test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

CDP Topic: PvP

1246711

Comments

  • kalina311kalina311 Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 1,885 Arc User
    edited March 2020
    low hanging fruit ,, again i am going to come up with suggestions and points that no one has mentioned or thought of yet ..this one does not have a format but lots of concerns : D this is gleamed from ten of thousands of pvp matches played

    suggestion 3

    fix the bugs/ holes and exploits that still remain on the pvp maps after 7 years !!!!

    stop players from entering enemy spawn on the hotenenow map and greifing players/ the riven map method was fixed

    This behavior sours new player experience

    some people dont realize
    there are slight variants of each of the classic 5 v 5 pvp maps that have slightly different terrain and landscapes and foliage / decor ..
    and as such there are unpatched holes and exploit never fixed on those maps ..

    stop players from entering enemy spawn on the hotenenow map and griefing players (Tr ranger and barbarian can get thru )
    this happens via climbing the rockwall where the potions spawn behind the players camp and using certain powers in certain ways ...

    stop players from getting behind point 1 and 3s external walls this happens on the fire lava variant of the hotenow map
    ( not going into details )

    stop players from launching / ejecting players from spawn with certain powers and dailies

    the (random terrain vines above the balcony of point 1 and 3 on the riven pvp map have a bug that you can go behind them as well etc /less match breaking tho ..

    back in the days accounts and players would get banned for jumping into enemy camps specifically on the guantlegyrm map
    and it was left unpatched for months ..they just banned players instead of fixing the map : (
    Chris the new lead is not a fan of banning players for something left bugged and reported and still unfixed for months..years in some maps cases ..

    I can be Pmed by devs for details not going into them here
    Post edited by kalina311 on
  • fluffy6977fluffy6977 Member Posts: 291 Arc User

    Hey everyone - I really appreciate all of this feedback and suggestions.

    I have a question for you folks though, based on your current opinion of PvP.

    If you do not play PvP, what do you feel it would take to get you to try it out for a bit?

    If you do occasionally play PvP, What do you feel it would take to make it more of a daily routine for you?

    If you play PvP frequently, do you feel like the time you spent in there isn't wasted? And if so, what do you feel would make your time investment feel more respected?

    Again, thank you everyone for your posts. I love seeing this discussion.

    Don't have the time to dedicate to this second CDP at the same time, but in a nutshell.

    For background: I've play a few MMOs over the years (NWO, SWTOR, LOTRO, DDO, ESO, Runescape, etc). I've dabbled in PVP from time to time in the various games, but I've always hated tab target PVP. Luckily NWO doesn't suffer from this, and for a very brief time it was a lot of fun to PVP with the action style combat.

    I loved Solo queue at first. I still think the idea is fantastic and if other issues were fixed for PVP I would likely exclusively run solo queue for the random variety built in to it by the random team compositions and player skill levels. But the implementation is a mess and with the vote kick problems it's not truly a random team any longer.

    Currently time spent in PVP is wasted time for me. It is not competitive, you run into the same handful of tactics over and over on the same stale maps in the same stagnant game mod. Either you have the itemization and the flavor of the month or you don't, which creates a binary system and is not compelling. I'd rather go play something like Halo multiplayer for the balanced start and skill/luck based variations.

    As I see it there are 4 major problems

    1. Community/Playlists: You only have "ranked" domination modes and everyone is forced to play together. Move Solo Queue to unranked and eliminate votekick (increase inactive detection and consequences - that idiot camping at the fire for the whole match should be autobooted and restricted from the playlist for 24 hours). Get it back to being a mode to blow off steam, with interesting match variations based on the teams assembled. Make it have different modes, Dom, King of the Hill, Deathmatch, free for all, there are literally decades of data from different games to draw inspiration from.

    Make similar changes to the regular queue, except this is ranked and competitive. This gives players who dabble in PVP and enjoy it something to strive for and separates the casual and serious players who don't want to play with each other so that each group can get what they want out of PVP.

    2. Cost of Entry: The way this game currently works you need stats and items to be competitive. Try playing with a Mod 5 weapon for an exaggerated example, you're basically slapping a wet noodle at your opponents. This unnecessarily limits the amount of players who can play together successfully. No solution to this problem will be universally popular, and a common one these days is naked pvp. I think a better approach would be to separate PVP and PVE gear and systems entirely.

    Example implementation (for feedback, would love to have fellow players discuss merits/lack thereof)
    PVE gear is not equip-able for PVP. Everyone is given a starter set of full gear (weapons, armor, belts, rings, artifacts etc) that is standardized role gear (choose a role, get that gear, can be reclaimed for another choice). No enchantments or overloads, no reinforcements (at least at first) and no companion/mount bonuses. Introduce two forms of currency, one from unranked and a second from ranked queues. Use this currency to purchase new PVP only armor with different stats (allows customization and gear path, but is not required). Make this mostly horizontal progression, with a slight vertical for the ranked gear (something along the lines of standard/unranked gear is 90-95% as effective as the ranked, close enough that skill or luck can overcome the gap but enough of a gap that there is a reason to go ranked).

    There's a lot of interesting game theory about the role of luck in games, mostly about how an increase in luck makes it easier for players of various skill levels to play together and have fun. I wonder if you could manipulate this luck factor by increasing the range of damage on PVP weapons? It would have to be carefully tuned and might not be worth the effort, but I think there's great potential for creating the kind of memorable PVP battles that keep players coming back - I don't want to stomp my enemy, I want a close game that could go either way, that one in a million holy HAMSTER that actually worked kind of thing.

    Slightly off topic but I want to illustrate my point. I still remember playing a Halo 3 match and equipping a sniper rife and hopping into a warthog passenger seat my bud was driving. We ran up against another 'hog and our gunner bailed out, so out of sheer desperation I tried to hit the gunner of the other hog while mid-jump (in halo 3 you couldn't scope in from the vehicles, so this was a hip shot) and somehow actually got the headshot. Every time my buddy and I talk about it (a good decade after the fact) we end up booting up the game and having a match or two. The memorable moments drive our engagement with games, and NWO PVP has none for me.

    3. Role balance - Classes aren't particularly well matched within their own roles, some are better at AOE, others single target. Not sure how much of a factor this actually is right now since I don't currently PVP, but it almost always is one.

    4. Stale gameplay - Each match plays the same, why play another?

    Hope that helps.
  • fluffy6977fluffy6977 Member Posts: 291 Arc User

    Thank you to folks who gave additional insight into Solo Queue. From a personal perspective, I've always been hesitant to remove features once they are introduced - yes, it happens in every game but I'm likely the one in meetings with counterpoints to removal, preferring to first explore how something can be modified to make it feasible. Only after reasonable options have been exhausted am I ok moving towards a removal decision. Again, this is just my own philosophy!

    @trgluestickz made a comment that has really stuck with me and I'm mulling over:

    "Solo que is currently the only active PVP type right now and puts 2 different groups of players with incompatible interests in the same que as each other."

    And that gets to the crux of one of the biggest issues (for me) - incompatible interests among the different existing PvP, potential PvP players, and PvE players.

    Traditionally PVP games design around this challenge by offering various playlists (Ranked, unranked, deathmatch, various objective based modes, etc). Neverwinter ignores this and forces everyone to play together. This has never been what players want (no consumer in the history of the world has ever wanted less options), and is a core reason PVP is so dead in this game.
  • gweddrygweddry Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 262 Arc User
    @fluffy6977 Neverwinter has traditionally offered only one option -- normal domination. There was also GG but that was more of a fun mode rather than competition. And it worked. I remember in M4, where many people already quit because of artifact gear, we had over 5000 players on leaderboard. What I'm trying to say is that you can't offer too many options or you won't have enough players in each.

    Game companies know this, if you look at for example League of Legends, it now has 2 maps, whereas a year ago it had 3 and some 5 years ago, it had 4. That's not because the game is struggling, that's because the main competitive mode has to have its matchmaking kept as healthy as possible.
  • thefiresidecatthefiresidecat Member Posts: 4,335 Arc User
    gweddry said:

    @fluffy6977 Neverwinter has traditionally offered only one option -- normal domination. There was also GG but that was more of a fun mode rather than competition. And it worked. I remember in M4, where many people already quit because of artifact gear, we had over 5000 players on leaderboard. What I'm trying to say is that you can't offer too many options or you won't have enough players in each.



    Game companies know this, if you look at for example League of Legends, it now has 2 maps, whereas a year ago it had 3 and some 5 years ago, it had 4. That's not because the game is struggling, that's because the main competitive mode has to have its matchmaking kept as healthy as possible.

    uncharted had a rotating menu of games in one que. when a match was found it would give you two options and everyone in the lobby could vote for the gametype/map. Destiny has something like this without the vote as well. keeps it unfractured and keeps variety.


  • fluffy6977fluffy6977 Member Posts: 291 Arc User
    gweddry said:

    @fluffy6977 Neverwinter has traditionally offered only one option -- normal domination. There was also GG but that was more of a fun mode rather than competition. And it worked. I remember in M4, where many people already quit because of artifact gear, we had over 5000 players on leaderboard. What I'm trying to say is that you can't offer too many options or you won't have enough players in each.



    Game companies know this, if you look at for example League of Legends, it now has 2 maps, whereas a year ago it had 3 and some 5 years ago, it had 4. That's not because the game is struggling, that's because the main competitive mode has to have its matchmaking kept as healthy as possible.

    hey man, thanks for the counterpoint.

    It's an interesting point. I don't play many PC games that aren't RTS or some variant of such. Anything like LoL i would tend to play on Xbox. At least on the PVP games on console I play we are constantly getting new maps, it's extremely rare to have less than 3 different playlist options and 7 is not uncommon, with variants as small as a normal deathmatch and a hardcore style deathmatch. Occasionally you run into issues having to wait a few minutes for a match, but by and large you will find one in your chosen list. Like @thefiresidecat mentions there are also other ways to introduce the variety without diluting queues. I think (Haven't played it in a while so might be mis-remembering/outdated) some of the games like Halo 5 even have a rotating queue list that hosts different style matches periodically.

    We could easily have the variety I described and more, with as few as two different "queues" in the form of ranked and unranked. Maps/gamemodes assigned randomly at match start if thats a concern. I don't really recommend just two options, since players develop preferences and get sick of doing the same thing over and over and want to queue for something different. Do you think (assuming you're a PC player) that kind of thing could work on your platform? Whatever the solution is it really needs to work for all of us.

    Thanks again for the counter, keep em coming!

    P.S. I think LoL is a bit of an apples to oranges comparison, I don't play but isn't the average match length something like 30 minutes? Way too long for a robust queue pop system to work well, but with 10-15 minute matches most games I play usually have popping queue times,
  • mordekai#1901 mordekai Member Posts: 1,598 Arc User
    edited March 2020



    My thought is for there to be PVP related metrics that move players up or down a division. Perhaps use the existing points system or make something new. I don’t necessarily think win / loss should or shouldn’t count as that is very group dependent. Individual, assists, kills, deaths, HP lost, HP healed, damage mitigated, damage dealt, etc. can be used to positively and negatively impact a player’s score. This calculated score will assign a player a rank, then place them in divisions. Since each class is different the formula will have to be calculated different to arrive at the same rank. I envision a system where if you do well you move up and if you do poor you move down (with a range of staying where you are). Honestly, I have no clue how something like this could be done.

    Let me pre empt this by saying that I have never had a good experience playing the PvP variant of this game. Back when I first started playing and got to just below L60 I decided to give it a go. It was not so much the lack of fun at having a couple of PvP demi gods waiting beneath the spawn point to slaughter me the moment I tried to enter the arena that led me to think, "This is HAMSTER!", but more the attitude of them when they did. The Throne spinning "Look at me... I'm better than a guy who never did this before!" attitude was what made me give up. For years i went through a cycle of every six months thinking, "I wonder if PvP has improved" and tried again. Only to be reminded of why I stopped in the first place.

    But that aside, I agree with @froger#9967 that a tiered system might help.
    I suggested this a few years ago, but people were more interested in gear and rewards than an accessible system.

    FEEDBACK OVERVIEW
    PvP sucks. There is little to no scope for casual PvP players to jump in and "enjoy" this part of the game.

    FEEDBACK GOAL
    If not stop this, at least try to mitigate it a bit.
    Gear and IL is not a relevant factor in PvP, and an IL 24K PvP novice could easily get slaughtered by an IL 20K expert playing on their alt, so a different metric needs to be used.

    FEEDBACK FUNCTIONALITY
    Introduce a Tiered system.
    All players begin at Tier 1. All characters are assigned a "Win/Loss" flag with a range of -5 to +5. And a "Tier" flag of 1 to (let's say...) 6000
    When they win a PvP, their flag increases by 1, and when they lose it is reduced by 1.
    When the Win/Loss flag hits +5, the player's Tier Flag is increases by 1, and when it hits -5 the "Tier" flag is reduced by 1. At this point the Win/Loss flag is reset to zero.

    When a player queues for PvP they are matched with players of their tier.
    Allow players to queue at higher and lower tiers that bracket their own by ONE rank with modifications to the rewards.
    Example, a Tier 4 player queues for PvP and elects to bracket his Tier in order to increase the speed their queue tales to fire. That player is now queuing to be matched with players of Tiers 3 to 5.The tier of the queue is decided by the average of the players within it.
    IF the match is of a lower tier than the player, they can not claim it as a +1 for Win, but can count it as a -1 for Loss. If the match is a higher tier than the player, then they cannot count it as a -1 for Loss, but can count it as a +1 for Win.

    After a few weeks, these tiers will level themselves out so that people are playing against people with similar capabilities.

    And, of course, rewards would be based around the discrepancy between the player's Tier, and the Tier of the Match itself.

    RISKS AND CONCERNS
    It would potentially dilute the pool of PvPers available to match at certain levels.
    The algorithm required to match those choosing to bracket their tier would be pretty complex.

    Note:
    This idea is not based on actual figures, as I don't have access to the stats for how many people play PvP and what the win/loss ratios look like, so the numbers may be horribly wide of the mark. Maybe the +/- 5 needs to be 7 or 10, and the brackets need to be 2 tiers either side to work efficiently, but the principle in practice would allow people to be more likely to get matched with players of roughly equivalent PvP prowess.


    If I know I'm going to be matched with equally HAMSTER players when I fancy a PvP bout, I'm going to be more inclined to actually play PvP.
    As it stands, short of paying me real money to do so, there is nothing that would make me choose to PvP in Neverwinter. You could offer me an Unbound Legendary Mount and a roster of Mythic companions as a potential reward, and I'd still think... "It's not worth the hassle of putting up with all the HAMSTER holes"
  • froger#9967 froger Member Posts: 413 Arc User
    > @rhroudadev#5641 said:
    > Hey everyone - I really appreciate all of this feedback and suggestions.
    >
    > I have a question for you folks though, based on your current opinion of PvP.
    >
    > If you do not play PvP, what do you feel it would take to get you to try it out for a bit?
    >
    > If you do occasionally play PvP, What do you feel it would take to make it more of a daily routine for you?
    >
    > If you play PvP frequently, do you feel like the time you spent in there isn't wasted? And if so, what do you feel would make your time investment feel more respected?
    >
    > Again, thank you everyone for your posts. I love seeing this discussion.

    I'm an occasional player I guess. Sometimes I try it with the hopes I can have fun competitively playing. Problem is I generally get destroyed. I'll make adjustments, rinse and repeat. For me I guess I don't know / understand how PVP stats, attacks, defence, controls, resists, etc. work. Beyond that I get one shot and can't do damage despite being able to do any PVE content. Trying to PVP is like playing a different game, I'll give it a go once in a while, then go back to what I know.

    I guess I could try harder, get constantly killed, insulted by other players (they get really angry if trying to work up the leader board), kicked, wait forever in queue, get zero rewards, maybe make some progress, get the occasional kill. Yeah, that sounds like a lot of fun.

    Now, I don't hate PVP, there have been really enjoyable matches where both teams were a mix of professionals, amateurs, and novices. I've had fun in runs where we were all bad.

    To make it a daily routine? Throw it in the random queue I guess, but not in it's current state.
    Froger - Barbie Girl in a Barbie World - Main in spirit only - 9 3/4 Unbuffed - Xbone
    Jade - Cleric - Main - 9 3/4 Unbuffed - Xbone
    Magnus - Fighter - Alt - 9 3/4 Unbuffed - Xbone
    Loverboy - Ranger - Alt - 9 3/4 Unbuffed - Xbone
    Nomnomnommm - Wizard - Alt - Droppin Crits on Fools - Xbone
    I Am The Wall - Paladin - Alt - Droppin Crits on Fools - Xbone
    Xeros - Rogue - Alt - 9 3/4 Unbuffed - Xbone

    Jade - DC - Shadows of Gauntlgrym - PC
  • gweddrygweddry Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 262 Arc User
    @thefiresidecat That's actually a good idea, I could definitely see players voting for a map once the queue is accepted. My only problem with that is that it requires additional programming since that's a system we don't have anywhere else in the game and it would also make sense to then add a few more maps to the rotation.

    I think we have seen quite a bit of good ideas like this one in the CDP, I just believe that prioritization is crucial here. I'd rather see the base of PvP fixed first, i.e. meta (adding some form of tenacity, adjusting broken items, disallowing unhealthy team comps like multi healer ones) and accessibility in terms of power gap. To put that into perspective, PvP currently has similar gear requirements as TOMM in PvE, I'd hope for them to be comparatively close to LOMM.

    @fluffy6977 Apart from what I said about dev time costs of making more queues or modes, I admit that I'm biased in this. I have been playing PvP in rivenscar ruins and hotenow domination for years and for me, it's THE way PvP should look like in NW. Recently, we got stardock arena and no veteran player I know, myself included, likes the map and always hopes they queue into one of the other two. I suppose if more modes or maps is what would make PvP more inviting to others I'm fine with it. I still think that for getting new players into PvP and keeping the current ones, balance/meta, accessibility and eventually queuing with friends is the most important thing.
  • huijianhuijian Member Posts: 73 Arc User
    Feedback Overview
    The current state of pvp in neverwinter is one of near non-existence. The pvp queues are almost completely vacant, with the exception of a handful of elite endgame players. The reason for this is quite simply if a player does not have a minimum of 3x rank 15 bonding stones, an epic/legendary quality companion, rank 13 or higher enchantments, and full set of endgame gear including epic quality weapons they will be completely ineffective in pvp. This has resulted in most players avoiding the pvp queue entirely because they have no chance of success against the elite endgame players. This has also resulted in those elite endgame players behaving extremely toxic towards players who dare to queue the pvp but are not well enough equipped to compete alongside them.

    Feedback Goal
    To rebalance the pvp queues so that ALL players have an opportunity to enjoy pvp and have a chance to succeed without having to spend years acquiring all that they need to be effective and competitive in pvp.

    Feedback Functionality
    To achieve a more level playing field in the pvp arenas, I suggest we first create queues based on players item level instead of just level. Specifically I would suggest we group players below 20k IL in one queue, 20k-22k in another queue, and 22k+ in the elite queue. This way the elitist endgame players won't have to worry about a low IL player dragging their team down. Secondly I also suggest we completely remove the use of companions in pvp. player vs. player should be players vs. players, not players vs. players vs. companions (and augmented stats).

    Risks & Concerns
    Solo pvp queue is GOOD, and there is nothing wrong with solo pvp queue. Yet, A handful of players in the CDP have suggested we get rid of solo queue. This is a theme I've been seeing in the CDP where certain players make suggestions that would only improve game for themselves while making it worse for everyone else. If you don't like the solo pvp queue, then don't queue for it, queue up in the other queue and feel free to fight other premade teams of elites. The only players who want to get rid of solo queue are players who want to go in with premade teams of elite players to stomp on groups of randoms. This was entire problem with pvp in first place, and whole reason the solo queue was added. Getting rid of the solo queue now will only damage pvp even further.
  • huijianhuijian Member Posts: 73 Arc User
    Feedback Overview
    The current state of pvp in neverwinter is one of near non-existence. The pvp queues are almost completely vacant, with the exception of a handful of elite endgame players. The reason for this is quite simply if a player does not have a minimum of 3x rank 15 bonding stones, an epic/legendary quality companion, rank 13 or higher enchantments, and full set of endgame gear including epic quality weapons they will be completely ineffective in pvp. This has resulted in most players avoiding the pvp queue entirely because they have no chance of success against the elite endgame players. This has also resulted in those elite endgame players behaving extremely toxic towards players who dare to queue the pvp but are not well enough equipped to compete alongside them.
    Feedback Goal
    To rebalance the pvp queues so that ALL players have an opportunity to enjoy pvp and have a chance to succeed without having to spend years acquiring all that they need to be effective and competitive in pvp.
    Feedback Functionality
    To achieve a more level playing field in the pvp arenas, I suggest we first create queues based on players item level instead of just level. Specifically I would suggest we group players below 20k IL in one queue, 20k-22k in another queue, and 22k+ in the elite queue. This way the elitist endgame players won't have to worry about a low IL player dragging their team down. Secondly I also suggest we completely remove the use of companions in pvp. player vs. player should be players vs. players, not players vs. players vs. companions (and augmented stats).
    Risks & Concerns
    Solo pvp queue is GOOD, and there is nothing wrong with solo pvp queue. Yet, A handful of players in the CDP have suggested we get rid of solo queue. If you don't like the solo pvp queue, then don't queue for it, queue up in the other queue and feel free to fight other premade teams of elites. The only players who want to get rid of solo queue are players who want to go in with premade teams of elite players to stomp on groups of randoms. This was entire problem with pvp in first place, and whole reason the solo queue was added. Getting rid of the solo queue will only damage pvp even further.

    *note - I posted earlier today but don't see my post now for some reason so am reposting
  • froger#9967 froger Member Posts: 413 Arc User
    I always thought Solo Queue was meant for casual players. Previously (pre Solo Queue) you were almost guaranteed, if the queue popped, to go up against premade team. I thought the expectation was for premades to do Traditional Domination, and casuals to Solo Queue Domination. I assume the number of players doing premades dropped, making Traditional Domination impossible to play, so they started timing the queue pop in Solo with hopes of getting together to actually play.
    Froger - Barbie Girl in a Barbie World - Main in spirit only - 9 3/4 Unbuffed - Xbone
    Jade - Cleric - Main - 9 3/4 Unbuffed - Xbone
    Magnus - Fighter - Alt - 9 3/4 Unbuffed - Xbone
    Loverboy - Ranger - Alt - 9 3/4 Unbuffed - Xbone
    Nomnomnommm - Wizard - Alt - Droppin Crits on Fools - Xbone
    I Am The Wall - Paladin - Alt - Droppin Crits on Fools - Xbone
    Xeros - Rogue - Alt - 9 3/4 Unbuffed - Xbone

    Jade - DC - Shadows of Gauntlgrym - PC
  • fluffy6977fluffy6977 Member Posts: 291 Arc User
    @gweddry I absolutely agree with there being higher priorities requiring fixes. A little bias is fine, you've developed a preference and want to play it and there is nothing wrong with that. I think the biggest part of "fixing" a game or game mode is understanding that there are a variety of users approaching it with an array of different goals and the game needs to be able to cater to all of them to some extent. Currently it doesn't, and the PVP player population has severely declined as a result.

    Thanks again for engaging! It definitely gave me something else to consider, hopefully you got something out of it as well.
  • abn173d2003#3683 abn173d2003 Member Posts: 28 Arc User
    pvp isn't pvp at all, I'm sorry to say this but it has become a game of hide behind your paladin sigil. truthfully if something isn't done you will completly kill PVP. I'm honestly starting to believe that is what people want :(
  • skrewfaz3d#1482 skrewfaz3d Member Posts: 103 Arc User
    Queue'd pvp should be normalized, open world can be left as is.
  • froger#9967 froger Member Posts: 413 Arc User
    Something I haven't really considered is coordinated group PVP vs uncoordinated group PVP vs one on one PVP.

    Was anyone around for Diablo 2 duels? The community 'self tiered' with duels that had max layer levels of 9, 30, 50ish, 99. Basically you equipped the best gear you could for your toon level, and used the max stats you could get for that level. IIRC it was a fairly active thing. Do you all think something like that could work for Neverwinter (provided gear was appropriate)?
    Froger - Barbie Girl in a Barbie World - Main in spirit only - 9 3/4 Unbuffed - Xbone
    Jade - Cleric - Main - 9 3/4 Unbuffed - Xbone
    Magnus - Fighter - Alt - 9 3/4 Unbuffed - Xbone
    Loverboy - Ranger - Alt - 9 3/4 Unbuffed - Xbone
    Nomnomnommm - Wizard - Alt - Droppin Crits on Fools - Xbone
    I Am The Wall - Paladin - Alt - Droppin Crits on Fools - Xbone
    Xeros - Rogue - Alt - 9 3/4 Unbuffed - Xbone

    Jade - DC - Shadows of Gauntlgrym - PC
  • thefiresidecatthefiresidecat Member Posts: 4,335 Arc User
    gweddry said:

    @thefiresidecat That's actually a good idea, I could definitely see players voting for a map once the queue is accepted. My only problem with that is that it requires additional programming since that's a system we don't have anywhere else in the game and it would also make sense to then add a few more maps to the rotation.

    I think we have seen quite a bit of good ideas like this one in the CDP, I just believe that prioritization is crucial here. I'd rather see the base of PvP fixed first, i.e. meta (adding some form of tenacity, adjusting broken items, disallowing unhealthy team comps like multi healer ones) and accessibility in terms of power gap. To put that into perspective, PvP currently has similar gear requirements as TOMM in PvE, I'd hope for them to be comparatively close to LOMM.

    @fluffy6977 Apart from what I said about dev time costs of making more queues or modes, I admit that I'm biased in this. I have been playing PvP in rivenscar ruins and hotenow domination for years and for me, it's THE way PvP should look like in NW. Recently, we got stardock arena and no veteran player I know, myself included, likes the map and always hopes they queue into one of the other two. I suppose if more modes or maps is what would make PvP more inviting to others I'm fine with it. I still think that for getting new players into PvP and keeping the current ones, balance/meta, accessibility and eventually queuing with friends is the most important thing.

    I'd be happy to see a vote added to random ques in pve as well.


  • micky1p00micky1p00 Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 3,312 Arc User
    edited March 2020

    I always thought Solo Queue was meant for casual players. Previously (pre Solo Queue) you were almost guaranteed, if the queue popped, to go up against premade team. I thought the expectation was for premades to do Traditional Domination, and casuals to Solo Queue Domination. I assume the number of players doing premades dropped, making Traditional Domination impossible to play, so they started timing the queue pop in Solo with hopes of getting together to actually play.

    Yes, the solo queue has (at least had) a very fundamental flaw, it doesn't shuffle the players, so if you time sync your queue you can have your practically premade in one team, and a bunch of solo players in the other. I'll leave it to the readers imagination how that works out for the match quality...

    A simple shuffle of the players, or better yet averaging the groups by the long implemented Elo (yes it actually exists, done eons ago, just not used), would have solved so much grief.


    I've been told it does shuffle by rank.
    Post edited by micky1p00 on
    Guild: The Imaginary Friends
    If you disagree with me: My opinions are my own and do not reflect on my guild and friends.
    If you agree with me: My opinions are totally the guild official policy !
    ;)
  • krumple01krumple01 Member Posts: 754 Arc User
    edited March 2020
    Feedback Overview

    The point system needs to be redone completely. Currently the system encourages NOT playing. Players who have achieved a win/loss ratio quit playing and instead turn towards kicking anyone who attempts to play.

    Feedback Goal

    The scoring system should be based on a variety of elements which get focused into participation.

    Feedback Functionality

    Points should be awarded for entering the match. (this is important although might seem meaningless)
    Points should be awarded for making kills.
    Points should be awarded for capping points. (domination)
    Points should be lost for dying.

    You can further give incentive to queue for pvp by providing a gradient rough AD reward based on participation results per match.

    Risks & Concerns

    The point system should be based on small numbers to encourage more queuing.
    If the numbers are too big its harder for "late" arrivals to catch up.
    Any rewards should be based on participation, which means bots or "i give up" minded players can't camp for rewards.
    You should encourage the pursuit to be good and reward based on that outcome.
  • trgluestickztrgluestickz Member Posts: 1,011 Arc User
    edited March 2020

    Thank you to folks who gave additional insight into Solo Queue. From a personal perspective, I've always been hesitant to remove features once they are introduced - yes, it happens in every game but I'm likely the one in meetings with counterpoints to removal, preferring to first explore how something can be modified to make it feasible. Only after reasonable options have been exhausted am I ok moving towards a removal decision. Again, this is just my own philosophy!

    @trgluestickz made a comment that has really stuck with me and I'm mulling over:

    "Solo que is currently the only active PVP type right now and puts 2 different groups of players with incompatible interests in the same que as each other."

    And that gets to the crux of one of the biggest issues (for me) - incompatible interests among the different existing PvP, potential PvP players, and PvE players.

    @nitocris83

    This may help you figure out which of the two options to go with, remove solo que or modify and update two separate ques.

    If moving forwards with 2 separate domination ques, one of the 3 following things would occur:

    #1) The “it will not change much”, “will be a small improvement”, or “make things worse" scenarios:
    We move fowards with 2 ques right from the start. Having two ques could split the population too much and we might not get enough newcommers and returning players to allow both ques to pop. So either PVP could die completely under this scenario or only one of the two ques would be active. The latter of which is what is currently the case with solo que.

    #2) The “build it and they will come” scenario:
    We move fowards with 2 ques right from the start. The PVP population due to a combination of these updates and other updates, grows fast and grows a lot. The veteran players that were previously demotivated and stopped playing, like what they see and more of them come back. The players that already play PVP start playing more matches. More new players take an interest in PVP and have a better experience queing for it and a lot more of them actually stick around. The end result being that the population grows rapidly and both ques become active within a very short time.

    #3) First one option happens, then the other scenario:
    Lets say we removed the solo que and now only regular/premading allowing que is active again. Some other good updates are made to PVP and then more continue to come out over time, resulting in a more gradual population and activity rise. Eventually the population and activity rate increases enough that this game can support two active separate domination ques. So a modified fully casuals oriented solo que gets reintroduced, the regular/premade que becomes the endgame/competitive que, and now both ques are popping and PVP is now in a much healthyer state.

    There are some factors that can be added in to reduce the odds of the first scenario above being the case:

    -- Other proposed updates and fixes + these ones bring in enough people to make both ques pop.

    -- The revamping of the ques could take psychological factors into account such as the one I pointed out about people being most likely to que for options that provide less hassle and waiting. The other end of it is which que feels like the “main” one to people, which can likely be influenced/changed. Here are some examples of this influencing using the idea I proposed:

    If the solo que had updates to make it more clearly oriented towards casual players (separate leaderboard and other changes) and the regular domination que got updates to make it more endgame/competitive oriented, with restrictions to match (such as the endgame que having a minimum item level requirement and the solo que having a maximum item level requirement), it may stop solo que from feeling like the main que to the current PVP regulars, who usually have BIS gear. Which would mean people with lots of gear (AKA most of the PVP regulars), are more likely to use the regular/premade allowing domination que.

    The casual and undergeared player populations, seeing that the BIS players that crush them can't que for the solo que or are at least less interested in it, are more likely to feel like solo que is a fair and fun environment for them to que in and may start PVPing again. This would likely aid player retention, more people would stick around long term instead of quitting within a few matches due to kicking and getting smashed by maxed out god level players.

    --------------------------

    I will also mention the pros and cons of solo que having a leaderboard under my suggestion vs the pros and cons of solo que not having a leaderboard at all. If solo que didn't have a leaderboard, it could reduce the frequency of solo que players kicking to win. However, no leaderboard in solo que does reduce visibility of PVP, which does make it harder to figure out who is currently around and may harm advertising for PVP.

    I'll also mention a bit about rewards and how they can influence people's behavior. The suggestions I made in the post I dedicated to a PVP rewards overhaul were all indirect ways of granting rewards instead of granting rewards directly from matches. I had stated that granting rewards directly from matches was the most risky way to grant rewards but would be fine if all rewards except glory were only granted from winning matches and the items in the glory stores were all bound to account.

    With the above in mind I mentioned about rewards, I would like to further clarify that the best system may be to only provide any kind of direct match rewards for the regular/premade allowing que. Both ques would have the indirect rewards systems but the regular/premade que would also grant some rewards directly from winning matches. The benefit of making it so the solo que doesn't grant any rewards directly from matches is that it further discourages players in the solo que from kicking to win.

    --------------------------

    I will also mention a very good point @ninefingers222 made. Solo que was intended to improve conditions for lone queing players, new players, and casuals, to which he mentioned he doesn't think this demographic of players have ever had it worse in this game. To this I agree, the current PVP environment is very unwelcoming to new, undergeared, and casual players, so solo que being introduced definitely wasn't successful at improving conditions for these players in the long run. If anything, things have gotten worse for them.
    Post edited by trgluestickz on
    --
    PVP Rogue,
    --[----- "Your friendly neighborhood spawn of Satan." -----]--
    ----------------------------------------------------------------
    Main Character: Hurricane Marigolds (Rogue WK & Assassin)
    Ingame Handle: trgluestickz
    Discord Name: Hurricane🌀Marigolds#2563
    Full Gaming Name: Gluestickz The Gap Closer
    Guilds: She Looked LVL 18 & Essence of Aggression
    Alliances: Imperium & Order of the Silent Shroud
    Platform: PC
  • nagasablade#3988 nagasablade Member Posts: 17 Arc User
    edited March 2020
    I PVP on Xbox

    Feedback Overview:
    Class Balancing in pvp

    Feedback Goal:
    Balancing and making PVP more fair

    Feedback Functionality:
    I want the tanks to be more relative in PvP. Right now, they are not because if you look at last mod the tanks were too tanky because companion stats were on all classes and tanks benefited from that more. In this mod, companion stats is out of PVP and tank's HP got nerf. It was suppose to be a 40% nerf but it end up being 80%. My pally lose around 100k HP just to go into PVP and that's not counting companion stats. My stamina is -42% in PVP. Since the nerf is removed from armor pent and crit servity and crit strike as a tank you get hit one time and you lose your shield. There isn't enough DPS for tanks to kill classes that don't wear armor and you should be able to kill. Rogue and CW are tanker than tanks and HR.

    First solution, give tanks back their HP they lose going into PVP because DPS is so much stronger now. Tanks should have some damage to at least make them half way useful and not just a punching bag. As for my class, the paladin as been turned into a glorified guardian fighter with no damage. There is no such thing as a tank paladin, only healdin in PVP. The solution is to fix pally and all classes is give them a feat tree similar to what we use to have were you can pick the powers you want not base on if you are a healdin or tank. Third solution, tenacity and and a full feat tree should be brought back and some kind of power points system like before so it is not so simplify.

    Also, the crashes on xbox is ridiculous. If this was Saha ball glitch, it would have been fixed. It seems if something is affecting money, it get fixed but not this which is affecting the customers. Cause of the crashes I have lost about 15 games in PVP because my whole team got disconnected and we were winning. Maybe some time of compensation for this.

    Please add different PVP modes like capture of the flag, king of the hill and more maps.

    Another thing that is messing up PVP is drains and wards and slayer cause that shouldn't be in PVP, especially the way it works in this game. For example, you can have a ward to stop a slayer or drain, but people stack slayers and drain so your ward only work against one of the person wearing it and the other person knows this so this is how they take advantage of it. Almost like DPS vs Support and the favoritism goes to DPS. This is why people don't build support.

    One more thing, when this game first came out it was one of most most played MMORPGS out there and now it's a former shell of itself due to it being dumb down. I use to play PVP for 8 hours a day now I'm lucky if I get 5 matches. In conclusion, go back and look at what the game use to be and look at the pros and cons of the old game before mod 15. Look at the problems of the game now and take the best of both worlds and put them together. This would help the game out quite a bit. Look at DND 5e because it has several classes. You don't have to have all of them but we need some variety because the game is too generic.

    Sincerely Yours,
    The Pally They Love to Hate

    Risk and Concerns - These changes are going to need several mods to fix. Also, the developers need to play PVP on all platforms and you'll see some of the problems. Not pre-made but solo queue.
This discussion has been closed.