test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Aug 1 PvP Changes

SystemSystem Member, NoReporting Posts: 178,019 Arc User
edited August 2010 in PvP Gameplay
Dunno about you, but I find the new PvP queue to be even more confusing.

I just don't see why not it can't be seperated into the Types of Arena that's selectable on the sides of the queue?


Space: FvK
Space: FvF

Ground: FvK
Ground: FvF


The Queues are improved, but it's still not intializing for some players, though better it was when Season 2 went online.

Also, I noticed in the FvF Capture and Hold maps that Red Squadron's Capture Icon is Klingon than the old Red Federation. So I'm not sure if that's intentional or not.
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    I've been watching the queues closely for the last hour. I'm noticing a lot more players are getting into maps than before the patch, however I'm noticing that occasionally there is an issue where players are getting unexpectedly booted from the queue when the queue pops. I will continue to investigate.

    Also, private queues are going up, which is exiciting, however I'm noticing that the map state isn't getting set properly. If you are experiencing problems with private games because of this, please notify me and I will see if I can fix the game state.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    I hate to keep griping but this really is ridiculous. Admittedly, part of my frustration is stemming from the fact that I don't know anything about what's going on behind the scenes. All I want to do is queue up and pew pew a bit but you guys can't get the queue to work.

    I'm fine with only allowing us to queue up for one type of map. I even like the idea that if you enter the queue then as soon as the numbers are there with you everything stops and you are teleported to the match. Hell, put it back the way it was and let us fight our 3 v 5 uneven teams, please. Thank you for monitoring it. Anything is better than this garbage.

    [Edit] I forgot to say "please" and "thank you" :D
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    how about the more pressing issue of the feds always having more players in the capture and hold missions than the klingons. its not really that fair when the feds have more players at all.

    Every single match my group has been in since the patch we have had the same, feds outnumber us by several ships. In a capture and hold map its a hell of a advantage as they have enough players to capture while fighting.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    I have been noticing I will queue for space cap FvK and ground will pop.

    Despite never queuing for ground at all
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    I did that the first time around too, before I finally noticed that ground is now at the top where the space queues used to be. Maybe that's not your issue, but you may want to double check just in case. Old habits die hard and I used to queue up on autopilot, lol.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    Unfortunately it looks like Starfleet is outnumbering Klingons by about 2 to 1 in most queues I have seen. Many are complaining about the new system as it doesn't start games unless they are matched within +-1 players for smaller queues and +- 2 for the larger maps (area control for example).

    Turning this off potentially imbalances the games even more - returning the games to possibly highly imbalanced like you would see pre-Season 2. Tightening this up more means that even more games would be canceled. If we balanced queues and didn't require players to accept their offers (auto-accept), then we'd run into the problem of AFKs in games.

    We will be tuning the PvP queues more in the coming weeks to try to come to the best possible solution, but for now that is our predicament.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    mkenneally wrote: »
    Unfortunately it looks like Starfleet is outnumbering Klingons by about 2 to 1 in most queues I have seen. Many are complaining about the new system as it doesn't start games unless they are matched within +-1 players for smaller queues and +- 2 for the larger maps (area control for example). Turning this off potentially imbalances the games even more. Tightening this up more means that even more games would be canceled. If we balanced queues and didn't require players to accept their offers, then we'd run into the problem of AFKs in games. We will be tuning the PvP queues more in the coming weeks to try to come to the best possible solution, but for now that is our predicament.


    This post has been edited to remove content which violates the Cryptic Studios Forum Usage Guidelines ~Stormshade
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    mkenneally wrote: »
    Unfortunately it looks like Starfleet is outnumbering Klingons by about 2 to 1 in most queues I have seen. Many are complaining about the new system as it doesn't start games unless they are matched within +-1 players for smaller queues and +- 2 for the larger maps (area control for example).

    Turning this off potentially imbalances the games even more - returning the games to possibly highly imbalanced like you would see pre-Season 2. Tightening this up more means that even more games would be canceled. If we balanced queues and didn't require players to accept their offers (auto-accept), then we'd run into the problem of AFKs in games.

    We will be tuning the PvP queues more in the coming weeks to try to come to the best possible solution, but for now that is our predicament.

    When the cap and hold limit was 5 up to 7, those games usually had 7 people on each side...eventually. That number of 9 is full of TRIBBLE - I haven't seen 9 Klingon BGs in any Cap and Hold match I've been in on Sunday - much less 10 (Feds have had 10 in every match, while the most Klingons I've even seen in a game is 8 but often more like 7).

    Bottom line is, pre-season 2 was better than every thing we have seen so far post season 2. It wasn't perfect, but the fixes that supposedly insure equal matches are anything but - I have not seen an even PvP match since Wednesday - and Sunday is by far the worst.

    Every change is a regression from the pre-season 2 system. You are going backward - and with the latest patch it appears your moving the wrong direction at flank speed.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    mkenneally wrote: »
    Turning this off potentially imbalances the games even more - returning the games to possibly highly imbalanced like you would see pre-Season 2. Tightening this up more means that even more games would be canceled. If we balanced queues and didn't require players to accept their offers (auto-accept), then we'd run into the problem of AFKs in games.

    Playing with imbalanced teams certainly was a lot more fun than getting < 4 matches per day and spending hours on top of hours just sitting in the queue and clicking through the invitation windows and the "NoPossibleMaps" prompts.

    I think most of our fleet in fact just logged off to play Starcraft 2 after getting fed up with fighting with the extremely cryptic queue system for the last three hours.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    SteveHale wrote: »
    I did that the first time around too, before I finally noticed that ground is now at the top where the space queues used to be. Maybe that's not your issue, but you may want to double check just in case. Old habits die hard and I used to queue up on autopilot, lol.

    It's impossible to be my issue as I always use the filter and set to space only, always have since it was put in
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    Btw, we have had a shanty town game earlier with 4 or 5 fed players vs like 10 klingons in it (and that wasn't the usual scoreboard issue where people quittet, one side really outnumbered the other one heavily, i don't think i've ever seen a 10 on 5 before on ground lol)

    So theres maybe something wrong with the new shanty queue settings, several of the present players submitted a bug report as far as i know, can't give you a number tho.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    thank you STO
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    Vennie22 wrote:
    Playing with imbalanced teams certainly was a lot more fun than getting < 4 matches per day and spending hours on top of hours just sitting in the queue and clicking through the invitation windows and the "NoPossibleMaps" prompts.

    I think most of our fleet in fact just logged off to play Starcraft 2 after getting fed up with fighting with the extremely cryptic queue system for the last three hours.

    This. I can't imagine a single person out there who is happier playing peek-a-boo with the queue than they were playing with uneven teams. Now there is one less Klink for queue fodder. I'ma go do Dynamis.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    SteveHale wrote: »
    This. I can't imagine a single person out there who is happier playing peek-a-boo with the queue than they were playing with uneven teams. Now there is one less Klink for queue fodder. I'ma go do Dynamis.

    I'm terribly sorry about the frustration this is causing. This issue will not be ignored.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    mkenneally wrote: »
    Turning this off potentially imbalances the games even more - returning the games to possibly highly imbalanced like you would see pre-Season 2. Tightening this up more means that even more games would be canceled. If we balanced queues and didn't require players to accept their offers (auto-accept), then we'd run into the problem of AFKs in games.

    There was a solution proposed to this problem in the PvP Interface thread which, while requiring new tech, would really solve both these problems.

    Copy/pasting an excerpt:
    [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
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    mkenneally wrote: »
    I'm terribly sorry about the frustration this is causing. This issue will not be ignored.

    I don't really play STO anymore but I haven't seen this suggested---audio notification for the queue. Frankly I was reading a book and watching old episodes of Voyager while waiting for the queue to start, but I would always miss the engage button because I wasn't watching the screen intently. So an audio notification would be nice so people can watch TV or something while waiting for the queue. (Although it's ridiculous that we have to wait so long in the first place, and the main reason why I quit.)
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    Edgecase wrote: »
    There was a solution proposed to this problem in the PvP Interface thread which, while requiring new tech, would really solve both these problems.

    Copy/pasting an excerpt:

    Thanks for the suggestion. I will schedule a meeting tomorrow to discuss this as well as other possibilities to obliterate the need to accept an offer more than once - or perhaps we can remove the accept option altogether and simply present the 'Delay' button to those that have changed their mind.

    The audio notification suggestion is great as well. Thanks!
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    thank you STO
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    I didn't get to play much with the improved queues, but one thing I noticed is that the queue listing was not showing any of the small salvage maps or even the assault maps. I'm sure those can be created, but frankly I hate the 10v10 queues, and much prefer 7v7. The large queues shouldn't be the only default option, yet they seemed to be listed twice in the queues.

    A cursory examination of the queues seemed to indicate that the space and ground arena maps would be chosen from a list, so I can't imagine why the assault/salvage maps were not also done similarly.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    I'm not a hardcore PvPer (I dabble from time to time); but on actually testing the PvP queues publically in the future - perhaps Cryptic coould put oout a call to PvPers and hold Tribble events on a regular basis; and try to coordinate with Fleets ets; the best time and day for these tests that allow for a robust test of any queue changes?

    I'm really not ytrying to get on Cryptics case at all per se; but the fact is, while TRibble IS a good thing and helps find the major software bugs in the general game; I don't think the PvP queues honestly get a real test until they go live - causing a lot of issues for those who enjoy PvP.

    It would be great if there was a way to set up some more close to 'real-world/real load' PvP queue testing so this ttpe of stuff could be avoiided.

    But as someone who did play the previous queue system on occassion, I'm sorry, NO - horribly unbalanced PvP was NOT fun; and I don't think continuing with the unbalanced queueing that was occuring before is a good solution.

    It's too bad (and this would probably be a lot of new software tech) where after a time limit, the PvP queue system could pop up and say "10vs10 is not attracting enough player, but a 5vs5 could now be started on the same map' - or have some to give players options similar to what they chose when not enough people are queueing for exactly what they would like.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    Vennie22 wrote:
    Playing with imbalanced teams certainly was a lot more fun than getting < 4 matches per day and spending hours on top of hours just sitting in the queue and clicking through the invitation windows and the "NoPossibleMaps" prompts.

    I'll bet you were on the plus side.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    meeowww wrote: »
    I don't really play STO anymore but I haven't seen this suggested---audio notification for the queue. Frankly I was reading a book and watching old episodes of Voyager while waiting for the queue to start, but I would always miss the engage button because I wasn't watching the screen intently. So an audio notification would be nice so people can watch TV or something while waiting for the queue. (Although it's ridiculous that we have to wait so long in the first place, and the main reason why I quit.)

    This might sound simple, but I think could make a world of difference. A really minor enhancement like this could help us avoid games timing out cos not enough people engage, when they're merely just distracted, grabbin a drink, on a bio break, etc, whilst waiting for the queue to pop.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    I'm sorry, I feel like a TRIBBLE now. I'm sure you guys are all working hard to fix the stuff, I just really like the game and I wanna play it! lol.
    Rojon wrote: »
    I'll bet you were on the plus side.

    Being on the lower side can actually be quite a bit of fun. Anyone who enjoys the game itself wouldn't hope for the deck to be stacked in their favor in that way. Their fleet sure doesn't need to be on the plus side.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    mikiy wrote:
    Btw, we have had a shanty town game earlier with 4 or 5 fed players vs like 10 klingons in it (and that wasn't the usual scoreboard issue where people quittet, one side really outnumbered the other one heavily, i don't think i've ever seen a 10 on 5 before on ground lol)

    So theres maybe something wrong with the new shanty queue settings, several of the present players submitted a bug report as far as i know, can't give you a number tho.

    I was in this match. It was an FvK shanty match - score board attached:

    http://tinypic.com/r/s44403/3

    Note there were 10 KDF players and 4 Feds in the match at the same time from the very start. There seems to have been a problem with the way this match has been initiated, because I've never seen a match so unbalanced since Season 2 launched.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    In the meantime I suggest that

    1) all people who are waiting for a match get sent to an Open PvP zone, where their kills and other stats are monitored and recorded.

    2) Romulan ships would be playable in this zones

    3) Sector control would be determined by the aggregate K/D from this daily.

    4) We wouldnt need any arena PvP if 1-3 were fulfilled.

    Yours in helpful Plasma,
    Star*Dagger
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    nevermind, Double Post
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    Edgecase wrote: »
    There was a solution proposed to this problem in the PvP Interface thread which, while requiring new tech, would really solve both these problems.

    Copy/pasting an excerpt:

    I'd just like to +1 this, and note that it's substantially similar to something I proposed way back when: http://forums.startrekonline.com/showpost.php?p=2374772&postcount=33

    There's a few more ideas in there about presentation and process, which may be useful.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    mkenneally wrote: »
    Unfortunately it looks like Starfleet is outnumbering Klingons by about 2 to 1 in most queues I have seen. Many are complaining about the new system as it doesn't start games unless they are matched within +-1 players for smaller queues and +- 2 for the larger maps (area control for example).

    Turning this off potentially imbalances the games even more - returning the games to possibly highly imbalanced like you would see pre-Season 2. Tightening this up more means that even more games would be canceled. If we balanced queues and didn't require players to accept their offers (auto-accept), then we'd run into the problem of AFKs in games.

    We will be tuning the PvP queues more in the coming weeks to try to come to the best possible solution, but for now that is our predicament.

    So Klingons now, on top of the second class citizen role they are forced into, are being considered cannon fodder for the Feds. I will leave every PvP match immediately if the numbers are uneven.

    I can't even imagine how someone can come up with the idea to allow uneven numbers in the PvP maps STO currently has. If 5 Klingons are queued and 20 Feds, only allow 5 Feds, the others have to wait. It's simple like that. If one of the Feds doesn't accept, pick the next one in the queue. Seriously, how hard can it be???????????

    EDIT: I changed my mind and simply won't participate in PvP until this imbalance issue is fixed. I'll just stay cloaked at the base in the games I have to do for the Dailies. Considering that I mostly play on the Klingon side, there then is really nothing much left to do. That really gets me thinking, my subscription runs out Aug, 4.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    This is terrible! I mean, new queue system its horrible.
    In 2 hrs i could only enter to 1, yes, 2hrs = 1 PVP!!
    Plz, fix it or go back to old queue.
  • Archived PostArchived Post Member Posts: 2,264,498 Arc User
    edited August 2010
    Cerritouru wrote: »
    This is terrible! I mean, new queue system its horrible.
    In 2 hrs i could only enter to 1, yes, 2hrs = 1 PVP!!
    Plz, fix it or go back to old queue.

    2hrs for 1 game is actually quite good still, i've been waiting up to 10 hours (even switching tiers between toons to the most promising one) to see a single ground game happen a day since season 2. Before season2 the average waiting time was somewhere between 30 minutes to a hour for me with like 5-10 games a day.
Sign In or Register to comment.