How about making "squad queue"?

[Jeydra.4386]

When commander moves maps, make it so the entire squad moves (with an exception for players who are receiving shared participation). If the target map is not large enough to accommodate the entire squad, then the entire squad joins the queue.

Could be annoying for people who don't want to follow tag, but in that case they can always leave squad.

[CafPow.1542]

So the squad will never be able to switch maps at prime time? Cause there will not be a moment where 30 people leave at the same time probably, making it so roamers always fill up the map?

if i misunderstand something i would be happy to be informed how you mean it.

[Dawdler.8521]

There is a HUUUUGE technical issue with this idea and that is the fact that the players joining the queued map will be “on hold” without an actual player on the map taking up the spot. otherwise there is no point - the idea require the map to become empty naturally (ie players leave) then the entire squad port in.

In a prime time full activity scenario you will end like this if one of the sides do it:
Red: 75 on queued map
Blue: 75 on queued map
Red: 40 on queued map, no one can join because 50 is in queue waiting for 15 of them to leave.

Yeah… that’s not going to be good. The squad would literally lock down a map just by queueing and playing on another map. Never mind the chaos when all 3 sides has the scenario with varying squad sizes. Don’t even think about the nestled scenarios where two 50 man are trying to swap maps but both are then queued because both squads block themselves from moving.

Would be great for spies with 50 bot accounts though.

Edited September 5 by Dawdler.8521

[SweetPotato.7456]

Should tell one player in the squad who joins a map, if their squad can join said map.

ie: commander: Bell, please check if we can fit into red borderland.
Bell join red borderland, if she goes in without a big yellow letter saying your whole squad  will not be able to fit thane then rest of the squad will join, her whole squad will receive a notification "do you want to join red borderland" click enter  to join.
If her squad cannot fit, when she try to join another map, a message will tell Bell, that "your squad will not be able to Join targeted borderland" 

solved it for you.

[Cyninja.2954]

For this to work, the target map would need to hold spots open  so a squad can jump. This means that the target map would need to be drained of players until the squad can jump.

Knowing that a map has a cap of 70-75 players, let's assume following example:

EBG has a squad of 30 players that want to change maps (EBG has a queue). Blue border also has a queue and is the target map for the squad.

In order for the squad to be able to jump to blue border, first the amount of players in queue in front of the squad (remember these players are already queued and enter the map once a player on the map leaves) needs to go to 0. Then the amount of players on blue would need to shrink by 30, so a bit less than half of the 75 players there would need to leave AND no new players would be allowed on that map because those spots are reserved for the squad.

Meanwhile the squad can't move. Not an inch. Meaning no spots are opening up on EBG. This means that any players leaving blue map would need to move to red or green or leaving WvW for the near future.

Net result: you are draining a map of players, blocking slots for players on that map and there is no chance for players to gradually replace the squad players on EBG.

How good does this idea sound now?

The alternative is that the commander suddenly initiates a squad jump with people not happy about him doing so. Great way to get EBG to empty out faster in some cases I guess.

Now as far as allowing a commander to set his entire squad on queue. That's great for more organized groups but worse for publics. You suddenly bloat the queues with players which might not even want to jump but were placed in queue. Given the average attention span of a public player is about as engaged as watching paint dry, this could cause issues. Unfortunate since this could be a cool feature for organized squads and engaged players.

TL;DR:

The summarizing interaction here is giving a commander more power over players on maps, in some cases overriding player abilities to prevent this. You want to NEVER take an individuals players agency over where he is. That only leads to problems down the road.

Edited September 5 by Cyninja.2954

[TheGrimm.5624]

9 hours ago, Jeydra.4386 said:

When commander moves maps, make it so the entire squad moves (with an exception for players who are receiving shared participation). If the target map is not large enough to accommodate the entire squad, then the entire squad joins the queue.

Could be annoying for people who don't want to follow tag, but in that case they can always leave squad.

So does the entire squad step back in line to let others in as they wait for enough space? Or are you suggesting that you starve the destination out of defenders until all can fit? I don't think this would work out so well.

[Jeydra.4386]

8 hours ago, CafPow.1542 said:

So the squad will never be able to switch maps at prime time? Cause there will not be a moment where 30 people leave at the same time probably, making it so roamers always fill up the map?

if i misunderstand something i would be happy to be informed how you mean it.

No the roamers can't switch either because the map is queued.

1 hour ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

For this to work, the target map would need to hold spots open  so a squad can jump. This means that the target map would need to be drained of players until the squad can jump.

Knowing that a map has a cap of 70-75 players, let's assume following example:

EBG has a squad of 30 players that want to change maps (EBG has a queue). Blue border also has a queue and is the target map for the squad.

In order for the squad to be able to jump to blue border, first the amount of players in queue in front of the squad (remember these players are already queued and enter the map once a player on the map leaves) needs to go to 0. Then the amount of players on blue would need to shrink by 30, so a bit less than half of the 75 players there would need to leave AND no new players would be allowed on that map because those spots are reserved for the squad.

Meanwhile the squad can't move. Not an inch. Meaning no spots are opening up on EBG. This means that any players leaving blue map would need to move to red or green or leaving WvW for the near future.

Net result: you are draining a map of players, blocking slots for players on that map and there is no chance for players to gradually replace the squad players on EBG.

How good does this idea sound now?

The alternative is that the commander suddenly initiates a squad jump with people not happy about him doing so. Great way to get EBG to empty out faster in some cases I guess.

Now as far as allowing a commander to set his entire squad on queue. That's great for more organized groups but worse for publics. You suddenly bloat the queues with players which might not even want to jump but were placed in queue. Given the average attention span of a public player is about as engaged as watching paint dry, this could cause issues. Unfortunate since this could be a cool feature for organized squads and engaged players.

TL;DR:

The summarizing interaction here is giving a commander more power over players on maps, in some cases overriding player abilities to prevent this. You want to NEVER take an individuals players agency over where he is. That only leads to problems down the road.

How good does that idea sound now? It still sounds good, since your 30-player squad is trying to move onto another queued map. For obvious reasons you'd rather discourage this.

If you don't want to jump maps, leave squad. It's especially easy if commander decides to jump onto a queued map, since you'd be in queue and have time to leave.

Edited September 5 by Jeydra.4386

[Jeydra.4386]

1 hour ago, TheGrimm.5624 said:

So does the entire squad step back in line to let others in as they wait for enough space? Or are you suggesting that you starve the destination out of defenders until all can fit? I don't think this would work out so well.

You starve the destination of defenders until all can fit. Those guys can see the queue. If they're serious about holding the objective, they'd know to switch maps because the squad will come.

[Dawdler.8521]

I think everything we said went in one ear and out the other.

[Cyninja.2954]

28 minutes ago, Jeydra.4386 said:

You starve the destination of defenders until all can fit. Those guys can see the queue. If they're serious about holding the objective, they'd know to switch maps because the squad will come.

Exactly, and that's a terrible design.

You are essentially reducing the already limited slots on WvW maps (4x75 per side).

Every player in a queue will rightfully hate you for this.

[Cyninja.2954]

32 minutes ago, Jeydra.4386 said:

No the roamers can't switch either because the map is queued.

How good does that idea sound now? It still sounds good, since your 30-player squad is trying to move onto another queued map. For obvious reasons you'd rather discourage this.

I don't think you understand your own suggestion...

32 minutes ago, Jeydra.4386 said:

If you don't want to jump maps, leave squad. It's especially easy if commander decides to jump onto a queued map, since you'd be in queue and have time to leave.

Yes, unless the map has enough space, in which case the sqaud gets moved immediately.

Which part of my comment on being able to troll people and intentionally move them from EBG went over your head?

Make a sqaud on EBG which has queue, let players join, jump to an open border. Fun!

Edited September 5 by Cyninja.2954

[Tovera.4039]

14 minutes ago, Dawdler.8521 said:

I think everything we said went in one ear and out the other.

Well it is the wvw subforum. I don’t think anyone really reads anything here (especially the devs) it all always been screaming into the void. 
 

Tl;dr: This is the way. 

[CafPow.1542]

1 hour ago, Jeydra.4386 said:

No the roamers can't switch either because the map is queued

As others already said, for a plethora of reasons that doesn’t sound to good.

i think most can relate to the problem. Most have experienced the situation where the comm swaps map, the entire zerg of 40 people follows and a few stay back. Everyone who zergs every now and then was already among those „fews“ and … yes. It sucks. But out of this creating a „solution“ that would just make qeues longer and outnumbered bigger is kinda the worst idea.

only because you met an inconvenience doesn’t mean, there is a fix needed.

just my2cents.

 

/edit

before i forget it, it’s still cool that you think about it and post ideas. Every idea is needed to be told to see how good it is.

edison made 200 wrong lightbulbs before he finally created the correct thing but without the 200 failures, he wouldn’t have done it. 

Edited September 5 by CafPow.1542

[Jeydra.4386]

49 minutes ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

Exactly, and that's a terrible design.

You are essentially reducing the already limited slots on WvW maps (4x75 per side).

Every player in a queue will rightfully hate you for this.

Why are they in a queue in the first place? Are you assuming all four maps are queued?

Edited September 5 by Jeydra.4386

[Jeydra.4386]

48 minutes ago, Cyninja.2954 said:

I don't think you understand your own suggestion...

Yes, unless the map has enough space, in which case the sqaud gets moved immediately.

Which part of my comment on being able to troll people and intentionally move them from EBG went over your head?

Make a sqaud on EBG which has queue, let players join, jump to an open border. Fun!

If you don't want to let your map decisions be decided by the commander, leave squad. I don't see how you can troll people by moving them off the map when you can always not join squad. Maybe you can do it once. Then you get blocked immediately and they don't join your squad again. How is that a problem? It's not even that dissimilar to advertising in LFG for so-and-so raid, then after everyone joins and enters instance you go "Lulz I didn't want to do the raid anyway, you've been trolled", and you can already do that.

[Jeydra.4386]

20 minutes ago, CafPow.1542 said:

As others already said, for a plethora of reasons that doesn’t sound to good.

i think most can relate to the problem. Most have experienced the situation where the comm swaps map, the entire zerg of 40 people follows and a few stay back. Everyone who zergs every now and then was already among those „fews“ and … yes. It sucks. But out of this creating a „solution“ that would just make qeues longer and outnumbered bigger is kinda the worst idea.

only because you met an inconvenience doesn’t mean, there is a fix needed.

just my2cents.

No, the problem I'm trying to address is when a squad does not defend an objective because they don't fit onto the map. In the situation where a 40-man squad with no queues on all maps does not all move together, that's not a problem.

Edited September 5 by Jeydra.4386

[Cyninja.2954]

25 minutes ago, Jeydra.4386 said:

If you don't want to let your map decisions be decided by the commander, leave squad. I don't see how you can troll people by moving them off the map when you can always not join squad. Maybe you can do it once. Then you get blocked immediately and they don't join your squad again. How is that a problem? It's not even that dissimilar to advertising in LFG for so-and-so raid, then after everyone joins and enters instance you go "Lulz I didn't want to do the raid anyway, you've been trolled", and you can already do that.

You are talking like a player who has spent 10 minutes in WvW.

There are alt accounts.

There is already fake pinging of way points of EMW to get players off a map.

There already is an issue if players NOT joining squads, to increase this is of its own a bad idea.

All of that while you still fail to address the core issue: this would empty maps for squads to jump for already limited slots to begin with making WvW even more exclusive and increasing queues while there is space on maps.

Also your LFG comparison, wow. Just wow. Yes, continous maps which are subject to a limited amount of players across the entire player base are comparable to instanced content where the map is created ON DEMAND.

22 minutes ago, Jeydra.4386 said:

No, the problem I'm trying to address is when a squad does not defend an objective because they don't fit onto the map. In the situation where a 40-man squad with no queues on all maps does not all move together, that's not a problem.

That same squad would still not come defend. A map would not immediately empty or make enough room for that sqaud to join and enemies are certainly not going wait, especially when the defenders are now being drained away from the map.

As mentioned: you come across as someone who has never played WvW.

TL;DR:

This is a terrible idea. Any veteran WvW player will immediately see the issues here. 

If you want a squad queue, the best you can ask for is that the commander can initiate a queue for all mebers which every member can accept or decline foe themselves. Even this might not be worth the effort implementing since it is easily replicated by the commander telling everyone to queue.

Here is an idea: why don't you bring this idea up with your guild and see where the more veteran members end up on it.

Edited September 5 by Cyninja.2954

[Jeydra.4386]

Are you trolling me? If so you're being very good at it.

"There are alt accounts." -- there are already alt accounts.
"There is already fake pinging of way points of EMW to get players off a map." -- which refutes your point, since it's already possible to troll people off map. (And you can also block the people who do it.)
"There already is an issue if players NOT joining squads, to increase this is of its own a bad idea." -- Lol? Why is it an issue if players don't join squad? Don't say "but then you lose fight" because those people clearly are happy with losing fight.
"All of that while you still fail to address the core issue: this would empty maps for squads to jump for already limited slots to begin with making WvW even more exclusive and increasing queues while there is space on maps." -- How so? You got four maps to play on. Just go to a map without a queue.
"Also your LFG comparison, wow. Just wow. Yes, continous maps which are subject to a limited amount of players across the entire player base are comparable to instanced content where the map is created ON DEMAND." -- It does the same thing, which is move people off the map they were already on to go to your map. If you don't want to move, go back. Or leave squad.
"That same squad would still not come defend." -- Incorrect, since I had commanders explicitly tell me they would come to defend if they could fit.
"A map would not immediately empty or make enough room for that sqaud to join and enemies are certainly not going wait, especially when the defenders are now being drained away from the map." -- Sounds like you've never played during off-peak hours. Ever seen a map drain off because there's an unstoppable karma train on the other team? That neglects the fact too that if your priority is to hold the objective, it's clear that leaving the map to let the squad in is the best way to do it, thereby aligning motivation.
"As mentioned: you come across as someone who has never played WvW." -- big words. There's an extremely high chance you've played less WvW than me, since I've played it as my main game mode since the game was released.
"If you want a squad queue, the best you can ask for is that the commander can initiate a queue for all mebers which every member can accept or decline foe themselves. Even this might not be worth the effort implementing since it is easily replicated by the commander telling everyone to queue." -- I've seen this happen multiple times. Some of the squad get in, rest do not, commander is unable to defend an objective because half their squad is not there, and they return to the original map after the objective is lost.
"Here is an idea: why don't you bring this idea up with your guild and see where the more veteran members end up on it." -- Joke's on you, since I did this yesterday, and they liked it.

[Cyninja.2954]

49 minutes ago, Jeydra.4386 said:

Are you trolling me? If so you're being very good at it.

"There are alt accounts." -- there are already alt accounts.

.... yes, I know. I was reminding you that your "they get blocked" suggestion is bs.

Quote

"There is already fake pinging of way points of EMW to get players off a map." -- which refutes your point, since it's already possible to troll people off map. (And you can also block the people who do it.)

Yes, it 's already possible. No reason to add an even worse way to get players off the map.

Remember, your position here is: this is not an issue.

IT ALREADY IS AND ADDING ANOTHER WAY TO ANNOY PLAYERS IS NOT GOOD.

Quote

"There already is an issue if players NOT joining squads, to increase this is of its own a bad idea." -- Lol? Why is it an issue if players don't join squad? Don't say "but then you lose fight" because those people clearly are happy with losing fight.

I am pointing to an issue in the mode and you are unable to actually give a reasonable rebuttal.

Quote

"All of that while you still fail to address the core issue: this would empty maps for squads to jump for already limited slots to begin with making WvW even more exclusive and increasing queues while there is space on maps." -- How so? You got four maps to play on. Just go to a map without a queue.

What if all 4 maps have queues? FYI you have 5 maps to play if we are to be exact. Obsidian sanctum is also a map.

Quote

"Also your LFG comparison, wow. Just wow. Yes, continous maps which are subject to a limited amount of players across the entire player base are comparable to instanced content where the map is created ON DEMAND." -- It does the same thing, which is move people off the map they were already on to go to your map. If you don't want to move, go back. Or leave squad.

Why am I even wasting time on this....

No it is not the same. Instanced maps are created the moment they are needed. WvW maps are not.

Quote

"That same squad would still not come defend." -- Incorrect, since I had commanders explicitly tell me they would come to defend if they could fit.

"A map would not immediately empty or make enough room for that sqaud to join and enemies are certainly not going wait, especially when the defenders are now being drained away from the map." -- Sounds like you've never played during off-peak hours. Ever seen a map drain off because there's an unstoppable karma train on the other team? That neglects the fact too that if your priority is to hold the objective, it's clear that leaving the map to let the squad in is the best way to do it, thereby aligning motivation.

So we are relying on off-peak hours and empty maps? Why do you need the squad jump feature then? The map is already empty is it not?

If the map drains off naturally, the squad members can sign up and start populating the new map and help while waiting on the rest of the squad.

There is absolutely 0 situation here where draining a map, denying the side a part of their map population cap is in ANY way beneficial. Neither to the side in question, nor to the mode as a whole.

Quote

"As mentioned: you come across as someone who has never played WvW." -- big words. There's an extremely high chance you've played less WvW than me, since I've played it as my main game mode since the game was released.
"If you want a squad queue, the best you can ask for is that the commander can initiate a queue for all mebers which every member can accept or decline foe themselves. Even this might not be worth the effort implementing since it is easily replicated by the commander telling everyone to queue." -- I've seen this happen multiple times. Some of the squad get in, rest do not, commander is unable to defend an objective because half their squad is not there, and they return to the original map after the objective is lost.
"Here is an idea: why don't you bring this idea up with your guild and see where the more veteran members end up on it." -- Joke's on you, since I did this yesterday, and they liked it.

You've played since launch and yet didn't even come up with the issues brought up in this thread which have been following this mode ever since then?

You are correct, I only dabbled in WvW since launch and started playing seriously around 2017. Yet I still noticed the glaring issues in your suggestion which you in part still fail to even recognize.

EDIT: but to cut this short, given it is quite easy to recognize the issues here and I doubt even the developers would not see them. Make your suggestion, don't respond or consider criticism, see when it gets implemented. I've already shown up the central issues here. No reason to go in circles on this topic.

Edited September 5 by Cyninja.2954

[Chaba.5410]

5 hours ago, Jeydra.4386 said:

You starve the destination of defenders until all can fit. Those guys can see the queue. If they're serious about holding the objective, they'd know to switch maps because the squad will come.

I don't see the point of this.  No one would leave the map to let the squad in because no one wants to take the risk that not enough defenders leave and then remain outnumbered and no one else can get on.  It sounds like a way to hand objectives over to an opponent faster than otherwise.

Edited September 5 by Chaba.5410

[CafPow.1542]

5 hours ago, Jeydra.4386 said:

No, the problem I'm trying to address is when a squad does not defend an objective because they don't fit onto the map. In the situation where a 40-man squad with no queues on all maps does not all move together, that's not a problem.

Hmm.

so when somebody pings a def event cause a keep is attacked.

and there are 30 free spots on this map.

and your squad has 35 people. How exactly are they going to defend? Now, 30 ppl will jump. With your scenario, nobody can jump until 5 people LEAVE the map.

tell me: if you roam around alone or with a friend or two and there is an incoming to a keep, you don’t wanna lose. What is your instinct telling you:

a) going there

b) leave the map

 

this is also very counterintuitive.

[TheGrimm.5624]

7 hours ago, Jeydra.4386 said:

You starve the destination of defenders until all can fit. Those guys can see the queue. If they're serious about holding the objective, they'd know to switch maps because the squad will come.

This would be an easy tactic to abuse to start with so there is the first no. The second is if the squad is to big to fit, they should breakup and make due with others already on the map and the rest reform as a new one on the old map, or choose a less full map. Now I agree more visibility in can you fit might be a good UI change. But I don't think starving a map to allow an all move in one motion would be a good change. 

[TheGrimm.5624]

5 hours ago, Jeydra.4386 said:

"That same squad would still not come defend." -- Incorrect, since I had commanders explicitly tell me they would come to defend if they could fit.

If a comm is going to try and defend they will fit what they can on the map regardless and work with defenders there. If you wait to starve out a map the objective trying to be held will be gone already. I just don't see this working the way you are picturing. At worst it's a way for a tag to force take over a map, the same when you get a tag saying everyone else leave so I can have this map. It would be a massive troll tool. 

In large scale a group needs to be able to function as a whole and as pieces. If it can't that's pretty much an issue with the group or the tag directing it.

[ArchonWing.9480]

Nah.

We don't have automatic queue joins and you have to manually click to enter the map for a reason. The game expects you to be active when joining a queued map, because active players should take priority.

Automatic queueing of a squad is going to allow afk/passive players to bypass that and if people aren't attentive enough to queue for a map, then they shouldn't be in it. The afk rules are lax enough as it is.

This is not to exclude that such a feature is effectively useless when there are multiple queued maps, and fitting a large enough squad is basically impossible

Edited September 5 by ArchonWing.9480

[Honeymoon.2514]

simple solution add queue system by rank and participation level and let alliancce kick none alliance pugs out of the map.  Alliance can also kick other alliance out of the map if they have higher ranking.  Ranking is based on kills, objects captured, etc.

 

or just add more maps and reduce tiers.

Edited September 5 by Honeymoon.2514