Please stop Hutball from being every match. 10 in a row now.

[TrixxieTriss]

Has anyone here actually mentioned the number of matches they've tracked in these "studies"?

 

I could say that in the matches I queued last night I got huttbal type games 75% of the time, which is true.

 

I also only queued 4 matches, which is a statistically insignificant sample.

 

I did back in May. But I’ve since misplaced the hard date I used to track, so I’m basing the number of matches as an average or approximation based on how many hours I played in PVP.

If I had to make a guess right now, I say it would have been in the thousands.

 

What I have still got is the ranking of the maps as they averaged out,.

[TrixxieTriss]

Again you are being misleading. Huttball maps popped less than 33% of the time in my test (though they will tend to 33% the more cases there are) and it corresponds to the experience i've had for many hundreads of them. If you want to group all huttball maps together, then you need to group all 3 objectives maps together and the remaining 3. All 3 of those groups must pop 33% of the time for balance or every one of the maps must pop 11% of the time. That is what is balanced.

You are the one that doesn't get it. You don't get to pretend 3 huttball maps are all the same map. They aren't. Indeed there is a difference between 33% and 11%. 33% corresponds to 3 maps, 11% to only one.

"objective type" is not a differentiating factor in warzones. They are all warzones. An 8v8 objective based map with respawns. Only one that doesn't belong is arena. It's a different game type. Huttball, novare, odessen, all of them are the same gameplay type, wich is what warzones are.

.

 

How am I being misleading? Your sample size was so small that it wouldn’t have been enough to ompleted a high school assignment.

 

I’m more than happy to compare and discuss the results when you have an actual working sample size to compare. So come back and see me in 3 months

 

In the meantime, we can let other people decide whether HB should statistically pop more because they have 3 out of 9 maps, Logic would dictate that 33% is higher number than 11%, but maybe it’s different in an alternate universe?

 

You also have it wrong with regards to the objective maps. There are only two maps that fall into the same category, which are civil war and Yavin.

Nova coast is different on how it works and is closer to a hybrid of hypergates, Yavin and Odessen.

 

I’ve not problem putting civil war and Yavin in to the same group and I’ve even suggested it in this thread as a means to making it fair.

Which means you should see them also pop more as a group than any other map type besides the HB group,

 

Hutt Ball should average out statistically at 33% and CWY should average out at 22%. Both of those is higher than the 11% represented by the other map types.

 

Even if we ignore the fact that as individuals maps, both CW & Y have a lower average of popping than the HB maps which hold positions 1, 3 & 4 in my 3 months study last year, you can not dispute the basic facts that 33% is both higher than 22% and 11%.

I don’t even know why you are arguing about it and why you think I’m being misleading because those facts are irrefutable to any who can count and understand which numbers are bigger.

 

What needs to happen to make it fair for all maps types to have the same percentage of being played is HB and CWY need to each be put into their own independent grouping(s) and considered one type of pop per group. Then you have a 1 in 6 or 16% chance or of getting a HB map, a CWY map or any other type.

 

The way they can do this, would be the queue pops the HB or CWY group and then rolls the dice again to decide which one of the maps from the group to choose.

Another option (but one Bioware are less likely to do) is when HB pops, it then asks the players to vote which of the maps to play and the majority wins the vote. In the case if a draw, the system chooses randomly.

 

Now, I’m not a fan of 4v4, but in the name of fairness, it could also be argued arena should also be put into their own grouping like HB and CWY and have just as much chance to pop that style of pvp. I’m not a fan of that idea, but as you pointed out earlier to us all, the game isn’t just about us. So I’m trying to look at this from all sides and offer a fair alternative to the current system which a large amount of players hate and are leaving the game over.

[TrixxieTriss]

random is random I doubt they go out of their way to "not" make warzone random

but I am sure they didn't go out of their way to make it feel "less random."

 

because real random could even be 100-time hutball as there is no diminishing return of probability

 

if every time a game start there is a roll of dice 1-10 and each warzone is a number theoretically you can get 8 even 100 times in raw is not probable but is remotely possible

 

You got this 100% right. The only issue is that’s not how the queue works because Bioware can / have and do manipulate when it suits them.

 

Ie, when ever they have introduced a new map, they have artificially increased its pop rate so just about every pop is that map. They don’t fully turn it to 100% because very occasionally you would get another map (like 1/20).

 

That tells me that they don’t have a real or proper random generator if they have back end systems in place to be able to manipulate the percentages at will. Because that would involve two different systems and I think we can all guess that Bioware won’t have that sort of setup,

 

The last time they manipulated it was when they released Vandin 13 months ago and then left it like that for 8 weeks. Which is why so many people developed such a hatred for HB, especially Vandin. Then when they decided to turn it back to a normal queue pop, they still didn’t turn Vandin down enough for another couple of months and it still popped a lot more than any map. Finally they adjusted it down again, but still not enough as the results from my experiment showed because Vandin still popped more than any other individual map.

(FYI, theyve gone through this absurdity many times over the years because they can’t seem to get it right the first two times they adjust)

 

 

As much as I’d probably complain about it, I think I’d prefer a 100% randomisation generator like you’ve suggested over this current system.

But the best system IMO, would be the one I suggested in my last post.

Edited January 15, 2020 by TrixxieTriss

[Nemmar]

How am I being misleading? Your sample size was so small that it wouldn’t have been enough to ompleted a high school assignment.

 

I’m more than happy to compare and discuss the results when you have an actual working sample size to compare. So come back and see me in 3 months

 

In the meantime, we can let other people decide whether HB should statistically pop more because they have 3 out of 9 maps, Logic would dictate that 33% is higher number than 11%, but maybe it’s different in an alternate universe?

 

You also have it wrong with regards to the objective maps. There are only two maps that fall into the same category, which are civil war and Yavin.

Nova coast is different on how it works and is closer to a hybrid of hypergates, Yavin and Odessen.

 

I’ve not problem putting civil war and Yavin in to the same group and I’ve even suggested it in this thread as a means to making it fair.

Which means you should see them also pop more as a group than any other map type besides the HB group,

 

Hutt Ball should average out statistically at 33% and CWY should average out at 22%. Both of those is higher than the 11% represented by the other map types.

 

Even if we ignore the fact that as individuals maps, both CW & Y have a lower average of popping than the HB maps which hold positions 1, 3 & 4 in my 3 months study last year, you can not dispute the basic facts that 33% is both higher than 22% and 11%.

I don’t even know why you are arguing about it and why you think I’m being misleading because those facts are irrefutable to any who can count and understand which numbers are bigger.

 

What needs to happen to make it fair for all maps types to have the same percentage of being played is HB and CWY need to each be put into their own independent grouping(s) and considered one type of pop per group. Then you have a 1 in 6 or 16% chance or of getting a HB map, a CWY map or any other type.

 

The way they can do this, would be the queue pops the HB or CWY group and then rolls the dice again to decide which one of the maps from the group to choose.

Another option (but one Bioware are less likely to do) is when HB pops, it then asks the players to vote which of the maps to play and the majority wins the vote. In the case if a draw, the system chooses randomly.

 

Now, I’m not a fan of 4v4, but in the name of fairness, it could also be argued arena should also be put into their own grouping like HB and CWY and have just as much chance to pop that style of pvp. I’m not a fan of that idea, but as you pointed out earlier to us all, the game isn’t just about us. So I’m trying to look at this from all sides and offer a fair alternative to the current system which a large amount of players hate and are leaving the game over.

 

My sample size is probably better than your selective one. You are not the only one who's played this game for thousands of hours. You are lying and misleading. Huttball should pop 33% of the time cause there are 3 huttball maps. 3 objective maps should pop 33% cause there are 3 maps. How is this difficult to understand?

 

Stop the BS! Warzones are objective based 8v8 maps. They are not huttball warzones, a different mode warzones from 3 objectives, from odessen warzones, etc. This is not pick and choose. This is WARZONES. Objective based 8v8! If you don't like some maps to the point you come to these forums and lie about it, then you don't like warzones and should stop rather than try to ruin the mode for everyone else due to entitlement. Huttball has been 33% of warzones on this game at launch. Why should it be different now?

 

Huttball NEVER poped more than it should. This test is way more credible than just doing 3-4 warzones every day. If there was a trend it would show it clearly. And i have never noticed it pop more than it should since Onslaught. You are the one that needs to make a new test. But ofc you can't cause you are leaving huttball maps and telling others to do the same to perpetuate this notion that huttball pops more when it doesn't. You are wrong on this. Sorry, but it's the case. Huttball IS NOT popping more than it should. Find a new reason to get rid of it. I don't want to hear people queueing 3 to 4 warzones in evenings and getting funneled into huttball maps cause of leavers and then having an "unlucky" streak. Yeah, it's random, and especially with leavers it can happen. Think of a solution for that that doesn't involve misrepresenting how often it pops. My solution is a debuff for leavers like in ranked. That will solve the problem that you people are creating.

Creating a preference list will only lead to much increased queue times and less map variety, so no, i don't support that one.

 

 

As for the post above, it is complete speculation. We don't know what the code is. Bioware might be incompetent, but we don't know how the warzones are drawn, but we have been explicitly told that they all have the same chances to pop now. I would be ok if we were to blacklist the warzone that won previously from the roll, but make no mistake, this will not solve the problem of people getting funneled into huttball maps cause of leavers.

I want to add that the reason the vandin chance came back is the same reason that bugs come back. Bioware has a build compilation issue. People work on things and can't or don't update to the latest version of the game and when it compiles it resets the things that were fixed. Wich is why as i told you before it's best to not rush these devs. The more builds the more likely it is they will screw up. Now i don't know if it's incompetence, negligence, or simply a bug in the engine they could never fix. But, it is obvious that it's the only reason why fixed bugs come back.

Edited January 16, 2020 by Nemmar

[KendraP]

Maybe someone should say in X matches I had Y huttballs, rather than it pops Z% of the time.

 

I for one lend more credence to statistics where I have knowledge of the underlying population. An average with no supporting information is just as meaningless as my saying huttball popped 75% of the time in 3/4 matches was (and I picked that example in fact, to illustrate meaninglessness).

Edited January 15, 2020 by KendraP

[Nemmar]

Maybe someone should say in X matches I had Y huttballs, rather than it pops Z% of the time.

 

I for one lend more credence to statistics where I have knowledge of the underlying population. An average with no supporting information is just as meaningless as my saying huttball popped 75% of the time in 3/4 matches was (and I picked that example in fact, to illustrate meaninglessness).

 

I did in another thread but here.

 

I did as many warzones as i can in 5 days test (january 5 to 10 of 2020). Usually from 2pm to 2am with only breaks to sleep, eat and all that (all lvl 75). Obviously it's not a test that can be done for weeks on end for obvious reasons and at late night (past 2am) is when warzones pop the least so less was lost. Server Darth Malgus. Time gmt+1.

 

I did 94 warzones in 5 days (86 if you remove arenas).

 

Voidstar 4

Novare 17

Yavin 10

Alderaan 8

Hypergates 6

Quesh 4

The pit 13

Arena 8

Odessen 12

Vandin 12

 

Huttball maps always seem to pop more in the evenings wich seems to be for the reasons i mentioned with people getting funneled to them cause of leavers instead of new warzones popping. Also the same with Odessen cause it's another map that people love to quit and seems to pop more in the evening.

Edited January 15, 2020 by Nemmar

[KendraP]

Ignoring the arenas, because supposedly they only pop in low queue populations:

 

86/9 = 9.56

(13+4+12)/86 = 29/86 = 0.337

 

So we would expect each map to occur roughly 10 times. It is likely this data has not converged. There are many reasons, some of which may also explain the reasons hutball feels more common:

 

First, I have no way of knowing if these were original queues, or backfills, and even as a queuer, you have no way of knowing if you are a pre-match-start backfill.

 

The maps are not all equal length - it takes a certain, set amount of time for odessen/voidstar/hypergates (because rounds), coast/alderaan/yavin (because even triple capped takes a set amount of time to reduce points). For the three hutball maps, there really is no set minimum time. (Quesh for instance, camp a stealther up top, throw up to him repeatedly, match is over very quickly).

 

Because of these issues, and despite the fact that huttball maps did occur roughly 1/3 of the time in your data, I argue this data is not convergent, and thus, cannot really be used to support or deny any argument about non-random queue pops.

[orillah]

Today i have 10 HB out of 12 games. Thats my data.

[Nemmar]

Ignoring the arenas, because supposedly they only pop in low queue populations:

 

86/9 = 9.56

(13+4+12)/86 = 29/86 = 0.337

 

So we would expect each map to occur roughly 10 times. It is likely this data has not converged. There are many reasons, some of which may also explain the reasons hutball feels more common:

 

First, I have no way of knowing if these were original queues, or backfills, and even as a queuer, you have no way of knowing if you are a pre-match-start backfill.

 

The maps are not all equal length - it takes a certain, set amount of time for odessen/voidstar/hypergates (because rounds), coast/alderaan/yavin (because even triple capped takes a set amount of time to reduce points). For the three hutball maps, there really is no set minimum time. (Quesh for instance, camp a stealther up top, throw up to him repeatedly, match is over very quickly).

 

Because of these issues, and despite the fact that huttball maps did occur roughly 1/3 of the time in your data, I argue this data is not convergent, and thus, cannot really be used to support or deny any argument about non-random queue pops.

 

No one has huge data enough to make scientific claims. I make my affirmations with this data and the experiences of probably thousands of warzones by now. I have no reason to believe huttball pops more and i have not seen any data that even sugests that.

 

Also, to get a good sample we would need someone playing constantly for several weeks or the sample would be tainted by the time frame it falls onto. Aka would give a picture of that time interval only. Also, the data needs to be from 6.0+, not previous expansions where warzone launches and bugs tainted the numbers.

I could only do this for 5 days. It's annoying to keep track of something cause of wild forum claims rather than just enjoy the game you pay for.

 

Either way, i think we can move on from the wild claim and focus on getting air jets fixed, solo queue for warzones and arenas seperated, class balance etc. You know, real issues, not made up ones.

Edited January 16, 2020 by Nemmar

[KendraP]

What's the point presenting uncoverged data? Worse, making conclusions on uncoverged data? Oh but uncoverged data with experience.

 

Experience in this type of scenario is always going to have a confirmation bias issue - what you see depends very strongly on your point of view.

 

I literally don't see the point arguing over how often maps pop using "ststistics" when, empirically, there are simply too many variables for us to possibly control for.

[TrixxieTriss]

Maybe someone should say in X matches I had Y huttballs, rather than it pops Z% of the time.

 

I for one lend more credence to statistics where I have knowledge of the underlying population. An average with no supporting information is just as meaningless as my saying huttball popped 75% of the time in 3/4 matches was (and I picked that example in fact, to illustrate meaninglessness).

 

Yep that’s what I did back in May.

 

It seems the “other” poster doesn’t like to lose an argument or can admit his methodology has holes in it.

 

I’m done trying to talk sense to him because all he keeps saying is I’m misrepresenting (which is short for I must be lying, but he knows he’ll get a warning if he says it). Then he rambles on about nonsense to justify why I’m wrong.

 

Anyway, people can run their own experiment and see for themselves. As long as they get a proper sample size, their results will reflect what’s actually happening. An isolated sample size or too small sample size will be skewed and mostly useless, something he fails to grasp.

Edited January 17, 2020 by TrixxieTriss

[Nemmar]

What's the point presenting uncoverged data? Worse, making conclusions on uncoverged data? Oh but uncoverged data with experience.

 

Experience in this type of scenario is always going to have a confirmation bias issue - what you see depends very strongly on your point of view.

 

I literally don't see the point arguing over how often maps pop using "ststistics" when, empirically, there are simply too many variables for us to possibly control for.

 

There is a big problem here. I am not making the claim, Trixxie is. She has no evidence to back it up. So, why exactly should i conclude less? I got 5 days, lets see someone else try more than that. Play 12 hours a day each day and tell me how it goes. Until there is proof, there will be no proven claim.

Edited January 17, 2020 by Nemmar

[Nemmar]

Yep that’s what I did back in May.

 

It seems the “other” poster doesn’t like to lose an argument or can admit his methodology has holes in it.

 

I’m done trying to talk sense to him because all he keeps saying is I’m misrepresenting (which is short for I must be lying, but he knows he’ll get a warning if he says it). Then he rambles on about nonsense to justify why I’m wrong.

 

Anyway, people can run their own experiment and see for themselves. As long as they get a proper sample size, their results will reflect what’s actually happening. An isolated sample size or too small sample size will be skewed and mostly useless, something he fails to grasp.

 

Sure you did. There is no sense. You are literally making stuff up. You cannot possibly know when you are a replacement before the match starts either.

You have not tested in onslaught, yet you keep your claim and deny other tests.

I can easily continue my test, but i know you will still claim your mythical test is better and shows huttball popping way more. BS is what it is. Indeed everyone is welcome to make the test themselves. Just watch the time frame cause huttball pops more in evenings cause of leavers.

Edited January 17, 2020 by Nemmar

[TrixxieTriss]

Sure you did. There is no sense. You are literally making stuff up.

You have no tested in onslaught, yet you keep your claim and deny other tests.

I can easily continue my test, but i know you will still claim your mythical test is bigher and shows huttball popping way more. BS is what it is. Indeed everyone is welcome to make the test themselves.

 

Go back a few pages and you’ll see that I’m currently running the experiment again and have been since December. Expect results in February, if you’re still around.

 

Anyway, I’ve had enough of you saying I’m lying or calling what I’m saying BS because your argument is weak. People only resort to name calling and trying to bully when they know they are sinking.

 

I will not be replying to anymore of your posts.

 

/ignore.

[Nemmar]

Go back a few pages and you’ll see that I’m currently running the experiment again and have been since December. Expect results in February, if you’re still around.

 

Anyway, I’ve had enough of you saying I’m lying or calling what I’m saying BS because your argument is weak. People only resort to name calling and trying to bully when they know they are sinking.

 

I will not be replying to anymore of your posts.

 

/ignore.

 

Good. Bring us proof, not word salad.

I will continue mine as well, cause at this point i dont trust you to not alter the results.

 

And for the record, i would be perfectly fine if huttball was popping more than it should. If that were the case i have said before that it should be lowered, but i have yet to see any proof. So, i very much welcome you bringing something to the table.

Edited January 17, 2020 by Nemmar

[Pekish]

I have returned just recently and only made new character so i am playing 1-40 pvp and since i started pvp @ lvl 10 and mostly just leveled in warzone i played 5 Hutball in 1 month

 

a lot of 4x4 obviously it pop more often when there is fewer people

 

and the most common that is the one i like the least is the new one with 5 places to stand and conquer that change every few minutes i don't remember the name is my least favorite and i feel it the one popping the most

 

but after reading this i just think i feel it pop the most because i don't like it ahaha

[orillah]

4 days, 40 wz played - 25 Huttballs.

[Pekish]

i think is because lot of people leave so you end up with more of those as back up choice 1 hutball if 5 leave is not perceived only by 8 people but 13 people

 

so if people keep leaving everybody will feel there is a lot more going on because one match is seen by 13 people vs normal 8

 

at low level 1-40 people rarely leave they don't have a favorite or just don't care so it feels it pop less

Edited January 17, 2020 by Pekish

[KendraP]

4 days, 40 wz played - 25 Huttballs.

 

If 86 matches were statistically inconclusive, I seriously doubt 40 are. And there is still no further information. How many did you join at the start? Were you ever a backfill pre-start? How do you account for the time consumed by the match?

 

These are all questions that affect the problem, statistically speaking.

[TrixxieTriss]

I have returned just recently and only made new character so i am playing 1-40 pvp and since i started pvp @ lvl 10 and mostly just leveled in warzone i played 5 Hutball in 1 month

 

a lot of 4x4 obviously it pop more often when there is fewer people

 

and the most common that is the one i like the least is the new one with 5 places to stand and conquer that change every few minutes i don't remember the name is my least favorite and i feel it the one popping the most

 

but after reading this i just think i feel it pop the most because i don't like it ahaha

 

Yeah, you will mostly only get 4v4 in lowbies these days because there aren’t enough people playing it to form enough full 8v8 matches. So the queue reverts to 4v4. If I play lowbies, I might get 2 or 3, 8v8 matches in a few hours (if I’m lucky).

 

Surprising, HB matches in lowbies are usually better quality and more fun than Mids and especially better than lvl 75. More people seem to want to play it to win because they are still learning or maybe because farming dps means even less in lowbies than it does at lvl 75?

 

There is also a hell of a lot less dysnc and lag in lowbie HB, which certainly puts a spot light on how bad it’s become in lvl 75. The only conclusions is all the extra abilities, especially the mobility ones, are what contributes to most of the dysnc and lag in higher lvl pvp.

Maybe if Bioware stopped giving “every” class speed abilities, the game might be better able to keep up with player positioning.

[TrixxieTriss]

i think is because lot of people leave so you end up with more of those as back up choice 1 hutball if 5 leave is not perceived only by 8 people but 13 people

 

so if people keep leaving everybody will feel there is a lot more going on because one match is seen by 13 people vs normal 8

 

at low level 1-40 people rarely leave they don't have a favorite or just don't care so it feels it pop less

 

I guess that’s possible and I will add that to my data. ie, when HB pops, how many people do I see on the score board at the end of the match vs how many left before it. I’m pretty sure it only records people who stay or leave after the start, so I need to confirm that first.

 

It’s going to skew the results a little and only Bioware can really see what’s happening in those circumstances, but if it is happening as you propose, then that is something they can also fix.

Ie if you pop a HB, your next match should have less chance of popping a HB and the more it pops in a row, the more those odds reduce till they are 1% chance of getting another HB in a row,

 

I think I might actually get my wife involved too for a month. But I won’t group with her and we will queue separately. Every time she pops a HB, I will get her to leave before it starts and I will stay for all of mine (damn, guess I’m taking one for the team ). I don’t know what it will show or if it’s even relevant, but it will be good to compare between us.

[TrixxieTriss]

In case anyone is wondering why so many people who used to love HB have come to hate it... you only need to watch this and the ridiculous dysnc that can happen to understand why it kills all the fun for us and why we prefer to leave.

 

 

This was posted in another thread, so it’s not my recording. But it is an example of what many of us encounter in all HB style maps. It might not always be that bad (quesh is the worst, followed closely by Vandin), but there is ALWAYS some bad dysnc to a degree and its more often as bad as the recording than less.

 

The dysnc is worse in all HB maps than any other map type because of the multiple platforms. The engine can’t cope with x,y,z axis positioning enough and it’s only getting worse with every major patch or change.

 

Even though there is dysnc in other maps, it affects the play less because it’s mostly combat and you can adjust. It’s hard to adjust and stop someone scoring (which is the main way to play) when they are glitching all over the place and most of the time you can’t stop them because of the glitching or even actually know where they are most of the time.

 

To be totally transparent here, personally, if HB didn’t have the dysnc and glitching and people actually wanted to win by playing it properly, I wouldn’t care if it popped all day or more than other maps. I used to love HB before, but in its current state, it ruins my favourite type of pvp in the game and I would rather put it down like a sick animal than see it suffer in such a disgraceful way.

Edited January 18, 2020 by TrixxieTriss

[Aetideus]

or just remove the damn game.

 

Pleaaaase

Edited January 18, 2020 by Aetideus

[Nemmar]

If 86 matches were statistically inconclusive, I seriously doubt 40 are. And there is still no further information. How many did you join at the start? Were you ever a backfill pre-start? How do you account for the time consumed by the match?

 

These are all questions that affect the problem, statistically speaking.

 

 

That is not possible to know accurately. Are you gonna accept the queue directly every time? How do you know someone didn't decline the queue or someone joined and immediately left? What you are asking for is impossible to know from our end. Only one you can track is if it was underway already as in the fight started.

Also do you understand how difficult it is to track all that on top of the warzone pops? I will make this clear. Chances for human error: very high.

Whoever claims to have done it i will know they are not being honest. There is no way to know accurately so there really is no point trying to track what you can't track.

 

In case anyone is wondering why so many people who used to love HB have come to hate it... you only need to watch this and the ridiculous dysnc that can happen to understand why it kills all the fun for us and why we prefer to leave.

 

 

This was posted in another thread, so it’s not my recording. But it is an example of what many of us encounter in all HB style maps. It might not always be that bad (quesh is the worst, followed closely by Vandin), but there is ALWAYS some bad dysnc to a degree and its more often as bad as the recording than less.

 

The dysnc is worse in all HB maps than any other map type because of the multiple platforms. The engine can’t cope with x,y,z axis positioning enough and it’s only getting worse with every major patch or change.

 

Even though there is dysnc in other maps, it affects the play less because it’s mostly combat and you can adjust. It’s hard to adjust and stop someone scoring (which is the main way to play) when they are glitching all over the place and most of the time you can’t stop them because of the glitching or even actually know where they are most of the time.

 

To be totally transparent here, personally, if HB didn’t have the dysnc and glitching and people actually wanted to win by playing it properly, I wouldn’t care if it popped all day or more than other maps. I used to love HB before, but in its current state, it ruins my favourite type of pvp in the game and I would rather put it down like a sick animal than see it suffer in such a disgraceful way.

 

This kind of stuff is why i keep saying you mislead people.

Desync happens in ALL warzones. You just notice it more in huttball cause there is a line and traps to cross.

 

Otherwise i totally agree. Desync sucks in all warzones. I wouldn't be happy if it was fixed in Huttball but not other maps. I would like to see it fixed altogether. But yeah... Bioware. :x

 

I guess that’s possible and I will add that to my data. ie, when HB pops, how many people do I see on the score board at the end of the match vs how many left before it. I’m pretty sure it only records people who stay or leave after the start, so I need to confirm that first.

 

It’s going to skew the results a little and only Bioware can really see what’s happening in those circumstances, but if it is happening as you propose, then that is something they can also fix.

Ie if you pop a HB, your next match should have less chance of popping a HB and the more it pops in a row, the more those odds reduce till they are 1% chance of getting another HB in a row,

 

I think I might actually get my wife involved too for a month. But I won’t group with her and we will queue separately. Every time she pops a HB, I will get her to leave before it starts and I will stay for all of mine (damn, guess I’m taking one for the team ). I don’t know what it will show or if it’s even relevant, but it will be good to compare between us.

 

See on that we can agree. I am all for variety and it does happen that people can have unlucky streaks.

But it isn't that easy. What will the game track? You personal last warzone or the last warzone the system popped? If it's the system one, it can happen that 2 other warzones happened close to the same time and you can get the same map again.

So, the system would have to take into account who is in the queue and decide the warzone from all those 16 people it's queueing. This means that it will have to be a mathematical statistic and if you were unlucky, again you can have the same warzone twice in a row, thought for the majority of people it wouldn't be the case.

It's complicated math and it might chug the system though. But it could potentially solve the issue. Though unlucky streaks could still be possible they would be less common.

Though we have to take into account leavers again. If the person left or didn't accept the system cannot take the replacements into account anymore cause the WZ was already chosen.

 

Also, don't worry about taking one for the team, i am tracking mine cause of you too and it's not something i enjoy doing. Makes it feel like work.

I hope for next report to have somewhere close to 1 thousand warzones so there are no more doubts. We'll see how it goes. It will take a while.

Edited January 19, 2020 by Nemmar

[KendraP]

That is not possible to know accurately. Are you gonna accept the queue directly every time? How do you know someone didn't decline the queue or someone joined and immediately left? What you are asking for is impossible to know from our end. Only one you can track is if it was underway already as in the fight started.

Also do you understand how difficult it is to track all that on top of the warzone pops? I will make this clear. Chances for human error: very high.

Whoever claims to have done it i will know they are not being honest. There is no way to know accurately so there really is no point trying to track what you can't track.

 

Which is why I'm saying: all the "data" people are quoting is literally meaningless to the point where it's stupid to try to make conclusions based off it. Unless you and anyone else here can control for these and other issues, the data is inconclusive and meaningless, irregardless of who collected it.