Maintenance for the week of November 18:
• [IN PROGRESS] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – November 19, 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC) - 6:00PM EST (23:00 UTC)
• PlayStation®: EU megaserver for maintenance – November 19, 23:00 UTC (6:00PM EST) - November 20, 17:00 UTC (12:00PM EST)
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/668861
• [IN PROGRESS] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – November 19, 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC) - 6:00PM EST (23:00 UTC)
• PlayStation®: EU megaserver for maintenance – November 19, 23:00 UTC (6:00PM EST) - November 20, 17:00 UTC (12:00PM EST)
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/668861
3 v 3 pvp? E3?.
-
Lowbei✭✭✭✭✭Jade_Knightblazerb14_ESO wrote: »HippieTheGreat wrote: »So wait, they said earlier they were focusing PvP into Cyrodill. What happened? ...
Maybe they can give it context in Cyrodiil.
Have the battleground sign up NPC located in the Cyrodiil cities (Bruma, etc.) around the map. This would also promote combat in Cyrodiil as people could fight while signing up/while waiting on their match to begin.
When two teams from enemy factions sign up they are queued in.
They could have an AvA sign up option and an AvAvA sign up option.
The battleground could be the cities, where the two teams would fight to hold a central area for the match.
Team "wins control" over the city(strictly symbolic to decide the match winner); winning team gets alliance points for use in Cyrodiil.I'm talking out of my ass, I have no idea how they plan to implement arenas or battlegrounds in game, if they do.
Nope... all this would lead to is people sitting afk at the NPC taking up space for those that would engauge in PVP inside Cyrodiil.
Good News: I guess the population would look high on campaigns...
Bad News: The campaign itself is just full of afk Queing players...
WOW, this sounds just like World Of Warcaft with battle masters.... /facepalm
again... thats why you have a 24 hour timer on it to make it a daily gvg and not distract from cyrodiil.
this ensures that the fights mean more to the participants, and thus no rewards are needed0 -
Samadhi✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Jade_Knightblazerb14_ESO wrote: »HippieTheGreat wrote: »So wait, they said earlier they were focusing PvP into Cyrodill. What happened? ...
Maybe they can give it context in Cyrodiil.
Have the battleground sign up NPC located in the Cyrodiil cities (Bruma, etc.) around the map. This would also promote combat in Cyrodiil as people could fight while signing up/while waiting on their match to begin.
When two teams from enemy factions sign up they are queued in.
They could have an AvA sign up option and an AvAvA sign up option.
The battleground could be the cities, where the two teams would fight to hold a central area for the match.
Team "wins control" over the city(strictly symbolic to decide the match winner); winning team gets alliance points for use in Cyrodiil.I'm talking out of my ass, I have no idea how they plan to implement arenas or battlegrounds in game, if they do.
Nope... all this would lead to is people sitting afk at the NPC taking up space for those that would engauge in PVP inside Cyrodiil.
Good News: I guess the population would look high on campaigns...
Bad News: The campaign itself is just full of afk Queing players...
WOW, this sounds just like World Of Warcaft with battle masters.... /facepalm
Make it so that players have to be alive and outside of base to enter the battleground; more than 60 seconds dead or in the entry point bases and their group gets kicked from queue.
I proposed the NPCs be placed in contested zones so that players going to the area and signing up would have to also fight on map to do so.
The cities are already hotspots for PKing due to the PvE quests in the area.
I've never played World of Warcraft though, please feel free to provide further feedback on the idea.I literally devised the idea while I was in the process of posting it, I did not mean it as any form of serious suggestion
"If you want others to be happy, practice compassion. If you want to be happy, practice compassion." -- the 14th Dalai Lama
Wisdom is doing Now that which benefits you later.
0 -
maholi✭✭✭It would be AMAZING if they added this to live! It would add so much flavor to the game and a LOT of players would probably resub who wanted a more personal style of PVP. And if people didn't want to play, they wouldn't have to.0
-
liquid_wolf✭✭✭✭This is not arena pvp. It is simply something they have setup at specific shows.
At least... according to moderators.ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »We actually have a knowledgebase article about this. Quoting it below:Will the PvP we saw at E3 be added to the game?
We set this up specific for shows, such as E3, so we can get small groups working together for a quick PvP-style match.
While it’s a small taste of what our massive PvP is like in the live game, we thought it would be a fun way for folks to fight with / against each other with the limited amount of time they have at shows like this.
This mode isn't in the live game, as it’s something we specifically setup for small, quick matches. However, ESO is a living, ever-evolving game, and if we see lots of requests for smaller style PvP combat, it could be something we add in a later update.
0 -
Lowbei✭✭✭✭✭i really dont care what they call it. its arena pvp, and since we have been asking for it for ages, its coming soon.
0 -
0 -
Lowbei✭✭✭✭✭you mean like the forum approval of the ae caps? lol oh right, they dont care what the forum thinks.
arenas are coming to eso0 -
alexj4596b14_ESO✭✭✭Jade_Knightblazerb14_ESO wrote: »/wrist -_-
Atleast be 4v4, since that is the full group setup...
Even 4vs4 is small for MMO GvG.
I feel like 3v3 would allow for more balance, dar I say it. 3 means u have fewer ways too make the prefect pvp team.1 -
Samadhi✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭alexj4596b14_ESO wrote: »Jade_Knightblazerb14_ESO wrote: »/wrist -_-
Atleast be 4v4, since that is the full group setup...
Even 4vs4 is small for MMO GvG.
I feel like 3v3 would allow for more balance, dar I say it. 3 means u have fewer ways too make the prefect pvp team.
Maybe they made it 3v3 because they didn't want people at E3 to have a negative impression by playing a Nightblade in the demo."If you want others to be happy, practice compassion. If you want to be happy, practice compassion." -- the 14th Dalai Lama
Wisdom is doing Now that which benefits you later.
0 -
alexj4596b14_ESO✭✭✭alexj4596b14_ESO wrote: »Jade_Knightblazerb14_ESO wrote: »/wrist -_-
Atleast be 4v4, since that is the full group setup...
Even 4vs4 is small for MMO GvG.
I feel like 3v3 would allow for more balance, dar I say it. 3 means u have fewer ways too make the prefect pvp team.
Maybe they made it 3v3 because they didn't want people at E3 to have a negative impression by playing a Nightblade in the demo.
At lvl 11 in pvp I'm not having any big issues in 1v1 pvp, melee0 -
Lowbei✭✭✭✭✭alexj4596b14_ESO wrote: »alexj4596b14_ESO wrote: »Jade_Knightblazerb14_ESO wrote: »/wrist -_-
Atleast be 4v4, since that is the full group setup...
Even 4vs4 is small for MMO GvG.
I feel like 3v3 would allow for more balance, dar I say it. 3 means u have fewer ways too make the prefect pvp team.
Maybe they made it 3v3 because they didn't want people at E3 to have a negative impression by playing a Nightblade in the demo.
At lvl 11 in pvp I'm not having any big issues in 1v1 pvp, melee
good to hear!
ignore these bads. they will always whine about pvp because they are bad at it.0 -
alexj4596b14_ESO✭✭✭alexj4596b14_ESO wrote: »alexj4596b14_ESO wrote: »Jade_Knightblazerb14_ESO wrote: »/wrist -_-
Atleast be 4v4, since that is the full group setup...
Even 4vs4 is small for MMO GvG.
I feel like 3v3 would allow for more balance, dar I say it. 3 means u have fewer ways too make the prefect pvp team.
Maybe they made it 3v3 because they didn't want people at E3 to have a negative impression by playing a Nightblade in the demo.
At lvl 11 in pvp I'm not having any big issues in 1v1 pvp, melee
good to hear!
ignore these bads. they will always whine about pvp because they are bad at it.
Lol, I'm not starting a troll or anything, however the skills not going off is annoying. And people need learn too stop looking at what they "CANT" do but what they can.0 -
Samadhi✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭alexj4596b14_ESO wrote: »alexj4596b14_ESO wrote: »Jade_Knightblazerb14_ESO wrote: »/wrist -_-
Atleast be 4v4, since that is the full group setup...
Even 4vs4 is small for MMO GvG.
I feel like 3v3 would allow for more balance, dar I say it. 3 means u have fewer ways too make the prefect pvp team.
Maybe they made it 3v3 because they didn't want people at E3 to have a negative impression by playing a Nightblade in the demo.
At lvl 11 in pvp I'm not having any big issues in 1v1 pvp, melee
Oh, you're new.
You came at a good time; they are finally starting to fix Nightblade's bugged skills after months of issues.
I hope you have fun with it.
"If you want others to be happy, practice compassion. If you want to be happy, practice compassion." -- the 14th Dalai Lama
Wisdom is doing Now that which benefits you later.
0 -
Yasha✭✭✭✭@Zubba all is possible. Experience says that everyone will be sitting inside a safe city queuing up for Arena non-stop and Cyrodil will be deserted. I like small scale fights WAY more then large, but I like to do it in a chaotic environment of world pvp. Instanced queued pvp and open world just don't mix well
This fear is unfounded- WvW works fine in GW2 and RvR was more popular than battlegrounds in WAR.
You guys that think OW pvp will die if some form of structured pvp were to be implemented may well be right- luckily ESO has no OWPVP- it has Cyrodiil which is a form of WvW.
0 -
Nijjion✭✭✭✭The problem with arenas it gives yet another incentive to do something else if your campaign alliance is getting owned.
Guesting already does that when people are losing they leave to another server and not fight back.
We don't need arenas to help with that.NijjijjioN - DK - AR27NijjioN - NB -Daggerfall CovenantThe Nice Guys GuildEverQuest -> Dark Age of Camelot -> Ragnarok Online -> Cabal Online -> Guild Wars 1 -> Warhammer Online -> Vindictus -> SWTOR -> Tera -> Guild Wars 2 -> Elder Scrolls Online ->
Eagerly awaiting Camelot Unchained.0 -
lao✭✭✭✭SwampRaider wrote: »Nox_Aeterna wrote: »Mate considering how poorly balanced this game is right now, adding arenas is zen playing with fire.
I do hope they have the good sense to balance it more first.
I want 24 vs 24 vs 24 or 12 vs 12 vs 12 battlegrounds, before they include arenas.
WoW was ruined, once they tried gonig the E sports route and balanced all classes for Arenas.
Wouldn't 3 DK's be an unbeatable Arena team? hell, they'd get nerfed to [Snip] just by palying in arena's alone.
WoW was ruined the day blizzard announced to make it. and not only WoW was ruined but the entire mmo genre....
0 -
lao✭✭✭✭
You probably have not played many mmos that tried to mix world and instanced pvp. World/cyrodil pvp will be dead, except for people farming/swapping emperor.
it will be dead anyway once the pre VR campaign is in the game so they might aswell add arenas then. wont change anything tho. this game is done. dead and buried.1 -
Sallakat✭✭✭If I were to get insulted about anything that is said in the forums, I would feel that way because of being called WoW player due to my preference on the arena pvp regarding ESO :P
Don't you arena pvp haters have any other reasoning besides a) WoW, b) balance issues? You just make yourself look like those Facebook people that thought they were so witty while spamming "elder scrolls offline" into every maintenance notification ZOS makes.
Where it seems that the anti-arena players threaten to leave the game (don't really get that tho) and offend people with that used-up WoW aspect, at least good amount of the pro-arena players seem to just wish the game to succeed even more with getting more and different type of content for many type of players to indulge in.
Edited by Sallakat on 12 June 2014 12:17Rebuilt - Aldmeri Dominion
Kaia Linnea - templar
Ruusu - sorcerer
Aino - nightblade0 -
Yasha✭✭✭✭Why do people have a problem with 3v3 battles? : S As an mmo-noob i don't get it..
The main arguments are:
1) Arena or battlegrounds kill open world pvp because players just sit in town and queue for the pvp games
2) It is easier to assess imbalances between classes when there is some form of structured pvp (arenas/BGs).
Some people also just seem to have some irrational fear about it that is hard to define.
Anyway, most people who are dead against structured pvp due to point 1 are probably drawing their point of reference from games that have OWPVP, whereas they really should be looking at examples like WAR and GW2 which have a more similar pvp set up. In those games the large scale "open" pvp was/is more popular than the structured pvp.
For people that see point 2 as an issue, although on the surface it seems like ridiculous reasoning, the concern is homogenization of abilities and balancing for pvp affecting other parts of the game.0 -
lao✭✭✭✭Why do people have a problem with 3v3 battles? : S As an mmo-noob i don't get it..
The main arguments are:
1) Arena or battlegrounds kill open world pvp because players just sit in town and queue for the pvp games
2) It is easier to assess imbalances between classes when there is some form of structured pvp (arenas/BGs).
Some people also just seem to have some irrational fear about it that is hard to define.
Anyway, most people who are dead against structured pvp due to point 1 are probably drawing their point of reference from games that have OWPVP, whereas they really should be looking at examples like WAR and GW2 which have a more similar pvp set up. In those games the large scale "open" pvp was/is more popular than the structured pvp.
For people that see point 2 as an issue, although on the surface it seems like ridiculous reasoning, the concern is homogenization of abilities and balancing for pvp affecting other parts of the game.
the reason why arena is bad is cos its boring. its competitive yes but with only half of the skill elements. guess thats why lowbei likes it. its easy but it lacks everything that makes pvp fun. its generic maps so no dynamic terrain that can be used to your advantage. you always know what ur gonna face so no element of surprise. you never get jumped from the side or the back so its always a straight up inc. you cant get adds which require you to dynamically adjust ur play. arena is competitive pvp for awful players rly, nothing more. thats why awful players want it.1 -
Lowbei✭✭✭✭✭
lol so much rage
you are just mad that even if arenas came, you still wouldnt be able to compete because no good guilds will group you.
less butthurt pleaseEdited by Lowbei on 12 June 2014 15:230
