test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Should the Devs roll back the new queuing system to the old version?

124

Comments

  • ssbn655ssbn655 Member Posts: 1,834 Arc User
    Yes, I would like to see the old queue system brought back
    Devs the people have spoken 3 to 1 AGAINST the "revamp queues" !
  • azrael605azrael605 Member Posts: 8,345 Arc User
    Irrelevant, not once has any system in the game been rolled back after a revamp.
    #TASinSTO
    #IStandWithCBS
    Bring on Discovery season 2 and Age of Discovery.
  • daiphdaiph Member Posts: 149 Arc User
    Yes, I would like to see the old queue system brought back
    daiph wrote: »
    Which absolutely would be an improvement to the UI for this aspect of the game which is absolutely the paramount issue here regardless of whether it's 'new' or 'old', but if it's 'functional' and better at it's given function overall.

    Only a Sith deals in absolutes. ;)

    Only someone with a biased agenda quotes out of context.
    daiph wrote: »
    They might well know what they have planned for the game but that doesn't necessarily mean it's better for the players who play the game and/or inherently better for the game overall. It is entirely possible that the direction they have in mind is actually detrimental and I agree that we won't know that until they show us the changes, at which point we must give our opinions, impressions and suggestions for improvement, even if that is to say that it's 'stupid and needs rolled back'.

    Oh, I have no problem with people voicing their opinions and making their suggestions. In fact, I encourage it. It's just that, we know that Cryptic WON'T be rolling it back. They never do with changes like this, so I was simply pointing out that the premise of the poll is flawed. It's irrelevant how many people think it should be rolled back, because it won't happen.

    You can say it's likely they won't roll it back because historically they haven't, but you can't say that you know they won't and the point of the poll is obvious, it's to get an approximate understanding of how many people agree/disagree with the premise. Your suggestion that a "better poll would be asking how they could best improve on the new queue system" wouldn't work given the abstract nature of the question as suggestions would need to be collated first, through a thread, well, exactly like this one.
    daiph wrote: »
    I accept that there are people who go over the score but we absolutely must be critical (in as far as the proper definition of the term with regard to analysis) of all changes which come into the game if we're to have any hopes of true improvements overall. That, as you suggested previously, Cryptic don't listen because of how toxic this community can be then frankly that's a separate issue and when compared to the substantially less toxic communities of other games, it is clearly then Cryptics own doing and they must address them, and separately too. That they would ignore this topic because of others is ludicrous, just as automatically giving in to player wishes on a future topic without proper consideration based on the interactions of this topic (if they were to actually listen to the majority so far shown here) would also be utterly ludicrous.
    There you go with your absolutes again. ;) But yes, be critical. Honest, CONSTRUCTIVE feedback should always be welcomed. I have suggested nothing about Cryptic not listening, or the community being toxic. You've confused me with someone else.
    By all means, tell me how using 'absolute' or any derivative is inherently bad for emphasis.
    Apologies, getting some of my responses mixed up, possibly because I try to keep everything in the same comment.

    But Cryptic is listening to constructive comments about improving the new UI.
    Keeping things complete and in order, but I'll get to this in towards the end as this is, strangely, part of the problem.

    daiph wrote: »
    Frankly insinuating that every step is a forward step is ridiculous too. Sitting as a blind 'yes man' saying that the changes are wonderful as the levels of raw sewage being pumped into the system are rising up to your neck isn't going to do anyone any favours.
    Frankly, you're putting words in my mouth. I didn't insinuate anything, nor did I say anything about the changes being "wonderful". I stated that the suggestion to step backwards to the old UI, is not the same as making an improvment to the new UI. It's simply switching them out.
    You certainly did insinuate that which was clear with more of what you said, prompting that response:
    It's quite possible that this new UI was a necessary step towards something down the line. Again, I have no issue with ideas or suggestions on actual improvements to the new UI. But equating stepping backwards to stepping forward is not necessarily true.
    Specifically that last line, 'but equating stepping backwards to stepping forward is not necessarily true' near states (okay, it actually implies, but it's pretty damned close) that all changes or 'stepping forwards' are inherently good and shouldn't be looked at as being poor choices even when it's obvious that they are. I added some hyperbole for colour, so sue me...

    daiph wrote: »
    The new UI has been stated often and by many to have an improved mission reward filter, even if the application of that filter is actually detrimental on more than one front. This gives us one step forward and two steps backwards (one for queue viewing, one for tracking)
    The difficulty filter has been moved from being a column header to mission specific and continually resets itself. Bug or as intended aside, that's another step back when it would actually be easier to see at a glance what difficulties are available, even within the new tabbed style.
    The lost use of CD timers and the whole HOST of bugs which have been introduced, essentially without need. Given I gave two steps above, I'll restrict this to just one even though it should probably be 5+.

    So, one step forward, four steps backwards. Of those 4 steps, we might get it back to just the top point eventually in which case it'll still be 1 forward, 2 back, chachacha...

    As I said, make your suggestions to improve the new UI all you want. I just think that you're wasting your time asking them to rollback to the old one.

    And now to return to the earlier 'issue'. The changes to how queued missions work and appear is what brought us here, and the functionality, ease of use, etc of such a system is of far greater importance than just 'old vs new' or 'familiar vs change'. When the situation genuinely exists that a change is so poor that a return to an older system, perhaps with some changes to accommodate the improvements such a change brought around or highlighted, is genuinely the best option then that option should be on the table.
    That your own responses, especially from someone with the position of a mod, have potentially indicated (even lightly) that this option shouldn't even be approached given historical responses ( "it should be obvious that Cryptic won't be rolling back to the old queue system. They wanted to improve on it. A better poll would be asking how they could best improve on the new queue system." ) actually reinforces my point about Cryptic perhaps needing to re-examine their policy. (Regardless of whether I attributed that specific response regarding toxicity and not returning to earlier systems simply because they're 'earlier' to the wrong person, which again, apologies)

    The worst and most frustrating part of this suggestion is in how little difference there is in the two systems. Tabbed list on the left with the filters per reward, an expanded reward list in its own column, difficulty switched per mission row, and checkboxes. Looked at like that, it's not much. That there's a call to keep the expanded rewards column and change away from tabs to a single column header filter all but makes it the old system because the biggest cause for complaint (between the two) is the tabs, jumping between them and having everything reset every time.

    As a side point, I think a lot of the calls for the return to the old system started because of all the bugs and other issues or, like this thread, far less a call for rollback specifically as much as a request to gauge other peoples feelings. On the former point, this is barely an alpha state with the amount of problems it's causing and it should never have been released to holodeck, much less made it out of Tribble like this. The thread seems to have taken far more of a 'why this sucks and why the old system was better', even though most of the people who seem to want to keep the new system only say that 'because rollbacks never happen' and that's just pathetic reasoning, tbh.
    What everyone buying Zen are really saying while all these bugs are still floating freely:
    qHiCsi6.gif
    Stop new content until quality returns
  • baddmoonrizinbaddmoonrizin Member Posts: 4,696 Community Moderator
    No, I prefer the new queue system
    daiph wrote: »
    daiph wrote: »
    Which absolutely would be an improvement to the UI for this aspect of the game which is absolutely the paramount issue here regardless of whether it's 'new' or 'old', but if it's 'functional' and better at it's given function overall.

    Only a Sith deals in absolutes. ;)

    Only someone with a biased agenda quotes out of context.

    OK, seriously. That was a joke. Just lighthearted humor, trying to dispel some of the tension. My apologies if you didn't see it as such. I have no agenda here, as it doesn't really matter to me if the new UI remains or is reverted back to the old one. I'm just trying to be practical in realizing that it won't, but that improvements can be made.

    daiph wrote: »
    daiph wrote: »
    They might well know what they have planned for the game but that doesn't necessarily mean it's better for the players who play the game and/or inherently better for the game overall. It is entirely possible that the direction they have in mind is actually detrimental and I agree that we won't know that until they show us the changes, at which point we must give our opinions, impressions and suggestions for improvement, even if that is to say that it's 'stupid and needs rolled back'.

    Oh, I have no problem with people voicing their opinions and making their suggestions. In fact, I encourage it. It's just that, we know that Cryptic WON'T be rolling it back. They never do with changes like this, so I was simply pointing out that the premise of the poll is flawed. It's irrelevant how many people think it should be rolled back, because it won't happen.

    You can say it's likely they won't roll it back because historically they haven't, but you can't say that you know they won't and the point of the poll is obvious, it's to get an approximate understanding of how many people agree/disagree with the premise. Your suggestion that a "better poll would be asking how they could best improve on the new queue system" wouldn't work given the abstract nature of the question as suggestions would need to be collated first, through a thread, well, exactly like this one.

    OK, I cannot say that I know beyond the shadow of a doubt that they won't, no. But as you said, historically they have not, so I will stand by my statement until proven otherwise. As such, the point of the poll is irrelevant, since a rollback is extremely unlikely. And perhaps a better poll wouldn't work either, as forum polls tend to be poorly written in the first place. A discussion thread on how to improve the new UI would work much better.

    daiph wrote: »
    daiph wrote: »
    I accept that there are people who go over the score but we absolutely must be critical (in as far as the proper definition of the term with regard to analysis) of all changes which come into the game if we're to have any hopes of true improvements overall. That, as you suggested previously, Cryptic don't listen because of how toxic this community can be then frankly that's a separate issue and when compared to the substantially less toxic communities of other games, it is clearly then Cryptics own doing and they must address them, and separately too. That they would ignore this topic because of others is ludicrous, just as automatically giving in to player wishes on a future topic without proper consideration based on the interactions of this topic (if they were to actually listen to the majority so far shown here) would also be utterly ludicrous.
    There you go with your absolutes again. ;) But yes, be critical. Honest, CONSTRUCTIVE feedback should always be welcomed. I have suggested nothing about Cryptic not listening, or the community being toxic. You've confused me with someone else.
    By all means, tell me how using 'absolute' or any derivative is inherently bad for emphasis.
    Apologies, getting some of my responses mixed up, possibly because I try to keep everything in the same comment.

    Again, I was joking. Apologies since you didn't see it as such.

    daiph wrote: »
    But Cryptic is listening to constructive comments about improving the new UI.
    Keeping things complete and in order, but I'll get to this in towards the end as this is, strangely, part of the problem.

    daiph wrote: »
    Frankly insinuating that every step is a forward step is ridiculous too. Sitting as a blind 'yes man' saying that the changes are wonderful as the levels of raw sewage being pumped into the system are rising up to your neck isn't going to do anyone any favours.
    Frankly, you're putting words in my mouth. I didn't insinuate anything, nor did I say anything about the changes being "wonderful". I stated that the suggestion to step backwards to the old UI, is not the same as making an improvement to the new UI. It's simply switching them out.
    You certainly did insinuate that which was clear with more of what you said, prompting that response:
    It's quite possible that this new UI was a necessary step towards something down the line. Again, I have no issue with ideas or suggestions on actual improvements to the new UI. But equating stepping backwards to stepping forward is not necessarily true.
    Specifically that last line, 'but equating stepping backwards to stepping forward is not necessarily true' near states (okay, it actually implies, but it's pretty damned close) that all changes or 'stepping forwards' are inherently good and shouldn't be looked at as being poor choices even when it's obvious that they are. I added some hyperbole for colour, so sue me...

    No, you're misunderstanding what I said. I didn't say or mean to imply what you have interpreted here. I was saying that stepping backwards, that is, rolling back to the old UI, does not equate to an improvement, or a step forward. It doesn't improve on or fix the problems with the new UI. Nor does it improve on or fix issues with the old UI. It is simply a step backwards to the way things were before. I never said, implied, insinuated, or meant to have inferred that all change is inherently good (or otherwise) or that such choices should or shouldn't be looked at as poor (or otherwise) whether obvious or not.

    daiph wrote: »
    daiph wrote: »
    The new UI has been stated often and by many to have an improved mission reward filter, even if the application of that filter is actually detrimental on more than one front. This gives us one step forward and two steps backwards (one for queue viewing, one for tracking)
    The difficulty filter has been moved from being a column header to mission specific and continually resets itself. Bug or as intended aside, that's another step back when it would actually be easier to see at a glance what difficulties are available, even within the new tabbed style.
    The lost use of CD timers and the whole HOST of bugs which have been introduced, essentially without need. Given I gave two steps above, I'll restrict this to just one even though it should probably be 5+.

    So, one step forward, four steps backwards. Of those 4 steps, we might get it back to just the top point eventually in which case it'll still be 1 forward, 2 back, chachacha...

    As I said, make your suggestions to improve the new UI all you want. I just think that you're wasting your time asking them to rollback to the old one.

    And now to return to the earlier 'issue'. The changes to how queued missions work and appear is what brought us here, and the functionality, ease of use, etc of such a system is of far greater importance than just 'old vs new' or 'familiar vs change'. When the situation genuinely exists that a change is so poor that a return to an older system, perhaps with some changes to accommodate the improvements such a change brought around or highlighted, is genuinely the best option then that option should be on the table.

    Except that this poll doesn't accommodate making changes to or improving on the old UI. It's a simple choice between the old unchanged UI and the current one.

    daiph wrote: »
    That your own responses, especially from someone with the position of a mod, have potentially indicated (even lightly) that this option shouldn't even be approached given historical responses ( "it should be obvious that Cryptic won't be rolling back to the old queue system. They wanted to improve on it. A better poll would be asking how they could best improve on the new queue system." ) actually reinforces my point about Cryptic perhaps needing to re-examine their policy. (Regardless of whether I attributed that specific response regarding toxicity and not returning to earlier systems simply because they're 'earlier' to the wrong person, which again, apologies)

    I'm not speaking as a moderator, but as a fellow player. My responses in this thread have been mine, and mine alone, and do not reflect on any position that Cryptic may or may not have on the issue at hand. And that you would insinuate otherwise, I find to be disingenuous. It's now painfully obvious to me why moderators rarely venture their personal opinions into the forums. As I cannot be seen as anything other than a moderator, then I shall comment as a player no further, least I color the discussion unintentionally. Carry on.
    GrWzQke.png
    Star Trek Online Volunteer Community Moderator
    Community Moderators are Unpaid Volunteers and NOT Employees of PWE/Cryptic
    Views and Opinions May Not Reflect the Views and Opinions of PWE/Cryptic
    Contact Customer Support --> https://support.arcgames.com
  • ltminnsltminns Member Posts: 7,713 Arc User
    No, I prefer the new queue system
    Yeah, reasoned on-topic commentary is not expected from our Moderators. We just expect them to respond to the hall monitors setting off the three-alarms on necro Threads. :)
    'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!
    Judge Dan Haywood
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 7,876 Arc User
    Yes, I would like to see the old queue system brought back
    azrael605 wrote: »
    Irrelevant, not once has any system in the game been rolled back after a revamp.
    On the contrary, there have been plenty of rollbacks of things players complained of. One of the biggest being the fail conditions on Advanced queues.

    Of course, they never actually call it a "rollback." But for players it's a useful shorthand, in cases like this when the list of removed and/or downgraded features that need restoring amounts to almost everything they changed about the UI.

    As I've said before, probably in another thread, if they added an "All" category tab, an option to display difficulty settings on separate lines that allow queueing to all of them at once and restored the cooldowns display and the visible "waiting to start" timer when accepting the queue instead of surprise map transfer, that would work perfectly for me. But that's pretty much exactly how things were before, so instead of typing all that all the time, it's convenient to say "make it work like before" instead.
  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 32,795 Arc User
    No, I prefer the new queue system
    gannadene wrote: »
    For Kobali, it's more about the daily bonus. Go there each day just long enough for the daily bonus and stack marks until you have enough.
    I usually just do a sector alert to get the daily. It's much faster than any of the Kobali ground content, and doesn't require flying to the Delta quadrant. Relying on dailies for marks if you need 1,000 isn't a good solution either, as it'd end up taking you nearly a month to obtain that amount, instead of a couple of days, like some of the other reputations.

    Thank goodness though the new episode layout didn't affect the ability to participate in some of the content. Although it did seem to make trying to map track them a little more awkward.
    Enh, when I did Delta rep I didn't try to grind marks. On the person I wanted rep gear on, I did the daily daily in order to build up a stockpile as I advanced in the rep.
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • eradicator84eradicator84 Member Posts: 1,113 Arc User
    Yes, I would like to see the old queue system brought back
    I would be happy with the new UI IF it were possible to have the difficulty selection stick - so that if I change to advance it stays that way.

    This.
    Dislike the STO news page layout? Try THIS.
    Hassans-ship-for-T6.jpg~original
    Using - Tarantula, Pythus Fighter Favs - Corsair, Klinzhai, Qui'Tu, Voth Fighter
    Some others - Kolasi, Manasa, Qib, Nicor, Sheshar, JAS, Bulwark The rest - HERE
  • mattjohnsonvamattjohnsonva Member Posts: 4,788 Arc User
    edited May 2017
    Yes, I would like to see the old queue system brought back
    daiph wrote: »

    As a side point, I think a lot of the calls for the return to the old system started because of all the bugs and other issues or, like this thread, far less a call for rollback specifically as much as a request to gauge other peoples feelings. On the former point, this is barely an alpha state with the amount of problems it's causing and it should never have been released to holodeck, much less made it out of Tribble like this. The thread seems to have taken far more of a 'why this sucks and why the old system was better', even though most of the people who seem to want to keep the new system only say that 'because rollbacks never happen' and that's just pathetic reasoning, tbh.

    Well spotted. Of course, when I started this thread, even were the results 100% against the new system, would I ever have actually expected an actual roll back. However what it does show is players lack of enthusiasm for this change, even amongst those who support the new queue system they usually have some reservations. I notice a few minor changes in the patch today, let's see if they help significantly, I have a sneaking suspicion there will be changes made that are not in the patch notes, but I could be wrong there.

    So in summary, it looks great, but it's over complicated, it doesn't always work, it sends way to many confusing messages, folks don't know when they are actually queued easily, it pulls people out of maps with no warning, it lacks a cool down list, it cannot hold difficulty settings, it jumps from one queue to another when you change something (times we've ended up in SB82 instead of something else).

    This poll proves one thing, that players are generally not happy with the system and much work is required, I hope by now the devs can see that and changes will be made accordingly.

    Thank you to everyone who took part.

  • meimeitoomeimeitoo Member Posts: 11,393 Arc User
    No, I prefer the new queue system
    And the far greater issue the queue themselves simply being empty. Tried to get a Romulan space Shield, for instance, for the visual. Yet, apart from a single daily, you can't get Rom marks anymore anywhere (no, a pathetic 10 marks per patrol doesn't count). Been trying to queue for the only regular space mission available for Rom marks, Vault Ensnared Advanced, for days, but nada.
    2u4ikno.jpg
  • mattjohnsonvamattjohnsonva Member Posts: 4,788 Arc User
    Yes, I would like to see the old queue system brought back
    meimeitoo wrote: »
    And the far greater issue the queue themselves simply being empty. Tried to get a Romulan space Shield, for instance, for the visual. Yet, apart from a single daily, you can't get Rom marks anymore anywhere (no, a pathetic 10 marks per patrol doesn't count). Been trying to queue for the only regular space mission available for Rom marks, Vault Ensnared Advanced, for days, but nada.

    We did that the other day, feel free to join our red alerts channel and make a request /channel_join SRS Red Alert

    You can also get rom marks from the normal red alerts.
  • meimeitoomeimeitoo Member Posts: 11,393 Arc User
    No, I prefer the new queue system
    meimeitoo wrote: »
    And the far greater issue the queue themselves simply being empty. Tried to get a Romulan space Shield, for instance, for the visual. Yet, apart from a single daily, you can't get Rom marks anymore anywhere (no, a pathetic 10 marks per patrol doesn't count). Been trying to queue for the only regular space mission available for Rom marks, Vault Ensnared Advanced, for days, but nada.

    We did that the other day, feel free to join our red alerts channel and make a request /channel_join SRS Red Alert

    You can also get rom marks from the normal red alerts.



    ^^ Thanks. :) Appreciate it!
    2u4ikno.jpg
  • carasucia83carasucia83 Member Posts: 559 Arc User
    edited May 2017
    No, I prefer the new queue system
    After almost unanimous complaints on various aspects of the new queue system I thought it was time to get a more overall view from the community. You may have little trouble queuing for an event if you are a single player, but before you answer this question please form a team and try to join a queue and then come back here to give your vote.

    I vote no with caveats.

    Overall I like the potential of new system, but it needs work.

    The q pop popup message needs to be like the old one, as in, let us know how long we have to slot that space or ground specialization when we do a lucky dip and q for everything rather than disappearing and then 'randomly' deciding to warp us in - random is just how it feels, I'm sure there's a timer in there somewhere.

    A 'select all' checkbox would be amazing.

    Further to the above, there REALLY needs to be a difficulty filter.

    Teams also need to be non-separable like they were before. It's happened a few times that one or more members of the team have hit decline and the rest have gone in without them to do the q. The point of forming a team is to do whatever q with those people. If we're really that desperate to go without them (like cos they take too long in the lil boys' room) we'll kick or make new team. Team should be all go or none go, like before.

    I'd love an 'order by X' system too. How many marks, time to complete, how many skill points, how much dil, etc.

    There's probably more.
    Everything in this game is free and all you have to do to get it is play the game for a bit.

    If you have a multitude of characters to get the stuffz for, or can't wait to gather the dilithium to exchange for zen - FOR FREE - that's your business and not really Cryptic's problem.
  • ltminnsltminns Member Posts: 7,713 Arc User
    edited May 2017
    No, I prefer the new queue system
    You want Romulan Marks? In addition to the Tholian Red Alert, do New Romulus Ground. First area for the day 85 Marks, all others 30. 1,080 Dilitium for the first zone, all others 720.

    Raise an Epohh.

    Don't forget Azure Nebula Rescue.
    Post edited by ltminns on
    'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!
    Judge Dan Haywood
  • pennylongpennylong Member Posts: 195 Arc User
    Yes, I would like to see the old queue system brought back
    I think they should have reworked how the queues work and offer rewards rather than how it is presented. I don't like waiting ages for a queue to pop only to have a few minutes of actual game time.
    The ticking boxes, selecting skill levels and match making has made a mess of it and it's a chore not worth doing now.
  • dragnridrdragnridr Member Posts: 671 Arc User
    edited May 2017
    Yes, I would like to see the old queue system brought back
    From all I've read, and tested out, the new queue system is just overly complicated and too much is hidden. The old system had it's flaws, but they weren't that bad at all. Really, the new system just needed to be tested more and teams shouldn't be separated. Some people team together BEFORE starting one mission and plan to run through multiple missions, but they end up having to re-team after every single mission. It gets old FAST.

    Plus when KDF and Feds are on the same mission and the mission finishes, the team immediately disbands causing the factions to become enemies at the end of the mission. It then becomes a pvp nightmare for those that didn't want to pvp in the first place.
    latest?cb=20141230104800&path-prefix=en
  • skullblits#4627 skullblits Member Posts: 1,263 Arc User
    sounds like you guys got the console Q system. it is kinda TRIBBLE
  • mattjohnsonvamattjohnsonva Member Posts: 4,788 Arc User
    Yes, I would like to see the old queue system brought back
    sounds like you guys got the console Q system. it is kinda ****

    Do you mean this is basically the same system that you see on consoles? That would make sense for Cryptic to try and optimise the code between the two platforms, same system, only one set of changes when updates are needed. Still, I can't see it working any better on consoles than it does on the PC, the fact that it's designed to work on consoles partly explains why it's so damn clunky on the PC.
  • skullblits#4627 skullblits Member Posts: 1,263 Arc User
    disbanding teams after every game is annoying.

    when a maps on cool down its grayed out.

    meh we had it from launch so kinda used to it
  • stoodoggstoodogg Member Posts: 46 Arc User
    There needs to be an improved system, but the one they have implemented is wrong (Sorry Cryptic, your fun is wrong) Itemising them all, that's a good idea, easier to navigate than the massive ever fattening list that was buckled under the weight of 100 queues. just get rid of the sillier than Camelot box ticking drop down menu stuff, put the advanced and elites on the list and just have a double click to join option and boom, job done. and while your at it have it set so you can queue for more than 3 actions..... 100 queues and i can only queue for 3? That's bonkers.
    Panel member, Tribbles In Ecstasy
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 7,876 Arc User
    Yes, I would like to see the old queue system brought back
    Yes, the category tabs are the only good change on the new UI.
  • johnnyray14#4257 johnnyray14 Member Posts: 188 Arc User
    Yes, I would like to see the old queue system brought back
    I miss seeing all the queue counts at once. When I only have a short time to play, it's nice to quickly see which queues are likely to pop soon, without wading through all the dang categories. The categorization doesn't add value... you still can't see which mark options are available for the "choice of marks" queues.
  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 32,795 Arc User
    No, I prefer the new queue system
    dragnridr wrote: »
    From all I've read, and tested out, the new queue system is just overly complicated and too much is hidden. The old system had it's flaws, but they weren't that bad at all. Really, the new system just needed to be tested more and teams shouldn't be separated. Some people team together BEFORE starting one mission and plan to run through multiple missions, but they end up having to re-team after every single mission. It gets old FAST.

    Plus when KDF and Feds are on the same mission and the mission finishes, the team immediately disbands causing the factions to become enemies at the end of the mission. It then becomes a pvp nightmare for those that didn't want to pvp in the first place.
    Heh, I've done queues as a 4-man team and never got disbanded. One run it was a random friend who was the fifth....
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • charlesdonovancharlesdonovan Member Posts: 49 Arc User
    edited May 2017
    Yes, I would like to see the old queue system brought back
    My problem was simply the lack of functionality. While it was nice having a filter to get the points I was seeking, the inability to queue up for the Advanced and the Elite version of a mission at the same time was a let down.
  • ltminnsltminns Member Posts: 7,713 Arc User
    No, I prefer the new queue system
    If there are Advanced or Elite versions you could switch to your needed type through the drop-down selector on the UI for that Queue.
    'But to be logical is not to be right', and 'nothing' on God's earth could ever 'make it' right!
    Judge Dan Haywood
  • mattjohnsonvamattjohnsonva Member Posts: 4,788 Arc User
    Yes, I would like to see the old queue system brought back
    After another waste of time watching hundreds of messages flying across the screen informing each of us that x had joined, y had left, z had left, X had left, y had joined etc. we finally noticed that one of the guys was being reported as being in another queue. Said guy wasn't aware he was in another queue and couldn't find out which queue he was in. So we suggested he relogged, that should clear it. He did this and to our amazement the queue finally worked.

    This is seriously broken in so many ways. Fix these issues Cryptic please, it's spoiling our fun, for some of us at least.
  • xeevoxeevo Member Posts: 10 Arc User
    Yes, I would like to see the old queue system brought back
    The new queue system is SO confusing.
    -Half the time it 'removes me from queue' without telling me and I am waiting for ever for nothing.
    -Other times, I am queued in a queue that says no one it queued, when I should at least count as one person.
    -Every time I change the queue window, everything is reset, so I have to 'find' the queue that I am supposed to be queued in to see if I am still queued or not....since I am randomly booted from a queue.....
    -Sometimes it asks if I want to accept or decline a queue, other times it just accepts without giving me the option......

    A great system that worked has been changed to a system that so few people are able to navigate that the queues are no longer filling, and the wait time has been more than tripled......basically making the game unplayable......

  • lianthelialianthelia Member Posts: 6,677 Arc User
    I wouldn't mind them rolling it back while keeping the queues listed by mark type they drop.

  • orangeitisorangeitis Member Posts: 5,215 Arc User
    No, I prefer the new queue system
    No. This is a ridiculous suggestion. After the new queue UI is ironed out, it'll be much easier to us and more convenient than before.
  • mattjohnsonvamattjohnsonva Member Posts: 4,788 Arc User
    Yes, I would like to see the old queue system brought back
    orangeitis wrote: »
    No. This is a ridiculous suggestion. After the new queue UI is ironed out, it'll be much easier to us and more convenient than before.

    In the meantime it's putting off many folks from playing at all, yeah that's a ridiculous and naive view you have there my friend. If you'd read through this entire thread you would know that none of us truly expect a complete roll back, however the strength of feeling from this poll will illuminate the requirement for some rework sooner rather than later. The new queue UI should never have needed to be ironed out, it's a broken mess that was released onto holodeck with little thought or care given to it's functionality.
This discussion has been closed.