Jump to content

8 vs 8 ranked: Sign if you agree this needs to be done!


Lhancelot

Recommended Posts

Yeah seriously. Everytime I see a "bring 8v8 back" post, I think "Where do these people thing these teams are going to materialize from?" Do people really think regStarz don't play ranked just because they don't like arena? There's a lot more to it then just the game format.

 

For some yes.

 

For many people it is indeed the fact that they do not like arenas. They are simply too dull to be passed off as entertainment. I can stomach a few per day, then it's back to regs, which then tends to throw me an arena as a slap in the face anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For some yes.

 

For many people it is indeed the fact that they do not like arenas. They are simply too dull to be passed off as entertainment. I can stomach a few per day, then it's back to regs, which then tends to throw me an arena as a slap in the face anyway.

 

Those "many" people are way less than you think, if you honestly think 8v8 would revitalize anything then I am going to have to laugh at you. Like seriously you would have to have a severe case of rose-tinted glasses considering 8v8 ranked only ever happened on two servers at the time of its death, and even on those servers it wasn't exactly booming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i liked to play 8man ranked but it would never work without cross server imho. On tofn even after some teams transfered from other servers, outside of maybe a 2 hour window during prime time we still had to schedule our matches in order to get pops, and there were rarely more than 4 teams in the queue at the same time
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 years later...

Where do you find all the people to revitalize a healthy 8v8 population? Reg que? Lol. And wut happens when all those reg players that we know get globalled on a daily basis get farmed outa the 8v8 ranked que?

 

No one likes to get farmed repeatedly.

 

snip

 

How do u do this?

Reg warzones only give regular comms, including daily/weekly with a random chance of bag drop for gear tokens.

Solo q gives ranked comms and increased bag drop chance (no longer part of the leaderboard).

Ranked 4v4 is the only ranked q, gives 2x the ranked comms of solo q, 2x credit rewards, and offers unique rewards. For example, crafting mats for pvp stims/adrenals (get rid of reusable to increase economy demand). Able to acquire old PvP schematics in an orange form (Centurion, Battlemaster, etc) whereby you can then make them and sell on GTN.

 

This creates a clear progression for players, get some comms and gear tokens in regs, test out the arenas in solo and get more gear, than form a team in grouped ranked once you are geared. Think PvE, story, hard, NIM modes.

 

ELO needs to be adjusted. Give late comers to the ranked scene a boost in ELO gain. Losing against teams with higher ELO averages should result in dramatically less ELO lost.

 

Punish leavers, 5-10-15min prevention of q'ing again on the entire account.

 

This may be the only real solution to fixing ranked in this game. Only criticism I have is that 1) the devs may have to introduce an in-game utility that helps solo players find a group, kinda like group finder but which prioritizes your friends list 2) solo ranked should give 1/5 the rewards as 4s 3) leavers need to be even more highly punished. I disconnect from a lot of games and I still think leavers need to be punished more. 3v4 games are literally impossible to win. Leavers should be prevented from queuing again for 30 minutes on the entire account. 4) loosing in any game mode is less punishing on your rating than it was before. This change implements a quasi decay system that incentives playing games while still allowing the winning team to reach higher elo.

Edited by septru
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It won't hurt to bring back 8v8 ranked, but there is an issue with population and it would be hard to get it going. As far as the cross server queues, I dont think it's actually possible to have cross server between NA and EU; the best thing I could see Bioware doing would be 1 last server merge.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread is from 2014...how in the world did you find this?

 

the force.

 

at first, he had no idea what he was doing. then I saw his potential and promised him 3 lessons. it was a sham, though, because my lessons were really cynical observations about the inevitability of his failure, but the ultimate joke was on me, because despite receiving no training in the force whatsoever, he force-dug deep in the msg abyss where all things thoughtful and inane go to die and resurrected this sunken ship.

 

wow. that sounds so intriguing, I should write a movie about it! :eek:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if u want to do competitive 8v8s just get 16 people together, split into 2 groups, and use the challenge feature. If people don't even realize you can do this/don't currently do this I don't think there is enough interest in bringing back 8v8s.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

How could you ask for 8v8 ranked when 4v4 ranked participation is seemingly suffering from a total lack of population? Also, nice necro

 

It's not the lack of population that is the problem with team ranked arena's. It's the lack of pvp'ers willing to commit to it. Most of these pvp guilds you see in reg's have given up on ranked after a short time due to seasoned teams destroying them in ranked. What they don't understand is that communication,coordination, and all of that takes time when it comes to doing teams. The population is there, the patience isn't.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not the lack of population that is the problem with team ranked arena's. It's the lack of pvp'ers willing to commit to it. Most of these pvp guilds you see in reg's have given up on ranked after a short time due to seasoned teams destroying them in ranked. What they don't understand is that communication,coordination, and all of that takes time when it comes to doing teams. The population is there, the patience isn't.

 

Assume you're right, that there just arent people queuing ranked. That is still a population issue in ranked pvp. For the record in the very short time I was doing group ranked, my group hardly got destroyed. I just found the experience more infuriating and frustrating than fun, so I stopped doing it. The point was simply if people arent queuing ranked, why'd they being back an even bigger ranked format (and of course why necro a petition from years ago)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not the lack of population that is the problem with team ranked arena's. It's the lack of pvp'ers willing to commit to it. Most of these pvp guilds you see in reg's have given up on ranked after a short time due to seasoned teams destroying them in ranked. What they don't understand is that communication,coordination, and all of that takes time when it comes to doing teams. The population is there, the patience isn't.

 

I agree with you here, so what comes next isn't a refuation.

 

My problem with teams (this goes back to 8v8) is not that my team will be destroyed by a clearly superior team. It's that the clearly superior team is what my team is going to face 9.5/10 times we queue. I would like to earn I nice pretty rating -- who wouldn't? But the population in queue was never -- ever -- such that similarly skilled teams faced off regularly. Even when everyone transferred to Pot5, the teams barely had time to settle into any sort of a pecking order before BW announced the death of 8v8.

 

Before the Pot5 renaissance, the guild that established the best 8-man team actively recruited the best players from every other guild, thus ensuring that no new teams ever established a foothold on the server. That's good for their dominance, but it absolutely killed competition on the server. Despite having more than enough members to field two teams, the aforementioned top guild refused to put players in the queue against their picked squad. My point is that while your explanation of human nature (lack of patience) is absolutely true, there's this side of human nature too, in which good guilds pilfer players from up and coming guilds but never queue more than their one team, thus stifling the queue.

 

The solo queue is flawed in may ways, but it does seem to circumvent the reticence of guildies from playing against each other in rated competition.

 

Lastly, there comes a point where skill disparity is so great that one learns (next to) nothing competing against a vastly superior opponent. Like, if what the other team is doing is so coordinated and precised that it looks like magic (use the force, Luke!), then you're not going to pick up anything useful.

 

/2cents

Link to comment
Share on other sites

snip

 

The issues you lay out are symptomatic of a population problem:

 

I.e. what does the system do if 8 similarly skilled players are not currently queueing? It has 3 choices essentially:

1. Wait and only form a match when 8 similarly skilled players are on

2. Match the 4 highest together and the 4 lowest

3. In an attempt to make some kind of balance, distribute the bad players equally among the good.

 

By most peoples accounts the current system is trying to use option 3 to balance fairness with queue quantity.

 

If the system can't find 8 people to do a match, how is it supposed to find 16?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was trying to get at the fact that it's a tail chasing cycle (or maybe a snake devouring its tail). One leads to the other which leads to one.

 

4's teams a generally more set, so you'd think there would be less "guild solidarity" in terms of avoiding going against your own guild. but honestly, the only time I'm aware of that happening is when a guild plays kickball amongst themselves.

 

which reminds me, they're actually doing kickball matches on DM. that's really cool, imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The issues you lay out are symptomatic of a population problem:

 

I.e. what does the system do if 8 similarly skilled players are not currently queueing? It has 3 choices essentially:

1. Wait and only form a match when 8 similarly skilled players are on

2. Match the 4 highest together and the 4 lowest

3. In an attempt to make some kind of balance, distribute the bad players equally among the good.

 

By most peoples accounts the current system is trying to use option 3 to balance fairness with queue quantity.

 

If the system can't find 8 people to do a match, how is it supposed to find 16?

 

It doesn’t need to pick the 4 best and 4 lowest for each team. That isn’t a good match at all.

 

It could just pick the top 16 people in the queue and then spread them over both teams in a 1 for 1 type system. Then the next 16 players in skill and so on.

Eventually the lowest skilled players should be all together and the highest skilled should all be together. And the medium skilled players would be spread between the two groups if there aren’t enough people in the queue or if there are enough people, the medium guys would mostly be together.

If you have a premade be a full pug team, then the pug team gets more if the highest rated players to off set the “possible” premade advantage.

Then the only time it should have the highest skilled and lowest skilled in the same match would be when there are less than 32 people in the queue. At which point it should probably start popping 4v4 to keep the different skilled groups separated more.

That’s how I always envisaged reg pvp match making should work. Not this system where it puts 2 high skilled players on teams with 6 of the lowest skilled players and then expect them to carry the team against a Premade of medium skilled players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...