Fast queues vs quality of the match — Guild Wars 2 Forums

Fast queues vs quality of the match

Cynz.9437Cynz.9437 Member ✭✭✭✭
edited November 23, 2017 in PVP

Inspired by discussion in other thread i wanted to make a poll to see what players actually prefer right now regarding the matchmaker and their ranking atm.
The point is to see whether players in mid/lower ranks that are not as affected by imbalanced matches would still prefer to sit in longer queues as trade off for better quality of matches as well as opinion of plat/legend players that are more likely to land in imbalanced matches due to low population.

So which do you prefer? Please pick answer based on your preference and your current ranking.

edit: i am aware there is typo in the poll.

GW is P2Win. We are always lied to.

Fast queues vs quality of the match 80 votes

Fast queues as costs of match quality (bronze/silver/gold).
15%
Jahroots.6791Seiken.3176Ayrilana.1396Quisquous.7480rank eleven monk.9502Will.9785Cosminion.5042rwolf.9571lightningz.1465Flauvious.6195bigmonto.4215Niokoles.9362 12 votes
Fast queues at costs of match quality (plat/legend).
7%
kKagari.6804DaShi.1368Exedore.6320KaporHabakuk.6219Abazigal.3679Zypp.7921 6 votes
Quality matches despite longer queue times (bronze/silver/gold).
22%
MichalAniol.5807haus.1590Pensadora.9478Ithilwen.1529Phyrene.2830Bazooka.3590Archer.4362otto.5684Ioras Dagnir.3927Lilyanna.9361ilmi.5369rohbroy.5736Eddbopkins.2630Titan.3472Maat.3940Wesa.3580FyzE.3472Frozenblade.6039 18 votes
Quality matches despit longer queue times (plat/legend).
45%
Razor.6392maddoctor.2738ButterPeanut.9746reikken.4961Dahkeus.8243Trigr.6481st elmos fire.2987Alatar.7364messiah.1908zHasgard.9827Felipe.1807lorddavito.2395HeadCrowned.6834dragonkain.3984Elementalist Owner.7802Loop.8106NICENIKESHOE.7128voltaicbore.8012shadowpass.4236Imperadordf.2687 36 votes
Other (please leave comment).
10%
Zaxares.5419Wolfric.9380Mr Godlike.6098Deadly Moonshiner.1354brannigan.9831corey.6451Morwath.9817nissart.6195 8 votes

Comments

  • Loboling.5293Loboling.5293 Member ✭✭✭

    I won't answer this, but in my opinion. Que's should aim for a maximum duration of 5 minutes, with 2 minutes as the norm. I don't believe waiting 20 minutes for matches will improve things.

  • Exedore.6320Exedore.6320 Member ✭✭✭
    Fast queues at costs of match quality (plat/legend).

    Considering the match quality sucks even when i wait, I'll go with fast matches.

  • Abazigal.3679Abazigal.3679 Member ✭✭✭
    Fast queues at costs of match quality (plat/legend).

    I played Hero battles in GW1 for a really long time ( over 15k matchs there), which was a 1v1 competitive mode, and the same kind of stuff happened. There wasn't such a big population and once you were in top100, you would wait 1 minute to fight someone within 50 rating points difference and up to 10 mn with someone with 500 rating difference.

    Here's my point of view regarding GW2 system :

    • It is more complicated because it requires 10 players and not only 2, so queues could be really really long
    • I'm not sure people generally appreciate waiting long for matchs on the long term
    • If there's no more people playing, it's basically going to be the same, except people are going to wait 20 minutes and not 5 minutes

    Considering my experience in GW1, what annoyed me the most was waiting 3 hours and ending up losing everything i gained in one or two loses( that could occur to a simple disconnect)

  • Vertep.2498Vertep.2498 Member ✭✭
    edited November 24, 2017
    Quality matches despit longer queue times (plat/legend).

    more fun with more equal teams to dont get fights like 100-500 as this isnt fight...this is just horror

    while also better split it more to plat/legend and maybe some higher gold as for bronze, sivler and low gold this is almost same thing wile the biggest difference in skill level is starting at the border between gold and plat and legend and plat

    EDIT: as it is really 0 fun from playing gold and sometimes silver agaisnt plat as I had sometimes with this matches

  • Wolfric.9380Wolfric.9380 Member ✭✭✭
    Other (please leave comment).

    better to balance teams out AFTER 10 players are found. And do class MMR (of course with class locking) sigh ...

  • Ithilwen.1529Ithilwen.1529 Member ✭✭✭✭
    Quality matches despite longer queue times (bronze/silver/gold).

    @Wolfric.9380 said:
    better to balance teams out AFTER 10 players are found. And do class MMR (of course with class locking) sigh ...

    I agree, and I'd add class specific MMR. So you vote quality over speed?

    Mesmerizing Girl

  • Fast queues as costs of match quality (bronze/silver/gold).

    It is already really annoying to play with the same people all over again (every match I play there are at least 2-3-4 players from the match before).

    Strict matchmaking would make it even a lot worse. You really want to play with the same 9 people after 15 mins of waiting time? Because that's a direct consequence on higher levels.

    Regardless of the results of this vote, long waiting times would kill the remains of PvP especially on lower levels. (I misvoted, T2 plat and sticking with short queues).

  • Wolfric.9380Wolfric.9380 Member ✭✭✭
    edited November 24, 2017
    Other (please leave comment).

    @Ithilwen.1529 said:

    @Wolfric.9380 said:
    better to balance teams out AFTER 10 players are found. And do class MMR (of course with class locking) sigh ...

    I agree, and I'd add class specific MMR. So you vote quality over speed?

    I vote for quality as long as speed does not suffer to much. Over five minute Q´s is to much. But i think it´s solvable even when the picks are with high MMR diffrence.
    Shure there can be that worst player costing the match but when you have class specific MMR and then balance sides after map roll (not stacking high rating to one side) we will get better quality and less need to have long Q times. It´s not good to have extreme MMR diffrences but something like up to 300 when totals are close to even should be acceptable.
    So if you first try to finde 10 with close MMR knowing their class MMR like trying to find all within 100 MMR first minute and then expand the MMR diffrence per 50 each minute you cant find a team. After 10 are settled divide most played classes first then distribute sides to keep total MMR diffrence as low as possible
    There will be some class stacking left and it is not a gurantee all is perfect but it should work.

  • Fast queues as costs of match quality (bronze/silver/gold).

    Short queue,only have couple of hours everyday to play this game after work, the more time efficient the better.

  • Razor.6392Razor.6392 Member ✭✭✭✭
    Quality matches despit longer queue times (plat/legend).

    What a surprise, plat / legend don't mind longer queues.

    Never said I'm the best, but I believe I'm better than you.

  • Other (please leave comment).

    I would allow players to make a choice via radio-button that would define the mode when queuing
    - short queue (as today) or
    - long queue (all players must be within certain MMR range or all players must be within the same division tier)

    Rytlock Brimstone: So we find the archon, take him out, then use Kas's "imposter" trick to take his place, right?
    Lady Kasmeer Meade: It's not a trick. Mesmers don't do "tricks"—we utilize illusion.
    Rytlock Brimstone: Yeah, yeah. You guys are worse than elementalists.

  • Exedore.6320Exedore.6320 Member ✭✭✭
    Fast queues at costs of match quality (plat/legend).

    There seems to exist a common fallacy that longer wait times yield better games. I would expect that short wait times are better games because the rating differential is less. As time elapses, rating differential will only increase, and large rating differential seems to be the biggest driver of bad matches.

    So it's not a question of queue time as much as a question of whether the system should start matches at all if there is no one within a small rating difference. Currently the system increases allowed rating differential over time in order to find matches for outliers at off-hours.

  • Other (please leave comment).

    Since we have low player base I don't see any solution for match quality... result will be always the same...

  • sephiroth.4217sephiroth.4217 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited November 25, 2017

    I prefer Quality.....

    Not to brag, but I put together a puzzle in 4 days and the box said 2-4 years.
    Please allow team queue with rewards again at our own discretion

  • brannigan.9831brannigan.9831 Member ✭✭✭
    edited November 25, 2017
    Other (please leave comment).

    The queue should wait at least 5 minutes before expanding the matchmaking parameters. Maybe it could be a little less based on the queue size so your not waiting forever off hours. But as it is right now is complete kitten and results in tons of uncompetitive matches. It matters not one whit to me that I occassionally benefit from these types of matches. I like competitive games not games where I feel like I had no effect hardly w or l.

  • Quality matches despit longer queue times (plat/legend).

    We had that during season 1-5 then people complained. Specially players in legend ranked cause we had even 10 hours waiting on a game.We would be not be here now cause that change.Look now they get their game in 1 to 5 minutes or so.BUT the quality?Welcome to bronze player farming yay cash your win or lost game.Even when i got bored to do spvp to fight low ranked players now to progress or lose a game thx to low ranked players in my team.Started to watch streams man that is even boring to watch who can enjoy watching bronze league its all the way to legend.They even should stop streaming its a kitten embarrassment to see games like that.

    A Monkey learns to Paint!While Humans in sPvP after long playing Devolution back to Amoeba.

  • rwolf.9571rwolf.9571 Member ✭✭✭
    Fast queues as costs of match quality (bronze/silver/gold).

    Eh... I'm kinda screwed both ways... In Gold T3. Wait 5-10 mins a match (Usually double avg waiting time). Only to be qued up against legendary and/or first place finishers from the automated tournaments... It doesn't happen all the time. But seems to be at least once a week. with 1-5 matches a day.

  • Cynz.9437Cynz.9437 Member ✭✭✭✭
    Quality matches despit longer queue times (plat/legend).

    @brannigan.9831 said:
    The queue should wait at least 5 minutes before expanding the matchmaking parameters. Maybe it could be a little less based on the queue size so your not waiting forever off hours. But as it is right now is complete kitten and results in tons of uncompetitive matches. It matters not one whit to me that I occassionally benefit from these types of matches. I like competitive games not games where I feel like I had no effect hardly w or l.

    Theoretically it would be quality over fast queues. Obviously MM would expand pool of players at some point but i do agree with suggestion that it should wait a bit longer for it first.

    GW is P2Win. We are always lied to.

  • Lilyanna.9361Lilyanna.9361 Member ✭✭✭
    Quality matches despite longer queue times (bronze/silver/gold).

    I am a person that likes to see my progress over the seasons and I've been hanging on the edge to get into play for three seasons now (almost made it into plat last season ;-;)

    I would prefer people of same skill level and then progressing skill after that so I can make adjusts and work on specific skills I am weak at as such. Honestly tired of hanging in gold 3 just because the quality matches are garbage.

  • OriOri.8724OriOri.8724 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I would rather have longer queues but better matches, however I don't think that the population is large enough, nor classes balanced remotely near well enough, to ever have high quality matches the majority of the time. And in that light I'd rather settle for the quicker queues since I doubt Anet could actually do anything to make most matches high quality unless the population explodes for some reason.

    Eyyyy I unlocked signatures

  • @OriOri.8724 said:
    I would rather have longer queues but better matches, however I don't think that the population is large enough, nor classes balanced remotely near well enough, to ever have high quality matches the majority of the time. And in that light I'd rather settle for the quicker queues since I doubt Anet could actually do anything to make most matches high quality unless the population explodes for some reason.

    I personally would rather a smaller max conquest team format. That can handle the low population while still giving fast and high quaility matches at the same time. (ie. 4v4s and 3v3s)

    I mean it's just senseless to expect people to want to compete. When the matchmaker parameters by default. Are creating some of the worst match ups in all of gaming PvP. Bronze vs Plat/Leg. and still expect players to want to compete. SENSELESS!

    If populations can't support 5v5 matching. Than the simple answer is to shorten up the max players per team. Till the matchmaker can support the low player pop.

    But as most have come to terms with. ANet simply just can't be asked to care. So all is vain here.

    I am the one and only true Majestic Being.
    I stand now on the precipice of change.
    My perceptions on quality is refined.
    I am now the outsider looking in.
    Next level simi profession troll at your service.
    Bring the lols like no other.

  • Loop.8106Loop.8106 Member ✭✭✭
    Quality matches despit longer queue times (plat/legend).

    At this point Im just queue-dodging the terrible players by re-rolling their class.

    Example: I have an Ele in my team that is god-awful. In order to not get this ele in my team the next game, I reroll to ele. Considering matchmaking is trying to create mirror matches and not stack X profession on Team 1, he will more likely than not be placed on the enemy team. This allows me (As a Core Guardian) to actually have a Firebrand in my team AND dodge the Ele player.

    This being said, I did vote for longer queues and quality games. Going 10-0 placements may be fun at first, but the games are getting stale real fast.

    Slam Jammed self proclaimed strongest core guardian on this side of the atlantic.

  • Zaxares.5419Zaxares.5419 Member ✭✭✭
    Other (please leave comment).

    It depends. How MUCH longer queue times are we talking about? If there's an average queue time of 2 mins, with a max of 5 mins, I'd be for that. if, however, the queue times were like 20 - 30 mins (or longer!), then HECK NO.

  • Fast queues at costs of match quality (plat/legend).

    I dont think match quality has changed since HOT,and in before divisions it used to be bit worse.99% of ppl want to be legend players,noone wants to loose a game,and if they loose its others fault or matchmaker quality fault.Its not like these threads are poping all the time,in every PvP game,right? :)
    But longer queves might drive more ppl out of ranked,i sure as hell wont queve for 10-20min.

  • reikken.4961reikken.4961 Member ✭✭✭
    Quality matches despit longer queue times (plat/legend).

    I'll take a 15 min queue if it means getting matches that have only skilled players instead of having newer players mixed in

©2010–2018 ArenaNet, LLC. All rights reserved. Guild Wars, Guild Wars 2, Heart of Thorns, Guild Wars 2: Path of Fire, ArenaNet, NCSOFT, the Interlocking NC Logo, and all associated logos and designs are trademarks or registered trademarks of NCSOFT Corporation. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.