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

Arkerus's Avatar


Arkerus
11.17.2012 , 12:35 AM | #851
Quote: Originally Posted by Doomsdaycomes View Post
=P not meaning to sound childish or rude, but adding "Period" on the end of your statement doesn't end the argument, doesn't strengthen your point, and really just sounds stupid.

Please explain to me why PuG's should get their own queue?

We're talking about people who are not willing to take 5 minutes and put a group together (or make friends to begin with). Their complaint is that they're losing, but they are unwilling to take the steps to fix that. I get there are times when PuG'ing is your only option (friends not on, only got a half hour or so, or simply not feeling social today.) Shouldn't an Massive Multiplayer Game be encouraging people to group up and step up?

If PuG's do get their own queue, why should they get rewards equal to the "group" queue?

The complain is once again, PuG's lose to premades because... because... better group composition, coordination, communication, etc... If PuG's get their own little casual happy-palace queue, why should they be rewarded for essentially wallowing in their sucktastic-ness. =P I know that sounds rude, but it's pretty much true.

Why do we need split queue's instead of (or with) proper matchmaking? Wouldn't a more flexible, inclusive system be better than split pools?
Somebody in this thread likes stomping on pugs. Can anyone guess ?
Hooning in the rex : http://youtu.be/xtXUM6yPMCY

Doomsdaycomes's Avatar


Doomsdaycomes
11.17.2012 , 12:55 AM | #852
Quote: Originally Posted by Arkerus View Post
Somebody in this thread likes stomping on pugs. Can anyone guess ?
=P some one in this thread really hasn't read much of it, and jumps to conclussions. Care to guess?

DarthRaika's Avatar


DarthRaika
11.17.2012 , 02:31 AM | #853
Leon, I don't think cross server is off the table and I think they would like to. They have a smaller dev staff than they expected at this point and they need to prioritize.

If the game can keep a decent amount of money coming in then I'm sure cross server will eventually happen, however it does require some work and matchmaking would seemingly be much easier and be a pretty good fix to the current issues.

That is why I would like as many people to get behind a matchmaking system as possible so that that if a dev accidentally winds up on their forums they might make a matchmaking system!

DarthRaika's Avatar


DarthRaika
11.17.2012 , 02:33 AM | #854
Also, doom actually wants some even matches. She just thinks (and I tend to agree) that our small pvp population would have some long q's at times if we made a solo only and premade only q system. Why punish one group when both can benefit? Thats why matchmaking we both agree on. I mean with cross server then solo q might be a good idea but its not happening anytime soon.

gryhmr's Avatar


gryhmr
11.17.2012 , 02:39 AM | #855
This is a multiplayer game. Make friends, que with them. The bigger problem I think is people who are not very good losing in competitive play. Which is shockingly, what PVP is. You win some, you lose some get over it.
Greggas - Shadow/Sin- The Bastion

CommanderKeeva's Avatar


CommanderKeeva
11.17.2012 , 03:24 AM | #856
I think we can all agree that a balanced matchmaking system (if it's even possible to achieve such) would benefit both sides more in the long run.

However, seeing that this is an imminent problem that might very well drive the majority of F2P players away (after all this thread does have 28.000 views and over 80 pages) would it really hurt to try separate queues just for a few weeks?

We could see how matches go in true PuG vs PuG situations (I'm guessing PuG players would instantly have far more fun) and if premades have to wait an atrocious time to get a queue (which they should anyway because they have multiple advantages over the typical PuG player (team composition, gear, skill, vent). we could always revert to a previous state (the one that drives F2P and casual subbers away).

By all means implement a proper matchmaking system that can achieve overall balance and gives a fair chance to win for both solo players and premaders. But by the same extension you could wish for an end to starvation or pollution. Or wish for world peace. These are awesome ideas on paper but they are just not possible to achieve.

What can be achieved is queue separation. All we're asking is a few weeks' long test. Maybe it would make the F2P players stick around, too. I'm sure they're having tons of fun losing their 5 matches a week against well-coordinated, well-geared premades. They can't even get their damn daily done.
BEING A GOOD SOLDIER COMES DOWN TO ONE THING, ONE SINGLE QUESTION:
WHAT ARE YOU PREPARED TO SACRIFICE?

UncelSam's Avatar


UncelSam
11.17.2012 , 03:35 AM | #857
Quote: Originally Posted by CommanderKeeva View Post
I think we can all agree that a balanced matchmaking system (if it's even possible to achieve such) would benefit both sides more in the long run.

However, seeing that this is an imminent problem that might very well drive the majority of F2P players away (after all this thread does have 28.000 views and over 80 pages) would it really hurt to try separate queues just for a few weeks?

We could see how matches go in true PuG vs PuG situations (I'm guessing PuG players would instantly have far more fun) and if premades have to wait an atrocious time to get a queue (which they should anyway because they have multiple advantages over the typical PuG player (team composition, gear, skill, vent). we could always revert to a previous state (the one that drives F2P and casual subbers away).

By all means implement a proper matchmaking system that can achieve overall balance and gives a fair chance to win for both solo players and premaders. But by the same extension you could wish for an end to starvation or pollution. Or wish for world peace. These are awesome ideas on paper but they are just not possible to achieve.

What can be achieved is queue separation. All we're asking is a few weeks' long test. Maybe it would make the F2P players stick around, too. I'm sure they're having tons of fun losing their 5 matches a week against well-coordinated, well-geared premades. They can't even get their damn daily done.
I agree 100%

Let the premades go have thier fun and we PUGs go have our fun. We'll see who has the most fun

Doomsdaycomes's Avatar


Doomsdaycomes
11.17.2012 , 03:55 AM | #858
Quote: Originally Posted by CommanderKeeva View Post
I think we can all agree that a balanced matchmaking system (if it's even possible to achieve such) would benefit both sides more in the long run.

However, seeing that this is an imminent problem that might very well drive the majority of F2P players away (after all this thread does have 28.000 views and over 80 pages) would it really hurt to try separate queues just for a few weeks?

We could see how matches go in true PuG vs PuG situations (I'm guessing PuG players would instantly have far more fun) and if premades have to wait an atrocious time to get a queue (which they should anyway because they have multiple advantages over the typical PuG player (team composition, gear, skill, vent). we could always revert to a previous state (the one that drives F2P and casual subbers away).

By all means implement a proper matchmaking system that can achieve overall balance and gives a fair chance to win for both solo players and premaders. But by the same extension you could wish for an end to starvation or pollution. Or wish for world peace. These are awesome ideas on paper but they are just not possible to achieve.

What can be achieved is queue separation. All we're asking is a few weeks' long test. Maybe it would make the F2P players stick around, too. I'm sure they're having tons of fun losing their 5 matches a week against well-coordinated, well-geared premades. They can't even get their damn daily done.
This reminds me of those religious arguments. "Come on, try God for a little. What can it hurt?"

Could the same argument not be made for matchmaking? Come on, let's just try this (better idea) for a few weeks, see how it goes?

Veniras's Avatar


Veniras
11.17.2012 , 05:10 AM | #859
Quote: Originally Posted by Managuense View Post
y statistics. Using Bayes theorem, given that there is one premade (group of 4), the chance that the premade is on your side is 50%.
Reps can haz imp premades?

Veniras's Avatar


Veniras
11.17.2012 , 05:14 AM | #860
Quote: Originally Posted by DarthRaika View Post
Why punish one group when both can benefit?
But pugs dont benefit.
Pugs gets stomped, pugs get frustrated, pugs quit.