Best Of
Re: This is how ESO recovers: a tale of two MMOs
3–5 minute queues in an MMO aren’t healthy, man. There’s plenty of data showing the population is dropping. Don’t turn this into politics, it’s a game, not a campaign.Yeah, you do need more people for it to be fun. Waiting 10 minutes for a 4v4 BG is ridiculous. I’ve got a life, do they really think people actually love BG that much?licenturion wrote: »I don't know where are this doom and gloom posting comes from in the recent weeks.
I find random dungeons, group finder trials, battlegrounds within 3-5 minutes. And when I put stuff up for sale I am usually annoyed that everything has sold withing 24 hours and I have to put up new stuff or my guild master is mad. XD
And when in public dungeons or delves I am usually 'oh no all the bosses are dead already' and have to wait. So the game is absolutely not dead.
I also expect a huge influx of players for the wall event and the next Vengeance test. Especially now that the summer season is over on the server that I play.
That's PC EU. Maybe on PC US everything is super dead, no idea... But you don't need 100 000 concurrent steam players to have fun in ESO.
Dock01
3
Re: Gatekeeping and the Beam Meta
Idk man, I haven't experienced this, because I spent time finding the right guilds. The right group of people is important, and I never pug vet. I know that some don't have the inclination to find a guild but it'll up your game experience so much.
As for heavy attacks. Some players are just stupid. My main guild in which I'm an officer, the co GM (husband and wife team) she is a HA sorc. She is an amazing player and has very high DPS, in the high 120s. We never have an issue with her pulling her weight and she has many hard mode clears. So I wouldn't be so quick to kick a HA build out of hand even if the play style isn't for me.
As for heavy attacks. Some players are just stupid. My main guild in which I'm an officer, the co GM (husband and wife team) she is a HA sorc. She is an amazing player and has very high DPS, in the high 120s. We never have an issue with her pulling her weight and she has many hard mode clears. So I wouldn't be so quick to kick a HA build out of hand even if the play style isn't for me.
Re: The Official Vengeance Test Campaign Feedback Thread (Test 3)
Some General feedback on the environment. For me personally the green lightening flashing every 15 or so seconds is really a no go. Maybe reducing the consistency or being able to disable this in game altogether somehow would be nice in future. It's almost an instantaneous migraine trigger for me. Makes the mode not very playable for more then 20 - 30 minutes.
Re: The Official Vengeance Test Campaign Feedback Thread (Test 3)
Why make it concurrent with the Undaunted Event? Populations will probably be far lower
Re: "Small Refine Method" AKA Time Wasting Pseudo Science Scam
frogthroat wrote: »Sorry to hear that. However...With the "small technique" I once refined 2.000+ Platinum without getting a single Chromium.
Being in small sizes or big chunks, such a terrible RNG shouldn't happen IMO.
(EDIT: I think I was near 4.000 refinement when it finally dropped. Only happened one time, but still... It's a huge bummer)
If it is truly random, this kind of bad luck should absolutely happen. Random does not mean uniformly distributed. Sometimes there might be 10 "jackpots" in a row, other times there might be a "dry spell" for 1000 mats.
In fact, if you would look at a list of random things, say, a 1000 die rolls or coin flips, you can easily see if it is truly thrown or if a human just wrote something random down because they couldn't be bothered to actually throw a die or a coin 1000 times. If the numbers are uniformly distributed with no more than maximum 7 same results in a row, it's probably human generated. If there's strange, long streaks in the mix, that is a good indication it is randomly generated.
That's why different music player providers have to tweak their "shuffle" function because truly random would not feel random.
My opinion tends to be that anything that has RNG (crates, leads, plans, mats, motif, gear...) should have a pity system. Such bad RNG shouldn't happen IMO, because it pushes away players.
Re: Amsterdam (missing) Goblet news?
Astronomical season
21 March – 21 June
Meteorological season
1 March – 31 May
If ZOS meant the meteorological spring season...
21 March – 21 June
Meteorological season
1 March – 31 May
If ZOS meant the meteorological spring season...
Re: Vengeance test key metric - player interest
the population went from near full to near empty.
AND THEN YOU BROUGHT THAT DEAD THING BACK TO LIFE?!
You literally shot your own foot, and then did it AGAIN!
AND THEN YOU BROUGHT THAT DEAD THING BACK TO LIFE?!
You literally shot your own foot, and then did it AGAIN!
Re: Most requested skill styles
BretonMage wrote: »The recent "sci fi shoot-em-up" thread had me thinking of one of my greatest wishes for Fatecarver: a more apocryphal or runic look to the beam, as suggested by @twisttop138 .
I have always wished Fatecarver looked less like a laser beam, and more like a stream of apocryphal magic. It could have little tendrils of tiny runes emanating from the beam, for example, to make it look more like Hermaeus Mora's magic.
Thanks for the credit @BretonMage but I think this is just a no brainer. I can make my beam blue and soon purple I hear but how about like green tendrils with, as you said, runes in it. Like...magic.
Re: Vengeance has officially ended the THREE BANNERS WAR
moderatelyfatman wrote: »I love how ZOS absolutely refuse to let players know what the pop cap is for Cyrodiil, as if it is some state secret.
We should try to find out by having an entire guild log into Cyrodiil when it is zero bars and see how many get in before there is a queue.
In 2013 it was officially stated at 600 per alliance, but due to performance issues they lowered that more and more. Live is around 75 players per alliance, though Vengeance has been estimated to be back up to about 300 per alliance.
Re: The Official Vengeance Test Campaign Feedback Thread (Test 3)
Were you able to successfully get into large-scale battles?
Yes/No, there were not enough players logged in to the campaign on the first day PCNA 8pm EST. More players were on by 10pm but still not pop locked. Fights were much larger than typical Greyhost, but not nearly as large as test 1 and 2. Day one we saw 3bar pop with no lag.
Did large-scale battles feel better latency-wise and how combat feels (responsive or not, fun or not, etc.)?
There was only a few truly large scale battles. There was no lag the whole night even during the aleswell trifaction seige around 9pm EST PCNA. A couple of my guildies had FPS issues even with 3070 series graphics cards. I had no issues all night with my 5070ti. I think a lot of people are still messing up FPS and ping issues.....kinda sad tbh that people cant distinguish client and serverside issues in 2025.
What you think of the simplified abilities?
The simplified abilites play fine, but we need morphs and stat changes like item sets, mundus, enchants. Skills having cooldowns is a dangerous precedent to have, it would be better to just have higher costs on these skills. Crit surge having a slotted berserk buff is also a dangerous precedent to have.....the whole point of vengeance is to not have extra tacked on effects. Once these doors are open what is to stop future patches from tacking on more buffs and then we will be right back to live pvp where every skill has multiple passive buffs tacked on.
IMO you should be focusing efforts to think of pvp specific gamerule changes to prevent lag.
What are your initial thoughts on Vengeance Test?
Do you have any general feedback?
This first day is a loss performance data capture wise. The only data to pull from is how many players are interested in vengeance during events. PvP players have no incentive to participate in the test and many are refusing to participate for fear that it will be implemented. Keep in mind that you NEED the pvp players to participate since THEY are the problem. PvE players simply do not know how to pvp and do not contribute the same amount of lag as pvp players would. With a diluted population any test data will be useless. Maybe we can cram 400 pve players on a server, but maybe only 250 or 300 pvp players are enough to cause lag.
You have to ensure that vengeance is not a longterm solution and it is just a means for answers. PvP people do not want to participate because they believe zos will see it as though people want vengeance as it currently is. There are three paths I see the game going at this point:
Yes/No, there were not enough players logged in to the campaign on the first day PCNA 8pm EST. More players were on by 10pm but still not pop locked. Fights were much larger than typical Greyhost, but not nearly as large as test 1 and 2. Day one we saw 3bar pop with no lag.
Did large-scale battles feel better latency-wise and how combat feels (responsive or not, fun or not, etc.)?
There was only a few truly large scale battles. There was no lag the whole night even during the aleswell trifaction seige around 9pm EST PCNA. A couple of my guildies had FPS issues even with 3070 series graphics cards. I had no issues all night with my 5070ti. I think a lot of people are still messing up FPS and ping issues.....kinda sad tbh that people cant distinguish client and serverside issues in 2025.
What you think of the simplified abilities?
The simplified abilites play fine, but we need morphs and stat changes like item sets, mundus, enchants. Skills having cooldowns is a dangerous precedent to have, it would be better to just have higher costs on these skills. Crit surge having a slotted berserk buff is also a dangerous precedent to have.....the whole point of vengeance is to not have extra tacked on effects. Once these doors are open what is to stop future patches from tacking on more buffs and then we will be right back to live pvp where every skill has multiple passive buffs tacked on.
IMO you should be focusing efforts to think of pvp specific gamerule changes to prevent lag.
- For instance vengeance has more aimed single target heals instead of massive aoe smartheals for everything. This is a great change.
- Another one would be to make all effects nolonger stack to cut down on large groups making a black hole singularity of effects during breach fights.
- Another would be to make hots drop off once you overheal to cut down on persistent abusive group healing.
- Another would be to limit crosshealing or make morphs specific for crosshealing and less efficient by comparison to group only heals.
- Another would be to make ults have no aoe caps, but put aoe caps on more spammed skills. Caps around 6 players is around the point where you stop to notice. Damage caps being 6 and healing caps being 3 would be fine I believe.
- dots are capped at 6-10 ticks, then timing and the tooltip could be played with instead.
- Maybe the first 3 or 4 skills in skillines are more streamlined as the bread and butter common spammable skills. Then have the ult, 5th and maybe the 4th skills as the more taxing unique defining skills.
- etc, there are so many more you could do where general gameplay is not impacted that much.
What are your initial thoughts on Vengeance Test?
- The notion of splitting pve and pvp skills is an amazing idea, mainly because you can now impose game rule changes as I listed above to target and remove unnecessary calculations. I think zos should use this split concept and apply it to live immediately. Doing tests on vengeance and live would be ideal to start to moving towards live implementations
- Simplifying skills and cutting out the bloat is a good idea not even just for performance, but combat has become so much more clear animation wise. New players will have a much easier time understanding what is happening to their character because they can see better. Ultimates and CC skills should be designed for visibility and counterplay.
- Making ACTIVE skills chosen for their ACTIVE effect is a good idea. Many live skills are only chosen for their passive effects which ruins the purpose of an ACTIVE skillbar.
- Healer skills being more AIMED single target is a huge step in the right direction. This is a huge boost in player skill.
- Player movement speed feels in a better spot. This movement speed is in tension with mechanics like gapclosers. The worrying part is that when you add back in speed buffs how do things stack? Live has the issue where there are so many easy choices most average builds sit at 150-170% movement speed without sprinting. So combat trivializes mechanics like gap closers and snares.
- Mount speed is another concern. Many new players learn to pvp through ganking. On live pvp most people have infinite mount stamina and travel at lightspeed on their mounts, making ganking gameplay impossible for people to learn through. Vengeance almost feels close to being right, however mount stamina is too high I think. There is going to be a sweetspot of balance where you either choose to risk being ganked and get to the fight faster or you play it safe and slow with a reserve of mount stamina.
- Template loadout pvp is a terrible idea longterm. People want to use item sets and enchants and potions and food and cp. I would design the loadout and perk system to be a simple window where people can "slot" gear, change their mundus with a dropdown menu, or change their enchants with a dropdown. Not only would this help teach new players building with an easy free menu, but you also wont *** off your pvp community into thinking their game is being ruined.
Do you have any general feedback?
This first day is a loss performance data capture wise. The only data to pull from is how many players are interested in vengeance during events. PvP players have no incentive to participate in the test and many are refusing to participate for fear that it will be implemented. Keep in mind that you NEED the pvp players to participate since THEY are the problem. PvE players simply do not know how to pvp and do not contribute the same amount of lag as pvp players would. With a diluted population any test data will be useless. Maybe we can cram 400 pve players on a server, but maybe only 250 or 300 pvp players are enough to cause lag.
You have to ensure that vengeance is not a longterm solution and it is just a means for answers. PvP people do not want to participate because they believe zos will see it as though people want vengeance as it currently is. There are three paths I see the game going at this point:
- Zos removes live pvp for template vengeance as is or with the loadout/perk system
- Zos gives up on vengeance after this test and the december test showing no population due to other events or options. Live pvp returns and lag intensifies until faction caps reduce cyrodil down from 100v100v100 all the way to 12v12v12
- Ideally Zos continues and slowly introduces more and more old systems back into vengeance and conducts test on live in parallel. Food, enchants, armor, passives, morphs, item sets. Ideally with pvp specific rules or performance balance in mind to keep things split from pve power creep. Maybe then we can land in the goldilocks zone where we have all our choices and build elements while still having open world pvp.
