Fun and unpredictable matches are the one thing that can draw in newcomers to become interested in PVP itself (not just the daily). Unfortunately, what we have right now is the complete opposite, as the removal of the third team has introduced certain critical flaws that made battlegrounds very difficult to balance, and particularly unwelcoming to the vast majority of players. Thankfully, it's still possible to utilize all of the work that has been done so far, without throwing anything away. Not the new BGs, and certainly not the old ones. We begin by replacing the existing queue options like so:

1) 4v4v4 Objectives Queue, solos only

This is the most important step towards balancing Battlegrounds. Even if every objective mode was revamped by experienced BG players to actively encourage fighting, there would still be people only interested in deathmatch. All 12 players obviously need to be playing the same game. Can't have some playing chess, while others are playing checkers.

2) 4v4v4 Deathmatch Queue, solos only (maybe solos and duos)

There used to be a separate DM Queue years ago, but the extremely poor implementation meant that objective matches were hard to come by. The creation of the first queue would ensure this problem wouldn't happen again.

3) 8v8 Random Queue, solos only

Currently the most popular option. A few players might still choose it even after the better alternatives start rewarding daily XP, endeavors, golden pursuits, tokens and obscene amounts of transmutation crystals. Offering this queue alongside the first two is certain to provide valuable insight into what the future of Battlegrounds should look like.

4) 4v4 Group Queue

There is technically some merit in having a place where a Premade can test itself against another.
_______

• Three-Teams BGs for those who want them.
• Two-Teams BGs for those who want them.
• No more farming newcomers all day for lack of alternative.
• No more forcing players with different objectives into the same matches. No more mutual hatred between them.
• The community would, after all this time, finally have a chance to grow.

From Cyrodiil PvP perspective, ESO combat has always been a mess with all these animation cancelling, nonstop jumping/circling, la weaving, proc sets, OP builds going on. The latest changes scribing and especially subclassing have finally completely burned any hope that was left for this game's combat (congratulations!). Everyone running the same corpse + overload + merciless + streak combo with any number of proc sets (kjalnar being a favourite one).

That you can combine this stun, unpurgable, unblockable, stackable 40k+ damage (that you can cast from 30+ m away) and then still have 40k hp, be at speed cap, cast 6 times streak to get away or chase... There are thousands of combinations right now, but everyone plays a single build out of all. And when you nerf it, everyone will shift to another same build. There were at least some other skills and playstyles, classes in the game, now there is only 1 build everyone runs. And that the outcome would exactly be this was crystal clear the moment these brilliant changes where announced. What a joke, this game's pvp...

The buff to Hardened Ward was to make Sorcs more viable as PVE tanks because having a pet was not desirable.

An unfortunate consequence was that it made the ability completely OP in PVP.

With the introduction of subclassing, it was no longer necessary in PVE, so the change was reversed for the benefit of PVP balance.

I would suggest adapting to subclassing because it's a reality in Cyrodiil and it has resulted in a lot of incredibly strong builds.

Maybe others have thought this besides us. It's just a rough idea. So go easy on us.

Gear and weapons have a nirncrux (somewhat rare)item. Jewely doesn't have a crux or Bismuth item. Even if a lesser used trait is removed it could work. Adding flat damage percent of some type to your build after so many heavy nerfs might be welcomed. It'd surely be better than the current harmony or protective values and might make more traits viable. Otherwise, things are just the same old stale meta.

if not crux (maybe for lore reasons or timing) than maybe this new material called Bismuth. It could be that jewelry trait type which ties into the new expansion. My guild mates pretty much think it's a great idea to add a rarer and better trait to jewelry?


It may really be a good opportunity to tie either the base game OR the solstice chapter in with a new jewelry trait that probably should've been there already. Seriously more than one trait is severely lacking.

Have a good time playing

fizzybeef wrote: »

And if Microsoft is serious about backing this game, they need to start pushing for leadership changes at the top. Because right now, it just feels like we’re being milked with cosmetics while the core experience slowly dies. The players are still here—frustrated, vocal, and wanting to engage—but we’re not being given the tools or updates to do that.

It’s long past time for real change.

this aged like wine

“Stuck in combat” coming up on 10 years is really remarkable.

End game no longer exists, try to find a prog group for anything hard especially trials and it’s difficult. This was before the latest update and there’s been no improvement since. I cancel subscription I think because it’s just fallen apart.

So great, in my guilds (ps eu) discord another player just announced he stops playing because its so empty and dead in the endgame content we are participating (pvp in greyhost, 2 bars max at prime time on a sunday). 👍👍👍👍 Great how the devs take care of their game.

MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »

Rungar wrote: »

ADarklore wrote: »

MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »

I get the idea behind wanting more challenging overland content, but I don’t think making solo zones harder is the magic bullet for fixing ESO’s engagement or group content problems.

The real issue isn’t that overland is “too easy,” it’s that the game doesn’t encourage or reward group interaction in meaningful ways outside of dungeons, trials, and PvP. Making overworld bosses tougher might get a few more people to group up for a moment, but it won’t create lasting social interaction. Most players would just zerg it with randoms and move on.

And comparing ESO to games like Elden Ring or Monster Hunter doesn’t really work. Those are designed around difficulty and precision combat, while ESO is more about accessibility, exploration, and flexible playstyles. If you suddenly ramp up the difficulty of overland stuff, you risk alienating the casual base that actually sticks around.

What we need more than harder mobs is better systems to promote cooperation—like better guild tools, crossplay, cross-server grouping, world events that scale up with player involvement, or shared progression goals. Those things build community. Difficulty alone doesn’t.

While I understand where you're coming from... you point fails to accept that a very very large percentage of players just DO NOT want to have anything to do with groups or multi-player gameplay... period. So increasing incentives isn't going to make those players any more inclined to group than they already do.

i would wager they do, the content just isnt good enough to be worth it.

agree, they would if the content was good.

ADarklore wrote: »

MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »

I get the idea behind wanting more challenging overland content, but I don’t think making solo zones harder is the magic bullet for fixing ESO’s engagement or group content problems.

The real issue isn’t that overland is “too easy,” it’s that the game doesn’t encourage or reward group interaction in meaningful ways outside of dungeons, trials, and PvP. Making overworld bosses tougher might get a few more people to group up for a moment, but it won’t create lasting social interaction. Most players would just zerg it with randoms and move on.

And comparing ESO to games like Elden Ring or Monster Hunter doesn’t really work. Those are designed around difficulty and precision combat, while ESO is more about accessibility, exploration, and flexible playstyles. If you suddenly ramp up the difficulty of overland stuff, you risk alienating the casual base that actually sticks around.

What we need more than harder mobs is better systems to promote cooperation—like better guild tools, crossplay, cross-server grouping, world events that scale up with player involvement, or shared progression goals. Those things build community. Difficulty alone doesn’t.

While I understand where you're coming from... you point fails to accept that a very very large percentage of players just DO NOT want to have anything to do with groups or multi-player gameplay... period. So increasing incentives isn't going to make those players any more inclined to group than they already do.

Its maybe time to understand this isnt skyrim 2.0
It‘s a multiplayer game.
If you decide to treat it like a single player game thats on you, but this does not appear for everyone.

At first I was horribly disappointed that ESO wasn't skyrim 2.0. But after about six months I got good enough to PvP and began to realize how exponentially better ESO is than skyrim specifically because it's an MMO with a heavy social side to the game. Now ZOS seems to want to essentially eliminate PvP as we knew it and U35 killed the end game PvE.