Please Take A Moment . . .

[Februs]

If it had been simple they would have done something by now.

That's not necessarily true.

All of the PvP content in this game is still running on the same system. They have the same rules, and they use the same Duty Finder to divide teams. Yet, despite this, Feast and WD were programmed only to have 2 teams and much smaller numbers than Frontlines. Feast, in particular, also has a deviant programming for an 8v8 mode. On that note, ALL Frontline game modes are equipped with alternative 24 man versions. If I remember correctly, Secure also had a 48-man version back when it was first conceived, which was later removed. On top of that, the actual game mode itself was adjusted to reduce the number of capture points depending on team sizes. The only thing that has remained constant was the GC restrictions. That might seem unrelated at first, but the overall size of the match is part of the same system as how teams are divided. If they can make changes to one, then it's highly unlike that they can't make changes to the other. The fact that Feast actually goes out of its way to "balance" teams by dividing players by rank is further proof of this. It might be time consuming, annoying, and a bit of work, but it shouldn't be so hard that it justifies not doing it. It's their baby, after all. They should know it better than anyone.

Regardless, even if they do have some bizarre reason for why they couldn't do this (they lost he manual or something?), it doesn't make the OP's point any less valid. They have been consistently ignoring us for over a year now. Even if they couldn't retro-actively remove GC restrictions from previous Frontline game modes, there is absolutely NO reason for why they have continued to use the same, almost unanimously hated, system in each subsequent version. GC restrictions were a problem as early as Secure, yet they designed Slaughter, Seize, and Shatter to use the same framework. There's no excuse for that blatant disregard for our wishes. After all this time, the whole lot of them should prostrate themselves on stage at the next fan expo and beg our forgiveness, and even then, it wouldn't be enough to make amends for over a year of such shameful behavior.

[Guesswhat]

That's not necessarily true.

No it don't have to be true. I'm only making guesses around the fact that they have not removed GC restrictions yet (as their reasoning don't make sense, and not assuming they simply ignore us). Concerning SE's work-schedule and time budget, I have no idea what is actually true. But anyone who has worked for a big company knows that even the simplest of things can be extremely hard to push through. Even if it as simple as removing 1 line of code. When it comes to the actual GC stuff it may be nested within several other modules. Thus it's not justifiable to put "remove GC restrictions" on their schedule considering the PvP population. Making new maps without GC restrictions may be their escape route here. Again, I have no idea, but to me this seems like the best explanation if they are not flat-out ignoring our requests. Which may be true too; no idea.

[Februs]

I'm only making guesses around the fact that they have not removed GC restrictions yet (as their reasoning don't make sense, and not assuming they simply ignore us). Concerning SE's work-schedule and time budget, I have no idea what is actually true.

When it comes to SE's inner workings, we can only speculate. I can agree with that, and I'd be more willing to show SE some sympathy ... if they hadn't already told us, several times, that they were taking this into consideration.

We don't have to speculate on this. Yoshi-P has already gone on record addressed GC restrictions in numerous interviews as far back as the Secure days, but nothing happened. In his earliest interviews, they were reluctant to even consider removing GC's and said, instead, that they would explore other options to improve queue times. No changes were made. More recently (about a month ago), Yoshi-P outright said that they would, finally, consider removing GC restrictions from the game mode; yet, 3.4 is right around the corner and ... you guessed it. Nothing. There's been no mention of it at all.

No matter how sympathetic you want to look at SE for this, the fact is that they stood up and told us to our faces that they knew this was an issue and would address it, and then they didn't. At best, that makes them liars.

It should also be noted that SE already makes frequent changes and adjustments on regular basis, and that changes are typically made to reflect the bottom line. The goal is to keep people playing and subscribed. The PvP community is small, sure, but that community is small largely in part to how poorly SE has managed their content. No one wants to wait an hour for a 10 minute match. That fact alone should put this as a priority, but SE continues to refuse to do anything, despite repeatedly telling us that they would do something. Even considering the absolute worst case scenario of office politics, SE ran out of leash on this a long time ago.

[Guesswhat]

...At best, that makes them liars...

The comments from Yoshi are probably "truths with a twist". The whole situation smells like cooperate BS to me, thus my "educated" guesses.

[P4X0R10N]

They did take steps to improve queue times. Namely, they reduced the number of players needed to start a game. As for their reasoning for nor removing gcs, Yoshida said it was because it would make it easier to rmt-random match trading.

Don't call people liars. It's kinda rude and they didn't really lie.

If the choice was between the current state of the game and a situation where rmt was rampant, I'd like things to stay as they as they are now.

[P4X0R10N]

Further, the problem could be solved WITHOUT removing GCs. Just remove the players ABILITY TO CHOOSE a gc. Randomly assign players gcs before a match. This will improve queue times AND make it hard for groups of players to random match trade.

Of course this means restrictions must be placed on premades. Perhaps no premades greater than 4 players?

[Vaeria]

Further, the problem could be solved WITHOUT removing GCs. Just remove the players ABILITY TO CHOOSE a gc. Randomly assign players gcs before a match. This will improve queue times AND make it hard for groups of players to random match trade.

Of course this means restrictions must be placed on premades. Perhaps no premades greater than 4 players?

This is a fresh idea, one that would also preserve the lore to an extent since its supposed to be friendly combat anyway. What ever gets the slots filled quickest. Because the current Mael: 234 in q, Adders: 127 in q, Flames: 6 in q > More than 30 minutes- bs is draining the life outta the urge to play.

[Februs]

They did take steps to improve queue times. Namely, they reduced the number of players needed to start a game.

I'm assuming you're referring to this:

A: We’re aware of all the feedback on this topic including the requests to remove Grand Company restrictions. However, it’s not for lore reasons that we haven’t removed these limitations; it’s because we are concerned about PvP being abused in ways such as creating fixed matches resulting in moral degeneration. However, as an attempt to reduce matching times we’re exploring whether we can make a system that places you in content without waiting for 72 players and then fills in the other members as they queue. Naturally, we have not completely ruled out removing the Grand Company restrictions; however, we would like to have some restrictions in place for PvP.

Taken from the Live Letter XXIV. If so ... you must be joking.

Not only was this implemented a full year ago (as well as a full year after the implementation of Frontlines), but it didn't fix anything. Terrible queue times continued to be a problem for the entire life span of Secure, as well as Shatter, and they knew that they would be from the word go. Reducing the player count wasn't exactly an original idea. The first version of Secure had 24, 48 and 72 man versions upon implementation for the exact same reason:

To improve matching efficiency, 72 (three teams of 24), 48 (three teams of 16), or 24 (three teams of eight) combatants may be matched together depending on the number of available participants.

(taken from the original 2.3 patch notes for Secure)

Only, it didn't work. They did this at the very conception of the original Frontlines, knowing that queue times would be garbage, and queue times stayed garbage. Then they repeated a slight variation of the exact same mistake one year later, and it still didn't work. All the while, they hit us with flimsy, wet-noodle, excuses like this one:

we are concerned about PvP being abused in ways such as creating fixed matches resulting in moral degeneration.

This is a bald faced lie, if not flat out hypocritical, because win trading already happens. They know it. We know it. It's not a secret to anyone. If they didn't want it to happen, then they wouldn't have allowed pre-made parties to join the matches. Spying on other GC's happens too, and it's also not a secret. There's almost no penalty for swapping GC's and throwing a match. Further, the entire game mode was a breeding ground for afk tome farmers and bots, yet SE did almost nothing to police it. They relied on us to do it for them, which just caused witch hunts within the community. You can't really have any worse "moral degeneration" than that.

Don't call people liars. It's kinda rude and they didn't really lie

Only they did. Repeatedly.

In two separate occasions, Yoshi-P has outright said to us that they would consider removing GC restrictions, yet, within the same breath, he also said that he doesn't want to do it for fear of causing "moral degeneration." That's a promise followed by an immediate contradiction of that promise. Worse still, that contradiction is based on a false premise, because he lied, outright, when he said in the most recent interview that win-trading and GC spying were issues that were not already happening within the community. We have 2 years of evidence saying that it does, and they actually asked us on occasion to report it if we see it; yet, they deny that it's a problem that even exists and use the possibility of it as an excuse to avoid removing GC restrictions. That's just ridiculous. It's corporate spin doctoring at it's worst, because no one who PvP's regularly is buying it.

[P4X0R10N]

They did take steps to improve queue times. Namely, they reduced the number of players needed to start a game. As for their reasoning for nor removing gcs, Yoshida said it was because it would make it easier to rmt-random match trading.

Don't call people liars. It's kinda rude and they didn't really lie.

If the choice was between the current state of the game and a situation where rmt was rampant, I'd like things to stay as they as they are now.