Loading...
  OR  Zero-K Name:    Password:   

Forum index  > General discussion   >

New Lobby Size and Player Experience

7 posts, 174 views
Post comment
Filter:    Player:  
sort
AUrankSarathos
12 hours ago
Greetings, Lobsters

I appreciate the developers experimenting to improve the game, but I feel the recent lobby changes have had a severe negative impact and wanted to offer some constructive feedback.

The core issue is that large-scale battles, the main draw for many players, are now essentially dead. The 22-player cap forces more people to spectate, and the queue system creates a frustrating "dice roll" for anyone wanting to play consecutive games. The automatic 32-player split into 8v8s doesn't help, as the lobby rarely reaches 32, and players have consistently shown they would rather wait for a big match than be forced into a smaller one they don't want.

This new system is incredibly frustrating. When I lose the "dice roll" to stay in the game, my impulse is to just quit for the night. Why would we expect a new player to do anything else? Imagine their first experience at peak time is playing one game, then being moved to the waiting list. It just happens, and they have no idea why. A great experience.

While things like the map pool add to the frustration, if the goal is to retain players, I believe the focus is misplaced. The single biggest barrier to player retention is not our lobby system; it's community culture. I recently witnessed a veteran player dismiss a newcomer, saying "I don't care if new players learn or leave, I want more Palla players." That toxic mindset does infinitely more damage to player growth than any lobby mechanic.

Honestly, it feels like we're trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist. What exactly was the goal here? It feels like we're compromising on player satisfaction, retention, and the large-scale battles that make Zero-K unique, and I'm not sure why.
+2 / -0
FRrankmalric
12 hours ago
quote:
Honestly, it feels like we're trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist.
Not sure how I would call dismissing other peoples problems or preferences, but yes, this probably is part of the same culture issue where player of both sides of the spectrum just don't acknowledge the others.

I personally don't like the current experiment (because I don't think it's "fair" for everybody, which is the problem we started with), but I also personally avoid what I think are large boring games, which sometimes results in just quitting playing for the day. So, not doing anything also affects retention, just for other people.
+2 / -0
AUrankSarathos
12 hours ago
The thing is, small games, if they are your preference, are much easier to form. Is the problem that small games are not easy enough to form? Does this somehow help that change?

Its less that I'm trying to dismiss an issue, more that I wish to understand what precisely the issue is seen to be. Palla games happen when/because people want them to happen. There are small game lobbies, but they are simply not as popular.
+1 / -0
FIrankAdminAlcur
12 hours ago
(edited 11 hours ago)
quote:
This new system is incredibly frustrating. When I lose the "dice roll" to stay in the game, my impulse is to just quit for the night. Why would we expect a new player to do anything else? Imagine their first experience at peak time is playing one game, then being moved to the waiting list. It just happens, and they have no idea why. A great experience.

What about using a visible priority score to possibly move players to the end of the queue? Waiting or spectating would increase the score and partaking in a battle would reduce the score so it shouldn't force some people to stop playing after just one battle. The possible changes wouldn't necessarily be only 1 and -1.

quote:
The thing is, small games, if they are your preference, are much easier to form. Is the problem that small games are not easy enough to form? Does this somehow help that change?

I don't care for small games personally. I want to play big team games, but 16v16 battles are generally silly in my humble opinion.
+2 / -0

DErankmadez
12 hours ago
I really liked the matches I saw so far in TAW. It's nice that newcomers can go directly up in the player list and get a match.
+1 / -0
USrankQuietMute
6 hours ago
If small team matches were so popular, then they would happen much more often. If people really wanted to play 4v4 or smaller, then those rooms would be full and people would spectate those matches instead of joining the big room.

It really lookss like a very small number of players prefer small matches over large matches. If I'm wrong, then I expect the 4v4 room to constantly be full. It's not.

I really think the issue is that more skilled players do not like playing with less skilled players. The more skilled players have less ability to impact the match. The larger the match, the more diluted the efforts of any one player. The more skilled players tend to blame their less skilled teammates - forgetting the fact that the matchmaker balances the games very well. The larger the match, the better the balance.

It's human nature to blame somebody else when something goes wrong and when a less skilled player clearly plays worse than more skilled players, the blame game becomes all too tempting - even if it they do not blame anybody openly - they think it (I've done it).

It's also true that the pressure to perform well is greater in smaller matches so people do tend to perform better, which is what more skilled players like to see.

Is the goal to increase player count, is that secondary to creating a game that current core players want, or some other priority? I think that regardless of the stated goal, the primary goal is something other than increasing the player numbers, because the numbers are tiny. If 2.2k ELO players were numerous enough for constant small matches and the overall numbers enough for multiple 32 player matches all at the same time, then this discussion would not happen.
+1 / -0

GBrank[GBC]HarveyN
84 minutes ago
if 50vs50 were an option, that would be my preference.
Ever since the earliest days of playing both ZK it's earlier incarnation as CA and on other spring engine games before that, I have longed for the biggest pot of lobster.
+0 / -0