Incredibly long group SC pops

[roadkillrobin]

You are (were) more likly to win with a premade and win more rewards/time inviested. So no it's not about the rewards. It's about the experience. If it was a bout the rewards then people would make groups to try and get the rewards as it is (was) the fastest way to get it. Puging is pure RNG.

[Collateral]

I thought Tuxedo were guys from order side who also played destro from time to time.

Well, there's not many groups in the first place (especially destro as far as I can tell), but, Simtex group (although I don't see them/him often), you guys from Fusion/Clown or I don't even know what guild lol, Svarz group (also don't know the guild, and I think he's not playing order atm, or if he's playing at all?) and to be honest I don't know what guilds exactly, but we all know the players. I see many of you guys from this community playing together and mixing up (or maybe I'm wrong). I'm really not engaged a lot in this sort of play so I don't know what kind of groups destro, or order even, have. I did play with Don't Panic (if I remember correctly lol) recently, we went up against another premade (russian I think) in gromril crossing. It was fun. In general though, you can see I'm only mentioning order groups. Destro groups are less well known even among our own realm.

But of course I agree. Some kind of incentive is needed it seems. But what kind, I can't really think of atm.

And yes what Robin said, it's not about rewards. I played for 30-40 minutes that night and got literally 2 emblems. So yea there's your rewards for pugging. I lost every single sc, and group comps were abysmal, especially when fighting premades (which was in every sc).

[Dreadspectre]

More people would probably queue up for SC's if they were less heavy handed on experience/renown at the end.

It was one problem I had with live back in the day, the winners got a LOT and the losers generally got next to nothing.

The power gap just keeps widening and widening at that point, rich get richer etc.

I'm not saying that losers should get the same as winners(and obviously this could just lead to afk SC farming) but no one likes waisting 5-10 minutes for 750 xp and 100 renown.

[Kali14]

When 100 People doing Q for SC and there is only 24 spots, it's total random and let's say 1-2-3-4 or 5 players from your team didn't won this POP then all party is ignored and nobody didn't get pop so you must waiting till each Player from your party win pop between all players who doing Q. I may be wrong but probadly that this work.

[Collateral]

Yes I agree with Dreadspectre. As I said, I got 2 emblems for 40 minutes of playing. This is absolutely wasting my time, and not to mention I'm not having fun. It can get pretty frustrating when you go up against the same group or groups in a row and get less than 100 points every time. Even if you did put up a fight you got jack ****.

[Foltestik]

sc are boring even with party you :| your enemy because its pugs or you get raped because enemy have 2 premades and you have 2 dps doks 3 maguses and dps zealot in your second party.
and even if you win you get to small renown for your effort and same usless medailon (all main spec sets are conq)
and even if you can survave this you get like 2 max 3 pops in evening, and is ****, you can go to rvr and get 10 times more renown

[dansari]

Well the first thing to do would be to figure out what encourages people to queue for 6v6 scenarios, or figure out what people who could queue for 6v6 but don't, want out of the scenario, without opening up an exploitation. It's tough to incentivize the suboptimal group to go up against the optimal group without the optimal group getting much more of the incentive.

You want to add 25% renown to 6v6 scenarios? The suboptimal group can get more by winning another sc rather than losing an EC.

You want to add more rewards to 6v6 scenarios? The suboptimal group is still going to lose; why try to get through a sc just for the increased rewards?

Any incentive you create ultimately benefits the "better" group the majority of the time, which doesn't fix the issue, it just exacerbates it. Unless you created a scenario where you had balancing conditions, like if you reach 5 deaths for your team you get 10% healing/dmg increase until you kill two players on the opposing team. This way even if you're in a suboptimal group it gives you increased base stats to compete (but you likely still won't win if the balancing is done correctly). I dunno it's still messy and complicated.

[Daknallbomb]

Well the first thing to do would be to figure out what encourages people to queue for 6v6 scenarios, or figure out what people who could queue for 6v6 but don't, want out of the scenario, without opening up an exploitation. It's tough to incentivize the suboptimal group to go up against the optimal group without the optimal group getting much more of the incentive.

You want to add 25% renown to 6v6 scenarios? The suboptimal group can get more by winning another sc rather than losing an EC.

You want to add more rewards to 6v6 scenarios? The suboptimal group is still going to lose; why try to get through a sc just for the increased rewards?

Any incentive you create ultimately benefits the "better" group the majority of the time, which doesn't fix the issue, it just exacerbates it. Unless you created a scenario where you had balancing conditions, like if you reach 5 deaths for your team you get 10% healing/dmg increase until you kill two players on the opposing team. This way even if you're in a suboptimal group it gives you increased base stats to compete (but you likely still won't win if the balancing is done correctly). I dunno it's still messy and complicated.

hm true ;(

[ragafury]

Well the first thing to do would be to figure out what encourages people to queue for 6v6 scenarios, or figure out what people who could queue for 6v6 but don't, want out of the scenario, without opening up an exploitation. It's tough to incentivize the suboptimal group to go up against the optimal group without the optimal group getting much more of the incentive.

You want to add 25% renown to 6v6 scenarios? The suboptimal group can get more by winning another sc rather than losing an EC.

You want to add more rewards to 6v6 scenarios? The suboptimal group is still going to lose; why try to get through a sc just for the increased rewards?

Any incentive you create ultimately benefits the "better" group the majority of the time, which doesn't fix the issue, it just exacerbates it. Unless you created a scenario where you had balancing conditions, like if you reach 5 deaths for your team you get 10% healing/dmg increase until you kill two players on the opposing team. This way even if you're in a suboptimal group it gives you increased base stats to compete (but you likely still won't win if the balancing is done correctly). I dunno it's still messy and complicated.

hm true ;(

best incentive would be an appereance or multiple. worked in WoW always. worked in GW2 with that shiny wep skins. worked here in T3. Why not in SC's to populate them better?
place would be crouded with ppl goofin around. <:-)
RR increase is for many players almost irrelevant. my proof: forums and dozens of gear moan threads (gief gief gief). No threads about "increase RR gain."

[Collateral]

Exactly, renown in scs barely bares any significance to me. I get 100x more in one guild warband night, which is also 100x times more fun. It could help if some appearance or whatever was introduced.