Scenario queue

[Axerker]

There is a real problem with sc q.

Or another solution is to q sc in 2 or 3 groups of 2 people to join pugs sc only like some people like to do

I believe if you can ever prove this, this is a bannable offense.

It's not the reason of my post, if i wanted to report acts like this one i'll do it to a GM, not to you.

You said "another solution is to...", telling people to do this. You're telling people to do an action that is bannable. So, I'm glad you'll tell GMs and not me, cause I could care less about what you do with your life. But telling people to do something that will get them banned (since most people don't know its a bannable offense) is a **** move. Lucky for you, I'm not a GM, or I'd ban you on the spot for suggesting people do that.

[dansari]

form a group.

/thread

[GodlessCrom]

form a thread.

/group

[Gobmarley]

I believe if you can ever prove this, this is a bannable offense.

It's not the reason of my post, if i wanted to report acts like this one i'll do it to a GM, not to you.

You said "another solution is to...", telling people to do this. You're telling people to do an action that is bannable. So, I'm glad you'll tell GMs and not me, cause I could care less about what you do with your life. But telling people to do something that will get them banned (since most people don't know its a bannable offense) is a **** move. Lucky for you, I'm not a GM, or I'd ban you on the spot for suggesting people do that.

I don't encourage at all people to do that, you just quote a part of my sentence, at the end i've said that it's a shame. Lucky for everybody, you are not GM. Few minutes ago on /ad on destro side people and a GM were talking about this problem of premade in pugs sc.
Mp me if you want to continue to talk about your opinions instead of flooding this topic with false informations.

Afaik from what the devs said a long long time ago, the scenario queue does attempt to provide balanced team compositions, however it's always a trade-off between queue time and good compositions. With this server having a relatively low pop (the server is doing mighty fine on its' own terms) compared to other games, the scenarios with bad comps are just a reality. Premades vs. PuG are another story, personally I am just happy the PuG scenario exists at all, which is a cool feature compared to the original. Also bad comps are just a part of PuGlyfe to a certain extent, it's not like I've never played Overwatch/DotA with 4 people on my team who are determined to play dps/carry at all costs.

What would be nice if it was possible to relog into a scenario like in GW2, seeing that you don't have enough tanks/healers you would relog an alt to make the comp better. Although with how the game works around character locations etc. it might be very hard/impossible to make such a change.

As you said, devs said that a long time ago, now the population seems to be more stable. That could be interesting to add parties of 3 people in pugs sc, if it's too unbalanced they could just give up this idea after few weeks of test.
Btw i liked the possibility to relog into scenario like in GW2, but that means people must have all of classes and should play another class that they wanted to play.

[Axerker]

Or another solution is to q sc in 2 or 3 groups of 2 people to join pugs sc only like some people like to do (orders and destro) but it's a shame.

Sorry, I've included the last few words now. You did say that its a shame, but you are still stating it is another option that players can do. There is no misinformation. You explicitly stated that a viable option is for players to perform a bannable offense. Shameful. But viable.

If you disagree, you may PM me your opinions. Not that there is anything that could disprove an explicit statement, but you can try.

To remain on topic:
As others have said, there is not really any chance for a fix that would fit OP's wishes anytime soon. The population just doesn't support it. The best option is to form a group if you don't want to chance the RNG of classes. I did a pug SC this morning where our team had 1 Tank and 7 DPS, and the enemy team had 4 Healers, 2 Tanks, and 2 DPS. We won 500-6. Composition isn't everything. This is rare, and you will almost always lose in that matchup, which is OP's point. But, since winning is definitely still possible, it isn't a high priority to change when paired with the population issue.

[peterthepan3]

Or another solution is to q sc in 2 or 3 groups of 2 people to join pugs sc only like some people like to do (orders and destro) but it's a shame.

Sorry, I've included the last few words now. You did say that its a shame, but you are still stating it is another option that players can do. There is no misinformation. You explicitly stated that a viable option is for players to perform a bannable offense. Shameful. But viable.

If you disagree, you may PM me your opinions. Not that there is anything that could disprove an explicit statement, but you can try.


.

Who the hell do you think you are with that condescending manner? Kroi is a respected member of the game, an epic shaman, and is a huge advocate for group vs group play. It's obvious that you're misinterpreting what he's saying (he calls it viable, but a shameful thing to do.)

[Axerker]

Or another solution is to q sc in 2 or 3 groups of 2 people to join pugs sc only like some people like to do (orders and destro) but it's a shame.

Sorry, I've included the last few words now. You did say that its a shame, but you are still stating it is another option that players can do. There is no misinformation. You explicitly stated that a viable option is for players to perform a bannable offense. Shameful. But viable.

If you disagree, you may PM me your opinions. Not that there is anything that could disprove an explicit statement, but you can try.


.

Who the hell do you think you are with that condescending manner? Kroi is a respected member of the game, an epic shaman, and is a huge advocate for group vs group play. It's obvious that you're misinterpreting what he's saying (he calls it viable, but a shameful thing to do.)

First, he started the condescending tone, so it was reciprocated fairly.

Everything you stated about him is subjective and your opinion. I don't consider him a respectful person due to how aggressive he handled this conversation, and all of the things you state about him have no relevance. He is informing players that an option they can choose to do is one that is against the rules. This isn't rocket science. The person advocating for rule-breaking behavior, whether he does it or not, is in the wrong. Its that simple. Had he included: "but that is against the rules, so please refrain from doing so" rather than "but it is a shame", then there would be nothing to fault. But he didn't. He left it open that players can perform this action if they choose to. This would result in other players getting banned for his suggestion, because they don't know its a bannable offense.

So, who the hell do I think I am? I think I'm the one trying to stop players from getting banned, not the one defending the guy who would let them. Take a look in the mirror, pal. Nothing is misinterpreted. If you speak the English language, its plain as day. I've quoted it several times, please re-read it.

You think I'm continuing and participating in this conversation to argue? Or make him look bad? No. I'm doing it for the sole purpose of making sure players know the rules, and follow them. Perhaps he should try the same. There is no respect to give when it isn't deserved. Rather than apologizing and fixing his statement, he got aggressive like a child. Own up to your mistakes and admit you're at fault, don't make the problem worse. That is what deserves respect.

[GodlessCrom]

Pretty sure he was stating it facetiously, i.e. poking fun at people who do engage in premades in the pug scs.

[Axerker]

Pretty sure he was stating it facetiously, i.e. poking fun at people who do engage in premades in the pug scs.

Unfortunately, text on a screen removes any representation of sarcasm or hidden meanings. Text is taken literally, because it is the only controlled form of interpretation.

Even if he did mean it sarcastically, people will not read it that way.

[GodlessCrom]

I read it that way.