Lots of Numbers: Twilight's Tide Event Scenarios

[Brizio]

How many of them care about doing event with discordant sc only? Is it even intended to complete with discordant only or is it just an addition if normal sc going bad due to uneven numbers of premades in queue?

At current state, i doubt anyone would. Too many SCs. to complete it. So basicaly you can do the event quest with Discordant... but not really.

[Rydiak]

Even a loss in group queue counts for the event, right? Why not just fish for the wins in discordant and the games in group queue if it is such an issue?

[Akalukz]

i wonder why we never hear any thing from the dev's about how they would like the scenario situation to be.

[lumpi33]

Even a loss in group queue counts for the event, right? Why not just fish for the wins in discordant and the games in group queue if it is such an issue?

Yes, correct. For the 10 participations you just have to queue them up and sit out / surrender to finish them. That's what people are doing, as you can see from the numbers. It's not that they don't want to play, it's usually that they try, can't kill anything and give up within the first minutes. Is it the fault of the players? Id say no. It's the design, pulling solo players from discordant and throwing them into the group sc meat grinder. If they could do it in solo / discordant mode as well then they would but as numbers has shown this option is not working at all. You would need more than 100 discordant rounds to finish the tasks.

[lumpi33]

i wonder why we never hear any thing from the dev's about how they would like the scenario situation to be.

From what I've seen and heard over the years it's mostly not the devs deciding things. It's selected players in the team telling them what they want to have changed. Then they do a voting but I guess devs go with the vote of certain people / players there who were selected because they are experienced and know the game well.

Now the bad thing about this is that the "selected players" making the choices for the game direction are almost always premade players and not casuals/pugs. I cant do name calling here but people who are in the discord and look what's going on know who they are. They are guild players and try-hards. They are calling the shots.

So, when it comes to whether to help pugs/casuals or premades to have fun, the vote is always the same. It is premades. That's the direction we have been seeing over years. The last barrier change were in that direction and the adding of event SCs to discordant was also in that direction because that solution with only 11.11% pop chance and over 100 rounds needed to finish the tasks is so bad that people still going to join group scenarios because they are much faster done there. Exactly what the group players waiting there want, right?

[calipso]

Spoiler:

i wonder why we never hear any thing from the dev's about how they would like the scenario situation to be.

From what I've seen and heard over the years it's mostly not the devs deciding things. It's selected players in the team telling them what they want to have changed. Then they do a voting but I guess devs go with the vote of certain people / players there who were selected because they are experienced and know the game well.

Now the bad thing about this is that the "selected players" making the choices for the game direction are almost always premade players and not casuals/pugs. I cant do name calling here but people who are in the discord and look what's going on know who they are. They are guild players and try-hards. They are calling the shots.

So, when it comes to whether to help pugs/casuals or premades to have fun, the vote is always the same. It is premades. That's the direction we have been seeing over years. The last barrier change were in that direction and the adding of event SCs to discordant was also in that direction because that solution with only 11.11% pop chance and over 100 rounds needed to finish the tasks is so bad that people still going to join group scenarios because they are much faster done there. Exactly what the group players waiting there want, right?

As far as we know, Balance team members (tryhards as u called them), didn’t vote for any change in scs. We asked then who is responsible for that, but no reply yet.

[lumpi33]

As far as we know, Balance team members (tryhards as u called them), didn’t vote for any change in scs. We asked then who is responsible for that, but no reply yet.

I take my wording back on this. Lets call it the "inner circle". I think it is not only the balance team members that are having an influence there. But I know at least one of the current and previous balance team members name, guild and play style. It fits what I have pointed to and the direction we have seen over the years. It wasn't their responsibility back then but Id say the players that were and are getting selected for this job fall into said category.

People that are mostly playing in groups or warbands have a total different view on the game and also a different experience when playing. They might think "Hey, I've won the scenario because I've entered with good players, good gear and communicated well". Of course we deserved that win. But what about the pugs/casuals/solos they are stomping day by day? Who is representing their view and voice in that inner circle? They are the ones that the server actually needs to grow in population. Since nobody cares about them they just disappear and the pop is on a steady decline.

[Flowson]

I can only speak for myself and my personal perception here:

Please be assured that the development team is working hard on a practical solution for clean and fair matchmaking. Good results take time and internal testing. Please be patient. Nobody benefits from a revision if it doesn't work in the end. The main goal was therefore to create a functional matchmaking basis that only needs to be finetuned in the end. And it is precisely this good basis that needed so much time because it has to get good.

A lot of feedback from the community has been collected, discussed and played through. There are currently various approaches, all of which have their own advantages and disadvantages, which can lead to problems in times of low population. e.g. unreasonable waiting times or hopeless pairings. Personally, I am grateful for any further thoughtful suggestions, ideally with a precise description of what and where and how. Unfortunately, mere posts of dissatisfaction do not help, except that they reflect the mood that we are all familiar with.

[calipso]

Spoiler:

I can only speak for myself and my personal perception here:

Please be assured that the development team is working hard on a practical solution for clean and fair matchmaking. Good results take time and internal testing. Please be patient. Nobody benefits from a revision if it doesn't work in the end. The main goal was therefore to create a functional matchmaking basis that only needs to be finetuned in the end. And it is precisely this good basis that needed so much time because it has to get good.

A lot of feedback from the community has been collected, discussed and played through. There are currently various approaches, all of which have their own advantages and disadvantages, which can lead to problems in times of low population. e.g. unreasonable waiting times or hopeless pairings. Personally, I am grateful for any further thoughtful suggestions, ideally with a precise description of what and where and how. Unfortunately, mere posts of dissatisfaction do not help, except that they reflect the mood that we are all familiar with.

It is good to hear you guys are trying to fix matchmaking. Imho, it should’ve been done before implementing any changes to scenarios. As others pointed out and i totally agree, scenarios were fine until changes were made.
There is a thread with a lot of feedback made months ago but completely ignored, judging by last patches. That’s why we are, lets say, a bit disappointed on how things are handled. You guys made the call, we replied and wrote our feedbacks but none of them have been taken into consideration. This issue has been addressed in several threads already, but just barriers as an example, lots of ppl asking to remove them and place guards back, none made a feedback to add barriers yet more have been implemented.

[Akalukz]

Thanks for the reply Flowson, just saying it would be nice for the team to explain what they are trying to do, in a bit more detail. I would really hate for all of us the think hey they are making changes and then come out with something similar to rank fiasco or the Dueling area, totally disconnected from the general player base.

I have long been a voice of the casual/pug player. Without us the server is dead. If the game becomes any more "unfun" there will be more and more people making an exodus. Events are basically not even worth doing for a large portion of the player base, or the feeling of doing them is at least not positive, because of the scenario issue.