > 1. agree to some extent we dont know how many players would actually come to pvp or return to the game to play in a team que as there is no way to measure that...even so let que times be something that the team quers have to worry about. > > > > 2. team que should only allow teams of 2, 3 and 5 ..... OR allow players to que solo in team que for bonus rewards or something to that effect.... then you could allow 4 man. > > 3. people already blame people for games its natural for people to find blame with other players nothing new there..... as for people wanting specific builds etc for team comps this exists in raids 2 but no one is trying to get raids taken out the game! people always have the ability to form their own team if they so choose as well! > > 4. Answer to that is in 3. again you could always form your own team... > > 5. This is true teams were more likely to lose to solos bc often times not all players in the premade are not of the same skill and the the way matchmaking worked atleast in the later half of team que was it took the higher of the premade.... so therefore handicapping the premade unless all players in the premade were same skill which is sorta impossible for everyone to be exact same skill. I think to determine how those games played out would be on a individual basis... > > 6. that's not typically the answer the reason for the blowout is unranked if filled with people running non meta builds or troll builds all in the name of fun...also unranked is filled with players who are off classing learning new class....what this means is no one is really trying to win in unranked because why would you there is no reward to do so and THAT is the problem why unranked is not a good substitute for ranked atm.....if they simply added pips (pip rewards) to unranked it would motivate people to actually win in unranked as they would miss out on rewards which is plenty motivation. > > > > > > my .02 > > Thanks for the comment and hope you don't mind I would like to give my thought about them: > My greatest problem is that yes you are right raiders asking the same thing and if you check out the raiding scene does have troubles getting new members because those kind of things demotivated people from raiding. When team queue was a thing I wasn't able to form a team with friends or guildies because different schedule and so on and when I wanted to get in a party I was harshly sent away because I don't have X rank or don't use Y as my build so I either try to form a party myself with randoms (which we know how it can go) > > Also how would the leaderboard work if there would team leaderboards? Because you performance as an individual is different than as a pre-made team which would make it tough to measure and create a system around it. If there would be team leaderboards and you get a high rank as a 5 man team but suddenly two of your teammates aren't able to play and you drop that rank drastically because of that would make the leaderboard inaccurate and difficult to work with. > > Blame Wars is in the game already yes but usually it is one guy blaming another or the whole team. If a pre-made team gets in a match ,lets say 3 guys with 2 soloers, all three of them will harass the same player. Yes block them and move on but it still gives that bad feeling in your mouth demotivating you enough to take a long break. Not to mention that happening over and over again can make you quit the game. I am not a special snowflake but everyone has a level where they say "Eff this I'm leaving" > > For the unranked thing I already said that the matchmaker mostly pairs pre-made teams with other pre-made ones. If the team players are really that many they can get fights against each other and not get people who are trying out builds / training. Same as ATs matches at the start would be fast ones but the more and more you play the better players would you get against you. This I have experienced not just in Ranked but Unranked. > > About the statistics I am curious the match qualities because loosing with 50 points difference and loosing with 400 points difference is really a big thing. Matches shouldn't be only checked by "this one was won and this one was lost" but analyzed more deeply. How was Match A lost and how was Match B won? etc. to see the real difference for the soloers vs pre-made-teams subject. > > But firstly instead of arguing about team queue vs solo queue we need fresh people to join the community and not cry about the veterans leaving because X and Y. They would leave no matter what. Removal of the team queue wasn't a reason but an excuse most of the time because they were just burnt out. NP id like to reply to your reply ;-) I agree that a team requiring people to run a certain build or have a certain amount of skill to be in a certain team will exist as it exists in any mode...(and it's not fair to criticize people who want to be teamed with people equal to there skill) HOWEVER, there is not many apples left on the tree and people who are too picky will be left without a full team.....i ran a guild for many years which only did spvp (more or less) and there was always 30-40 people on ready to team at any given time my personal exp. was it was never difficult to find 4 guys i realize my exp is not representative of everyone's experience but still worth mentioning....Note-my guild did require players to be at least gold tier before joining as that was where we as a guild determined that players who understood mechanically how spvp worked were located. that was the only "requirement so to speak of" you would have a hidden rating (individually) and the leaderboard would only show actual guild teams (a system already created in gw2) this would do 2 things... one encourage people to actually join guilds and create communities and also be in multiple places on a leaderboard so say you were much better at one class then another you would not ruin your leaderboard placement off classing for another team's needs etc... I agree with the blame wars but you will find that this doesn't happen that much in guilds and more so in rando teams formed....(also people are much nicer on comms such as discord or teamspeak) something about typing makes people mean i guess LOL but i never have joined a guild gw2 that was super rude and felt like that was the norm... while i agree to some extent consider this........ realistically there is about equal amount of times we find ourselves on both ends of the spectrum....equal amount of times we narrowly win and narrowly lose and equally amount of times we win by 400 pts vs lose by that......so is it really worth dedicating dev time for something that kinda takes care of itself anyways......yea some games feel unwinnable but equally some games are freebies... my opinion strongly here on the last point..... i personally after playing since launch can tell you that it's why i left the game....up until its removal everyday i spent all day on discord chatting up team comps/builds/etc to play once i was off work (this also meant i was talking 4 other players into logging on and playing).... when they removed ranked que it didn't kill that right away but ATS simply were blowouts till we played a old ESL team and then we would get blown out (maybe a good game or 2) and then after that we couldn't play in a rewarding way at least for 5 hours till the next AT and unfortunately it wasn't long till that just slowly caused everyone to quit.... note - i fully think that on demand AT or swiss ATS will fill a huge void but everytime its talked about its off in the distant future and IMO not having a team outlet i think led to spvp being in the state its in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crab Fear.1624 Posted August 7, 2018 Share Posted August 7, 2018 This one can smell teams coming back. Keep hammering guys, we can win this fight. Anet is starting to care again. They are bringing back duo q for top players and removing win trade currencies! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OutOfOrder.3719 Posted August 7, 2018 Share Posted August 7, 2018 Removing win trade currencies? What do you mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nova.3817 Posted August 7, 2018 Share Posted August 7, 2018 > @"Crab Fear.1624" said: > This one can smell teams coming back. Keep hammering guys, we can win this fight. Anet is starting to care again. They are bringing back duo q for top players and removing win trade currencies! big step in the right direction but i still think we need a team que format to come out to see PvP return to a healthy state Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shadowpass.4236 Posted August 7, 2018 Share Posted August 7, 2018 > @"BadMed.3846" said: > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > @"BadMed.3846" said: > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > @"Lucentfir.7430" said: > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > @"LegendaVagyok.9132" said: > > > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > > "We want to have fun matches with our friends." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If playing with your friends important to you and the main goal here, then play in unraked or practice more and go for AT. Sometimes you'll face way better opponents, that's bad luck. The game in this current allows you to play with friends, even in ranked (sure only one until 1600), having the neccessary team skill and exp level is a different topic (through which you'll have fun with friends in AT for example). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > FUN > > > > > > > > > > > > FUN MATCHES > > > > > > > > > > > > ARE YOU PEOPLE BLIND > > > > > > > > > > > > UNRANKED IS NOT FUN MATCHES NEITHER ARE ATS > > > > > > > > > > Please define your version of a fun match, because there are many takes on what a fun match is. There are people that like having matches skewed in their favor to win, but like having a little more opposing resistance to play against. Others find fun matches to be equal playing fields against similar skilled players. What exactly is your take on a fun match? I'm curious. > > > > > > > > A match that plays out like an actual competitive game would. Solid fights and rotations from all (or most in the case of ranked) players. > > > > > > > > 500-0 stomps aren't fun. The enemy team just gives up and you spend the next 8 minutes sitting outside their spawn for the game to end. > > > > > > > > However this WON'T happen when Anet listens to people who wish to drive good players from the game. In fact, it makes it worse for them because they end up getting matched against good players more often because the matchmaker doesn't have enough to keep plat against plat. > > > > > > > > Those who are complaining about unbalanced matches are actually just making it worse for themselves by voting away duo/team que. > > > > > > This is seriously a joke. Makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Don't just throw in to the mix that your so called "good players" want duo queue. I'm sure we got plenty other good players and we won't miss the ones that moved on. That's for being part of the journey! > > > > Sorry, we have different definitions of "good players." When I say good, I'm referring specifically to about 20-30 players on NA. > > > > > > > > These are in-houses. People are having fun because the matches are competitive and balanced. You will NOT see games like this in unranked, ranked, or ATs. > > Your 20-30 are welcome to stay in custom arena. I would rather not see them win trading and manipulating in ranked arena. You really think we need to care about these "good players" because they are capable and good at the game. I don't care at all honestly. They can go play whatever they like. See, the thing is, we don't. If you think we all wintrade and manipulate in ranked, you're very misled. Just because we win more often, doesn't mean we're gaming the system. Have you ever thought, maybe, that the 20-30 top players win the most BECAUSE we are top players? No one asked you to care. You're opinion is irrelevant to me, personally. The fact is, if you drive good players from the game, the matchmaker can't make balanced matches at the top end. Thus, it WILL pull people from lower divisions MORE and MORE frequently to fill those gaps. Until there is not a single player in the game rated above plat 2, matches will get extremely unbalanced the more you seek to drive out good players. You're making the issue worse for yourself and don't even realize it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadMed.3846 Posted August 7, 2018 Share Posted August 7, 2018 > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > @"Etheri.5406" said: > > > @"BadMed.3846" said: > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > @"Lucentfir.7430" said: > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > @"LegendaVagyok.9132" said: > > > > > > > > @"shadowpass.4236" said: > > > > > > > > "We want to have fun matches with our friends." > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If playing with your friends important to you and the main goal here, then play in unraked or practice more and go for AT. Sometimes you'll face way better opponents, that's bad luck. The game in this current allows you to play with friends, even in ranked (sure only one until 1600), having the neccessary team skill and exp level is a different topic (through which you'll have fun with friends in AT for example). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > FUN > > > > > > > > > > > > FUN MATCHES > > > > > > > > > > > > ARE YOU PEOPLE BLIND > > > > > > > > > > > > UNRANKED IS NOT FUN MATCHES NEITHER ARE ATS > > > > > > > > > > Please define your version of a fun match, because there are many takes on what a fun match is. There are people that like having matches skewed in their favor to win, but like having a little more opposing resistance to play against. Others find fun matches to be equal playing fields against similar skilled players. What exactly is your take on a fun match? I'm curious. > > > > > > > > A match that plays out like an actual competitive game would. Solid fights and rotations from all (or most in the case of ranked) players. > > > > > > > > 500-0 stomps aren't fun. The enemy team just gives up and you spend the next 8 minutes sitting outside their spawn for the game to end. > > > > > > > > However this WON'T happen when Anet listens to people who wish to drive good players from the game. In fact, it makes it worse for them because they end up getting matched against good players more often because the matchmaker doesn't have enough to keep plat against plat. > > > > > > > > Those who are complaining about unbalanced matches are actually just making it worse for themselves by voting away duo/team que. > > > > > > This is seriously a joke. Makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. Don't just throw in to the mix that your so called "good players" want duo queue. I'm sure we got plenty other good players and we won't miss the ones that moved on. That's for being part of the journey! > > > > He has a point tho. Many low-end scrubs constantly asking to make the game more designed for them, only to realise it bites them in the kitten soon after. At the end of the day, development can't avoid L2P issues. Clearly you won't admit you miss the players that moved on; but you'll happily complain about the issues which are the direct result of them moving on without even realising it. > > > > Let's call it casual naïvity; casual enough to not have a clue about what's going on and how things interact with eachother, naive enough to think you're acting in your own self-interest when it's not even that. Still suprises me casual players who barely grasp the thing somehow are convinced they know what's best for it. > > > > It's funny how most of these players never encounter wintrading; but will use wintrade as an excuse for why they don't care about their silver rank. Having very few high-end players is very bad for your entire scene, most importantly the lower rated players who constantly have to deal with inbalanced matches with and against players way out of their league. But I guess that's all too convoluted to grasp. > > > > Having only 30 high-end players is insanely bad and only makes the NA scene decay even quicker. It's clear that the EU scene which had a significantly larger competitive group of players also still provides higher quality ranked matches not just at top 100 or top 50 ratings, but throughout high gold, low plat and so forth. Meanwhile on NA 400-500 rating differences in ranked matches aren't even abnormal... LUL. > > > > Bullying good players out of the game doesn't make the skill difference go away, it makes it more noticable which punishes BOTH sides. You'll learn one day. > > On the other hand, I don't have to play with the (self-proclaimed and smallish) elitist group and would prefer more casuals like me in the games instead of them. I don't need a competitive tournament scene to have fun with people at my skill level and my rate of investing time into it. _If_ I could trade these players with more (good) casuals, I would be happy. > > But that's unrealistic of course. :smile: Without that competitive scene, videos and streams, less people might become interested in PVP in total and all these side effects, so of course it has a bad influence on the whole PVP scene. > > I wouldn't know the perfect solution. Seperate leaderboards with these few people? Or the easy way they might try now... See, you get it. I don't understand how some of these good players are struggling to understand. The issue here is not about what the top 20 players might like. They are a minority. I like to learn from their gameplay too, but if they threaten to leave then I would only smile and say goodbye! I'm sure there are good players who will stick around anyway. The issue is: **The ability to be play competitive, balanced games with friends.** Ranked queue, in it's current state, is not the answer. It's based around an individual leaderboard recognition model. Things have to change to accommodate duo queue to ensure the majority of the playerbase is not adversely impacted. It is simply NOT FAIR to recognize duo queue on Solo leaderboard. Don't throw in pointless arguments about matchmaking and top 20 players. While they have some impact, in the bigger scheme of things, they are irrelevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kako.1930 Posted August 7, 2018 Share Posted August 7, 2018 I think it's a possibility that a full team queue could return, but it probably won't be very soon since duo queue was just announced today as returning. It might actually be more likely that 3v3's will come sooner, but that might be just wishful thinking too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sephiroth.4217 Posted August 17, 2018 Author Share Posted August 17, 2018 > @"Kako.1930" said: > I think it's a possibility that a full team queue could return, but it probably won't be very soon since duo queue was just announced today as returning. It might actually be more likely that 3v3's will come sooner, but that might be just wishful thinking too. Even just duo queue returning is going to have a major influence over games hopefully, need the top players around to play with each other... With any luck team queue will return and I'll be able to rebuild a team, practice with them and head into the swiss tournies or AT's or what ever we got going on at the time, win or lose it will be fun just to experience this with friends and guildies again. 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