Cp being added to BG !! ( as of now )

jaws343

I do find it funny that a few months ago all of the outrage on the forums was about BGs not having CP. And now people are up in arms over CP being enabled. Personally, I welcome the change, as it actually gives some builds a fighting chance against proc sets.

bubbygink

Riggsy wrote: »

lol, ZOS couldn't handle the negative reactions to adding CP so they moved this thread to the BG forum to bury it.

I hope that they at least give some kind of explanation for the change. They just sort of buried it in the patch notes in one line. No Dev comment or anything explaining why. And there was previously no indications that they would make such a switch. I don't get what changed. The Devs really need to weigh in.

HEBREWHAMMERRR

jaws343 wrote: »

I do find it funny that a few months ago all of the outrage on the forums was about BGs not having CP. And now people are up in arms over CP being enabled. Personally, I welcome the change, as it actually gives some builds a fighting chance against proc sets.

You do realize they nerfed nearly all proc sets, right? Not just the crit on them but they made majority of them a DoT or timed damage to make them avoidable damage?

Feanor

One of the biggest issues is the game modes are designed in a way that absolutely awards tanking up. Played in a Deathmatch (!) today when after 10 minutes the score was like 220-175-70. Trees all over the place and nobody dies for minutes at all. This will just get considerably worse with CP enabled.

Also I don't understand what's so hard about implementing ELO or Glicko. It's not rocket science.

Ihatenightblades

bubbygink wrote: »

Ihatenightblades wrote: »

Like i said go play Cod or just keep getting rekt in eso OR quit cryin like s baby and man up and L2P. 99.9 percent of the game included cp in every content. Why change that? L2p fam if i had to take a guess you are one of those people who cant kill anything in pvp so you ONLY do non cp bg so you can put on proc sets and burst people 50/50. That would be the only reason someone is as salty as you are for adding cp Bg and removing non cp. back to call of duty you go leave eso for the big boys ( haha jokes )

You are throwing around "L2P" at other players when you apparently keep dying to FREAKING PROC SETS??? HAHAHA If you are getting wrecked by proc sets, even after the nerf, then you are the one who desperately needs to L2P because I have friends who just picked up the game a month ago who don't have any problem dealing with proc sets in their nerfed state. And then the fact that you say that those who "cant kill anything in pvp" go to BGs for easy kills. LOL too funny. BGs are even competition, it is the most fair things can be. You are just used to running around in a huge Zerg in Cyro killing low-CP pug groups and are counting that as getting kills even though it takes no skill. Lets see your gamertag and videos/screenshots of you 1vXing in Cyro and dominating BGs if you're so good at killing in PVP...

Obviously, you are a big zerger who went into BGs and got wrecked (again, by proc sets? LMAO too funny) and are now blaming it on no-CP. If CP is added you are still going to get wrecked by players like me and the others in this thread. Then you'll go crying back to your Cyro zerg with another excuse and us actual competitive players will be left with BGs in a worse state with CP. This is exactly what we don't want and the point we are trying to make - those of you whining to get CP in BGs because you're getting wrecked need to realize that CP isn't going to help you but it will make BGs worse for those of us actually interested in some competition. But by all means, if you aren't a big zerger who struggles in BGs just let us know what your gamertag is or show us a couple videos or screenshots. I know you won't though because it would just prove us right.

I stopped reading at "YOU DIE TO PROC SETS?!?"

Where did i say that? I said proc sets dominated bg i was a proc set user myself and bg. Why? Because it was OP as hell go ask some of the best on xbox i would know

I enjoy all of the game and adding CP doesnt make me cry on forums like you are here. ( no offense) l2p and adapt.

CatchMeTrolling

I don't know why you guy's are going back and forth with a troll but I'll just say I've seen many player's that aren't at the cap that's way better than the average capped player. The ability to compete shouldn't be taken from them because people have a need for an advantage but somehow call themselves competitive.

montiferus

Ihatenightblades wrote: »

Because it was OP as hell go ask some of the best on xbox i would know

I enjoy all of the game and adding CP doesnt make me cry on forums like you are here. ( no offense) l2p and adapt.

Whom do you consider "some of the best on xbox"?

Also why are you so reticent to share your xbox gt?

JWillCHS

CatchMeTrolling wrote: »

I don't know why you guy's are going back and forth with a troll but I'll just say I've seen many player's that aren't at the cap that's way better than the average capped player. The ability to compete shouldn't be taken from them because people have a need for an advantage but somehow call themselves competitive.

Actually this is very much true. I've seen a few different times where players below level 50 were wrecking their CP630+ counterparts in BGs in full group fight situations.

Before Morrowind the only PvP I did was very casual as a zergling. I usually only had a couple hours or less to play per day. I hated the idea of wandering around Cyrodiil looking for small scale PvP. My Templar was so freakin' cancerous; Blazeplar. I thought it was the only the way I could effectively play.

But the no-CP battlegrounds really taught me how to play my Templar in 1vX situations. The only sustain I can rely on is with the natural magicka recovery, Vampirism(which I don't use anymore), and Channeled Focus. In the end Magicka Templars do not have good sustain in comparison to other classes and the changes in Morrowind made that even harder. Oh yeah, I used dual wielding and sword/shield. My heavy attacks don't restore magicka! I usually pop a potion, but when I'm out I AM OUT!

I got pretty competent with PvP[in my opinion]. During the past PvP event in the Imperial City I switched to the main CP campaign on PC/NA. The way I was performing with CP was even better especially with the magicka sustain. I also got more out of the defensive set I was using in full 5 piece light armor. I could literally stop attacking, and take a few seconds while thinking about my next move. There were moments when I would say, "I should be out of magicka right now" but I wasn't. I could heal even better, and longer!

FYI. I don't use Radiant Oppression, Javelin, or Dark Flare.

Still, I don't like the long fights with shield stacking Sorcerers. In BGs they could almost do the same thing but eventually they'd run out of juice. That still doesn't mean they're not killable. Most of them don't even know how to play.

While I don't like the idea of CP in BGs, I still think it'll be interesting. I'm hoping that CP-BG victories won't be determined by the time limit running out. The only time anything like that happens is in some of the most competitive BG games where even losing feels pretty good because the teams are so equal.

HEBREWHAMMERRR

JWillCHS wrote: »

CatchMeTrolling wrote: »

I don't know why you guy's are going back and forth with a troll but I'll just say I've seen many player's that aren't at the cap that's way better than the average capped player. The ability to compete shouldn't be taken from them because people have a need for an advantage but somehow call themselves competitive.

Actually this is very much true. I've seen a few different times where players below level 50 were wrecking their CP630+ counterparts in BGs in full group fight situations.

Before Morrowind the only PvP I did was very casual as a zergling. I usually only had a couple hours or less to play per day. I hated the idea of wandering around Cyrodiil looking for small scale PvP. My Templar was so freakin' cancerous; Blazeplar. I thought it was the only the way I could effectively play.

But the no-CP battlegrounds really taught me how to play my Templar in 1vX situations. The only sustain I can rely on is with the natural magicka recovery, Vampirism(which I don't use anymore), and Channeled Focus. In the end Magicka Templars do not have good sustain in comparison to other classes and the changes in Morrowind made that even harder. Oh yeah, I used dual wielding and sword/shield. My heavy attacks don't restore magicka! I usually pop a potion, but when I'm out I AM OUT!

I got pretty competent with PvP[in my opinion]. During the past PvP event in the Imperial City I switched to the main CP campaign on PC/NA. The way I was performing with CP was even better especially with the magicka sustain. I also got more out of the defensive set I was using in full 5 piece light armor. I could literally stop attacking, and take a few seconds while thinking about my next move. There were moments when I would say, "I should be out of magicka right now" but I wasn't. I could heal even better, and longer!

FYI. I don't use Radiant Oppression, Javelin, or Dark Flare.

Still, I don't like the long fights with shield stacking Sorcerers. In BGs they could almost do the same thing but eventually they'd run out of juice. That still doesn't mean they're not killable. Most of them don't even know how to play.

While I don't like the idea of CP in BGs, I still think it'll be interesting. I'm hoping that CP-BG victories won't be determined by the time limit running out. The only time anything like that happens is in some of the most competitive BG games where even losing feels pretty good because the teams are so equal.

It most definitely will be drawing out and won't feel like those pretty good games because the teams are so equal. It's going to be TDM games being won with 200 points, CTR being won with 1-2 scores of who caps first then let your tanks hold the relic for stalemate standoffs, crazy king will be tanks from all sides standing in points negating actual fighting and domination they should have maybe adjust the capture time or something because it will still be as is, a marathon around the map to different flags with no actual fighting. It's not going to be a good time and ZoS's complete silence on this terrible change is deafening.

ZOS_GinaBruno

To explain this change a bit, we've found (through data and feedback) that the majority of players tend to flock more toward CP-enabled campaigns, so we wanted to open that same selection for Battlegrounds and will be testing it out. We’ve considered adding an option between the two as some of you have suggested, but this would cause the population to become pretty divided and we want to make sure you can join Battlegrounds quickly. All that said, if we find this option simply isn’t popular or there’s a higher preference to have Battlegrounds be non-CP, we’ll simply change it back. Thanks for all the feedback so far!

Turelus

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

To explain this change a bit, we've found (through data and feedback) that the majority of players tend to flock more toward CP-enabled campaigns, so we wanted to open that same selection for Battlegrounds and will be testing it out. We’ve considered adding an option between the two as some of you have suggested, but this would cause the population to become pretty divided and we want to make sure you can join Battlegrounds quickly. All that said, if we find this option simply isn’t popular or there’s a higher preference to have Battlegrounds be non-CP, we’ll simply change it back. Thanks for all the feedback so far!

Thanks Gina, I'll be interested to see what happens but I really don't have love for CP enabled PvP.

Are you able to say if ZOS has also considered moving BG either to the base game or making it a separate DLC pack purchase? Currently at retail it still costs $40 just to have access to battlegrounds, opening it to the entire game might help with the queues and enable us to have both CP & No-CP options with reasonable queue times.

Kartalin

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

we've found (through data and feedback) that the majority of players tend to flock more toward CP-enabled campaigns

Just because 4 out of 5 lemmings prefer smashing into unkillable tanks repeatedly doesn't mean you should force the 5th one to do the same.

The 30 day no CP campaign would be more popular if the overnight population (oceanic prime time + NA crew purposely playing off hours) of one faction hadn't been actively killing the campaign all summer long.

Lexxypwns

Oreyn_Bearclaw wrote: »

RouDeR wrote: »

@Ihatenightblades
@Oreyn_Bearclaw
Tell me again how Unkillable tanks are dealing no dmg and CP is needed for trolling when if u know what are you doing in NO CP as a real tank (AKA Wardens) you can DESTROY your enemies .

Nice opportunity for self promotion I suppose...Would you like a cookie?

The point I was making is that one of the arguments made for removing CP and for the recent re balance of CP is that it allows for what are known as "troll" tanks. Tanks that arent killing anything but can soak up nearly limitless amounts of damage. They used to be very common in cyro, but are a little more scarce these days. We certainly dont want them in BGs That is not the same thing as a skilled tanky player that is getting kills.

More specifically, the ability to use CPs to cover holes in a build. As it stand

montiferus wrote: »

Ihatenightblades wrote: »

Because it was OP as hell go ask some of the best on xbox i would know

I enjoy all of the game and adding CP doesnt make me cry on forums like you are here. ( no offense) l2p and adapt.

Whom do you consider "some of the best on xbox"?

Also why are you so reticent to share your xbox gt?

Himself

And because he's nowhere near as good as he pretends to be

ajcorbell

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

To explain this change a bit, we've found (through data and feedback) that the majority of players tend to flock more toward CP-enabled campaigns, so we wanted to open that same selection for Battlegrounds and will be testing it out. We’ve considered adding an option between the two as some of you have suggested, but this would cause the population to become pretty divided and we want to make sure you can join Battlegrounds quickly. All that said, if we find this option simply isn’t popular or there’s a higher preference to have Battlegrounds be non-CP, we’ll simply change it back. Thanks for all the feedback so far!

But by doing this you are effectively telling me I can't play battlegrounds competitively for the months it will take me to get to the ever increasing CP cap. You are saying that if I want to participate in PVP content that I can either get destroyed by people who have a clear advantage over me, or I can join a campaign in Cyrodil that caters for this.

I bought Morrowind as I was excited about small scale PVP. It was advertised as being accessible from early in the game with CP disabled. I am disappointed that a CP160 player will likely be put off knowing they will likely not do well, and have the long road of 500CP to grind.

I appreciate why you have made the change, but you are also being incredibly short sighted by ring fencing content for a large portion of players.

Tyrion87

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

To explain this change a bit, we've found (through data and feedback) that the majority of players tend to flock more toward CP-enabled campaigns, so we wanted to open that same selection for Battlegrounds and will be testing it out. We’ve considered adding an option between the two as some of you have suggested, but this would cause the population to become pretty divided and we want to make sure you can join Battlegrounds quickly. All that said, if we find this option simply isn’t popular or there’s a higher preference to have Battlegrounds be non-CP, we’ll simply change it back. Thanks for all the feedback so far!

Thanks Gina for some clarification.

But... Cyrodiil and BGs are completely different environment. The fact that people usually choose CP Cyrodiil over non CP does not mean that people will also prefer CP BGs. That said, you really have to consider giving us a choice with regard to non-CP and CP BGs. This way you can make everybody happy and at the same time monitor the population of both.

CatchMeTrolling

On my platform there’s literally only one cp campaign that’s active. So if anything there’s a place for the cp people and no cp people but now with this change there won’t be a place at all for players that prefer no cp.

technohic

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

To explain this change a bit, we've found (through data and feedback) that the majority of players tend to flock more toward CP-enabled campaigns, so we wanted to open that same selection for Battlegrounds and will be testing it out. We’ve considered adding an option between the two as some of you have suggested, but this would cause the population to become pretty divided and we want to make sure you can join Battlegrounds quickly. All that said, if we find this option simply isn’t popular or there’s a higher preference to have Battlegrounds be non-CP, we’ll simply change it back. Thanks for all the feedback so far!

Any chance for looking at the population of all the Cyrodiil campaigns as well? Seems we have too many dead servers and 1 with too high of a pop cap to function.

ZOS_GinaBruno

technohic wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

To explain this change a bit, we've found (through data and feedback) that the majority of players tend to flock more toward CP-enabled campaigns, so we wanted to open that same selection for Battlegrounds and will be testing it out. We’ve considered adding an option between the two as some of you have suggested, but this would cause the population to become pretty divided and we want to make sure you can join Battlegrounds quickly. All that said, if we find this option simply isn’t popular or there’s a higher preference to have Battlegrounds be non-CP, we’ll simply change it back. Thanks for all the feedback so far!

Any chance for looking at the population of all the Cyrodiil campaigns as well? Seems we have too many dead servers and 1 with too high of a pop cap to function.

Yes, we're taking a look at the campaigns to see what should change for Update 16.

TequilaFire

What should change is a cool down on changing alliances as no one is playing the map anymore just alliance hopping and trolling the other side.

Dissentinel

Personally, I think having battlegrounds be non-CP makes it more accessible to less PvP oriented players. As a PvE player, I don't like having to change my CP every time I enter Cyrodiil. Non-CP Battlegrounds makes it easy to PvP without having to overhaul my build. If this change to Battlegrounds goes through, I don't think I will use them anymore, and will be very sad.

technohic

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

technohic wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

To explain this change a bit, we've found (through data and feedback) that the majority of players tend to flock more toward CP-enabled campaigns, so we wanted to open that same selection for Battlegrounds and will be testing it out. We’ve considered adding an option between the two as some of you have suggested, but this would cause the population to become pretty divided and we want to make sure you can join Battlegrounds quickly. All that said, if we find this option simply isn’t popular or there’s a higher preference to have Battlegrounds be non-CP, we’ll simply change it back. Thanks for all the feedback so far!

Any chance for looking at the population of all the Cyrodiil campaigns as well? Seems we have too many dead servers and 1 with too high of a pop cap to function.

Yes, we're taking a look at the campaigns to see what should change for Update 16.

Neoauspex

Leave the extra CP campaigns and tier them like English Premier League football

dimensional

Kartalin wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

we've found (through data and feedback) that the majority of players tend to flock more toward CP-enabled campaigns

Just because 4 out of 5 lemmings prefer smashing into unkillable tanks repeatedly doesn't mean you should force the 5th one to do the same.

The 30 day no CP campaign would be more popular if the overnight population (oceanic prime time + NA crew purposely playing off hours) of one faction hadn't been actively killing the campaign all summer long.

No such thing as unkillable tanks if you know how to play the game. And yes, it does mean that.

Dissentinel

Battlegrounds are meant to be activities that you can jump in and out of whenever you feel like it. If they are CP enabled, it means that players will have to adjust their CP each time they enter Battlegrounds, which is a major inconvenience.

HEBREWHAMMERRR

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

To explain this change a bit, we've found (through data and feedback) that the majority of players tend to flock more toward CP-enabled campaigns, so we wanted to open that same selection for Battlegrounds and will be testing it out. We’ve considered adding an option between the two as some of you have suggested, but this would cause the population to become pretty divided and we want to make sure you can join Battlegrounds quickly. All that said, if we find this option simply isn’t popular or there’s a higher preference to have Battlegrounds be non-CP, we’ll simply change it back. Thanks for all the feedback so far!

Appreciate the feedback and shedding some light on this, Gina. I hope that this does gain serious consideration. The answer seems obvious with how populated the CP campaigns are vs Non CP when it comes to cyrodill. I believe that cyrodill players seem to prefer large scale fighting in large groups, whereas, smallscale players want the most challenge and competitiveness. Not to be repetitive, but the non-CP format offers the most competitive platform and in a 4v4v4 format that's what is needed to keep battlegrounds relevant. Adding CP in to battlegrounds will extremely complicate something that is an amazing feature currently. It doesn't take much research to find the unkillable builds that litter cyrodill currently, if 10 people can't kill these people, 4v4v1 won't stand much of a chance as well. It just doesn't make sense.

I figured the reason for a push for all or nothing with the cp change was a population issue, that makes sense. However, I believe the pvp population in itself is pretty stagnant and aside from adding battlegrounds to the base game, I don't think this is going to drive up the numbers much, if only temporarily, maybe.

Has there been any consideration in a skill based matching / ranking system? I think this coupled with potentially better rewards would make leaps and bounds difference to increase population and could even increase Non CP PvP interest across the board.

Thanks again for the feedback. @ZOS_GinaBruno

Kartalin

dimensional wrote: »

Kartalin wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

we've found (through data and feedback) that the majority of players tend to flock more toward CP-enabled campaigns

Just because 4 out of 5 lemmings prefer smashing into unkillable tanks repeatedly doesn't mean you should force the 5th one to do the same.

The 30 day no CP campaign would be more popular if the overnight population (oceanic prime time + NA crew purposely playing off hours) of one faction hadn't been actively killing the campaign all summer long.

No such thing as unkillable tanks if you know how to play the game. And yes, it does mean that.

I agree, but your typical 4 person random group where each queued solo will not know how to handle them. With the spec I typically play I'm not going to pull it off alone if 3 randoms aren't cooperating, especially with 7 other players to worry about.
.

Datolite

1 m ore vote to have both CP and non CP.

Ridiculous.

exeeter702

Yeah your all digging cp bgs until your team consists of cp 30s and everyone else is 500+

exeeter702

Logistically, i underatand why they are making bgs cp enabled. Zos sees the numbers and participation is most definitely low. Perhaps they feel cp enabled will bring in more players....

I want them to offer both cp and non cp bgs at lvl 50+. I say this NOT because i think it is a solution because it isnt. I say this simply so we can simultaneously have one group shut up when their queue times skyrocket and also find out which of the 2 camps actually populates bgs between those that favor cp to those that prefer no cp bgs.

Sigtric

@ZOS_GinaBruno

If this is just a test then offer both and base conclusions on that.

Outright switching it is effectively shutting out anyone who is not at CP cap or comfortably near it.

It's effectively shutting down the only PVP in the game that anyone can join at any time and have a chance because it's a more equal footing.

It's a bad change.