Be nice if a Dev from the PvP department would grow some balls and comment on this.....

What you are asking is too much for them. First of all they don't have any to begin with, and if they would start commenting (which would be like a miracle in this game) they would only be able to show us their incompetence.

Or they simply can't comment as there is no one in PVP dept. They've all been moved to Cartel market section .

you cant create 2 separate queue b/c this game does not have the population to sustain them. [...]

 

you need x-server queuing, which is a massive long-shot with this game.

I concur: I am all for seperate queing but we need cross server queues first.

Also, can I haz Arenas?

I really would love an pvp developer to comment on the plans (beyond the attempt to revive illum).

A number of people have suggested that the way forward is to some how group all "bads" together and group all "elites" together in some way or another, either by some kind of skill or gear match making system.

to me this is totally the wrong way to go since it would detract from the overall experience of playing WZ's. Each Warezone should have a similar mix of people with different abilities so that you don't have all the "elites" on one side and all the "bads" on the other. after all the "bads" need someone to learn off and the "elites" need someone to bring them down a peg or two now and again

It should be feasible to have one queue for both solo and ranked WZ's (not two separate like now) but make it optional as to what type of oposition you are willing to play against (i.e. 2 man groups?,4 man groups?,8 man groups)

This may sound like it would not work for ranked but I think it would as you could then have solo queuers (and there are a lot of them) who would have a go ranked and make up the numbers where a group of friends can't get a full ranked 8 man team. (obviously they are taking a chance with a pug but this is probably better than not being able to do rated at all)

On the flip side the solo queuers would also be able to choose NOT to play against groups, which may mean they will have to wait a little longer in the queue but will at least get a totally random selection of players with all skill and gear types which is how some people like to play WZ's.

I only brought up GG's quality to illustrate how ineffective a pug is against them, which reduces the fun factor for anyone who's not hardcore, and I'm sure that's not something BW wants.

 

In regards to it not resolving the quitters problem, let me elaborate. I believe it will mitigate the issue. Don't you breathe a sigh of relief when you solo queue into a group with a quality premade, because you're worried about a premade on the other side? But if there were no premades, the gear distribution in a pop would be far more even, an aspect that you could effectively rely on from pop to pop. A quitter, knowing that there is no premade and with a statistically even distribution of gear and skill, is more likely to stay. Only quitting on the odd pop.

 

Now I wasn't thinking there should be 2v2, 3v3 and 4v4 queues (if that's what you meant). You're either grouped or you're not, but you do bring up a point about the 3v3. I guess you'd have to test it to see how effective it was. But is very possible that we'll get a larger pool if solo queueing was separated. And again, cross-server queueing would fix the wait issue. I know that's been done in other games.

Rage quitters aren't quitting because there is a premade on the other side. I would hazard a guess that half of them aren't paying enough attention to even notice. All it takes is losing two turrets or giving up a door early or one bad move by someone to get them out. Matchmaking will only help because the game should be more even. People will still drop when one of the players makes a mistake. There is no guarantee of even games by having a solo only queue. You could still very easily run up against 8 far more geared players and get destroyed. All you do is take away the ability of any one person to ensure their team will be on the right side of the gap.

As to team makeups, I was referring to putting teams together with different group sizes. If a group of 3 queues, they will have a significantly longer wait time because it will require another group of 3 and a group of 2 to queue in order for them to get matched up. I don't think population will be high enough to guarantee you will have another 3-man available if you happen to have 2 friends on to play.

Not to mention, you are basically punishing any more casual players who want to group with friends by sticking them in a group only queue that will have significantly more high level players in it. As long as BW manages to make a decent matchmaking system, it should resolve the issue as low end PUGs will only see low end premades.

A number of people have suggested that the way forward is to some how group all "bads" together and group all "elites" together in some way or another, either by some kind of skill or gear match making system.

 

to me this is totally the wrong way to go since it would detract from the overall experience of playing WZ's. Each Warezone should have a similar mix of people with different abilities so that you don't have all the "elites" on one side and all the "bads" on the other. after all the "bads" need someone to learn off and the "elites" need someone to bring them down a peg or two now and again

 

It should be feasible to have one queue for both solo and ranked WZ's (not two separate like now) but make it optional as to what type of oposition you are willing to play against (i.e. 2 man groups?,4 man groups?,8 man groups)

This may sound like it would not work for ranked but I think it would as you could then have solo queuers (and there are a lot of them) who would have a go ranked and make up the numbers where a group of friends can't get a full ranked 8 man team. (obviously they are taking a chance with a pug but this is probably better than not being able to do rated at all)

 

On the flip side the solo queuers would also be able to choose NOT to play against groups, which may mean they will have to wait a little longer in the queue but will at least get a totally random selection of players with all skill and gear types which is how some people like to play WZ's.

Matchmaking wouldn't necessarily keep bad players from ever seeing good players, it will just make the teams even. So if I have a rating of say 50 and queue with someone who has a rating of 100, we would see team player averages around 75.

Just make separate Q for premade teams and PUG teams.

Premades get thier challange in fighting other premades and PUGs get thier fun of the game.

Everyone would be happy.

Just make separate Q for premade teams and PUG teams.

 

Premades get thier challange in fighting other premades and PUGs get thier fun of the game.

 

Everyone would be happy.

Premades will not happy, cuz they dont wanna challenge but wanna fun and easy win

I think, premade queue will be dead in next week after begins.

Premades will not happy, cuz they dont wanna challenge but wanna fun and easy win

 

I think, premade queue will be dead in next week after begins.

/agree

Premades should stay in ranked PVP. The unbalance you face as a PUG going head to head vs a handpicked premade team with uber heals and tanks is GIGANTIC, and you can tell right from first minute of the WZ that there is ZERO chance of winning.

Thats why ppl quit WZs

What you mean by 'fun in the game' ?

You mean total random haos and havoc of stupidity covered by ignorance over objectives, best seen in 10-49 brackets?

last night Civil war, I'm running to help 2 defenders who are fighting with 4 enemy players, they didn't call incs, I just noticed and called '4 inc grass'

They died killing one of four. I interrupted cap, killed 2 of 3 left, had a little dance with last one, but I lost (comon, no one is immortal), looked on map, and to my suprize, 2 defenders who died about 35 seconds earlier, went mid, and no one from mid moved to help defend, and all I heard was 'sorry, I thought u can handle that, so we moved from boring defence'.. really?

/agree

 

Premades should stay in ranked PVP. The unbalance you face as a PUG going head to head vs a handpicked premade team with uber heals and tanks is GIGANTIC, and you can tell right from first minute of the WZ that there is ZERO chance of winning.

 

Thats why ppl quit WZs

Giving up right at the start when they face a good team comp...the pug mentality.

It always amazes me the number of people that have a boatload of excuses as to why they can't do rateds (I work irregular hours is a fav) and also have tons of reasons why they should be in a premade in a pug system. (What? I can't play with my friends? ) they cry plaintively.

There is no mystery here. Everyone knows what happens when premades face pugs. Oh sure, that is that "one time" exception to the rule, but the vast majority of results are predictable.

But the fun of games is uncertainty of outcome (with no serious consequence). It behooves any games maker to set up the rule set to foster equal competition.

What you mean by 'fun in the game' ?

Fun of the game is

1. Always new content = everytime random ppl on wz

2. Equal (+-) chances to win

When you play in solo pug vs solo pug, its always fun cuz you dunno what they can make and which tactics they can choose.

When you play in solo vs ranked premade, its absolutely no new content for you and absolutely no equal chances to win, and its not "fair game" for solo puggers.

Fun of the game is

 

1. Always new content = everytime random ppl on wz

2. Equal (+-) chances to win

 

When you play in solo pug vs solo pug, its always fun cuz you dunno what they can make and which tactics they can choose.

When you play in solo vs ranked premade, its absolutely no new content for you and absolutely no equal chances to win, and its not "fair game" for solo puggers.

Well spoken

Premade runners just want easy fights with ZERO challange and minimal tactical thinking.

Matchmaking wouldn't necessarily keep bad players from ever seeing good players, it will just make the teams even. So if I have a rating of say 50 and queue with someone who has a rating of 100, we would see team player averages around 75.

I can see what you mean but I think the fact that you would be normalising the teams would detract from the warezones simply because every match would be with virtually equal team which may get boring after a while.

i don't think most people would mind coming up against a team that was totally better geared/skilled (such as a ranked team) than the team they are in, i think for most people the issue is that it can happen 3,4,5 warezones in a row which is then very annoying.

If you are queuing solo and came up against a team that had fully geared and skilled people in it but knew that they had been thrown together randomly then its just "hey thats the luck of the draw" and you just hope that the next random roll of the dice puts you in a similar group.

Part of the challenge of solo warezones is being in an inferior (geared) group but still coming out on top because you have outplayed the oposition. One of the problems with the current system is that you can be constantly in the inferior group because the oposition are all groups and not totally randomly selected.

Premades will not happy, cuz they dont wanna challenge but wanna fun and easy win

 

I think, premade queue will be dead in next week after begins.

Agreed 100%.

Hey let's punish people that want to play with their friends in on a multiplayer game? Am I missing something?

Lol but no really.. I do see the point of the seperate que idea. I would be interested to see how that would unfold though.

Premades will not happy, cuz they dont wanna challenge but wanna fun and easy win

 

I think, premade queue will be dead in next week after begins.

Hooray for ignoring any logical argument against separating the queues! There is no way that the handful of people with the mentality you described would solo queue at the same time to get put together in the same match....

What I am taking away from your post is this:

Other team played cooperatively and objectively--->Make them play somewhere else so I can mindlessly deathmatch undergeared and inexperienced players instead

If you feel my assumption is incorrect, then I suggest posting a logical reason for separating the queues. Not "ZOMG, premades just want it easy".

I can see what you mean but I think the fact that you would be normalising the teams would detract from the warezones simply because every match would be with virtually equal team which may get boring after a while.

 

i don't think most people would mind coming up against a team that was totally better geared/skilled (such as a ranked team) than the team they are in, i think for most people the issue is that it can happen 3,4,5 warezones in a row which is then very annoying.

If you are queuing solo and came up against a team that had fully geared and skilled people in it but knew that they had been thrown together randomly then its just "hey thats the luck of the draw" and you just hope that the next random roll of the dice puts you in a similar group.

Part of the challenge of solo warezones is being in an inferior (geared) group but still coming out on top because you have outplayed the oposition. One of the problems with the current system is that you can be constantly in the inferior group because the oposition are all groups and not totally randomly selected.

The point you made in this post is the exact reason why separating queues will not have an impact on making games more fair. Like you said, it will eliminate one person from always being on a superior team by taking away their opportunity to group, but the teams still won't be fair. And how would having even teams make games less exciting? I don't want to play 3-capping snoozefests every match. I like to win, but I like to work for my wins not have them handed to me. That being said, I also don't want to wait 6 hours for my queues to pop.

Thus matchmaking>queue separating. After all, do you really care that the other team is grouped? No, the complaints come from them beating people soundly which won't be the case if you aren't on their level or if your teammates are of equal skill to them.

Hooray for ignoring any logical argument against separating the queues! There is no way that the handful of people with the mentality you described would solo queue at the same time to get put together in the same match....

 

What I am taking away from your post is this:

Other team played cooperatively and objectively--->Make them play somewhere else so I can mindlessly deathmatch undergeared and inexperienced players instead

 

If you feel my assumption is incorrect, then I suggest posting a logical reason for separating the queues. Not "ZOMG, premades just want it easy".

Honestly I could care less about perfect group make up, voice coms and gear. I group with someone I know has a head on their shoulders and trust them to call incs, pass the ball, run ahead to get a pass, not over commit, not break cc, marks healers, attacks marked healers, does not go for a 3 cap when we don't need one etc....

so the whinners on this thread basically want people to NOT play with thier friends in a star wars large scale MMO

 

No, nobody said that, but thanks for the strawmen.

People simply should have a choice on how to play and every way should have a reasonable chance to be successful, rewarding and fun.

I.e. we need options for large (4+) premades, small premades and pugs who don`t want to /can`t always be in premades. E.g. WZ (ranked/unranked), arenas, open world pvp.

I admit, however, that this all requires a large pvp population and cross server pvp.

No, nobody said that, but thanks for the strawmen.

 

People simply should have a choice on how to play and every way should have a reasonable chance to be successful, rewarding and fun.

 

I.e. we need options for large (4+) premades, small premades and pugs who don`t want to /can`t always be in premades. E.g. WZ (ranked/unranked), arenas, open world pvp.

 

I admit, however, that this all requires a large pvp population and cross server pvp.

No. Not in "competition". In the PVE portion of the game, absolutely. But the second players start competing against other players, the idea that everyone has an equal "right to win" goes out the window. Bioware is not the opposition at that point, the other players are, and to say everyone has a right to win and have fun, is the same as saying other players have a responsibility to let you win, and make sure you have fun. But nobody says that, because they know it would sound ridiculous and entitled, so instead they say "Bioware, tell the people who won't let me win, that they are not allowed to play against me."

"Well then the game is just going to lose subs".... I've said it before, I'll say it again. If the vast majority of the PvP population is "casuals", then chances are they aren't running into premades as often as they think. And if the casuals only make up the fringe, well better to lose them, than the hardcore PvPers who play 23.5 hours a day.

This is mostly directed at the thread, not just the guy I quoted...

funny how premades always tell soloers that they need a challenge lol

i just find no matter what type you play it should be a challenge.

Pugs shouldn't have to face organized groups. It's like beating up an angry puppy. Why aren't all these amazing premades facing each other, anyways?

Because they don't really want to.

Imagine if this game had cross-server pvp and an actual ELO type matchmaking system. Why do I always feel like I'm playing a game that will do nothing to really help it's players enjoy the game?