Enabling CP has detrimentally changed Battleground playstyle

DosPanchos

Lexxypwns wrote: »

Blobsky wrote: »

Honestly I like CP, I feel it creates more build diversity and specialism... But being a min maxer I guess that is just my thing

Except it does the opposite, fewer builds are competitive in CP than no-CP since you can afford to sacrifice damage in a no-CP environment and win off out-sustaining. This is blatant misinformation that gets propagated, I assume, because people think more places to spend more points is "build diversity" when it's just simply not. In fact, if your CP aren't spent mapped out properly then you're losing efficiency and placing yourself at a competitive disadvantage, therefore lowering the amount of viable options.

As a stamplar moving from non-cp to cp (I have 500cp) I completely agree with this! It's meta or nothing in my brief cp experience.

OdinForge

I didn't play battlegrounds before CP was added, and I haven't played since they were added.

The problem with battlegrounds isn't CP, the problem is how poorly the system was implemented in the first place. So many people wanted battlegrounds and it's cool that we have it now, but what's the point if it wasn't designed properly.

Datthaw

leandro.800ub17_ESO wrote: »

Couple comments:

-Enable CP has made the diference between pre made groups and others even greater
-CP has enable the permablock and role dodge around objects a cancer
-BG has turned into a 2 shot kill very fast pace mechanics
-Dont know if related or not but very long load screens on death respawn are now present

ZOS please consider a option to chose between CP and no CP and also battle type, to avoid long qeues please put a number for the total amount of people on that mode (aplaying and waiting) so pleople can know whats the population

Hahaha ask zos to add options? I think that's impossible. If they could then the would have just added cp and game mode options from the start.

mistermagic87b14_ESO

As a player that just came back to the game, I really really hope to see this change reverted. I hope it is a test that fails. I don't know how any brand new player or returning player can be expected to enjoy this aspect of the game (One reason I wanted to come back and a major reason I purchased the Marrowind expansion)

+1 Please revert this change.

Beardimus

^ agreed @mistermagic87b14_ESO I know alot of lower CP players completely put off the whole content because of it. When you are 200CP 690CP seems a lifetime away even with focused grinding (which many, me included, don't want to do) and I had some 300CP buddies before who were top ten leaderboards consistently now moved away.

WillhelmBlack

It needs changing back. I really miss the only competitive PvP we had in this game, even if it's 4v4v4, it was the closest thing we had.

Just another zergfest now.

Beardimus

WillhelmBlack wrote: »

It needs changing back. I really miss the only competitive PvP we had in this game, even if it's 4v4v4, it was the closest thing we had.

Just another zergfest now.

Spot on @WillhelmBlack . Just hope they listen.

TarrNokk

Imo the games haven't changed. I was a bad pvp player in BGs before CP and I am still bad with CP. Unkillable Tanks have been unkillable before CP as they are still. Most matches have no Teamplay except premade groups before CP and now.
If ZOS would implement the choice for CP/nonCP everyone would be happy and ZOS itself could readout the logs to see what is preferred.

Soris

No CP is just not fun for a game that is designed for CP. It feels like you are gimping yourself in every possible way.

Though I personally dislike CPs in general. BUT since the game is balanced around CP, I'd much rather to have CP enabled battlegrounds than noCP. Because some classes/builds perform way better than the others in noCP settings. CPs balance that issue.

JWillCHS

TarrNokk wrote: »

Imo the games haven't changed. I was a bad pvp player in BGs before CP and I am still bad with CP. Unkillable Tanks have been unkillable before CP as they are still. Most matches have no Teamplay except premade groups before CP and now.
If ZOS would implement the choice for CP/nonCP everyone would be happy and ZOS itself could readout the logs to see what is preferred.

While I agree with you when it came to tanky builds, or individuals warding off death in no-CP. You were less likely to sustain your wall of defense. Whether that be healing, shield stacking, blocking, roll dodging, sprinting, or any combination of the 4. People died. The Stam Warden wasn't dodging rolling 5 times, bursting players down, then getting hit himself below 10% health before completely healing to 100% HP. Doing all of this while "sprinting" circles around players.

Beardimus

Spot on ^

And just in general, aside from individuals the game play has definitely changed, that's without question. Enough of us can feel it

Lexxypwns

JWillCHS wrote: »

TarrNokk wrote: »

Imo the games haven't changed. I was a bad pvp player in BGs before CP and I am still bad with CP. Unkillable Tanks have been unkillable before CP as they are still. Most matches have no Teamplay except premade groups before CP and now.
If ZOS would implement the choice for CP/nonCP everyone would be happy and ZOS itself could readout the logs to see what is preferred.

While I agree with you when it came to tanky builds, or individuals warding off death in no-CP. You were less likely to sustain your wall of defense. Whether that be healing, shield stacking, blocking, roll dodging, sprinting, or any combination of the 4. People died. The Stam Warden wasn't dodging rolling 5 times, bursting players down, then getting hit himself below 10% health before completely healing to 100% HP. Doing all of this while "sprinting" circles around players.

The CP system is blatantly skewed towards prolonging fights, it takes about 15 seconds of looking at the passives available to realize this. You can add significant offensive damage, but nowhere close to the amount of defense/sustain you can pack in

JWillCHS

Lexxypwns wrote: »

JWillCHS wrote: »

TarrNokk wrote: »

Imo the games haven't changed. I was a bad pvp player in BGs before CP and I am still bad with CP. Unkillable Tanks have been unkillable before CP as they are still. Most matches have no Teamplay except premade groups before CP and now.
If ZOS would implement the choice for CP/nonCP everyone would be happy and ZOS itself could readout the logs to see what is preferred.

While I agree with you when it came to tanky builds, or individuals warding off death in no-CP. You were less likely to sustain your wall of defense. Whether that be healing, shield stacking, blocking, roll dodging, sprinting, or any combination of the 4. People died. The Stam Warden wasn't dodging rolling 5 times, bursting players down, then getting hit himself below 10% health before completely healing to 100% HP. Doing all of this while "sprinting" circles around players.

The CP system is blatantly skewed towards prolonging fights, it takes about 15 seconds of looking at the passives available to realize this. You can add significant offensive damage, but nowhere close to the amount of defense/sustain you can pack in

Whether it's damage, resource sustain, or defense. I always felt that increasing anything like that beyond 5% through the Champion System was too much. Where are the nodes for increase gold earned, or raising the drop rate of rare items? Why is almost everything centered around the amount of damage you can do or defend against.

mistermagic87b14_ESO

Soris wrote: »

No CP is just not fun for a game that is designed for CP. It feels like you are gimping yourself in every possible way.

Though I personally dislike CPs in general. BUT since the game is balanced around CP, I'd much rather to have CP enabled battlegrounds than noCP. Because some classes/builds perform way better than the others in noCP settings. CPs balance that issue.

While people who have these points won't mind and want to be able to choose to use them and choose their playstyle - players like myself that are returning, with the intent to purchase the game and are attempting to be competitive, are at a huge and laughable disadvantage. As it stands now, at CP254, I might as well be afk the 3 matches I tried, because I definitely couldn't kill someone, and at most lived for 30 seconds.

By all means, if the player base that has the CP wants CP bgs, give it to them, but allow me and other returning players the ability to compete and play a big portion of why I bought the expansion in the first place.

I don't think it's fair to ask returning or NEW players to be max level and max usable CP before they can consider being competitive in BGS.

Lexxypwns

JWillCHS wrote: »

Lexxypwns wrote: »

JWillCHS wrote: »

TarrNokk wrote: »

Imo the games haven't changed. I was a bad pvp player in BGs before CP and I am still bad with CP. Unkillable Tanks have been unkillable before CP as they are still. Most matches have no Teamplay except premade groups before CP and now.
If ZOS would implement the choice for CP/nonCP everyone would be happy and ZOS itself could readout the logs to see what is preferred.

While I agree with you when it came to tanky builds, or individuals warding off death in no-CP. You were less likely to sustain your wall of defense. Whether that be healing, shield stacking, blocking, roll dodging, sprinting, or any combination of the 4. People died. The Stam Warden wasn't dodging rolling 5 times, bursting players down, then getting hit himself below 10% health before completely healing to 100% HP. Doing all of this while "sprinting" circles around players.

The CP system is blatantly skewed towards prolonging fights, it takes about 15 seconds of looking at the passives available to realize this. You can add significant offensive damage, but nowhere close to the amount of defense/sustain you can pack in

Whether it's damage, resource sustain, or defense. I always felt that increasing anything like that beyond 5% through the Champion System was too much. Where are the nodes for increase gold earned, or raising the drop rate of rare items? Why is almost everything centered around the amount of damage you can do or defend against.

But consider this, on a build that you plan to kill people on you spend blue points on damage, maybe a nice passive like tactician and exploiter. Green tree has some regen for both stam and magika, lots into befoul if you've got a defile, break free reduction, dodge roll cost, block reduction. Then the red tree you stack into mitigation. On a tank build, you've got points in blessed in the blue tree increasing your survivability where a more offensive build needs that damage. Then finally, the green tree, you don't need as much into stam regen allowing more bloack cost reduction. Now, consider that the blue tree adds slightly more offense to balanced offensive builds than it does defense to those same builds and that when you take 70+ points out of offense and add them into a defensive star(blessed) it allows you to achieve more defense from the CP system than you can possibly achieve offense.

I mean, there's other issues with the CP system, but this is what supports the tank meta so much imo. Combine that with the poor choices they've made in changing block cost and you've got a situation where you can gain significantly more defense than you can offense when stacking one or the other to the extreme. The difference is that when stacking offense to the extreme you have a viable counter in small scale objective gameplay, whereas building the extreme opposite end of the spectrum defensively allows you to create a build without a reasonable counter in small scale objective based gameplay.

Beardimus

Lexxypwns wrote: »

JWillCHS wrote: »

Lexxypwns wrote: »

JWillCHS wrote: »

TarrNokk wrote: »

Imo the games haven't changed. I was a bad pvp player in BGs before CP and I am still bad with CP. Unkillable Tanks have been unkillable before CP as they are still. Most matches have no Teamplay except premade groups before CP and now.
If ZOS would implement the choice for CP/nonCP everyone would be happy and ZOS itself could readout the logs to see what is preferred.

While I agree with you when it came to tanky builds, or individuals warding off death in no-CP. You were less likely to sustain your wall of defense. Whether that be healing, shield stacking, blocking, roll dodging, sprinting, or any combination of the 4. People died. The Stam Warden wasn't dodging rolling 5 times, bursting players down, then getting hit himself below 10% health before completely healing to 100% HP. Doing all of this while "sprinting" circles around players.

The CP system is blatantly skewed towards prolonging fights, it takes about 15 seconds of looking at the passives available to realize this. You can add significant offensive damage, but nowhere close to the amount of defense/sustain you can pack in

Whether it's damage, resource sustain, or defense. I always felt that increasing anything like that beyond 5% through the Champion System was too much. Where are the nodes for increase gold earned, or raising the drop rate of rare items? Why is almost everything centered around the amount of damage you can do or defend against.

But consider this, on a build that you plan to kill people on you spend blue points on damage, maybe a nice passive like tactician and exploiter. Green tree has some regen for both stam and magika, lots into befoul if you've got a defile, break free reduction, dodge roll cost, block reduction. Then the red tree you stack into mitigation. On a tank build, you've got points in blessed in the blue tree increasing your survivability where a more offensive build needs that damage. Then finally, the green tree, you don't need as much into stam regen allowing more bloack cost reduction. Now, consider that the blue tree adds slightly more offense to balanced offensive builds than it does defense to those same builds and that when you take 70+ points out of offense and add them into a defensive star(blessed) it allows you to achieve more defense from the CP system than you can possibly achieve offense.

I mean, there's other issues with the CP system, but this is what supports the tank meta so much imo. Combine that with the poor choices they've made in changing block cost and you've got a situation where you can gain significantly more defense than you can offense when stacking one or the other to the extreme. The difference is that when stacking offense to the extreme you have a viable counter in small scale objective gameplay, whereas building the extreme opposite end of the spectrum defensively allows you to create a build without a reasonable counter in small scale objective based gameplay.

Great explanation. Articulate as ever man!

#DownWithCPinBG

Waffennacht

A gold increase CP ... My PvE build would max that sucka out

grannas211

I just wish they would lower the teams to 4v4 instead of 4v4v4

DosPanchos

I'm seeing the BG population decrease fairly rapidly on PS4 compared to the first 2 weeks. Anyone else seeing this? (I'm basing it off of the frequency I see the same players).

Lexxypwns

DosPanchos wrote: »

I'm seeing the BG population decrease fairly rapidly on PS4 compared to the first 2 weeks. Anyone else seeing this? (I'm basing it off of the frequency I see the same players).

It could also be attributed to holidays and server stability issues

JWillCHS

Waffennacht wrote: »

A gold increase CP ... My PvE build would max that sucka out

I know people want to increase their effectiveness, but I feel ZoS could have made the nodes more interesting. Especially when it comes to making the game feel more like the Elder Scrolls. And the cap keeps growing every patch. Why?

You already allows the classes to spec into any armor or weapon. There's no actual cooldown on abilities. The soft cap has been removed and you have the Champion Point system. How many other variable have to be added to the game where the meta has uncontrollable extremes? At one point they were even considering spell crafting.

What I mentioned above are reasons why I like the Elder Scrolls Online. But come on y'all. . .

This game since day 1 one has always been easy to take advantage of. I've never seen a MMORPG in my 20 years patch in fixes that completely break how the people play indirectly.

And it's not just CP battlegrounds but the under level 50 bracket. You should not be level 19 playing against level 46 players.

It really sucks to see many other games in the genre have more controlled environments. And the one that has "The Elder Scrolls" name on it is all over the place. But I guess that's how it is when you couldn't figure out what type of game you originally wanted to create in the first place consider everyone's initial response in 2014.

killingspreeb16_ESO

CP just ruined BG for me,before it was fun but right now well not so much,im waiting for the patch that atleast let us to queue cp or no cp bg before play again.

Also cp have a place in PvE but in PvP when you fight other player and you stand no chance because of CP is not fun also what if a new player want to buy the game?after reading that you might take months to actually be competitive the said guy will just buy another game,even WoW changed the Artifact Power gain.

So i think we have some choice for example

1)remove cp from BG(for me they should remove CP from PvP but it's just my opinion)

2)allow people to Queue for both game mode CP or NoCP

3)the catch up need to be changed so new or returning player can feel competitive before getting bored of grinding cp and actually catch up

4)remove cp and add a new system for PvP with perks that are not just "Increase X by X%"example when you crit reduce the cd on your potion(stupid example i know but it's just to give the idea)and is allowed when you reach 160 cp or even at level 10 when you can join the PvP

Beardimus

I persevered at first but the funs gone. Been in there weekly since MW dropped and now drifted away, mainly vMSA for the double drops.

Gutted really. But am testing out Sotha Sil. It's just quiet when I'm on

WIsh Shor was no-CP..think it would get pop being a 7 day and no CP that way.

Blobsky

Cinbri wrote: »

Blobsky wrote: »

Lexxypwns wrote: »

Blobsky wrote: »

Lexxypwns wrote: »

Blobsky wrote: »

Honestly I like CP, I feel it creates more build diversity and specialism... But being a min maxer I guess that is just my thing

Except it does the opposite, fewer builds are competitive in CP than no-CP since you can afford to sacrifice damage in a no-CP environment and win off out-sustaining. This is blatant misinformation that gets propagated, I assume, because people think more places to spend more points is "build diversity" when it's just simply not. In fact, if your CP aren't spent mapped out properly then you're losing efficiency and placing yourself at a competitive disadvantage, therefore lowering the amount of viable options.

Cp AND no cp still have a balance of sustain. People are just afraid to give up the "extra" suatain for more damage and learn to suatain properly. I personally have over 100M ap across chars and see no sustain difference in cp and non cp, sinply by adjusting to more damage in CP and playing properly

I don't mean sustain in the sense of direct resource sustain, but rather the fact that all the extra mitigation and defense and the fact that the CP system favors surviving over killing. All CP does is artificially inflate TTK on good players and artificially lower it on bad players, that's not balance, its trash gameplay.

I know you're a skilled player, I just can't understand how you think a system designed to artificially increase defense and resource sustain while offering lower values of damage relatively is good for the health of an objective, controlled, environment. I see you switched to your mDK though and perhaps that explains why you're enjoying CP more, since the balled up brawls suit your playstyle. If you were still on your mageblade consistently I wonder how you'd feel about the changes to the environment.

@Thogard WoE been strong, PC NA just late to the party

I play magNB too, only I finished all achievements there now. And yes I certainly like it as a means to further seperate strong and weak players. If somebody is stronger, builds smarter and pays closer attention to every 1% they can get out of a build then they frankly deserve to win. My only negative for CP is that lower level players have a natural disadvantage, rather than the skill and intelligence advatages a full CP, well customised setup can offer. Im aware that my opinions are probably disliked by many, but they are my opinions all the same.

Also worth mentioning, as it seems ignored im my initial post, I happily play in no cp as well. I simply like the further customisation that CP offers.

It is contradiction itself. CP system meant to carry people, cover their weak spots by investing in particular passives and as result removing such thing as perfectioning builds and decreasing gap between good build and perfect build.
Perfect build don't need cp since it don't have way to improve anymore, while average weak builds with being carried by cp will be equal to perfect. This can be seen on example of blazing trollplars - on no-cp such troll tank can be destroyed in a 10-15 seconds; on cp it will take more than minute just to deal with someone who spam one skill and hold right mouse button.

The "perfect build" is simply fine tuned with cp... another area of tiny detail for those with mathematical minds. You know me, im happy fighting with or without... I just like the extra detail personally. Its not about covering weaknesses, more about getting every sinlge 1 point of damage, survivability etc

Beardimus

Hi @ZOS_GinaBruno I recall you posted that adding CP was a test.

Are we close to knowing the results of the test? 99% of BG players from launch dislike CP and there are multiple threads. But I appreciate you will be looking at population to prove the popularity?

I know we saw alot of new names drop in from Vivec, however many have left due to the dull nature of the games now, bigger skills gap and alienation of lower CP Players. So just curious if there's any view of reverting or at least two queues (not ideal as pop already thin)

WillhelmBlack

Beardimus wrote: »

Hi @ZOS_GinaBruno I recall you posted that adding CP was a test.

Are we close to knowing the results of the test? 99% of BG players from launch dislike CP and there are multiple threads. But I appreciate you will be looking at population to prove the popularity?

I know we saw alot of new names drop in from Vivec, however many have left due to the dull nature of the games now, bigger skills gap and alienation of lower CP Players. So just curious if there's any view of reverting or at least two queues (not ideal as pop already thin)

Morrowind is 50% off so they're gonna see an increase in popularity. I just hope they're looking at the real figures.

BroanBeast1215

Beardimus wrote: »

Hi @ZOS_GinaBruno I recall you posted that adding CP was a test.

Are we close to knowing the results of the test? 99% of BG players from launch dislike CP and there are multiple threads. But I appreciate you will be looking at population to prove the popularity?

I know we saw alot of new names drop in from Vivec, however many have left due to the dull nature of the games now, bigger skills gap and alienation of lower CP Players. So just curious if there's any view of reverting or at least two queues (not ideal as pop already thin)

where are you getting 99% from?(your head im guessing) there are multiple threads by some of the same people and most players that play the game don't also comment on the forums so there is no way to know if they dislike them.

Im still seeing plenty of new players everytime I que up

Thogard

BroanBeast1215 wrote: »

Beardimus wrote: »

Hi @ZOS_GinaBruno I recall you posted that adding CP was a test.

Are we close to knowing the results of the test? 99% of BG players from launch dislike CP and there are multiple threads. But I appreciate you will be looking at population to prove the popularity?

I know we saw alot of new names drop in from Vivec, however many have left due to the dull nature of the games now, bigger skills gap and alienation of lower CP Players. So just curious if there's any view of reverting or at least two queues (not ideal as pop already thin)

where are you getting 99% from?(your head im guessing) there are multiple threads by some of the same people and most players that play the game don't also comment on the forums so there is no way to know if they dislike them.

Im still seeing plenty of new players everytime I que up

TBH I think a lot of the new players are in BGs because of the transmute crystals... RftW is by far the easiest way to get them, and BGs are the easiest access to PvP... cyrodil gives more AP, but takes longer to get into a group and to where you need to be.

Beardimus

^ true that.

And @BroanBeast1215 across all those threads you are about the only person I hear that likes CP in BG so....

86% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

BroanBeast1215

Beardimus wrote: »

^ true that.

And @BroanBeast1215 across all those threads you are about the only person I hear that likes CP in BG so....

86% of all statistics are made up on the spot.

well cant have the whole subforum be an echo chamber for you guys

there are many ppl that like or prefer cp over nCP, they just don't post about it on the forums lol most of the population of eso doesn't post on forums.