ahh yes… all that friendly banter in bgs 
a great way to get to meet people!
Yes.
How are premades a bad thing?
How in TF would “matchmaking” counter a coordinated raid group bypassing que restrictions to get 40 of their team into a single epic bg?
Those 2 things are so far apart they don’t belong in the same discussion. UNLESS it is to break up any groups and split them between teams which is a bad thing. That is punishing legit 5 mans because of what the troll communities are doing.
This issue wasn’t such a big one until blizzard dropped the ball and then were too chicken to take a stance.
Under the current queue system, you can still queue with up to five people.
It’s still the same impact as premades, just with less people.
So I’m not entirely sure what you’re even talking about.
People have outlined why they are bad several times. I shouldn’t have to outline it a 50th time for you because you chose to ignore 49 times before.
And a loss for all the players who were on the side of the premade that decided to leave. I started an isle a few weeks back and 30+ people left. It took about 5 minutes to fill. Game was lost in the first minute.
Man you people are the worst.
Fast games? The premade matches are often the slowest. As in, they don’t even try to win and just sit GY and farm people for hours.
Why are you commenting when you don’t even understand what’s happening?
MMR would kill bgs. We have rated for that reason. =/
Yea, that would almost entirely solve the problem. Assuming it was random AND the teams were randomly sorted via ilvl.
Oh, another troll arguing that people enjoy being farmed in the gy.
Dude? What?
Made up? There are 100’s of post in this thread outlining the issues. What the hell?
1 Like
Not a PvPer, but it blows my mind that this is even up for discussion or why there are people hellbent on disagreeing with OP.
If there is something impacting the player experience, then Blizzard should do something about that thing. They’ve taken action on things far less egregious in the past. I don’t know why we should view this as the exception to the rule.
3 Likes
no, people have talked about their feelings.
Why they feel things should be against the rules… while claiming that things which are actually against the rules, are justifiable.
Everyone here is talking about their feelings.
It just so happens that one side actually has valid reasoning for feeling this way, while the other side does not and has spent more time discrediting those reasons rather than trying to explain why allowing premades would be better for the game.
1 Like
Yea, spot on. For years it has been a minor issue. So much so that I really didn’t mind those communities and groups existing. Same was the case with the multiboxers. When it was rare, the majority of us didn’t care. Now it’s turning into every other match or even multiple games in a row.
The majority defending it are the players doing it.
Sometimes I talk about other peoples feeling but in a plagiaristic fashion.
1 Like
Saying that “matchmaking” would fix this problem is coming from a place that doesn’t understand the whole problem.
The first issue: These communities don’t want to fight a premade. They will leave games if the other side is a premade raid themselves.
The second issue: If the raid gets split in the same bg, 1 half immediately leaves and takes deserter as to not fight their own.
The only way a cross-factioned matchmaking system addresses the problem is if you break up the 5 mans. And that’s bad. It’s punishing the innocent for the guilty.
Otherwise, there will still be raids stacking the bg’s and games starting 10 or 20 v 40.
Clarify the damned rules. Then address the player reports of this issue.
Blizzard needs to stop catering to players that go beyond intended play. Like those that “exploit” bugs early and end up getting to keep their exploited rewards. This stance always ends up hurting the innocent.
going right back to the original post…
op is using their feelings, to apply meanings to words which just aren’t applicable.
when it comes to computers, the term “exploit”, is not a verb.
this is the level of misunderstanding which is on the table.
how many times does this need to be done?
They may respond to trolls, I don’t
Well, first of all, that’s not true in the slightest. That is your own made up rule about what can and cannot be considered exploiting.
Second of all, are you fresh out of arguments now that you’ve resorted to being pedantic about things like this rather than addressing her broader concerns?
Exploit or not, it’s still a problem that hampers the player experience in random BGs. If your only response to the matter is to stick your nose up in the air, push up your glasses and say “Um, ackshually, exploit isn’t a verb for computers,” then it feels like you’re grasping at straws when it comes to leveraging any coherent argument that may actually counter her points.
^
Premade raids in random bgs result in:
- One-sided games and roflstomps that drive players away from PvP.
- Games where one team starts half-empty because premade raids are mass dropping queue pops in their attempts to circumvent the system.
Unfortunately, there are people who don’t respect the spirit of fair play and they don’t care about other players’ gameplay experience.
^
Premade raids already use various ways to keep track when other premade raids are queuing up. They also first send in a scout to see who’s in their game before they all join (or don’t join) the instance.
Blizzard would need to add countermeasures like a stacking, account-wide deserter debuff for players who miss/drop their queue pops.
That brings up a good point. These players don’t respect the spirit of fair play. It’s highly optimistic to think that they’ll play the game as intended.
If the premade raid gets split up, they’ll pick one side to win, and then their members on the other team will AFK/desert or maybe even actively sabotage.
When queues pop, premade raids can send in a scout from each party to see which team everyone is on. Drop queue decisions can be made after they have that info.
Premade raiders will test the limits of the system and come up with new ways to circumvent it.
2 Likes
no, it’s how words work.
exploit
verb (used with object)
-
to utilize, especially for profit; turn to practical account:
-
to exploit a business opportunity.*
-
to use selfishly for one’s own ends:
-
employers who exploit their workers.*
-
to advance or further through exploitation; promote:
-
He exploited his new movie through a series of guest appearances.*
noun
, Digital Technology.
-
- a flaw in hardware or software that is vulnerable to hacking or other cyberattacks.
-
a piece of software that takes advantage of such a flaw to compromise a computer system or network.
-
(in a video game) the use of a bug or flaw in game design to a player’s advantage or to the disadvantage of other players.
see how the word is spelled the same way, but IN CONTEXT, it has different meanings.
the disingenuous posters here, are pretending Blizzard don’t know the meaning of the words which they use.
it’s not pedantic.
people can’t argue a point, if they don’t understand the words which are being used.
Guys, what are we even doing here? Why do we care what Blizzard thinks, and since when have we assumed the position that Blizzard is incapable of making mistakes?
1 Like
This could literally be about today’s situation.
I can’t with how dishonest some of you are being.
if people prefer a slow burn game where nobody wins, why was the game changed so this doesn’t happen?
spots fill fast, the only people inconvenienced, are the afkers who are suddenly very visible to everyone who zones in.
Wait, so you think that because the dictionary doesn’t explicitly state “with computers” that the verb exploiting can’t be used with computers? Even though it states “used with object” which can encompass computers?
Quick question: Do you even work with computers?
No, it’s absolutely pedantic.
Because even if she used the term incorrectly, her point remains that premades in random BGs are a problem, and that is something you have failed to address time and again, which is why you’re hyperfocusing on her word choice instead of her intent.
1 Like