5 man queue season 11 trial

[Xanctus The Dragonslayer.2]

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@"Xanctus The Dragonslayer.2318" said:

@sephiroth.4217 said:

@"Panda.3620" said:

So premade teams are just a excuse for bronze/silver/gold players to climb something they don't deserve and plat players to maintain their spots on the LB and try to supress their losses, making it easier to climb the LB, so there will be players on the LB that are there because of their skill and players that were just carried.

How do you come to that conclusion when people are happy to be capped before platinum similar to the duo system?

---

To summarize this thread:Team queue player: "Can we have team queue to farm with friends and play with friends"Solo Queue player: "No because you just want to be carried to platinum"Team queue player: "Put a cap on it like Duo then"Solo Queue player: "No because you just want to be carried to the leaderboards"Team queue player: "We just said we want to play with friends or have competitive play"Solo Queue player: "No because all you want to do is pug stomp as a premade"Team queue player: "We don't mind our own queue and would prefer 5v5 modes"Solo Queue player: "No because you just want to be carried to the leaderboards"

and round n round it goes.

---

We have team queue players (and a few solo q) offering suggestions to cater to everyone and I do hope Anet considers their suggestions.

---

exactly this is the type of obstructionism u face. even with facts thrown around disproving the farming nonsense. this is what we get. also if that statement some poster made (Reaverkane) of most players who signed into gw2 effiency not even having reached rank 80 is true. and that is a big IF. then it makes the notion of them literally dictating that no implentation or not even arguing team queue bieng present even more absurd. but if there rank is really that low it would indicate a lack of experience and explain why they even have such a skewed opinon.

I can understand arguments about top tiers all teaming up, or maby teams carrying that solo player higher then he would giving him a rating that does not truly reflect solo queu level or anything like that. I can understand discussing that. But if u are not even gonna accept facts for what they are but keep ad nauseuming the same:: ''No just want to farm solo's trololol'' nonsense. then at that point what kind of argument is there to be had? I'm pretty sure they are other solid arguments on the other side. but this is just absurd.

Well thats it ey, even if a solo player gets carried by a team, he's only going to fall once he's not matched up with said team.

If top tier teams give you smashing, well that's because they are better than you. (not you specifically, but the ones who complain about losing to them... They are top tier for a reason)

true the solo player is gonna fall but at that point a player with an expected 1600 rating(while actually bieng an 1450 level player) would still be cause of inaccuracies in matchmaking. ofcourse even if that's the case we know team queue players are small portion but yeah still an shitty experience.

I think the argument is that of other top tiers don't team up. they'd still get smashed by teams of equal level simply cause they are teaming up and the other not. giving an less accurate representation at the leaderboard wich for all intents and purposes doesn't differentiate between teamplayers and solo players.

I'd argue for two different leaderboards. or two skill ratings.

[allias.1420]

the population is so low right now, that if 5 man ranked teams were a thing, casuals would get smashed by tryhard teams daily

[Spoichiche.1290]

@"sephiroth.4217" said:To summarize this thread:"I didn't read any of what's actually in this thread and i'm gonna make up a stupid argument that never existed just to discredit anyone who doesn't share my point of view"FTFYRead the thread, soloQers are not against a separate teamQ, for the most part, we either don't care or are in favor of it.What we don't want is premades facing soloQers in a competitive environement like it was back when ranked was a mixedQ.

[Exalted Quality.8534]

@ReaverKane.7598 said:

@Sylosi.6503 said:

@Exalted Quality.8534 said:

@Sylosi.6503 said:

@Exalted Quality.8534 said:Where were all these yes voters when this poll first came out?

There are barely any voters of any sort in this poll, that should be the clue as to why a poll like this does not match up with the results of an official poll...

Perhaps people realize the futility of such a poll. ANET devs have given us no reason to beleive they are focused on making PvP a more enjoyable experience.

Pretty much every random poll like this on the forums is futile because firstly the vast majority of the playerbase will not even read the thread, let alone vote on it and secondly in most polls (including this one) there is usually one side who feel more strongly about the poll than the other (they typically feel the current situation is wrong, unfair, etc so are often more bothered about it), so that group is more 'active', which then distorts a poll that is already statistically worthless, even more.

It’s my opinion that there was overwhelming support for solo/duoQ from PvE players because they were salty that legendary wings were taking longer than a season to compete. Now that most of them have already “earned” their wings, they’ve left us with crap kitten solo/duoq and moved back to PvE.

This is apparently going to come as a shock, but most people in PvP games play solo/duo, then of the people that play in groups larger than that most also play solo / duo at least some of the time, very few people play only as 3/4/5 man groups, hence the result of the official poll should not have been a massive surprise to anyone.

Here's a issue i have with this whole poll thing...So because of a different discussion i've been looking a lot at the statistics in GW2 Efficiency, and i hit a disturbing note:Out of everyone playing sPvP only ~11% are rank 80 or higher... Meaning that 89% of players don't care enough about sPvP to play it consistently enough to have done something that a lot of people did in the first year the game released (reach Rank 80).

So now you're telling me that a majority vote should matter on an issue that only ~10% of people actually care about enough to invest the time to even just rank to 80, only about 6% have enough ranked games played to have been on the leader boards every season (120 per season x 10 seasons = 1 200 ranked games).

So why do you expect the vote to help improve sPvP when the majority doesn't really play that much of it? And i'll admit i'm not in that majority, i could have been closer than i am, but i like to play with my guild mates, that's why i play MMORPGs. And its not fun when we have to split into pairs and maybe leave one guy alone, or have to play the less rewarding game mode (which i've done often, until i actually stopped playing entirely).Every other pvp game privileges teams in team modes, which Conquest most certainly is. And yet GW2 doesn't. Small wonder its floundering hard!

The majority posted simply to advance their ease of farming. Its certainly easier to farm and get wins (and win-trade) when the competitive aspect of the game is entirely ruined.

@ReaverKane.7598 That was smart to check gw2efficiency for PvP ranks above 80. I remember feeling a tangible drop in skill level during season they practically gave you a free set of ascended armor. In a way, I can appreciate the effort to bring more people into PvP by offering legendary collections, ascended armor, etc., but perhaps a better move would’ve been to allow paths to these things outside of ranked play.

Taking away the ability to choose who you play with coupled with infusing completely new, casual players into PvP was a recipe for disaster. Evidently, very few people stuck around in ranked after they get what they wanted.

I beleive that the devs failed to clearly indicate what the success/fail criteria of the solo/duoQ trial were. Since ANET did not define the scope of the trial, those of us who actually enjoy tactically-rich team play are basically screwed because PvErs wanted their precious rewards to come easier.

I’ve lost count of how many times people have said this, but the egregious lack of transparency is one of the most prevelant barriers between devs and the community. This is just another sad example.

[sephiroth.4217]

@Spoichiche.1290 said:

@"sephiroth.4217" said:To summarize this thread:"I didn't read any of what's actually in this thread and i'm gonna make up a stupid argument that never existed just to discredit anyone who doesn't share my point of view"FTFYRead the thread, soloQers are not against a separate teamQ, for the most part, we either don't care or are in favor of it.What we don't want is premades facing soloQers in a competitive environement like it was back when ranked was a mixedQ.

It was generalizing, I'm sorry you couldn't comprehend that before resorting to posting insults like a child having a tantrum, but as I said - some solo queue players have made good suggestions and I hope Anet considers what they say.

---

End of the day the outcome doesn't bother me, I'm still going to drag down players in platinum to gold just because I'm playing casually and don't actually care for the 3 randoms on my team. I don't want to be duo capped either so I threw a few as I got close to 1600... Maybe 1/10 games I actually take serious but that's when I'm facing Team P Z or Jeffy or someone of a like and even then I could spend all game forcing 1v1 situations onto them to help improve my own builds or skills.Hell, I've throw games to get into gold just so my silver/bronze friends don't get farmed as hard too. I don't feel bad for the 3 randoms on my team that are going to lose just because me and a friend want to play double Rev on a side node either, we are just having fun... Sometimes it's playing golf with 2 hammer guards.so as you can see, I have no care for rank at all, my life isn't structured around my online ego or a meaningless leaderboard, I play for fun.

---

If you are happy for players like myself to be randomly put on your team, then lets keep everything the way it is now.(for clarification, when I'm throwing, I'm still actively playing but I'm pretending that I'm playing a death match, I don't afk, I just ignore the nodes and focus on fights and because of this I accidentally climb in rating... Most games I can end up with 20-25 kills and 1 or 2 deaths)

---

4 main reasons I want team queue back:

• Rebuilding the Mists population and communities
• Farming ascended gear with friends in a MMO.
• Not having to feel bad for leaving guildies out, it really sucks posting "who wants to farm pvp ascended gear" and getting 2 people willing to queue with me because now 1 has to miss out
• Friendly guild scrims like we used to have, putting bets down on the winner and having prize pools for best out of 3.

If they add things like guild leader boards or guild ratings then awsome, I won't be fussed by it but I know it would help bring in players that do, and that to me is a good start to repopulating the mists.

---

I'm never against healthy progression... It's part of the reason why I voted yes to Duo queue implementation... I thought it would have been a great way to attract more players to the mists but I was uninformed of the poll and was under the impression that we were going to get 2 separate queues.

[Math.5123]

@allias.1420 said:the population is so low right now, that if 5 man ranked teams were a thing, casuals would get smashed by tryhard teams daily

This is how teams improve though. I can promise you that you will learn more getting smashed by rank 55 than destroying noobs in unranked.

[Sampson.2403]

Yes, the core theme of any MMO should encourage people to create guilds, teams, groups and develop strategies to improve as a unit as they conquer more n more difficult game content. This should be true for both PvE & PvP.

[choovanski.5462]

oh man

ive written so much about this. so many arguments, so many posts- but i just get the ‘you want to farm solos you scrub’ responses so i get jaded. but it’s a nice hot morning in the Netherlands, so before i go off & get some green trees ill whip something up for y’all.

THE ILLUSION THAT TEAMS ARE HARD TO FORM

there is this notion propagated by solo queue players, that teams are an arduous difficult thing to form. they actually aren’t at all. it’s actually pitifully easy if you take initiative. just like how people think it’s hard to make friends, when in reality it’s very easy.

hold tight, ima lay out a step by step guide for how a forever alone solo queuer can become a team queue chad in under three games.

1. yo ask in map chat? say youre a silver holosmith, maybe ask around see if anyone wants to party up.
2. queue up for your first team regardless of if you were able to successfully able to whisper up some teammates.
3. examine the players on both teams. are any of them playing well? saying nice things on chat? or maybe they just have a funny name?
4. whisper those dudes you liked, invite those pals to party up.
5. queue for more games & repeat steps 1 to 4

in under 3 games you should be able to recruit a team, well providing that you’re not a toxic human being who sprays chat hate- no one will want to play w you then.

back when i used to play it would mostly be with a set trio (me & two guildies) & two subs we would pick up in matches or from our friends lists. it was good times, pretty easy getting two subs for the team too.

the really cool thing about forming teams like this, is you end up with an active friend list of players you like who you can invite in the future. you end up with a community of players that you can easily whisper for partys. maybe this could even lead to y’all forming a pvp guild, that would be rad.

so now, you’ve got people to play with. you can avoid the frustrations caused by the matchmaker, the afks, toxic chat, bad comps & wintrading. but there’s actually a bunch of hidden benefits too.

this is because this behaviour effects the community culture if done by enough players. huh? what does that mean you ask?

well buddy, i’ll explain. now if people start forming teams as i suggest above it will have a community impact, why? because people make the connection between being on a team & winning, so they want to join teams. so what does this mean? it means people no longer want to afk or be super toxic in chat, because they want to be invited to teams too.

it’s simple human group psychology. a system that rewards cooperation is going to punish people who can’t cooperate by exclusion, thus enforcing a standard of conduct on the community. however a community where cooperation is forbidden is going to be unable to punish antisocial behaviour, & due to the antisocial nature of the community this behaviour is going to most likely become the norm.

yeah, so in short a community where team queue is popular is going to be a lot less toxic than one that is full solo.

now i could extrapolate about how this all relates to population growth & decline, but i have in the past, & honestly i think it’s pretty obvious- plus the drop in pvp population speaks for itself.

so ah, TLDR: I just want to farm solos & need to be lynched ;) B)

[Cougre.6543]

I fail to see how the current implementation of queues isn't the best possible one.

The population isn't big enough to divide ranked queues into solo and team, face it. Beyond that remains solo and team mashed up into one queue, and the only argument you have for that is an outdated statistic released by ANet with far too little information. If that statistic had proven that teams lost more than matchmade teams on every division, then maybe that argument wouldn't be so shallow and delusional. The argument against this only requires you to look at automated tournaments; I'm fairly certain no PuG team has ever won the mAT, and a majority of the daily tournaments, especially during prime time, are being being won by premades with superior coordination.

So, if you're already on voip with a full team of friends, why aren't you content with automated tournaments? One argument I've seen by glancing over this thread is that your team gets stomped there. Well, who to better learn from than those who clearly outmatch you? If this part of the competitive mentality flies over your head, then maybe you should be content with unranked team queues, as demanding them in ranked while fretting the competition in automated tournaments is a double standard.

The last argument would be team queues in ranked below a certain rating threshold. This falls into the same category of "what's the point of something that avoids true competition in the queue that is all about competition?" as wanting ranked team queues because tournaments are too difficult.

[Math.5123]

@"Cougre.6543" said:I fail to see how the current implementation of queues isn't the best possible one.

The population isn't big enough to divide ranked queues into solo and team, face it. Beyond that remains solo and team mashed up into one queue, and the only argument you have for that is an outdated statistic released by ANet with far too little information. If that statistic had proven that teams lost more than matchmade teams on every division, then maybe that argument wouldn't be so shallow and delusional. The argument against this only requires you to look at automated tournaments; I'm fairly certain no PuG team has ever won the mAT, and a majority of the daily tournaments, especially during prime time, are being being won by premades with superior coordination.

So, if you're already on voip with a full team of friends, why aren't you content with automated tournaments? One argument I've seen by glancing over this thread is that your team gets stomped there. Well, who to better learn from than those who clearly outmatch you? If this part of the competitive mentality flies over your head, then maybe you should be content with unranked team queues, as demanding them in ranked while fretting the competition in automated tournaments is a double standard.

The last argument would be team queues in ranked below a certain rating threshold. This falls into the same category of "what's the point of something that avoids true competition in the queue that is all about competition?" as wanting ranked team queues because tournaments are too difficult.

I can send you a screen where me, my buddy and three randoms beat Vaanss team in an AT if you want me too.

[choovanski.5462]

@"AngelLovesFredrik.6741" said:

@"Cougre.6543" said:I fail to see how the current implementation of queues isn't the best possible one.

The population isn't big enough to divide ranked queues into solo and team, face it. Beyond that remains solo and team mashed up into one queue, and the only argument you have for that is an outdated statistic released by ANet with far too little information. If that statistic had proven that teams lost more than matchmade teams on every division, then maybe that argument wouldn't be so shallow and delusional. The argument against this only requires you to look at automated tournaments; I'm fairly certain no PuG team has ever won the mAT, and a majority of the daily tournaments, especially during prime time, are being being won by premades with superior coordination.

So, if you're already on voip with a full team of friends, why aren't you content with automated tournaments? One argument I've seen by glancing over this thread is that your team gets stomped there. Well, who to better learn from than those who clearly outmatch you? If this part of the competitive mentality flies over your head, then maybe you should be content with unranked team queues, as demanding them in ranked while fretting the competition in automated tournaments is a double standard.

The last argument would be team queues in ranked below a certain rating threshold. This falls into the same category of "what's the point of something that avoids true competition in the queue that is all about competition?" as wanting ranked team queues because tournaments are too difficult.

I can send you a screen where me, my buddy and three randoms beat Vaanss team in an AT if you want me too.

i’ve given up on replying to the ‘why aren’t you satisfied with one AT every 6 hours’ posts, but nice one dude. bet Vaanss was salty lol

[pah.4931]

@Vieux P.1238 said:

@Crab Fear.1624 said:

@Vieux P.1238 said:Yes i said it! No one else. Yeah yeah i can hear the rants & all the multi excuses vs my point. But hear this for a sec.... You got to agree. No matter how many times Anet balances the classes. No matter how many times Anet makes up new changes to matchmaking & spvp conquest. No matter how good or how new you are in this game mode.

CONQUEST WILL PUNISH YOU IF YOU DON'T GO BY THE NUMBERS.

I said it & i said it before. It takes only one player in your team to F it up. & it punishes you & the whole team no matter what. In most of the time there's no catching up. Conquest in RANK, has got to be replaced by an other game mode that does not punish the whole match for you or another that messed up. That AFK's. That Wintrade's. That hacks. There is no but's about it. Rank deserve a new look at it's core game mode & replaced by a new one. Keep conquest in unrank.

your original thread

to show i didnt edit it

Hmm... a game mode that doesnt punish you for messing up or someone you dont know messing up....

like a team required game mode?

Hey i forgot about that one..& look, i got 15 thumbs up.. :dizzy: WoooW

You got it backwards. Ranked should be TEAMS only and conquest is just fine. Unranked should be solo-q or team-q with a bunch of different maps and gamemodes. Both should reward pips, but Ranked (team-only) should be much better rewards.

How could ranked be improved (with asolo-q in mind) with a simpler, more forgiving game mode? The only way would be rank is based on personal performance on not W/L.

[Crab Fear.1624]

@"Cougre.6543" said:I fail to see how the current implementation of queues isn't the best possible one.

The population isn't big enough to divide ranked queues into solo and team, face it. Beyond that remains solo and team mashed up into one queue, and the only argument you have for that is an outdated statistic released by ANet with far too little information. If that statistic had proven that teams lost more than matchmade teams on every division, then maybe that argument wouldn't be so shallow and delusional. The argument against this only requires you to look at automated tournaments; I'm fairly certain no PuG team has ever won the mAT, and a majority of the daily tournaments, especially during prime time, are being being won by premades with superior coordination.

So, if you're already on voip with a full team of friends, why aren't you content with automated tournaments? One argument I've seen by glancing over this thread is that your team gets stomped there. Well, who to better learn from than those who clearly outmatch you? If this part of the competitive mentality flies over your head, then maybe you should be content with unranked team queues, as demanding them in ranked while fretting the competition in automated tournaments is a double standard.

The last argument would be team queues in ranked below a certain rating threshold. This falls into the same category of "what's the point of something that avoids true competition in the queue that is all about competition?" as wanting ranked team queues because tournaments are too difficult.

We want on demand tournaments.We want a team required game mode with rewards and glory.The leaderboards should reflect team/guild positions, not the individual.

ATs do not satisfy this.

[Cougre.6543]

@"AngelLovesFredrik.6741" said:I can send you a screen where me, my buddy and three randoms beat Vaanss team in an AT if you want me too.But can you tell whether they were playing serious? It is anecdotal evidence at best.

@Crab Fear.1624 said:We want on demand tournaments.I can get behind that, but what you want is not always what is best for most, or even wanted by them.We want a team required game mode with rewards and glory.Automated tournaments fail to be this, how?The leaderboards should reflect team/guild positions, not the individual.Who are you to claim this? Are you implying that a leaderboard of single players is unfit for its own purpose? The individual can very well be ranked in a game mode of teams as, in the end, everyone is playing alone, and thus everyone's individual skill influences their success.

[Lucentfir.7430]

@Cougre.6543 said:

@"AngelLovesFredrik.6741" said:I can send you a screen where me, my buddy and three randoms beat Vaanss team in an AT if you want me too.But can you tell whether they were playing serious? It is anecdotal evidence at best.

@Crab Fear.1624 said:We want on demand tournaments.I can get behind that, but what you want is not always what is best for most, or even wanted by them.We want a team required game mode with rewards and glory.Automated tournaments fail to be this, how?The leaderboards should reflect team/guild positions, not the individual.Who are you to claim this? Are you implying that a leaderboard of single players is unfit for its own purpose? The individual can very well be ranked in a game mode of teams as, in the end, everyone is playing alone, and thus everyone's individual skill influences their success.

On demand tournaments are needed, just because having to wait every 6 hours for a team to play with each other competitively is pretty absurd. People also get locked out of it to depending on the person's time schedule. Wanting to play as a team shouldn't be denied if they want to play against other teams.

ATs don't fail to provide this, what's wanted falls into things like a team/guild leaderboard, and just generally better/unique rewards for playing as a organized team over something like solo queue ranked.

He means that respective gamemode types shouldn't all use one universal rating , using a MMR rating system used in current ranked(individual) shouldn't be used in a environment where it's team against teams, and rather use a team/guild rating instead.

[Crab Fear.1624]

@Lucentfir.7430 said:

@Cougre.6543 said:

@"AngelLovesFredrik.6741" said:I can send you a screen where me, my buddy and three randoms beat Vaanss team in an AT if you want me too.But can you tell whether they were playing serious? It is anecdotal evidence at best.

@Crab Fear.1624 said:We want on demand tournaments.I can get behind that, but what you want is not always what is best for most, or even wanted by them.We want a team required game mode with rewards and glory.Automated tournaments fail to be this, how?The leaderboards should reflect team/guild positions, not the individual.Who are you to claim this? Are you implying that a leaderboard of single players is unfit for its own purpose? The individual can very well be ranked in a game mode of teams as, in the end, everyone is playing alone, and thus everyone's individual skill influences their success.

On demand tournaments are needed, just because having to wait every 6 hours for a team to play with each other competitively is pretty absurd. People also get locked out of it to depending on the person's time schedule. Wanting to play as a team shouldn't be denied if they want to play against other teams.

ATs don't fail to provide this, what's wanted falls into things like a team/guild leaderboard, and just generally better/unique rewards for playing as a organized team over something like solo queue ranked.

He means that respective gamemode types shouldn't all use one universal rating , using a MMR rating system used in current ranked(individual) shouldn't be used in a environment where it's team against teams, and rather use a team/guild rating instead.

Exactly what I meant, thanks for clearing it up.

[Crab Fear.1624]

Check this out for those that think teams are not part of the core GW spirit.

Official Introduction of PvP Leagues

Official Introduction of PvP Teams

And a couple picture screens I just took. The last one is the best. The devs took the words out of my mouth.

[Nova.3817]

@"Crab Fear.1624" said:Check this out for those that think teams are not part of the core GW spirit.

Official Introduction of PvP Leagues

Official Introduction of PvP Teams

And a couple picture screens I just took. The last one is the best. The devs took the words out of my mouth.

joke was on us i suppose lol

[Crab Fear.1624]

You could be like this in pvp with teams or gvg, except Helseth would not be at the front of the pack!

[sephiroth.4217]

@"Crab Fear.1624" said:You could be like this in pvp with teams or gvg, except Helseth would not be at the front of the pack!

You can stack all the Warriors you want but 1 scourge will ruin it for you :lol:https://youtu.be/wdOTK68n42s

[Aden.9306]

@choovanski.5462 said:oh man

ive written so much about this. so many arguments, so many posts- but i just get the ‘you want to farm solos you scrub’ responses so i get jaded. but it’s a nice hot morning in the Netherlands, so before i go off & get some green trees ill whip something up for y’all.

THE ILLUSION THAT TEAMS ARE HARD TO FORM

there is this notion propagated by solo queue players, that teams are an arduous difficult thing to form. they actually aren’t at all. it’s actually pitifully easy if you take initiative. just like how people think it’s hard to make friends, when in reality it’s very easy.

hold tight, ima lay out a step by step guide for how a forever alone solo queuer can become a team queue chad in under three games.

1. yo ask in map chat? say youre a silver holosmith, maybe ask around see if anyone wants to party up.
2. queue up for your first team regardless of if you were able to successfully able to whisper up some teammates.
3. examine the players on both teams. are any of them playing well? saying nice things on chat? or maybe they just have a funny name?
4. whisper those dudes you liked, invite those pals to party up.
5. queue for more games & repeat steps 1 to 4

in under 3 games you should be able to recruit a team, well providing that you’re not a toxic human being who sprays chat hate- no one will want to play w you then.

back when i used to play it would mostly be with a set trio (me & two guildies) & two subs we would pick up in matches or from our friends lists. it was good times, pretty easy getting two subs for the team too.

the really cool thing about forming teams like this, is you end up with an active friend list of players you like who you can invite in the future. you end up with a community of players that you can easily whisper for partys. maybe this could even lead to y’all forming a pvp guild, that would be rad.

so now, you’ve got people to play with. you can avoid the frustrations caused by the matchmaker, the afks, toxic chat, bad comps & wintrading. but there’s actually a bunch of hidden benefits too.

this is because this behaviour effects the community culture if done by enough players. huh? what does that mean you ask?

well buddy, i’ll explain. now if people start forming teams as i suggest above it will have a community impact, why? because people make the connection between being on a team & winning, so they want to join teams. so what does this mean? it means people no longer want to afk or be super toxic in chat, because they want to be invited to teams too.

it’s simple human group psychology. a system that rewards cooperation is going to punish people who can’t cooperate by exclusion, thus enforcing a standard of conduct on the community. however a community where cooperation is forbidden is going to be unable to punish antisocial behaviour, & due to the antisocial nature of the community this behaviour is going to most likely become the norm.

yeah, so in short a community where team queue is popular is going to be a lot less toxic than one that is full solo.

now i could extrapolate about how this all relates to population growth & decline, but i have in the past, & honestly i think it’s pretty obvious- plus the drop in pvp population speaks for itself.

so ah, TLDR: I just want to farm solos & need to be lynched ;) B)

This is the best post that describe the state of pvp perfectly and how to fix it.

[shadowpass.4236]

@choovanski.5462 said:oh man

ive written so much about this. so many arguments, so many posts- but i just get the ‘you want to farm solos you scrub’ responses so i get jaded. but it’s a nice hot morning in the Netherlands, so before i go off & get some green trees ill whip something up for y’all.

THE ILLUSION THAT TEAMS ARE HARD TO FORM

there is this notion propagated by solo queue players, that teams are an arduous difficult thing to form. they actually aren’t at all. it’s actually pitifully easy if you take initiative. just like how people think it’s hard to make friends, when in reality it’s very easy.

hold tight, ima lay out a step by step guide for how a forever alone solo queuer can become a team queue chad in under three games.

1. yo ask in map chat? say youre a silver holosmith, maybe ask around see if anyone wants to party up.
2. queue up for your first team regardless of if you were able to successfully able to whisper up some teammates.
3. examine the players on both teams. are any of them playing well? saying nice things on chat? or maybe they just have a funny name?
4. whisper those dudes you liked, invite those pals to party up.
5. queue for more games & repeat steps 1 to 4

in under 3 games you should be able to recruit a team, well providing that you’re not a toxic human being who sprays chat hate- no one will want to play w you then.

back when i used to play it would mostly be with a set trio (me & two guildies) & two subs we would pick up in matches or from our friends lists. it was good times, pretty easy getting two subs for the team too.

the really cool thing about forming teams like this, is you end up with an active friend list of players you like who you can invite in the future. you end up with a community of players that you can easily whisper for partys. maybe this could even lead to y’all forming a pvp guild, that would be rad.

so now, you’ve got people to play with. you can avoid the frustrations caused by the matchmaker, the afks, toxic chat, bad comps & wintrading. but there’s actually a bunch of hidden benefits too.

this is because this behaviour effects the community culture if done by enough players. huh? what does that mean you ask?

well buddy, i’ll explain. now if people start forming teams as i suggest above it will have a community impact, why? because people make the connection between being on a team & winning, so they want to join teams. so what does this mean? it means people no longer want to afk or be super toxic in chat, because they want to be invited to teams too.

it’s simple human group psychology. a system that rewards cooperation is going to punish people who can’t cooperate by exclusion, thus enforcing a standard of conduct on the community. however a community where cooperation is forbidden is going to be unable to punish antisocial behaviour, & due to the antisocial nature of the community this behaviour is going to most likely become the norm.

yeah, so in short a community where team queue is popular is going to be a lot less toxic than one that is full solo.

now i could extrapolate about how this all relates to population growth & decline, but i have in the past, & honestly i think it’s pretty obvious- plus the drop in pvp population speaks for itself.

so ah, TLDR: I just want to farm solos & need to be lynched ;) B)

You should make this its own thread. You nailed it.

[Crab Fear.1624]

@starhunter.6015 said:I voted yes, but only if the 5 man ques are only paired against other 5 man ques.

I just wanted to say that this is what I meant. I would not want to play against pugs and waste my time either. Thanks for the response, and I apologize for not acknowledging it sooner.

[Oberwaldmeister.8239]

I votes yes as a mostly solo-queing-player. Why are Most ppl solo-queing? Because you can't group up properly.As someone said before: it's a 5v5 Team vs Team mode. And what a wonder: you should also be ranked for your team skills. If we would allow ppl to team up they would do it and therefore most ppl would be attached by the ATs.But we have to allow team-queing under a few circumstances:

No solo-que-player should be forced into premade teams. That said before you enter the que you should allow/Not allow queing against groups/teams where you can say which is the biggest matchup you wanna face. That said you can say you only wanna face solos/solos+duos/solos+duos+trios etc. So If you Start queing you tick a box where the max groupsize you want to face is given. Of course you have to wait longer for some matchups but you have the Options. Maybe implement Something like bronze can't que with plat/leg and if you group-que the min-level of your opponents is the highest-groupmember-level -1 (this could be Rank in generell or division like Platinum 1 e.g.) so that a group with 1 silver and 1 plat Player counts as plat or gold for the que.

Eventually group queing would be better IMO but you have to implement restricitions like those I mentioned.