Re: Take away “switch teams” temporarily

@AWMaxSterlingYou're right about the challenges affecting the team swap issue even more. But apart from the reasons why players swap the result is killing the game. I don't see the point why a whole lobby should be nearly unplayable due to a few players challenges. Most character challenges can be done in PVE as well. If they are bound to PVP modes why not wait one round when teams swap anyway? Players would have to do that if team swap would be removed. Problem solved.
About statistics: Sure you are right. But devs should rely on feedback they are getting in forums. Apart from that they are having additional statistics ingame. And PopCap would be blind not to realize that issue.

@AWMaxSterling I get it.  You’re in it for you.  As most are in this game because that’s how the current design and outlay is.  That’s precisely what’s hurting this game.  It needs to be team based, as designed, and not based on the individual player, who wants to just do well with whatever it takes.

Removing "switching teams" would mean specific teams would be less likely to dominate, due to better balances of teams, rather than say, 2 v 6, for instance. The team who wins would mostly depend on the persons' skills and the teamwork involved. I think EA/Pop cap should test this feature out, similar to the 8v8 turf takeover testing, and see what feedback people give them🤨!

---

@ippig wrote:

@AWMaxSterlingYou're right about the challenges affecting the team swap issue even more. But apart from the reasons why players swap the result is killing the game. I don't see the point why a whole lobby should be nearly unplayable due to a few players challenges. Most character challenges can be done in PVE as well. If they are bound to PVP modes why not wait one round when teams swap anyway? Players would have to do that if team swap would be removed. Problem solved.
About statistics: Sure you are right. But devs should rely on feedback they are getting in forums. Apart from that they are having additional statistics ingame. And PopCap would be blind not to realize that issue.

---

As I stated above, players will not stay in a game... they will just quit and try to get into another match. Players are gonna play with whomever they want and if you're stuck on a crappy team, you're gonna get out one way or another.

Most feedback on the forums is what kills the player base. Every decision made is gonna kill off players... including things I type up here. We're all trying to make the game better here, unfortunately removing options is wrong. I recall a game removing the option to quit a game because people believed that would force players to stay and play in the game they were put into. Instead it lead to players turning off their system or disconnecting their internet... or just going AFK... which then lead to complaints about teams being short players. It's never as easy as taking away the option to switch teams... which eventually turns into other, worse issues because everything that sounds like a decent idea on the forum, is a half-arsed thought out plan that fails to see the whole picture.

---

@dwooten77 wrote:

@AWMaxSterling I get it.  You’re in it for you.  As most are in this game because that’s how the current design and outlay is.  That’s precisely what’s hurting this game.  It needs to be team based, as designed, and not based on the individual player, who wants to just do well with whatever it takes.

---

I've never understood why companies like this always reward based on kills. Most game types are objective-based and yet most challenges are personal stat based... and rewards at the end are based on individual stats instead of based on time spent progressing the objective. It's why most games like this always have issues. I started gaming online in the 90's... and back then kill/death ratios weren't a thing. It was about winning or losing. Kill/death ratios are what killed objective games like this. People can * and gripe about team switching all they want... disable it for all I care. They're still gonna get stuck with a bunch of stat padders sitting in back doing nothing to progress the objective.

Ooh imagine a world in which team swap doesn’t exist... That would be amazing

@AWMaxSterling I can certainly agree with you on k/d ratios killing shooters in general.  That has been a gripe of mine since the beginning.  

The other stuff about taking away or changing team swapping we’ll just have to disagree on.  As @ToastedSarnie mentioned, data could be collected from this (temporarily) and see where it goes from there.  Even if it’s in just one mode of play.  Ultimately if the devs agree with your point of view, that people will just not play, then yes, it’s not going to happen.  This problem was worse in GW2 than GW1.  Wayyyyy worse.  

All of that being said, my goal is not for the game to just be better for me.  I’d really like to see new players stick around and have a fair start.  It’s not like our day as kids when you got that new NES game (which were all hard to some extent) and you just had to put time in and figure it out.  If you didn’t, you were going to wait a while before getting another one.  The access to gaming has changed as you know.  Kid doesn’t like the game after a couple days, they’re going somewhere else.

---

@ToastedSarnie wrote:

My personal wishes for things that might reduce team-swapping / stacking would include :

Challenges:
•Make all achievable in PvE as well as PvP.
•Randomise the character ones - just having everyone focus on the same few characters each month is also causing gameplay issues
•Have fewer based on vanquishes (GW2 challenges included things like contribute to capturing an objective)

---

Honestly, I'd prefer all challenges to be separated. For PvP, each map in each playlist should have one pool of challenges to pull from that pertains to that game type and that map. The reason being, some TT maps have you carrying a bomb, while another may have you carry a battery. Leave out any character based challenges from PvP. I don't want challenges which may force players to play characters they don't like. Let them do that in PvE. If there's an objective game type, I'd rather see a player around the objective defending it... than seeing a chomper chasing around foot soldiers due to a challenge that deters from the objective of the game. Instead of just vanquishes, I'd rather see vanquishes while defending within a radius of the objective... or vanquishes stopping an objective capture.

---

@ToastedSarnie wrote:
XP / Stats:
•Make xp for revives equal to that of a vanquish, it's harder to do for a start & would also help TV as well as TT
•Increase xp for support & objectives generally
•Add heals to personal stats - WHY isn't this there atm?
•Remove the K/O ratio in objective-based games (I'd happily see the back of Vanquish Master as well, but don't envisage anyone going along with me! 😂)

---

Ideally for the results screen, you'd want to see those with the most time in the objectives at the top and those perched in back only sniping at the bottom. Objective time should reward the most. Heals, revives, and boosts should reward more than vanquishes. As for boasts... remove vanquishes and assists and replace it with one for most capture time and one for most capture stops. It's a kid rated game and subtle changes like that could emphasize this being a game for casual fun play... where the average Joe who isn't a great vanquisher can receive a boast for standing in the objective a long time.

---

@ToastedSarnie wrote:
Drop-outs:
Needs to be a way of evening up teams if people drop out mid-match - whether this is introducing AIs to plug the gaps until new players come in or something else

---

I'd rather stay away from AI. Perhaps a notification of an opening in Giddy Park... whether a message flashing across the top of the screen or a biplane towing a banner making an annoying sound... or both... may be a way to get someone to jump in quickly. Maybe even converting the current matchmaking to a list of lobbies would be the way to go?

---

@ToastedSarnie wrote:
Matchmaking:
Teams do really need to have an even distribution of experience to try & avoid steam-rolling - we know they're working on this, so fingers crossed!!!

---

Part of the problem with this matchmaking and ranking system is... nothing about it is skill based. It's based on lobby filling. You can create a party of 4 and pub stomp all day and night if you choose. If we're just looking at filling lobbies, then depending on how full a lobby is would determine if merging lobbies or just adding individuals would be best. Perhaps even taking plants from one lobby and swapping with a plants lobby of another match to even things up. If we're looking for more even matches, then we need to find ways of calculating skill levels and go from there.