Starting down players in BG = GG

#0 - June 17, 2008, 10:57 p.m.
Blizzard Post
I'm really sick of getting into a AB or EotS or hell even a WSG and seeing horde down half the team or sometimes more than half the team. By the time the game starts we are way behind because people are just queing in. After 4 years and billions of dollars i cannot believe blizzard hasnt fixed such a glaring imbalance. This needs to be fixxed. Same numbers on same teams. If the other team only has two people then the other team should only be allowed to que two members in. I'm sick and tired of losing games we had no control of winning due to being down players. Four years blizzard. Four years the que system has been awful. There's no excuse for it anymore.

FYI i dont care if this happens to Horde OR Alliance. It shouldnt be happening to either side.
#24 - June 18, 2008, 3:08 a.m.
Blizzard Post
The fact of the matter is that the queue system has been altered over the years since the implementation of Battlegrounds to be the most convenient to the most players with regards to selecting one's preferred Battleground, as well as the amount of time one must wait before entering a match.

An equal number of players from each faction at the top of the respective queues are selected at the launch of the Battleground. Each player selected is given a grace period to enter the match before they are automatically removed from the queue. The issue you're describing is a result of players not entering the match when selected, and not leaving the queue before this grace period ends. By the time new players from the top of the queue are offered the chance to join the match, it has already begun. Most of you understand this; I only mention this to acknowledge the primary cause of the situation discussed in this thread.

It can be very demoralizing when one team is forced to begin a battle with less members than the opposing team. I've been there and experienced that first-hand many times over.

There are inherent issues with both leaving the queue system as it is, and imposing further requirements before a match begins. For instance, if we keep the match from starting until each side has an equal number of players, everyone is forced to wait beyond the actual queue time to ensure enough players have accepted to enter the match.

The choice may well be between suspending a match indefinitely until both teams have the same number of players; and starting a match lopsided so players can get through the match and carry on with their gaming. I suspect not everyone would have the same preference given this choice, and the difference could greatly impact the style, reason, and enjoyment of the Battlegrounds for many.

That said, we aren't completely satisfied with the queue system as it stands.
#75 - June 18, 2008, 5:17 a.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:


seriously, almost every game I go into is starts with less than 2/3, whyll the alliance always seem to be full or maybe missing 1

so your saying several horde players, every game, dont join...BUT every alliance player does, come on now....just admit its blizzards way of making sure alliance don't whine and stop playing all the other BGs like they did AV, until you "fixed" it.

The queue system works exactly the same for both factions. I'm not sure if that's what you're asking me to admit, but it happens to be true.
#90 - June 18, 2008, 6:12 a.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:


next your going to tell me the alliance teams that seem almost hand picked are just a coincidence, arent u?

Yes, that's what I'm telling you. The idea that we would decide to implement a different queuing system for each faction just to make your life more difficult is... well, it's not a good idea.
#117 - June 18, 2008, 8:07 p.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:
Several people offered constructive responses and managed to get their point across.

And for this I thank you all. I will continue to review the feedback in this thread, though I will be unable to comment on specific suggestions at this time.
#123 - June 18, 2008, 8:26 p.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:


Back out response #7.

In my book it's #1. ;p