ICONIC to the devs

[Arbich]

Thanks for clarification!
Could you explain why you devs think it's a good idea to make wbs queue, considering the issues raised in this thread?
The mechanic will be like presented in the test last Sunday?

1. The issues raised arent that well thought out. Certain classes or bomb groups being too good isnt going to change based on what size premades are allowed to join together. It's based on the scale of the content.

2. So the only thing that would really change based on the amount that can join to together would be the level of coordination. Why should there be a line drawn at how competitive you can be and why should the line be drawn at 6? That seems like a rather arbitrary number, you could make the same argument for allowing 6 man's would he too competitive and that people should only be allowed to join solo.

3. The fact that a lot of people think a group of 6 is the appropriate level of coordination that should be allowed doesnt mean that there is any merit it to that idea.

4. You could argue that a group of 6 is more realistic for a lot of people to form and that's true. But literally everyone could form a group of 1. So with that same argument couldnt you say it would be more fair if you didnt allow groups to join together at all?

5. What if you had to queue for CH 22 PQs, but you could only queue with a group of 6? You would have take 18 random people even if you have 18 other friends ready to go? It makes no sense.

6. It seems like the crux of the argument is 24 people shouldnt be allowed to join together because it would harder for 6 mans to compete. Boo hoo, form an alliance and have multiple 6 mans team up. If you want to do the pinnacle of RvR, you should have to play it like RvR. Dont expect to be able to play whatever you want or in whatever group size you want and expect to be able to compete against people that are pushing the envelope, that's not realistic.

1. Could be adjusted by changing the mechanic. And its at least likely that the impact of bombing is decreased, when WBs (who are setup exactly for this), couldnt join together.
2. Thats a point, but I adressed this issue already with the comparison between 12vs12 sc and 18vs18 scs. And there is also a PuG-Scenario for exactly these complaints
3. valid, but I would only exclude WBs (given the actual mechanic), due to the issues raised with enabling joining together. This is an MMO, group play should be encouraged.
4. thats not an issue
5. you point make no sense.
6. strawmen

[toffikx]

Thanks for clarification!
Could you explain why you devs think it's a good idea to make wbs queue, considering the issues raised in this thread?
The mechanic will be like presented in the test last Sunday?

It seems like the crux of the argument is 24 people shouldnt be allowed to join together because it would harder for 6 mans to compete.

Crux of of the argument is a dedicated warband will stomp anything except for another dedicated warband, removing the fun/enjoyment factor. So unless there is something to compensate for it, like Mr.Iconic wrote, people will just do their best to hop instances.
Also to point it out, am not against any kind of play, wheter it's warband play, group play or solo. It's good that there are different types of people and different types of guilds that make the server just more rich in choice and lively. But whatever the choice of play or content, it should also be fun to a certain degree. Noone enjoys being farmed.

[toffikx]

I should also mention that we'll be locking people to one instance per city siege. If you don't like the instance you are in, you will be unable to queue for another city siege until the next campaign's city siege. Subsequent queues will place you back into the city siege instance you're locked to, in case of disconnection.

Prepare for a lot of salt then.

[pepperoni420]

I should also mention that we'll be locking people to one instance per city siege. If you don't like the instance you are in, you will be unable to queue for another city siege until the next campaign's city siege. Subsequent queues will place you back into the city siege instance you're locked to, in case of disconnection.

Anyone with Alts on different accounts just won the lottery

[Anthr]

I think the middle ground would be allowing 24 to queue together but forcing them to split in the map in order to capture points simultaneously (or needing to hold multiple points simultaneously). Or even better, have a mix of fights throughout the stages that encourage different styles. Like small groups for the multi-bo stage and big 36v36 fights in the final stage. Rolling from one BO to another as a blob will probably be boring for everyone involved. The only time it will get interesting for the big WB guilds is when fighting other WB guilds which will only occur during EU time, and only if they are lucky enough to be in the same siege.

[Secrets]

Thanks for clarification!
Could you explain why you devs think it's a good idea to make wbs queue, considering the issues raised in this thread?
The mechanic will be like presented in the test last Sunday?

The system will allow for a warband of up to 24 people to queue up for a city siege.

You will be able to queue as a 6man, a 12 man, or whatever-many-man you want up to 24 people.

It will not be the same restrictions as Sunday's test.

I should also mention that we'll be locking people to one instance per city siege. If you don't like the instance you are in, you will be unable to queue for another city siege until the next campaign's city siege. Subsequent queues will place you back into the city siege instance you're locked to, in case of disconnection.

Fair enough, can we sticky this thread for when city sieges come out. Posted before the inevitable cries.

As always ICONIC will adapt and overcome.

I think we'll put it in patch notes when the cities come out. It's too soon to finalize anything and stickying stuff that may change is pointless.

[madrocks]

Warband queues will be enabled for city content, a group between 1 and 24 can queue at max. This won't be changing. (per our internal dev chat)

The total size of city sieges, as far as I'm aware, is not finalized but is being aimed at either 36v36 or 24v24.

I don't believe there will be separate queues for premades vs solo play. The system will obviously be able to match 24 mans vs 24 mans better as there's equal numbers that are queueing.

Regarding 6man content,

Those wanting engaging 6man content can simply queue for ranked scenarios when that system is finished. When rewards and leaderboards are finished, I expect it to take off a bit more in popularity.

I'm considering opening the "Ranked Solo" queue to duos and to match at least one healer, and the rest DPS or tanks, based on the numbers that we've seen queueing - it may be that the interest just isn't there yet because there's no rewards.

Sorry to hijack the thread, but you mentioned engaging 6man content and I feel like there's already a separate system being designed for that.

Thanks Mr.Eyeliner for the clarification..

Welcome once again to the **** bombing meta everyone!
There was a glimpse of hope! Aaaannnd it's gone.
Let's see how long it will take you to nerf marauders after we stack the **** out of them.

[Secrets]

I should also mention that we'll be locking people to one instance per city siege. If you don't like the instance you are in, you will be unable to queue for another city siege until the next campaign's city siege. Subsequent queues will place you back into the city siege instance you're locked to, in case of disconnection.

Anyone with Alts on different accounts just won the lottery

The plan would be to not lock all characters on your account to the siege. But you could only get rewards for as many sieges you could do in a 4 hour period - which, if you're not online on the character at the time of the stage ending, would not give you rewards.

[Secrets]

Warband queues will be enabled for city content, a group between 1 and 24 can queue at max. This won't be changing. (per our internal dev chat)

The total size of city sieges, as far as I'm aware, is not finalized but is being aimed at either 36v36 or 24v24.

I don't believe there will be separate queues for premades vs solo play. The system will obviously be able to match 24 mans vs 24 mans better as there's equal numbers that are queueing.

Regarding 6man content,

Those wanting engaging 6man content can simply queue for ranked scenarios when that system is finished. When rewards and leaderboards are finished, I expect it to take off a bit more in popularity.

I'm considering opening the "Ranked Solo" queue to duos and to match at least one healer, and the rest DPS or tanks, based on the numbers that we've seen queueing - it may be that the interest just isn't there yet because there's no rewards.

Sorry to hijack the thread, but you mentioned engaging 6man content and I feel like there's already a separate system being designed for that.

Thanks Mr.Eyeliner for the clarification..

Welcome once again to the **** bombing meta everyone!
There was a glimpse of hope! Aaaannnd it's gone.
Let's see how long it will take you to nerf marauders after we stack the **** out of them.

Why would we nerf Marauders? They actually are a viable counterplay to bomb warbands.

You need to learn to adapt if you're relying on stacking AOE damage morales to win matchups anyways...

[madrocks]

No **** Sherlock.