Warzones/Arena please let the player decide!

[Kontraz]

Come on guys.. the point of PvP is to kill other players. Instanced PvP is designed to force opposing players into close quarters to fight. 90% of all tactics in a PvP instance revolve around that. Stop pretending that is not the case. WZs have objectives in them to motivate confrontation for PvP. Arena's lack objectives and just cut to the core theme of PvP.. to kill each other. It's a nuance, not a major difference.. unless you are somehow holding objectives peacefully and not killing each other. It's Player on Player combat.

 

Okay, I admit it. Before when I said "not sure if serious or trolling" I was trolling... Now I'm saying that legitimately.

 

There only three options here that would lead you to make such a claim.

 

1) You have no true understanding of how the objective-based PvP in this game worked

2) You understand however you are too prideful to admit you are wrong, and are therefore digging your hole deeper

3) You are trolling

[TUXs]

Come on guys.. the point of PvP is to kill other players.

 

FPs and Ops are both group PvE. They have fundamentally different objectives and rewards. If they didn't nobody would play OPs ever.

Wait...what?! You're seriously suggesting that FP's and Ops have "fundamentally different objectives"? Um...kill trash, kill boss, proceed to next boss...they're the SAME THING, just smaller.

 

And maybe to some PvPers, the only objective was to kill other players, but that's the stupidest of strategies any team can implore. "Just kill em" has never been an effective strategy in ANY winning WZ I've been a part of.

[iamthehoyden]

OIC.. so in Arena.. you kill other players.. but in WZ you don't?

 

Come on guys.. the point of PvP is to kill other players. Instanced PvP is designed to force opposing players into close quarters to fight. 90% of all tactics in a PvP instance revolve around that. Stop pretending that is not the case. WZs have objectives in them to motivate confrontation for PvP. Arena's lack objectives and just cut to the core theme of PvP.. to kill each other. It's a nuance, not a major difference.. unless you are somehow holding objectives peacefully and not killing each other. It's Player on Player combat.

 

FPs and Ops are both group PvE. They have fundamentally different objectives and rewards. If they didn't nobody would play OPs ever.

They are both types of pvp - players fighting other players - but 4v4 deathmatch is a different variety than 8v8 objective. You can keep arguing, you always do, but, frankly, your arguments in this case are outright laughably ridiculous. They're two different varieties of pvp.

[TheNahash]

FPs and Ops are both group PvE. They have fundamentally different objectives and rewards. If they didn't nobody would play OPs ever.

 

How so?

Because the way I see it they're both about a group of players who go in an instanced environment against easy-to-kill mobs and a few harder-to-kill Bosses. Both FP and OP bosses have "mechanics" that you have to know in order to survive/defeat them.

 

You can break anything down to its basic components. it doesn't mean that the simplest explanation is the correct one, though. Yes, PVP is about killing other players. There is a difference in how you play Warzones and Arenas. And some people like tactics and objectives instead of killing anything that moves.

[TUXs]

Okay, I admit it. Before when I said "not sure if serious or trolling" I was trolling... Now I'm saying that legitimately.

 

There only three options here that would lead you to make such a claim.

 

1) You have no true understanding of how the objective-based PvP in this game worked

2) You understand however you are too prideful to admit you are wrong, and are therefore digging your hole deeper

3) You are trolling

 

All of the above tbh

[Kontraz]

You guys really are bitter about PvP in SWTOR IMO. Which frankly impairs your objectivity.

 

I agree with you on some issues, while on others I'm content to simply disagree. This is one of the few cases where I will challenge everything you've said. You have had your own objectivity completely destroyed due to blind adoration of a copration, or are arguing for the sake of arguing.

[Exly]

I agree with you on some issues, while on others I'm content to disagree. This is one of the few cases where you have had your own objectivity completely destroyed due to blind adoration of a copration, or are arguing for the sake of arguing.

 

I honestly wonder the same thing myself.

[Andryah]

Okay, I admit it. Before when I said "not sure if serious or trolling" I was trolling... Now I'm saying that legitimately.

 

There only three options here that would lead you to make such a claim.

 

1) You have no true understanding of how the objective-based PvP in this game worked

2) You understand however you are too prideful to admit you are wrong, and are therefore digging your hole deeper

3) You are trolling

 

You are entitled to your opinion on the topic, and I am entitled to mine. That does not make me a troll.. no matter how much you wish that it does.

[johnduane]

I love how this company rips off WoWs ideas, but not enough to be remotely close in quality. This is a big failure, and I urge you all to support people dropping arenas.

 

I can go log into WoW right now, queue for an arena and get it instantly and separately from an objective-based pvp map (of course Blizzard provides quite a larger scale of battle as far as team size). The reason it is instant is because they group servers into a queue and call them a Battle Group. Evidently, that level of expertise doesn't exist with the clearly inferior development squad here.

 

TLDR: If you are going to copy WoW, please copy it in its entirety, because their game actually works.

[TechTheHic]

I agree with you on some issues, while on others I'm content to simply disagree. This is one of the few cases where I will challenge everything you've said. You have had your own objectivity completely destroyed due to blind adoration of a copration, or are arguing for the sake of arguing.

 

This.

 

 

There have been plenty of calm, respectful opinions on this that this poster is seemingly trying to make them more emotional about the situation, and I am debating on whether some of their posts should be reported as trolling.

[AMulls]

Wait...what?! You're seriously suggesting that FP's and Ops have "fundamentally different objectives"? Um...kill trash, kill boss, proceed to next boss...they're the SAME THING, just smaller.

 

And maybe to some PvPers, the only objective was to kill other players, but that's the stupidest of strategies any team can implore. "Just kill em" has never been an effective strategy in ANY winning WZ I've been a part of.

 

Beat me to it.

 

Just a completely idiotic and laughable post from Andryah.

[Kontraz]

You are entitled to your opinion on the topic, and I am entitled to mine. That does not make me a troll.. no matter how much you wish that it does.

 

I have no desire for anyone to be a troll. So, if true, then you have eliminated option 3, leaving the plausible reasons for your ill-informed opinion to be either the product of pride or ignorance of the subject matter.

[TheNahash]

You guys really are bitter about PvP in SWTOR IMO. Which frankly impairs your objectivity.

 

I'm not arguing how much of a priority PvP is or is-not. I am simply stating that they make changes to game content based on telemetry+analysis+player_feedback. Timeliness of change and whether any given player agrees with a change is beside the point.

 

I'm sorry, Andryah. I agree with a lot of the things you say, but you are wrong on this one.

I can only speak for myself but I will tell you that I'm not "bitter" at all. Unlike most people I see here, if PVP was so bad that I couldn't stand it, I'd never do it. It's exactly because I enjoy it that I want to be able to continue enjoying it without having to take part in something that I don't find entertaining.

 

I'm not asking them to fundamentally change PVP in Swtor. I like it as it is and I've grown to accept most of its shortcomings and BW's lack of real support. All I'm asking is for Bioware to give me the same options they give PVE players - just like PVErs don't HAVE to do an Operation if they don't want to (which means they are losing out on story content, some nice fights and great loot) and can instead queue only for Flashpoints, I'd like to opt out of this part of PVP and be able to enjoy the part of it I enjoy.

 

How is that so irrational?

[Andryah]

I agree with you on some issues, while on others I'm content to simply disagree. This is one of the few cases where I will challenge everything you've said. You have had your own objectivity completely destroyed due to blind adoration of a copration, or are arguing for the sake of arguing.

 

By all means.. have fun with that then.

 

I see the sense for why they did what they did here. You apparently don't.

 

I see the nuance in different PvP instance designs, while at the same time understanding that most players actually play for the PvP.. not for the sake of the objectives. You disagree. Actually, most players these days PvP for the rewards, and don't give two cents about actual persistent team play, or objectives at all, much less the random players they might be queued with. It's why queues are even required to begin with.

 

Based on previous behavior by the devs, they will watch the results and make adjustments to address the issues expressed in this thread IF they see data that supports the player feedback. I'm fine with that. You apparently are not.

 

Did I miss anything?

[Kontraz]

By all means.. have fun with that then.

 

I see the sense for why they did what they did here. You apparently don't.

 

I see the nuance in different PvP instance designs, while at the same time understanding that most players actually play for the PvP.. not for the sake of the objectives. You disagree. Actually, most players these days PvP for the rewards, and don't give two cents about actual persistent team play, or objectives at all, much less the random players they might be queued with. It's why queues are even required to begin with.

 

Based on previous behavior by the devs, they will watch the results and make adjustments to address the issues expressed in this thread IF they see data that supports the player feedback. I'm fine with that. You apparently are not.

 

Did I miss anything?

 

You missed the part where you provide proof for any of the claims you made.

[Andryah]

I have no desire for anyone to be a troll. So, if true, then you have eliminated option 3, leaving the plausible reasons for your ill-informed opinion to be either the product of pride or ignorance of the subject matter.

 

I see. Because it's not allowed for people to have a different views and opinions on a topic and to actually express them?

 

Only your view is valid? Your way or the highway.. is that what you are implying?

 

Is that what we are down to now here?

[Andryah]

You missed the part where you provide proof for any of the claims you made.

 

Et tu.... my friend.

[Twin]

There is more evidence that their data drives the right changes to the game rather then the wrong changes.

 

I get that any change they make is by definition invalid if you don't agree with it.. regardless what their data says.

 

That doesn't matter when they are so focused on their metrics that they dont understand when there is a problem even tho metrics says its not.

 

WZ queues for example; No, maybe it's a huge freakin coinsidence that i get the same wz popping 5-6 in a row a few days each week - or that 1 wz is trending showing up 75% of all pops each session. But you know what? -If thats working as intended - it needs to be changed so it CANT happen, regardless of what their internal data says.

 

So no, their metrics might show some hard facts - but doesn't neccesarily reflect reality in any shape or form.

 

100% of the players in game are using bolster in warzone, so it must be well liked by pvpers - No need to change that! All subscribers love the CM, because each month they are buygin stuff for at least 500 coins!11!

 

It's like all forms of statistics, they show hard facts but to really know whats going on you need to experience it - or its just numbers on a paper.

 

Im sure they have gotten stuff right as well, but trusting metrics over players is a bad move.

[Kontraz]

I see. Because it's not allowed for people to have a different views and opinions on a topic and to actually express them?

 

Only your view is valid? Your way or the highway.. is that what you are implying?

 

Is that what we are down to now here?

 

Not at all, but to make the claim that objective-based pvp is fundamentally the same as deathmatch is venturing beyond e realm of opinion.

 

That's like saying the color red is fundamentally the same as the color blue. While it is true they are both colors and share similar properties, they are not the same and should not be considered as such. The same goes for objective-based warzones and deathmatch.

 

Seeing as you lash out against any opinion (or anyone) that has views at odds with your own (or Bioware's) I'd imagine that you believe it has been your way or the highway for a while now.

[Andryah]

I'm not asking them to fundamentally change PVP in Swtor. I like it as it is and I've grown to accept most of its shortcomings and BW's lack of real support. All I'm asking is for Bioware to give me the same options they give PVE players - just like PVErs don't HAVE to do an Operation if they don't want to (which means they are losing out on story content, some nice fights and great loot) and can instead queue only for Flashpoints, I'd like to opt out of this part of PVP and be able to enjoy the part of it I enjoy.

 

How is that so irrational?

 

I never said it was irrational.

 

There was a time when PvE players had no queues.. and to this day still complain about queue design. Different parts of this game are always at different states of maturity and feature set. There is no equivalent to Arenas in PvE, never has been, in any MMO. Arenas are brand new here. It makes total sense that they devs install them and do not deliberately separate them in queues to me. I'm not saying it was a perfect solution in any way. But I do know that if they separate them.. they'll get probably as many (if not more) complaints about that. So for them.. it's scorned one way or scorned another.

 

You don't have to use the queue system to play.. right? It's just convenient for PUG play, right? I'm sure they will make adjustments to how queues for PvP work as they see how the players access the PvP play in the game.

[Exly]

By all means.. have fun with that then.

 

I see the sense for why they did what they did here. You apparently don't.

 

I see the nuance in different PvP instance designs, while at the same time understanding that most players actually play for the PvP.. not for the sake of the objectives. You disagree. Actually, most players these days PvP for the rewards, and don't give two cents about actual persistent team play, or objectives at all, much less the random players they might be queued with. It's why queues are even required to begin with.

 

Based on previous behavior by the devs, they will watch the results and make adjustments to address the issues expressed in this thread IF they see data that supports the player feedback. I'm fine with that. You apparently are not.

 

Did I miss anything?

 

Please stay on topic. We are discussing the need to allow people to choose which warzone types that they queue for, not your opinions on why people PvP in the first place.

[Andryah]

Seeing as you lash out against any opinion (or anyone) that has views at odds with your own (or Bioware's) I'd imagine that you believe it has been your way or the highway for a while now.

 

I don't lash out at anything. You assume too much and I resent your accusation.

 

Again.. an ad hominem on your part to try to control my expression of my views about the topic.

[Joesixxpack]

By all means.. have fun with that then.

 

I see the sense for why they did what they did here. You apparently don't.

 

I see the nuance in different PvP instance designs, while at the same time understanding that most players actually play for the PvP.. not for the sake of the objectives. You disagree. Actually, most players these days PvP for the rewards, and don't give two cents about actual persistent team play, or objectives at all, much less the random players they might be queued with. It's why queues are even required to begin with.

 

Based on previous behavior by the devs, they will watch the results and make adjustments to address the issues expressed in this thread IF they see data that supports the player feedback. I'm fine with that. You apparently are not.

 

Did I miss anything?

 

So you see what no one else seems to see, have levels of understanding no one else can comprehend, are talking from a higher plain, and so forth. I doubt you'll get then why it's rather difficult to take your posts ITT as credible.

[Kontraz]

Et tu.... my friend.

 

I did proved proof. two six month gaps without touching anything in terms of PvP from development, as well as a steady decline in subscribers.

 

You are making claims on behalf of "most pvpers", stating that they go into objective-based warzones only wanting to deathmatch, as well as suggesting bioware will look at their data and update accordingly in the best interest of the player base.

 

You have no basis for either of these claims.

[Andryah]

Please stay on topic. We are discussing the need to allow people to choose which warzone types that they queue for, not your opinions on why people PvP in the first place.

 

I'd be happy to stay on topic if people would stop attacking me for saying something they do not agree with.

 

As to the topic.. I have stated my views on it, responded to rebuttals, and Eric has as well. What else really is there to discuss.. other then people refusing to accept it as is for now.. play it.. and let your play show Bioware the error of their ways?

 

Seriously.. play the game.. drop from the Arenas if you don't want them. Drop from the WZs if you don't want them. The data will show Bioware what they need to do, if anything.