Deserter Lockout in 6.1.4

[TrixxieTriss]

I was away from SWTTOR for about a year and I just came back about the middle part of November. I spent the first few weeks gearing back up before stepping back into WZs. It literally took me 2 weeks with trying WZs at different times to finally get a win to KO the daily.

 

If it takes a week(s), or even multiple days, to finish a daily then there is something seriously wrong with the system in use.

 

When you can no longer reliably and regularly finish a daily in a day, it’s stops becoming a daily. At what point do we stop calling the “pvp missions” daily missions?

Edited December 23, 2020 by TrixxieTriss

[DavidAtkinson]

When you can no longer reliably and regularly finish a daily in a day, it’s stops becoming a daily. At what point do we stop calling the “pvp missions” daily missions?

 

This was a very stupid decision by them.. I can't even imagine what they thought when they came up with it. For ranked it would make sense, but for unranked ? I freakin' hate Hutball and it pops all the time. I would leave.. but that 15 minute timer is killing me.

 

Also, not to mention the slower pop times this system has created. It' needs a redesign or rethinking.

[Alericus]

Agreed, all Im seeing since they introduced this is a marked increase in win trade squads, and players massively undergeared at level 75. Most teams Ive had since this changed always has 1-3 players geared at lvl 280 or under. Its very obvious to see them ignore objectives or in the case of hutball they just duel and blatantly ignore the ball carrier.

 

Basically one or another players want their easy points. Im also seeing a lot of old hacks being used..usually by the same players over and over again. BW isnt doing a very good job of policing their game.

 

This change has allowed win traders to flourish, matches arent getting better they are getting worse.

[Raazmir]

This was a very stupid decision by them.. I can't even imagine what they thought when they came up with it. For ranked it would make sense, but for unranked ? I freakin' hate Hutball and it pops all the time. I would leave.. but that 15 minute timer is killing me.

 

Also, not to mention the slower pop times this system has created. It' needs a redesign or rethinking.

 

 

Literally every decision made is made to prop up a pvp ranked system that is a broken bad format that will never work.

 

you think there'd be a problem with bouncing out of ranked games if you had to form a team to even join them? Nope, its a problem because its solo ranked and you don't even have to be civil enough to 3 other people to group with them. Would the leaving be a problem in solo ranked if it was an 8v8 map and people dropping in wouldn't drop in after the team had been stomped once and given up due to being outnumbered? Nope, 6 and 7 v 8's still manage to squeeze out wins through superior play in objective based 8v8. til solo ranked arena format is removed as the end game pvp choice rather than broad changes that **** up other aspects of the game, pvp will remain a *****how.

[TrixxieTriss]

This was a very stupid decision by them.. I can't even imagine what they thought when they came up with it. For ranked it would make sense, but for unranked ? I freakin' hate Hutball and it pops all the time. I would leave.. but that 15 minute timer is killing me.

 

Also, not to mention the slower pop times this system has created. It' needs a redesign or rethinking.

 

I’m playing pvp less. I know other people are playing pvp less. I would love to see Biowares data to see just how many people are playing less pvp than before.

[Sappharan]

I’m playing pvp less. I know other people are playing pvp less. I would love to see Biowares data to see just how many people are playing less pvp than before.

 

In the past couple of days, I have not even logged on. It is because I am disgusted with the PvP situation right now.

[Jarbarian]

I'm OK with this *IF* the vote kick is removed. Just because ranked can queue up with RANDOM players, you cannot vote kick them because they're not "as good as you."

 

Again, this kind of socialism will kill PVP entirely.

[TrixxieTriss]

I'm OK with this *IF* the vote kick is removed. Just because ranked can queue up with RANDOM players, you cannot vote kick them because they're not "as good as you."

 

Again, this kind of socialism will kill PVP entirely.

 

Vote kick has already been removed.

[Raazmir]

I'm OK with this *IF* the vote kick is removed. Just because ranked can queue up with RANDOM players, you cannot vote kick them because they're not "as good as you."

 

Again, this kind of socialism will kill PVP entirely.

 

Bro socialism would mean the people actually playing have control of the format.

[Sappharan]

I’m playing pvp less. I know other people are playing pvp less. I would love to see Biowares data to see just how many people are playing less pvp than before.

 

Tonight I noticed that in every warzone, bar none, at least 1 person deserted. The deserter debuff has had ZERO impact on keeping people in warzones in my experience. Kinda wondering why I bothered trying again.

[DariusCalera]

Tonight I noticed that in every warzone, bar none, at least 1 person deserted. The deserter debuff has had ZERO impact on keeping people in warzones in my experience. Kinda wondering why I bothered trying again.

 

To be honest, with the state of PvP right now, I'm more than willing to take a 15 min lock out than deal with the level of derp that I'm seeing.

[TrixxieTriss]

Maybe BioWare could do a player survey when you login to ask about the pvp deserter lockout and also the win only requirements for the whole pvp eco system.

 

I’d certainly welcome ChrisS coming back to this thread or a new one to discuss alternatives or to present some data to show results and impact of the changes to show they are working as they envisaged. If they aren’t working, then they should be reverted.

[_Miriya_]

Still no clue who had the ide aof doing this for regs.

 

Who cares if someone who doesn't want to be in the match leaves a group of already 8 people and someone refills it soon?

 

This situation doesn't affect almost in any aspect a match of 8v8. Is not a 4vs4. Keep the lockout for ranked, if you like it so much. In regs? Doesn't make sense.

 

It only punishes players who has Disconnects and BioWare Bugs inside the wzs :/

[GojuSuzi]

Who cares if someone who doesn't want to be in the match leaves a group of already 8 people and someone refills it soon?

 

Yesterday, I was in one where three people dropped the second we didn't get both pylons. The rest of the match was spent with someone joining, seeing we were behind (from fighting 8:5), and dropping without leaving the spawn point, repeat ad nauseum. We lost, shockingly.

 

The trouble is, the deserter lockout is often less time than would be spent slogging through a match when outnumbered and behind. If we got three people who stuck, we might have been able to pull it back, but having those three spots locked out by the rotating selection of join-quitters prevented that chance.

 

Making it more time-effective to quit and wait out the penalty than to try and help the team you got dumped into is a problem. Combine that with the fact that losses don't count for quests/conquest/whatever, and people will leave more often than not when reinforcing.

 

So yes, people care. The people who have put time into a WZ only to have their efforts undermined by some child throwing a tantrum and drop because they died when fighting away from the group and objectives (happens regularly), and then reinforcers opting to drop as a time saver, so suddenly you lose outnumbered and have to start again because that whole battle doesn't count...those people care that their time was wasted and disrespected.

 

Having quests and whatnot count like GSF (losses=1,wins=2) rather than losses being worthless would help make droppers not such a hindrance and disincentivise dropping anything less than a guaranteed win. But there does still need to be some penalty even if that were fixed, because yes, your drop does hurt your team and disrespect their time/effort regardless of whether or not someone replaces you. Yeah, sucks if it's outwith your control, but that's why a sliding scale is better so those one time scream-from-the-kids-room drops aren't treated the same as the repeated easy-wins-only drops.

[Prapcaster]

I would be fine with a deserter lockout if we didn't get 5 huttballs in a row

[AlrikFassbauer]

The people who have put time into a WZ only to have their efforts undermined by some child throwing a tantrum and drop because they died when fighting away from the group and objectives (happens regularly), and then reinforcers opting to drop as a time saver, so suddenly you lose outnumbered and have to start again because that whole battle doesn't count...those people care that their time was wasted and disrespected.

 

My guess is rthat the problem will only go away if the psychology behind this decision to drop so fast has been found out, analysed, and fought against.

 

I always thought that exactly this behaviour is likely to be the result of the typical PvP way of teaching : Destroying players and expect them to learn from the 3 seconds in which they have been destroyed.

 

Because the typical PvP way of teaching is against ALL scientifically proven ways of properly teach people something, this is imho the expected result. Peoplre just don't learn by just getting destroyed but withheld ANY possible clue to do it better.

 

The typical PvP way of teaching consists of destroying and EXPECTING to learn from no clues.

 

And I do *not* mean those players who really go into efforts to actually TEACH Newbies something - what I mean instead ois the "typical" , elitist PvP player who doesn't have even the smallest clue about scientific methods of teaching (called Pedagogy).

[Crazzy_Uno]

as im not sure where else to put this.. i see an update swtor wants to do with the ban policy for pvp.. just wanted to note that this change can cause a few issues with the ranked pvp with the vote kick as there are competitive players that will kick just because you arent at "their level and dont want you in their team" so that gives them the ability to kick you out for an entire season just because.. even if youve done nothing wrong... the rest with people leaving matches i can agree with.. the vote to kick is my only issue..

[TrixxieTriss]

as im not sure where else to put this.. i see an update swtor wants to do with the ban policy for pvp.. just wanted to note that this change can cause a few issues with the ranked pvp with the vote kick as there are competitive players that will kick just because you arent at "their level and dont want you in their team" so that gives them the ability to kick you out for an entire season just because.. even if youve done nothing wrong... the rest with people leaving matches i can agree with.. the vote to kick is my only issue..

 

There is no vote kick option anymore in ranked, it has been removed for a few months now and vote kick rarely if ever works in regs.

[brnji]

"Ranked:

In Ranked modes (both solo and group) there are a few changes. First, as previously discussed, vote kick has been removed in these modes. Next, the Deserter lockout timer has been increased to 20 minutes for declining a match or leaving early - the first time. Over time, if a player continues to decline or leave matches that lockout timer will increase until they hit the maximum threshold. If a player hits the max once, all declines or leaves for the rest of the week in ranked modes will use the maximum lockout timer."

 

So I welcome this change. But you need to add a warning on Log out button, when the "Building Match" is active. I've logged out during this by mistake. And I just generally think this is way more user friendly to new/old players.

[Stellarcrusade]

Bro socialism would mean the people actually playing have control of the format.

 

No, socialism means the overlords control everything, and the people suffer. Maybe that is the point, the more restrictive and controlling of behavior and choice over players 100% of the time reduces fun. It's really not hard to predict what has happened to participation and why.

[Stellarcrusade]

Tonight I noticed that in every warzone, bar none, at least 1 person deserted. The deserter debuff has had ZERO impact on keeping people in warzones in my experience. Kinda wondering why I bothered trying again.

 

You are correct. Until they offer map choice, I'll take a deserter flag any day of the week, without hesitation to leave a map I hate. People are here to play a game, do things they like, and should NEVER do things they hate. Heck, even if penalty for leaving war early was perma-ban, I'd take it without even a second thought.

[Stellarcrusade]

Maybe BioWare could do a player survey when you login to ask about the pvp deserter lockout and also the win only requirements for the whole pvp eco system.

 

I’d certainly welcome ChrisS coming back to this thread or a new one to discuss alternatives or to present some data to show results and impact of the changes to show they are working as they envisaged. If they aren’t working, then they should be reverted.

To be fair Trixx, if they cared what people wanted none of this would be in the game right now. People want more freedom, more choice, not heavy handed penalties to try to force us to do things we hate. Its a game, supposed to be fun.

[SVTCarnage]

Well thanks a lot ChrisSchmidt, we are really glad to have ya

[Decalin]

Just to throw in that I have stopped playing ground PvP altogether at this point, largely due to the removal of points for a loss.

 

I could deal with all the unbalance, premade's in reg's, numbers farmers, ignoring objectives, etc, etc, etc. when I would at least get a point for the loss.

 

Its high time that BW actually listen to what the players are telling them in regards to PvP before it dies completely IMO.

[EllieAnne]

Its high time that BW actually listen to what the players are telling them in regards to PvP before it dies completely IMO.

 

Apparently they are listening, but whether that translates into action ... history says no.