Best Of
Re: Any update on Romance Options/Food and Potion Hybridization? (NEW AMA answer inside 9/9/2025))!!
i hope it's not companions we been in too many battles together to even want to think about it 
bastion (just wish it was easier to move him out of harmful aoe) is just as good as a tank now as some end game players and deserves his life unbothered with any sort of romancing. and mirri is well..mirri..still my favourite companion but so far away from romance may aswell move to the moon. companions need some love alright but not that kind
bastion (just wish it was easier to move him out of harmful aoe) is just as good as a tank now as some end game players and deserves his life unbothered with any sort of romancing. and mirri is well..mirri..still my favourite companion but so far away from romance may aswell move to the moon. companions need some love alright but not that kind
Daoin
1
Re: Future of Battlegrounds
Thumbless_Bot wrote: »Thumbless_Bot wrote: »Unholy_Holywarrior wrote: »Thumbless_Bot wrote: »Unholy_Holywarrior wrote: »i hope they seriously remove 'capture the relic' from pvp queue rotation... i utterly detest that mode, it should be removed like they did that one mode where you can only respawn twice and have to spectate the rest of the match...
the issue ive seen with relic games, if your team doesnt score first, the next 20 mins is a complete waste of time, 90% of the time. every relic match i play comes down to who can spawn lock the other team first. its not fun, there is very little chance to turn the tides of a match with current meta of invincible, invisible lightning guys teleport stunning everywhere
also another thing what i think needs to be retooled is waiting 20 minutes in queue, to join a horrible losing match already in progress, with no hope of winning beyond the point of turning it around. seriously, joining those kinds of matches several times in a row, makes me quit the pvp battlegrounds grind for the day...
I am pretty sure the respawn twice thing still exists. It is 4v4 death match. Don't do 4s much any more so not certain.
Some people really enjoy relic. I am against removing content people enjoy.
I think the answer is to allow people the ability to queue for the mode(s) they want. You know, play the way you want and all that jazz. You might have to wait longer to get a game, maybe not, but at least you'll get a game you actually want to play. Could be like dungeon queues. If you want to run x dungeon you might have to wait, especially if you're not a tank, but you get the content you want. You could also queue into any bg, just like any dungeon, for the daily bonus and xp.
and i simply drop the match anytime i load in to a relic match. i simply do not enjoy it. mmr, if it means anything, be damned.
I know the feeling.From now on I'll be referring to the four reasons two-sided BG are so much harder to balance when compared to three-teams as ''four critical flaws''. Shorter this way.
Slightly more fitting than ''abominations''. Speaking of which, Domination weekend has been brutal. Does anyone know when will it end?
Green: 5,6,8
Orange: 1,3,4,5,8
Assigning each of these players to a team of newcomers in 3-sided BGs: Unpredictable and fun for everyone.
It's a shame it can't work in 2-sided BGs.
Looking at the stats here it looks like more than just an imbalance of “new” players being places against experienced ones.
Look at the 3rd player on the Orange team, 11 kills & 11 assists & no deaths while dealing 643k damage output.
Now player 8 on the Green team had a little less damage output, 541k but had no kills and only 3 assist.
Green team had one mid healer (in terms of output) versus the Orange team who had one mid healer and one heavy healer.
Thats your difference. If you consider that players 8 & 3 have similar damage output we should see a (somewhat) similar result between the two .. the swing factor here; extra healing. Player 8’s damage output was mitigated by persistent strong healing while Player 3 didn’t have the same level of healing.
Even with 3 sides BG’s, if you don’t have balanced healing you’re going to get steamrolled; it just won’t matter. One team with significantly more healing can bowl over one or two squads with ease.
I’ve been in matches where the opposing team had two Templar healers who would simply alternate being in their Ult so it was literally a persistent, constant, state of massive heals. That Ult is both mobile and un-interruptible. .. Nobody is going to counter that, I don’t care how much experience a player has. That’s because there’s no mechanic to address it. The Ult is cheap enough and players can get access to enough Ult gen that they can pop it too frequently; especially when there’s two of them. And since you can’t interrupt it, well, you’re porked.
The only counter to that is to have a similar level of healing yourself; this way it then comes down to group cooperation and strategy.
It’s been suggested that healing output be a measure factor in MRR balancing and I agree that would help; epically in matches exactly like this one. Where you guys were just out healed.
I disagree with the premise that same damage output should equal similar KDA. For example, I can go 10-0 in the same bg where another player goes 10-0 and I will almost always do far less damage. I normally do a third of the damage of other players because I dont use proc sets and the only aoe I use are lightning form and beetles.
In other words, damage numbers are usually not important.
I agree that healing is busted. However. I think a simple KDA based mmr will solve most problems. Can't solve.low population though.
KDA won’t solve anything because it won’t address the healing imbalances.
As for damage output; I’m not saying both of those players should have exactly the same outcomes, that’s silly, but, if we have two players with damage outputs that are comparable then their results should be “comparable” .. not exact, not the same, but comparable. .
In this context, those two players had way more damage outputs than the majority of players in that whole match yet only one of them had a high kill count. .. when you look at all of the values it tells a story and in this case it’s clear; the one team had far more significant healing than the other which was the largest contributor to the win.
Yes, I agree, there’s players who don’t have experience and lean on cheese gear or broken builds; but we see different numbers in those cases.
Imbalanced healing is probably issue #1 right now in BG’s, because with that in play no amount of extra teams will save the game … the proverbial ship is sinking and the lifeboats are all gone.
KDA will solve a lot. So will fixing healing and the associated scoring of healing.
I didn't say only inexperienced players run cheese. This isn't about cheese. Just commenting that damage output does not equate to kills. I was in a bg yesterday and got 14 kills and 0 deaths on about 600k damage. My teammate got 10 kills with 1.4 million damage and also died 4 times. Kda matters, not damage.
KDA will solve nothing unless healing is also a factor.
A player who’s DoT heavy will likely see a lot of damage output but few kills, this is because a DoT tick rarely scores the kill shots. Are we saying that player doesn’t contribute or should be ranked low because they’re not hitting kill shots? They’re dealing plenty of damage?
The big thing missing here is the A in KDA. If all you do is dot up a ton of enemies you are going to rack up twice as many assists. So matchmaking wise you could come up even based on weight. What gives an assist can also play into this where you could calculate oh hey, this person did 80% of the target's healthbar. Or hey this person did 5% of the player's healthbar he doesnt get an assist.
At the end of the day kills are what matters and will inherently be the main metric. Building in eso is far to complicated and unregulated for the vast majority of the playerbase and probably zos to understand. This is why you need a simple "what is actually the output" design philosophy.
Re: Update 48 Combat/Balancing Changes
Watched the U 48 Sneak peak twice.
Each Vengeance test is now beginning to feel more useless than the next. It's unimaginable how massive the failure of the lead dev to listen to the simplest and most common feedback from YEARS of posting and move forward.
The next Vengeance test may as well be skipped.
Then there's the pre-made loadout test coming. For 2 weeks.
10 years of free data and the devs still have less of an idea of how to fix Cyrodiil than the most experienced PVP players and guilds who have asked for literally the same thing ad-nauseum.
...but yeah, more meetings. He spoke about tuning abilities while adding a minor 33% execute buff. What tuning and how is this much damage minor?!!
#epicfail
Each Vengeance test is now beginning to feel more useless than the next. It's unimaginable how massive the failure of the lead dev to listen to the simplest and most common feedback from YEARS of posting and move forward.
The next Vengeance test may as well be skipped.
Then there's the pre-made loadout test coming. For 2 weeks.
10 years of free data and the devs still have less of an idea of how to fix Cyrodiil than the most experienced PVP players and guilds who have asked for literally the same thing ad-nauseum.
...but yeah, more meetings. He spoke about tuning abilities while adding a minor 33% execute buff. What tuning and how is this much damage minor?!!
#epicfail
Re: Overland Content Feedback Thread
twisttop138 wrote: »SilverBride wrote: »The point being given for the past 4 years was immersion and that there should be danger from overland mobs. If players are switching back to normal difficulty that is defeating the whole purpose. And if they are switching back and forth unrestricted for better rewards or for easy farming, that is manipulating the system.
Others may not agree, but this is how I see it, and I hope they are taking things like this into consideration.
No dear, that was not the point given. There were many and varied points given. Multitudes of people want different things for different reasons. Who are you to say what people want it for or dictate? It's frankly none of your business if I want to have harder quest boss and 5 seconds later go do an easy survey and then immediately after that do a hard quest. All through this thread you speak as if you're in some kind of control. Please stop pretending like you have the sum of all answers and know the reason people want things. You don't.
We all have the right to present our feedback as we see it.
Re: Future of Battlegrounds
lolI've been playing Domination weekend for two months.I don't think so. I'm still partial to the theory they want to force people to play the objective modes. It's better than just doing whatever for no reason.Did ZOS ever say why they keep doing this?
By the way, finally had time to write an intro to the thread.
Zos is doing everything they can to make sure pvp is anything but pvp. If it's not forcing objectives its introducing ridiculous proc sets that do the work for you. They want pvp to be a safe and happy place where intense competition is not allowed and dying is fun for everyone. Its a safe and happy place. They are the Planet Fitness of mmos.
Re: Future of Battlegrounds
Thumbless_Bot wrote: »Thumbless_Bot wrote: »Unholy_Holywarrior wrote: »Thumbless_Bot wrote: »Unholy_Holywarrior wrote: »i hope they seriously remove 'capture the relic' from pvp queue rotation... i utterly detest that mode, it should be removed like they did that one mode where you can only respawn twice and have to spectate the rest of the match...
the issue ive seen with relic games, if your team doesnt score first, the next 20 mins is a complete waste of time, 90% of the time. every relic match i play comes down to who can spawn lock the other team first. its not fun, there is very little chance to turn the tides of a match with current meta of invincible, invisible lightning guys teleport stunning everywhere
also another thing what i think needs to be retooled is waiting 20 minutes in queue, to join a horrible losing match already in progress, with no hope of winning beyond the point of turning it around. seriously, joining those kinds of matches several times in a row, makes me quit the pvp battlegrounds grind for the day...
I am pretty sure the respawn twice thing still exists. It is 4v4 death match. Don't do 4s much any more so not certain.
Some people really enjoy relic. I am against removing content people enjoy.
I think the answer is to allow people the ability to queue for the mode(s) they want. You know, play the way you want and all that jazz. You might have to wait longer to get a game, maybe not, but at least you'll get a game you actually want to play. Could be like dungeon queues. If you want to run x dungeon you might have to wait, especially if you're not a tank, but you get the content you want. You could also queue into any bg, just like any dungeon, for the daily bonus and xp.
and i simply drop the match anytime i load in to a relic match. i simply do not enjoy it. mmr, if it means anything, be damned.
I know the feeling.From now on I'll be referring to the four reasons two-sided BG are so much harder to balance when compared to three-teams as ''four critical flaws''. Shorter this way.
Slightly more fitting than ''abominations''. Speaking of which, Domination weekend has been brutal. Does anyone know when will it end?
Green: 5,6,8
Orange: 1,3,4,5,8
Assigning each of these players to a team of newcomers in 3-sided BGs: Unpredictable and fun for everyone.
It's a shame it can't work in 2-sided BGs.
Looking at the stats here it looks like more than just an imbalance of “new” players being places against experienced ones.
Look at the 3rd player on the Orange team, 11 kills & 11 assists & no deaths while dealing 643k damage output.
Now player 8 on the Green team had a little less damage output, 541k but had no kills and only 3 assist.
Green team had one mid healer (in terms of output) versus the Orange team who had one mid healer and one heavy healer.
Thats your difference. If you consider that players 8 & 3 have similar damage output we should see a (somewhat) similar result between the two .. the swing factor here; extra healing. Player 8’s damage output was mitigated by persistent strong healing while Player 3 didn’t have the same level of healing.
Even with 3 sides BG’s, if you don’t have balanced healing you’re going to get steamrolled; it just won’t matter. One team with significantly more healing can bowl over one or two squads with ease.
I’ve been in matches where the opposing team had two Templar healers who would simply alternate being in their Ult so it was literally a persistent, constant, state of massive heals. That Ult is both mobile and un-interruptible. .. Nobody is going to counter that, I don’t care how much experience a player has. That’s because there’s no mechanic to address it. The Ult is cheap enough and players can get access to enough Ult gen that they can pop it too frequently; especially when there’s two of them. And since you can’t interrupt it, well, you’re porked.
The only counter to that is to have a similar level of healing yourself; this way it then comes down to group cooperation and strategy.
It’s been suggested that healing output be a measure factor in MRR balancing and I agree that would help; epically in matches exactly like this one. Where you guys were just out healed.
I disagree with the premise that same damage output should equal similar KDA. For example, I can go 10-0 in the same bg where another player goes 10-0 and I will almost always do far less damage. I normally do a third of the damage of other players because I dont use proc sets and the only aoe I use are lightning form and beetles.
In other words, damage numbers are usually not important.
I agree that healing is busted. However. I think a simple KDA based mmr will solve most problems. Can't solve.low population though.
KDA won’t solve anything because it won’t address the healing imbalances.
As for damage output; I’m not saying both of those players should have exactly the same outcomes, that’s silly, but, if we have two players with damage outputs that are comparable then their results should be “comparable” .. not exact, not the same, but comparable. .
In this context, those two players had way more damage outputs than the majority of players in that whole match yet only one of them had a high kill count. .. when you look at all of the values it tells a story and in this case it’s clear; the one team had far more significant healing than the other which was the largest contributor to the win.
Yes, I agree, there’s players who don’t have experience and lean on cheese gear or broken builds; but we see different numbers in those cases.
Imbalanced healing is probably issue #1 right now in BG’s, because with that in play no amount of extra teams will save the game … the proverbial ship is sinking and the lifeboats are all gone.
KDA will solve a lot. So will fixing healing and the associated scoring of healing.
I didn't say only inexperienced players run cheese. This isn't about cheese. Just commenting that damage output does not equate to kills. I was in a bg yesterday and got 14 kills and 0 deaths on about 600k damage. My teammate got 10 kills with 1.4 million damage and also died 4 times. Kda matters, not damage.
KDA will solve nothing unless healing is also a factor.
You’re not thinking about the mechanics of HOW people score kills. In the state of BG’s post subclassing this is a big deal.
In your example ask yourself WHY you got so many more kills than your teammate despite them dealing far more damage output than you. This goes to mechanics.
A player who’s DoT heavy will likely see a lot of damage output but few kills, this is because a DoT tick rarely scores the kill shots. Are we saying that player doesn’t contribute or should be ranked low because they’re not hitting kill shots? They’re dealing plenty of damage?
A player who’s damage bypasses more of their opponents mitigation can wear down the opponents health without having to re-apply damage; a player with a toolkit of multiple crowd control varieties can also wear down an opponent without having to reapply as much damage due to interrupting their target.
Conversely, a player sitting back spamming Impale or Mages Wrath can score a high kill count with overall low damage output by sniping kill shots with executes and doing little else.
Just because someone has kills, low deaths, and assists doesn’t mean their contribution was as significant, same goes in the opposite; simply having high damage doesn’t always reflect contribution. In Deathmatch, maybe, but not the rest of the game modes.
We have players going into BG’s and treating them like their own personal dueling arenas rather than actually helping their team or playing objectives. We don’t want to matchmake those players simply because they go for kills.
KDA isn’t all encompassing. When we talk about the state of BG’s and how to address problems we can’t do that with blinders on with mechanics.
Context is key, damage output alone, no, doesn’t tell you squat .. damage output PLUS the context of KDA PLUS the context of group outgoing healing tells more about the mechanics in play that cause the imbalances and things like spawn camping.
KDA simply isn’t enough to match make anymore. Damage isn’t the major issue in BG imbalances it’s the healing factor. Yeah, we have cracked crit metas but healing is now determining more of the outcomes than anything else; whether it’s group heals or excessively strong self heals, or any combination thereof. Healing resources need a method to be more evenly spread between teams via MRR to address that.
NxJoeyD
1
Re: Update 48 Combat/Balancing Changes
We now know from the Reddit AUA that in 2026 we'll likely see Overland Difficulty implemented - why balance now?
Few months from now everything will need to be looked at anyway.
Let them work on what they think is the priority right now... We'll have needed balances down the road; game isn't in an unplayable state right now, we can wait a bit IMO.
I'm asking for a bare minimum of looking at numeric values of abilities, moving a slider left or right basically. This is not a time consuming task, nor a huge investment of ZOS' resources.
What happens if you add 5% more damage to Twisting Path/Refreshing Path in Shadow? Or increase their durations? Or to Shattering Spines? Or any number of virtually unused skills? In all likelihood, nothing that would come close to changing the meta. But it could make them slightly more competitive to where somebody might consider it an option, even if it still doesn't stack up with Assassination for pure damage, or Herald of the Tome, etc.
Some of these skills may be in skill lines more "intended" (for those classes that DO have defined skill lines) for tanks or healers, sure, but is a tank doing slightly more damage going to hurt anybody? It's much more likely a dps takes something like Shadow and now has a little bit more hp from passives and a now serviceable skill for doing some damage.
Why not implement small, easy changes on skills that we KNOW aren't commonly used?
Re: Future of Battlegrounds
Thumbless_Bot wrote: »Unholy_Holywarrior wrote: »Thumbless_Bot wrote: »Unholy_Holywarrior wrote: »i hope they seriously remove 'capture the relic' from pvp queue rotation... i utterly detest that mode, it should be removed like they did that one mode where you can only respawn twice and have to spectate the rest of the match...
the issue ive seen with relic games, if your team doesnt score first, the next 20 mins is a complete waste of time, 90% of the time. every relic match i play comes down to who can spawn lock the other team first. its not fun, there is very little chance to turn the tides of a match with current meta of invincible, invisible lightning guys teleport stunning everywhere
also another thing what i think needs to be retooled is waiting 20 minutes in queue, to join a horrible losing match already in progress, with no hope of winning beyond the point of turning it around. seriously, joining those kinds of matches several times in a row, makes me quit the pvp battlegrounds grind for the day...
I am pretty sure the respawn twice thing still exists. It is 4v4 death match. Don't do 4s much any more so not certain.
Some people really enjoy relic. I am against removing content people enjoy.
I think the answer is to allow people the ability to queue for the mode(s) they want. You know, play the way you want and all that jazz. You might have to wait longer to get a game, maybe not, but at least you'll get a game you actually want to play. Could be like dungeon queues. If you want to run x dungeon you might have to wait, especially if you're not a tank, but you get the content you want. You could also queue into any bg, just like any dungeon, for the daily bonus and xp.
and i simply drop the match anytime i load in to a relic match. i simply do not enjoy it. mmr, if it means anything, be damned.
I know the feeling.From now on I'll be referring to the four reasons two-sided BG are so much harder to balance when compared to three-teams as ''four critical flaws''. Shorter this way.
Slightly more fitting than ''abominations''. Speaking of which, Domination weekend has been brutal. Does anyone know when will it end?
Green: 5,6,8
Orange: 1,3,4,5,8
Assigning each of these players to a team of newcomers in 3-sided BGs: Unpredictable and fun for everyone.
It's a shame it can't work in 2-sided BGs.
Looking at the stats here it looks like more than just an imbalance of “new” players being places against experienced ones.
Look at the 3rd player on the Orange team, 11 kills & 11 assists & no deaths while dealing 643k damage output.
Now player 8 on the Green team had a little less damage output, 541k but had no kills and only 3 assist.
Green team had one mid healer (in terms of output) versus the Orange team who had one mid healer and one heavy healer.
Thats your difference. If you consider that players 8 & 3 have similar damage output we should see a (somewhat) similar result between the two .. the swing factor here; extra healing. Player 8’s damage output was mitigated by persistent strong healing while Player 3 didn’t have the same level of healing.
Even with 3 sides BG’s, if you don’t have balanced healing you’re going to get steamrolled; it just won’t matter. One team with significantly more healing can bowl over one or two squads with ease.
I’ve been in matches where the opposing team had two Templar healers who would simply alternate being in their Ult so it was literally a persistent, constant, state of massive heals. That Ult is both mobile and un-interruptible. .. Nobody is going to counter that, I don’t care how much experience a player has. That’s because there’s no mechanic to address it. The Ult is cheap enough and players can get access to enough Ult gen that they can pop it too frequently; especially when there’s two of them. And since you can’t interrupt it, well, you’re porked.
The only counter to that is to have a similar level of healing yourself; this way it then comes down to group cooperation and strategy.
It’s been suggested that healing output be a measure factor in MRR balancing and I agree that would help; epically in matches exactly like this one. Where you guys were just out healed.
I disagree with the premise that same damage output should equal similar KDA. For example, I can go 10-0 in the same bg where another player goes 10-0 and I will almost always do far less damage. I normally do a third of the damage of other players because I dont use proc sets and the only aoe I use are lightning form and beetles.
In other words, damage numbers are usually not important.
I agree that healing is busted. However. I think a simple KDA based mmr will solve most problems. Can't solve.low population though.
KDA won’t solve anything because it won’t address the healing imbalances.
As for damage output; I’m not saying both of those players should have exactly the same outcomes, that’s silly, but, if we have two players with damage outputs that are comparable then their results should be “comparable” .. not exact, not the same, but comparable.
And why’s that? Because it takes a degree of experience to land damage output numbers that climb that high. The crit meta builds can chunk health and cop kills without having to consistently reapply damage; that’s when we see high kill counts and lower damage output numbers. That instantly tells you the player was leaning on a build with little to no counters or just spamming an execute from the rafters, not experienced play.
Even some of the most broken, cheesiest gear sets require some degree of skill to apply damage output values that exceed 500k, especially on an imbalanced match because the match doesn’t last that long. Even the infamous RoA & Vicious Death combo requires a setup to apply broad damage against non-zergs. One can absolutely do it but they need the experience to do the setup.
In this context, those two players had way more damage outputs than the majority of players in that whole match yet only one of them had a high kill count. .. when you look at all of the values it tells a story and in this case it’s clear; the one team had far more significant healing than the other which was the largest contributor to the win.
Yes, I agree, there’s players who don’t have experience and lean on cheese gear or broken builds; but we see different numbers in those cases.
Imbalanced healing is probably issue #1 right now in BG’s, because with that in play no amount of extra teams will save the game … the proverbial ship is sinking and the lifeboats are all gone.
After that it’s overall mechanics but that’s an even bigger tackle.
NxJoeyD
1
Re: West Weald Treasure Map Leads are Bugged
Just wanted to follow up here. Our teams are still looking into this. We tested on PC and leads are dropping, specifically with West Weald treasure maps on the live server. So we are not seeing an issue there. Still investigating.
I think the issue is specific to second and potentially third drops of leads, except the grand tree lead, which drops a lot. I have 14 of these myself.
I used IA to grab 7 maps at a time. Thie first seven gave me six leads. I had every lead found via treasure maps my the second batch of 7 maps. I excavated all leads. These were all my first instances of leads outside of THE TREE.
Since then I have done 8 batches of 7 leads. Meaning I opened 56 treasure maps. I have gotten the tree again and one green lead.
Something is up with subsequent leads. Can we please test for this or confirm that this is the desired behavior by zos? 1 lead ( not counting that tree ) in 56 treasure maps is terrible and the likelihood that this is bad rng is exceedingly low.
@ZOS_Kevin
Im up to 63 treasure maps now with one 'second' lead. 63 treasure maps with 11 available leads is not rng
Something is definitely wrong with subsequent leads.
Can I get a refund on my archival fortunes while we're at it?
Re: West Weald Treasure Map Leads are Bugged
katanagirl1 wrote: »I’ve bought a few cheaper maps but I’m holding onto them until we hear something. I can’t stand seeing one more map without a lead.
lol same, i got 40 new maps for ww, but i'm not moving a finger until i hear a change
Asdara
1