Will Team Queue ever come back?

[BadMed.3846]

@"shadowpass.4236" - ranked queue is not a training ground. Just accept that.

[Crab Fear.1624]

team queue should come back. no one voted it away permanently.

 

i got a couple of guesses why the pvp population is shrinking and no team queue, no guild queue is at the top of the list.

 

these things already exist so it would not require so much effort as creating a new game mode or map that may take years to ever show up.

 

i played 80 games this season, and uhg.... no more ranked for me.

 

sure you can just say bye felicia, but if more players do it (they will, they have, and they are) soon their might not even be enough active players to fill a leaderboard.....cept maybe some uh ftp newbs that low tier vets occupying those places can farm

 

**just give us a seperate queue with a team leaderboard and lt us earn the same rewards as in ranked. allow members of the team to have the teams rank badge and we will shut up and leave your solo queue alone.**

 

**i got this feeling you don't want it because the population is very small and you know that atleast about half of us will ditch solo queue in a heartbeat.**

[shadowpass.4236]

> @"BadMed.3846" said:

> @"shadowpass.4236" - ranked queue is not a training ground. Just accept that.

 

At this point you've resorted to putting words in my mouth and arguing against them.

 

I NEVER said ranked was a training ground. So I have no idea where you're getting that from. I want to have fun with my friends in ranked. I do not want to play alone in an online game. And no, I will not CHOOSE to play unbalanced matches in unranked nor do I think unbalanced matches for 1 hour a day in an AT is fun. Neither do the majority of skilled players. What is so hard to understand? We're spelling it out for you people. "We want to have fun matches with our friends."

 

INB4 one of you claims that's NOT what we want, and that instead we want to wintrade for titles. 4head

[LegendaVagyok.9132]

I just posted this in a different thread, so just copied here, laziness lvl 9000 I know. Team queue in spvp is just a ridiculous idea. Let’s see how salty salty saaaaaaalty is a 500-100 unranked match against a well organised, pre-made team, got it? So you want this experience all the time, I see. Although I believe something is wrong with you. Not all of us has unlimited time to play, nor have a pro pvp guild and friends with no life (no offense here). If you want this, then feel free to go for AT and / or play unranked with your friends, oh wait so they aren’t here? Why the kitten would they come back just because Anet would let premade teams in this game mode? Your argument is soooo invalid and also boring to see again and again :) Allowing team queue in ranked would definitely beneficial for these guilds and players but not for the majority of us! And don’t think that team queue would bring back thousands of players, because it won’t! - or at least only this change by itself won’t make any significant difference here (guess what, the game is more than 6 years old, so it’s normal to see declining numbers).

Anet please don’t make this happen.

[pah.4931]

> @"LegendaVagyok.9132" said:

> I just posted this in a different thread, so just copied here, laziness lvl 9000 I know. Team queue in spvp is just a ridiculous idea. Let’s see how salty salty saaaaaaalty is a 500-100 unranked match against a well organised, pre-made team, got it? So you want this experience all the time, I see. Although I believe something is wrong with you. Not all of us has unlimited time to play, nor have a pro pvp guild and friends with no life (no offense here). If you want this, then feel free to go for AT and / or play unranked with your friends, oh wait so they aren’t here? Why the kitten would they come back just because Anet would let premade teams in this game mode? Your argument is soooo invalid and also boring to see again and again :) Allowing team queue in ranked would definitely beneficial for these guilds and players but not for the majority of us! And don’t think that team queue would bring back thousands of players, because it won’t! - or at least only this change by itself won’t make any significant difference here (guess what, the game is more than 6 years old, so it’s normal to see declining numbers).

> Anet please don’t make this happen.

 

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.

 

BUT... I am willing to compromise. Pips and chests should move to Unranked. This lets solo- or team-q people farm pips and fun and still lets you solo ranked players who are totally only concerned with competitive fair fights (since you are so adamant about losing to teams who are just trying to enjoy an MMO together). I fail to see any counterargument to this logic.

[sephiroth.4217]

> @"LegendaVagyok.9132" said:

> I just posted this in a different thread, so just copied here, laziness lvl 9000 I know. Team queue in spvp is just a ridiculous idea. Let’s see how salty salty saaaaaaalty is a 500-100 unranked match against a well organised, pre-made team, got it? So you want this experience all the time, I see. Although I believe something is wrong with you. Not all of us has unlimited time to play, nor have a pro pvp guild and friends with no life (no offense here). If you want this, then feel free to go for AT and / or play unranked with your friends, oh wait so they aren’t here? Why the kitten would they come back just because Anet would let premade teams in this game mode? Your argument is soooo invalid and also boring to see again and again :) Allowing team queue in ranked would definitely beneficial for these guilds and players but not for the majority of us! And don’t think that team queue would bring back thousands of players, because it won’t! - or at least only this change by itself won’t make any significant difference here (guess what, the game is more than 6 years old, so it’s normal to see declining numbers).

> Anet please don’t make this happen.

 

Please acknowledge previous posts in the thread as most of your comments have already been covered.

[shadowpass.4236]

> @"LegendaVagyok.9132" said:

> I just posted this in a different thread, so just copied here, laziness lvl 9000 I know. Team queue in spvp is just a ridiculous idea. Let’s see how salty salty saaaaaaalty is a 500-100 unranked match against a well organised, pre-made team, got it? So you want this experience all the time, I see. Although I believe something is wrong with you. Not all of us has unlimited time to play, nor have a pro pvp guild and friends with no life (no offense here). If you want this, then feel free to go for AT and / or play unranked with your friends, oh wait so they aren’t here? Why the kitten would they come back just because Anet would let premade teams in this game mode? Your argument is soooo invalid and also boring to see again and again :) Allowing team queue in ranked would definitely beneficial for these guilds and players but not for the majority of us! And don’t think that team queue would bring back thousands of players, because it won’t! - or at least only this change by itself won’t make any significant difference here (guess what, the game is more than 6 years old, so it’s normal to see declining numbers).

> Anet please don’t make this happen.

 

All of you people only respond with completely anecdotal and dismissive arguments as if somehow that justifies your point of view.

 

Try again. ^-^

[LegendaVagyok.9132]

> @"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.

> BUT... I am willing to compromise. Pips and chests should move to Unranked. This lets solo- or team-q people farm pips and fun and still lets you solo ranked players who are totally only concerned with competitive fair fights (since you are so adamant about losing to teams who are just trying to enjoy an MMO together). I fail to see any counterargument to this logic.

 

I know how team-q worked, my argument was that I wouldn't expect much ppl coming back just bacause we have team-q again. People have left this game for many reasons, probably they got bored at some time.

Personally I find this a good idea : Pips and chests should move to Unranked - so we won't see this much annoying PvE farmers in Ranked.

 

> @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> All of you people only respond with completely anecdotal and dismissive arguments as if somehow that justifies your point of view.

> Try again. ^-^

 

Well I though a forum is to share our opinions, which is not necessarly the same and I hoped that we can discuss this in a good manner.

 

> "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).

 

 

[shadowpass.4236]

> @"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

[Lucentfir.7430]

> @"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.

[shadowpass.4236]

> @"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.

[LegendaVagyok.9132]

> @"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.

 

Thank you man, I felt kinda alone representing the other side in this conversation. Fun not necessarily means easy win. Fun is playing against similar skilled or better players and beat the kitten out of them.

[sephiroth.4217]

> @"LegendaVagyok.9132" 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.

>

> Thank you man, I felt kinda alone representing the other side in this conversation. Fun not necessarily means easy win. Fun is playing against similar skilled or better players and beat the kitten out of them.

 

It would be nice to do that with friends.

 

 

 

 

[Lucentfir.7430]

> @"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.

 

I think this is what all players would want, matches of players with equal skill which aren't lopsided and generally fun . I'd wait for the swiss on-demand tournaments before excluding ATs as a fun outlet for team players. Considering current ATs are heavily time constrained so not everyone will be able to enjoy them/participate, hence why matches in the ATs are real lopsided. They could also easily add another separate ranked queue(1-5 man) with separate leaderboards to also appeal to people that like to queue with their friends for rewards. Just basically giving players the option back and the choice to put yourself up against the possibility of premades.

[Crab Fear.1624]

Anet do you compare about any of your competitive game modes?

[Math.5123]

> @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> > @"BadMed.3846" said:

> > > @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> > > > @"BadMed.3846" said:

> > > > > @"Pvt Frosty.6973" said:

> > > > > It is already back, in the form of ats and it will come back a little more when they make at's start times flexible

> > > >

> > > > This ^^^. This is not that hard to understand. This is all you need. You play as a team? then go do ATs. Want to practice? Go unranked. Don't like unranked matchmaking? Go custom arena. Surely, if you can gather 5 to form a team you could stretch to 10 to practice.

> > >

> > > Yes, do ATs. Play as a team for 1 hour a day in unbalanced 500-0 stomps until the finals which end up at 500-100. _Fun!_

> > >

> > I thought you could manage better than that.

> >

> > > Want to practice as a team for competitive matches? Go to unranked! Here you can 500-0 steamroll new players to get ready to fight against pros in the monthly tournament.

> > >

> > Ranked in not your training ground. It's a different game mode. People like you just don't get it. Or rather refuse to accept the reality.

> >

> > > Go to custom arena! Gather a bunch of players that have uninstalled the game to play a few matches. Cause that's easy AND convenient!

> > >

> > Your friends uninstalled? Then why do you even need duo. I play Solo so I'm fine here. Shouldn't you be with your friends?

> >

> > > Wow, why haven't we thought of these things before? You're a genius!

> >

> > You think I'm here to solve your problems? I was reminding you what the game modes are for. Understand that first.

>

> Manage better than what? Finals are usually 500-0s as well.

>

> So unranked is better training that ranked? That's what you suggested and its a terrible suggestion.

>

> A lot of them uninstalled/quit the game. You said gather 10 for scrims, I don't realize that's a lot harder than you're making it out to seem. Not only do people have different schedules, but gathering 10 players ALL at a pro level of skill to have meaningful scrims with is difficult when there is only a solid 4-7 left that actively still play. Some of those only log in once a month to do the monthlies.

>

> You're wrong again lol. ATs nor Unranked are training grounds for pros. Custom Arenas are extremely difficult to organize scrims in because most of the pros no longer play.

 

Make an EU account, we have weekly scrims containing verified accounts only.

[BadMed.3846]

> @"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!

[Solidaris.5423]

I have given an opinion about this in a different post but let me post it here also:

 

I am not against a team queue but the current leaderboard is not really useful for that. We could do a team based leaderboard but then if someone from your team cannot make it / is busy etc than your team would be down to 4 guys which would impact your performance / ranking.

 

So to answer the incoming know-it-alls about why there is no team queue is:

1. You can make a 5 v 5 team queue but the queue time would be long.

2. If one of your team mate would not be able to do it than the other 4 would need to solo queue if separate team queue / solo queue is introduced.

3. If separate team queue and solo queue would not be introduced the teams which formed would be blaming the non-party members for everything in the match adding to the already high toxicity. Yes there are people who would not do that but let's be honest they are the minority

4. If team queue would be a thing and would not be separated by solo queue people who do not have their team mates online or have no team formed yet would try to get in a team but seeing at past experiences those teams would demand ridiculous things from you and you wouldn't be able to join teams which were already formed excluding a big part of the players. Again there are people who are not like that but again they are the minority.

5. Everyone is coming out that long ago there was a statistic that teams had a higher chance of loosing against solo queue team which disappeared for some reason. Even if that is true we do not know the quality of those matches. Was it total destruction for the pre-made team? Was it near fights? etc.

6. When people tell you why not go for unranked the answer they get is that unranked would be a 500 - 0 blowout if you queued with a team against soloers. Wouldn't that be the same thing for ranked? Also if there are so many good players want to queue as a team why don't they queue as a team to unranked? If they are good the system would put them against good pre-made teams?

[Nova.3817]

> @"Solidaris.5423" said:

> I have given an opinion about this in a different post but let me post it here also:

>

> I am not against a team queue but the current leaderboard is not really useful for that. We could do a team based leaderboard but then if someone from your team cannot make it / is busy etc than your team would be down to 4 guys which would impact your performance / ranking.

>

> So to answer the incoming know-it-alls about why there is no team queue is:

> 1. You can make a 5 v 5 team queue but the queue time would be long.

> 2. If one of your team mate would not be able to do it than the other 4 would need to solo queue if separate team queue / solo queue is introduced.

> 3. If separate team queue and solo queue would not be introduced the teams which formed would be blaming the non-party members for everything in the match adding to the already high toxicity. Yes there are people who would not do that but let's be honest they are the minority

> 4. If team queue would be a thing and would not be separated by solo queue people who do not have their team mates online or have no team formed yet would try to get in a team but seeing at past experiences those teams would demand ridiculous things from you and you wouldn't be able to join teams which were already formed excluding a big part of the players. Again there are people who are not like that but again they are the minority.

> 5. Everyone is coming out that long ago there was a statistic that teams had a higher chance of loosing against solo queue team which disappeared for some reason. Even if that is true we do not know the quality of those matches. Was it total destruction for the pre-made team? Was it near fights? etc.

> 6. When people tell you why not go for unranked the answer they get is that unranked would be a 500 - 0 blowout if you queued with a team against soloers. Wouldn't that be the same thing for ranked? Also if there are so many good players want to queue as a team why don't they queue as a team to unranked? If they are good the system would put them against good pre-made teams?

 

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

[shadowpass.4236]

> @"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.

[Abelisk.4527]

> @"Megametzler.5729" said:

> It is in unranked.

>

> Jeez, such obsession everywhere... just give pips in unranked. Rank doesn't mean anything anymore, does it?

 

Even if you put pips in Unranked all the good players will flock to Ranked due to shiny badges and titles.

 

 

 

> @"Pvt Frosty.6973" said:

> It is already back, in the form of ats and it will come back a little more when they make at's start times flexible

 

Not everyone wants to spend 1-2 hours of PVP everytime they wanna play with a team.

[Nova.3817]

> @"Abelisk.4527" said:

> > @"Megametzler.5729" said:

> > It is in unranked.

> >

> > Jeez, such obsession everywhere... just give pips in unranked. Rank doesn't mean anything anymore, does it?

>

> Even if you put pips in Unranked all the good players will flock to Ranked due to shiny badges and titles.

>

>

>

> > @"Pvt Frosty.6973" said:

> > It is already back, in the form of ats and it will come back a little more when they make at's start times flexible

>

> Not everyone wants to spend 1-2 hours of PVP everytime they wanna play with a team.

 

then whats the harm of adding it to unranked ;-/

[Abelisk.4527]

> @"Nova.3817" said:

> > @"Abelisk.4527" said:

> > > @"Megametzler.5729" said:

> > > It is in unranked.

> > >

> > > Jeez, such obsession everywhere... just give pips in unranked. Rank doesn't mean anything anymore, does it?

> >

> > Even if you put pips in Unranked all the good players will flock to Ranked due to shiny badges and titles.

> >

> >

> >

> > > @"Pvt Frosty.6973" said:

> > > It is already back, in the form of ats and it will come back a little more when they make at's start times flexible

> >

> > Not everyone wants to spend 1-2 hours of PVP everytime they wanna play with a team.

>

> then whats the harm of adding it to unranked ;-/

 

ignore this comment.

[Solidaris.5423]

> @"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.

[BadMed.3846]

> @"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.