test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Random TFOs have brought bad content to the surface

13

Comments

  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 35,231 Arc User
    warpangel wrote: »
    Just had my very 1st ever Undine infiltration run, almost curled up in the fetal position as I suddenly thought i'm in Of Bajor. I can see why this mission fails it does require you to pay attention and use your brain when questioning those filthy Bajorans
    the hilarious part is that if you look around the game gives you all the info you need. Like the one where you ask if the Bajoran has ever been to the fire caves.... there's always a photo of them IN the fire caves in the level. So it's not guesswork whether it's right, and if you've played it as many times as I did when it was new, you've memorized the right answers. That's another thing about this. The right/wrong definitions don't change. The only part that changes is if the people you question give you the right answers.
    Unfortunately, STO queues are not the kind of environment that's naturally conducive to patient observation and thought, even in that part of the playerbase that's capable of such. It's all rush ahead finish it fast and if failing the optionals makes it go faster...

    It would help if there were a list of correct answers or even a transcript of the dialogue involved that players could study in advance. The wiki apparently has at some point received a link to such a list...but it doesn't work.
    there's only 6 of them.... Truth is it doesn't take much patience. You just interact with a piece of the environment before talking to the guy and read what pops up.
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 9,427 Arc User
    edited October 2018
    ruinthefun wrote: »
    warpangel wrote: »
    No number at all is not a 0. Most people will now join queues they want to play, now that there is no more negative feedback telling them not to. The rest will not be missed.
    The negative feedback is "it didn't pop, thus proving the number was zero". There was never a "negative" feedback: People have varying degrees of adventurousness when it comes to queuing: Some will queue even at 0, others are have a join condition of >= 1, etc. If that number is not present, then those people who have non-zero trigger conditions simply do not bother as the value is never initialized, and therefore, is always zero. This means that the queue now exclusively depends on people who will attempt to queue no matter what.
    Nobody can have a "join condition" anymore. You join the queue or you don't. Nobody cares if you'd rather not play at all over a silly useless number. Other people who do want to play, play. And benefit from not having that scary 0 there telling them not to.
    Everyone else? Sees no value, therefore, the uninitialized value is 0, because that's how things work in computers, and thus do not join.
    People are not computers.

    BTW, depending on programming language an uninitialized variable could in fact contain pretty much any value at all.
  • dongemaharudongemaharu Member Posts: 544 Arc User
    A couple of weeks ago, I was able to join up in my favorite queues with usually little wait. Now I can’t. They are dead. It worked before. Now it doesn’t. There was transparency and choice, and I and other players had more options. Now there’s less, and these queues are dead. Again, it used to work.

    This is what happens when you try and force/manipulate behavior, remove choice and reduce transparency.

    The new system simply rewards people who want less choice.
  • feordilagorgefeordilagorge Member Posts: 247 Arc User
    What I don't like is getting restricted choice of marks in random. The system should attempt to not give you a mission with a specific type of mark if those are on cool down. I did two randoms today: One was ground and only choice was Temporal Marks and the other was space and Temporal Marks.
    Star Citizen: Pay-2-Win?
    i.imgur.com/LGpIGVB.png

    FREE HONG KONG! *
    * With purchase of another Hong Kong of equal or greater value.
  • pottsey5gpottsey5g Member Posts: 3,774 Arc User
    edited October 2018
    warpangel wrote: »
    “Nobody can have a "join condition" anymore. You join the queue or you don't. Nobody cares if you'd rather not play at all over a silly useless number. Other people who do want to play, play. And benefit from not having that scary 0 there telling them not to.”
    All the evidence at Elite points to you being wrong as it’s the other way around. It’s not a silly useless number as it caused the queues to start faster and the number caused people to spur of the moment swap from not playing at all to playing which caused everyone to benefit.

    See my example in my last post where in the old system 5 people who want to play a queue play together due to the number. In the new system 5 people who want to play a queue sit there waiting and not playing.

    In fact at times in the old system you could have 15+ people playing over 3+ queues. Now with the new system those same 15 people can end up sitting waiting, playing nothing as nothing starts all because the number has been removed.


    warpangel wrote: »
    “And benefit from not having that scary 0 there telling them not to.”
    That is where you are going wrong. The numbers didn’t stop people playing. The numbers turned people who would never have played into players which caused us all to benefit. By removing the numbers those none players that got turned into players are now turned back into none players so everyone loses out. Now we have less people playing queues and the queues are in a worse state all because of the UI change.

    As you were warned before removing the numbers doesn’t turn all those spur of the moment players into people sitting in a queue waiting. So we all lose out from the UI change.
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 9,427 Arc User
    ruinthefun wrote: »
    warpangel wrote: »
    Nobody can have a "join condition" anymore. You join the queue or you don't. Nobody cares if you'd rather not play at all over a silly useless number. Other people who do want to play, play. And benefit from not having that scary 0 there telling them not to.
    Without the option to ever see a non-zero telling you that you should even bother again, after the first time that you try it and it doesn't work, you stop doing it.
    warpangel wrote: »
    People are not computers.
    If you're going to rely entirely on irrational behavior to drive participation, you've effectively excluded all rational actors and therefore reduced the population.
    Pining after a nonexistent number is not rational. Nor is assuming that because at one moment there were less than 5 people in a given queue, that there will always be less than 5.
    pottsey5g wrote: »
    warpangel wrote: »
    “And benefit from not having that scary 0 there telling them not to.”
    That is where you are going wrong. The numbers didn’t stop people playing. The numbers turned people who would never have played into players which caused us all to benefit. By removing the numbers those none players that got turned into players are now turned back into none players so everyone loses out. Now we have less people playing queues and the queues are in a worse state all because of the UI change.
    Yes they did. Someone did a poll on it and many people responded seeing the queues empty as the primary reason for not playing. It's no good encouraging the last 1 at the cost of discouraging the first 4.

    And in all likelyhood most of the "people who would never have played" would have, and do actually play anyway. People who are looking for a quick pop of anything will now simply do so in the random system, which snipes the quick pops for them.

    Or with the good old "select all" that does the same thing with more control like space/ground. In that aspect it might be useful if they added a customizable "favorites" category to the queue list that would allow picky players to quickly join all queues they like without joining everything.

    You assume there are less people playing queues, based on nothing but your own personal feelings. Just as much I could assume there are more people playing, based on every queue I've played since the update popped in <10 seconds.

    However, more likely is there are about the same number of people playing, but they are playing different queues now that the random system gives extra reward and the numbers are no longer telling people where they must (not) queue.
  • thunderfoot#5163 thunderfoot Member Posts: 4,364 Arc User
    [W.O.T.]This isn't about "choice". Or "fun", for that matter. It is about something for nothing. A large number who play this game play those Queues because they reward maximum benefit for minimal effort. Some of these people assumed this state of affairs would continue as long as STO was alive. They completely ignored that MMO's change and adapt over time. If an MMO does not do this, it fails. This game is now very very different from what it was in February 2012.

    As James T. Kirk said Azetbur, "Some people are frightened by change, Madam Chancellor." This probably isn't an exact match because I haven't watched that film in a long time. But it gets the job done.

    I don't like the new UI. I think ALL the choice buttons should be on top and prominently displayed. But the choices made about button placement are made by Marketing as well as the Dev Team. And until the used car salesmen notice a significant drop off in the revenue stream, the buttons, and the UI, will remain as they are.

    I was a skeptic about RTFO's. Still am. But instead of endlessly bashing them, I will continue to try them out. Had my first bad experience with them last night. Assault on Terok Nor. We were all geared adequately. We were all around lvl 65. But when we got to any part of the mission which required someone to do something other than pew-pew we stalled and remained there. After twenty minutes of watching ADM Leeta wander about with impunity while only two of us attempted to Activate the Charge Plates, I decided to take the Leaver Penalty. It's only thirty minutes. I'd already wasted a half hour for no gain anyway. I have enough other chars doing interesting stuff to more than fill up thirty minute's worth of time. I have never taken either an AFK Penalty or a Leaver Penalty as a personal attack. See no good reason to do so now.

    Having read this thread in its entirety, The arguments against RTFO's are specious, vapid, and present no facts to support themselves. They are all terrible examples of critical thinking and logic. They are all based upon emotion. They are also self-centered and selfish. I understand why some people view RTFO's as Satan Spawn sent to ruin the Universe as we know it.

    I cannot agree with them and will not do so for other parts of this game either, Especially the parts of it I don't like. Some STO fan somewheres likes parts of this game I thoroughly detest. They enjoy things I have no patience or stomach for.

    Who am I to deny them this? Am I so important to STO the Dev Team must heed my every whim and chase off or punish those other players? Will they make enough profit off of me to keep the lights on? Isn't it easier and less nerve-wracking for me to, I dunno, not play those parts of the game?

    I think so, yes. STO is a game. It should not ever be allowed to become a lifestyle choice. [/W.O.T.]
    Nope. It ain't Discovery. It ain't Picard. It's not SNW, either.
    It's your obsessive-compulsive belief that you are the only 'real' Star Trek fan around here.
  • duncanidaho11duncanidaho11 Member Posts: 7,624 Arc User
    ruinthefun wrote: »
    warpangel wrote: »
    Pining after a nonexistent number is not rational. Nor is assuming that because at one moment there were less than 5 people in a given queue, that there will always be less than 5.
    Imagine that every time you've previously gone to the store, there was no milk, nor any indication that there was going to ever be any milk. Do you assume that there will one day be milk if you just keep going there, or that the store simply does not have any milk

    The analogy is more appropriate (per the actual timescale involved) if you consider the problem as waiting at the store without any milk in hopes that the shipment might arrive at any moment. You could stand there, waiting, or simply go to another supermarket which is carrying milk that day. This doesn't stop players from looking on another day, but if they repeatedly see that the store isn't carrying any milk they might just gravitate to Borg RA-Mart to consistently satisfy their needs.
    Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
    Last missions:
    Evolution's Smile [SSF:3-3]
    Epoch, Part 2 [AEI]
    Transcendence, Part 4
    Memorial Tour

    For the latest Tardigrades and other creative output: @Gorgonops_SSF
    Looking for something new to play? The interactive Foundry Mission Database has you covered.
  • pottsey5gpottsey5g Member Posts: 3,774 Arc User
    edited October 2018
    warpangel wrote: »
    ruinthefun wrote: »
    warpangel wrote: »
    Nobody can have a "join condition" anymore. You join the queue or you don't. Nobody cares if you'd rather not play at all over a silly useless number. Other people who do want to play, play. And benefit from not having that scary 0 there telling them not to.
    Without the option to ever see a non-zero telling you that you should even bother again, after the first time that you try it and it doesn't work, you stop doing it.
    warpangel wrote: »
    People are not computers.
    If you're going to rely entirely on irrational behavior to drive participation, you've effectively excluded all rational actors and therefore reduced the population.
    Pining after a nonexistent number is not rational. Nor is assuming that because at one moment there were less than 5 people in a given queue, that there will always be less than 5.
    pottsey5g wrote: »
    warpangel wrote: »
    “And benefit from not having that scary 0 there telling them not to.”
    That is where you are going wrong. The numbers didn’t stop people playing. The numbers turned people who would never have played into players which caused us all to benefit. By removing the numbers those none players that got turned into players are now turned back into none players so everyone loses out. Now we have less people playing queues and the queues are in a worse state all because of the UI change.
    Yes they did. Someone did a poll on it and many people responded seeing the queues empty as the primary reason for not playing. It's no good encouraging the last 1 at the cost of discouraging the first 4.

    And in all likelyhood most of the "people who would never have played" would have, and do actually play anyway. People who are looking for a quick pop of anything will now simply do so in the random system, which snipes the quick pops for them.

    Or with the good old "select all" that does the same thing with more control like space/ground. In that aspect it might be useful if they added a customizable "favorites" category to the queue list that would allow picky players to quickly join all queues they like without joining everything.

    You assume there are less people playing queues, based on nothing but your own personal feelings. Just as much I could assume there are more people playing, based on every queue I've played since the update popped in <10 seconds.

    However, more likely is there are about the same number of people playing, but they are playing different queues now that the random system gives extra reward and the numbers are no longer telling people where they must (not) queue.


    Those same people are still not going to play as they still see the queue as empty. Only now the problem is amplified because the spur the moment people who would have joined are now also not joining. So we end up in an even worse position.

    Most of the people who never waited are not suddenly going to start waiting. While the people who would have joined spur of the moment are not going to join spur of the moment anymore. That means all the people who wait and queue now have to wait even longer and get less queues played at Elite level. That is bad for the game.

    The change is not rational as it has done nothing but harm the game for zero benefit. More so at Elite level where the change has been devastatingly bad.
  • pottsey5gpottsey5g Member Posts: 3,774 Arc User
    edited October 2018
    ruinthefun wrote: »
    warpangel wrote: »
    Pining after a nonexistent number is not rational. Nor is assuming that because at one moment there were less than 5 people in a given queue, that there will always be less than 5.
    Imagine that every time you've previously gone to the store, there was no milk, nor any indication that there was going to ever be any milk. Do you assume that there will one day be milk if you just keep going there, or that the store simply does not have any milk

    The analogy is more appropriate (per the actual timescale involved) if you consider the problem as waiting at the store without any milk in hopes that the shipment might arrive at any moment. You could stand there, waiting, or simply go to another supermarket which is carrying milk that day. This doesn't stop players from looking on another day, but if they repeatedly see that the store isn't carrying any milk they might just gravitate to Borg RA-Mart to consistently satisfy their needs.
    They might but many have just stopped, leaving us in a worse position at Elite level. The change has reduced the amount of queues I have played from daily to less then 1 a week . Not just me but the whole Elite via the queue system community has been hit extremely badly by this change.
  • duncanidaho11duncanidaho11 Member Posts: 7,624 Arc User
    edited October 2018
    pottsey5g wrote: »
    They might but many have just stopped, leaving us in a worse position at Elite level. The change has reduced the amount of queues I have played from daily to less then 1 a week . Not just me but the whole Elite via the queue system community has been hit extremely badly by this change.

    Okay but the entire PVE community was being hit hard by population over-clustering. Listed players in queue was a contributing factor. Again, you can make do for elite by queuing for all elite queues irrespective of whether you think they'll pop rather than trying to anticipate as was your stated habit. If you don't find a match across all elite queues, then that's another population distribution problem and this should show in Cryptic's data. It'll be up to them then to find a solution that'll help you find games more consistently.

    That said, this specific problem, for which there are several inputs (ex. RTFO's being the current hot item, players queueing for what they want to play or what will earn them progress across the rest of the PVE system rather than sticking to a few tautological favorites) doesn't outweigh the problem we used to have with the vast majority of the PVE system being effectively unplayable (hurting everyone but those content to grind CCA, Borg RA, and ISA). Re-instituting wait times is not a solution as the drawbacks across the entire population would appear to exceed the benefits for the restricted group of players trying to find specific elite matches (and not finding an amenable population distribution.)

    Something else should be done instead to help elite players find matches (ex. elite RTFO's, giving some players who don't much care what they play quick matches and others [who want to play a specific queue] a better chance at finding their games populated by said players.)
    Bipedal mammal and senior Foundry author.
    Last missions:
    Evolution's Smile [SSF:3-3]
    Epoch, Part 2 [AEI]
    Transcendence, Part 4
    Memorial Tour

    For the latest Tardigrades and other creative output: @Gorgonops_SSF
    Looking for something new to play? The interactive Foundry Mission Database has you covered.
  • peterconnorfirstpeterconnorfirst Member Posts: 6,223 Arc User
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    Okay...so all this bickering off topic aside...did we ever learn from the OP what these bad content are? Or should we close this down and continue the merits and flaws of the random system in the thread that is actually about that issue?

    Good call, I'd close it. :|
    animated.gif
    Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
    felisean wrote: »
    teamwork to reach a goal is awesome and highly appreciated
    Bring it on
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    wishful thinking is not really a reliable source
  • pottsey5gpottsey5g Member Posts: 3,774 Arc User
    edited October 2018
    pottsey5g wrote: »
    They might but many have just stopped, leaving us in a worse position at Elite level. The change has reduced the amount of queues I have played from daily to less then 1 a week . Not just me but the whole Elite via the queue system community has been hit extremely badly by this change.

    Okay but the entire PVE community was being hit hard by population over-clustering. Listed players in queue was a contributing factor. Again, you can make do for elite by queuing for all elite queues irrespective of whether you think they'll pop rather than trying to anticipate as was your stated habit. If you don't find a match across all elite queues, then that's another population distribution problem and this should show in Cryptic's data. It'll be up to them then to find a solution that'll help you find games more consistently.

    That said, this specific problem, for which there are several inputs (ex. RTFO's being the current hot item, players queueing for what they want to play or what will earn them progress across the rest of the PVE system rather than sticking to a few tautological favorites) doesn't outweigh the problem we used to have with the vast majority of the PVE system being effectively unplayable (hurting everyone but those content to grind CCA, Borg RA, and ISA). Re-instituting wait times is not a solution as the drawbacks across the entire population would appear to exceed the benefits for the restricted group of players trying to find specific elite matches (and not finding an amenable population distribution.)

    Something else should be done instead to help elite players find matches (ex. elite RTFO's, giving some players who don't much care what they play quick matches and others [who want to play a specific queue] a better chance at finding their games populated by said players.)
    As I explained before that isn’t working I queued up for 28 Elite queues (minus a few I hate) and set a stop watch the first time was 18mins before a pop the 2nd time I gave up after 30mins as nothing started. I have been trying this since the change and it’s for the most part that bad every day.

    The problem is not just population distribution. There are other people like me trying to play Elites but we can no longer find each other. The typical Elite players doesn’t queue up for 28+ queues at once so we are all trying to guess and queuing up for different things. Which is causing very little to start. If we could just see the UI number we could queue up together and play.

    The simplest change they can do is to undo the UI number change. That would pretty much solve everything with no negative impact on normal/advanced.

    What is more frustrating is I warned you and others this would happened before the change. It could have been avoided. Instead a massive amount of harm has been done to the Elite community who used the queue system.

    "Listed players in queue was a contributing factor. "
    I am not convinced it was as that helped more then it hurt from everything I have seen. I have not seen any evidence showing it did harm but I have seen evidence people benefited from it. I believe if the UI change was undone for everything not just Elite and Random was kept how it is now then everyone would benefit. The population over-clustering would be in an even better state then it is now with the UI change put back.

    "doesn't outweigh the problem we used to have with the vast majority of the PVE system being effectively unplayable"
    Isn't it around something like 1/3 or 1/4 of queues are now unplayable due to the change. Many of which where playable before the change. We turned 30+ queues into unplayable to gain how many playable queues? It does not seem like a good tradeoff to me more so when it could have been avoided and those 30 queues could have been left as playable.
  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 9,427 Arc User
    pottsey5g wrote: »
    There are other people like me trying to play Elites but we can no longer find each other. The typical Elite players doesn’t queue up for 28+ queues at once so we are all trying to guess and queuing up for different things.
    Which is quite simply wrong and if the "typical Elite players" did queue up for more of them, you would find each other (presuming they exist and haven't all jumped on the random bandwagon instead).
  • pottsey5gpottsey5g Member Posts: 3,774 Arc User
    edited October 2018
    warpangel wrote: »
    pottsey5g wrote: »
    There are other people like me trying to play Elites but we can no longer find each other. The typical Elite players doesn’t queue up for 28+ queues at once so we are all trying to guess and queuing up for different things.
    Which is quite simply wrong and if the "typical Elite players" did queue up for more of them, you would find each other (presuming they exist and haven't all jumped on the random bandwagon instead).
    It is not wrong you just need to try and use Elites and speak to others to see its true. Sure if those typical Elite players queued up for more then 1 there might not be as bad a problem but they are not and that is the point.

    Your argument is that by removing the numbers those people who join spur of the moment via numbers will swap to waiting and will swap to queue multiple queues. That has not happened just like we warned you. There is enough evidence now to prove the numbers benefited us and by removing them we have not seen the benefit you describe only a massive negative. The UI change needs to be undone as it is doing massive damage not benefiting us. Undoing the UI change will keep the benefits of Random while bringing back the benefits of the UI numbers. It is the best of both worlds without the negatives we have now.



  • warpangelwarpangel Member Posts: 9,427 Arc User
    pottsey5g wrote: »
    warpangel wrote: »
    pottsey5g wrote: »
    There are other people like me trying to play Elites but we can no longer find each other. The typical Elite players doesn’t queue up for 28+ queues at once so we are all trying to guess and queuing up for different things.
    Which is quite simply wrong and if the "typical Elite players" did queue up for more of them, you would find each other (presuming they exist and haven't all jumped on the random bandwagon instead).
    It is not wrong you just need to try and use Elites and speak to others to see its true. Sure if those typical Elite players queued up for more then 1 there might not be as bad a problem but they are not and that is the point.
    It is unsuccessful therefore wrong. The advice for how this can be done better has been given, many times, by me and others. We can't follow the advice for you or your alleged "typical Elite players," that you will have to do yourselves.
    Your argument is that by removing the numbers those people who join spur of the moment via numbers will swap to waiting and will swap to queue multiple queues. That has not happened just like we warned you. There is enough evidence now to prove the numbers benefited us and by removing them we have not seen the benefit you describe only a massive negative. The UI change needs to be undone as it is doing massive damage not benefiting us.
    No, what I'm saying is that people who used to lurk the queues will now have to join them, or not play. If they choose not to play (or not to play the same things you do), that's entirely their choice.

    Despite your repeated claims of "evidence," you have never presented any. Your personal opinions are not evidence.
  • bellydancer42bellydancer42 Member Posts: 42 Arc User
    pottsey5g wrote: »
    But like minded people can no longer find and join each other leading to less queues starting with less queues being played due to the UI change. The UI change has been nothing but a negative impact on the queue system with no positive side to it. If the devs undid that UI change but kept the rest of TFO the same everyone would benefit and more queues would be played.

    While I can join any and all queues many will not start anymore or take much longer to start.
    I just queue for all the TFOs I want and play what pops. Is it a pitty, Starbase Fleet Defense hasn't popped in ages? Of course it is, but I keep queuing it nevertheless.
  • pottsey5gpottsey5g Member Posts: 3,774 Arc User
    edited October 2018
    warpangel wrote: »
    “The advice for how this can be done better has been given, many times, by me and others. We can't follow the advice for you or your alleged "typical Elite players," that you will have to do yourselves.”
    Your advice is wrong and doesn’t work at Elite level. The advice also doesn’t change the fact you are wrong on the UI numbers and the impact has been negative. The UI change has had a negative impact on Elite queues and if we readded the UI numbers the current problem would go away. Your advice doesn’t fix the problems crated by the UI change.


    warpangel wrote: »
    “No, what I'm saying is that people who used to lurk the queues will now have to join them, or not play. If they choose not to play (or not to play the same things you do), that's entirely their choice.”
    You are missing two points. A) Those lurkers do want to play but are not playing due to the change. B ) The lurkers are not swapping over to waiting which is having a large negative impact on the none lurkers who used to wait and join queues even with 0 people in them.

    Everyone has lost out. The lurkers have lost out and the people who waited and joined zero queues have lost out. Why is it so hard for you to admit you are wrong and removing the UI numbers was a giant mistake that is having a large negative impact.

    warpangel wrote: »
    “Despite your repeated claims of "evidence," you have never presented any. Your personal opinions are not evidence.”
    Yes I have you just seem to be ignoring it. I gave you examples of where we benefited from the UI numbers which caused queues to start faster. I gave you examples where removing the UI numbers stops the queues starting.

    I used a stop watch and joined 28 queues over multiples days which failed to work. I ran a test on the live server without the UI numbers before the season came out and ran into the same problem as today. Now the UI change is forced onto everyone and pretty much everyone who ran Elites via this system is running into the same problem just like my pre-season test. Lots of people have said the same thing as me proving that at least a portion of people are not swapping to waiting like you expected.

    You said there would be a benefit but you have provided zero evidence to show the benefit. All the Elite queues are either dead or taking longer to start. Not because the population has moved on to different things but because the UI change is stopping those of us that are active from teaming up. As per my example before 15 active people in the old system can have 3 queues going, 15 active people after the UI change can have 0 queues going With the old UI system we wouldn’t have the current problem that has been created. So clearly you are wrong and clearly the UI numbers had a large benefit.
    “I just queue for all the TFOs I want and play what pops. Is it a pitty, Starbase Fleet Defense hasn't popped in ages? Of course it is, but I keep queuing it nevertheless.”
    I tried that at Elite level and it rarely works in my timezone.
  • markhawkmanmarkhawkman Member Posts: 35,231 Arc User
    warpangel wrote: »
    pottsey5g wrote: »
    There are other people like me trying to play Elites but we can no longer find each other. The typical Elite players doesn’t queue up for 28+ queues at once so we are all trying to guess and queuing up for different things.
    Which is quite simply wrong and if the "typical Elite players" did queue up for more of them, you would find each other (presuming they exist and haven't all jumped on the random bandwagon instead).
    I think that's the real deal here. It's not that the people who used to play elites with him quit playing TFOs, it's that they decided RTFO has better rewards than Elite.

    Obv Pottsey thinks it's not true, but... There's an easy way to discern if true. Pottsey can join one of the LFG channels and beg people to team with him.
    -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
    My character Tsin'xing
    Costume_marhawkman_Tsin%27xing_CC_Comic_Page_Blue_488916968.jpg
  • pottsey5gpottsey5g Member Posts: 3,774 Arc User
    edited October 2018
    Obv Pottsey thinks it's not true, but... There's an easy way to discern if true. Pottsey can join one of the LFG channels and beg people to team with him.
    As this time of day there are currently 2 people in the Elite channel. Not sure if that counts me or not. Joint Task force has 1 person in, DPS diamond has 35 but none of them are running Elites at the moment as they are in ISA's. The only way I managed to run Elites at this time of day was to join the other people using the queue system. But now even when there are other people who would have joined me before the UI change, they cannot see my queue so do not join.

    From what I can tell only a small fraction of the population use the LFG channels although they do work much later at night and over weekends. Plus the Find a Team page is broken. No one can see each other or invite each other via the find a team at the time of writing.



  • peterconnorfirstpeterconnorfirst Member Posts: 6,223 Arc User
    edited October 2018
    My general observation is that during EU primetime more players in sum are around than during US primetimes. I also noticed that it helps immensely if one has at least 1-2 in team for the elite grounds to pop. There seem to be 1-2 on most ground maps lined up publicly so that it pops fairly soon then.

    If one is on his own it gets tough to get anything to pop during certain times of the day, I can confirm that.
    animated.gif
    Looking for a fun PvE fleet? Join us at Omega Combat Division today.
    felisean wrote: »
    teamwork to reach a goal is awesome and highly appreciated
    Bring it on
    coldnapalm wrote: »
    wishful thinking is not really a reliable source
  • salazarrazesalazarraze Member Posts: 3,789 Arc User
    edited October 2018
    pottsey5g wrote: »
    Obv Pottsey thinks it's not true, but... There's an easy way to discern if true. Pottsey can join one of the LFG channels and beg people to team with him.
    As this time of day there are currently 2 people in the Elite channel. Not sure if that counts me or not. Joint Task force has 1 person in, DPS diamond has 35 but none of them are running Elites at the moment as they are in ISA's. The only way I managed to run Elites at this time of day was to join the other people using the queue system. But now even when there are other people who would have joined me before the UI change, they cannot see my queue so do not join.

    From what I can tell only a small fraction of the population use the LFG channels although they do work much later at night and over weekends. Plus the Find a Team page is broken. No one can see each other or invite each other via the find a team at the time of writing.
    Through a combination of the channels [DPS-10,000], [DPS-30,000], [DPS-75,000], [PublicEliteSTF], [DPS-200] and [DPS-400], I can usually get a team together to run elite queues. It has slowed down lately though and the problem like I and others have said is that random advanced now pays out more than elite. With RNG, random normal can even pay more than elite.
    When you see "TRIBBLE" in my posts, it's because I manually typed "TRIBBLE" and censored myself.
  • meimeitoomeimeitoo Member Posts: 12,417 Arc User
    pottsey5g wrote: »
    The problem is not just population distribution. There are other people like me trying to play Elites but we can no longer find each other. The typical Elite players doesn’t queue up for 28+ queues at once so we are all trying to guess and queuing up for different things. Which is causing very little to start. If we could just see the UI number we could queue up together and play.

    The simplest change they can do is to undo the UI number change. That would pretty much solve everything with no negative impact on normal/advanced.

    What is more frustrating is I warned you and others this would happened before the change. It could have been avoided. Instead a massive amount of harm has been done to the Elite community who used the queue system.


    'Participation thru obfuscation' is a bit of a flawed concept. If anything, when a queue takes too long to pop, ppl will assume no one queued at all. And not seeing whether someone queued to begin with, will often result in ppl just not even bothering.

    Remember that former CM who pretty much openly lied on a podcast? (he got fired, the next day, btw, but likely due to him opening like 500 R&D boxes, and getting nothing: a fact I'm sure PWE did not appreciate). Anyway, he boldly claimed all queues were popping for him just fine, when (this was shortly after DR) they sure weren't for everyone else. Tl;dr: that strategy doesn't work either (after all, lying and obfuscating are simply too closely related).

    So, to make my long-winded point: just show the amount of ppl already queued in the UI. Better for everyone.
    ChCDpuh.jpg
This discussion has been closed.