Forum Discussion
- RayD_O14 years agoHero
@ragnarok013 wrote:
@Stew360Completely disagree. Server browser would allow you to join the experience that you want and that alone would drive additional player engagement. I personally hate playing a bad map 3 times in a row now that the server scrambles after each round. I'll err on the side of giving players choice - if you want to be at the mercy of the quick match Gods so be it, but the rest of us want to be able to find and play our favorite map.Very well said. I agree let us the players have the choice to play the game the way we enjoy it.
- 4 years ago
Server browser is essentially a necessity in less populated regions.
My experience playing in Australia is its random luck if you can find a game.
If you were in a round previously it will generally be able to start a new server quickly as it is pooling together the players from the previous round.
However, if you start match making whilst all the servers are in the region are currently in play it will generally try and start a new lobby rather than joining a game in progress.
When this happens, it can sometimes take 15 to 20 minutes to get enough players to start a new server.
This isn't because of an infinite loading bug, its because the lobby hasn't gotten enough players to start the game.
You would think that the system would work efficiently in splitting up players from previous rounds to populate lobbies which do not have enough players / merging lobbies together.
Unfortunately this is not the case, and because the game prioritizes creating new lobbies over joining existing games, it can be a long wait.
Sometimes it can be quick, sometimes it can take such a long time it's pointless, because the wait is longer than the round time. Furthermore since the game disconnects / crashes a bit it makes this experience of trying to rejoin only for a new lobby to be formed all the more jarring.
The efficiency of the match making system could probably be improved to make this better, but if a server browser was available I could simply see what games I could join.
Simply put; match making might work fine for Europe and North America, but in a lot of parts of the rest of the world finding a game is a roll of the dice, and we don't have enough players to quickly start new servers.
- 4 years ago
@Ga-Knomboe_BoyI guess you're on PC or playing during early hours of the morning?
I'm on Xbox One in Australia and during evenings and weekends from about 8am I have no long wait times.
However I'm all in on a return of the server browser with fixed map rotations and the option to play on US servers out of peak times.
- EA_Darko4 years ago
Community Manager
Hey all, when posting on AHQ please do so in a polite and constructive manner.
It is never acceptable to post in a rude or abusive manner toward another user.If you are unable to post without being rude then we would ask that you not post.
Darko
- 4 years ago
oh god another post of Stew360... can't wait to see how you once again go against the people that dislike BF42 here with full force to the wall...
- 4 years ago@Xherdos LIke all the haters here tell us if you don't like it scroll on.
- 4 years ago@ragnarok013 And how exactly ?
AOW matchs are matchmaking base as soon as a player quit he is replaced either by a player friend trying to join etc.. Servers are always filling up at full capacity super quick a server browser will be totally useless ..- RayD_O14 years agoHero
@Stew360 wrote:
@ragnarok013And how exactly ?
AOW matchs are matchmaking base as soon as a player quit he is replaced either by a player friend trying to join etc.. Servers are always filling up at full capacity super quick a server browser will be totally useless ..I think there are a lot more reasons why a server browser will not be totally useless as I pointed out in my previous reply :
MM may be working in AOW as DICE intended and it may suit your needs but imho it is no substitute for a proper server browser. (Portal is not an option in it's current state and no one is using it).
In BFV and previous BF's I was able to use the server browser :-
To see the server name and location.
I was able to find a match in seconds which suited my requirements that I was able to specify using the browser filter.
I knew how many players were on the server before I joined.
I was able to stay on that server for a few hours or longer if required.
Importantly I was able to play through the whole map rotation uninterrupted.
Play with friends or build a rapport with a squad round after round.
In MM :
I am put in a lobby which then puts me in a server with an unknown number of players. I then wait for players to join.
Sometimes it puts me in a server where the round is almost finished and I then get dumped back to the lobby to start the whole elongated process all over again.
I have had to play the same map several times in a row, so some days i only get to play 2 or 3 off the 7 available maps which gets boring very quickly.
There is no rapport with squads as you get put back to the lobby after every single round.
All in all I find MM very frustrating and spend too much time waiting in menus in comparison to using a server browser.
You are obviously happy with MM and it suits your needs, but I much prefer the traditional server browser, so we need to agree to disagree.
It would be nice if we had the option to use either one or the other methods and then that would keep everyone happy.
- 4 years ago@RayD_O1 In AOW matchmaking you are matched in the best ping servers to your location and if you press TAB on your keyboard you see your ping on the top right near your KDRA Etc .. So this way they make sure the server population is of players with the lowest ping possible so no ones ruins other experience or have bad experiences themselves ..
my ping is always between 25 and 35 wich is acceptable i never ever needed a server browser and never gotten matched into a 200 ping server never ever with AOW matchmaking
- ragnarok0134 years agoHero+
@Stew360 wrote:
@ragnarok013 And how exactly ?
AOW matchs are matchmaking base as soon as a player quit he is replaced either by a player friend trying to join etc.. Servers are always filling up at full capacity super quick a server browser will be totally useless ..@Stew360 They revert the system back to the traditional Battlefield system where servers are able to be filled by both quick match and people manually joining and/or queuing for full servers instead of forcing this Battlefront/Apex quick match stuff on us. They would also have to stop scrambling the servers after each map - something which the community largely dislikes. The tech is there or we wouldn't have a server browser and quick match in Portal.
BF1/5 are on AWS like 2042 is and BF1/5 use the traditional Battlefield system so this is 100% possible from a server perspective.
- RayD_O14 years agoHero
@ragnarok013 wrote:
@Stew360 wrote:
@ragnarok013And how exactly ?
AOW matchs are matchmaking base as soon as a player quit he is replaced either by a player friend trying to join etc.. Servers are always filling up at full capacity super quick a server browser will be totally useless ..@Stew360They revert the system back to the traditional Battlefield system where servers are able to be filled by both quick match and people manually joining and/or queuing for full servers instead of forcing this Battlefront/Apex quick match stuff on us. They would also have to stop scrambling the servers after each map - something which the community largely dislikes. The tech is there or we wouldn't have a server browser and quick match in Portal.
BF1/5 are on AWS like 2042 is and BF1/5 use the traditional Battlefield system so this is 100% possible from a server perspective.
Sounds like it wouldn't be that difficult to implement for AOW f the tech is already there and BF2042 uses the same system as BF1 / 5
Hopefully they work towards this in upcoming updates.
- Flavin9134 years agoSeasoned Ace
BIggest reason 2042 is failing, is lack of continual "team-mates", if your not with old friends or on a discord, your not really finding new friends in Battlefield.
Server Browser/Consistant Servers would be the only option IMO
- Flavin9134 years agoSeasoned Ace
Theres also a problem now of being trapped going back into the same game over and over if you want to leave that game you are stuck connecting back to it unless you pick a different mode.
- RayD_O14 years agoHero
@Flavin913 wrote:Theres also a problem now of being trapped going back into the same game over and over if you want to leave that game you are stuck connecting back to it unless you pick a different mode.
That doesn't sound like fun I haven't come across that one yet.
- Micawber7294 years agoSeasoned Veteran@Flavin913 Reading the latest news the sever browser will be revised in mid February and will continue to get redone.
As for continual teammates I read what I already suspected is they use team balancing and doubtful that will ever occur. VoIP is also being addressed and will come once it’s done. Just read the tweets to the right.- 4 years ago
@k1u73 I hope so but I think they are just going to try to add filters to match making and improve the match making system. I'd prefer a server browser for AoW but if they can improve match making to the point that I don't get random long wait times that would be a big plus.
Also quite pleased with the changes to portal xp; I'm hoping it results in some of the portal servers being repopulated.
They talked about a lot of the issues I have with the game (not including gameplay stuff), so this has been good news.
Lets hope they add an option to turn off end of round voices / animations, team switching and server browser.