Matchmaking is a farce :P

[Nemarus]

Cross-server queuing is needed. Honestly, whatever resources you would devote to ship or class balance changes for GSF or Ranked Arenas or Seasons or any of that needs to be redirected to cross-server queuing. In one fell swoop, it would solve the vast majority of problems that the game has, let alone GSF has.

 

I know you know this. What do we need to do to make it happen? Petitions? Letter writing? Who keeps making the decision not to pursue this? It's not impossible. Your game's code isn't made of adamantium. Anything can be changed in software, given enough time and manpower. So who is making the call that cross-server queuing isn't a worthy return on investment? They are wrong, and they need to be told so.

[Fractalsponge]

Cross-server queuing is needed. Honestly, whatever resources you would devote to ship or class balance changes for GSF or Ranked Arenas or Seasons or any of that needs to be redirected to cross-server queuing. In one fell swoop, it would solve the vast majority of problems that the game has, let alone GSF has.

 

I know you know this. What do we need to do to make it happen? Petitions? Letter writing? Who keeps making the decision not to pursue this? It's not impossible. Your game's code isn't made of adamantium. Anything can be changed in software, given enough time and manpower. So who is making the call that cross-server queuing isn't a worthy return on investment? They are wrong, and they need to be told so.

 

The man speaks truth. Anyone that cares about the health of GSF needs to be harping on this constantly.

[TrinityLyre]

Cross-server queuing is needed.

An intelligent, necessary post. This should be stickied. I approve. 100%. A++++++ would deal with again.

 

I've mentioned it so many times, but it bears repeating. It's really the solution.

Edited May 9, 2014 by TrinityLyre

[Verain]

I bring up cross server queuing every time, but I understand that it's something that the devs OBVIOUSLY want to do, but clearly have monetary or technical hurdles.

 

If they aren't working on that, shame on them.

[Rollory]

Cross server queueing would mean I could queue as a group with my guild on a regular basis and not feel guilty about it because we wouldn't be beating up on noobs all the time.

 

Cross server queueing would mean the noobs would have a chance in hell of being put up against other noobs instead of veteran pilots who can't help but treat them (as a guildie put it last night) like flying ham sandwiches.

 

Cross server queueing would mean I would WANT to play a lot more because there would be so much more scope for interesting things to happen. In a MMO, players are content. Cross server queueing instantaneously multiplies the content for all servers all at the same time. The dollar value added to your product is larger by this single action than any other you could take.

 

Any 2-faction PVP system (especially as opposed to a 3-faction one) is inherently unstable as one side will always be stronger than the other, which encourages those who don't like losing to play more on the stronger side or less on the weaker side or both, thus tending to reinforce and aggravate the imbalance. Cross server queueing instantaneously remedies this, as individual server imbalances average out over the aggregate whole, and actual differences in overall strength across all servers between the 2 factions will have effects well within the margin of uncertainty and randomness of matchups.

 

Namespace problems? Add server tags to each name being put into the warzone. Guarantees uniqueness.

 

Synchronizing between geographically distant servers, and dealing with the consequent differential in lag between different participants? As a technical problem this certainly is something to worry about and will cost resources to address. It is hardly insoluble.

 

Cross server queueing is needed.

 

Rhodogast / Kelril, The Ebon Hawk

[Nomaad]

100% agree, my interest in GSF has diminished quite a bit, even though I still queue from time to time, not as much as I used to. I doubt very much we will ever see cross-server matches, even though it would be the best thing to ever happen to this game. I would love to be in competitive game play, as many of us stated before, getting tired of going up against junior pilots who end up getting curb stomped to death and being discouraged to going back in queue.

 

BW has a real habit of candy coating issues and problems that seem to never get addressed, so, keep your hopes up for the cross server queues, cause...sorry to say...will never ever happen, which sucks the big d.

[Bull_Five_Golf]

/signed

 

The first season of ranked PVP was supposed to include cross server queues but they abandoned it and said it was too challenging. It's time Bioware revisits this issue and puts real effort into making it work. Even if for some technical reason it didn't include cross server flashpoints or Operations it is desperately needed for both ground PVP and GSF.

[SammyGStatus]

If this isn't implemented, I can definitely assure you that more players will leave. The state of affairs are definitely not showing the matches to be fair in the slightest, and our self regulation shouldn't have to happen (because most don't) when it can just be programmed. This needs to be fixed immediately, for the sake of maintaining an actual GSF community. I will straight up leave matches where I'm the only experienced player grouped with 7 two ships vs a team full of 5 shippers. I don't even look at the name in these instances - predicting these matches has become a specialty, and it's never good. Please add X-server

 

/sign

[General_Brass]

Cross server and actual matchmaking.

 

Just having cross server only will just mean more bad matches.

Edited May 9, 2014 by General_Brass

[Verain]

I will straight up leave matches where I'm the only experienced player grouped with 7 two ships vs a team full of 5 shippers.

 

I think you'll leave if you are losing, even versus teams with low requisition ships and pug ships, as long as you are being outcoordinated and/or outplayed.

[Verain]

Cross-server queuing is needed.

 

I think this is just hard for them. I agree this is the #1 thing they need.

 

Honestly, whatever resources you would devote to ship or class balance changes for GSF or Ranked Arenas or Seasons or any of that needs to be redirected to cross-server queuing. In one fell swoop, it would solve the vast majority of problems that the game has, let alone GSF has.

 

But, I don't think this works like this. They have designers and developers, and the ones that are going to be doing the server type code for all this are not the ones that balance this or that. They can't just retask those people. You can't take game designers and make them write server code. It's not just a big bucket.

 

I know you know this. What do we need to do to make it happen? Petitions? Letter writing? Who keeps making the decision not to pursue this? It's not impossible. Your game's code isn't made of adamantium. Anything can be changed in software, given enough time and manpower. So who is making the call that cross-server queuing isn't a worthy return on investment? They are wrong, and they need to be told so.

 

It's cost benefit. But they HAVE to know that the benefit would be huge. It would be SO DAMNED GOOD for them to cross server.

[phoenixjon]

I think you'll leave if you are losing, even versus teams with low requisition ships and pug ships, as long as you are being outcoordinated and/or outplayed.

 

It's true! The stock gunsheep has seen this! I approve of this flame.

[SammyGStatus]

It's true! The stock gunsheep has seen this! I approve of this flame.

 

hmmm? whatcha mean flame

[Verain]

It's not really a flame, no.

[Nemarus]

 

But, I don't think this works like this. They have designers and developers, and the ones that are going to be doing the server type code for all this are not the ones that balance this or that. They can't just retask those people. You can't take game designers and make them write server code. It's not just a big bucket.

 

 

I know that. My point was that even devoting Developers or Designers to GSF or Ranked Warzones is a waste of time so long as the queuing/population situation is not solved. You might as well put them on PvE duty until cross-server is implemented, because no amount of tweaks and twerks are going to fix the matchmaking imbalance.

 

And when I talk about "redirecting resources" I mean money. And if they have to hire new resources (such as server code experts), then they either need to make the case to EA to fund the extra hires, or they need to reprioritize their budget.

 

I know that sounds cold, since "budget" = "people's job's", but if they just continue with their current budget allocation, they are throwing good money after bad, and all the investment they've done in PvP (both GSF and Ground) will no longer provide any revenue for this game, because no one will play it anymore.

 

The thing is, GSF is brilliant--it really is, as long as you are matched against the right opponents. When that happens, the game is completely balanced from a playability standpoint, and pretty close to balanced from a theoretical standpoint as well. The same goes for ground PvP.

 

This game has always had excellently designed PvP, compared to other MMO's and class-based multiplayer. But it's being killed by matchmaking and population issues.

 

The trouble is, unless EA gives more money to BioWare, in order to invest in server infrastructure to support cross-server queues, then it means someone has to get fired to make room in the budget. But who? What area of ongoing development can be axed?

 

You can't kill raid development without losing the raiding guilds. You can't kill flashpoints and new planets without losing the bulk of players. GSF and PvP you can reduce active development on, with the assumption that the PvP players are their own content. I hope desperately that that doesn't mean Chris or anyone associated with GSF is losing their job. Rather I hope they're simply being redirected ... but toward what? Strongholds? Blech. That will give an initial influx of cash as whales pay CC for housing doodads, but it won't last.

 

It's a bit of a Catch-22 unfortunately. What the game really needs is a temporary, Iraq-style "surge" of budget to make cross-server queues happen. Once it does happen, the PvP elements of the game will be in a much stronger, more stable "healthy state". Each can keep a small crew of devs to make balance changes and new maps. Meanwhile the lion's share of budget can continue to go to PvE content (as it should).

Edited May 9, 2014 by Nemarus

[Verain]

I think you've nailed it- they need to have internal enhancements. The problem is this: players come for features and kit, they stay for implementation and execution. "We have player housing" will get players, just as "we have GSF" did (and still will). But "our product is so quality we support cross server queueing" is something that...

 

 

Ok, here's an example. If I told you Rift had cross realm, would that make you more or less likely to play it? The answer is PROBABLY neither- your decision to play it is probably not based on that. Your decision to KEEP playing it might be- or at least it would be a factor.

 

 

Either way, I can say with absolute certainty that no one reading this thread at Bioware has any say over cross realm. I'm sure they read every idea you've ever said about bombers and mines and at least considered it, but there's no way that the GSF devs have anything at all to do with cross realm.

 

So bring it up and firmly state that the game needs it- I think I literally put this in every "suggestions" thread- but don't just keep hammering it, or imply that the actions of the devs are WORTHLESS without it- that's simply not true, in addition to being ludicrous to gaze upon.

[FridgeLM]

The situation as I see it is they won't implement cross-server until after 3.0, and that most of their current resources are allocated to 3.0 and Strongholds. They're gambling on the issue, betting that they'll retain enough people through content with Strongholds and 3.0, and that players will be busy enough with whatever they've got cooking for 3.0 that they will be able to afford the allocation of resources that implementing cross-server would require.

[Slivovidze]

But the starfighter is in HEALTHY state and they are perfectly HAPPY with it!!! Why do you ungrateful players keep complaining!!!

 

But yeah, seriously, for the love of Force (or was it Farce?) that stuff is super needed. Sadly there are no profits in that, unless they charge CC's for queuing in cross-server queue. And they won't spend manpower on stuff that doesn't yield no profitz.

[Kheld]

Had a great time on my Republic chars last night, racking up kills & wins game after game.

 

Switching to my Imp characters (same server), we got absolutely hammered (1000-3 etc) 7 times in a row.

 

GSF is NOT in "healthy state" right now.

[MystbladeWA]

I will /sign this also. I think we do need to keep bringing this up, despite the likely futility of the endevour.

[SammyGStatus]

I will /sign this also. I think we do need to keep bringing this up, despite the likely futility of the endevour.

 

Agreed. How else will BioWare recognize the issue? I will definitely post /signing any thread related to this - it's a really big deal and needs more support than just those who visit the forums. Tell your GSF buddies in game to visit the forums and actually make a comment on these issues - the more attention we can draw the better (considering the alternative is slaughtering newb teams relentlessly, time and time again, just to show BW that they need to reexamine their metrics of 'healthy'.... Morally ambiguous, but those really are the options). The need for cross server ranked is a necessity, and we can't let the campaign die (we also can't have a martyr for ranked queues as that's just silly). Please keep the conversation alive and reach out in these threads to confirm the problems that we know exist.

 

Maybe posting is futile, but the people who don't try to create change cannot complain when we as a community are forced to remain stagnant. I'd rather see us try and fail than give up. I mean, it'd be nice for BW to even acknowledge the issues that we see, rather than deceive the rest of the community. Then again, it probably would become an internet spectical if they did announce it... but I think more people would be understanding to the situation if the developers just admitted that there is an issue.

[Verain]

Agreed. How else will BioWare recognize the issue? I will definitely post /signing any thread related to this - it's a really big deal and needs more support than just those who visit the forums.

 

Mention it and move on. If the forums become everyone clamoring for cross server, I don't think that makes us more likely to get it faster, but it will make the forums entirely unreadable.

 

This is most of my gripe with forums anyway. Something will always be OP, or at LEAST up for debate- even if the game is perfectly balanced, some bad will come in and decide that his losses are due to design failure. If the forum keeps these discussions (which can be interested) to some small subset of threads, super.

 

But when people feel the desire and need to crap up every thread with burst laser cannon / bombers / gunships, then all the threads become useless. And the solution isn't to appease every loudmouth, it's to shame them- because even if they are correct, their correctness doesn't factor in to their willingness to crap up a forum.

[SammyGStatus]

But the mention it and move on belief doesn't work for change. Does a presidential candidate just say they want to be president, go out and give one speech, then say "Screw campaigning - I'm gonna go count my money again"? No - he continues to campaign for what he believes in. Saying something in passing does not cement the issue for those who're responsible for balancing this match. Without voicing opinions on change CONTINUALLY, BW could get the impression that the community gave up and doesn't care anymore. Sure, there will still be other metrics to track how well the matchmaking is working, but it's not going to be an accurate representation of people's feelings.

[Verain]

They don't design by player vote, and all you'll succeed in doing is crapping the forums up to be ignored by the devs.

 

Do you want to come here and read:

 

1- Some cool thing someone said.

2- Something funny related to the game

3- A question about how to do something.

4- Updates to a guide for new players

5- Things other players are doing that are effective and good.

 

 

Or throw all that out and make it a political platform where you continually agitate for change? In your world it's just a bunch of whining mouths talking talking begging squealing.

 

Say they get around to cross server- which I'm sure is a top priority for everyone who might read the forums and their superiors already- then some subsection becomes convinced that hey guys it works.

 

Then the forums would be nothing but nerfherding, buffbegging, class whines, etc.

 

 

We GET those terrible threads. It would be the whole forum though.

[SammyGStatus]

They don't design by player vote, and all you'll succeed in doing is crapping the forums up to be ignored by the devs.

 

Do you want to come here and read:

 

1- Some cool thing someone said.

2- Something funny related to the game

3- A question about how to do something.

4- Updates to a guide for new players

5- Things other players are doing that are effective and good.

 

 

Or throw all that out and make it a political platform where you continually agitate for change? In your world it's just a bunch of whining mouths talking talking begging squealing.

 

Say they get around to cross server- which I'm sure is a top priority for everyone who might read the forums and their superiors already- then some subsection becomes convinced that hey guys it works.

 

Then the forums would be nothing but nerfherding, buffbegging, class whines, etc.

 

 

We GET those terrible threads. It would be the whole forum though.

 

You're points are completely valid - the game is not a democracy. I was using the example as more of a reinforcement to continuity as I was under the impression that the devs do, from time to time, read the forums and if they were to come here, I really hope there would be a WE NEED MATCHMAKING REVAMP ASAP thread at the top so there is no way that it's missed.

 

Balance only comes from speaking up (Star Citizen backers are PO'd right now because the 300i got nerfed in a game that's two years out). Without threads like these, the consensus is that there isn't enough care to change it. We can identify the qqers because we've played the game long enough to know what the strengths and weaknesses are, as well as how others are more than likely misinterpreting their expectations.

 

No, clogging the forums is not ideal. That's not the goal - one thread with 1000 posts is worth (imho) more than 1000 threads with 1 post. I'm also pretty sure that we've had matchmaking complaints prior to "GSF is in a healthy state". That being said, the conversation shouldn't die. And in my world, we get a lot more booze than the half bottle of jack sitting on the shelf Cheers!

Edited May 10, 2014 by SammyGStatus