Feedback: Smallscale PvP

[Aluviya]

Why I’m writing this
As a first-minute veteran of this project, I’m going to spare you the usual introduction about how long I’ve been around or how much I care about the game. I AM SORRY FOR THE WALL OF TEXT. At this point, this genuinely feels like my last attempt to raise a warning for the sake of the project. I returned after a somewhat longer break, and seeing the current state of scenarios first-hand has been quite sobering. Yes, the scenario queue pops, and that is important. Nobody wants to spend their evening staring at a queue timer. But from my perspective, a series of decisions aimed at accessibility and faster pops seems to have stripped scenarios of much of the competitive aspect they once had.

What has been lost
One of the rewarding aspects of an MMORPG like this, at least to me, has always been teaming up, organising, communicating and overcoming the odds. I am fully aware that many players have jobs, families and other obligations. Not everybody has the time or motivation to build a proper group before playing a few scenarios. I get that. But I do not think the answer should be to turn scenarios into something that increasingly resembles a PvE participation exercise — at times, even PvE feels more demanding — where everyone simply does whatever produces the required points.

The current scenario experience
From what I have seen since returning, a large portion of scenarios currently feels completely headless. Some players run flags or objectives almost independently of what is happening in the fight, while others ignore the objective and fight on their own. I also get the impression that people give up much faster once they meet resistance. If the flag cannot simply be run or an objective is contested, frustration often seems to set in very quickly. Instead of asking whether positioning, target choice or disengaging could have been better, the problem is frequently attributed to the queue, matchmaking or the scenario itself rather than considering mistakes in actual gameplay.

Meanwhile, you regularly see healers walking straight into the frontline, DPS players who seem to have barely any experience with the basic rotations of their respective classes — let alone a reverse gear when some strategic repositioning is required — tanks sitting on objectives instead of even attempting to guard anyone, people chasing targets far out of position, and groups barely reacting to what the enemy is doing. This is not about mocking inexperienced players. The relevant question, in my opinion, is why they would learn these things when scenarios so rarely require them to. The reward structure arguably reinforces this as well. Weekly scenario quests revolve around accumulating scenario points. If points are what you need, interacting with PvE-like objectives becomes a perfectly rational way to progress regardless of whether coordinated PvP actually takes place. The question can easily shift from “How do we beat the enemy team?” to “How do I get the points I need?”

Small-scale keeps exposing the same underlying problem
In my experience, small-scale has always been one of the places where some of the underlying issues of this game become particularly visible, and I feel that this dimension is often overlooked. This goes beyond scenarios and, in my view, also affects how class balance is perceived. A class can appear perfectly “balanced” when a large portion of the players using it are inexperienced and do not make full use of what the class is actually capable of. At the same time, the forums are filled with cryposts almost every week, often judging balance from isolated experiences without necessarily accounting for player skill, group setup or the actual ceiling of a class. Then you have experienced players taking the very same class much closer to its limits in small-scale, making use of tools, interactions and advantages that the average player may barely touch. In those situations, something that looks completely reasonable in average gameplay can, in my opinion, become genuinely oppressive or expose balance issues that are otherwise easy to miss. Low average performance does not necessarily mean that a class itself is weak or balanced; it can also mean that a significant part of its potential is simply not being used. This is one of the reasons why I think small-scale remains important when looking at the game as a whole. It tends to expose differences in player skill, class ceilings and group interaction much more clearly than zerg gameplay does.

Organisation should matter
The issue is not casual or solo players. They have always existed, and there is nothing wrong with that. The issue, to me, begins when organisation becomes increasingly optional, coordination matters less and participation alone is often sufficient. A scenario should not merely be 12 people who happened to enter the same instance. It should give them reasons to play as a team.

There used to be a very noticeable difference between a side that assisted targets, protected its healers, controlled space and played intelligently and one that did not. Losing against a better organised group could be frustrating, but adapting and eventually beating that group was also rewarding. That struggle was part of the reward.

A healthy queue is not healthy PvP by itself
More scenarios popping is obviously a good thing. But I do not think more pops automatically mean better PvP. If you make the effort to build a proper six-man group, queue times can become extremely long. And when you finally get a pop, the competitive aspect can still be very limited because you may end up facing an essentially unorganised opposition. But the problem can be even simpler than that: in my experience, one or two experienced players on DPS or tank roles can already be enough to snowball an entire scenario against twelve headless chickens. That at least raises the question of how much coordination and organised opposition the current environment actually produces — or, more generally, what a large part of the current “PvP” experience really consists of. So what is the incentive to build a full group? You wait significantly longer and, when you finally get a scenario, there may still be very little actual competition.
I hope I’m not alone in saying that a healthy queue, with PvE-like objective play making up a large part of the actual experience, does not automatically translate into healthy PvP — not in the short term, and certainly not in the long term.

The question I am left with
This ultimately leaves me with one question: Why do we keep moving towards a design in which the game itself seems to teach players less and less about how to actually play PvP? Teamplay has always been one of the central elements of Warhammer PvP for me. Scenarios should therefore be one of the places where players can learn positioning, assisting, protecting the backline, recognising priority targets, knowing when to engage or disengage and, importantly, understanding their own class’s role within the wider PvP environment.Instead, it seems possible to go through scenario after scenario without needing much of this. That is particularly problematic in a game where the experience gap between new players and long-time veterans is already enormous. If scenarios do not regularly put players into situations where these skills actually matter, where are they supposed to learn them? Clearly, zerging in ORvR is unlikely to teach most of these things either. When players eventually encounter one or two people who do understand these fundamentals, it is hardly surprising if they suddenly hit a wall.

In an MMORPG like this, I would argue that teamplay should be one of the defining elements of the experience. Shouldn’t the systems therefore actually encourage and reward it? With an experience gap this large, newer players will inevitably have to bleed for that experience to some degree — but the game should at least provide a minimum level of challenge through which that experience can actually be gained.

[mrkimarko]

Scenarios should be deathmatches. Easy, simple, strait forward, and everyone is by auto on the same objective.
First team that gets to 20 kills wins. if its tie at the end of the timer with no 20 kills then the reward is split.
Idk why they keep rewardingg ppl to play flags, nobody really likes playing flag, there is no specific way to build your character to capture better, its just very boring and attracts lazy and bad players who want renown so they can gear their character, same people that play rvr and afk putting auto follow on warband member.
Its really frustrating for good players having to heavy lift in fights for these annoying renown farmers. They are not even contributing for greater win rate because you really cant capture any flag without majority of your team fighting and often struggling fighting outnumbered while you cap flag.
Worst is these people cant be reasoned with, no matter how good you explain the dynamics of proper scenario play, they are convinced that they are in right and that their standing on objective is manifestation of peak skill in pvp.
Why is this empowered with rewards is beyond me, rewarding the worst type of player, this is not even a jab on their performance when they actually meet the enemy on their bellowed objective. A lot of these people are full Sov gear and their skills are close to a real new player from t1.

The most obvious case of this is new talabec dam scenario mechanic, some of these guys will stand on giant no matter what happens around them, their team getting slaughtered in front of them, they will not move from the giant, even when alone and when its basically not moving, they will still sit on the giant while others are fighting. Its ridiculous that we see this level of performance and reasoning in a pvp game.

I really hate new sc, its impossible to have 1 match without these people now.

[Jajcek12]

I have very serious question.
When in history of war or ror game learn players to " perform effective playstyles" so called " meta" ?
I belive - never.
On new scenarios matchmaking/system/ rewards. New wave of gamers instinctly play around pve aspect of scenario because it gives weekly progres.
Fighting is not they way to win scenario by 500 victory point. Would be perfect when pve aspect would be gained thro fight.
There is no quest for " learn how to gameplay"
And im many fights gameplay that can be teach verbaly or by instruction is not even needed.
Gameplay that must be practice by gaming/ training takes time , player who play 4 monts will play worst then player who play 3 years on same archetype- simple .

[Nameless]

Imo scenario mode is much better than before, i see less total snowballs, more turn arounds. Overall better experience. To become even better we need more time for ppl to learn, that wont happened overnight but the process is running.
But i agree that premade group experience got hit hard. Before you had at /5 quite regularly someone looking for ppl to fill scen premade, nowadays that is totally gone. And that is real problem that prevent socialising, making communities and learning and developing yourself even faster

[Feodorovna]

atleast teams are way more balanced than before. you get good fights more often imo
but yeah the focus on pve obj just reinforce dumb behaviours that most pugs/casuals already have through zerging/blob.

exemple: 90% of the actual playerbase still think that focusing healers is THE thing to do in sc to win a fight. how many time did you see a guy in /sc saying "Focus healer" at the beginning to then overextend and die, giving 0 **** about his team getting pressured, 0 awareness 0 peeling, never pulling back. then go back to /sc to cry. those people dont want to learn and are full ego the moment you tell them they are doing wrong.