I started playing this game before Mekab came out. Left and come back several times. Just come back from a year or so break and Don't really understand the PVP change thinking. I was blown away when the second people think they are going to lose they throw the match. I mean blatantly and obviously, they throw the match.

What was the thinking that only rewarding winning was a good idea in unranked? Unranked is as much about the luck of who you get teamed up with as it is skill, maybe more. I play all aspects of this game ( prefer solo ) and just don't understand how this change was even considered a good idea. How could you not see this disaster coming? You could play unranked for a week or more with bad rng and for all your hours played get NOTHING.

I really hope this change gets reverted quickly. I wish I knew the words to express my disappointment with pvp and this game on my return. But I will continue to hope that just maybe they will listen and fix this mess that is pvp.

Nope. It’s not going to change anytime soon. To answer your question about what BW was thinking, surprise, it’s partially the PVP community’s doing. So many people complained about quitters and lazy people who would just hide or stay in stealth and get carried for nothing. If you tried to kick them, they would enter combat to clear the votes, but wouldn’t actually contribute anything meaningful.

So, the solution was to implement a system where only winning grants rewards. The idea was that if you had to win, you would put in more effort and try to win. It obviously didn’t address the underlying problems, but instead made it almost punitive to new players. Losing because you don’t know what you’re doing? *cue famous Willy Wonka quote*

Nope. It’s not going to change anytime soon. To answer your question about what BW was thinking, surprise, it’s partially the PVP community’s doing. So many people complained about quitters and lazy people who would just hide or stay in stealth and get carried for nothing. If you tried to kick them, they would enter combat to clear the votes, but wouldn’t actually contribute anything meaningful.

 

So, the solution was to implement a system where only winning grants rewards. The idea was that if you had to win, you would put in more effort and try to win. It obviously didn’t address the underlying problems, but instead made it almost punitive to new players. Losing because you don’t know what you’re doing? *cue famous Willy Wonka quote*

If anything, more people are committing match-seppuku and giving up prematurely now than there were before the supposedly "Greater incentive to win" was put in place.

If anything, more people are committing match-seppuku and giving up prematurely now than there were before the supposedly "Greater incentive to win" was put in place.

I've had the opposite experience.

I've had more Huttball matches end with a 1 point difference, more node capture maps end with a smaller gap in points between the 2 teams etc etc..

1 team steam rolling another and shutting them down to win still happens on occasion but not nearly as frequently as it used to be.

Overall, I find there are more players putting forth good effort to try and win and learn to play as a team.

The changes have been a good thing as far as i can tell.

Nope. It’s not going to change anytime soon. To answer your question about what BW was thinking, surprise, it’s partially the PVP community’s doing. So many people complained about quitters and lazy people who would just hide or stay in stealth and get carried for nothing. If you tried to kick them, they would enter combat to clear the votes, but wouldn’t actually contribute anything meaningful.

 

So, the solution was to implement a system where only winning grants rewards. The idea was that if you had to win, you would put in more effort and try to win. It obviously didn’t address the underlying problems, but instead made it almost punitive to new players. Losing because you don’t know what you’re doing? *cue famous Willy Wonka quote*

I still have hope they will revert it but sometimes it sucks being an optimist.

The irony is I've seen more people hide in the corner while loudly complaining how bad the team is and harassing people since the changes. There was one jerk the other night who actually did hit something to clear the kicks... in unranked!

It's becoming almost unbearable

And once it "looks like" the team is going to lose you see more people go off and try to get the 1v1's on instead and then there's my dumbself getting pummeled with no support while still trying to win.

I’ve seen people do both. Give up and try harder (the second is rarer).

Whole teams give up so that it’s over faster because you can’t leave bad teams or severely unbalanced games without incurring a lock out. That depends on the map of course (doesn’t work in Hutt Ball). In some people’s minds I guess they balance out the 15 min lockout to throwing the match to shorten it. It’s why more people probably leave Hutt ball or maps that play out the time regardless of the other team giving up.

Other teams trying hard is like winning the lotto for me because most of the teams I get aren’t up to snuff compared to the opposition.

I would love to know how the match making system is “supposed to work in regs”. I’d even start another account to test from scratch (clean slate) if Bioware would enlighten us a little bit more on the parameters.

I’m still of the opinion that Bioware should return to the win : loss points system. But increase the old ratio from 2:1 to 4:1 to incentivise winning over loss trading to complete missions.

I’ve seen people do both. Give up and try harder (the second is rarer).

 

Whole teams give up so that it’s over faster because you can’t leave bad teams or severely unbalanced games without incurring a lock out. That depends on the map of course (doesn’t work in Hutt Ball). In some people’s minds I guess they balance out the 15 min lockout to throwing the match to shorten it. It’s why more people probably leave Hutt ball or maps that play out the time regardless of the other team giving up.

 

Other teams trying hard is like winning the lotto for me because most of the teams I get aren’t up to snuff compared to the opposition.

 

I would love to know how the match making system is “supposed to work in regs”. I’d even start another account to test from scratch (clean slate) if Bioware would enlighten us a little bit more on the parameters.

 

I’m still of the opinion that Bioware should return to the win : loss points system. But increase the old ratio from 2:1 to 4:1 to incentivise winning over loss trading to complete missions.

Most of the people who currently try harder when at a disadvantage are the type who were motivated to win before losing yielded zero points towards mission completion. Maybe a few players who were on the fence about being invested in winning swayed that direction as well, but by a few, I mean you can probably count them on one hand.

Most of the people who currently try harder when at a disadvantage are the type who were motivated to win before losing yielded zero points towards mission completion. Maybe a few players who were on the fence about being invested in winning swayed that direction as well, but by a few, I mean you can probably count them on one hand.

I play to win, not in a dirty way but I mean /shrug

I might not be the best but my goal is to win so when everyone else is circle*cough*ing around getting kb's i'll still try to run that stupid huttball lol

That being said i have not managed once, well ok maybe one time because miracles happen, to get 10 wins on a single character in a weeks time and it stinks.

I started playing this game before Mekab came out. Left and come back several times. Just come back from a year or so break and Don't really understand the PVP change thinking. I was blown away when the second people think they are going to lose they throw the match. I mean blatantly and obviously, they throw the match.

 

What was the thinking that only rewarding winning was a good idea in unranked? Unranked is as much about the luck of who you get teamed up with as it is skill, maybe more. I play all aspects of this game ( prefer solo ) and just don't understand how this change was even considered a good idea. How could you not see this disaster coming? You could play unranked for a week or more with bad rng and for all your hours played get NOTHING.

 

I really hope this change gets reverted quickly. I wish I knew the words to express my disappointment with pvp and this game on my return. But I will continue to hope that just maybe they will listen and fix this mess that is pvp.

People whined and now we have a deserter debuff and wins only count. Given that we cannot adjust the level of difficulty (solo queue versus premade, numbers farmers, class stacking, terrible matchmaking and on and on) I think it is deplorable that we must endure this awful state of PvP.

I hope the fools who asked for and defended an "Only reward winning" change see the massive stupidity of that idea by now.

in any game, participation not being rewarded = people stop bothering. its not difficult to understand.

Wins count double, but participation must be rewarded. really simple, not so hard to figure out my dudes.

I hope the fools who asked for and defended an "Only reward winning" change see the massive stupidity of that idea by now.

 

in any game, participation not being rewarded = people stop bothering. its not difficult to understand.

 

Wins count double, but participation must be rewarded. really simple, not so hard to figure out my dudes.

You put it so succinctly thank you!

Dear Jackie and any and all devs who read this*, that ^ is the whole issue in a nutshell

*(i believe in miracles so i believe Jackie and other devs might just read this)

 

Lloyd Christmas : I want to ask you a question, straight out, flat out, and I want you to give me the honest answer. What do you think the chances are of a guy like you and a girl like me ending up together?

 

Mary Swanson : Well Lloyd, that's difficult to say. We really don't...

 

Lloyd Christmas : Hit me with it! Just give it to me straight! I came a long way just to see you Mary, just... The least you can do is level with me. What are my chances?

 

Mary Swanson : Not good.

 

[the background soundtrack music suddenly stops]

 

Lloyd Christmas : [he gulps, his mouth twitching] You mean, not good like one out of a hundred?

 

Mary Swanson : I'd say more like one out of a million.

 

Lloyd Christmas : [long pause while he processes what he's heard] So you're telling me there's a chance. YEAH!

Given the implementation of a few of the changes in reg pvp, just understand that you're a bit in the unenviable position of Lloyd Christmas.

That said, we're talking about the same devs/BW decision makers who thought - even for the slightest moment, let alone actually following through with it - it was a good idea to institute a legacy-wide deserter debuff while denying players the choice to A) select their map(s) and B) select their teammates.

Despite that colossal act of stupidity, all they needed to do was allow players to leave w/o the debuff before the match starts and give ALL PLAYERS the option to not pug into backfill. problem solved. the players who are cool with backfilling get to backfill. the players who don't want a particular map or want to avoid a particular teammate don't have to play with them. at least you brought them into the map to give them a little nudge. minimal impact on queue pops.

Do all of this, and a deserter debuff makes sense. Yes, ppl d/c. Life is tough. Yada yada. Those are "acts of God."

In any case, you're pleading your case about the participation trophy to the crew who came up with this particular deserter debuff system. not that a debuff system cannot be good, but this particular implementation is half-arsed and pays no heed to the way the rest of their own queue is structured.

The main issue with the deserter debuff is not the ability to choose maps and teammates, but the fact the game will more often than not pit 4 people against only 2 or 3.

NO matches should start without full teams on both sides, and people should not be able to quit so easily.

3 desertions in one day in pvp, ranked or unranked should result in a 24 hour legacy ban on queuing it without your own full group.

The main issue with the deserter debuff is not the ability to choose maps and teammates, but the fact the game will more often than not pit 4 people against only 2 or 3.

 

NO matches should start without full teams on both sides, and people should not be able to quit so easily.

 

3 desertions in one day in pvp, ranked or unranked should result in a 24 hour legacy ban on queuing it without your own full group.

lul no. you cannot begin a deserter debuff conversation without the fundamental ability to choose your map and team (e.g., ok. I have a premade of that grp that just ignores objectives the whole match. I'm leaving before the game starts). neither of which are actually feasible at this point (population issue), ergo can the debuff idea. but w/e. I don't want to get into it any further.

that fact that BW put these two systems (1. debuff; 2. wins only quest) into place at all shows a drastic disconnect between their view of the "world" and mine. which one of us is Lloyd in that context is...yeah...w/e. but certainly one expecting anything of the other is pretty absurd at this point, imo.

The main issue with the deserter debuff is not the ability to choose maps and teammates, but the fact the game will more often than not pit 4 people against only 2 or 3.

 

NO matches should start without full teams on both sides, and people should not be able to quit so easily.

 

3 desertions in one day in pvp, ranked or unranked should result in a 24 hour legacy ban on queuing it without your own full group.

Sometimes people do have legit reasons in 'real life' to leave a game, kids or what-have-you and this might penalize them more then anyone

If having a pre-made group was a loophole man would the toxicity be off the scale because the problematic ones are normally together.

I've left 4 x 4's before they started because i was put in games with people who i know would complain loudly if i screwed up and yeah i have a pretty thic skin considering i've pvp'd in games for decades however i know damn well i'd be a giant target for a while.

All i want at this point is for pvp to work the same way as it did a year ago at this time. Go back to the drawing board and they can start with new ideas then.

All i want at this point is for pvp to work the same way as it did a year ago at this time. Go back to the drawing board and they can start with new ideas then.

This right here. This sums up my point of view perfectly.

The main issue with the deserter debuff is not the ability to choose maps and teammates, but the fact the game will more often than not pit 4 people against only 2 or 3.

 

NO matches should start without full teams on both sides, and people should not be able to quit so easily.

 

3 desertions in one day in pvp, ranked or unranked should result in a 24 hour legacy ban on queuing it without your own full group.

24h legacy ban ? Damn, that's severe.

More like 30-45 min legacy ban, with 3 desertions allowed. There are plenty of legit reasons to leave a game : ultra toxicity (... random in pvp, but when it's too much you shouldn't have to endure a debuff) ; IRL pb ; this friend who clicked on the "leave button" by mistake, and now you're forced to play your match alone, because the current debuff is longer than most pvp games ; game crash. And so on.

3 desertions allow to leave when there is a problem, but dissuade people to abuse the system. From my experience, works great.