Matchmaking is getting worse.

[Bluefordsto]

Nothing I love more than starting a voidstar 6 on 3 as a defender, getting blown out through the three doors in 4 minutes, then watching people trickle in for an assured loss. Premades are not the problem. It's the algorithm.

[RedDeadFord]

It's not by accident. It's why they shift all concerns about pvp to the forums. They're focused on incremental story content. What was the last pvp update you remember? Odessen Proving Grounds. Pvp is an afterthought.

[Enticy]

Whatever backfill system BW has in place for PvP is utterly broken. I’ve queued into matches only to literally join at the ‘defeat’ screen. I once played a 3v8 Gree Hypergate, with four people joining thirty seconds before the match ended. 7v8 is doable. 6v8 sucks, but it can be pulled off with the right team comp. But 5v8, caused by a 3-man premade leaving shortly after the match starts and not being replaced until thirty seconds before the match ends? There is absolutely no reason for that to happen.

 

GSF has similar issues sometimes, but at least there’s more of an effort to balance the team numbers. Yes, I recognize that more people are playing GSF than PvP, therefore there are more players to pull from the queue. But at least GSF will end a match early if there is a deficit of three people or more between the two teams. Ground PvP just bends you over and takes you for the ride.

[KumbayaGOD]

Nothing I love more than starting a voidstar 6 on 3 as a defender, getting blown out through the three doors in 4 minutes, then watching people trickle in for an assured loss. Premades are not the problem. It's the algorithm.

 

as far as i know if you are geared to max say 326 , you are probably in high chance to be teamed with lower rated gear player like 316 or 320

i think the game try to average the rating for both team

[sGroggy]

Yesterday, while plenty of PvP was going on:

 

1st WZ: Arena. I simply refuse to play this game mode. So I leave immediately. 15 min lockout.

2nd WZ: Backfill to an assured loss.

3rd WZ: Backfill to an assured loss.

4th WZ: Arena. Again 15 min lockout.

 

I now wasted a good amount of time without being able to actually play an objective based WZ from start to finish.

 

Infuriating.

[ZUHFB]

Yesterday, while plenty of PvP was going on:

 

1st WZ: Arena. I simply refuse to play this game mode. So I leave immediately. 15 min lockout.

2nd WZ: Backfill to an assured loss.

3rd WZ: Backfill to an assured loss.

4th WZ: Arena. Again 15 min lockout.

 

I now wasted a good amount of time without being able to actually play an objective based WZ from start to finish.

 

Infuriating.

 

Let me get this straight: "Nice I have 15min lockouty such a BS, they should remove that" BUT then you get backilled into a lost game BECAUSE someone left, so they now have a lockout. So which one is it? Lockouts bad -> get more backfills into lost games. Lockouts good -> be punished for leaving a lost game?

 

Quite hyprocritical, you never get backfilled into winning teams because who would leave a winning team? But you also can't just remove backfills because that just makes it unfair. How about providing a VIABLE solution to this problem instead?

[sGroggy]

Let me get this straight: "Nice I have 15min lockouty such a BS, they should remove that" BUT then you get backilled into a lost game BECAUSE someone left, so they now have a lockout. So which one is it? Lockouts bad -> get more backfills into lost games. Lockouts good -> be punished for leaving a lost game?

 

Quite hyprocritical, you never get backfilled into winning teams because who would leave a winning team? But you also can't just remove backfills because that just makes it unfair. How about providing a VIABLE solution to this problem instead?

 

I'm sharing something I experienced, related to the topic being discussed. That doesn't mean I need to come up with a solution for it.

 

Anyway, I can see why you think I'm being a hypocrit. However: for me there's a difference between leaving before the match even begins - which is what I'm doing - and during the match.

 

That being said, on first thought, personally I would prefer:

• No lockouts at all, as it was in the past.
  
• With losses also counting towards progress (which will be the case with next update if I'm not mistaken), people will be less inclined to leave a losing match.
  
• Allow players to opt in/out for objective based pvp or arena.
  

 

You may disagree, and I'm sure this also would have its downsides, but for me personally at least, this would be less frustrating than what we have currently.

Edited April 21, 2022 by sGroggy

[TmoneyTime]

There should be a lockout for leaving. Causes way too many issues.

Also do you have any proof of the above. I think this is exaggerated. Unless your playing on SS then that's your own fault for not being on SF

Edited April 21, 2022 by TmoneyTime

[waisting]

I'm sharing something I experienced, related to the topic being discussed. That doesn't mean I need to come up with a solution for it.

 

Anyway, I can see why you think I'm being a hypocrit. However: for me there's a difference between leaving before the match even begins - which is what I'm doing - and during the match.

 

That being said, on first thought, personally I would prefer:

• No lockouts at all, as it was in the past.
  
• With losses also counting towards progress (which will be the case with next update if I'm not mistaken), people will be less inclined to leave a losing match.
  
• Allow players to opt in/out for objective based pvp or arena.
  

 

You may disagree, and I'm sure this also would have its downsides, but for me personally at least, this would be less frustrating than what we have currently.

There's not really any difference if you leave an arena before it starts or not. It will almost always just start the match 3v4 with your former team being at a disadvantage. I see it all the time when I am queueing lows.

 

I would be OK with them letting players entirely opt out of 4v4 if they accept they might face a 30 minute queue or worse during slow times of the day. But I would not be happy if they removed the lockout, even though I absolutely hate Hypergate and would leave every time if not for the lockout.

[Enticy]

People keep saying that the lockout is great and necessary. Except it’s literally pointless. The lockout was instituted to deter players from leaving matches early by punishing them. But people are still leaving matches early. And if less of them are doing it than before the lockout, I sure didn’t notice a change.

 

No one cares about not being to queue for fifteen minutes. Fifteen minutes is a flashpoint, two or three heroics, or just spending some time playing around on the GTN. The only thing the lockout does is unnecessarily punish people who get disconnected from Warzones because of a glitch or a lost internet connection.

[snave]

Lockouts and win requirements exist to encourage players to stay in games, and to actually try to win.

 

Since lockouts and win requirement has been introduced, in my experience, there has been a large up tick in objective gameplay. I'm not saying damage farmers don't exist, or that the tactics used on the objectives themselves are necessarily good, but I am saying more players are attempting to play the map rather than just play their class.

 

Backfill is a problem, especially when you join something like a voidstar with 14 minutes left in the game and virtually zero chance of winning. Bioware could add in a "do not join backfill games" option to the queue similarly to what they have for PvE, they've talked about enabling a map toggle for players for literally years, so maybe that will materialise with their "PvP Revamp" they're planning for this year.

 

I would say that until we are able to select maps, and to not join backfill games, the lockout timer should probably be reduced to 5-10 minutes in regs. Keeping it as is for ranked is a good idea, seeing as one of the major problems ranked used to face was players leaving games at the start as a way to throw the match.

 

In regard to matchmaking, I'm not certain how it works at the moment, but premades should always be prioritised to fight against another premade. If there are, for example, two premades currently playing then the game, with one team in a match and the other in the queue, the game should be able to recognise this and wait for the game to be over before matching them vs each other. This would result in longer queues if there are only 2 groups in the system, but obviously you can just drop the group if you're looking for a faster queue.

 

Premades are not, never have been, never will be, the problem with regs. PvP in this game was significantly better back when multiple guilds ran multiple premades most days. The community was also significantly better back then, probably because it actually existed.

 

None of these changes are likely to happen any time soon, if at all. In all honesty I'm dreading the upcoming PvP revamp because bioware haven't produced any good PvP maps or changes, since like AHG or NC I forget which one was the latter. If 7.0 is any indication of the talent left to produce content, they're better off not changing anything rather than making it significantly worse than it already is.

[varietasplus]

Lockout should not apply to players leaving 30+ sec before warzone/arena starts.

Everyone should be able to deselect warzones/arenas they do not wish to play.

Backfilled player should be granted a win automatically, regardless of the outcome (compensation).

Damage/healing done in a warzones should not be displayed at all.

I would really like to see a/the complex metric on each players' matchmaking rating.

 

Daily/Weekly progression should not be based on wins, an objective counter should be introduced instead. You can fill that meter in every warzones regardless of the outcome, hence your efforts will not be in vain. No more carrying and afking. Objective points granted for damage output should be inferior to achieving direct objective goals.

 

My main problem is that it is very difficult to turn the tides of war. Most of the times, you can foretell the outcome after 30 seconds. NC is the worst from this perspective. Also, HB with untargetable ("teleporting") operatives from top platform to goal line (dsync issues) is a game breaker. AH is too biased towards damage output.

 

On Darth Malgus premades always face another premade in warzones which is a great (guild prestige competition). Problem is, pug skill/intellectual level is all time low, hence it always ends up a 4-men carry or from a different perspective, 4 vs 4. Most of the times it is 2×4 premade vs 4-men premade with pugs, hence latter is in a helpless position.

Edited April 22, 2022 by varietasplus