So I keep getting stuck in these 6 v 8 warzone matches. I don't understand the logic here Bioware so I thought I'd break down why this is a terrible idea. 8/8 = 100%. so every 2 players is 25% of the team. That means that 6 v 8 is 75% of the total team. So basically you are sending a team that is a quarter down to face a full team. In most of your warzones, Numbers Mean EVERYTHING:

 

Voidstar: Bugged door, defensive team only has 6? easily overpowered because it becomes a 4 on 7 or 3 on 6 against a full team.

 

Denova: You can't take a node because you have to either go 6 v 6 leaving no one to defend of 5 v 6 or 4 v 6, which, you cannot hope to win and then have time to take the node.

 

Civil War: Again, how do you expect a team to take a node and hold it long enough to cap when they are fighting 4 v 6 defenders?

 

Huttball: Huttball can be won by 6 well coordinated players but only if they work extremely well together and the other team really doesn't do well at all.

 

Yes, we all hear about that rare instance where someone want a 6 v 8 or we managed to pull out the victory because we hit the zone and the other team sucked but simple math here Bioware. 6 v 8, 75% vs. 100%. It doesn't add up and it never will, especially when you design your maps around fighting for nodes.

 

Solution: Make it so the warzone only activates with 7 or more actually inside the instance. Give us a damn chance to actually win the match.

You're right. The simple solution of course is just to cap both sides at 6 if one faction only queues to 6...Why this is too hard for them to grasp I don't know tbh. I think they just like trolling us hard. Edited May 11, 2012 by dcgregorya
Update

i was in a nice 5 Vs 4 match this morning that ended at about the same time the first turret in Alderaan was capped since it took about 30 seconds to get there and cap because of flight times .... god bless Bio-ware they need it

But... but.. but.. I thought having the remaining players join 2 mins into the game when the game is basically lost was fun? You don't like uphill battles?

 

Don't get me wrong, I've been in a few games that once the players were evened out we were able to come back for a win but it happens very rarely. With the time it takes to cap certain points most games are lost in the first few mins.

 

But also, It's hard to predict whether a player will accept the queue at the end of the countdown. You can have 8 players queued but 3 don't accept leaving 5 to feel the wrath of an 8 player onslaught. I've been on the receiving end of a 5 v 8 onslaught. It is pretty close or worse than going up against a premade.

It doesnt make sense. Ive been in WZs that have 6 or 7 on "my" team and then we are facing 8 on the opposing team, everysingle one of them are in a PUG... And this is a "training excersise"... That REALLY doesnt make sense...

The reason is, that people join in all time and leave out, also all time.

So you can have it, to start with people and end with other peoples in your team.

 

Would it be fixed to a number of available joiners, and a single one leaves, what then ?

Match over or imbalance like before ?

 

It is sad, that the teams are imbalanced sometimes, but that is more fault of a dead community on your server.

If there are no joiners, you wont get your team full.

That may change quick with cross server queue's.

 

Nevertheless, the system grants us the ability to dynamically join a running game, so possible shamefull leavers can be replaced by other players.

The reason is, that people join in all time and leave out, also all time.

So you can have it, to start with people and end with other peoples in your team.

 

Would it be fixed to a number of available joiners, and a single one leaves, what then ?

Match over or imbalance like before ?

 

It is sad, that the teams are imbalanced sometimes, but that is more fault of a dead community on your server.

If there are no joiners, you wont get your team full.

That may change quick with cross server queue's.

 

Nevertheless, the system grants us the ability to dynamically join a running game, so possible shamefull leavers can be replaced by other players.

 

If a single one leaves or does not take the queue then the game gives another 30 seconds for someone else to join. If no one joins, the game does not even start and everyone in the match goes to the head of the line for the next queue. Games in progress where people leave or disconnect are filled like normal.

Edited May 11, 2012 by HelinCarnate

They cant make any complex algorithms to dictate balance because it would reduce the que from 10-15 warzone pops a day to 0-5, to something like 1/3 of the servers.

You're right. The simple solution of course is just to cap both sides at 6 if one faction only queues to 6...Why this is too hard for them to grasp I don't know tbh. I think they just like trolling us hard.

 

Yes this, you add backfills up to 8 as they que, but always keep the teams even.

 

Unless someone DCs ofc. Can't just randomly kick someone on the other team because someone leaves the WZ I guess.. =/

Thats ok, today on my server we were 3 v 8 and we all left. I am not going to get farmed for medals.

On my server we often win matches that start unbalanced against us.

Often times an early lead and "sure win" is easily beaten if you maintain pressure and

the other team gets cocky... I've been on the other side of the equation also where my team

got cocky and then we got whomped...

 

never surrender, never relent.

I zoned into a WZ on voidstar yesterday that was ME vs 8 imperials....

 

It's the only WZ i've ever left in disgust. And you know what I got credit for 'playing' in that wz.

 

 

Excellent fix to the leavers problem Bioware very well done indeed. They leave more often now and still get credit.

Utter FAIL.

They need to just allow 4v4 matches to fill a group. That way if there isnt enuff for 8v8 people can get a 4v4 and get a que to pop.

 

Im still waiting for duels to be allowed everywhere in game but to allow up to groups of 3 to duel other groups of 3 and if allowed everywhere then we could watch it aswell. It add a nice mini arena type aspect to the game but without any rewards simply for fun.

I actually don't know which is more frustrating at this point to me. I've qued 4vs8; been in a WZ that went to 8vs1; and most other combinations. I've been on the "up" side and "down" side of each. The numbers ARE a real problem. If there is a difference of more than 1 or 2 is almost solidifies the outcome.

 

Of course the gear doesn't make this anymore fair. I just popped a WZ that went 4vs8 about 1 minute in. Oh by the way, most of my team was geared in Recruit or non-PvP gear (if they are under geared by choice, shame on them and I suffer) and almost every member of the other team was War Hero, I think 1 had BattleMaster. The vast difference in expertise (which is just about the only thing the matters in a WZ) between WH and Recruit is ridiculous. Please get something in that breaks the 70+ Valor crowd away from those of us without. Either that or start letting us purchase the Battle Master gear prior to 50 (since we earn so many WZ Comms) so we can get competitive faster. I personally vote for a segregation of the War Heroes. If you are 70 valor and don't have a complete Battle Master set (which is only slightly below War Hero) it is your own fault. A Battle Master equipped toon can compete with a War Hero, at least somewhat. This just kills me because those of that WANT to compete (at least in my guild) can't because we enter a WZ and unless we are very lucky, are quickly outmatched by the fully kitted folks that do nothing but WZ (this happens less than 1 in 10 matches).

I think they (BW) just like trolling us hard.

 

Yes, uneven warzones are very annoying and it seems matchmaking has a lot of issues getting it right.

I rather wait a few minutes longer in queue then end up winning/losing because one team is short-handed.

 

I zoned into a WZ on voidstar yesterday that was ME vs 8 imperials....

 

It's the only WZ i've ever left in disgust. And you know what I got credit for 'playing' in that wz.

 

 

Excellent fix to the leavers problem Bioware very well done indeed. They leave more often now and still get credit.

Utter FAIL.

 

Fact check: Warzones with 2 people or less on either team will still terminate after 30 seconds.

( example: 3 vs 3 warzone will continue running, but a 2 vs 8 will terminate)

If you leave or have left before the auto-shutdown, you will not get any credits or commendations.

If you stay through the shutdown, both winners and losers will be rewarded accordingly.

Solution: Make it so the warzone only activates with 7 or more actually inside the instance. Give us a damn chance to actually win the match.

 

You can't blame bioware because some players don't hit "enter battle" when they're prompted to. From what I understand of your solution, that's like waiting in queue, except you are in the instance, waiting for more players to join, which is not an improvement. You'll still have players tabbing/afk or leaving if it takes long enough.

 

On my server we often win matches that start unbalanced against us.

Often times an early lead and "sure win" is easily beaten if you maintain pressure and

the other team gets cocky... I've been on the other side of the equation also where my team

got cocky and then we got whomped...

 

never surrender, never relent.

 

That's a very.. ah... touching story. The fact is, with the quarter of your team missing, you'll probably lose. We know there are some exceptions. You can't say "often", I'm pretty sure you are generalizing a few cases.

Edited May 12, 2012 by lpsmash

Another 6 v 8 this morning in voidstar. What happens? We managed to work our asses off and get someone ahead of them, break through two sets of doors and then they caught up and were slamming our heads into a wall for 3 minutes trying to get through the final door. When they got their turn they simply overpowered us because we lacked the numbers to hold against them. These warzones by design should make it obvious that a 25% disparity between numbers should not be allowed, I'll take the longer que time for a more even team.

 

How about this? System waits until 10 or 12 que, then pops the que for 8 with a 30 second timer. After that timer the next 2 are popped, etc. That way we increase the chance of full teams before launch.