DUST Search - [Suggestion] Wait to start matches

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

[Suggestion] Wait to start matches

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Ima Leet Imperfects Negative-Feedback 321	Posted - 2012.11.07 01:02:00 - [1] - Quote there was a build where you would not start a battle until both teams were full. currently matches start as long as there is one person queuing up. i'm asking that you not start battles until there is at least half a team on each side this should prevent games that people join where its 80-80 and 00:00 time left heck, i'd even bet it'd help server load since it wont be creating so many empty battles! thanks
DJINN Riot 63	Posted - 2012.11.07 01:17:00 - [2] - Quote Ima Leet wrote: there was a build where you would not start a battle until both teams were full. currently matches start as long as there is one person queuing up. i'm asking that you not start battles until there is at least half a team on each side this should prevent games that people join where its 80-80 and 00:00 time left heck, i'd even bet it'd help server load since it wont be creating so many empty battles! thanks I second. Id take waiting in the lobby until a match filled up.
Ima Leet Imperfects Negative-Feedback 321	Posted - 2012.11.07 01:30:00 - [3] - Quote DJINN Riot wrote: Ima Leet wrote: i'm asking that you not start battles until there is at least half a team on each side I second. Id take waiting in the lobby until a match filled up. ty, +1. i dont think they need to wait until the match is Full but at least half. i can remember it was a bit painful waiting til the whole game filled up before it would start.
From Costa Rica Grupo de Asalto Chacal CRONOS. 66	Posted - 2012.11.07 05:55:00 - [4] - Quote So, yep way for at least 6 vs 6
Ima Leet Imperfects Negative-Feedback 321	Posted - 2012.11.07 21:02:00 - [5] - Quote From Costa Rica wrote: So, yep way for at least 6 vs 6 i think it would definitely help stop empty games from starting :)
shadowking2121 WarRavens 2	Posted - 2012.11.07 23:27:00 - [6] - Quote start when 6vs6. i could live with that. im really sick of being dumped into games and the other team has 5 corp mates and im the only player on the other team
Daedalus Stray Talos Incorporated 22	Posted - 2012.11.07 23:51:00 - [7] - Quote Ima Leet wrote: there was a build where you would not start a battle until both teams were full. currently matches start as long as there is one person queuing up. i'm asking that you not start battles until there is at least half a team on each side this should prevent games that people join where its 80-80 and 00:00 time left heck, i'd even bet it'd help server load since it wont be creating so many empty battles! thanks Please do this. I am not educated on how it will affect server load but if i had to bet I would bet it would help.
Ten-Sidhe Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 414	Posted - 2012.11.08 03:07:00 - [8] - Quote I like the partial teams to start, 6vs6 sounds good.
Ima Leet Imperfects Negative-Feedback 321	Posted - 2012.11.18 16:39:00 - [9] - Quote Ten-Sidhe wrote: I like the partial teams to start, 6vs6 sounds good. it seems to be getting worse now. almost constantly joining a game that is empty and has like 5 minutes or less left in the game... makes for a crappy SP/ISK game
Cyn Bruin Imperfects Negative-Feedback 653	Posted - 2012.11.18 16:48:00 - [10] - Quote Ima Leet wrote: there was a build where you would not start a battle until both teams were full. currently matches start as long as there is one person queuing up. i'm asking that you not start battles until there is at least half a team on each side this should prevent games that people join where its 80-80 and 00:00 time left heck, i'd even bet it'd help server load since it wont be creating so many empty battles! thanks -1 for making sense!

Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 1849	Posted - 2012.11.18 17:00:00 - [11] - Quote +1 from me.
Reimus Klinsman BetaMax. 320	Posted - 2012.11.18 17:20:00 - [12] - Quote Do you rememeber when we had to wait until the teams were full. Games would take 30 minutes to start. The forums were flooded with complaints. Things are okay as they are. Just stop adding people to matches that are 30-50% complete. That will shift them to the battles that have few players. Bam, two bugs fixed with one change.
Cross Atu Conspiratus Immortalis 775	Posted - 2012.11.18 18:56:00 - [13] - Quote Ima Leet wrote: there was a build where you would not start a battle until both teams were full. currently matches start as long as there is one person queuing up. i'm asking that you not start battles until there is at least half a team on each side this should prevent games that people join where its 80-80 and 00:00 time left heck, i'd even bet it'd help server load since it wont be creating so many empty battles! thanks +1 I'd also like to add that once a match starts it should be locked so no new players are added. The amount of time wasted by being dropped into matches where the outcome is essentially decided (or where the match is outright ending) is maddening.
Ydubbs81 RND Ahrendee Mercenaries Legacy Rising 886	Posted - 2012.11.18 19:06:00 - [14] - Quote Yes...wait for full teams. No sense in playing a match that started already and you don't get much ISK because of it.
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 1849	Posted - 2012.11.18 20:38:00 - [15] - Quote Cross Atu wrote: I'd also like to add that once a match starts it should be locked so no new players are added. The amount of time wasted by being dropped into matches where the outcome is essentially decided (or where the match is outright ending) is maddening. I don't think matches should be locked straight away. I think that, once a 50% mark on any objective is reached, the match should go into lockdown and prevent new arrivals. Either MCC loses shields, either team drops below 50% clone count, or the mission timer runs down to halfway.
Maken Tosch Planetary Response Organisation Test Friends Please Ignore 1594	Posted - 2012.11.18 20:43:00 - [16] - Quote Garrett Blacknova wrote: Cross Atu wrote: I'd also like to add that once a match starts it should be locked so no new players are added. The amount of time wasted by being dropped into matches where the outcome is essentially decided (or where the match is outright ending) is maddening. I don't think matches should be locked straight away. I think that, once a 50% mark on any objective is reached, the match should go into lockdown and prevent new arrivals. Either MCC loses shields, either team drops below 50% clone count, or the mission timer runs down to halfway. This. However, if you follow this thread posted by CCP Cmdr Wang, you will see that they are hinting at the possibility of enabling us to queue up to the next starting match. This might help. https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=381213#post381213
Moonracer2000 Subdreddit Test Alliance Please Ignore 314	Posted - 2012.11.19 00:11:00 - [17] - Quote We definitely need a minimum number of players (with balanced teams) to start. I've definitely enjoyed spawning into an empty match and capping half the flags before the other team gets out of their spawn but that just shouldn't be allowed to happen.
Ima Leet Imperfects Negative-Feedback 321	Posted - 2012.11.19 20:41:00 - [18] - Quote Reimus Klinsman wrote: Do you rememeber when we had to wait until the teams were full. Games would take 30 minutes to start. The forums were flooded with complaints. Things are okay as they are. Just stop adding people to matches that are 30-50% complete. That will shift them to the battles that have few players. Bam, two bugs fixed with one change. yes, this is why i said to wait to start the matches at half capacity, not waiting until full teams, because yes, the wait was sometimes unbearable. but waiting til half full should not be too much time consuming. Maken Tosch wrote: Garrett Blacknova wrote: Cross Atu wrote: I'd also like to add that once a match starts it should be locked so no new players are added. The amount of time wasted by being dropped into matches where the outcome is essentially decided (or where the match is outright ending) is maddening. I don't think matches should be locked straight away. I think that, once a 50% mark on any objective is reached, the match should go into lockdown and prevent new arrivals. Either MCC loses shields, either team drops below 50% clone count, or the mission timer runs down to halfway. This. However, if you follow this thread posted by CCP Cmdr Wang, you will see that they are hinting at the possibility of enabling us to queue up to the next starting match. This might help. https://forums.dust514.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=381213#post381213 yes, i can see where it would be useful to block people from joining a game that was just about over, its pointless to throw people in these types of matches.


Pages: 1 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.