Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

Premades are ruining non-ranked warzones

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > PvP
Premades are ruining non-ranked warzones

Kontraz's Avatar


Kontraz
05.26.2013 , 11:48 AM | #2421
Quote: Originally Posted by Sharee View Post
In a team of 4/8 (as in, 4 premade in a 8 man team), the premade will definitely have a much more noticeable impact as it would in a team of 8/32. I really don't understand how you could possibly think otherwise. 4/8 you are guaranteed half of your team will be competent. 8/32 you only have a guarantee 25% will be competent. The higher the % of competent players, the harder the game for the opposing PUG.



That's a baseless assumption. Just because a system changes does not mean players leave. The change might go both ways, depending on the reception of said change. You have no reason(or at least you did not present one) to believe allowing solo players to avoid facing premades will have a negative tally.



This is very misleading. In your example swtor fared worse not because 5/10 subscribe, but because you let 1 of the 5 subs leave(20%) while in the wow example you let 1 of 10 subs leave(10%).




Sometimes i get carried away and start being sarcastic after commenting on a particularly nonsensical piece of text. Apologies if you got offended. I'm always targeting(or trying to) what you wrote, not you as a person.
My apologies, I meant 8/16 or 16/32. Jumped ahead of myself. Point still stands.


I know a number of players who will not like a change of this sort (whether they will leave or not I cannot know). However, in risk assessment, no change is zero risk, while the change offers only a chance for loss with no chance for gain in this situation. It would not be a wise business move.


The percentages is indeed a fair example, and the 10% to 20% was described in order to bring focus on it. Let me try to reword it. WoW and SWTOR both have 10 members each. All 10 of WoW's are subs (as it is sub only). Only half of SWTOR's are SuBs (as it is F2P). With WoW, they lose 1 PvPer (obviously a subscriber). With SWTOR, they also lose 1 PvPer (also a subscriber). This brings WoW down from 10 subs to 9, but Swtor from 5 to 4. 10% loss vs 20% loss.

Ajuntalee's Avatar


Ajuntalee
05.26.2013 , 11:48 AM | #2422
Quote:
What the premade supporters fail to realize is that the solo queuers DO NOT want to get better at warzones.

Does every kid who wants to play a quick game of soccer in the backyard HAVE to first work on himself to become a new Maradona before they can hope to have any fun? No.
Alright, now what if the kids he plays with are working on their game and .... one of the kids he plays with is the next Maradona ?

Does he stop playing soccer altogether with his friends, does he go to his parents to ask them to move and relocate the house around a playground where other kids suck at soccer ?

No he keeps playing with his friends and tries or not to get better, happens that he is going to be better at soccer than he would have if the other kids would suck as much as he does, and maybee he can understand there is no shame in losing against better players as long as you did your best.

The problem these days is that people only enjoy competition when they are sure to win. We already play a game where it doesn't matter to lose, isn't that enough to cater for people with weak personas and feelings.

You want to relax after work bash mobs.
You want to chat with friends you have that.
You want to do coop you do a flashpoint and the game has a gearing mechanic, that will ensure eventually your group will achieve that flashpoint, because your character gets better even if you can't.

You want competition , queue for WZs, the playfields is even, the gear is evened out, but you came for competition noone forced you to do WZs or whatever kind of PvP,

If you are on a PVE server you never ever have to put yourself in a direct PvP confrontation for anything.

If you play a competition your team expects you to play competitively or to at least try your best at it, and the people you face will assume you play competitively, and they will body you if they can just to show you how much leeway for improvement you and teh rest of your team have to cover.

Why on earth would anyone come into a WZ and not accept to do your best to be a contender and slice it however you want doing your best to be a contender implies (among a truckload of other things) : wanting to get better.

Kontraz's Avatar


Kontraz
05.26.2013 , 11:55 AM | #2423
Quote: Originally Posted by Sharee View Post
Just because you don't like it does not mean it is not congruent. It fits the situation perfectly, as it demonstrates that taking a risk does not automatically mean anything that happens is not forced.

Expanding such a twisted logic to it's limits, NOTHING is ever forced on you, as you decided not to commit a suicide, and thus willingly exposed yourself to further living and all risks that entails.
haha, if you want to expand to the furthest, everything is forced on you and free-will is nothing more than an illusion. So in that sense, yes, PUGs are forced to play against premades. But they are also forced to PvP at all. And Forced play the game in general. Not by the developers, mind you, but by their own passive inclinations hardwired into them to respond to both general and exact stimuli.

But if we are going by the general understanding/acceptance of Free Will, then no, I do not believe at all that pugs are forced against premades at all.

Sharee's Avatar


Sharee
05.26.2013 , 12:16 PM | #2424
Quote: Originally Posted by Kontraz View Post
My apologies, I meant 8/16 or 16/32. Jumped ahead of myself. Point still stands.
But, the point you originally made, was that swtor suffers less from premades because it has smaller teams. Thus it does not stand, as smaller teams actually make the problem worse. 4 man group in 8 man team is 50%. 5 man group in 10 man team(which is wow's smallest i think) is the same, but wow also has bigger sized BG's so on average premades effect it less.


Quote: Originally Posted by Kontraz View Post
I know a number of players who will not like a change of this sort (whether they will leave or not I cannot know). However, in risk assessment, no change is zero risk, while the change offers only a chance for loss with no chance for gain in this situation. It would not be a wise business move.
1, anecdotal evidence - not good. I also know a lot of players sick of facing premades. Does not mean a thing.
2, 'no change is zero risk'. You don't know that. If SWTOR is losing players sick of being pugstomped then no action = big risk.
3, 'while the change offers only a chance for loss with no chance for gain in this situation' Crystal ball much? (sorry my sarcastic self poking out agin )


Quote: Originally Posted by Kontraz View Post
Let me try to reword it. WoW and SWTOR both have 10 members each. All 10 of WoW's are subs (as it is sub only). Only half of SWTOR's are SuBs (as it is F2P). With WoW, they lose 1 PvPer (obviously a subscriber). With SWTOR, they also lose 1 PvPer (also a subscriber). This brings WoW down from 10 subs to 9, but Swtor from 5 to 4. 10% loss vs 20% loss.
You realize that in your example the ratio of f2p to subs is totally irrelevant right? The f2p's don't matter at all. You would get exactly the same result if you just assumed wow has 10 subs and swtor has 5 subs and nothing else.

With that out of the way: You just discovered the shocking truth(eh sorry ) that 1 sub means a higher percentage of total subs if the game has (edit) LESS total subs. SWTOR won't lose a higher percentage of subs with each lost player than wow because it has f2p'rs, but because it has less subs total. Which is kind of self-evident.

Raazmir's Avatar


Raazmir
05.26.2013 , 12:25 PM | #2425
No MMO worth its salt, EVER would EVER do anything to discourage people from grouping together. On a deep fundamental level that more than any number of people dissatisfied with fighting premades, relationships built through mutual play experience keep people in MMO's. Making it so people can't play with their friends drives them away from them.
Mk'dermott 55 Sniper
Makkant 55 powertech

Sharee's Avatar


Sharee
05.26.2013 , 12:27 PM | #2426
Quote: Originally Posted by Ajuntalee View Post
Alright, now what if the kids he plays with are working on their game and .... one of the kids he plays with is the next Maradona ?

Does he stop playing soccer altogether with his friends, does he go to his parents to ask them to move and relocate the house around a playground where other kids suck at soccer ?
What normally happens in cases like this is that the kids naturally try to achieve balance by either teaming the especially bad players with that future maradona, or even move a player from his team to the weaker side.

They certainly would NOT put all the strong players on one side and lose 16-0 over and over again.

Sharee's Avatar


Sharee
05.26.2013 , 12:30 PM | #2427
Quote: Originally Posted by Raazmir View Post
No MMO worth its salt, EVER would EVER do anything to discourage people from grouping together. On a deep fundamental level that more than any number of people dissatisfied with fighting premades, relationships built through mutual play experience keep people in MMO's. Making it so people can't play with their friends drives them away from them.
Oh boy. That's what you get from not reading the thread(not that i blame you )

http://wow.joystiq.com/2012/12/05/bl...ground-groups/

Quote:
a full, organized Battleground group to queue against a randomly assembled group is creating a scenario where that coordinated group has a huge advantage. That is not in the spirit of the experience we want to provide in the normal Battleground queue. Playing with friends is fun and important, but it shouldn't come at the expense of the spirit of the game nor the fun of others.

Jadescythe's Avatar


Jadescythe
05.26.2013 , 12:35 PM | #2428
As usual, this whole argument is ridiculous. However you feel about premade v pugs, it can't change under the current circumstances. There is no reason to stop people form playing in groups and the player base can't support a 3rd queue option and still have warzones happening at even 1/10th of the speed they do now. Move on.
I have opinions and stuff

You could get free stuff with my referral link here

Xooey's Avatar


Xooey
05.26.2013 , 12:46 PM | #2429
I agree that the most fun and exciting matches are the tough ones, where no one side holds an extreme advantage. That being said, I rarely solo queue and put being able to group with my friends at a premium. I think there generally is some matchmaking in place as with a group you are generally up against another group (though not all groups are created equal).

In an ideal world (and Blizzard has as close to that in mmo-land as possible with number of subs, funding, and infrastructure in place) everyone would be able to play exactly as they want - but SWTOR does not have the variables to make this happen. With larger numbers of players pvping or cross-realm it would probably be easier to put in multiple tracks of casual queue to achieve this result - but in the current game state it would lead to queue times that would be bad to start with and then continue to atrophy as people became frustrated.

I believe the best case scenario would be to tighten the matchmaking I think is already in place (to make sure there was never a true pug vs. 4-man scenario, 3 healers vs none, etc). I'll caveat that sometimes you don't like what you get even in this scenario, however, because a *bad* 4 man is worse than a solid pug. Yes, a team coordinates better than pugs can, but a bad team exponentially multiplies their bad through this coordination and just loses the wz for you.


Acupuncturist/Slashionista

Sharee's Avatar


Sharee
05.26.2013 , 12:49 PM | #2430
Quote: Originally Posted by Jadescythe View Post
As usual, this whole argument is ridiculous. However you feel about premade v pugs, it can't change under the current circumstances. There is no reason to stop people form playing in groups and the player base can't support a 3rd queue option and still have warzones happening at even 1/10th of the speed they do now. Move on.
I'm not asking to stop people from playing in groups, nor for a 3rd queue. I'm asking for a checkbox on the 'join warzone' UI, that only affects me, and when checked, will ensure that i will not be placed in a warzone with players that joined as a group.

"I only want to play with players that also queued solo" is what it would be called.

Players who want to queue as group still can. Solo players that don't mind playing with/against premades still can. And if this alone makes the queues unbearably long for groups it would mean one thing: the majority of the playerbase wants to play this way, and the feature made a lot of people happy.