When Darren started this thread, he hit the problem square on the head. PvP encounters are based on level bands, factions, and scenarios. As more factions and scenarios are added (highly desirable for variety), with a non-growing subscriber base, the "dilution" makes it more difficult to get a PvP encounter (highly undesirable).
While I like Darren's "sexier" vision of the modified interface. I don't see how it resolves the underlying problem.
It almost seems that the interface should focus first on indicating you want a PvP encounter, and once there are enough players that match the minimum criteria (e.g., level banding) then perhaps the players decide/vote on the type of the encounter (although folks that didn't like the vote result might drop).
Ideally though, I suspect a new solution has to be found overall. Something out of the box (like when you log in each character (based on level and faction) shows a PvP "wait-time" indicator, or active special events that character is qualified for).
Well, players want at least some choice. I think map rotation (much as it works in every long-lasting shooter) would grant at least some control to the player.
Imagine a spectrum:
1 queue for all______________________too many queues for anyone ________<
>
We're somewhere close to one end but at neither extreme.
Math for Total Number of Queues:
The Current system is (disregarding space/ground as either total maps or total modes):
(F+S-1) .. * T * L = C
S!(F-1)!
where F = factions, S = possible Sides to Select, T= Total Maps, L = Level Bands, and C= Combinations
This Thread's System is
(F+S-1) .. * M * L = C
S!(F-1)!
where F = Factions, S = possible Sides to Select, M = Total Modes, L = Level Bands, and C = Combinations
note: there will always be fewer modes than maps - which is why map rotation cuts the numbers down considerably
Does this thread idea scale well to faction v. faction v. faction? Not right now (unless you can choose two buttons) but I'd be happy to revisit it then. There's no new faction for the foreseeable ftureu and very little PvP interest.
What it does do is scale better than the current system while still affording a degree of control.
I imagine this might be the equivalent to giving PvP a bowl of wheaties: it's simple and it'll make the PvP experience more popular (whether a PUG or a premade).
Reduce the difficulty of entering a match is the first step toward making PvP more popular. However, there's counter-value of total player control. I'd like to think this (in conjuction with unburying the PvP option from that drop-down-arrow-bad-UI-choice-nightmare-thing would also be appreciated).
1) Put a button next to map for bringing up the PvP Queue (not a drop-down list).
2) Improve the PvP Queue to be less cumbersome (i.e. map rotation - so new maps can be added without breaking the queues).
3) ?????
4) Profit
We are investigating this and looking for ways to make this better, and are certainly aware that PvP queues are not popping as they should be (I had to PvE today on my lunch break... ).
To make a long story short:
We made a change in Season 2 which was meant to prevent unbalanced teams in PvP matches. An unfortunate consequence of this change is that fewer PvP Queues are launching now because players are dropping from waiting for one queue to launch, and joining another.
We're working on finding a fix right now, which currently involves greatly reducing the number of PvP Queues and introducing a more structured PvP Queue.
I've also sent up Darren's thread on the PvP Queue UI overhaul again as well.
I'll make sure to get you all more updates as I have them.
Regarding Private match setup and the tournament option... even if tournaments were bumped off to a later phase, one simple use case that is critically unsupported right now is to auto-populate two teams based on group leaders.
The functionality would be: Group A Leader invites Group B Leader to a private match through the interface. B Leader accepts. Private match is prepped to launch, pre-populated with Group A on one team, Group B on the other.
In order to support non-5v5 maps, this may need to take place in a flow of activity like: Choose match settings -> Create match -> Invite players => If invited player is in a group, give invited player the option to add the entire group. Some error handling would be required if, for instance, somebody tries to invite a group of 5 to a team that does not have 5 free slots left (e.g 7v7).
Regarding Private match setup and the tournament option... even if tournaments were bumped off to a later phase, one simple use case that is critically unsupported right now is to auto-populate two teams based on group leaders.
The functionality would be: Group A Leader invites Group B Leader to a private match through the interface. B Leader accepts. Private match is prepped to launch, pre-populated with Group A on one team, Group B on the other.
In order to support non-5v5 maps, this may need to take place in a flow of activity like: Choose match settings -> Create match -> Invite players => If invited player is in a group, give invited player the option to add the entire group. Some error handling would be required if, for instance, somebody tries to invite a group of 5 to a team that does not have 5 free slots left (e.g 7v7).
That's a very sexy idea, considering one of the scoring methods is Team Advancement (rather than individual K:D ratio).
I like... I like enough to add it to the interface.
great ideas in this thread, clearly some work needs to be done to fine tune the private q and additional mechanisms for "premade pvp" should be implemented. I applaud the op's idea and intentions.
great ideas in this thread, clearly some work needs to be done to fine tune the private q and additional mechanisms for "premade pvp" should be implemented. I applaud the op's idea and intentions.
The interface, like the game, should be easy to learn but hard to master.
Public Queues are easy, quick, and allow for pick-up-and-play fun.
Private matches (and tournament options) are deep but not overwhelming - allowing for the variety of needs PvP fleets need for vetting players (or making matches more interesting).
What could be done is abandon the random PUG groups all together and introduce a room type system.
- A player would open up his PvP Menu.
- There would be two tabs; Create game and Join Game.
- Under Create a game would be an interface, just like yours that allows you to create any game that you like. Also you can choose whether to password protect it or not. After creating the game a room window would open up very similar to the Private game one now. The room will also be displayed on a list within the Join a Game tab, displayed in order of games that have been waiting longest to the last made. People will join and the game is started when the room is full or if the host decides there are enough people, the teams must be even to start. In the waiting room there would be options for number of fighter and the ability to change the map for each battle as well as various other rules. After the match the host keeps control of his room unless he leaves then the next longest standing player within the room gets control and can change the options, kick people, switch teams etc.
- Under join a game there would be a list of all the games that people can join. Both currently active and waiting to start games. The player can see who is in each room and the current score etc. They can then either fill up a vacant slot in a game already started or join a room of people waiting to start. If the game type they want isnt there then they can go and create it themselves.
This system would mean people could play any map they want and wouldnt leave a massive list of disused maps and open up the option for unlimited new game types, Factions and maps to be added.
Only thing I can think of is adding an "Any" button to each layer (Location, Faction, Mode). I know you have the "Join Any" button in the lower-right, but someone might want to fight, say, Romulans specifically, but with no preferences for Location or Mode.
I wanted to give out some information on what's on the way for PvP in the near term.
1) A bug fix for the updated PvP queue system that causes match launch failure.
2) A simplified queue list that focuses the choices to space/ground, game type, and factions.
3) A new PvP Private Battle lobby interface. Private battles will allow for a wide variety of customization for creating the battle scenario you want to play.
Want to play 1 on 1? In.
Want to play 3 on 5? In.
Want to play with teams of mixed tier ships against another? In.
Want to mix Starfleet and Klingon ships on the same side? In.
Basically the only restrictions are the game type being tied to the battlefield map, as those elements are linked together with the way the existing maps are built. Otherwise, you'll have the functionality to either create a straightforward private match or recreate whatever team configurations you want to play with. This will be great for Fleets or Houses to challenge each other using their players from across all rank ranges.
4) Specific tournament queues that open for a fixed window of time (likely something short to start with; a weekend) that will track your individual performance and display the results with rewards given out for top honors.
More is on the way, but the above is in development (or already in testing) and should be out soon.
Thanks as always for your patience,
-snix
Even if it doesn't look like the mock-ups we made, this is good news. Not only might we get a better interface - we may be getting more features and content for PvP.
Maybe I can retire this thread and archive my photoshop files.
Wow, I only just found this thread, and I read the whole thing... I'm so impressed. Darren_Kitlor, that mock-up looks lovely. I could almost kiss you! (and all the other people that have posted suggestions, too!)
I wrote up my comments bit by bit in notepad whilst going through this. :P
Cycling maps would be fantastic. Most of the time, at the moment, I don't really care all that much which map I'm on, except that sometimes I feel like playing ground and sometimes I feel like playing space. variety in maps is nice but that aside it really doesn't matter what the scenery is like so long as I get the chance to play. (I'm sure that if the queues were sorted out, I would care more about the maps, but at the moment, I'm waiting an hour or so just to get on a map in the first place and by that point, ANY map will do!) So if I feel like playing ground I have to look at the queue and queue myself for all the ground maps that look like they MIGHT have enough people on them, and then if I wanna get in I have to sit and watch the numbers and alter my queues accordingly. This isn't fun in the slightest.
Cycling the maps would fix this issue and would mean people wouldn't have to sit there watching the PvP window trying to guess which map to click on to get in.
Even with this new system implemented it wouldn't be a problem not being able to select a particular map because you'd have an equal chance of playing any and all of them. It would no longer be a case of "I wanna play cracked planetoid but I'm gonna join solar wind because I actaully have a chance of maybe getting on it sometime within the next 2 hours", instead it would be a case of "I sure would like to get cracked planetoid this time. Oh I got solar wind? Well never mind, I'll play this and then try again next time, waiting time is only a few minutes I'll just have time to make a cup of coffee while I wait." :P You know, like a luck of the draw thing, I think most people wouldn't mind if they don't get on the map they want, especially if they don't have to wait X amount of hours just to get on in the first place.
The idea of a chat box is great for many reasons. In addition to what everyone else said - So many times I have found myself in a team where everyone is a tac and there's not one healer, or all are sci with no eng or tac, or whatever. The chat would help people who aren't on a premade team already, to organize one with the best variety of skills and whatnot.
I also like hurleybird's idea of letting the player choose "beginner/advanced", that sounds like it could work well.
I'm not sure that minimum stats to join or selecting a level based on a players stats would make a lot of difference though. When it comes to PvP a player's actual skill (as in the skill of the person at the keyboard, not the stats of the character) is often a lot more important than how good their stats are. A player can have the most awesome guns and skill points but if they're gonna run off without their teammates and try to take on 5 enemies by themselves then all the skill points in the world can't help them. Perhaps if there were a seperate scoring system for PvP matches to show how serious a player is? I don't know if that would help. Maybe it's just a case of "sometimes you just get the odd idiot no matter where you go"; I think a better queuing system WOULD cut down on the shoddy players though.
As for the "Join Any" option, perhaps the solution (to avoid breaking queues) would be to set it to a first-come-first-served system. Ie. the first person that clicks Join Any is put on a "join any" queue, they get in the first one that becomes avaliable. Once that person is in, the second person on the "join any" queue is then moved to the top of that list and they get in the next one, and so on.
All in all great stuff, I've really enjoyed reading everyone's suggestion and so glad that this has got some attention! Thank you, thank you, thank you.
I just want to see STO be one of the best games out there. While not perfect, I thought this might be a step in the right direction.
Fortunately, the rest of the community deserves a large amount of the credit. Without their feedback, based on their differing PvP experiences, I really couldn't have made it as robust as it is now.
It's great see the efforts here not gone to waste and I'm fascinated by the "official" tournament option with Stat-tracking that snix mentioned.
Hopefully, this will renew PvP interest across the board and get this game on track.
Also, who wouldn't want more maps/modes - this certainly paves the way, no?
Wow, I only just found this thread, and I read the whole thing... I'm so impressed. Darren_Kitlor, that mock-up looks lovely. I could almost kiss you! (and all the other people that have posted suggestions, too!)
I wrote up my comments bit by bit in notepad whilst going through this. :P
Cycling maps would be fantastic. Most of the time, at the moment, I don't really care all that much which map I'm on, except that sometimes I feel like playing ground and sometimes I feel like playing space. variety in maps is nice but that aside it really doesn't matter what the scenery is like so long as I get the chance to play. (I'm sure that if the queues were sorted out, I would care more about the maps, but at the moment, I'm waiting an hour or so just to get on a map in the first place and by that point, ANY map will do!) So if I feel like playing ground I have to look at the queue and queue myself for all the ground maps that look like they MIGHT have enough people on them, and then if I wanna get in I have to sit and watch the numbers and alter my queues accordingly. This isn't fun in the slightest.
Cycling the maps would fix this issue and would mean people wouldn't have to sit there watching the PvP window trying to guess which map to click on to get in.
Even with this new system implemented it wouldn't be a problem not being able to select a particular map because you'd have an equal chance of playing any and all of them. It would no longer be a case of "I wanna play cracked planetoid but I'm gonna join solar wind because I actaully have a chance of maybe getting on it sometime within the next 2 hours", instead it would be a case of "I sure would like to get cracked planetoid this time. Oh I got solar wind? Well never mind, I'll play this and then try again next time, waiting time is only a few minutes I'll just have time to make a cup of coffee while I wait." :P You know, like a luck of the draw thing, I think most people wouldn't mind if they don't get on the map they want, especially if they don't have to wait X amount of hours just to get on in the first place.
The idea of a chat box is great for many reasons. In addition to what everyone else said - So many times I have found myself in a team where everyone is a tac and there's not one healer, or all are sci with no eng or tac, or whatever. The chat would help people who aren't on a premade team already, to organize one with the best variety of skills and whatnot.
I also like hurleybird's idea of letting the player choose "beginner/advanced", that sounds like it could work well.
I'm not sure that minimum stats to join or selecting a level based on a players stats would make a lot of difference though. When it comes to PvP a player's actual skill (as in the skill of the person at the keyboard, not the stats of the character) is often a lot more important than how good their stats are. A player can have the most awesome guns and skill points but if they're gonna run off without their teammates and try to take on 5 enemies by themselves then all the skill points in the world can't help them. Perhaps if there were a seperate scoring system for PvP matches to show how serious a player is? I don't know if that would help. Maybe it's just a case of "sometimes you just get the odd idiot no matter where you go"; I think a better queuing system WOULD cut down on the shoddy players though.
As for the "Join Any" option, perhaps the solution (to avoid breaking queues) would be to set it to a first-come-first-served system. Ie. the first person that clicks Join Any is put on a "join any" queue, they get in the first one that becomes avaliable. Once that person is in, the second person on the "join any" queue is then moved to the top of that list and they get in the next one, and so on.
All in all great stuff, I've really enjoyed reading everyone's suggestion and so glad that this has got some attention! Thank you, thank you, thank you.
Alright, another suggestion I just thought of. At the moment, since the latest big changes, a big problem is that people are queuing up and then not engaging, and those that want to get in get the engage box followed by the "not enough people" message over and over again. Why is this?
Answer: because some people queuing just get bored of waiting, so they go off and do something else, a PvE or whatever. By the time they get the popup for the PvP they queued for, an hour or so has passed and they're already busy doing other stuff, so they don't engage.
I got to thinking about why this happens, and I think a lot of it is because once people get engrossed in something else they then lost interest in the PvP they queued for and forget they are even on the queue. It seems like common sense to tell these people "if you don't want to be on the queue anymore then remove yourself from it" but it's easy to forget to do this once you enter some other mission.
Solution: When you join a PvP, a box appears in the corner of your screen that looks very much like the "Continue X mission" box you get when you leave a mission halfway through. This box will say "YOU ARE QUEUED FOR X PVP" or something like that, with a "remove me from queue" option underneath it. While you are queued, this box would always be visible on your screen, not be obstructive (so if you want to do a quick patrol or something while you wait, it won't get in the way) but its presence would make sure that you don't forget that you're queued. Then if you change your mind about queuing you can remove yourself quick and easy at the click of a button, without having to go back to the PvP menu and mess about. And those people that DO want to PvP won't keep getting the Engage popup over and over again.
What do people think of this suggestion? Quick, easy, and simple I think!
Alright, another suggestion I just thought of. At the moment, since the latest big changes, a big problem is that people are queuing up and then not engaging, and those that want to get in get the engage box followed by the "not enough people" message over and over again. Why is this?
Answer: because some people queuing just get bored of waiting, so they go off and do something else, a PvE or whatever. By the time they get the popup for the PvP they queued for, an hour or so has passed and they're already busy doing other stuff, so they don't engage.
I got to thinking about why this happens, and I think a lot of it is because once people get engrossed in something else they then lost interest in the PvP they queued for and forget they are even on the queue. It seems like common sense to tell these people "if you don't want to be on the queue anymore then remove yourself from it" but it's easy to forget to do this once you enter some other mission.
Solution: When you join a PvP, a box appears in the corner of your screen that looks very much like the "Continue X mission" box you get when you leave a mission halfway through. This box will say "YOU ARE QUEUED FOR X PVP" or something like that, with a "remove me from queue" option underneath it. While you are queued, this box would always be visible on your screen, not be obstructive (so if you want to do a quick patrol or something while you wait, it won't get in the way) but its presence would make sure that you don't forget that you're queued. Then if you change your mind about queuing you can remove yourself quick and easy at the click of a button, without having to go back to the PvP menu and mess about. And those people that DO want to PvP won't keep getting the Engage popup over and over again.
What do people think of this suggestion? Quick, easy, and simple I think!
We're probably going to see a PvP patch fix (there's a new one slated for Tribble soon) before any major UI changes.
Hopefully, it'll iron out the weird kinks (i.e. NoMapsPossible or Enaged but waiting for 5 minutes before timeout).
Definitely, fix the queue in the interim before the massive interface changes can get put into effect (although, ultimately, queues should pop faster).
Answer: because some people queuing just get bored of waiting, so they go off and do something else, a PvE or whatever. By the time they get the popup for the PvP they queued for, an hour or so has passed and they're already busy doing other stuff, so they don't engage.
Actually, I'm pretty sure the best solution to this problem would be better progress saving in missions - my suspicion is that most people fail to click the queue because they're on 7/8 objectives in their mission and they know if they click Engage that they're going back to 0/8.
That said, it's not really something the queue can control. NoPossibleMaps bug aside, the next best thing the queue could do would be to put the players who DID engage "on deck" and simply try to fill the last remaining slots. They'd see a "Game will begin soon" indicator, maybe additionally with "Looking for __ more players..." as the queue tries to fill the last spots by handing out queue pops one by one. When the game finally fills, the message would change to "Game starting in 10... 9... 8..." and so on and count down before pulling everyone in.
This system would require some new queue tech, but would have the following advantages:
Players who are confirmed for queue are now "locked in" to the match
Players who are confirmed once do not get spammed with requests to re-confirm
Better feedback to players so they know that the system is still looking for players (and not AWOL/broken)
Players can continue playing while waiting for the final spots to fill, but know they are about to be pulled into a match
Actually, I'm pretty sure the best solution to this problem would be better progress saving in missions - my suspicion is that most people fail to click the queue because they're on 7/8 objectives in their mission and they know if they click Engage that they're going back to 0/8.
That said, it's not really something the queue can control. NoPossibleMaps bug aside, the next best thing the queue could do would be to put the players who DID engage "on deck" and simply try to fill the last remaining slots. They'd see a "Game will begin soon" indicator, maybe additionally with "Looking for __ more players..." as the queue tries to fill the last spots by handing out queue pops one by one. When the game finally fills, the message would change to "Game starting in 10... 9... 8..." and so on and count down before pulling everyone in.
This system would require some new queue tech, but would have the following advantages:
Players who are confirmed for queue are now "locked in" to the match
Players who are confirmed once do not get spammed with requests to re-confirm
Better feedback to players so they know that the system is still looking for players (and not AWOL/broken)
Players can continue playing while waiting for the final spots to fill, but know they are about to be pulled into a match
All games start at full player complement
I think you've hit the nail on the head.
No one likes the spam and -conversely- no one enjoys losing mission progress.
I'm definitely looking forward to the "under-the-hood" queue changes and they might mean for PvP (the current system is worse that I had anticipated - and very few of us were able to get matches started on tribble).
Considering there's a heavy PvP focus with such huge changes (tourneys, private, and new interface), I would imagine that how the queue operates is still on-the-table for discussion.
While this thread is part of the solution, the other part is implementation (or under-the-hood aspect).
I can't wait to see what's planned and hope we'll have some solid feedback on tribble as segments arrive for testing.
Actually, I'm pretty sure the best solution to this problem would be better progress saving in missions - my suspicion is that most people fail to click the queue because they're on 7/8 objectives in their mission and they know if they click Engage that they're going back to 0/8.
[/LIST]
That's true too, yeah. I've had to fail to hit engage for both reasons.
And I haven't had the joy of experiencing this "no possible maps" bug you've all been talking about yet :P
That's true too, yeah. I've had to fail to hit engage for both reasons.
And I haven't had the joy of experiencing this "no possible maps" bug you've all been talking about yet :P
It's a gnarly bug, man. I think it also influences the server disconnects I've experienced. If I get a NoMapsPossible bug, I generally know I will crash shortly.
It's a gnarly bug, man. I think it also influences the server disconnects I've experienced. If I get a NoMapsPossible bug, I generally know I will crash shortly.
I can't wait to see what the team has lined up.
Maybe that was why I got disconnected last night and couldn't get back on. (even though server was up) :E
(it is a .RAR file - so you must have appropriate software in order to download)
If used, all I ask is proper attribution and acknowledgment of the fans. No money, no compensation - just a shout out as to who did what. It took several hours in Photoshop getting things just right (~8 total over the past month or so).
I strived to ensure each graphical element is a separate layer: allowing full control for both developers and other players.
Let me know if it goes down, it can only support ten downloads at a time.
I can understand if a klink screws up the current system but i can not understand how a fed can. There are over 20 players on the fed side that say they are ready for pvp. why cant you just pass up any players that does not give the ok? Let them go in the next batch if they are not ready now.
The following changes should be up on Tribble soon. Please jump in and give us feedback!
PvP
Public Games:
Improved matchmaking. Games are balanced and start more frequently.
Improved the PvP Queue UI:
Queue list has been reworked to be more readable.
Each queue displays an average amount of time it will take to get into a map.
The queue minimum requirement for large battles has been reduced to a lower value (smaller game) after a queue timer expires, allowing for both large and small games to be accessible from the same queue.
Challenge System:
Players can now challenge other players to private PvP matches
Up to 20 players can participate
The teams can be mixed faction
Feds can invite Klingons to these matches, and they can be on the same team.
Participants can be from any tier
All tier 5, or any mix of tier 1 through 5
The teams can be unbalanced
For example, 10 tier 1 ships vs 2 tier 5 ships
The map the game will be played on can be set specifically
Maps are still restricted by game type
Players can set the number of kills to win on Arenas
Players can set the amount of influence to win on Capture and Hold maps
Players can set the amount of Station Health is allotted in Assault Maps
Challenge System UI:
There are team lists where players can change which team theyre on
Click and drag your name to the team you want
The initiator of the challenge can adjust the team of anyone participating
There is a chat window embedded in this window for all players that have been invited
I'm not sure what, if any, images were used from this thread. However, I do know that some of your ideas helped to form this new queue system. So, I just want to thanks you all again for this truly awesome thread.
I'm not sure what, if any, images were used from this thread. However, I do know that some of your ideas helped to form this new queue system. So, I just want to thanks you all again for this truly awesome thread.
Thanks,
Stormshade
No worries. It's the changes that count: not the specific pretties in Photoshop.
Ultimately, anyone who contributed to this thread did it for the greater good of the game - not for strict adherence to some dude's photoshop mock-up.
Besides, it looks like the devs went a few steps further which is always encouraging. :cool:
Comments
Imagine a spectrum:
________<
>
We're somewhere close to one end but at neither extreme.
Math for Total Number of Queues:
.. * T * L = C
S!(F-1)!
where F = factions, S = possible Sides to Select, T= Total Maps, L = Level Bands, and C= Combinations
.. * M * L = C
S!(F-1)!
where F = Factions, S = possible Sides to Select, M = Total Modes, L = Level Bands, and C = Combinations
note: there will always be fewer modes than maps - which is why map rotation cuts the numbers down considerably
Does this thread idea scale well to faction v. faction v. faction? Not right now (unless you can choose two buttons) but I'd be happy to revisit it then. There's no new faction for the foreseeable ftureu and very little PvP interest.
What it does do is scale better than the current system while still affording a degree of control.
I imagine this might be the equivalent to giving PvP a bowl of wheaties: it's simple and it'll make the PvP experience more popular (whether a PUG or a premade).
Reduce the difficulty of entering a match is the first step toward making PvP more popular. However, there's counter-value of total player control. I'd like to think this (in conjuction with unburying the PvP option from that drop-down-arrow-bad-UI-choice-nightmare-thing would also be appreciated).
1) Put a button next to map for bringing up the PvP Queue (not a drop-down list).
2) Improve the PvP Queue to be less cumbersome (i.e. map rotation - so new maps can be added without breaking the queues).
3) ?????
4) Profit
PvP Queues for STO. A queue barely alive.
Gentlemen, we can rebuild them. We have the technology. We have the capability to build the world's first bionic queue.
STO will have that queue. Better than it was before. Better, stronger, faster.
But then, I tend to regret a lot of the things I do, so I guess that's not much of a threat.
The functionality would be: Group A Leader invites Group B Leader to a private match through the interface. B Leader accepts. Private match is prepped to launch, pre-populated with Group A on one team, Group B on the other.
In order to support non-5v5 maps, this may need to take place in a flow of activity like: Choose match settings -> Create match -> Invite players => If invited player is in a group, give invited player the option to add the entire group. Some error handling would be required if, for instance, somebody tries to invite a group of 5 to a team that does not have 5 free slots left (e.g 7v7).
I like... I like enough to add it to the interface.
The interface, like the game, should be easy to learn but hard to master.
Public Queues are easy, quick, and allow for pick-up-and-play fun.
Private matches (and tournament options) are deep but not overwhelming - allowing for the variety of needs PvP fleets need for vetting players (or making matches more interesting).
- A player would open up his PvP Menu.
- There would be two tabs; Create game and Join Game.
- Under Create a game would be an interface, just like yours that allows you to create any game that you like. Also you can choose whether to password protect it or not. After creating the game a room window would open up very similar to the Private game one now. The room will also be displayed on a list within the Join a Game tab, displayed in order of games that have been waiting longest to the last made. People will join and the game is started when the room is full or if the host decides there are enough people, the teams must be even to start. In the waiting room there would be options for number of fighter and the ability to change the map for each battle as well as various other rules. After the match the host keeps control of his room unless he leaves then the next longest standing player within the room gets control and can change the options, kick people, switch teams etc.
- Under join a game there would be a list of all the games that people can join. Both currently active and waiting to start games. The player can see who is in each room and the current score etc. They can then either fill up a vacant slot in a game already started or join a room of people waiting to start. If the game type they want isnt there then they can go and create it themselves.
This system would mean people could play any map they want and wouldnt leave a massive list of disused maps and open up the option for unlimited new game types, Factions and maps to be added.
Even if it doesn't look like the mock-ups we made, this is good news. Not only might we get a better interface - we may be getting more features and content for PvP.
Maybe I can retire this thread and archive my photoshop files.
Anyways, celebrate!
/10char
Al Gore's self-deprecating sense of humor never fails to impress me.
Not sure what that means to PvP Queue changes but I look forward to what design the team is coming up with.
I wrote up my comments bit by bit in notepad whilst going through this. :P
Cycling maps would be fantastic. Most of the time, at the moment, I don't really care all that much which map I'm on, except that sometimes I feel like playing ground and sometimes I feel like playing space. variety in maps is nice but that aside it really doesn't matter what the scenery is like so long as I get the chance to play. (I'm sure that if the queues were sorted out, I would care more about the maps, but at the moment, I'm waiting an hour or so just to get on a map in the first place and by that point, ANY map will do!) So if I feel like playing ground I have to look at the queue and queue myself for all the ground maps that look like they MIGHT have enough people on them, and then if I wanna get in I have to sit and watch the numbers and alter my queues accordingly. This isn't fun in the slightest.
Cycling the maps would fix this issue and would mean people wouldn't have to sit there watching the PvP window trying to guess which map to click on to get in.
Even with this new system implemented it wouldn't be a problem not being able to select a particular map because you'd have an equal chance of playing any and all of them. It would no longer be a case of "I wanna play cracked planetoid but I'm gonna join solar wind because I actaully have a chance of maybe getting on it sometime within the next 2 hours", instead it would be a case of "I sure would like to get cracked planetoid this time. Oh I got solar wind? Well never mind, I'll play this and then try again next time, waiting time is only a few minutes I'll just have time to make a cup of coffee while I wait." :P You know, like a luck of the draw thing, I think most people wouldn't mind if they don't get on the map they want, especially if they don't have to wait X amount of hours just to get on in the first place.
The idea of a chat box is great for many reasons. In addition to what everyone else said - So many times I have found myself in a team where everyone is a tac and there's not one healer, or all are sci with no eng or tac, or whatever. The chat would help people who aren't on a premade team already, to organize one with the best variety of skills and whatnot.
I also like hurleybird's idea of letting the player choose "beginner/advanced", that sounds like it could work well.
I'm not sure that minimum stats to join or selecting a level based on a players stats would make a lot of difference though. When it comes to PvP a player's actual skill (as in the skill of the person at the keyboard, not the stats of the character) is often a lot more important than how good their stats are. A player can have the most awesome guns and skill points but if they're gonna run off without their teammates and try to take on 5 enemies by themselves then all the skill points in the world can't help them. Perhaps if there were a seperate scoring system for PvP matches to show how serious a player is? I don't know if that would help. Maybe it's just a case of "sometimes you just get the odd idiot no matter where you go"; I think a better queuing system WOULD cut down on the shoddy players though.
As for the "Join Any" option, perhaps the solution (to avoid breaking queues) would be to set it to a first-come-first-served system. Ie. the first person that clicks Join Any is put on a "join any" queue, they get in the first one that becomes avaliable. Once that person is in, the second person on the "join any" queue is then moved to the top of that list and they get in the next one, and so on.
All in all great stuff, I've really enjoyed reading everyone's suggestion and so glad that this has got some attention! Thank you, thank you, thank you.
I just want to see STO be one of the best games out there. While not perfect, I thought this might be a step in the right direction.
Fortunately, the rest of the community deserves a large amount of the credit. Without their feedback, based on their differing PvP experiences, I really couldn't have made it as robust as it is now.
It's great see the efforts here not gone to waste and I'm fascinated by the "official" tournament option with Stat-tracking that snix mentioned.
Hopefully, this will renew PvP interest across the board and get this game on track.
Also, who wouldn't want more maps/modes - this certainly paves the way, no?
Answer: because some people queuing just get bored of waiting, so they go off and do something else, a PvE or whatever. By the time they get the popup for the PvP they queued for, an hour or so has passed and they're already busy doing other stuff, so they don't engage.
I got to thinking about why this happens, and I think a lot of it is because once people get engrossed in something else they then lost interest in the PvP they queued for and forget they are even on the queue. It seems like common sense to tell these people "if you don't want to be on the queue anymore then remove yourself from it" but it's easy to forget to do this once you enter some other mission.
Solution: When you join a PvP, a box appears in the corner of your screen that looks very much like the "Continue X mission" box you get when you leave a mission halfway through. This box will say "YOU ARE QUEUED FOR X PVP" or something like that, with a "remove me from queue" option underneath it. While you are queued, this box would always be visible on your screen, not be obstructive (so if you want to do a quick patrol or something while you wait, it won't get in the way) but its presence would make sure that you don't forget that you're queued. Then if you change your mind about queuing you can remove yourself quick and easy at the click of a button, without having to go back to the PvP menu and mess about. And those people that DO want to PvP won't keep getting the Engage popup over and over again.
What do people think of this suggestion? Quick, easy, and simple I think!
We're probably going to see a PvP patch fix (there's a new one slated for Tribble soon) before any major UI changes.
Hopefully, it'll iron out the weird kinks (i.e. NoMapsPossible or Enaged but waiting for 5 minutes before timeout).
Definitely, fix the queue in the interim before the massive interface changes can get put into effect (although, ultimately, queues should pop faster).
Actually, I'm pretty sure the best solution to this problem would be better progress saving in missions - my suspicion is that most people fail to click the queue because they're on 7/8 objectives in their mission and they know if they click Engage that they're going back to 0/8.
That said, it's not really something the queue can control. NoPossibleMaps bug aside, the next best thing the queue could do would be to put the players who DID engage "on deck" and simply try to fill the last remaining slots. They'd see a "Game will begin soon" indicator, maybe additionally with "Looking for __ more players..." as the queue tries to fill the last spots by handing out queue pops one by one. When the game finally fills, the message would change to "Game starting in 10... 9... 8..." and so on and count down before pulling everyone in.
This system would require some new queue tech, but would have the following advantages:
No one likes the spam and -conversely- no one enjoys losing mission progress.
I'm definitely looking forward to the "under-the-hood" queue changes and they might mean for PvP (the current system is worse that I had anticipated - and very few of us were able to get matches started on tribble).
Considering there's a heavy PvP focus with such huge changes (tourneys, private, and new interface), I would imagine that how the queue operates is still on-the-table for discussion.
While this thread is part of the solution, the other part is implementation (or under-the-hood aspect).
I can't wait to see what's planned and hope we'll have some solid feedback on tribble as segments arrive for testing.
That's true too, yeah. I've had to fail to hit engage for both reasons.
And I haven't had the joy of experiencing this "no possible maps" bug you've all been talking about yet :P
It's a gnarly bug, man. I think it also influences the server disconnects I've experienced. If I get a NoMapsPossible bug, I generally know I will crash shortly.
I can't wait to see what the team has lined up.
Maybe that was why I got disconnected last night and couldn't get back on. (even though server was up) :E
I am posting this in hopes that this expedites the UI redesign sooner rather than later.
( --| Click here to download the file from Rapidshare.com |-- )
(it is a .RAR file - so you must have appropriate software in order to download)
If used, all I ask is proper attribution and acknowledgment of the fans. No money, no compensation - just a shout out as to who did what. It took several hours in Photoshop getting things just right (~8 total over the past month or so).
I strived to ensure each graphical element is a separate layer: allowing full control for both developers and other players.
Let me know if it goes down, it can only support ten downloads at a time.
Sincerely,
Darren_Kitlor
(d.a. peters)
No word yet on whether it includes anything in this thread.
However, the queues in the old interface were condensed first - which makes me wonder.
Thanks,
Stormshade
No worries. It's the changes that count: not the specific pretties in Photoshop.
Ultimately, anyone who contributed to this thread did it for the greater good of the game - not for strict adherence to some dude's photoshop mock-up.
Besides, it looks like the devs went a few steps further which is always encouraging. :cool: