[PVP]Scenario balance suggestion

[Jaycub]

It's been suggested before OP, while in a perfect world any arguments against it are pretty much void this server is far from perfect or even in a finished state.

I'd absolutely love a role based que, but if it means SC pops take longer than 15 minutes most people would be very against it. As Bacta has also stated doing so is going to require dev time, which would be wasted on the current state of the server... lvl 40 / T4 are much more important to many.

[zabis]

I'd like to see a system where it first fills premade groups, second fills roles, and third fills solo players.

[Azarael]

I've actually been working on archetype balancing over the past few days, but I want to make something perfectly clear while I do.

I offered, back in the day, restrictions upon both the size and party makeup of premade groups for scenarios to significantly aid their balancing. This was roundly rejected by almost everyone because they valued the ability to queue in any Godawful composition and number for scenarios more than they valued the balance.

Accordingly, the archetype balance is not perfect. It'll be better, but not perfect, and it's not likely to get any better until sacrifices are made. The balancer will do its best, but it is forced to trade off between balance, pops and code time, and it will be forced to open potentially imbalanced scenarios every so often in order to keep these small groups popping.

[Cyril]

I'd like to see a system where it first fills premade groups, second fills roles, and third fills solo players.

That would just destroy the pop rate completely and that's it.

[Razid1987]

The suggestion looks nice on the surface, but once you take a deeper look, there are many problems with it:

First of all, trolling is sadly a common thing on the internet. You only need to take a lot at games like League of Legends to see how role-based queue systems fail in this regard. DPS Healers would queue as healers just to piss people off, or even sincere DPS healers could queue as Healer by mistake. It would only make people pissed off to realize that their "supposed" healers and tanks, are all DPS.

Secondly, the size of a party is 6 players, not 5 (Which is what you seem in indicate by your original post in this thread). The current meta is by many people considered to be 2-2-2. Which means you would need 2 tanks, 2 dps and 2 healers per party, in a scenario. The problem with this is that 6 out of the 12 classes per faction, are DPS (50%). While only 33,33% of the party of a scenario would have to be DPS in the 2-2-2 meta.
On top of that, you have tanks and healers outside of that 50% that specs into DPS, further increasing the gap between the two. A realistic percentage if the number of each class was the same, would mean that about 55-60% of all players where playing DPS. This is an optimistic estimate. It's probably far worse. In other words, the queue for DPS would be very, very, very long.

Thirdly, if you wouldn't go with the 2-2-2 system, then the Devs would effectively force many of the players to play in a different way, than what they want (e.g. 1 tank, 4 dps, 1 healer). This would just be to give even queue times, for everyone, despite their selected role.

I'm not saying I'm either for or against such a system. I'm only pointing out the flaws.

[Azarael]

The queue system will read the spec and stat distribution of classes with multiple specs to determine what they should be classed as, and it is based around 2/2/2. If you want to bypass that, form a premade.

[Jaycub]

The suggestion looks nice on the surface, but once you take a deeper look, there are many problems with it:

First of all, trolling is sadly a common thing on the internet. You only need to take a lot at games like League of Legends to see how role-based queue systems fail in this regard. DPS Healers would queue as healers just to piss people off, or even sincere DPS healers could queue as Healer by mistake. It would only make people pissed off to realize that their "supposed" healers and tanks, are all DPS.

Secondly, the size of a party is 6 players, not 5 (Which is what you seem in indicate by your original post in this thread). The current meta is by many people considered to be 2-2-2. Which means you would need 2 tanks, 2 dps and 2 healers per party, in a scenario. The problem with this is that 6 out of the 12 classes per faction, are DPS (50%). While only 33,33% of the party of a scenario would have to be DPS in the 2-2-2 meta.
On top of that, you have tanks and healers outside of that 50% that specs into DPS, further increasing the gap between the two. A realistic percentage if the number of each class was the same, would mean that about 55-60% of all players where playing DPS. This is an optimistic estimate. It's probably far worse. In other words, the queue for DPS would be very, very, very long.

Thirdly, if you wouldn't go with the 2-2-2 system, then the Devs would effectively force many of the players to play in a different way, than what they want (e.g. 1 tank, 4 dps, 1 healer). This would just be to give even queue times, for everyone, despite their selected role.

I'm not saying I'm either for or against such a system. I'm only pointing out the flaws.

Potential for abuse/trolling should never be a roadblock to moving a system forward.

The manager doesn't have to put together a perfect 2-2-2 group. One thing every single 6 man will have in common is at least 1 tank, at least 1 pure healer. Getting 1 tank and 1 healer per party guaranteed would be magnitudes better than what we are currently dealing with when solo queuing in some cases.

[Cornerback]

The queue system will read the spec and stat distribution of classes with multiple specs to determine what they should be classed as, and it is based around 2/2/2. If you want to bypass that, form a premade.

Awesome.

[Scrilian]

Again you try to make League of Dota queue balance here, shame on you.

[Jaycub]

Again you try to make League of Dota queue balance here, shame on you.

At least explain why it is bad instead of basically shitposting