Disruptive Frontline Gameplay

[IDontPetLalas]

Unfortunately it isn't just premades, because I've seen a premade (DRK/AST/AST/AST) with at least two other ASTs in tow, getting just as much kill participation. I don't know how it could be done with the way the game is designed, but there needs to be some degree of restriction on how many of a job is in each alliance. Either that or nerf AoE damage to make AST less of a nuclear bomb when stacked up with so many of them.

I honestly wouldn't mind if my first suggestion made queue times longer for FL, because then I'd get into a match with a chance of winning. Right now it's 100% loss rate if these DRK/ASTx3+ groups are in the match. There's no competition if one team is guaranteed to win every time.

Also, today after seeing the same group again I decided to send one a tell since they're on the same world as me. It went about as well as you'd expect, since they don't care about ruining the game for other people:



It really shows that they believe they're entitled to the win more than anyone else, which actively disrupts the gameplay for most people in those matches.

It's not an "AST issue". Prior to this, it was A "SMN" issue. If you nerf ASTs (and this wouldn't be the first time), then it would be "nerf DRKs", not to mention there have been multiple cries to nerf various melee jobs.

Also- as you say, limiting the number of a specific job that can queue isn't practical. imagine, you want to queue as - let's say- a machinist. Game says - nope- too many in queue? Or- you've already entered, you want to switch. but the game says- sorry , we have "x" number of machinists, you can't have more? I don't see that working.

The most practical suggestion I've seen is likely a combination of adjustments to several jobs, and that would include limiting AOE effects to no more than 5 players at a time, so that it could be applied to CC as well as FL, since the devs seem very reluctant to separate FL and CC job development.

Finally- I don't know what the screen grab has to do with this discussion? If someone forms a premade and they beat you, it isn't "disruptive gameplay", they're not "ruining the game for other people". They're playing with their friends. You can do the same.

Regarding "guaranteed to win" pretty rare to see a premade that never loses, but if that's how you feel when you're up against that specific premade then it goes double-why not form a premade, or if you know them well by know, try shot-calling?

[Scintilla]

Finally- I don't know what the screen grab has to do with this discussion? If someone forms a premade and they beat you, it isn't "disruptive gameplay", they're not "ruining the game for other people". They're playing with their friends. You can do the same.

There's a whole world of difference between 'playing with friends' and forming voice-coordinated teams with the sole intention of controlling the game to the point where opposing teams have to form a silent alliance to focus them down, with one random team practically forfeiting the match for the sake of the other.

I play with friends. We queue together to be on the same team, but aside from that we play separately. My support/coordination with my friends is no different to that of random players on the team. Our competition remains between each other, comparing scores at the end. These premade teams are totally different, taking heavy advantage of the fact that they have a pre-arranged team which many players may not have (PvP isn't exactly a highly popular part of the game and matters like this contribute to that) and using voice chat to reach a level of coordination which cannot be replicated within a random team. It gives such an immense advantage that sometimes there is practically nothing that can be done to overcome this setup.

You are heavily playing the problem down when you say "they're not ruining the game for other people". Matches are supposed to be as balanced as possible, with each teams having a fairly equal chance of success. Yes, other factors come into play which skew this slightly (class imbalances and team composition, RNG, player experience etc.) but in a regular match each team has a relatively equal chance of winning. In matches with a premade, this 'balance' is heavily disrupted. Sometimes, depending on the premade, it can still be worked through with good luck and a strong team. But in some premade setups, this just isn't possible.

There shouldn't be this level of imbalance. It shouldn't be the case that objectives have to be voluntarily 'given away' to the random team in second place just to keep them in the game while you both focus down the premade's alliance. Games become predictable and dull. More and more players will be turned away from PvP. Why bother when wins are almost guaranteed to go to whichever team has the premade in?


Can we do it? Yes, I suppose if I wanted to I could always organize my own premade with the friends I play with and repeat exactly the same as them. It doesn't take any kind of skill.

Would I want to? No, because I enjoy PvP, I like fair competition, and I like to see more new players joining us in these games.

[Mawlzy]

Can we do it? Yes, I suppose if I wanted to I could always organize my own premade with the friends I play with and repeat exactly the same as them. It doesn't take any kind of skill.

Would I want to? No, because I enjoy PvP, I like fair competition, and I like to see more new players joining us in these games.

Bingo! Instead we get many new players regarding the whole thing as a lottery in which they have no agency, and thus either quitting the mode, or perhaps worse never learning their jobs well nor contributing to their team because "what's the point?"

There are a couple of threads on Reddit in defense of Shatter, in which many self-confessed unstudied players note they like that map because at least they feel they are doing something by smashing ice (despite the fact they're really not). In other words, in the face of oppressive PvP from premades, they default to PvE.

I'd suggest anyone frustrated by "casuals" playing poorly might consider the possibility that, in many cases, this is a direct result of premades creating despondency.

[IDontPetLalas]

Bingo! Instead we get many new players regarding the whole thing as a lottery in which they have no agency, and thus either quitting the mode, or perhaps worse never learning their jobs well nor contributing to their team because "what's the point?"

There are a couple of threads on Reddit in defense of Shatter, in which many self-confessed unstudied players note they like that map because at least they feel they are doing something by smashing ice (despite the fact they're really not). In other words, in the face of oppressive PvP from premades, they default to PvE.

I'd suggest anyone frustrated by "casuals" playing poorly might consider the possibility that, in many cases, this is a direct result of premades creating despondency.

If there is a "bingo" moment here, a new player often has no agency because they don't understand how FL works, they have never PvPed at all (no situational awareness), or they have never even used their new skills or know other job PvP skills - there should be a mandatory tutorial to introduce them before FL can be joined
However- the actual alliance composition is RNG, and that is because this is not a PVP oriented game. This is not EvE, nor any number of other PvP oriented games of which I have played (I know Eve, but haven't played it). That doesn't mean that a relatively small number of players can't make a difference .


So is saying that "matches are supposed to be as balanced as possible" that's a worthy goal to aim for - however now you have a lot of factors to consider (1) the PvP design team, and the mode that they balance for - it is NOT Frontline. (2) Do they consider the presence of pre-mades to be an issue ? Past history says no- they would have to agree. (3) New players quitting the mode- from my own view, at even this late in the expansion- queues don't seem to be an issue- that's also based on the number of sprouts I see- BUT I would trust Square's metrics more than just my experience in queues.

In addition, I don't rely upon a few Reddit threads (which I also follow) to see whether there are "oppressive premades" - people often whack ice in Shatter for the same reason that they say "let them fight" in any FL mode, and in many (not all) cases because they think BH doesn't apply in Shatter.

Finally- given some of the endgame stats, I'm not going to blame premades "creating despondancy". Not when I see some players with practically no damage, assists or kills. If someone is that easily discouraged, perhaps they should ask for some tips, or try another mode, or try another job.

[Mawlzy]

In addition, I don't rely upon a few Reddit threads (which I also follow) to see whether there are "oppressive premades" - people often whack ice in Shatter for the same reason that they say "let them fight" in any FL mode, and in many (not all) cases because they think BH doesn't apply in Shatter.

I'm not relying on Reddit threads. I'm basing my suggestions on my own experience playing the mode, the comments in FL chat, and what is to me the blindingly-obvious fact that queue mixing is unfair to solo players. There are plenty of other reasons that FL is less than ideal and that players get hacked off. This is one with an ostensibly simple fix.

FWIW a few days ago on Aether during peak times, one of these oppressive premades and a flurry of negative comments in chat "coincided" with the queue time suddenly shifting from its usual 2-3 minutes to 9+. On the DC on which I play, premades are a problem.

You're quite correct to ask if a twin-queue is something SQEX would contemplate. Do we have any evidence they might? Say, a "ranked" 8v8v8 party-queue FL, and a "casual" 24v24v24 solo queue? This is exactly the sort of approach SQEX takes to keep its casual players, who pay the bills, engaged, while giving the more ambitious ones some tougher content.

FWIW if an 8v8v8 party queue mode was introduced, I'd immediately seek out a pseudo-static to join. I suspect it would be a ton of fun.

[IDontPetLalas]

I'm not relying on Reddit threads. I'm basing my suggestions on my own experience playing the mode, the comments in FL chat, and what is to me the blindingly-obvious fact that queue mixing is unfair to solo players. There are plenty of other reasons that FL is less than ideal and that players get hacked off. This is one with an ostensibly simple fix.

FWIW a few days ago on Aether during peak times, one of these oppressive premades and a flurry of negative comments in chat "coincided" with the queue time suddenly shifting from its usual 2-3 minutes to 9+. On the DC on which I play, premades are a problem.

You're quite correct to ask if a twin-queue is something SQEX would contemplate. Do we have any evidence they might? Say, a "ranked" 8v8v8 party-queue FL, and a "casual" 24v24v24 solo queue? This is exactly the sort of approach SQEX takes to keep its casual players, who pay the bills, engaged, while giving the more ambitious ones some tougher content.

FWIW if an 8v8v8 party queue mode was introduced, I'd immediately seek out a pseudo-static to join. I suspect it would be a ton of fun.

Would Square implement an 8x8x8 premade queue? I have no way of knowing that, personally as long as queues were acceptable I would be fine with it. You have your experience of some queues lengthening due to some people avoiding a premade, I'm not going to dispute that, personally I haven't had it happen, it may or may not have happened to other people. I have no idea - I can only speak for my own experience- and I haven't had an issue with pre-mades. That does not mean that I haven't lost to one. Those comments in chat comments in chat if they see a premade? I wonder how many of them are useful, and how many of them are from people who don't really try - like someone who commented recently at the start that if they saw "x" premade they were just going to run. You know, even if the odds are that you (group "you") are likely going to lose, if you at least try, you can improve. But if you quit like that- you can't even give yourself the chance to improve or try to have some fun. I find that rather sad.

[Doozer]

It's not an "AST issue". Prior to this, it was A "SMN" issue. If you nerf ASTs (and this wouldn't be the first time), then it would be "nerf DRKs", not to mention there have been multiple cries to nerf various melee jobs.

Also- as you say, limiting the number of a specific job that can queue isn't practical. imagine, you want to queue as - let's say- a machinist. Game says - nope- too many in queue? Or- you've already entered, you want to switch. but the game says- sorry , we have "x" number of machinists, you can't have more? I don't see that working.

The most practical suggestion I've seen is likely a combination of adjustments to several jobs, and that would include limiting AOE effects to no more than 5 players at a time, so that it could be applied to CC as well as FL, since the devs seem very reluctant to separate FL and CC job development.

Finally- I don't know what the screen grab has to do with this discussion? If someone forms a premade and they beat you, it isn't "disruptive gameplay", they're not "ruining the game for other people". They're playing with their friends. You can do the same.

Regarding "guaranteed to win" pretty rare to see a premade that never loses, but if that's how you feel when you're up against that specific premade then it goes double-why not form a premade, or if you know them well by know, try shot-calling?

First of all, I never said it was an AST issue. In fact, I said that it's not any single job, but multiples of some being stacked together. And you're saying my suggestions to nerf won't work, but "adjustments" will? Okay semantics.

The screen grab has something to do with it because when confronted about their behaviour, they revel in it. Look at the posts above you, it's relevant.

You also really don't understand that the solution to a party comp that always wins is not the same party comp. Ever heard of how fighting fire with fire just makes more fire? And yes, every time I've seen that specific group, they've won every single time. They don't have to be strategic, they don't even have to take the objectives, they just follow the single DRK, pull in a bunch of people, nuke them, repeat. They always win. I've never seen them lose. They win enough that they're committed to doing it all the time. Do you really not understand? Shot-calling does nothing. There are people trying to win by grouping up and playing better and it still doesn't stop these people, hence my problem. Stop putting the blame on me and start acknowledging that something is wrong.

[IDontPetLalas]

First of all, I never said it was an AST issue. In fact, I said that it's not any single job, but multiples of some being stacked together. And you're saying my suggestions to nerf won't work, but "adjustments" will? Okay semantics.

The screen grab has something to do with it because when confronted about their behaviour, they revel in it. Look at the posts above you, it's relevant.

You also really don't understand that the solution to a party comp that always wins is not the same party comp. Ever heard of how fighting fire with fire just makes more fire? And yes, every time I've seen that specific group, they've won every single time. They don't have to be strategic, they don't even have to take the objectives, they just follow the single DRK, pull in a bunch of people, nuke them, repeat. They always win. I've never seen them lose. They win enough that they're committed to doing it all the time. Do you really not understand? Shot-calling does nothing. There are people trying to win by grouping up and playing better and it still doesn't stop these people, hence my problem. Stop putting the blame on me and start acknowledging that something is wrong.

So, what exactly are you trying to do here? You're talking about my "blaming" you, when you're posting about an issue that you're having, which I know nothing about, and when I make some suggestions about how you might succeed with what sounds like a specific premade, you get self-defensive.

What is your objective here? Do you want to win your matches, or do you want to go ahead and start nerfing jobs? Because I prefer to find out how to win. Because frequently (not always), when the discussion goes to "nerf this job"- then the people who want a job nerfed then move on to the next target, and the cycle of nerfs and buffs goes on and on. In any case- it won't help you right now.

No one is forcing you to use the same composition. I didn't say that. I've been in fights where we beat teams that *should* have beat us because they had the "meta" jobs- but they didn't. I suggested shot-calling, because you seem to have come up against them often enough to have learned their tactics- if you can't understand why that should help you- then I agree, something sounds very wrong, that premade is playing better than you, and they deserve to win.

[Doozer]

So, what exactly are you trying to do here? You're talking about my "blaming" you, when you're posting about an issue that you're having, which I know nothing about, and when I make some suggestions about how you might succeed with what sounds like a specific premade, you get self-defensive.

What is your objective here? Do you want to win your matches, or do you want to go ahead and start nerfing jobs? Because I prefer to find out how to win. Because frequently (not always), when the discussion goes to "nerf this job"- then the people who want a job nerfed then move on to the next target, and the cycle of nerfs and buffs goes on and on. In any case- it won't help you right now.

No one is forcing you to use the same composition. I didn't say that. I've been in fights where we beat teams that *should* have beat us because they had the "meta" jobs- but they didn't. I suggested shot-calling, because you seem to have come up against them often enough to have learned their tactics- if you can't understand why that should help you- then I agree, something sounds very wrong, that premade is playing better than you, and they deserve to win.

You are blaming me, because you're assuming/implying that the only reason why we don't beat them is because we aren't trying hard enough, or that I'm not shot-calling. Suggesting it as a solution implies that would fix it, which wouldn't. I know their strat, it's the DRK runs in with 6 healers covering him, pulls everyone in, and then the ASTs all nuke everyone. The only solution is to Guard and that's not always available. You can't outheal the damage as it's happening. How would shot-calling fix that? Say "don't go there, you'll die"? What if that's the objective? You have to understand that this enemy team doesn't play normally because they can always win. They don't scurry around and try to flank or pinch, they just run in and kill everyone because that specific comp lets them.

My objective is I want match outcome to be based in skill and not whether one party has DRKs and ASTs in large numbers all grouping together. And that last bit is a joke, and after reading that I would be surprised if you sometimes took part in that kind of behaviour. Everyone who has played against them hates it because there's no chance to win no matter what. Get your head out of their asses and realize this.

[IDontPetLalas]

You are blaming me, because you're assuming/implying that the only reason why we don't beat them is because we aren't trying hard enough, or that I'm not shot-calling. Suggesting it as a solution implies that would fix it, which wouldn't. I know their strat, it's the DRK runs in with 6 healers covering him, pulls everyone in, and then the ASTs all nuke everyone. The only solution is to Guard and that's not always available. You can't outheal the damage as it's happening. How would shot-calling fix that? Say "don't go there, you'll die"? What if that's the objective? You have to understand that this enemy team doesn't play normally because they can always win. They don't scurry around and try to flank or pinch, they just run in and kill everyone because that specific comp lets them.

My objective is I want match outcome to be based in skill and not whether one party has DRKs and ASTs in large numbers all grouping together. And that last bit is a joke, and after reading that I would be surprised if you sometimes took part in that kind of behaviour. Everyone who has played against them hates it because there's no chance to win no matter what. Get your head out of their asses and realize this.

So, it seems that you've made up your mind as to what the problem is and are open to any other resolution.

I'll try anyways, so- I doubt that Square will enforce composition limits, that may enforce job design changes that would be compatible with CC ( which I think would be the best solution).

In the meantime, unless Square makes changes, you could always leave when you see that premade, which is, by definition "playing normally" it seems, and beating you on skill, unless you suspect that they are using.. shall I say..assistance? By the way- you can deflect on me all that you want - but I solo queue.