Bring Back 5 Man Ranked Que - Needs To Happen At This Point - Solo/Duo Failed

[jbondo.9817]

So the majority of the 10-12k matches that I've played were before duo/solo was enabled. I can confirm that forcing 1-2 queue chased away a lot of the players. Yes you'd run into 5 man queues but it wasn't frequent unless you were on a win streak and you'd hit the top of the MMR. Even then facing some 5 mans wasn't a threat, and the players that are great at this game would compete for fun in ranked and often times queue snipe each other for 5v5's, because they did not fancy pug stomping. Pug stomping occurs regardless by the way.

In terms of wintrading that'll happen regardless of party size. The guy that got the first response to OP isn't even thinking rationally. If people are going to trade wins they are clearly going to know each other before the match and whether or not that person queued with another, it only takes 1 person to throw matches in this game.

Also I agree with OP bring back 5 man if you want players to return. This solo/duo garbage chased away quite a lot of people. Crying for solo/duo is ridiculous, make some friends, or solo queue. It shouldn't be on the entire community that you're having trouble finding a group of people to queue with. The people who cried for this literally chased away the majority of friends that I had on this game and I think it's complete crap. Get a group and get better at the game, and if you can't do that don't rag on others for doing it.

BRING BACK 5 QUEUE PLEASE.

[Trevor Boyer.6524]

@Crab Fear.1624 said:

@Thane.9421 said:

Trump being a ignorant xenophobe is an opinion, but a majority voted away teams, and that is fact.

Let me fix this for you. Actually players voted to do a 1 season trial of duo queue max, after which we were promised a second poll to decide whether it would be kept in place or not. Things seemed bad, of course a majority of players were in favor of trying something different, knowing that if it was worse, they could vote to return to the previous system. Anet just decided to keep duo queue max in place and broke their word on giving us a second poll.

So no, technically the community

Never voted for permanent duo queue max

they voted it away, but the devs did mention a post season poll about keeping the changes. i never saw it. the original poll was ~79.9% in favor of removing teams.

permanent in mind or not, it is still fact that a majority voted it away.

so your beef is that they reneged on the after season poll?

I could start an unofficial poll but it would not get the same attention as an official poll announced at the login window. So the results would not matter.

perhaps we need to get to screaming about the post season poll.

to know what the community wants, and to have data to prove it

Oh I completely second this. I would love to the see a new official poll. There is however one thing that should be pointed out about these forum poll votes. People have alt accounts, some of them many alt accounts. So technically, there are people out there who will be casting anywhere from 2 to 3 or 4 or more additional votes. That really makes any forum poll vote highly questionable, including this original poll vote that the solo que defendants keep standing by.

[brannigan.9831]

Getting rid of team queue killed the game. It was gotten rid of because a lot of bad players whined about it (woah is me I'd be a legend if it wasn't for all the groups Im facing) and A-net bought the BS. Very rarely did you ever face a full 5 man as a solo under the old system. Extremely rare. And if you faced 2 or 3 man groups the matcher did a decent job of putting a partial group on your side. And really that sort of stuff evened out over time. They'll never get back the literally thousands of players they lost with that ludicrous poll based decision. Democracy at its worst. I say this as a person that almost never ran in a full group I was probably 75% solo and 25% 2-3 man groups under the old system. The fact that they are not even considering bring it back as even a limited time test (maybe for one season and then poll again afterwards) shows you how far there heads are stuck up there butts.

[ReaverKane.7598]

@Thane.9421 said:

Trump being a ignorant xenophobe is an opinion, but a majority voted away teams, and that is fact.

Let me fix this for you. Actually players voted to do a 1 season trial of duo queue max, after which we were promised a second poll to decide whether it would be kept in place or not. Things seemed bad, of course a majority of players were in favor of trying something different, knowing that if it was worse, they could vote to return to the previous system. Anet just decided to keep duo queue max in place and broke their word on giving us a second poll.

So no, technically the community

Never voted for permanent duo queue max

Also this... I didn't remember if there had been a second poll.

@Crab Fear.1624 said:

@"Trevor Boyer.6524" said:But you have to follow lines of evidence, not things that are just said aloud or what people "believe". I notice that solo que defendants are only tossing sword quotes from years past and arguing about other arenanet sword quotes. They are not however, forming their opinions from actually evaluating the Guild Wars 2 ranked spvp experience, day in and day out, for the said last 6 years.

Before the end of 2015, what kind of ranked arena could I justify bringing into the discussion?

Maybe the should bring a better guild team league in. Where players can register 5 members and 5 alternate/substitutes max per team, max (x) team per guild. Let guild teams battle it out for glory and leader board positions. Drop teams out of competition if they lose more that (x) number of games consecutively . Guild teams are registered within 3 days of season start or they will not be allowed (to register).

A lot of arguments about teams point towards having cohesion and practicing together, so forcing them to be real guild teams vs other guild teams instead of of a 5 man premade versus a dedicated throwing team would be healthy for the game.

If participation in guild league was low, like only 10 teams, make the seasons short, and grow as more teams join.

But I don't think it will be healthy to bring teams back to the standard league.

Do it the guild way and perhaps strengthen guild pride and rejuvenate pvp guilds once again.

1) Before the end of 2015 there hadn't even been the first season of the league system, nevermind them removing Guild Teams. That happened at the end of 2016. With Season 5 (started December 2016). So there was no discussion to have even.People seem to forget that Enforced Solo/Duo queues have been in the game for little more than a year, which incidentally, and according to the defenders of that choice, coincidentally, has marked the worse PvP decline since 2012, and the most toxic the community has been, with rampant hacking and wintrading.

2) Participation in guild leagues wasn't that bad, there were a lot of them. The big problem was double entries from the same guild, with guilds having 2-3 teams in the top 10 by rotating members. So yeah that was also something they messed up, there should have been a lock on guild team memberships in ranked, so that if a guild has 2 teams competing, each team's members shouldn't overlap.

3) The fix would be extend the duration of leagues to get more people in during each season, not make them shorter. Most competitive games have 6-12 month seasons, not 2...

@Crab Fear.1624 said:

@Thane.9421 said:

Trump being a ignorant xenophobe is an opinion, but a majority voted away teams, and that is fact.

Let me fix this for you. Actually players voted to do a 1 season trial of duo queue max, after which we were promised a second poll to decide whether it would be kept in place or not. Things seemed bad, of course a majority of players were in favor of trying something different, knowing that if it was worse, they could vote to return to the previous system. Anet just decided to keep duo queue max in place and broke their word on giving us a second poll.

So no, technically the community

Never voted for permanent duo queue max

they voted it away, but the devs did mention a post season poll about keeping the changes. i never saw it. the original poll was ~79.9% in favor of removing teams.

permanent in mind or not, it is still fact that a majority voted it away.

so your beef is that they reneged on the after season poll?

I could start an unofficial poll but it would not get the same attention as an official poll announced at the login window. So the results would not matter.

perhaps we need to get to screaming about the post season poll.

to know what the community wants, and to have data to prove it

The beef is that this kind of decision isn't something that should be let to the community to decide. Because they will always decide poorly. Because the majority doesn't care for PvP as a competitive mode, they care for PvP as a way to farm bling.I guarantee to you that if they removed the reward farm, gave only a end-season reward according to rank (like most MOBAs) there would be 50% or more people voting "I don't care for pvp". The fact of the matter is that the vast majority of people voting against teams are people that solo queue to farm rewards, that's why there's so many people win-trading, that's why there's so many people hacking. And that's why people are still defending solo queue locks. Because all they care for is the farm.

[Master Ketsu.4569]

For the 1000000000th time, no.

The people who benefit from 5 man are a microscopically small yet highly vocal minority. The overwhelming majority of players solo, and anet knows this from their match data. Saying "the game is dying becuz no 5 man!!111!oneone!" is objectively wrong. Most people give zero crappers.

[Trevor Boyer.6524]

@"Master Ketsu.4569" said:For the 1000000000th time, no.

The people who benefit from 5 man are a microscopically small yet highly vocal minority. The overwhelming majority of players solo, and anet knows this from their match data. Saying "the game is dying becuz no 5 man!!111!oneone!" is objectively wrong. Most people give zero crappers.

If so people give zero crappers one way or the other, then why not listen to the people who care enough to post and discuss?

[Zaxares.5419]

ANet can bring back 5 man. They just need to split Solo and Team Queues again. Now, the problem this caused last time was that Team Queuers could spend upwards of 30 mins waiting in queue (because the population of soloers is WAY bigger than team, and ANet knows this). To solve this problem, ANet needs to include a new PvP option that says "Allow me to be matched against Team Queue players", and make it opt-in. This allows matchmaking to fill gaps in Team Queue, lower queue times, and it also means that no soloer who adamantly does not want to play against teams will never do so. Finally, to sweeten the deal, make it so that any solo player who gets put into a team queue match gets DOUBLE the rewards (pips and reward track progress) of what they would normally get. This will incentivize players who don't mind getting thrown up against much tougher teams to fill queues (and I can guarantee there will be LOTS of players who don't give a damn whether they win or lose as long as they feel it is worth their time).

[messiah.1908]

if only anet could implement ingame teamspeak like shooting games this could be great and solve lots of problems

[messiah.1908]

or much easier to do is to force ppl to get a group before queing in rank (gw1 a like)

[Master Ketsu.4569]

@messiah.1908 said:or much easier to do is to force ppl to get a group before queing in rank (gw1 a like)

Oh yeah go back to the days of HA where it would often take 2+ hours to form a group due to the Dunning-Kruger effect.

[brannigan.9831]

@jcbroe.4329 said:As a person who's been playing since season 1, I enjoy solo queuing much more than I enjoyed queuing into full rosters of Team PZ and The Abjured.

Numbers aren't dwindling because of anything to do with this topic. They're dwindling because on top of a stagnant balace cycle with low build diversity, ANet allows players to engage in toxic behavior including but not limited to: afking, griefing, ragequit/disconnecting, match manipulation, and harassment.

The vast majority of the population isn't even playing at a level where they recognize the people accused of wintrading, much less encountering them in games.

And frankly, accomodating the verbal minority of people that want to pugstomp ranked queues before taking the necessary and so far absent heavy handed approach to curb the negative behavior that affects players in every PvP venue, not just ranked queues, would be the nail in the coffin for PvP.

I don't think I'd be alone in saying the only reason I can even still tolerate playing PvP is because I have most of the people that have been consistently in plat and on the leaderboards blocked in game, and I'll still get griefed by some of them with abuse of the targeting system or by them afking or DCing.

Why would I want to play in an environment where not only is there no protection or retribution from/for player behavior, but that I'd also have to contend with tournament teams and basically be punished by the system for queuing alone?

Not to mention it would make rating even more arbitrary than it already is since there would be no split between solo leaderboards and team leaderboards.

If you're really dead set on this suggestion, then once again, coming from a person who has had more than enough of queuing into full teams for a lifetime, here's the suggested stipulations:

• Teams queuing use the highest rated players MMR to make matches and determine rating gain/loss.
• Random teams made by the matchmaker in order to face a premade team have to be +-50 (BEFORE deviation) at the maximum range to make the match, and even then that's a loose range against a full 5 man group.

That's all just your opinion. My opinion and personal observances are the exact opposite that banning grouping has hurt this game. It has in fact driven many players away. I am also pretty sure the data would show that you were rarely facing full teams of highly ranked players. A-net gave into the mob and it hurt the game. It would help if they made the data available. I would bet people faced full groups in less then full groups less then 5% of the time. Its actually not really a big deal to me as I almost never ran in a full group but it's ludicrous to me that a game that was sold as a team game and requires coordination you are going to tell people they can't group up. Spare me automated tournaments as the answer. How it effects rating is also not important at all because rating right now is not legitimate for a host of reasons. At this point the main objective for A-net should be how do we stop population drain and make the game fun for the most amount of people and to me that involves bringing back queueing with a group or partial group.

[Falan.1839]

5 Man Q would completely invalidate the leaderboard, even duo Q distorted it quite a bit. A separate team Q would not have enough teams to ensure balanced matchups. The current solution with the ATs is close to optimal in my opinion, but for some reason the agenda whiners here just keep going. Probably because they get stomped 2. round in ATs and want to farm Solo Qers again. But hey, let's bring the guild leaderboard back too, which so few decent teams actually cared about that you either had total trash teams on top there or one decent guild making a joke out of it by placing 10 of their teams on there.

[Trevor Boyer.6524]

Please support your opinions of bringing back 5 man ranked ques by voting in this thread:

• https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/33233/5-man-queue-season-11-trial#1

[Faux Play.6104]

The "play with friends" excuse has always been either for people that want to smurf, or people that need to be carried.

There are ATs for people that want to do serious 5 man. There is WvW for social team pvp.

[choovanski.5462]

@"Faux Play.6104" said:The "play with friends" excuse has always been either for people that want to smurf, or people that need to be carried.

There are ATs for people that want to do serious 5 man. There is WvW for social team pvp.

spoken like someone who has never had friends before

[sephiroth.4217]

@rank eleven monk.9502 said:

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@Awe.1096 said:

@"ReaverKane.7598" said:

Oh, i didn't know those statistics existed, but they pretty much confirm my experience then. I had better win rates with solo/duo than teams. The Algorithm was doing its job apparently.This only makes Arena Net's choice more unjustifiable.I had 8 guild mates that would regularly do PvP with me in guild teams (we'd rotate) and a few more that played less often. Of those 10-15 players, only ONE plays PvP regularly. It an't me either. I've not touched PvP once this last season.

The worse part, the part that really stings is that PvP was fun, was cool to play with friends, and a lot of my old mates actually quit the game entirely as well, and are now playing stuff like Warframe, Overwatch and LoL. And because of the damage done, the accumulation of errors, PvP is unlikely to ever bounce back.

Good premade > Hey guys lets make a premade > pubs

I suspect that when you queue as a premade, system in the first place tries to match you vs another premade with similar average rating. When it fails, it expands a bit and puts you vs a premade with different skill level. If you are a "casual" premade, you end up stomped by some hardcore guys. But then when it even fails to find you another premade, it throws you some random pubs. Can pubs win with a premade? I guess thay can. But I think this mostly happens when a casual premade assembled on map chat gets pitted vs random solo guys from platinum rank. I sit in gold from 2-3 seasons and I never was above that. And from my own experience I can tell that 4 or 5 man premade thrown vs solos is a stomped game even before the gates open. I dont remember when was the last time I seen a game where all solos won vs a 4+ premade. Did I ever? I heard people claiming it happens, so as I described above, I suspect this may happen when all or most solos are platinum at least and they simply dominate all 1v1's during the match.

I understand that not being able to play ranked with a full premade is a bad thing. And I agree with that. But this is a necessary evil in a game where PvP population is mediocre in size at best. There are not enough people to keep the premade only queue busy. And if you keep feeding pubs to premades, pubs will leave sooner rather than later. And I am fairly certain that, as in any game, there are more pubs than hardcore and skilled PvP-ers (take a look at tournaments participation) and utlimately this is what matters more.

its mediocre population because they removed team queue... cause and effect.

Just a few photos though having a quick scrimmage through my desktop in regards to claims regarding winning against premades.

That was taken from the last 100 photos I have, I have thousands of screenshots. As you can see, most are complete blowouts favoring the "pugs".You are trying to justify yourself with screenshots from the current unranked arena? Are you trolling or what? Show me similar screenshots from ranked seasons when we had 5 man queue too. I literally had one win in hundreds of games against a 5 man premade. Also lol you having thousands of screenshots like this, love the irrelevant hyperboles

I'd gladly give you 5 man ranked photos if we had a 5 man ranked queue, but for now you will have to settle for unranked due to the game restrictions, doesn't change the evidence that 5 man teams can and will be beaten by "pugs".

[Ioras Dagnir.3927]

@"Faux Play.6104" said:The "play with friends" excuse has always been either for people that want to smurf, or people that need to be carried.

There are ATs for people that want to do serious 5 man. There is WvW for social team pvp.

I am already in a WvW guild and its basically the only thing that is still keeping me playing this game. Because yes I absolutely do value social teamplay above all else.

You clearly aren't listening to anything being said, ATs are time gated and awkward. If you are lucky you might get your friends together and play 1 or 2 rounds before losing and then what? Go casual and fight pugs while you wait for the next one /s yay that sounds like so much fun.Ranked allows for consecutive games with a form of progression and reward, without a time gate which so much more convenient. It'd also give teams a place to practice for ATs without going to the hassle of organizing scrims making the quality of AT matches better too.

[Kraitan.8476]

I like how OP states his opinions as facts, baits a lot of comments on a useless post

[Ioras Dagnir.3927]

@Kraitan.8476 said:I like how OP states his opinions as facts, baits a lot of comments on a useless post

How do you get to that line of thought? How can you deny that securing yourself a team prevents wintrading from affecting you and say that its an opinion?

[Faux Play.6104]

@Ioras Dagnir.3927 said:

@"Faux Play.6104" said:The "play with friends" excuse has always been either for people that want to smurf, or people that need to be carried.

There are ATs for people that want to do serious 5 man. There is WvW for social team pvp.

......You clearly aren't listening to anything being said, ATs are time gated and awkward. If you are lucky you might get your friends together and play 1 or 2 rounds before losing and then what? Go casual and fight pugs while you wait for the next one /s yay that sounds like so much fun.

I am listening. You are making my point for me. Unranked uses the same match making algorithm as ranked. what you are asking for is to stomp pugs in a system that formally ranks you.

Now think of how a system like that would be abused.

The last time this came up for vote, 5 man queues lost worse than Putin's political opponents.

[ReaverKane.7598]

@Falan.1839 said:5 Man Q would completely invalidate the leaderboard, even duo Q distorted it quite a bit. A separate team Q would not have enough teams to ensure balanced matchups. The current solution with the ATs is close to optimal in my opinion, but for some reason the agenda whiners here just keep going. Probably because they get stomped 2. round in ATs and want to farm Solo Qers again. But hey, let's bring the guild leaderboard back too, which so few decent teams actually cared about that you either had total trash teams on top there or one decent guild making a joke out of it by placing 10 of their teams on there.

LOL, you think so?Cause win-trading just substantiates it? Or the fact that there's so little people playing PvP that weather you're actually matched properly and have a fair game is entirely dependant on the time you can play. PvP sure has grown healthy as f**k since they removed ranked team queues (roughly 2years ago), right?

@Faux Play.6104 said:

@Ioras Dagnir.3927 said:

@Faux Play.6104 said:The "play with friends" excuse has always been either for people that want to smurf, or people that need to be carried.

There are ATs for people that want to do serious 5 man. There is WvW for social team pvp.

......You clearly aren't listening to anything being said, ATs are time gated and awkward. If you are lucky you might get your friends together and play 1 or 2 rounds before losing and then what? Go casual and fight pugs while you wait for the next one /s yay that sounds like so much fun.

I am listening. You are making my point for me. Unranked uses the same match making algorithm as ranked. what you are asking for is to stomp pugs in a system that formally ranks you.

Now think of how a system like that would be abused.

The last time this came up for vote, 5 man queues lost worse than Putin's political opponents.

Actually, no... It doesn't.Yeah it did, because 90% of the game's community don't care for pvp to be competitive. They care to farm pvp for pve rewards, that's why ranked teams lost. Because the majority just wants to play pvp to the point it gives them faster access to pve rewards. If pvp rewards were separated from pvp like in the early years you can bet your ass that ranked teams would have won, because it would have been people interested in actual pvp, not farming rewards.

@brannigan.9831 said:

@"jcbroe.4329" said:As a person who's been playing since season 1, I enjoy solo queuing much more than I enjoyed queuing into full rosters of Team PZ and The Abjured.

Numbers aren't dwindling because of anything to do with this topic. They're dwindling because on top of a stagnant balace cycle with low build diversity, ANet allows players to engage in toxic behavior including but not limited to: afking, griefing, ragequit/disconnecting, match manipulation, and harassment.

The vast majority of the population isn't even playing at a level where they recognize the people accused of wintrading, much less encountering them in games.

And frankly, accomodating the verbal minority of people that want to pugstomp ranked queues before taking the necessary and so far absent heavy handed approach to curb the negative behavior that affects players in every PvP venue, not just ranked queues, would be the nail in the coffin for PvP.

I don't think I'd be alone in saying the only reason I can even still tolerate playing PvP is because I have most of the people that have been consistently in plat and on the leaderboards blocked in game, and I'll still get griefed by some of them with abuse of the targeting system or by them afking or DCing.

Why would I want to play in an environment where not only is there no protection or retribution from/for player behavior, but that I'd also have to contend with tournament teams and basically be punished by the system for queuing alone?

Not to mention it would make rating even more arbitrary than it already is since there would be no split between solo leaderboards and team leaderboards.

If you're really dead set on this suggestion, then once again, coming from a person who has had more than enough of queuing into full teams for a lifetime, here's the suggested stipulations:

• Teams queuing use the highest rated players MMR to make matches and determine rating gain/loss.
• Random teams made by the matchmaker in order to face a premade team have to be +-50 (BEFORE deviation) at the maximum range to make the match, and even then that's a loose range against a full 5 man group.

That's all just your opinion. My opinion and personal observances are the exact opposite that banning grouping has hurt this game. It has in fact driven many players away. I am also pretty sure the data would show that you were rarely facing full teams of highly ranked players. A-net gave into the mob and it hurt the game. It would help if they made the data available. I would bet people faced full groups in less then full groups less then 5% of the time. Its actually not really a big deal to me as I almost never ran in a full group but it's ludicrous to me that a game that was sold as a team game and requires coordination you are going to tell people they can't group up. Spare me automated tournaments as the answer. How it effects rating is also not important at all because rating right now is not legitimate for a host of reasons. At this point the main objective for A-net should be how do we stop population drain and make the game fun for the most amount of people and to me that involves bringing back queueing with a group or partial group.

Lol, that's just like Republican Americans denying climate change... Or flat earthers. His is not an opinion, it's misinformation and ignorance. There's facts and statistics, the guy is arguing from ignorance and making a fool of himself.There's statements from Arena Net from their own compiled statistics that show 90% of anti-team queue people to be wrong. Pretty much the only argument they make that is actually true is that people voted against team queues.That doesn't mean that this is something that should be decided based on a vote. It was a poor decision by Arena Net and it clearly hurt the game, because, lets face it, just like every other "competitive / high end" facet of the game (Raids, T4 and CM fractals) sPvP was and is only taken seriously by a minority (more now that there's no proper form of competition, outside the very inaccessible ATs). If you put the health of something that only a minority cares about into the hands of the majority, that'll come out poorly. And it did.

@Faux Play.6104 said:The "play with friends" excuse has always been either for people that want to smurf, or people that need to be carried.

There are ATs for people that want to do serious 5 man. There is WvW for social team pvp.

LOL, you can't really be serious. WvW is an entirely different game mode. sPvP is a team based mode, it's natural state is to be played in 5 man teams. Impeding that simply prevents people from actually being able to be competitive in that game mode.AT's have serious time-constraints, and are incredibly inaccessible for the majority of people.You can't smurf or be carried in GW2 ranked since they made it so that your team's rank is the same as the highest player (plus probably an extra for team factor). Get your facts straight.The fact that your arguments are these, just means you're arguing from ignorance, and don't really know what you're talking about and should be given no credence, pretty much.It's not hard to see it: For 4 and a half years PvP was growing stronger and better, even with the slight hiccup stemming from the poor decisions concerning balance, pvp was going strong. They removed ranked teams in all forms ~2 years ago, the vote was to be for a trial season, and then reviewed. I'd really like to see the vote if it was said it would be permanent instead of a trial season.PvP has only gone downhill since season 5, and it's been only getting worse.

[Ioras Dagnir.3927]

Nope you are missing my point entirely and twisting my words to infer something else, you haven't listened to anything or you are being purposefully ignorant.

1. Pug stomp farm is a fallacy. it already been said that 50% of the time there were premades vs pugs the pugs actually won, that means the other 50% other time it was teams vs teams. I will assume you know what the definition of a fallacy is. 1.1 Same algorithm different mmr, back then the algorithm still matched teams against each other first and foremost.

2. Ranked allows for progression and reward, while casual doesn't. You forgot to quote me on that. Higher risk = higher reward. So ranked is the place to be competitive without being in an elimination tournament, not casual. If we are forcing playerbases into different queues and solo players don't want to face teams they should be the ones playing solo/duoQ in casual not the otherway around. I don't want to stomp pugs, back in s4 it was good for a break when facing tough opponents but 90% of the time I would much rather face other teams of similar skill and have good quality matches. That's what it means to have healthy competition. Yet you seem to repeatedly try and pull this victim card, nah I dont care for solo players and I don't imagine anyone else does either, thinking teams just want to farm you is flattering yourself. This is where your thinking and mine differs greatly. I'm not a pip farm warrior and you clearly dont have a competitive bone in your body. If you had met me on these forums before you would know even before ATs I was fully advocating only allowing 5man premades into ranked, but I know its not realistic because of queues and population.

3. Take OW and R6S for example, both of which have successful esports btw, no player in their right mind would vote out teams, because they enjoy good quality pvp and their ranked system actively encourages team and clans to form (they also have the advantage of built in vc). But it is these social interactions that makes communities grow, ours atm is so lacking and has been since the forced soloQ and now the game mode is getting more toxic and less populated. Correlation and causation can be observed if you open your eyes.

4. Newsflash the current system has been abused by wintraders and throwers for seasons now, teams can protect you personally from being affected. You throw the word abuse in like it is a crime to want to play with other people you trust more than randos because its simply more efficient to be organised and cooperative.The only message you are sending is you are scared of losing rank to people who are more willing and more dedicated to winning than you are, you want to keeping doing your pip farm solo and cling to a meaningless rng number a leaderboard that nobody else actually cares about.

tdlr: Anet catered to the wrong playerbase.

[Faux Play.6104]

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@"Faux Play.6104" said:The "play with friends" excuse has always been either for people that want to smurf, or people that need to be carried.

There are ATs for people that want to do serious 5 man. There is WvW for social team pvp.

LOL, you can't really be serious. WvW is an entirely different game mode. sPvP

is

a team based mode, it's natural state is to be played in 5 man teams. Impeding that simply prevents people from actually being able to be competitive in that game mode.AT's have serious time-constraints, and are incredibly inaccessible for the majority of people.

The only people that benefit from 5 man ranked would be people exploiting the system. This is how I see the game modes and who they are for:

• unranked: casual teams up to 4 other friends
• ranked: completive environment for entire spectrum of players. Can play with 1 friend until you make top 250.
• AT: 5 man teams only. Top tier competition -- currently being tweaked to make it worth peoples time to play if they aren't top tier players.
• private servers: anything from hard core private scrimmages to PvE dailies.
• WvW: social team play with large groups

@ReaverKane.7598 said:You can't smurf or be carried in GW2 ranked since they made it so that your team's rank is the same as the highest player (plus probably an extra for team factor). Get your facts straight.Here is a quote from the wiki article about match making. Note the words average. I would try getting your facts straight before you start bashing others:Scoring/Rating/@distanceScore added or removed based on the distance between the potential roster's average effective rating (i.e. rating - deviation) and the average effective rating of all selected rosters, including both teams.

@ReaverKane.7598 said:The fact that your arguments are these, just means you're arguing from ignorance, and don't really know what you're talking about and should be given no credence, pretty much.It's not hard to see it: For 4 and a half years PvP was growing stronger and better, even with the slight hiccup stemming from the poor decisions concerning balance, pvp was going strong. They removed ranked teams in all forms ~2 years ago, the vote was to be for a trial season, and then reviewed. I'd really like to see the vote if it was said it would be permanent instead of a trial season.PvP has only gone downhill since season 5, and it's been only getting worse.

If you think getting rid of the pip system destroyed PvP, I can't really take your opinion seriously. Everyone shouldn't be legendary just because they played a lot of matches. There should be some skill component factored into it.

[Exedore.6320]

@Faux Play.6104 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:PvP has only gone downhill since season 5, and it's been only getting worse.

If you think getting rid of the pip system destroyed PvP, I can't really take your opinion seriously. Everyone shouldn't be legendary just because they played a lot of matches. There should be some skill component factored into it.Removal of 1-5 party queue in ranked happened in season5 as well. He's referring to that change.

[ReaverKane.7598]

@Ioras Dagnir.3927 said:Nope you are missing my point entirely and twisting my words to infer something else, you haven't listened to anything or you are being purposefully ignorant.

1. Pug stomp farm is a fallacy. it already been said that 50% of the time there were premades vs pugs the pugs actually won, that means the other 50% other time it was teams vs teams. I will assume you know what the definition of a fallacy is. 1.1 Same algorithm different mmr, back then the algorithm still matched teams against each other first and foremost.

2. Ranked allows for progression and reward, while casual doesn't. You forgot to quote me on that. Higher risk = higher reward. So ranked is the place to be competitive without being in an elimination tournament, not casual. If we are forcing playerbases into different queues and solo players don't want to face teams they should be the ones playing solo/duoQ in casual not the otherway around. I don't want to stomp pugs, back in s4 it was good for a break when facing tough opponents but 90% of the time I would much rather face other teams of similar skill and have good quality matches. That's what it means to have healthy competition. Yet you seem to repeatedly try and pull this victim card, nah I dont care for solo players and I don't imagine anyone else does either, thinking teams just want to farm you is flattering yourself. This is where your thinking and mine differs greatly. I'm not a pip farm warrior and you clearly dont have a competitive bone in your body. If you had met me on these forums before you would know even before ATs I was fully advocating only allowing 5man premades into ranked, but I know its not realistic because of queues and population.

3. Take OW and R6S for example, both of which have successful esports btw, no player in their right mind would vote out teams, because they enjoy good quality pvp and their ranked system actively encourages team and clans to form (they also have the advantage of built in vc). But it is these social interactions that makes communities grow, ours atm is so lacking and has been since the forced soloQ and now the game mode is getting more toxic and less populated. Correlation and causation can be observed if you open your eyes.

4. Newsflash the current system has been abused by wintraders and throwers for seasons now, teams can protect you personally from being affected. You throw the word abuse in like it is a crime to want to play with other people you trust more than randos because its simply more efficient to be organised and cooperative.The only message you are sending is you are scared of losing rank to people who are more willing and more dedicated to winning than you are, you want to keeping doing your pip farm solo and cling to a meaningless rng number a leaderboard that nobody else actually cares about.

tdlr: Anet catered to the wrong playerbase.

1) That's not entirely correct: What that means is that 49% or less of the times that a full 5 man premade fought a full 5 man random solos the premade won. But the actual instances of that happening was 1% of the time. So 99% of 5 man premades went against teams that had at least a duo premade in them (in Season 1, in subsequent seasons there had to be at least a 2 man pre-made in your team to queue up vs 5 man premades).2) True3) That's the case for all instances of competitive pvp games. It's a small wonder that GW2 was booted out of ESL one season after they removed ranked teams. The problem is that to get more people in what was already a growing game-mode in gw2 (sPvP) they turned the Leagues system into a easy farmable source of PvE rewards. Which brought in the PvE farmers and completionists, people not interested in competitiveness, but in getting the most loots. Which then skewed the vote towards a less competitive game, which broke PvP, which is supposed to be a competitive place.4)Exactly!

Your TLDR sums up the issue precisely.> @Faux Play.6104 said:

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Faux Play.6104 said:The "play with friends" excuse has always been either for people that want to smurf, or people that need to be carried.

There are ATs for people that want to do serious 5 man. There is WvW for social team pvp.

LOL, you can't really be serious. WvW is an entirely different game mode. sPvP

is

a team based mode, it's natural state is to be played in 5 man teams. Impeding that simply prevents people from actually being able to be competitive in that game mode.AT's have serious time-constraints, and are incredibly inaccessible for the majority of people.

The only people that benefit from 5 man ranked would be people exploiting the system. This is how I see the game modes and who they are for:

• unranked: casual teams up to 4 other friends
• ranked: completive environment for entire spectrum of players. Can play with 1 friend until you make top 250.
• AT: 5 man teams only. Top tier competition -- currently being tweaked to make it worth peoples time to play if they aren't top tier players.
• private servers: anything from hard core private scrimmages to PvE dailies.
• WvW: social team play with large groups

1) The system was there when PvP was at it's healthiest, and with the highest population. That simple fact denies everything you said. But i'll rebate it none the less.:Unranked is "Practice mode", like the name said it's the step prior to playing ranked, it's where people should go to really test builds and comps. Also, like you said it's the mainstay for casual players.Ranked is the competitive environment. You can't have the entire spectrum of players in ranked, because half the spectrum aren't really interested in being competitive, just farming. Also you can't be competitive in a team-based mode and be forced to queue solo. That's why you don't have tournaments and pro competitions with draft teams.ATs: Aren't really what you said. You can't have 2 competitive environments. ATs should be an extention of the ladder system. But because there's no team ladder, ATs exclude the majority of players interested in the game mode but that can't grow into proper teams for lack of proper ladder progress.Also ATs don't take into account MMR, they simply go all out which means that lower ranked teams are immediately excluded, which prevents them from growing, thus stagnating the competitive environment.Finally AT's in their current format also exclude players simply because they're based on fixed time windows. Which means that most people can't be placed.Private servers, are what they are... Private servers, they're there for people to do what they want with themWvW is a whole different game mode from sPvP, and has nothing to do with this discussion.

@ReaverKane.7598 said:You can't smurf or be carried in GW2 ranked since they made it so that your team's rank is the same as the highest player (plus probably an extra for team factor). Get your facts straight.Here is a quote from the wiki article about match making. Note the words average. I would try getting your facts straight before you start bashing others:Scoring/Rating/@distanceScore added or removed based on the distance between the potential roster's average effective rating (i.e. rating - deviation) and the average effective rating of all selected rosters, including both teams.

Oh boy... Are you serious... I'm having a hard time being polite here....

That quote you copy pasted is for the current system without team queues. When there were team queues the algorithm was different, obviously, TO ACCOUNT FOR PREMADES!!!

Here's an actual citation of how it

used to work

from Season 2 patch notes:

Matchmaking

As we’ve mentioned previously, Ranked matchmaking in PvP during season two will now be based primarily on your current division placement and a predetermined “pip range” that extends from that spot. We’ll search for other players that fall within your pip range (which can extend outside of your division depending on where you’re currently placed) and pair you up with teammates who have a similar skill level to your own. Then we’ll find you opponents within that same pip range and pair them against you, regardless of their skill level. For players that queue as a pre-made group, the pip range that we’ll use to find you both teammates and opponents will be based off of the player with the highest division placement in your group (which, as a reminder, is a change that we’ve already introduced to the game prior to the end of season one).

There is an additional matchmaking change that we’ll be making which will affect a specific type of match-up:

Five-person premade groups will never be matched up against a group made up of five solo players.

Only 1% of all Ranked matches played in season one were a full five-person premade group vs. a group of five solo players, and even then, the win rate for those five solo player teams in those cases was consistently at or above 50% throughout the entire season. That being said, even though the instances of this specific type of matchup occurring were actually very rare during season one, we still felt that matchmaking would be improved overall if we made sure that this type of match-up was simply no longer possible in future seasons.

Lastly, we are pleased to report that matchmaking wait times have been reduced by an average of four minutes for both Ranked and Unranked play for season two.

As you can see that's how it worked. Seriously... Idk if you're intentionally being disingenuous, or just too new to the game to even be worth discussing this with...

@ReaverKane.7598 said:The fact that your arguments are these, just means you're arguing from ignorance, and don't really know what you're talking about and should be given no credence, pretty much.It's not hard to see it: For 4 and a half years PvP was growing stronger and better, even with the slight hiccup stemming from the poor decisions concerning balance, pvp was going strong. They removed ranked teams in all forms ~2 years ago, the vote was to be for a trial season, and then reviewed. I'd really like to see the vote if it was said it would be permanent instead of a trial season.PvP has only gone downhill since season 5, and it's been only getting worse.

If you think getting rid of the pip system destroyed PvP, I can't really take your opinion seriously. Everyone shouldn't be legendary just because they played a lot of matches. There should be some skill component factored into it.I never said the pip system destroyed PvP. For one the Pip System is still there. What destroyed PvP was

ADDING

the pip system, and keeping it, as well as

removing team queues

. I never even

mentioned

pips ever in any post.

There should be a skill component, but sadly, because seasons are too short, and the game pop is too small, you can't really tell... You rarely have proper matches with people of your rank. Especially as you climb higher, you end up with 1-2 opponents at your rank. Can't argue there's a proper progression system with this.Also idk where having teams would reduce that skill component.

Also the pips system is actually more farmable right now, because you get the pips, and the chest rewards simply on games played, not on rank progression. Which makes rank, and actually being competitive matter less for rewards than it ever did.