You kill solo ranked and make people form groups for ranked play, because its literally the only format it causes a problem in, and is the format that leads to the most toxic behavior in the playerbase.

This guy still on his crusade. At least he has commitment.

So what is your suggestion for the Devs?

 

It's a long, long known situation that people will Alt-F4 to quit a match to avoid a penalty. That's why the debuff is for loss of connection. There's no known way of determining a legit connection issue from someone's deliberate disconnection. Tying the debuff to just the exit button is something that is basically debunked as being useful. (Using red, by the way, isn't a good idea for accessibility reasons -- something Bioware does pay attention to -- because of red/green color blindness. Which is the most common situation in males. ^_^)

You're endeavoring to reframe the discussion to place the onus is upon me to deliver a solution. We pay the developers to deliver solutions. The one they implemented is sloppy and ill conceived because it punishes those of us who have done nothing wrong. Preach to someone else about positive thinking and constructive use of time.

The solution proffered you dismissed as "debuned", and I'd like to know by whom and what the findings were. Either way, attaching the debuff to the exit during an active warzone is the only reasonable solution. Alternatively, it should be reverted. As mentioned before, I have little tolerance for a punitive system that snares players affected by unfortunate incidents of which they have no part. FWIW, I don't care what you think about it, but I am hoping the developers give it consideration. Clearly they are reading and responding to our input...and there is mine.

You kill solo ranked and make people form groups for ranked play, because its literally the only format it causes a problem in, and is the format that leads to the most toxic behavior in the playerbase.

People don’t form groups because you end up with the 4-8 best players all gravitating to one/two teams and then they dominate the server. Which kills it completely.

Solo is more random and less predictable and people see they have a chance to not get owned every match.

You don’t get toxicity in granked on your own team because you get to choose who is on it. Any toxicity is more or less the same vs the other guys. The difference is one is projected out and the other toward your own team. But don’t fool yourself into thinking any implicit toxicity would disappear.

We all know toxicity is in pvp, I don’t think anyone will say there isnt. But it’s in ALL parts of the game from pvp to flash points to operations. And it’s also not as bad you are making out. I dare say there is less toxicity in the game than there used to be.

You don’t get toxicity in granked on your own team because you get to choose who is on it. Any toxicity is more or less the same vs the other guys. The difference is one is projected out and the other toward your own team. But don’t fool yourself into thinking any implicit toxicity would disappear.

This is an important point, and there's a clear example of it. Most of the most toxic people on SF are in one guild: educated squad. Many of them recently got permabanned for wintrading. A bunch of them queue together in group ranked, and a lot of them are in discord together while they play solo ranked. They're very "social."

If anything, the fact that they all play together like that makes them even more toxic than they would be if they were solo. There's peer pressure involved in fitting in with the "cool kids." And there's plenty of established sociology that people are capable of doing terrible things as part of a group that they would never consider doing alone. It's some of the most pathetic stuff I've ever seen in a game.

This is an important point, and there's a clear example of it. Most of the most toxic people on SF are in one guild: educated squad. Many of them recently got permabanned for wintrading. A bunch of them queue together in group ranked, and a lot of them are in discord together while they play solo ranked. They're very "social."

 

If anything, the fact that they all play together like that makes them even more toxic than they would be if they were solo. There's peer pressure involved in fitting in with the "cool kids." And there's plenty of established sociology that people are capable of doing terrible things as part of a group that they would never consider doing alone. It's some of the most pathetic stuff I've ever seen in a game.

Yeah, had a run in with them a few times. They were very meme worthy poster boys of toxicity and peer pressure.

I totally turned chat off when I saw them. But as you said, many were perma banned, including a few forum regulars who used to defend toxicity So I’ve not seen any of that “group” since then.

And while a lot of pvp chat is now quieter, at least those few bad eggs have been dealt with.

I’d actually have loved to see how a seperate queue for reg premades would stack up against a Reg solo queue.

I think many of the premade vs solo defenders would quickly stop queuing premade once the dominant premades or guilds recruited the better players and they started getting farmed every match because there was no longer a bunch of solo pugs to farm.

I honestly believe a solo reg queue would be more popular under such a setup and a reg premade queue would end up being like the granked queue. I think this is why there is such outrage from part of the premade community because they like farming solo pugs to feel superior. And the other part of the community doesn’t like the idea because they know the hard truth of what I’m saying and pops would slow right down for them.

And don’t get me wrong, I totally understand why the second group would be nervous by such change and I know as a previous big premader I wouldn’t want my pops to slow. Which is why I can’t ever see Bioware doing it even if it might turn out to be better in improving the quality of pvp matches and healthier in the long term.

It’s something Bioware should have done when they removed 8v8 ranked and while we had a large population. Then people could have had a choice in regs to play in premade queue or solo queue. It would certainly make it easier for the system to match make and balance team composition in a solo queue.

Of the 4 matches I played today:

1 was a 4v4 which, even with unbalanced teams composition we still tried to win,

1 was a hypergate which ended at 607 to 563

1 was Odessen which ended at 600 to 513

1 was a Huttball which ended at 3 to 1, with a lot of almost scores from the losing team

If this was before the deserter lockout, they would of been:

2 people on my team in the 4v4 wouldn't have bothered to even try

Hypergate would of been 600 to 100

Odessen would of been 600 to 150

Huttball would of been 7 to zero.

Objectively speaking, reg pvp is better now. There are a few people here and there intentionally throwing games "protesting" the changes, but they're fewer and fewer now. PVP needed a little chemotherapy, and if that means we lose a few s@#$bags along the way, that's fine, it'll mean a healthier population in the long run.

If this was before the deserter lockout, they would of [sic] been:

 

2 people on my team in the 4v4 wouldn't have bothered to even try

Hypergate would of been 600 to 100

Odessen would of been 600 to 150

Huttball would of been 7 to zero.

 

Objectively speaking, reg pvp is better now. There are a few people here and there intentionally throwing games "protesting" the changes, but they're fewer and fewer now.

That is speculative. There is no way you could know whether they would have tried or not or how badly you would have lost.

I am glad your experience is improving, though. Perhaps things will improve, but that is not what I expect. My experience is markedly different. When it was first introduced, I did sense a small uptick in quality, but that soon plummeted. Were the debuff applied only to people who quit, I'd be fine with it. But, it applies to all who leave an active warzone, whether intentional or not -- and that is the part I find so untenable.

PVP needed a little chemotherapy, and if that means we lose a few s@#$bags along the way, that's fine, it'll mean a healthier population in the long run.

FWIW, I don't believe in protesting in the game like that. That is petulant and selfish. However, it will take a lot for me to believe that this poorly implemented "solution" is the correct one.

Of the 4 matches I played today:

 

1 was a 4v4 which, even with unbalanced teams composition we still tried to win,

1 was a hypergate which ended at 607 to 563

1 was Odessen which ended at 600 to 513

1 was a Huttball which ended at 3 to 1, with a lot of almost scores from the losing team

 

If this was before the deserter lockout, they would of been:

 

2 people on my team in the 4v4 wouldn't have bothered to even try

Hypergate would of been 600 to 100

Odessen would of been 600 to 150

Huttball would of been 7 to zero.

 

Objectively speaking, reg pvp is better now. There are a few people here and there intentionally throwing games "protesting" the changes, but they're fewer and fewer now. PVP needed a little chemotherapy, and if that means we lose a few s@#$bags along the way, that's fine, it'll mean a healthier population in the long run.

This is great/ is exactly what we need. and will go little further and suggest the following:

1. No win = No mats

current problem is Win Traders are still throwing games because they can still get mats, wont get dailies but still can get mats. So to take away such incentive, no win = no mats

New rules are great; they still manage to win trade but is becoming a whole lot harder/difficult for them, and by taking such incentive we'll see the end of them.

New rules are truly working. Just take away mats.. without victory no mats.. for sure

Trade win still goin but Dev's are on the right track

btw; players who desperately advocate against new rules are win traders for sure

 

btw; players who desperately advocate against new rules are win traders for sure

You sir, are a special kind of...intelligent... i don t even play ranked and the rules hurt me a lot... i couldn t finish my pvp weekly for almost one-and a half weeks because now, even in unranked wins are required to progress...at all... when i dc... i can t even retry immediatelly... because i get LOCKED OUT...and there goes my play-time outside the weekend, you know... because of work and such...

That is speculative. There is no way you could know whether they would have tried or not or how badly you would have lost.

 

I am glad your experience is improving, though. Perhaps things will improve, but that is not what I expect. My experience is markedly different. When it was first introduced, I did sense a small uptick in quality, but that soon plummeted. Were the debuff applied only to people who quit, I'd be fine with it. But, it applies to all who leave an active warzone, whether intentional or not -- and that is the part I find so untenable.

 

 

 

FWIW, I don't believe in protesting in the game like that. That is petulant and selfish. However, it will take a lot for me to believe that this poorly implemented "solution" is the correct one.

That is not speculative; its telling the current state of affairs in Rank/Unrank, but I do have to admit the new rules had brought no change at all. I can tell that less than 1% still do as they please.

You sir, are a special kind of...intelligent... i don t even play ranked and the rules hurt me a lot... i couldn t finish my pvp weekly for almost one-and a half weeks because now, even in unranked wins are required to progress...at all... when i dc... i can t even retry immediatelly... because i get LOCKED OUT...and there goes my play-time outside the weekend, you know... because of work and such...

Like i said before i do admit the rules had been ineffective. These individuals still do as they please/want. With the exception of this game I had yet to see other mmos where a handful of players always stomp on developers.

I've never left matches unless i have sudden personal business that comes up...

but I've PvP'd long enough to know within a minute which team will win in a WZ (barring an unlikely stealth cap)...in those cases i just facilitate the rapid conclusion of a wz via nefarious means.

as for Arenas, I give it my all unless there's some toxic pantywaste sh*te talker in the team...in which case i will throw the match on purpose because being petty to scumbags gives me pleasure.

That is not speculative; its telling the current state of affairs in Rank/Unrank

The part quoted was speculative. He was forecasting outcomes contingent on the absence of a debuff. It is literally impossible for him or anyone to know what the outcomes would have been were the debuff not in place. It is an opinion formed without full information. He does not and cannot have full information because he did not experience those exact games without the debuff in place. It is axiomatic.

For the love of GOD, remove the lockout timer for regs

PvP has become much, much worse. The deserter debuff needs to be revoked.

Far too much attention has been paid to the scenario of people leaving warzones in progress, rather than the fact that there are certain maps and warzone types that aren't enjoyable for everyone.

Perhaps a decent stopgap change would be to remove the deserter lockout if people leave BEFORE the warzone starts, until there's an actual selection mechanism that Flashpoints and other group content have.

Writing "you can't force people to consume content they don't like" on a Post-it note and sticking it to a few monitors might bring some enlightenment too. You never know.

Hi friends,

 

I wanted to take a minute to talk about the Deserter changes coming in Game Update 6.1.4. As part of our efforts to reduce toxicity, it’s important to understand how game rules themselves can contribute to the problem. I previously talked about how behaviors like declining multiple matches in a row or leaving matches could be used to intentionally degrade the quality of PvP matches, particularly in Ranked modes, and how we planned on addressing the problem.

 

Unranked:

In Unranked matches, the 15-minute Deserter lockout will still apply for leaving a match. In addition, the 5-minute lockout penalty for being vote kicked will still apply.

 

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.

 

An important change here to note is the lockout timer prevents queueing for ALL PvP activity: Unranked, Solo Ranked, Group Ranked, and Galactic Starfighter. In addition, all Deserter lockouts will be account-based.

 

Some of the philosophy behind this change is to still allow a smaller penalty for one-off accidents, such as missing a queue due to a bad internet connection or stepping away for a few minutes. Where the penalty increases is when we can begin to assume the likelihood of an attempt to manipulate the queue or gain an advantage in Ranked matches is greater than the likelihood of missing several queue pops on accident in a row. This is based on data and observation of past player behavior, so these changes to the game rules are an attempt to change that behavior, and ultimately provide a more fun and safe place to play.

 

As always, we will measure the results of this change and adjust as needed if we see any opportunities for improvement.

 

Thanks!

-Chris

 

U ppl are Just Stupid..

Do you ppl even play this game???

I had to admit.. u dev's are just 'F@#uing Stupid..

Seriously; not making this up..

Please remove the Lockout for Regs. It's a Ranked issue.

People having DC's shouldn't be penalize because of that in regs, or forced to stay in a long warzone with AFK players who don't want to be there.

First of all, i want to say that i like an idea of deserter lockout. Combined with daily/weekly rewards rework it is a quite decent incentive for more objective-focused gameplay.

But how it currently works in regs is ridiculous.

15 min and legacy-wide (***?) is waaaaaay too much, especially if you consider things like crashes, lost connection or 5 pits/ancient hypergate in a row (personally i love old huttball but hate AH - point is people dont enjoy certain maps)

Make it 5 min long and remove legacy-wide lockout. It would be a good compromise.

First of all, i want to say that i like an idea of deserter lockout. Combined with daily/weekly rewards rework it is a quite decent incentive for more objective-focused gameplay.

But how it currently works in regs is ridiculous.

15 min and legacy-wide (***?) is waaaaaay too much, especially if you consider things like crashes, lost connection or 5 pits/ancient hypergate in a row (personally i love old huttball but hate AH - point is people dont enjoy certain maps)

 

Make it 5 min long and remove legacy-wide lockout. It would be a good compromise.

I agree there is a need for changes to the system because it’s having more of a negative affect than the positive affect to improve the quality of pvp.

* I would take it a step further and remove the lockout entirely from lowbies and Mids.

* Remove the “legacy” lock out feature for reg pvp, but keep it for ranked pvp to prevent people manipulating the queue.

* Reduce the lock out length as you suggested, but to 10 mins for 8 man maps and 5 mins to arena reg maps. The reason is 5 mins wait in prime time isn’t really long enough and 10 mins outside of prime time (when reg arena pops the most) is too long and kills the queue.

Eventually they will add those other maps back into the fold and I’m hoping when they do, that players will have more control over map choice without increasing the pop times between matches, my concern is there won’t be enough players left for that to work without increasing the wait times between matches

So I would suggest they start trialIng the system they are planing before adding those other maps back into the fold.

I would also like to suggest the following :

* Allow people to leave reg matches with no penalty as long as the match hasn’t started. The requirement could be 30 sec cut off before the match starts.

* Allow people who back fill a match that’s already started the option to leave without penalty.

* If a match starts with less than full teams on both sides. It should either :

a) lock the match so no more back fills if the team numbers are even (aka, 3v3 or 7v7)

b) stop and finish the match with no winners if the teams are uneven

The other thing that needs to change is the daily/weekly completion garbage. Only allowing progression on wins is insult to injury. It doesn't encourage me to fight harder, I fight hard simply because I loathe losing and enjoy winning. I don't need the incentive to win. Winning is its own reward.

The real issue are the numbers farmers. Bioware needs to find a way to address them. When they're not playing objectives, they're as bad as win traders.

The other thing that needs to change is the daily/weekly completion garbage. Only allowing progression on wins is insult to injury. It doesn't encourage me to fight harder, I fight hard simply because I loathe losing and enjoy winning. I don't need the incentive to win. Winning is its own reward.

 

The real issue are the numbers farmers. Bioware needs to find a way to address them. When they're not playing objectives, they're as bad as win traders.

Agreed. The idea of wins only counting was supposed to combat the number farmers, but it’s had little to no affect as far as I can tell. This is especially true if people think their team can’t win at the start, so they don’t even try, they just farm numbers.

Plenty of people listed other ideas to combat against the number farmers. None of which have been tested yet to see if they work.

It’s obvious the win only system doesn’t work and only infuriates players who get put on bad teams due to faulty matchmaking. The lock out and lack of mission advancement if you lose is in my opinion more detrimental to player participation than not having it at all.

There are better ways to encourage people to try and win and to not rage quit matches if they are losing. They’ve all been listed for the last 12+ months, so I won’t repeat them all “yet” again. It would be great if Bioware could have a constructive “two way” discussion with the “whole” pvp community and not just what the ranked guys on Discord want.

It’s obvious the win only system doesn’t work and only infuriates players who get put on bad teams due to faulty matchmaking. The lock out and lack of mission advancement if you lose is in my opinion more detrimental to player participation than not having it at all.

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.