Joining a running scenario

[Thorwyn]

I wanted to play some T3 scenarios last night, so I queued for all of them. Got my first invitation a couple of minutes later, joined and found myself in a running scenario, with 12 minutes to go and Destro leading by 180 : 0.

Played it, lost 500:5ish... re-queued. Same thing happened again, this time it was 120:10 or something. Rinse repeat...
Joined another scenario with 14 minutes to go and Order leading 20:0 (woot!), jumped down the slope to join the battle, when a message told me that the scenario is going to be reset in 60 seconds due to imbalance of the forces... which then probptly happened. -.-

Now, I don´t know about you but I find it pretty annoying to be thrown into a scenario that´s already lost (or won.. doesn´t matter for that case). I also don´t have a solution for the problem, other than punishing the scenario-leavers. I guess suggesting a "only join beginning scenarios" option is asking a bit too much.

Anways, just had to get this off my chest. Feeling better now.

 

[Gahn]

Punish leavers and don't even start a scenario without the minimum balance required.
Only real solution i see.

 

[Lubbock]

Aye happend to me yesterday also, kept getting invited into losing scenarios, happend 6 times in a row, finally i got in one and i was alone, 1 Shaman vs 8 Order, odds were not in my favor, wish i was a sorc or BW and i would show em <before i get flamed that was sarcasm >

 

[Javai]

Gave feedback on this during Beta when I kept getting put in scenarios with 4 minutes to go and opposition on 400+, would be better to end the scenario than put people in after a set time (maybe if timer < 13 minutes or something like that). Seems to be worse since Beta too as it used to be that you could join when in combat, now I see alot of reserved spots that dont get filled (possibly cos the people are fighting something they can't kill inside the timer) which results in a huge imbalance in numbers at the start

 

[Muylaetrix]

I wanted to play some T3 scenarios last night, so I queued for all of them. Got my first invitation a couple of minutes later, joined and found myself in a running scenario, with 12 minutes to go and Destro leading by 180 : 0.

Played it, lost 500:5ish... re-queued. Same thing happened again, this time it was 120:10 or something. Rinse repeat...
Joined another scenario with 14 minutes to go and Order leading 20:0 (woot!), jumped down the slope to join the battle,

Now, I don´t know about you but I find it pretty annoying to be thrown into a scenario that´s already lost (or won.. doesn´t matter for that case). I also don´t have a solution for the problem, other than punishing the scenario-leavers. I guess suggesting a "only join beginning scenarios" option is asking a bit too much.

Anways, just had to get this off my chest. Feeling better now.

it might not be nice to start a scenario that`s already underway, but i think it`s the only way to counter the fact that a lot of people just leave scenarios when the odds don`t look good.

i`ve felt tempted a few times to say `oh shit, we have like one healer out of 18 people and he is not even in my group, this will be a frustrating round, i`d better just quit here and now and requeue`.

...or times when we queued with a group and one or more of us didn`t get the popup to join the scenario and we all left the scenario (before the start timer ran out) to requeue and make sure that we all were in the same scenario...

...or the times when someone goes LD...

plenty of reasons why numbers can become unbalanced, even in a scenario. so, allowing `reinforcements` in scenarios is a good thing for balance purpose, even if it might not be nice to get thrown into a scenario that`s underway...

it`s a nescecary evil for the greater good i guess .. dunno what the alternatives would be.

mostly i feel very happy that vacant spots get filled up anyway in scenarios that have already started.

when a message told me that the scenario is going to be reset in 60 seconds due to imbalance of the forces... which then probptly happened. -.-

i`ve never seen that happen. i guess when odds are totally fubar that`s a good thing ..

 

[Muylaetrix]

Punish leavers and don't even start a scenario without the minimum balance required.

point is, some scenarios become unbalanced after the scenario has started due to attrition of players, for whatever reason.

 

[rynnor]

One thing I've experienced is that if I do a bunch on scenarios in a row the load time keeps increasing to the point where if I click immediatly at 59 seconds I still dont actually get in until the games like 100 points gone.

So I imagine a number of those gaps at startup are other folk in a similar position.

I fixed it with a new graphics card but it still seems to me that there are memory leaks associated with scenarios - we shouldnt all need to run buff throttle to make the game playable?

 

[Penlid]

I dont run buff throttle ^^

 

[Andrilyn]

Punish leavers and don't even start a scenario without the minimum balance required.
Only real solution i see.

Then people will just AFK outside the "idle hands" zone, either that or they will use a bot that randomly runs around and cast's/hit's stuff to not get the AFK flag on (Hi WoW!).

Personally I don't mind if I am 490 behind I will never AFK it out and always try and play till the very end.
Must say though that I also dislike joining an already started scenario but aslong as people join the queue for a scenario and wont join it when it pops or once they leave when they get hammered this problem will never be solved unless you want to accept that scenario's are just going to be imbalanced, number wise, after a certain length of time.

So imo you always either going to have AFK'ers or leavers once one side is losing and I don't see any fix that can force people to not leave or AFK during a scenario.

 

[Gahn]

point is, some scenarios become unbalanced after the scenario has started due to attrition of players, for whatever reason.

It's 15 minutes top not a big deal, need to force ppl to finish it that's the point.

 

[Gahn]

Then people will just AFK outside the "idle hands" zone, either that or they will use a bot that randomly runs around and cast's/hit's stuff to not get the AFK flag on (Hi WoW!).

Personally I don't mind if I am 490 behind I will never AFK it out and always try and play till the very end.
Must say though that I also dislike joining an already started scenario but aslong as people join the queue for a scenario and wont join it when it pops or once they leave when they get hammered this problem will never be solved unless you want to accept that scenario's are just going to be imbalanced, number wise, after a certain length of time.

So imo you always either going to have AFK'ers or leavers once one side is losing and I don't see any fix that can force people to not leave or AFK during a scenario.

The Afk thing can work in whole of the scenario, so put a debuff that means you get no rps-xp and a debuff that you can't join scenarios for 10 minutes when that one is over.
Solved -.-

 

[Muylaetrix]

It's 15 minutes top not a big deal, need to force ppl to finish it that's the point.

forcing people is never a popular option. attrition will ALLWAYS happen, for various reasons. some reasons to leave a scenario, like `we are gone loose` are ... sad. other reasons like crashes, guild stuff, all of a sudden realizing you have to be on your work in 5 mins ( ), ones partner/mum yelling that if you want to have your food warm you`d better get away from that computer, ..., are other reasons for attrition.

people leave scenarios for more reasons than just odds they don`t like.

 

[Gahn]

forcing people is never a popular option. attrition will ALLWAYS happen, for various reasons. some reasons to leave a scenario, like `we are gone loose` are ... sad. other reasons like crashes, guild stuff, all of a sudden realizing you have to be on your work in 5 mins ( ), ones partner/mum yelling that if you want to have your food warm you`d better get away from that computer, ..., are other reasons for attrition.

people leave scenarios for more reasons than just odds they don`t like.

Afk there, no xp-rps and join 10 minutes after the debuff is gone doesn't force you not to go have your dinner, parrying dishes thrown at you by an angry gf/mom/bf whatever.
As it is the System is open to any sort of "grief", hence needs changes.

 

[Muylaetrix]

Afk there, no xp-rps and join 10 minutes after the debuff is gone doesn't force you not to go have your dinner, parrying dishes thrown at you by an angry gf/mom/bf whatever.
As it is the System is open to any sort of "grief", hence needs changes.

but you can`t expect that scenarios will never suffer from attrition, whatever the reason might be. and having people join after the start of a scenario is one of the few ways to keep numbers ballanced.

 

[MagnusGOA]

Punish leavers and don't even start a scenario without the minimum balance required.
Only real solution i see.

There's merit to your suggestion, but just as the current system, it has its drawbacks. Currently, if the teams aren't balanced, the game will start anyway. If not sufficient new players join, the game will be aborted. With your model, the players who did join the game would stand there, waiting for new players to join. Scenarios are about action and whereas some would certainly prefer to wait a minute or two for the teams to balance out, others would experience this wait to be more frustrating than fighting against a larger team. In both cases, there's a risk of starting a chain of players leaving and being replaced by others who, too, leave when seeing the odds.

On my main server, this isn't really a significant problem - people tend to stick with it even when odds are dour. Then again, I'm sure other servers have other cultures.

The question of whether to leave an unfavourable game or stick with it and take one for the team is very similar to the classic Prisoners dilemma. What we learn from this is that what's seemingly the rational thing to do for each individual player (fold when the odds are poor) is really unfavourable in the long run. How this apply to us as WAR players is that if sufficient amount of players choose to look after their own self interest, a culture will develop where it's the only viable thing to do. A degree of self-sacrifice is needed in any team-oriented game and WAR is no exception.


More practically: in the near future (next couple of weeks) there's no deserter penalty or changes coming up as far as I know. That said, Mythic will keep adjusting their RvR and scenario mechanics until they and the players are happy with it. These issues are becoming increasingly important and Mythic are certainly aware of these concerns.


Cheers,
Magnus

 

[griralith]

i`ve never seen that happen. i guess when odds are totally fubar that`s a good thing ..

the most frustrating is when you are outnumbred 5 to 13, roll them twice and get a msg on screen... scenario will end due to imbalance

but tbh the queing seems quite bugged atm... latest hit is getting nordenwatch invites while in temple of isha?

I think there should be a time point where when passed you cant enter anymore, we (guildgrp and me) dont mind facing hard odds, but sometimes its just plain waste of time.

 

[Loneliness]

Reservered slots should be abolished altogether as its generally a capture asap tactic this leads to a disadvantage to the side with less players. Those reservered slots are then filled to late in the game, and usually not by the player that selected wait im busy in the first place.
Get rid of this and there will be 12v12 at the prime location, which will i would assume reduce the amount you win/lose by during the beginning of the scenario and then produce a less possibility of players leaving when they see the fail sign.

 

[Muylaetrix]

Reservered slots should be abolished altogether as its generally a capture asap tactic this leads to a disadvantage to the side with less players. Those reservered slots are then filled to late in the game, and usually not by the player that selected wait im busy in the first place.
Get rid of this and there will be 12v12 at the prime location, which will i would assume reduce the amount you win/lose by during the beginning of the scenario and then produce a less possibility of players leaving when they see the fail sign.

but, those reserved slots as far as i can tell are for group members when you signed up as group. not having reserved slots would mean you can`t enter as a group anymore, no ?

 

[Gahn]

There's merit to your suggestion, but just as the current system, it has its drawbacks. Currently, if the teams aren't balanced, the game will start anyway. If not sufficient new players join, the game will be aborted. With your model, the players who did join the game would stand there, waiting for new players to join. Scenarios are about action and whereas some would certainly prefer to wait a minute or two for the teams to balance out, others would experience this wait to be more frustrating than fighting against a larger team. In both cases, there's a risk of starting a chain of players leaving and being replaced by others who, too, leave when seeing the odds.

On my main server, this isn't really a significant problem - people tend to stick with it even when odds are dour. Then again, I'm sure other servers have other cultures.

The question of whether to leave an unfavourable game or stick with it and take one for the team is very similar to the classic Prisoners dilemma. What we learn from this is that what's seemingly the rational thing to do for each individual player (fold when the odds are poor) is really unfavourable in the long run. How this apply to us as WAR players is that if sufficient amount of players choose to look after their own self interest, a culture will develop where it's the only viable thing to do. A degree of self-sacrifice is needed in any team-oriented game and WAR is no exception.


More practically: in the near future (next couple of weeks) there's no deserter penalty or changes coming up as far as I know. That said, Mythic will keep adjusting their RvR and scenario mechanics until they and the players are happy with it. These issues are becoming increasingly important and Mythic are certainly aware of these concerns.


Cheers,
Magnus

Uhm how the not even start a scenario if the odds aren't balanced leave people in struggle?
Oh well if you are just standing in a warcamp waiting for the next scenario to come up, it may well be a problem, but it's a rather lazy choice. That's not my case tho
I do other things while waiting in queues

but, those reserved slots as far as i can tell are for group members when you signed up as group. not having reserved slots would mean you can`t enter as a group anymore, no ?

Yep, that's not a possible solution.

 

[Loneliness]

If you join as a group then the group should be there, shouldnt it?. I thought reserved slots were the players selecting busy atm - not groups joining without a group "im feeling confused".

 

[Belisar]

I would also debuff leavers.

If you need to go have dinner then surely you know in advance that it is not far away and therefore do not join the queue. If gf/mummy is getting the arse then a 10 min xp de-buff is not exactly a major worry (in comparison). Yes I am sure it will hurt a few people but better the odd one of them than a lot of annoyed players left in a scenario or the poor person who comes in part way through.

Queueing for scens and getting into one which has long been decided is a bit of a nonsense. If someone has 400+ points (plus a 300 point lead) then the end is not far off so even an unbalanced scenario is not a huge problem (it will probably just hasten the end). Had plenty of them (probably says a lot about my play) and always get out of them what I can and even had a few laughs as well.

Mind you had an odd one last night. Dude moaned like hell over /sp that we were noobs and losing (we were at the time) so he/she jumped ship. After that we staged a massive fightback and I think we even won by the odd few points, it was a damn good fight and we did better after the quitter quit.

 

[Belisar]

If you join as a group then the group should be there, shouldnt it?. I thought reserved slots were the players selecting busy atm - not groups joining without a group "im feeling confused".

I think reserved slots are for peeps in a group who join as a group. It is possible that the group do not always hit the ready button at the same time (maybe one is in a PvP fight or wants to swap q/bars or create a macro).

 

[Loneliness]

Not letting groups invite players already in scenarios/pvp so they wont be joining minus a player or removing the ability to join as party when a members in combat i.e removing reserved slots as they wont be needed.

 

[Loneliness]

Or even making it so the group leader isnt the only one that selects join as party, instead all players having to choose enter as party and only being able to enter until all members have.