Jump to content

Allow us to queue for the warzone we want

NakodaTheJedi

By NakodaTheJedi
in Suggestion Box

 Share

Recommended Posts

NakodaTheJedi

NakodaTheJedi

Posted
Posted
As many of us know. Most guilds have a sister pub side guild and a sister imp side. I know now you all are trying to figure out how to make Alliance proving grounds not pop as much. It's kind of a no brainer use the same system as you do for flash point and op group finder. This would be good because for guilds that use voice chat since you don't have a cross faction guild chat yet, if a guild wanted to just play with itself or a guild mate was just not feeling the imp side that day but the rest were but still wanted to pvp with or against them they could still do it and the selection of warzone option would increase the chances of them doing this. Just a thought I know people are going to hate.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Muljo_Stpho

Muljo_Stpho

Posted
Posted
This suggestion was made years ago and including an idea of how to keep players all the war zones not just their favorite one.

http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?t=750824

 

With them presenting more wz we should be given the opportunity to say "I'm done playing that zone for a while"

 

Did you link a different topic than you thought you did? That one suggests more pvp dailies, more pvp weeklies, and a whole bunch more new pvp dailies and weeklies on top of those which would be based around a new functionality to be added to the game which would allow missions to be spam-repeatable but with only a set number of repetitions allowed per day or week. (How / where would they track that and show the user how close they are to reaching their limits?) Not a single word was said about choosing which warzones to queue for.

 

I don't doubt that some form of selective warzone queuing is an idea that's been around for a while though.

 

It does seem like it would make sense to implement something to tweak the queue somewhat... Perhaps allow the huttball maps to be faction-neutral like the new Odessen map is. If they're concerned that flashpoint style on/off states for the queue would kill pvp queue times (example: there are enough people queued up to fill 1-2 matches but 1/4 of them only want to play huttball, 1/4 of them only want to play voidstar, and 1/4 of them only want to play novare... so all of them continue to wait until there are enough people that overlap their exact preferences), perhaps they could implement more of a priority ranking system (you assign up to 3 maps as top priority and you assign up to 3 maps as bottom priority, then the system tries to get you into your top maps as often as it can but it will open up to the middle tier options in a situation like in that example and it will open up to the bottom tier options only if a certain amount of time passes without finding a group for you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Jedi_riches

Jedi_riches

Posted
Posted
Don't you worry that by giving people a choice of warzones then warzone pops are going to increase? I mean there can already be a wait just finding the correct 'group' structure (ie 3 or 7 other players of your faction not counting the new ones and then the correct group structure for your opponents) without excluding warzones too.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DarthEnrique

DarthEnrique

Posted
Posted (edited)
Don't you worry that by giving people a choice of warzones then warzone pops are going to increase? I mean there can already be a wait just finding the correct 'group' structure (ie 3 or 7 other players of your faction not counting the new ones and then the correct group structure for your opponents) without excluding warzones too.

 

The queuing system's messed up as it is, it doesn't evenly distribute players.

 

Eg. You queue for a warzone and it pulls you into an 8v8 and imp vs imp, this is exactly how the queuing system works, it takes the first 8 people who were queued and makes them a team and the other 8 and makes them a team. You then end up with one team having 4 healers and people who can heal themselves through their abilities, while the other has no healers whatsoever all though they have some that can heal themselves they are team that's gonna lose cause they're healing can only go so far if they are healing themselves, which really does nothing when you got one or two people on you at once, sometimes more. So guess who's team is gonna end up losing.... Not the one's who don't have a healer.

 

While I know this probably won't fix that issue, at least I won't have to be in a 4v4 where I'm on a team of nothing but dps and the other team has 2 healers and 2 dps or tank and a dps. And as a Sith Sorcerer, guess who gets ganked first and there's not a damn thing I can do to stop it cause they got healers healing them and my damage to them ain't doing ****. I'm gonna be the first one down, you don't think that gets old?

Edited by DarthEnrique
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tragamite

Tragamite

Posted
Posted

So IMO to make this work, there needs to be incentive to play those zones you hate to play.

 

I like the idea of having huttball a faction nutral situation. Also adding a pve like queue system would benefit team balance. Allowing you to select a role to play in PvP, while not as crucial as in PvE, would allow the selector to divide the teams more evenly.

 

If 11 players are queued for a match and they all have arena as an option to play, then the goal is to make them as even as possible. There are 2xTanks, 1 healer and the rest dps. The game would likely put a 3man as tank, healer, dps vs tank and 3 dps.

 

This is in contrast to the current system that allows a wz of all one faction to be given 5 healers, one tank, and 2 dps to face off against 4 tanks and 4 dps.

 

This would only be in effect to attempt to balance matches, while still accepting a first come, first serve ideology. However, it would not select as accepted into teams, rather pool those who accept the wz invite and then select the most balanced teams.

 

The next big obstacle is queue times for each wz. If only 5 people are only selecting a particular wz it would not ever pop. If you got a message of queue waits on wzs or how many are currently in queue and in play, that way you could select alternatives if your favorite zone is not popular at that time.

 

Adding in mission for completion of the wzs would encourage players to select it even if they don't like playing that particular zone. And with the data received showing wz popularity they could provide events to boost other zone activity.

 

Additionally this will help them gear future zones around the popular ones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Muljo_Stpho

Muljo_Stpho

Posted
Posted (edited)
I would like arena to stay with Ranked or it's own queue entirely. There have been too many times where group members would drop because a arena popped up.

 

I don't do warzones often... In fact, until Pierce/M1-4X recruitment the last time I had actually queued at all had been before the 4vs4 arenas and the Quesh huttball map had been added. And I've queued a couple times since the addition of the Odessen and Rishi maps but I actually have yet to see either of them. Anyway, when I did queue up and end up in a 4vs4 my first thought was "Wait, NO!! I didn't queue for ranked, DID I?!?!" I really did not expect to EVER see a 4vs4 since I have no intention of EVER doing ranked and it seemed like something intended specifically for ranked players.

Edited by Muljo_Stpho
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...