Jump to content

Developer Update: Warzone Arenas


CourtneyWoods

Recommended Posts

How is it at all courageous to take things away from players already unhappy with there being too few things to do? It would be entirely understandable if the presence of 8v8 ranked hurt those players who didn't enjoy them, but it doesn't.

 

Saying, "there are problems so we are taking them away until we have them sorted out" is like saying, "Since Annihilation Marauder DPS is too weak we're removing the tree from the game right now."

 

it's courageous because they know that there are a few hardcore windbags looking for any excuse to publicly chastise BW devs. This thread also takes guts to do especially for someone that's invested a lot of time and hope and effort into the material behind it. Note how many threads on this board have ever gotten dev participation.

 

Throwing tantrums and insults and expressing general dismay on internet msg boards, on the other hand, is not at all courageous.

 

RWZs are maybe alive on a couple servers but sometimes a project needs to cut its losses on half-baked ideas that will never pan out.

 

I'm looking forward to the new arenas. I'm concerned that stealth teams can cc and focus half an enemy team before it can effectively react but I may be thinking too many steps ahead . i agreed with almost all of the design decisions in the blog. But it's the healing/cc balance changes that are going to make or break my sub and that's hopefully another blog.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 543
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Dev Post
What consumables will players be limited to in warzone arenas? Will it be the same as the current structure? (any type of health pots, warzone adrenals, any type of cybertech grenade?)

 

The limits that are in place currently for consumables in Warzones on Live will be present in Warzone Arenas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IF 8v8 warzones are only in the normal queue

 

AND the normal queue allows you to have 1-4 people in a group

 

THEN you can't queue with 8 people for 8v8s

 

Is this a good thing? no

Should they leave ranked? yes

Does this answer your question? yes

 

I'm not sure about this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IF 8v8 warzones are only in the normal queue

 

AND the normal queue allows you to have 1-4 people in a group

 

THEN you can't queue with 8 people for 8v8s

 

Is this a good thing? no

Should they leave ranked? yes

Does this answer your question? yes

 

None of my questions were about it being a good thing or whether they should leave ranked - but about the logistics of 8v8 Warzones and whether they had considered how core PvPers would queue for these and want to queue for these and how they plan to mitigate the fallout from this, which would conceivably see massive issues on either side, with the best solution being to leave Ranked Warzones as a part of the game in order to eliminate those issues.

 

Would greatly appreciate a response from the devs on this, but I'm assuming I won't get one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's courageous because they know that there are a few hardcore windbags looking for any excuse to publicly chastise BW devs. This thread also takes guts to do especially for someone that's invested a lot of time and hope and effort into the material behind it. Note how many threads on this board have ever gotten dev participation.

 

Throwing tantrums and insults and expressing general dismay on internet msg boards, on the other hand, is not at all courageous.

 

RWZs are maybe alive on a couple servers but sometimes a project needs to cut its losses on half-baked ideas that will never pan out.

 

I'm looking forward to the new arenas. I'm concerned that stealth teams can cc and focus half an enemy team before it can effectively react but I may be thinking too many steps ahead . i agreed with almost all of the design decisions in the blog. But it's the healing/cc balance changes that are going to make or break my sub and that's hopefully another blog.

 

I don't think anyone here is throwing around insults, at all. Sure, there are folks that do that and it has certainly taken place on these forums before, but at least in this topic people are doing little more than expressing genuine concerns in from what I have seen largely respectful ways.

 

I'll try to repeat again and clarify for you and the community team and for anyone else who cares: the problem with this decision is that it doesn't take anything to keep the 8v8s up. It costs no resources, no manpower, no additional bandwidth or anything else. That's why I asked "what is the opportunity cost of keeping the 8v8 ranked que available?"

 

I think if a clear reason was given as to why keeping 8v8 ques available would cause any problems then far fewer people would really complain (unless the reason was terrible, of course). However, saying that because they are imperfect they will be removed altogether is really serving no purpose other than to confuse and anger people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Warzones you play in the Warzone queue will not have a rating attached to them. Ratings only apply to solo and team for Ranked Warzone Arenas are present.

 

I think what we were getting at is not so much the rating; but whether groups of 4 would still go into the regular, non-ranked warzones and face solo Q players who also went into regular, non-ranked warzones. Same way they do now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

With the removal of Field Respecialization opportunities in WZ's (un-ranked) does that mean that there has been a fix to the system that was supposed to queue at least 1 healer w/ each team?

 

Currently, we have issues where one of the teams could end up w/ no healer, while the other team ends up w/ 2+. Having the Field Respec allowed many folks to be able to change from dps to heals or vice versa in order to have a more balanced game-play for that match.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps he is asking the wrong question then.

 

Very possible or just slightly confused. I had to read it a few times about the separation for arenas but it was probably due to my over abundance of coffee intake this morning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why 3 rounds? My guild has been doing 4v4's for the past couple of days and a lot of fights take 10-20 minutes, playing 3 rounds would be really annoying and take way too much time. And it's boring if the tie has to be decided by a time limit, just playing 1 round would make way more sense in my opinion and whoever is the last man standing wins.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think anyone here is throwing around insults, at all. Sure, there are folks that do that and it has certainly taken place on these forums before, but at least in this topic people are doing little more than expressing genuine concerns in from what I have seen largely respectful ways.

 

I'll try to repeat again and clarify for you and the community team and for anyone else who cares: the problem with this decision is that it doesn't take anything to keep the 8v8s up. It costs no resources, no manpower, no additional bandwidth or anything else. That's why I asked "what is the opportunity cost of keeping the 8v8 ranked que available?"

 

I think if a clear reason was given as to why keeping 8v8 ques available would cause any problems then far fewer people would really complain (unless the reason was terrible, of course). However, saying that because they are imperfect they will be removed altogether is really serving no purpose other than to confuse and anger people.

 

QFE

 

Since you're already separating solo ranked and group ranked ratings, I don't see a logistical problem with adding an 8 man team ranked rating. Additionally, I have to wonder how much extra coding there has to be to allow you to to queue solo ranked, queue group ranked (arena), queue ops group (8v8). Seems the basic framework is already in place.

 

As mentioned there is a huge gap between "the support for this has been anemic" to "this should be removed from the game", so the question of what keeping it really costs anyone is a good one. The reasons given show they are aware of current problems with ranked, but does it really hurt anything to leave them since they're already there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The ranked teams that exist today are a large portion of the community that would/will be doing arenas. Listen to this recent live stream from 9:00 to 10:10. "If you are a ranked warzone player you will really like it" referring to 2.4. How will we "really like" that you removed them? Beyond ridiculous.

 

http://dulfy.net/2013/06/10/swtor-patch-2-2-developer-livestream-notes/

Edited by Yodawizard
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, the new ranked queues are able to read the player's skill tree and determine what spec they are.

 

1) Is this based solely on number of points in a tree? i.e. - Whichever tree has the most points is the character's spec for purposes of queueing? If so, what happens if someone has an equal number of points in a healing or tanking tree as they do in a dps tree?

 

2) Could this same code that reads the skill tree and determines spec be a precursor to a skill tree saving/switching QoL enhancement? :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Neat stuff, the only thing I am not sure is that arenas and the normal objective based warzones are in the same queue. Sure, some don't mind to have both there, but some might perfer one over the other, so it should be peossible to select them (maybe like the flashpoints in the groupfinder, were you can exclude what you don't like).

 

Haven't read the whole thread, so I guess someone has surely said something about the last picture. Seems to me like we getting another huttball map, this time on Quesh. I love that idea and look forward to that. With the soldiers in the background, maybe this is even an open world huttball really on Quesh not just an warzone that looks like Quesh?

Edited by Drudenfusz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...