ZOS we need more information about you pvp tests and plans.

LarsS

I am GM of on of the oldest, largest, and most active pvp guilds on the EU server. This is my view, but I think I know what many experienced pvp players thinks about your upcoming tests.

Its good that you try to do something about the lag in pvp, but there is a serious lack of communication from your side, regarding your goals and possible alternatives to the announced tests. While we complain about the lag, we also love the fluid game play and the large range of possible playing styles in cyro. Most of the test alternatives will fundamentally change the game so we have fair reasons to be worried. Its thus bad policy not to answer our questions and even suspend some peoples form forum because they question your motifs. Please do answer our questions, in fact I have difficulties to understand your inabilities to communicate, its hardly good for your business.

Below you find some questions which I hope you will answer.
- Are these tests there to collect data or do you plan to implement one of the solutions? We need a clear statement from you if you want to reduce our worries.
- Will you consult with us before you make a major change of the game mechanics? If you do not you may lose what you have left of experienced pvp players, some may not even participate in the tests, thus making the results less useful.
- Is it possible to expand/improve the servers? If not explain why, is it a cost issue or a technical issue?
- Why don’t you try to reduce the lag by shutting of the proc sets? It would not fundamentally change the game play.
- You say that the problem is that the sustain has increased with time, why don’t you test the reduction of regeneration in cyro? It should be possible to do with the battle spirit function and it would not fundamentally change the game play.

Pinja

I think they kinda hinted at the answer to one and two in the main Dev post. These aren't necessarily lazy blanket solutions, but if the test works they'll go back and audit abilities giving them supposedly workable cool downs. They also kinda dramatically said something along the lines of this test would dictate what direction they pick. IE: ability audits. Not to say they wont pts and get feedback, but the feedback would have to geared toward the given direction, I'm guessing, to be accepted.

I was going to write a post with my own question than stumbled on this here. Some valid concerns I have are:

• What does lag look like from the server side? Are you simply checking to see if the server's are running hot?
  • What type of data are you collecting?
• What if the tests 'cool' the servers, but doesn't fix the lag players experience?
  • Are you going to be checking feedback and game play to validate results?
  • Would you simply ignore bad feedback that doesn't correlate to the data?
  • Would you or could you do an audit of the many in game glitches?
• Plenty of lag instances involve the server mismanaging player position. Can this be seen in your data?
  Examples:
  • People flying away.
  • People getting hit with abilities from absurd ranges.
  • A hit registering when a player is out of their original position.
  • Snail Marches

Joy_Division

LarsS wrote: »

I am GM of on of the oldest, largest, and most active pvp guilds on the EU server. This is my view, but I think I know what many experienced pvp players thinks about your upcoming tests.

Its good that you try to do something about the lag in pvp, but there is a serious lack of communication from your side, regarding your goals and possible alternatives to the announced tests. While we complain about the lag, we also love the fluid game play and the large range of possible playing styles in cyro. Most of the test alternatives will fundamentally change the game so we have fair reasons to be worried. Its thus bad policy not to answer our questions and even suspend some peoples form forum because they question your motifs. Please do answer our questions, in fact I have difficulties to understand your inabilities to communicate, its hardly good for your business.

Below you find some questions which I hope you will answer.
- Are these tests there to collect data or do you plan to implement one of the solutions? We need a clear statement from you if you want to reduce our worries.
- Will you consult with us before you make a major change of the game mechanics? If you do not you may lose what you have left of experienced pvp players, some may not even participate in the tests, thus making the results less useful.
- Is it possible to expand/improve the servers? If not explain why, is it a cost issue or a technical issue?
- Why don’t you try to reduce the lag by shutting of the proc sets? It would not fundamentally change the game play.
- You say that the problem is that the sustain has increased with time, why don’t you test the reduction of regeneration in cyro? It should be possible to do with the battle spirit function and it would not fundamentally change the game play.

If you've been here since launch, then you already know the answers to all of these questions. Would it make any difference if Lambert came out and said what we already know is the case?

He's not going to come out and admit this stuff becuase once he does, all the subscriptions and emotional investment people have in the game on the hope and belief (or, one might say, self-delusion) instantly evaporates.

Tammany

Joy_Division wrote: »

If you've been here since launch, then you already know the answers to all of these questions.

But without personal topic we won't know he is a GM of on of the oldest, largest, and most active pvp guilds on the EU server.

TineaCruris

Joy_Division wrote: »

LarsS wrote: »

I am GM of on of the oldest, largest, and most active pvp guilds on the EU server. This is my view, but I think I know what many experienced pvp players thinks about your upcoming tests.

Its good that you try to do something about the lag in pvp, but there is a serious lack of communication from your side, regarding your goals and possible alternatives to the announced tests. While we complain about the lag, we also love the fluid game play and the large range of possible playing styles in cyro. Most of the test alternatives will fundamentally change the game so we have fair reasons to be worried. Its thus bad policy not to answer our questions and even suspend some peoples form forum because they question your motifs. Please do answer our questions, in fact I have difficulties to understand your inabilities to communicate, its hardly good for your business.

Below you find some questions which I hope you will answer.
- Are these tests there to collect data or do you plan to implement one of the solutions? We need a clear statement from you if you want to reduce our worries.
- Will you consult with us before you make a major change of the game mechanics? If you do not you may lose what you have left of experienced pvp players, some may not even participate in the tests, thus making the results less useful.
- Is it possible to expand/improve the servers? If not explain why, is it a cost issue or a technical issue?
- Why don’t you try to reduce the lag by shutting of the proc sets? It would not fundamentally change the game play.
- You say that the problem is that the sustain has increased with time, why don’t you test the reduction of regeneration in cyro? It should be possible to do with the battle spirit function and it would not fundamentally change the game play.

If you've been here since launch, then you already know the answers to all of these questions. Would it make any difference if Lambert came out and said what we already know is the case?

He's not going to come out and admit this stuff becuase once he does, all the subscriptions and emotional investment people have in the game on the hope and belief (or, one might say, self-delusion) instantly evaporates.

Not a fan of the band, but the player using the user name has been a long term positive force in game, and their comments are always helpful and wholly accurate.

SweepsAllClowns

You have listed 5 quite clear questions in bolded letters, I guarantee they've been noted and someone has read them, still the communication is absolutely nonexistent as usual and it's not even a slightest surprise anymore.

Joy_Division

TineaCruris wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

LarsS wrote: »

I am GM of on of the oldest, largest, and most active pvp guilds on the EU server. This is my view, but I think I know what many experienced pvp players thinks about your upcoming tests.

Its good that you try to do something about the lag in pvp, but there is a serious lack of communication from your side, regarding your goals and possible alternatives to the announced tests. While we complain about the lag, we also love the fluid game play and the large range of possible playing styles in cyro. Most of the test alternatives will fundamentally change the game so we have fair reasons to be worried. Its thus bad policy not to answer our questions and even suspend some peoples form forum because they question your motifs. Please do answer our questions, in fact I have difficulties to understand your inabilities to communicate, its hardly good for your business.

Below you find some questions which I hope you will answer.
- Are these tests there to collect data or do you plan to implement one of the solutions? We need a clear statement from you if you want to reduce our worries.
- Will you consult with us before you make a major change of the game mechanics? If you do not you may lose what you have left of experienced pvp players, some may not even participate in the tests, thus making the results less useful.
- Is it possible to expand/improve the servers? If not explain why, is it a cost issue or a technical issue?
- Why don’t you try to reduce the lag by shutting of the proc sets? It would not fundamentally change the game play.
- You say that the problem is that the sustain has increased with time, why don’t you test the reduction of regeneration in cyro? It should be possible to do with the battle spirit function and it would not fundamentally change the game play.

If you've been here since launch, then you already know the answers to all of these questions. Would it make any difference if Lambert came out and said what we already know is the case?

He's not going to come out and admit this stuff becuase once he does, all the subscriptions and emotional investment people have in the game on the hope and belief (or, one might say, self-delusion) instantly evaporates.

Not a fan of the band, but the player using the user name has been a long term positive force in game, and their comments are always helpful and wholly accurate.

They are for sure "dark" as their singer had legit emotional trauma, but I do think their music is nevertheless provocative and powerful. A common combination with art historically. But to each their own.

If i had to guess, ZOS knows full well templars and other current mechanics will be 100% unplayable during these tests and they have zero intention of implenting one of the four tests as is in a future update. They just want to completely remove the AoE variable for their data collection. And they dont know what they will do until the tests come back, which is another reason they cant really answer the OP.

If you still plan on playing ESO, then dust off your stamina toon whose heals (vigor, which isnt spammed, rally) arent affected by the tests and take the single target executioner morph so you dont drive yourself crazy during the tests.

TineaCruris

Joy_Division wrote: »

TineaCruris wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

LarsS wrote: »

I am GM of on of the oldest, largest, and most active pvp guilds on the EU server. This is my view, but I think I know what many experienced pvp players thinks about your upcoming tests.

Its good that you try to do something about the lag in pvp, but there is a serious lack of communication from your side, regarding your goals and possible alternatives to the announced tests. While we complain about the lag, we also love the fluid game play and the large range of possible playing styles in cyro. Most of the test alternatives will fundamentally change the game so we have fair reasons to be worried. Its thus bad policy not to answer our questions and even suspend some peoples form forum because they question your motifs. Please do answer our questions, in fact I have difficulties to understand your inabilities to communicate, its hardly good for your business.

Below you find some questions which I hope you will answer.
- Are these tests there to collect data or do you plan to implement one of the solutions? We need a clear statement from you if you want to reduce our worries.
- Will you consult with us before you make a major change of the game mechanics? If you do not you may lose what you have left of experienced pvp players, some may not even participate in the tests, thus making the results less useful.
- Is it possible to expand/improve the servers? If not explain why, is it a cost issue or a technical issue?
- Why don’t you try to reduce the lag by shutting of the proc sets? It would not fundamentally change the game play.
- You say that the problem is that the sustain has increased with time, why don’t you test the reduction of regeneration in cyro? It should be possible to do with the battle spirit function and it would not fundamentally change the game play.

If you've been here since launch, then you already know the answers to all of these questions. Would it make any difference if Lambert came out and said what we already know is the case?

He's not going to come out and admit this stuff becuase once he does, all the subscriptions and emotional investment people have in the game on the hope and belief (or, one might say, self-delusion) instantly evaporates.

Not a fan of the band, but the player using the user name has been a long term positive force in game, and their comments are always helpful and wholly accurate.

They are for sure "dark" as their singer had legit emotional trauma, but I do think their music is nevertheless provocative and powerful. A common combination with art historically. But to each their own.

If i had to guess, ZOS knows full well templars and other current mechanics will be 100% unplayable during these tests and they have zero intention of implenting one of the four tests as is in a future update. They just want to completely remove the AoE variable for their data collection. And they dont know what they will do until the tests come back, which is another reason they cant really answer the OP.

If you still plan on playing ESO, then dust off your stamina toon whose heals (vigor, which isnt spammed, rally) arent affected by the tests and take the single target executioner morph so you dont drive yourself crazy during the tests.

I was mostly trying to say thank you for all the great information you post, in game and out. And, that I totally agree with the post I was quoting. (we know what the issue is, but they will not come out and say it publicly for obvious reasons)

I prolly should have left out the part about not having the same taste in music since that's just an aside.

nk125x

I just want to say I am very disappointed that ZOS have not answered any of the questions by Lars. They are well thought out and a hell of a lot more diplomatic than I would of posted. (Maybe that's why I have had two 72 hour suspensions in the last 2 weeks)

Here's hoping (mind you not holding my breath).

SweepsAllClowns

nk125x wrote: »

I just want to say I am very disappointed that ZOS have not answered any of the questions by Lars.

I'm not surprised or disappointed at all anymore, the questions were clear and constructive without any additional sarcasm or other garbage, I sure would have been interested to see some answers for them. However just take the hint, such questions clearly aren't needed here and this certainly wasn't the first or the last time when some clear questions are totally ignored here.

Rowjoh

There are two separate issues here.

1) Base issue: Lag, de-syncs, random crashes and regular pop-up loading screens occur in campaigns that are quiet. This has nothing to do with player driven actions or activity as there are insufficient numbers present. There doesn't appear to be a potential plan to fix as yet.

2) All of the above exacerbated by high campaign population and player driven activity such as ball groups and zergs.
The AOE tests may well lead to changes that result in some performance improvement, but it wont solve the base issue.

nk125x

Someone mentioned this in another thread. Remember when we had that release where everybody crashed every 10mins. They fixed this, but since then performance has gone down the toilet.

Cinbri

nk125x wrote: »

Someone mentioned this in another thread. Remember when we had that release where everybody crashed every 10mins. They fixed this, but since then performance has gone down the toilet.

Well we had entire year dedicated to perfomance improvement without getting rebalance and more pve content for that reason.
It successfully resulted in perfomance degradation (fix input lags ffs) and no much needed rebalance and no content. Sorry, but from my point of view spend entire year to make game even less playable looks like complete fail.

Ranger209

nk125x wrote: »

Someone mentioned this in another thread. Remember when we had that release where everybody crashed every 10mins. They fixed this, but since then performance has gone down the toilet.

Yes the game ran much better, but it made you crash. Maybe they should go back to the point in time right before they fixed the crashing and see if they can fix the crashing in another way that doesn't shoot performance down the toilet.