Premades are ruining non-ranked warzones

[mulzii]

better match-making is key. but also maybe some compensation (for a lack of a better term) to the solo folks in regular wzs to put up with the disadvantages of facing premades. Something like i you join a wz solo, you get 3x amount of credits/comms/valor than the current baseline amount.

 

At least then solo people would be more inclined to stay in the wz and get roflstomped, and it would not affect folks who want to remain in premades for whatever their reasons are, as they would still earn the baseline/current amount of credits/comms/valor/etc while playing with their friends.

[Atramar]

better match-making is key. but also maybe some compensation (for a lack of a better term) to the solo folks in regular wzs to put up with the disadvantages of facing premades. Something like i you join a wz solo, you get 3x amount of credits/comms/valor than the current baseline amount.

 

At least then solo people would be more inclined to stay in the wz and get roflstomped, and it would not affect folks who want to remain in premades for whatever their reasons are, as they would still earn the baseline/current amount of credits/comms/valor/etc while playing with their friends.

 

few more comms for queing solo I would like. but we can't promote stupid at same time. other wise people will go in, camp node for 15 minutes, get 5 medals for protection if not attacked and would get more comms then people who actually fought for their win.

 

matchmaking is complicated. in ideal world you could divide 64 people who are waiting for a pvp pop into 4 groups depending on their win/lose ratio so top players will fight agaisnt top players having only top players in their team, while numpty players teamed with numpty players will have numpty warzone against numpty players, and 2 teams of avarage.

 

but on low population, only thing you can do is make teams equal - so high rank players will be teamed with low rank players against avarage players. and that is promoting low ranking players with no efford on their side.

[Vaerah]

matchmaking is complicated. in ideal world you could divide 64 people who are waiting for a pvp pop into 4 groups depending on their win/lose ratio so top players will fight agaisnt top players having only top players in their team, while numpty players teamed with numpty players will have numpty warzone against numpty players, and 2 teams of avarage.

 

One could envision a simple yet better than nothing match making system based on Valor rank.

It's quite probable that somebody who is rank 80 has a better gear and game experience than a rank 10.

 

In fact what I find aggravating is the constant putting a (dual) premade against totally fresh newbies, I mean it does not even put the premade against good geared randoms, but against 25k health scrubs who don't know their way out of the spawn.

[TonyDragonflame]

Yesterday I had the "fun" to experience the new arrivals on ToFN: even in regular WZs, constant premade after premade, mostly imp side.

It was not fun, they ALL play stupidly FOTM classes and BiS gear, it's like playing with or against level 75 people.

 

When I landed with a premade we'd win 6-0 and even 3-0 (yesterday a whole imp team quit at 3-0 after seeing how impossibly hard we were farming them in Huttball) yet it was not fun, not challenging.

 

When I l landed against single and even dual premades it was the contrary. Me in close to full augmented Conqueror would die before Resolve bar even started moving up. I estimate a time to live of 3-4 seconds tops, for full Conqueror non FOTM class.

 

Is this how regular WZs are meant to be?

 

No, because the unexistant team matching promotes constant level up gear randoms with 25k health vs 4 and 8 men full augmented Conqueror premades.

 

They were so determined implementing the irritating bolster but did not care to actually evenly match the opponents. Bolster is useless when facing voice comm teams playing FOTM classes and specs.

 

^ this.

 

I stop playing 55 lvl warzones solo queue, cuz its just zero fun. After transfers every imp and his mom run premade. When all transfered reps pvp guilds play rwz, all imps pvp guilds run premades on regulars for easy commz farm.

 

I play now 55 lvl wz when only all stars align and my friends on-line, and we go our FoTM -premade of our OP classes - only in this case we are competitive and have good chances to win vs every other team.

 

When I log in and there is no any my friends on-line, I go play solo lowbie wz for leveling my alts, they are still fun and competitve cuz there are much less premades, and much more solo pug vs solo pug action.

 

GG Bioware, your endgame pvp just piece of sh*t. However, solo-based storyline leveling and solo-leveling on warzones still great, and this is only thing why i dont quit still this game.

 

Quote:

Hi guys,

While we cant comment right now on any future changes to the matchmaking or grouping system for Warzones, I can tell you something is coming down the pipe in 2.4 that will probably make a lot of you very happy.

 

However, we will not be restricting groups in the Regular Warzone queue. This game is built around playing with multiple people, and discouraging grouping in anyway is not a path we want to go down.

 

Bioware want to go down with discouraging solo players in solo-based storyline game... GG Bioware, good luck you in your business in future...

[Atramar]

@TonyDragonflame:

I don't want to judge, but from you wrote it sounds like 'before transfers we could faceroll every imp, now those damn imp are fighting back, how DARE they, so I form FoTM premades to have competetive 99% win ratio against those damn imps'

[TonyDragonflame]

@TonyDragonflame:

I don't want to judge, but from you wrote it sounds like 'before transfers we could faceroll every imp, now those damn imp are fighting back, how DARE they, so I form FoTM premades to have competetive 99% win ratio against those damn imps'

 

I am okay loosing in pug versus other pug. Its not frustrate me, competitive game without roflstomping. I accepted this lose if we lose.

And I play 80% my playtime in solo pug on 55 lvl and 90-95% on lowbies.

 

Before transfers when I play solo on regulars I have ~60-65% wins ratio; in our premade we have 90-95% win ratio.

 

After transfers when I play solo I have ~20% wins ratio; in premade 65-80% wins ratio.

 

Its not good for playing solo for me now. I am okay with 50-60 and more %

Edited July 4, 2013 by TonyDragonflame

[Tayl-Wynn]

After 400+ pages on this thread, it's clear that the first post contained the simplest solution - which is often the correct one. Create an option for pugs and solo PvPers to play in "Solo Queue Only" WZ's. It won't discourage social play, unless your idea of "social" is farming noobs from the cowardly comfort of a 4-8 man miked-up team. It won't contribute to the frantic search for that elusive "we'll balanced server", in fact, it would encourage folks to stay on their original as they would always have a viable PvP option to play as they progress. For all you arena-freaks: keep in mind that many ppl don't have hours on end to sit, coordinate with 5 others, and THEN play - many of us only have 30-90 mins to sit down and hope for a WZ to pop before RL intervenes. Wasting that window being farmed by pre-made's is no fun. Before you discount me as "baddie" or a "lowbie" consider that I'm a Founder w/multiple 55's geared out, and have been on both sides of this phenomenon. Bottom line is that the game will LOSE a good amount of players (f2p AND subs like me) if they have nowhere fun to play. Hope BW and the Arena-Freaks enjoy less populated servers.

[Doomsdaycomes]

After 400+ pages on this thread, it's clear that the first post contained the simplest solution - which is often the correct one. Create an option for pugs and solo PvPers to play in "Solo Queue Only" WZ's. It won't discourage social... *Snip*

 

Does someone else want to get this one? I'm getting really tired of repeating the cons of a Solo-Queue, correcting the miss-conceptions of Premades, discussing the negative effects on groups (non-highly-competitive-premade), and/or explaining the positive/superior effects of a matchmaking, etc...

[Comfterbilly]

It won't discourage social play, unless your idea of "social" is farming noobs from the cowardly comfort of a 4-8 man miked-up team.

 

That is their idea of social play. "Free stuff or go home!" Their subscription is absolutely meaningless to them unless they and their "friends" who you don't want to play with are ruining the value of your subscription.

 

For all you arena-freaks: keep in mind that many ppl don't have hours on end to sit, coordinate with 5 others, and THEN play - many of us only have 30-90 mins to sit down and hope for a WZ to pop before RL intervenes.

 

They really don't have minds to keep things in mind in.

 

Hope BW and the Arena-Freaks enjoy less populated servers.

 

I'm pretty sure BW are the Arena-Freaks. They get paid to play their own game, surely the entire player base will have the same priorities as them.

Edited July 4, 2013 by Comfterbilly

[Tayl-Wynn]

Again, the lack of understanding, followed by the knee-jerk criticism "ohh, stupid, lowly, know-nothing players blah, blah, blah..." Your self-aggrandizing argument is essentially that, since other players can't compete with fully tricked out gear and a group of miked vets they aren't qualified (like you obviously) to complain. Question: Is it not in the best interest of the entire community (including AF's) to have a self-promoting platform that includes EVERYONE who wants to play - thus swelling server population? Consider this: The "natural" progression of the game (for most players) is to start out a Pub jedi, level a bit, get used to the game, find some friends, join a guild, level out their favorite toon, and start PvP. Only AFTER developing a Legacy with a few more toons and getting good do most ppl decide to start over on the Imp side. The result is a natural talent/experience disparity slated towards Imps - with the new (often younger) players constantly cycling in at the lower ranks and "feeding the beast" so to speak. With the mandatory inclusion of pre-made groups in WZ's there is very little for these relative "noobs" and lesser experienced players to enjoy PvP-wise. It's so obviously a problem, I just can't understand why vets would want to perpetuate this, stopping the flow of new and excited players so they can farm them with noses held high. Seems awfully stupid to me.

[Comfterbilly]

Again, the lack of understanding, followed by the knee-jerk criticism "ohh, stupid, lowly, know-nothing players blah, blah, blah..." Your self-aggrandizing argument is essentially that, since other players can't compete with fully tricked out gear and a group of miked vets they aren't qualified (like you obviously) to complain.

 

Dooms is pretty much the poster child for bads who couldn't make it on their own so are propping up group mechanics and hoarding them like skill. Anyone who doesn't want the same handicaps that allow her to survive is a "bad". lol. Because "skill" is not having to win on merit - get it?

[Tayl-Wynn]

I think I do haha! People naturally are unwilling to relinquish an advantage they have over others, it's understandable because its so cliche.

[Doomsdaycomes]

*Snip*

 

Matchmaking based in win/loss and/or skill criteria does everything to ensure newbies play newbies, vets play vets, and as your personal skill, group tendencies/skill, and gear begins to increase, you end up placed against similar opponents and allowed to continue improving. Everyone's win/loss ratio should be around 50%.

 

It only doesn't work properly in the case of extreme low population servers during off-hours. At the same time, a split-queue solution also suffers terribly during those circumstance, to the point of having the maximum amount of players unable to play. (Solo-only option allows up to 30 players waiting in queue indefinitely, while matchmaking is 14. Assuming 15-16 is required to start).

 

Solo-only does nothing to prevent a lopsided matches, meaning Low skill/geared players can (and will) be matched against High skill/geared players, and the problem isn't solved. It also adds more problems, including logistic issues in the regular queue.

 

Edit:

 

And yes, Comfter fails to defend his points. I'm still waiting for an answer from him, but he'd much rather continue attacking my gender. I suppose I should expect such, his kind does hate losing "to a giiiiirl!"

Edited July 4, 2013 by Doomsdaycomes

[Tayl-Wynn]

That all sounds very cogent - unfortunately it's just wrong. The advantage is not necessarily the gear or level of Elder experience, it's the group obviously! It just also happens that the groups usually consist of we'll-geared Elder players, creating a double-whammy. Having a solo-only queue wouldn't make it harder for groups to form, just another option - remember that individuals can leave groups and queue solo, solos don't have that instant option. If a server's population is so low that it can't field a group of 16 solos and a few groups then I would suggest there is a larger problem. Also, follow your logic to its ultimate conclusion, where, the only ppl PvPing on your server are groups? There are many ways this problem could be solved, funneling saber fodder to AF groups in non-ranked WZ's helps zero. Any argument to the contrary is a transparent attempt by AF's to preserve the current imbalance for their own benefit (they might not even realize they're doing it) or hubris meeting laziness on the part of Devs.

 

The truth has a unique quality of not needing justification, clarification, or rationalization....just sayin

[Doomsdaycomes]

That all sounds very cogent - unfortunately it's just wrong. The advantage is not necessarily the gear or level of Elder experience, it's the group obviously!

 

Explain to me what advantage grouping magically gives.

 

Else wise I'm starting to think you're just trolling me.

[Tayl-Wynn]

Wow. I guess if we can't even agree on the inherent advantage of grouping vs. going solo then we don't have much to discuss. Not trying to "troll" you at all - just a loud mouthed American voicing his opinion. Enjoy the game and MTFBWY

[Doomsdaycomes]

Wow. I guess if we can't even agree on the inherent advantage of grouping vs. going solo then we don't have much to discuss. Not trying to "troll" you at all - just a loud mouthed American voicing his opinion. Enjoy the game and MTFBWY

 

No seriously, you're telling me take 4 poorly geared, low skill players, in a group and let them face 4 decently geared, decently skilled players randomly stuck together, and the 4 poor players will have some intangible advantage you won't even name that makes it unfair for the 4 good players to play them?

 

 

 

...

 

 

On a side not, assume there is a magical advantage that 4 group players inherit, would that not reflect in their win/loss ratio? Once in matchmaking, they'll be paired against players with a similar win/loss ratio (meaning either another group of similar skill, 4 random pugs of higher skill (so much that their win/loss ratio competes with the magical group advantage), or 4 people who just got lucky enough to be on the winning team as much as the 4 magic group players).

 

Once more, Matchmaking still provides a more accurate "fair" situation.

[Tayl-Wynn]

How many groups, exactly, of 4 lowly geared and inexperienced players have you encountered? While there will always be exceptions, the advantage of a pre-made group and the REALITY of them in practice is not in question. Again, the more contorted your reasoning becomes, the more obvious it is that your argument doesn't hold water.

[Doomsdaycomes]

How many groups, exactly, of 4 lowly geared and inexperienced players have you encountered? While there will always be exceptions, the advantage of a pre-made group and the REALITY of them in practice is not in question. Again, the more contorted your reasoning becomes, the more obvious it is that your argument doesn't hold water.

 

You said:

 

The advantage is not necessarily the gear or level of Elder experience, it's the group obviously! It just also happens that the groups usually consist of we'll-geared Elder players, creating a double-whammy.

 

Then reply:

 

How many groups, exactly, of 4 lowly geared and inexperienced players have you encountered?

 

So I ask again:

 

What is the advantage you speak of? If there is an advantage in grouping that makes 4 low skill, poor geared players an unfair match vs A random 4 skilled, well geared players that isn't skill or gear, why can't you name it?

 

Further more, why would the imbalance/advantage not be addressed by some form of win-loss ratio matching?

[Tayl-Wynn]

Oh, you mean the "Holy Trinity" advantage, the "miked-up" advantage, or the experience in reality advantage? Seems like you're trolling ME now haha! Again, if you truly don't see any advantage between pre-made's and solo's then we're just beating that poor, dead horse. I believe you are wedded to your position, lucky for us people of good conscience can agree to disagree.

[Doomsdaycomes]

Oh, you mean the "Holy Trinity" advantage, the "miked-up" advantage, or the experience in reality advantage? Seems like you're trolling ME now haha! Again, if you truly don't see any advantage between pre-made's and solo's then we're just beating that poor, dead horse. I believe you are wedded to your position, lucky for us people of good conscience can agree to disagree.

 

1. "Holy Trinity" advantage is more prevalent in a group yes, but is not exclusive to groups. It assumes that PuG's never end up with healers or tanks, or that PuG will never be willing/capable to use a legacy respec. Considering skilled players have legacy respec and over half the classes can either heal or tank (3/8 heal, 3/8 tank) you're making a mountain out of a mole hill here claiming this is a group-only advantage.

 

2.I assume you refer to voice chat when you say miked-up. This is not an advantage inherent in grouping because the game doesn't give VoiP to groups automatically but not PuGs. Game policy involving group/grouping can't based around something outside of the game that can't be controlled nor proven by Bioware. (I personally feel there should be an in-game VoiP).

 

On a side note I personally had a Vent server I allowed anyone to join back near launch, and offered/gave it to a majority of PuG's (long before any match they would have used it on) on my server. Sadly, even given a chance to use voice chat, most of the PuG's on the server declined my invitation despite having Vent/Mikes.

 

3. Experience is a facet of skill and is not restricted to nor granted from simply grouping.

 

So none of those are inherent group advantages nor exclusive to groups.

 

All of that aside:

 

If any of those "advantages" are taking place in a group it will... reflect in their matchmaking rating! So a High-skilled, high-geared, voice-chat using, holy-trinity swinging premade will be...

 

Matched against players of the same uber-high matchmaking rating! All advantages (real or imagined) will be reflected in a rating system that matches players as best as possible. More fair matches, less stomping, more happy players?

 

Isn't that what we want?

[Brundhila]

Simply put: Match pre-mades with pre-mades - Pugs with Pugs. Problem solved.

[UncelSam]

Simply put: Match pre-mades with pre-mades - Pugs with Pugs. Problem solved.

 

Here Here

[Tayl-Wynn]

That might work, assuming that Devs would be willing to put the required effort into such a restructuring. The problem I see here is that, especially with already low population levels, splitting the available players up by so many different leveling criteria would force much smaller "match-able" subsets than simply dividing by two (pubs & groups), also, ppl can switch between solo and group. I'm not sure the current population of the servers would support such pigeon-holing of players, though the concept would be sound with an abundance PvPers on every server. See? We agree a little bit

[Doomsdaycomes]

Simply put: Match pre-mades with pre-mades - Pugs with Pugs. Problem solved.

 

That would be an a form of matchmaking. I don't think it would be as good as a win/loss or skill-based matching, but if the match making prioritized group vs group, filling with solo for partial groups and backfilling then the remaining PuG's would be matched vs a full-PuG's. Again there would need to be a queue time limiter so no one suffers indefinite queue's.

 

Of course, a Queue-type criteria with a skill-based criteria would be amazing, provided its still a soft-split, not a hard split (like split queue's or the solo-only toggle.)