Two Redpills That Would Actually Make Teams More Balanced

[Multicolorhipster.9751]

2 hours ago, DoomNexus.5324 said:

It's so kittening hilarious.
If you told anyone in CS2, LoL, Dota2, Valorant,... basically ANY competitive team game ever, that you can only solo Q in ranked games and "yOu CaN pLaY wItH fRiEnDs In UnRaNkEd!1!!!" you could watch this game collapse and die in real-time, yet in GW2 soooo many players are obsessed with the smallest issue imaginable.
I've never experienced a game where people are so kitten about being in a 4+1 stack against a full-team that the devs had to remove arbitrary team sizes altogether and people are still crying about "uuhhh duo is broken uhhh".

Look at this before you go, the real solution to the 2v1 question:

https://imgur.com/a/8qzk6Sk

How hard is that? 5 years of complaining and dumb-dumb unfair 2v1 solved with a drop-down arrow. 🤯

2 hours ago, DoomNexus.5324 said:

Idk about your matches in particular but I didn't feel any difference back when duo-Q was plat2+ only or when duo was removed entirely.
Been playing solo on a top250 level for the last 5 years too, so I don't know what to tell you. It's not duo-Q that's holding you guys back, seriously.

Duoq has never been specific to plat2+ It was disabled for plat2+  for a while if that's what you mean, and that was probably the most enjoyable and fair this game has ever been.

Your anecdote is also useless because the standard for top 250 is often gold 2 - gold 3 these days and your personal experience doesn't speak for everybody, but only a niche handful of masochistic sweats that enjoy playing with a handicap that has no earthly business existing in a self-proclaimed 'competition'. A handicap is something pros put on themselves when going against more inexperienced players, only in ranked sPvP the roles are flipped and the newer, more inexperienced players are forced to go against pros with an advantage.

2 hours ago, DoomNexus.5324 said:

Real talk: If you think duo queue is the only reason why you aren't in the leaderboard

Promise you nobody cares about the leaderboard. 2v1 or any number >1 vs 1 is unfair. It's definitely not competitive. The people obsessed with the leaderboard are often times the ones promoting 2v1 because 2 people is a massive advantage over 1. Objectively speaking, soloq is the hardest way to queue and requires the most effort to make it onto the LB as.

2 hours ago, DoomNexus.5324 said:

then please just stop playing this game because duo is one of the least problems ranked has.

Only bit of truth to that entire post. If you're a soloq and you're still playing spvp, you're doing yourself a disservice. Should quit and let the duoqs play alone because they've always been outnumbered by soloqs like 9:1 and they deserve to have 10-20 minutes of their life wasted sitting in queues to farm bots. They still get to do it with friends so they'll be fine, no worries.

2 hours ago, DoomNexus.5324 said:

Also, you do realize that 5v5 in ranked was the original change that killed competitive game play in gw2, right? Why would anyone form a pvp guild or join any community if you can't even play the single most important queue in pvp together?

5v5 ranked was actually good because 5v5 is fair unlike 5v1 or 2v1 which are not fair by any standard definition of the word

2 reasons it was taken out: 1 being the population was never there to support it, and 2 being that ATs are essentially the same thing. No exaggeration, even after duoq was added back close to 90% of all ranked games played (According to Ben P) were done so completely soloq
@"Ben Phongluangtham.1065" said: The problem with splitting the queue is that our data doesn't show that 2 separate queues for ranked would work. To put things in perspective, 92% someone queues is queuing solo. The team queue would have horrendous wait times. And when a match finally popped, difference in team skill would likely be rage inducing.

2 hours ago, DoomNexus.5324 said:

Like I said many times in the last 2 weeks or so: I couldn't give any less kittens about duo-Q being in the game but remove duo-Q and the game will lose even more players + it's really not nearly as much of an issue as you guys make it look.

at most 8% of the population(in 2019) would quit because of duoq being removed or given its own queue, compared to the 92% that soloq. Bye-bye, don't let the door hit you on the way out, enjoy your DOTA 👋

of course duoq doesn't have to be removed, just given its own queue where it's only duos vs duos or teams vs teams, but since an even smaller % of that 8% is actually using duoq to play with friends and not just for the advantage, they don't want that. Split queues are too fair for leaderboard-obsessed snakes even though it gives both solos and teams exactly what they're asking for.

Edited December 11, 2023 by Multicolorhipster.9751
God wills it!

[DoomNexus.5324]

5 hours ago, Multicolorhipster.9751 said:

2 reasons it was taken out: 1 being the population was never there to support it, and 2 being that ATs are essentially the same thing. No exaggeration, even after duoq was added back close to 90% of all ranked games played (According to Ben P) were done so completely soloq

@"Ben Phongluangtham.1065" said: The problem with splitting the queue is that our data doesn't show that 2 separate queues for ranked would work. To put things in perspective, 92% someone queues is queuing solo. The team queue would have horrendous wait times. And when a match finally popped, difference in team skill would likely be rage inducing.

at most 8% of the population(in 2019) would quit because of duoq being removed or given its own queue, compared to the 92% that soloq. Bye-bye, don't let the door hit you on the way out, enjoy your DOTA 👋

of course duoq doesn't have to be removed, just given its own queue where it's only duos vs duos or teams vs teams, but since an even smaller % of that 8% is actually using duoq to play with friends and not just for the advantage, they don't want that. Split queues are too fair for leaderboard-obsessed snakes even though it gives both solos and teams exactly what they're asking for.

Correction:
Full team queue was taken out because people were crying about getting matched solo+4 against full stacks, the exact same argument with duo-Q, just different numbers.
Back then GW2 even had an esport league, which I'm convinced could've succeeded if Anet didn't kitten up the balance and neglect it so hard that the league had to be canceled.

I used to be in some pvp guilds and still had at least some friends playing the game, but with the removal of 5v5 pvp guilds died in no time and all my friends quit. None of my friends play anymore and I actually know nobody whose friends are even remotely interested in GW2 anymore either, so of course only a bunch of sad individuals are left. No wonder 92% are solo-Q'ing. The only people I know who are still playing pvp are the ones who have always played pvp, no matter how kitten it was.

And no, ATs are NOT the same thing or even remotely enough and it's mind boggling that everybody always brings this up as an excuse. How is having 2 or 3 matches every few hours enough for a full team? Even Teapot made this stupid point over and over again. Like.. you finally manage to get 5 people together and then have to wait several hours until the next AT starts? Or all come on at the same time to enroll.. there's absolutely no flexibility and even 1 dude delaying for 10min results in possibly the only opportunity for that day gone. How stupid is that?
If ATs worked or was enough content for full teams we would still have a pvp community but it is very very obviously insufficient so please stop making that argument, reality is proving y'all wrong.. Heck, even GW1 has a way healthier pvp community than GW2, wonder why... (hint: guilds/teams can play together against other guilds/teams *wink wink*). Last time I checked there were at least 200 guilds still competing (with leaderboard btw) and I even spectated some GvG matches.
On-demand ATs have been on Anet's list since 2018 and we still don't have it so they will likely never come. I've been advocating for a split solo-only and mixed-team queue for years too but this will also never come.. the only hard pill to swallow is that sPvP in general is already kittening dead, Anet doesn't care about the game mode or the players there.
No amount of posting on the forum will get Anet to spend a single penny on making PvP changes outside of "balancing" either. The game mode is doomed, just accept it. Outside of balance changes there has been 0 change for Ranked in the last idk, 8 years? EoD and SotO didn't even mention sPvP at all! Anet is done with this and has been for a long time, anyone who's still expecting a change is completely delusional.

Obviously I still hope for some changes or new content (at some point) but I have 0 expecations anymore, even removing duo-Q is too much effort for Anet at this point, it will never come, get over it.

Edited December 11, 2023 by DoomNexus.5324
typo and stuff

[Azure The Heartless.3261]

On 12/10/2023 at 8:54 AM, Multicolorhipster.9751 said:

If it's about playing with friends, there should be absolutely 0 issue with that and it should only be about playing with buds.

Correct.

I said this before, but If I want to play with a group on discord for fun, it should resemble the Splatoon queue system.

If it's ranked, it's premade vs premade or solo vs solo. If you want teams, go to league. If you wanna play in the same general game as some people, expect some of them to randomly be your opponents. 

If it's for fun and there's no other premades, it should shuffle some of the people on my team off to the other team. They're friends, I don't mind steamrolling them/getting steamrolled a couple matches if it makes the game fun for everyone.

Edited December 11, 2023 by Azure The Heartless.3261

[JTGuevara.9018]

7 hours ago, Multicolorhipster.9751 said:

@"Ben Phongluangtham.1065" said: The problem with splitting the queue is that our data doesn't show that 2 separate queues for ranked would work. To put things in perspective, 92% someone queues is queuing solo. The team queue would have horrendous wait times. And when a match finally popped, difference in team skill would likely be rage inducing.

Not my problem.  Let 'em wait.

gw2 spvp was NEVER ready for prime-time. The merging of queues back in 2014 or 2015 was the beginning of the end. Instead of supporting the majority of pvp players who play solo queue, gw2 decides to go all in on the minority who play 5v5 and promote "e-spurtz". BIG MISTAKE.

4 hours ago, DoomNexus.5324 said:

Correction:
Full team queue was taken out because people were crying about getting matched solo+4 against full stacks, the exact same argument with duo-Q, just different numbers.
Back then GW2 even had an esport league, which I'm convinced could've succeeded if Anet didn't kitten up the balance and neglect it so hard that the league had to be canceled.

Nope. "E-spurtz" and the merging of solo and team queues were the biggest mistakes this game has made. It should NOT have sacrificed its majority player base (solo queuers) in favor of the trickle of 5v5 teams who could barely field a freakin' tournament just for a desperate chance to kiss the ESL's feet...

 

[Multicolorhipster.9751]

5 hours ago, DoomNexus.5324 said:

Correction:
Full team queue was taken out because people were crying about getting matched solo+4 against full stacks, the exact same argument with duo-Q, just different numbers.
Back then GW2 even had an esport league, which I'm convinced could've succeeded if Anet didn't kitten up the balance and neglect it so hard that the league had to be canceled.

so not even true 5v5 by your own admission, which is stupid for the same reason 2v1 is stupid. It shouldn't be solo+anything. If you would call it 5v5, then it should be 5v5, not 2+3v5 or 5v1, that's stupid and uncompetitive. 5v1 would be fundamentally no different from unranked just with ratings and a leaderboard slapped on.

5 hours ago, DoomNexus.5324 said:

I used to be in some pvp guilds and still had at least some friends playing the game, but with the removal of 5v5 pvp guilds died in no time and all my friends quit. None of my friends play anymore and I actually know nobody whose friends are even remotely interested in GW2 anymore either, so of course only a bunch of sad individuals are left. No wonder 92% are solo-Q'ing. The only people I know who are still playing pvp are the ones who have always played pvp, no matter how kitten it was.

I'll give you a short rundown on why soloq is so popular since it's clear you have no idea why despite claiming to have done it for 5 years straight.

1. It's easily accessible

2. It's the quickest way to find a match

And 3. Friends have their own lives, jobs, and other games. If you no-lifed spvp and only played that, there would be times where you would be forced to soloq or elsewise not participate at all. This might also sound wild, but some people prefer to ONLY play with friends when they do it, and recognize merged 5v1 or 2v1 queues for the complete joke they are, and would rather find a different game that recognizes this, or otherwise play soloq.

5 hours ago, DoomNexus.5324 said:

And no, ATs are NOT the same thing or even remotely enough and it's mind boggling that everybody always brings this up as an excuse. How is having 2 or 3 matches every few hours enough for a full team? Even Teapot made this stupid point over and over again. Like.. you finally manage to get 5 people together and then have to wait several hours until the next AT starts? Or all come on at the same time to enroll.. there's absolutely no flexibility and even 1 dude delaying for 10min results in possibly the only opportunity for that day gone. How stupid is that?

5 hours ago, DoomNexus.5324 said:

If ATs worked or was enough content for full teams we would still have a pvp community but it is very very obviously insufficient so please stop making that argument, reality is proving y'all wrong.. Heck, even GW1 has a way healthier pvp community than GW2, wonder why... (hint: guilds/teams can play together against other guilds/teams *wink wink*). Last time I checked there were at least 200 guilds still competing (with leaderboard btw) and I even spectated some GvG matches.

Very typical of the spvp community. "Everyone else is wrong, the last honest content creator we had is wrong, but me, I am right."

It's worth noting that ranked is not the same thing as ATs, meaning that if we ever did get split queues, the teamq option could be the same thing as ATs, only without any of the drawbacks you mentioned, long-queue times and imbalanced matches aside, but what can you expect with such catering to an overwhelmingly small minority? Still worth doing if only to make ranked fair and competitive.

Skipped GW1 and I'm not going back to play a game only 7 years younger than I am, but I will say this about GvG. On paper, it sounds fair, therefore it has potential to be fun. Now if it were Gv1, that would be a complete joke, but I'm assuming GvG means guild v guild just like 5v5 should mean 5 v 5 and not 5v1.

5 hours ago, DoomNexus.5324 said:

On-demand ATs have been on Anet's list since 2018 and we still don't have it so they will likely never come. I've been advocating for a split solo-only and mixed-team queue for years too but this will also never come.. the only hard pill to swallow is that sPvP in general is already kittening dead, Anet doesn't care about the game mode or the players there.
No amount of posting on the forum will get Anet to spend a single penny on making PvP changes outside of "balancing" either. The game mode is doomed, just accept it. Outside of balance changes there has been 0 change for Ranked in the last idk, 8 years? EoD and SotO didn't even mention sPvP at all! Anet is done with this and has been for a long time, anyone who's still expecting a change is completely delusional.

Obviously I still hope for some changes or new content (at some point) but I have 0 expecations anymore, even removing duo-Q is too much effort for Anet at this point, it will never come, get over it.

True, but it's worth telling the truth still. Just because Anet doesn't care and has completely forgotten about us isn't an excuse to lie and be sinful, that's conceited vanity.

"If ye continue in My word, then are ye My disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free." -John 8:31-32  🙏

[Multicolorhipster.9751]

3 hours ago, Azure The Heartless.3261 said:

I said this before, but If I want to play with a group on discord for fun, it should resemble the Splatoon queue system.

If it's ranked, it's premade vs premade or solo vs solo. If you want teams, go to league. If you wanna play in the same general game as some people, expect some of them to randomly be your opponents. 

If it's for fun and there's no other premades, it should shuffle some of the people on my team off to the other team. They're friends, I don't mind steamrolling them/getting steamrolled a couple matches if it makes the game fun for everyone.

Splatoon got it right if that's the way they handle things. Casual queue fine either way, competitive everyone should play at the same level, meaning a soloq should have an option to queue solo and only be matched against other solos, and if someone disagrees they can go pretend to have fun in league of leggings.

Mixing the queues only ensures nobody has what they want. The teams are getting random solos thrown in with them, and the solos are; as 1 person, going up against groups of people and it sets a terrible precedent for future games with potential to be better.

2 hours ago, JTGuevara.9018 said:

Not my problem.  Let 'em wait.

gw2 spvp was NEVER ready for prime-time. The merging of queues back in 2014 or 2015 was the beginning of the end. Instead of supporting the majority of pvp players who play solo queue, gw2 decides to go all in on the minority who play 5v5 and promote "e-spurtz". BIG MISTAKE.

Fr soloq has always been the overwhelming majority in spvp. The needs of the many should always outweigh the needs of the few.

Can give them split queues so both sides have what they want and the teams can waste their lives away waiting around in queues to be matched with the other 8% of an already small population. There's got to be only a couple hundred people at most still playing ranked on both servers, let's say 1000 (though that's probably being generous) 

8% of 1000 is 80 people, meaning the other 920 people get 🔩'd just to cater to those 80 people. On what planet is that fair? Hello, duoqs, we the people of Earth greet you with hopes of peace 👽

[magickthief.6492]

14 hours ago, jdawgie.1835 said:

This is a trash game mode that offers people nothing and needs to be removed entirley - this is not an option or a solution.

This is also trash - its under developed for what the original goal was and is signficiantly less relevent as a game mode than unranked. 

Needs to be year round to count same with threes - outside of that I agree with you here. However as it currently stands its not an actual solution. Yet.

@magickthief.6492 You know whats so funny? I actually responded to each of your little items (excuses) in good faith - because I didnt read the response to the very end to see the "next excuse" part. Here you go buddy - Do yourself a favor before making flippant comments. Read peoples post historys. Its the best way to differentiate troll from genuine poster. Heres a quote from a different post that offers an actual solution to the problem. 

Play with friends is an excuse.  I'm not going to go through your history. I don't care. You missed tourneys by the way. Plenty of opportunities to play with friends, seems hyper focused on maintaining duo q though it is not fair in any sense. Maybe I can duo, but at least ONE person must be solo on each team to make a match, this is not fair at all for them, but in reality, that one is more like 95% of the pop.

[jdawgie.1835]

6 hours ago, magickthief.6492 said:

Play with friends is an excuse.  I'm not going to go through your history. I don't care. You missed tourneys by the way. Plenty of opportunities to play with friends, seems hyper focused on maintaining duo q though it is not fair in any sense. Maybe I can duo, but at least ONE person must be solo on each team to make a match, this is not fair at all for them, but in reality, that one is more like 95% of the pop.

So if you cant even be bothered to read the post I pulled from my own history and posted it for you to read... then your right you dont care, your not interested in actual discussion and everything you post is based in feelings and emotions instead of based in seeking solution or compromise with your fellow peer group. So what you have done is here is confirm, that you are actually the one who is full of excuses. You listed off a bunch of made up reason as to why you wont read my posts, so you therefore have no clue what I am talking about - which leaves you with no informed way to respond. 

If you read my post, that I quite literally handed you - you would see very easily that I am in fact not in favor of DUO que. I mean your post is a joke - its right in front of you, the proof you need to understand that your claims about my stance are not ture. Its well documented that I advocate for compromise regarding the split of solo quers and team ques. 

You do yourself a huge disservice to act the way you do. Good luck to you. 

[magickthief.6492]

6 minutes ago, jdawgie.1835 said:

So if you cant even be bothered to read the post I pulled from my own history and posted it for you to read... then your right you dont care, your not interested in actual discussion and everything you post is based in feelings and emotions instead of based in seeking solution or compromise with your fellow peer group. So what you have done is here is confirm, that you are actually the one who is full of excuses. You listed off a bunch of made up reason as to why you wont read my posts, so you therefore have no clue what I am talking about - which leaves you with no informed way to respond. 

If you read my post, that I quite literally handed you - you would see very easily that I am in fact not in favor of DUO que. I mean your post is a joke - its right in front of you, the proof you need to understand that your claims about my stance are not ture. Its well documented that I advocate for compromise regarding the split of solo quers and team ques. 

You do yourself a huge disservice to act the way you do. Good luck to you. 

You edited your post, you forgot your "quote". As you can see by me quoting all of you, AND your post says edited. Get off your small horse.

[magickthief.6492]

jdawgie, quotes capture all quotes, you added it in, just say sorry

 

[jdawgie.1835]

1 minute ago, magickthief.6492 said:

jdawgie, quotes capture all quotes, you added it in, just say sorry

 

It was posted and edited within the same time frame. Well before you chose to respond. It did not go in after the fact lol. You fumbled hard. Go read it and get back to me on what I shared regarding how to handle duo que issues actually.

@ me when you do so I can actually talk to you. The only way anything will ever change is if we can all have some loose agreement on the direction. Per forum norm though - everyone goes in their own direction void of any compromise. In the original post which from the 16th of November lmao - I messaged a few people on the forums and in that post we all seemed to agree they were changes we could live with. Ill be curious to see your thoughts. 

[magickthief.6492]

2 minutes ago, jdawgie.1835 said:

It was posted and edited within the same time frame. Well before you chose to respond. It did not go in after the fact lol. You fumbled hard. Go read it and get back to me on what I shared regarding how to handle duo que issues actually.

@ me when you do so I can actually talk to you. The only way anything will ever change is if we can all have some loose agreement on the direction. Per forum norm though - everyone goes in their own direction void of any compromise. In the original post which from the 16th of November lmao - I messaged a few people on the forums and in that post we all seemed to agree they were changes we could live with. Ill be curious to see your thoughts. 

i didn't remove anything from your post, it was what I saw. sorry, but you posted after i quoted, but i can fathom how you would have posted a response

[jdawgie.1835]

22 hours ago, jdawgie.1835 said:

  On 11/16/2023 at 12:10 PM, jdawgie.1835 said:

Conquest (5v5) Since we will not have 5v5 premade vs premade anymore because that time is over unfortunately - We need to make 5v5 a solo que mode only. (My oppinion is you will still have people stacking on each other so theres that) however removing duo que makes it a bit easier. Give 5v5 to Solo quers. Adjust top stats for solo que. For example that fact that is no stats for engagements survived in 5v5 is wild to me. You pushed far and engaged two people and did not die? Should be noted in *Least deaths vs damage done ratio* or something to that effect. 

Team Death Match (2v2/3v3) Needs to be premade only. What I mean by this is unless you are partied up you cannot que and if we dont want to do that at least ensure an understanding that queuing solo will put you at a significant disadvantage. This will allow people who want competitive team play (that is what this mode is afterall) a way to do it with out having to organize 5v5. 

Separate the ladder and have them both up all year round. Give individual rank, titles, etc to solo 5v5, and give the teams their rank and I think it would be cool to put the name of the duo or trio team name up on the leader board along with account names.

Ensure the titles are the same - IMO my of the arena title is something I favor over the 3v3 and 2v2 elite titles. I think many other people feel this way. Unified rewards for placement the boards.

What your left with is a game mode for solo quers, a game mode for teams year round, and unified rewards. Pugs not colliding with established teams, and something for everyone to do. Remove unranked all together and this way you have 3 total game modes (instead of two) it reduces population split, and add pips based on engagement in the match not on loss to reduce farming, botting. 

@magickthief.6492 Heres my post - I put an option or at least an idea for every scenario that I could think of here. It gives a little something to everyone. Im genuinely curious what you think. Or what you would do differently. 

[Lucentfir.7430]

Funny enough I play with friends in unranked as a full premade or stacked 4+ when we want to get dailies or weekly out of the way, I will say about 90% of the time matches tend to be blow outs in our favor. Kinda feel bad for the other full solo team sometimes. We also participate in ATs once a week normally just for the weekly and gold rewards. I don't think full premade mixed queue should be a thing in ranked, if the desire for ranked is to actually be competative, probably the most competative I remember it being since the beginning is full solo queue since good players would often land on both teams rather than 1 while playing the queue dodge game to avoid other good players. Mixed queue ranked back then were always blow out matches galore after a certain threshold. 

[DoomNexus.5324]

11 hours ago, Multicolorhipster.9751 said:

so not even true 5v5 by your own admission, which is stupid for the same reason 2v1 is stupid. It shouldn't be solo+anything. If you would call it 5v5, then it should be 5v5, not 2+3v5 or 5v1, that's stupid and uncompetitive. 5v1 would be fundamentally no different from unranked just with ratings and a leaderboard slapped on.

I'll give you a short rundown on why soloq is so popular since it's clear you have no idea why despite claiming to have done it for 5 years straight.

1. It's easily accessible

2. It's the quickest way to find a match

And 3. Friends have their own lives, jobs, and other games. If you no-lifed spvp and only played that, there would be times where you would be forced to soloq or elsewise not participate at all. This might also sound wild, but some people prefer to ONLY play with friends when they do it, and recognize merged 5v1 or 2v1 queues for the complete joke they are, and would rather find a different game that recognizes this, or otherwise play soloq.

Very typical of the spvp community. "Everyone else is wrong, the last honest content creator we had is wrong, but me, I am right."

You seemed reasonable in another thread. Sad.
I won't go into detail on you putting words in my mouth and dismissing my opinion to side with a popular person but let me explain myself. I think I never said something that suggests "I'm right and everybody is wrong", at least that wasn't my intention. I said this is a stupid argument because you are basically arguing against reality. If ATs were sufficient then where are all the pvp guilds GW2 used to have? If a few matches every 6 hours can keep a community alive - why aren't there tons and tons of groups enrolling and a big community supporting it? I see you arguing that "92% are playing solo!!1!!" but that's just delusional.. These stats are from where no team-queue exists so of course the vast majority can't play as a team lmao. Or are you saying gw2 is kitten and can only be played as a solo in a team? Well, okay, I could take that as you opinion. Don't agree in the slightest but sure.

And you are - in general - arguing against almost every successful competitive team based game in existence, as you are effectively saying they are all "stupid and uncompetitive"? At least I don't know of a single other game that doesn't offer a mixed team queue for ranked at all.
I mean, you can probably come up with an example of a game where this is the case but the next question is: is it successful? If it isn't then it's clearly not a good example.
You obviously don't have to have other games leading as an example to make a point but personally, I see the common structure of the vast amount of successful competitive games as proof to my point. Feel free to disagree.

And you do realize that ranking and leaderboards are THE single reason why a lot (probably most?) people even play competitive games in the first place, right? So yes, "slapping on" ratings and a leaderboard are pretty much the only distinctive feature for Ranked modes in most games out there. And that's enough, honestly.

I think we have a fundamentally different view on the matter so I doubt we will ever agree on this topic but that's also fine.
In my opinion teams are the backbone of a competitive game. Without being able to queue up as a team (of arbitrary size) the "community" will decay and eventually consist of a group of individuals, that is getting smaller and smaller by the day. As we can see with GW2 for the last several years.
If someone asked me, my ideal solution for GW2 would be a solo-only Q and a mixed-team Q* with their separate rating divisions and leaderboard, as I have said many times in the past.
I do realize solo-only is important for people like you and it does make it equally unfair for everyone, so that's kinda good I guess.
But I'd prefer to be a solo player put together with a coordinated 4-stack than with 4 randoms, even against a full stack.

* Mixed could be anything like 4+1   3+2   2+2+1 ... and full stack of course.
Essentially the same mixed-team like CS2 has. I think it allows but tries to avoid matching 2+1+1+1 together in a team for example.

  

10 hours ago, Multicolorhipster.9751 said:

Can give them split queues so both sides have what they want and the teams can waste their lives away waiting around in queues to be matched with the other 8% of an already small population. There's got to be only a couple hundred people at most still playing ranked on both servers, let's say 1000 (though that's probably being generous)

I agree tho, it's already too late. The tipping point was years ago. At this point team queue will not bring a lot of people back and I think nothing will ever revive sPvP. Anet is probably wise to not try and resurrect it.
I feel like a broken record at this point but sure, try to pressure Anet to remove duo-Q, let the last 500 people still playing sPvP have their peace. I'm indifferent to this and I've never advocated for duo-Q to remain in the game either. If this is so important to you and the 10 other people constantly spaming on the forums about it then I'm from now on your biggest supporter for removing it.
I have nothing to add at this point, everything I wanted to say has been said, so yea.. feel free to twist my words again I don't really care, I'm out for good now.

Edited December 12, 2023 by DoomNexus.5324
Correction, typo

[The Mole.6129]

ranked should allow 5 man queues, otherwise why is it a 5v5, unranked exists for a reason, I believe the ability to que 5 man would fix a lot of issues, you never have to worry about an afk whining idiot who loses the first teamfight and then just afks and blames you for the loss when you get 40 percent dam

 

yes, in a teambased game you will probably lose to a coordinated team of 5, so go play unranked then, I dunno, I just started playing like a month ago and I feel this is the biggest issue in pvp

 

as a counterpoint to my point, sociability doesn't equal skill, just because a team of 5 people has congregated that doesn't mean they are particularly skilled either, a team of 5 isn't unbeatable even if they do have an advantage, only allowing 2 man queues in ranked absolutely does dumb down the strategy of the game, basically if you don't go dps you're playing suboptimal, because you can't count on your team being able to kill anything, because you can't preorganize your team

 

really this game has some of the highest team synergy required for a multiplayer game that I've played in my life, so of all the games this is the one you aren't allowed to build a team in, it's kind of baffling

 

if the argument is that most people can't build a team then it doesn't matter if a few people can, most games will feature solo ques, either everyone can build a team or it is rare, which one is it, if it is extremely rare to be able to build a 5 man, then it has no effect on you other than you losing like 1 out of 10 games solely because they had better team work, if everyone can build a team easily, then why can't you find a team, sounds like you're bad at team based games and you should stick to pve

 

also if teamwork really is the deciding factor in wins, then they'll easily out elo you and you won't have to play against them soon, and if you win you'll make more points out of it, there is literally no negative from this

Edited December 12, 2023 by The Mole.6129

[Bunbury.8472]

I love seeing people with thousands of posts on this forum ranting about how it's impossible for someone to enjoy playing a video game with a friend

huge self report there

[Multicolorhipster.9751]

13 hours ago, DoomNexus.5324 said:

You seemed reasonable in another thread. Sad.

I don't mean to sound unreasonable and I apologize if I came off that way. I think it's important to remember that this is text on a video game forum, so there really isn't a way to convey tone without resorting to outright insults like some of the other degenerates in this forum do when their argument doesn't have a leg to stand on and all they can do is get mad and offended. I do not mean you in any capacity as you do indeed seem like a reasonable fellow.

I promise that I always try to read responses in full and reply in a way that is relevant to what is being presented, and if I do a bad job of this, I appreciate being called out on it. Spirit & truth.

13 hours ago, DoomNexus.5324 said:

I won't go into detail on you putting words in my mouth and dismissing my opinion to side with a popular person but let me explain myself. I think I never said something that suggests "I'm right and everybody is wrong", at least that wasn't my intention.

Looking back, you said "And no, ATs are NOT the same thing or even remotely enough and it's mind boggling that everybody always brings this up as an excuse. How is having 2 or 3 matches every few hours enough for a full team?"
Which is just simple contradiction. If you scroll up; I said, and I'm sure Teapot said as well that structurally, a 5v5 teamq-only ranked mode is exactly like ATs only without the drawbacks of getting 2-3 matches every few hours and having no leaderboard because ranked does have a leaderboard and more on-demand matchmaking than ATs do. This is why I'm so in favor of a split queue as; like I said, 5v5 is probably the best way to play with friends, I agree with you there. What I think is stupid is mixing in soloqs into an open queue creating a scenario where a full team of 5 people in going up against individual soloqs which is guaranteed to happen since the overwhelming majority of ranked's playerbase only plays soloq.

13 hours ago, DoomNexus.5324 said:

I said this is a stupid argument because you are basically arguing against reality. If ATs were sufficient then where are all the pvp guilds GW2 used to have? If a few matches every 6 hours can keep a community alive - why aren't there tons and tons of groups enrolling and a big community supporting it? I see you arguing that "92% are playing solo!!1!!" but that's just delusional.. These stats are from where no team-queue exists so of course the vast majority can't play as a team lmao. Or are you saying gw2 is kitten and can only be played as a solo in a team? Well, okay, I could take that as you opinion. Don't agree in the slightest but sure.

I don't see how this is an argument against reality when it's an argument from statistics which are objective and impartial. No, the stats from nearly a decade ago when ranked had an open queue are not there, but this thread is about duoq specifically and even with the option to duoq, 92% of players were still playing solo. That wasn't an opinion, those are stats that came directly from the developer. My position has been and remains that Xv1 is stupid and that ranked should have two separate queues and leaderboards, one for the 92% of soloq players, and one for those that prefer to team. One to reflect individual performance and one to reflect team performance.

If teaming up is truly about "playing with friends" as is so often said, then there shouldn't be any problem at all with this, as there would be a queue specifically for playing with friends and only with friends as soloqs would not be included, and meanwhile soloqs could expect an even playing field, being matched only with other soloqs. For someone to be against split queues would undermine the "playing with friends" excuse in its entirety, because that's basically an admission that they don't care about playing with friends and only want to play with an advantage over others.

13 hours ago, DoomNexus.5324 said:

And you are - in general - arguing against almost every successful competitive team based game in existence, as you are effectively saying they are all "stupid and uncompetitive"? At least I don't know of a single other game that doesn't offer a mixed team queue for ranked at all.
I mean, you can probably come up with an example of a game where this is the case but the next question is: is it successful? If it isn't then it's clearly not a good example.
You obviously don't have to have other games leading as an example to make a point but personally, I see the common structure of the vast amount of successful competitive games as proof to my point. Feel free to disagree.

Well the screenshot I originally provided comes from ESO; another MMO, and one with an even lower player population than GW2. They have split queues regardless.
Fortnite 🥳 has split queues for every single individual party size; solos, duos, trios, and squads. Consider for a moment that FORTNITE is designed more intelligently than spvp.

Apex took a long time, but they eventually got a separate soloq and Rocket League separates high-rated teams into 2v2 in way similar to how duoq used to be disabled past plat2.

Overwatch eventually had a split between open and role queue; which I get isn't the same thing as solos/teams, but it is a split queue and a good example of how NOT to do split queues.

And both Halo Infinite & LoL have split queues to some capacity with full teams being separated from solos/duos, but really the duos should be included in open and flex queues or otherwise deleted entirely, much like it should be in Gw2, though sPvP lacks any kind of open queue.

And that's just listing games I've played personally, if you can think of any more, let me know.

13 hours ago, DoomNexus.5324 said:

And you do realize that ranking and leaderboards are THE single reason why a lot (probably most?) people even play competitive games in the first place, right? So yes, "slapping on" ratings and a leaderboard are pretty much the only distinctive feature for Ranked modes in most games out there. And that's enough, honestly.

I think you misread there. I wrote: "5v1 would be fundamentally no different from unranked just with ratings and a leaderboard slapped on"

What I meant is that a totally open queue would make ranked uncompetitive since it would mirror the casual mode in every way with the only difference being a leaderboard. If a player wanted to play ranked to 'compete' which is what the button says when you go to queue ranked, they would have no outlet, because allowing teams of any size to go against individual random soloqs isn't competitive no matter how you try to spin it. 5v1 is unfair just like 2v1 is unfair. 5v5 is fair just like 2v2 is fair. Not exactly a mind-boggling concept, it's common sense.

13 hours ago, DoomNexus.5324 said:

I think we have a fundamentally different view on the matter so I doubt we will ever agree on this topic but that's also fine.
In my opinion teams are the backbone of a competitive game. Without being able to queue up as a team (of arbitrary size) the "community" will decay and eventually consist of a group of individuals, that is getting smaller and smaller by the day. As we can see with GW2 for the last several years.
If someone asked me, my ideal solution for GW2 would be a solo-only Q and a mixed-team Q* with their separate rating divisions and leaderboard, as I have said many times in the past.

How can you say we disagree when I am asking for the same exact thing? A solos arena that is only solos vs solos and a separate teams arena that is a totally open queue. That sounds loveleh. I don't even care about the leaderboards personally. Nobody is soloqing for leaderboard spots because soloq is objectively speaking, the hardest way to queue. It is about fairness because 2v1 is boring and fundamentally unfair. If I cared about leaderboards, I would duoq at 4am like this game's 'pros' do because that would put me at the max possible advantage.

13 hours ago, DoomNexus.5324 said:

I agree tho, it's already too late. The tipping point was years ago. At this point team queue will not bring a lot of people back and I think nothing will ever revive sPvP. Anet is probably wise to not try and resurrect it.
I feel like a broken record at this point but sure, try to pressure Anet to remove duo-Q, let the last 500 people still playing sPvP have their peace. I'm indifferent to this and I've never advocated for duo-Q to remain in the game either. If this is so important to you and the 10 other people constantly spaming on the forums about it then I'm from now on your biggest supporter for removing it.

Welcome to the cause, and feel free to DM me at any time for more information about our team non-friendship bracelets

[DoomNexus.5324]

10 hours ago, Multicolorhipster.9751 said:

Well the screenshot I originally provided comes from ESO; another MMO, and one with an even lower player population than GW2. They have split queues regardless.

Fortnite 🥳 has split queues for every single individual party size; solos, duos, trios, and squads. Consider for a moment that FORTNITE is designed more intelligently than spvp.
(...)
And that's just listing games I've played personally, if you can think of any more, let me know.

How can you say we disagree when I am asking for the same exact thing? A solos arena that is only solos vs solos and a separate teams arena that is a totally open queue.

I know it was from ESO, I've been playing eso too, battlegrounds included. I think it's kitten but that's beside the point - not BGs in particular but the combat/movement in general.
You continue to provide examples of a split queue, which I favor, but that's not what I was asking for. Probably irrelevant tho, I get that you also prefer a split queue too, not solo-Q only.
The forums are flooded with "rEmOvE dUoQ!!1!" posts without the context of replacing it with a split queue tho, including this one. OP suggested limiting premades to casual play only and removing anything from competitive other than solo-Q only. This is what I'm advocating against.

I could go through my post history on the forums and probably pull out a handful of occurrences where I got flak for suggesting a split queue because "team queue is not worth it" with arguments like low population, longer queue times for everyone (as the community is split further), etc..
Which I totally get, but I still think it's absolutely mandatory for a healthy pvp community to at least have the option. Worst case scenario would be that team queue is dead on launch and stays dead because everyone already abandoned sPvP for good. But not having this in the game at all is stupid imo. A community driven game mode like pvp can't exist when the community can't play together at all and we've been witnessing its decay for years. At this point even some completely abandoned games have a more active player base than GW2, case and point: GW1. It didn't receive a single competitive update in more than a decade and I feel like it's still more competitive than GW2 currently.
 

10 hours ago, Multicolorhipster.9751 said:

What I meant is that a totally open queue would make ranked uncompetitive since it would mirror the casual mode in every way with the only difference being a leaderboard. If a player wanted to play ranked to 'compete' which is what the button says when you go to queue ranked, they would have no outlet, because allowing teams of any size to go against individual random soloqs isn't competitive no matter how you try to spin it. 5v1 is unfair just like 2v1 is unfair. 5v5 is fair just like 2v2 is fair. Not exactly a mind-boggling concept, it's common sense.

I don't fully understand what you mean with 5v1 but I'm assuming a full stack vs a 4-stack + 1 random? At least that's what I meant with what we have different views on and I disagree with.
I've been playing 5v4+1 several times in CS2 and I would not call it uncompetitive at all, quite the opposite. I'd really love to have this in GW2 as well. At least as a solo player I'd rather be matched with a 4-stack than to join a complete clownfiesta of 2 full pug teams because with a stack I could be almost sure that my team mates are at least coordinated and I can focus on my role or fill what their team is lacking maybe.
Even if they are bad, it at least prevents the (imo) single most infuriating thing during a match, which are armchair commanders who want to push their kitten silver strats onto the team and when nobody follows their orders they just go afk and whine in spawn like a little kitten. I used to get one of those in like every 3rd or 4th match in g3/p1, it only gets better in p2 imo but they even exist there for some reason. Especially when the MM gives me gold team mates anyway, as nobody plays anymore.

The rest, I think, has been discussed enough, I won't comment on that anymore.

Edited December 13, 2023 by DoomNexus.5324

[Multicolorhipster.9751]

10 hours ago, DoomNexus.5324 said:

I know it was from ESO, I've been playing eso too, battlegrounds included. I think it's kitten but that's beside the point - not BGs in particular but the combat/movement in general.
You continue to provide examples of a split queue, which I favor, but that's not what I was asking for. Probably irrelevant tho, I get that you also prefer a split queue too, not solo-Q only.

Every single example I listed offers mixed queues, the difference is it's optional and not forced unlike with ranked spvp.

10 hours ago, DoomNexus.5324 said:

The forums are flooded with "rEmOvE dUoQ!!1!" posts without the context of replacing it with a split queue tho, including this one. OP suggested limiting premades to casual play only and removing anything from competitive other than solo-Q only. This is what I'm advocating against.

They're not wrong at all, completely rational conclusion to make based on statistics. SoloQ represents the strong majority of ranked's playerbase, and that's not an opinion. That's taken from developer statistics and various polls to the community since. SoloQ should never be in a position to draw the short stick and DuoQ should be removed outright. Split queues are a compromise to make the 8% feel better, and in the same way the diehard "remove duoq" people aren't willing to compromise so too are the totally aloof "I just want to play with friends" liars. It's not just one side dealing in absolutes, it's both, and you'll rarely if ever hear either mention splitting the queues.

10 hours ago, DoomNexus.5324 said:

I could go through my post history on the forums and probably pull out a handful of occurrences where I got flak for suggesting a split queue because "team queue is not worth it" with arguments like low population, longer queue times for everyone (as the community is split further), etc..
Which I totally get, but I still think it's absolutely mandatory for a healthy pvp community to at least have the option. Worst case scenario would be that team queue is dead on launch and stays dead because everyone already abandoned sPvP for good. But not having this in the game at all is stupid imo. A community driven game mode like pvp can't exist when the community can't play together at all and we've been witnessing its decay for years. At this point even some completely abandoned games have a more active player base than GW2, case and point: GW1. It didn't receive a single competitive update in more than a decade and I feel like it's still more competitive than GW2 currently.

That I agree with because split queues make both options elective, and I've seen the same things said in response to that suggestion. If they're worried about dividing the population, they're certainly leaderboard fanatics and duoq-enthusiasts because the soloq population outnumbers them 9:1. They know; if given the option, the majority of players would participate rarely if ever in their queue and their "I just want to play with friends" excuse would fall apart in an eyeblink.

I agree as well that a community driven game that allows for teams to play together is a healthy one, but really that should be done from the start and soloq should still be option. Eventually you will reach a point like spvp reached where players come to distrust and resent one and other as they pull in opposite directions with teams being more for fun and casual and solos being more competitive-oriented. If they aren't constantly stepping on each other's toes by being forced together, then there wouldn't be any resentment and a natural inclination to only soloq. Could probably have a separate mixed queue without knowing it will be dead on arrival too.

10 hours ago, DoomNexus.5324 said:

I don't fully understand what you mean with 5v1 but I'm assuming a full stack vs a 4-stack + 1 random? At least that's what I meant with what we have different views on and I disagree with.
I've been playing 5v4+1 several times in CS2 and I would not call it uncompetitive at all, quite the opposite. I'd really love to have this in GW2 as well. At least as a solo player I'd rather be matched with a 4-stack than to join a complete clownfiesta of 2 full pug teams because with a stack I could be almost sure that my team mates are at least coordinated and I can focus on my role or fill what their team is lacking maybe.
Even if they are bad, it at least prevents the (imo) single most infuriating thing during a match, which are armchair commanders who want to push their kitten silver strats onto the team and when nobody follows their orders they just go afk and whine in spawn like a little kitten. I used to get one of those in like every 3rd or 4th match in g3/p1, it only gets better in p2 imo but they even exist there for some reason. Especially when the MM gives me gold team mates anyway, as nobody plays anymore.

Oddly specific and niche, don't understand this view at all, but if queues were split, I'd never have to mind it. I'm assuming you're suggesting a totally open queue like unranked has in spvp, where you can queue with groups of 1-5. Assuming because I cannot name a game that specifically offers queuing 5, 4, or solo. Not trying to be mean either; this is just my opinion, but that sounds boring af. Basically queuing with a massive handicap to then trust the other 4 people on your team playing with a greater advantage to carry.

All I can say with absolute certainty is that it isn't competitive, not in any way. As I said before, an open queue is a casual queue. It is literally the exact same thing as unranked, the only difference is they give you a rating and rank you on a leaderboard as an individual despite being able to play as a team. Competitive would be 1v1, 2v2, 3v3, 4v4, 5v5, etc. meaning you can only queue with the maximum queue size because that forces everyone to play at the same exact level with no inherent advantage over anyone else. An advantage kills a competition, even if it was already dead. I'd recommend the new movie Lady Ballers with your viewer-discretion; little independent sports comedy, if you want a laugh and to explore this concept further.

I'd also recommend wrapping this up soon because I don't want to dominate this thread and I'm sure you don't either as we're not really getting anywhere, but if you have something to add I'm here to listen.

[Assolador.3598]

On 12/8/2023 at 5:34 AM, Sahne.6950 said:

I dont think taking the ability to play with your friends will help this gamemode one bit. 

Not at the current state. 

Its too late to Strive for competetiveness. 

Fun is all that matters. And for alot of people playing with 4 randoms of which 2 are just there for the dailys.... isnt exactly fun.

 

Scrap ranked, allow 5 man Q,  get rid of all form of leaderboards, increase the rate at wich you can get legendary gear. Give Newcomern a protectee bracket, until they reach level15. 

 

Thats what i would do. But i know alot of people wont like that.

U know what, that would actually be good

[Sahne.6950]

9 minutes ago, Assolador.3598 said:

U know what, that would actually be good

yup it would.

Completly scrap the competetive aspect from PvP.     turn it into a fun place to enjoy some casual games with your friends.  Cuz all form of competetiveness died YEARS ago. 

And the remains of that "competetive spirit" that still linger around, encourage toxic behavior.

might aswell just kill it, and reintroduce the "new pvp"

Edited December 14, 2023 by Sahne.6950

[Saiyan.1704]

On 12/8/2023 at 3:51 PM, Azure The Heartless.3261 said:

The population is already low because duos avoiding each other to fight solo groups makes match quality worse for everyone. 

I would argue that having Rank PvP Wizard Vault rewards is eons more detrimental to match quality than the top 1% queue dodging each other. You have players that literally AFK matches just to get their daily (or weekly) completed.

We need exclusive PvP titles/skins/color dyes/mounts/etc that extend beyond top 250... like a personal vault of items for Ranked pvp players that promotes playing through the match instead of afking the game for the "check mark" reward.