The future Consolidation of Cyrodil

MincMincMinc

My proposal is to have only two campaigns if vengeance is to remain. The main driving force is that new players currently do not have a functional cyrodil to even try pvp. Template pvp is perfect to learn in.

Before we saw with the noproc server that there was some interest, but it flopped. One reasoning is that people just bandwagon to the most populated server? Well why is that? Mainly because cyrodil as a gametype only functions with a high population. In lower population scenarios all it takes is one guild to log on and flip the map. This happened daily in the u50 campaign and killed it. Once those guilds gave up, they moved to nocp(noproc) and did the same thing until moving to greyhost. Which finally has enough population to stave it off for now..... Lag depending the player cap can only be reduced so far until inevitably one 40 man guild can control the server nightly.

So we would remove all the campaigns except greyhost as a CP1000+ only campaign. Then have the second campaign be a vengeance campaign which gives a functional cyrodil experience for new players lvl10+ that is fair even if older players decide to play. As a learning experience vengeance is far better, as you can really refine core mechanics in new players without the dlc bloated flashy nonsense drastically changing every quarter. If there is a good learning environment we may actually see the pvp population rise as a result. For the past 6+ years this hasn't existed since the u50 campaign has been desolate.

---

In time zos could use this as an ongoing testbed and add in more skill lines. Eventually slowly adding back:

• Attributes
• Simplified Passives
• Re-balanced Food buff system
• Re-balanced Mundus system
• Re-balanced Enchants+poisons
• The previous No proc pvp sets
• Stat proc sets (Think clever alch, but not Rush of agony)

Yasha

I agree that consolidating Cyrodiil into two servers (Vengeance and a laggy cheese server) would be a good step. However, I really think Vengeance was on to something with the equalized stats and no gear bonuses.

Instead of trying to go back to the non-proc style server they tried before, I think they should run with the Vengeance idea, but expand on it to allow more player choice and builds. That could include some of the things you mentioned, as well as weapon skill lines, armor type having an impact on health/resistance/regen etc.

Arrow312

Yes i agree. We need just 2 Campaign one in Vengence style and on "normal". There shouldnt be an option to PvDoor, as you wrote some Guilds go first BR and PvDoor and after this they come to GH. Meanwhile there Alliance has nothing then the homekeeps.

RebornV3x

Its should be
Grey Host
Vengeance PVP

Below 50
Iceheart

and maybe a 7 day no cp like Ravenwatch or whatever cause I like having one campaign that isn't alliance locked

Markytous

Sounds good to me. Nobody is proposing the proccers get the laggy crutch server removed. Grey Host can remain as long at it doesn't hold anything actually productive back in terms of server space. Shouldn't be an issue, as that basically only supports 150 players total lol

MincMincMinc

RebornV3x wrote: »

Its should be
Grey Host
Vengeance PVP

Below 50
Iceheart

and maybe a 7 day no cp like Ravenwatch or whatever cause I like having one campaign that isn't alliance locked

The problem is that without an event there is really only enough pop to fill one server even on weekends. With a vengeance available it allows new players to actually play a functional cyrodil though. So perhaps we would see an increase in pvp population.

Yasha

RebornV3x wrote: »

Its should be
Grey Host
Vengeance PVP

Below 50
Iceheart

and maybe a 7 day no cp like Ravenwatch or whatever cause I like having one campaign that isn't alliance locked

You don't need a below 50 campaign with Vengeance - that's one of the great things about the ruleset, it lets everyone play at the same level and is in fact much better for new under level 50 players than the current below-50 campaign. Vengeance also has a much higher population cap so there is no need from a population perspective to have four campaigns. However, Vengeance could bring so many new and existing players into eso/cyrodiil that Zos might have to start another server at some point.

Markytous

Yasha wrote: »

You don't need a below 50 campaign with Vengeance - that's one of the great things about the ruleset, it lets everyone play at the same level and is in fact much better for new under level 50 players than the current below-50 campaign. Vengeance also has a much higher population cap so there is no need from a population perspective to have four campaigns. However, Vengeance could bring so many new and existing players into eso/cyrodiil that Zos might have to start another server at some point.

I can't believe I didn't think of that lol With Vengeance No-CP and Sub50 can just be the same thing basically. Thats genius in my eyes! Well? There's the server space to do other things with for you.

I want to see "Seasons" in Vengeance Cyrodiil. Themed campaigns with changes around the map. Vampire, werewolf (or both), winter, autumn (West Weald tileset), and changes to accompany them. Different enemies or guards around keeps, events or bosses in interesting locations around the map. Dude theres a lot of possibilities to this once it gets rolling and all the necessary abilities/skills/player agency is implemented!

Wallar333

MincMincMinc wrote: »

My proposal is to have only two campaigns if vengeance is to remain. The main driving force is that new players currently do not have a functional cyrodil to even try pvp. Template pvp is perfect to learn in.

Before we saw with the noproc server that there was some interest, but it flopped. One reasoning is that people just bandwagon to the most populated server? Well why is that? Mainly because cyrodil as a gametype only functions with a high population. In lower population scenarios all it takes is one guild to log on and flip the map. This happened daily in the u50 campaign and killed it. Once those guilds gave up, they moved to nocp(noproc) and did the same thing until moving to greyhost. Which finally has enough population to stave it off for now..... Lag depending the player cap can only be reduced so far until inevitably one 40 man guild can control the server nightly.

So we would remove all the campaigns except greyhost as a CP1000+ only campaign. Then have the second campaign be a vengeance campaign which gives a functional cyrodil experience for new players lvl10+ that is fair even if older players decide to play. As a learning experience vengeance is far better, as you can really refine core mechanics in new players without the dlc bloated flashy nonsense drastically changing every quarter. If there is a good learning environment we may actually see the pvp population rise as a result. For the past 6+ years this hasn't existed since the u50 campaign has been desolate.

---

In time zos could use this as an ongoing testbed and add in more skill lines. Eventually slowly adding back:

• Attributes
• Simplified Passives
• Re-balanced Food buff system
• Re-balanced Mundus system
• Re-balanced Enchants+poisons
• The previous No proc pvp sets
• Stat proc sets (Think clever alch, but not Rush of agony)

Surely it would be much better if there would be only two servers, all the others are completely for nothing, except for emperor achivement hunt, which is exactly a problem about all those *low* campaigns. Any noob can be emperor now, it just needs to get drowned in coffee/energy drinks and have a guild who support him by taking over the whole map. But this is just killing those campaigns for obvious reasons.

As for your points:

1. Attributes -I fully agree about this one, cos it has no impact on fair play PVP at all.
2. Passives - About this one, i guess you mean class passives,well i would be against it to be honest, cos passives are also unbalanced. This one could probably become a problem AGAIN, especially group buff class passives.
3. Food buff - i dont see any problem with this one, cos only OP food is orz. smoked bear haunch, which is definitely not cheap, while also not providing much significant difference for its user. So i would keep food as it is normall, anyone can buy any recipe to craft any food OR ppl can buy it from shops/crafters, i dont see a problem here. Sure, it gives a little advantage to veterans, but this is just pure game knowledge/experience, not a bad mechanics. Also anyone can just ask which food to use etc. so i would not touch food at all.
4. Mundus - im not sure what you mean exactly, but i would say the same as about food buffs.
5. Enchants/poisons - Also the same as previous, with maybe exception for poisons which are verry strong also, posions would give another significant advantage for veterans, so this one should be tested for sure.
6/7. Im strictly against putting ANY set bonuses in there, cos set bonuses changes such server a LOT. Even set bonuses WITHOUT procs or buffs, cos it would still give INCREDIBLE advantage for veteran players, so again new players would just run away. Which im sure you also want to prevent. It would be too easy for us against them, and it would verry soon change into the same **** as old cyro, and only veterans would fight there. Thats not the good way to go. Allowing ANY set bonuses is a way into the same deep **** in which were now with old cyro .

1. Weapon, armor and race passives to be active
2. Switch all UNLIMITED things for regular inventory stuff, so ppl would still have to craft/buy potions etc.
3. Food buffs to be active
4. Changing current max stats to 2/3
5. Changing builds to provide their armor, enchants and trait bonuses, but keeping all SET bonuses BLOCKED
6. Changing cyro test spells to regular class ones but WITHOUT class passives
7. Alliance war skill lines to be active
8. Keeping champion points BLOCKED for obvious reasons
9. EDIT: Some classes are dependent on some weapon skills, so if it wont cause lags, it would be better to add those as well, for such classes. Those skills wont change pure fair gameplay i would like to achieve by making such campaign.
10. Mundus stone bonuses to be active

I would test this, while also reducing healing/shielding by another 15%, making it 70%.

Also changing joining of players, which is verry IMPORTANT if ZOS would want such campaign to actually work as it should, which means making it a pure fair-play PVP. Players should not join for alliance there, they should join the alliance which would need it, the alliance with lesser numbers of players, which would lead fights to be actually balanced in numbers, so end of ballgroups.
In close connection to THIS, im not sure how many sieges there could be by alliance on the map now, but i would make it MAXIMALY 2 sieges by each alliance, which would hopefully lead players to play as a team/army, preventing smaller groups to just play their own **** so much. There are BGs for that kind of gameplay.

I would also increase the speed of reviving by 33% there, to make it worth trying to get someone up, cos normally its way too slow, you usually wont even try when there are enemies cos its pointless. This would hopefully ALSO lead ppl to play more as a team/army.

Another thing could be increasing mount speed to MAXIMUM for everyone there, for reasons i hope i really dont need to explain.

For future updates i also suggest to add more and STRONGER mobs to defend forts, also giving at least 2 siege weapons to them on every side of the outer wall. I dont mean like boss type mobs, just make them at least a bit usefull, cos now they are literally useless there. Those mobs should respawn ONLY when siege would be over for obvious reasons. This would give alliance a few minutes more to react, cos more-less surprise sieges were incredibly fast during vengeance, defending alliance usually managed to come when attacking alliance were already controlling outer walls and courtyard, usually fighting inside the fort already.

Making this campaign to work as it should, would probably take a LOT of time testing it, and even more improving it, but its definitely worth to try it, theres nothing to loose literally, cos PVP is almost completely dead now.

BergisMacBride

Only problem I see with two different rulesets campaigns is that imo ZOS would in reality only support and do upgrades to one, and I’d bet it’d be the Vengeance server, given that is where their focus is currently and going forward. Current “normal” Cyrodiil would most likely be frozen in place with no significant updates or major changes or gear except for PvE sets. I can’t really see the Devs splitting their attention between the two, and the one not getting Dev love might suffer as a result.

Wallar333

BergisMacBride wrote: »

Only problem I see with two different rulesets campaigns is that imo ZOS would in reality only support and do upgrades to one, and I’d bet it’d be the Vengeance server, given that is where their focus is currently and going forward. Current “normal” Cyrodiil would most likely be frozen in place with no significant updates or major changes or gear except for PvE sets. I can’t really see the Devs splitting their attention between the two, and the one not getting Dev love might suffer as a result.

True, for them theres a verry hard decision to be made. They can *TRY* to fix a current dying PVP, which is to be honest unfixable thanks to overall game mechanics, sets and bonus stacking, which is obviuous since they cant fix it for almost a decade now. On the other side, they shoudlnt do such a move as to remove or drastically change something from current cyro, it could cause another community problem.
And again as i said, even if theyll manage to actually fix old cyro, it would stilly be mostly unplayable for new players, and since they CANT and SHOULDNT do a drastic change in old cyro, then they cant change that much to actually bring it back to life.

Old cyro is simply lost for now, while also with game mechanics like here, its probably just IMPOSSIBLE to fix it completely, and i dont expect ZOS to change WHOLE games mechanics so not a chance to make it actually work, probably no matter what they do.

So now its like trying to bring a corpse back to life feeling just pain in the process, OR focusing on trying to make a baby, which could make everyone happy .

Well their choice, im verry curious about what theyll do, but i expect them to just try with the corpse AGAIN.

darvaria

Really just need GH and Vengeance. With that 30/70/30 attributes, that would cover any under 50 and no cp would allow players with lower cp's to be competitive.

The other 3 campaigns are completely dead. Why not try it? And I would really not want "new" added to Vengeance because it would become the same mess as GH is eventually.

Vengeance may have been a mistake .... some players had fun for the first time ever or in years. I'm finding myself not going back to GH. Took Vengeance to make me see that. Leave GH for the proc sets/balls/bombers/and endless tower humpers.

MincMincMinc

My main concept is that zos needs to restandardize alot of the game anyways. At the same time vengeance to work needs to have continued support/testing. Why not do the two birds, one stone kinda thing. Like I pointed out in the OP, most of the systems have become near pointless because the balance doesnt exist. For instance 90% of people in pvp just run bear haunch or the lesser equivalent...... Why have the inflated stats if there really is no choice?

AngryNecro

mmmm more playrse who dont have any idea how make pvp bilds) Even now, most players perceive the two-panel system only as a split into a panel for hill and attack. And those who start PVP in the company of revenge will have no idea about half of the possible mechanics at all.

SaffronCitrusflower

After so long of basically not supporting the current PvP format in Cyrodiil that ZOS would invest into and maintain a new format and the original format at the same time? In other words, do you think ZOS would go from barely supporting one PvP format to fully supporting two formats at the same time?

In the end it's almost certainly going to be one format or the other. This is why people should oppose any further investment by ZOS into the vengeance format.

SaffronCitrusflower

AngryNecro wrote: »

mmmm more playrse who dont have any idea how make pvp bilds) Even now, most players perceive the two-panel system only as a split into a panel for hill and attack. And those who start PVP in the company of revenge will have no idea about half of the possible mechanics at all.

This is a good point. The vengeance format would essentially in no way be a training ground for the actual PvP format in GH today. They're too different.

MincMincMinc

SaffronCitrusflower wrote: »

After so long of basically not supporting the current PvP format in Cyrodiil that ZOS would invest into and maintain a new format and the original format at the same time? In other words, do you think ZOS would go from barely supporting one PvP format to fully supporting two formats at the same time?

In the end it's almost certainly going to be one format or the other. This is why people should oppose any further investment by ZOS into the vengeance format.

What support is needed for GH? Nerfing ROA? Otherwise it is/was basically on its own.

Vengeance also needs minimal support. Changing and implementing one system at a time per patch isn't much work until they get into doing more skills or sets. Rebalancing food for example can be implemented for both live and vengeance at the same time.

Stridig

What was/is your thought process around the 1000CP for GH? With only two campaigns it seems like one being Vengeance and one being CP and everything else enabled would be fine. Thoughts?

MincMincMinc

Stridig wrote: »

What was/is your thought process around the 1000CP for GH? With only two campaigns it seems like one being Vengeance and one being CP and everything else enabled would be fine. Thoughts?

Mainly to corral new players and low cp players into a scenario for learning. There isnt any reason they should be in GH, but they are......once....... and then log out. This problem stems from both that GH is listed first, and that the u50 and NoCP campaign are ghost towns.

The CP value is debatable for sure. I predict it should be between 500-1000. I forget the value for the new cp where you unlock full passives.

Pepegrillos

I don't mind if they bring all that back, as long as the TTK remains something like Vengeance's (and the performance doesn't get a hit). Part of the reasons I liked the campaign is that no one was able to one shot (or one-combo) anybody.

supabicboi

Vengeance works well as a training ground. GH is too hostile, without knowing what is happening, players get demotivated.

I think Vengeance needs a bare-bone upgrade, basically changing it from being a test to a bare-minimum live server. Limit the player level cap to CP 250-500, and from 500-750, GH and Vengeance are available as a middle ground, after CP 750, no more Vengeance/training grounds, so that we don't have highly leveled players that have become more avid PvPers to bully newbies. This is the same kind of subconscious rule sets that dictate trials and dungeons, some DLC contents are built to be harder.

Edit:
OR if not CP, consider alliance ranks - upon reaching - Palatine, Brigadier, Prefect, Preatorian, etc. (Alliance Rank differentiation might be better upon second thought, and makes ton more sense. there are many pve only players that have reached beyond 1000cp, but, still fairly new to pvp, or never really gave it a shot. Alliance ranks also indicate the interest levels of a player in PvP too, more interested players will be inclined to leveling up faster to join the 'major leagues'. shout out to home boi Jackie Welles. btw alliance war General, the 1 star, that could take up to a year or 2 or even more for frequent players. timeline wise, find a sweet spot, balance time to join GH after reaching ____ rank and able to enjoy it. imo, Floor - Tribune, Ceiling - Palatine) there is an issue with this proposal - same account different toons with different alliance rank, as a hindsight consideration. just make alliance rank translate to all toons and its solved, ex. grand overlord across all toons, earned it on 1 toon alrdy, why not make it translate all across.

The structure is good, but here's a few more considerations. Vengeance will need some higher-level players that show the ropes to new PvPers, and the reason why it can't be a task for a guild or a minority is that it gets tiring. No one is hiring coaches or zerglords lol, and the game doesn't have the kind of NPC that would guide people on Cyro PvP (don't even think that is possible unless utilizing AI, which is not feasible to build into ESO's model). That's why the 500-750 CP players are included. Not just simply what to use to siege, but also get familiar with the map, the geography, where and what are advantageous and disadvantageous. This process takes time because it needs to be experienced, observing the chaos; GH does not have the freedom to observe, it is straight sense, therefore no time to learn.

We see very well, there are a ton of players that would be interested in joining PvP from the results of Vengeance, and its one of the few if not only reason why I like vengeance, it shows the game I love is not dead, but needs attention and changes. There is the issue where players that played in Vengeance not wanting to leave the Vengeance setting after reaching the CP level cap, and would rather stay instead of becoming a more avid PvPer in a more hostile environment. TBF, if I see someone in GH, I'll probably give them a few hard pokes love taps to see what they made of, it's PvP without crutches. Just that after 750 CP, it's about time to get those big boy pants on and not hunt new players for entertainment. That's why I think there is a need for the 500-750 CP transition stage, where both Vengeance and GH are available. This fine line between beginner/expert campaign will also make sure that both camps have population, and that there isn't jumping.

Cyro PvP requires crutches to start, especially considering the current knowledge gap in PvP between new and old players, back then there were strong and established guilds with leaders that don't mind teaching and guiding, now that the game has aged, the previous players and guilds that would do that have dwindled, and it's hard to rekindle that kind of motivation, so there needs to be new leaders, this is a consideration of real on-ground gameplay, zone chat interactions, and player movements/motivation to gather, defend, or mobilize within Cyro. Thats why Vengeance felt great to many people, because everyone on the same physique and crutches, we all Timmy's out there. Nothing wrong with needing crutches, a different analogy - tricycle and bicycle lol, makes sense to give a beginner a tricycle to ride right? but dumbing things down for the experienced.. well thats disrespectful.

With the much greater CP level gap now compared to back then, it also shows the levels of experience. It was like CP 800 max? Forgot exactly. It's not just about skill, there's also game sense, and it's really, really important. Even if skill is a stagnant thing and there is a peak for many, game sense can still be further developed. GH is just tough, it's not impossible, we can see just how many 'casuals' would like to join into PvP, but it's hard to survive. Where and where not to place camps and siege, knowing the basics of different playstyles, DPS, tank, heal, etc.

Imagine a Vengeance where it's like Cyrodil when it first came out, with the additions of - limit to old/certain sets, or straight-up ban some meta/new sets up to a period in time, ex. Pre-Greymoor sets, no mythics, etc. Since new players can and should just use the current "A-C" tier gear and set up, get to know building gear, develop interest in theorycrafting, and gaining a better understanding of the plethora of sets available in the game, using unorthodox methods to play, because honestly, that's how PvP is supposed to be. GH is just twisted with salt, sweat, and cheese. With the same alliance, class, and weapon skills as other campaigns would, cuz can't really make much difference in the skill than the versions that are elsewhere in the game, or else there is a lack of consistency, and also would basically mean it's new and independent PvP skills, don't think it'll work well.

I like the current Cyrodil GH, or at least I don't hate it. What I do despise are the poor maintenance and lack of balance updates to unbalanced sets and playstyles, as well as cheesy rat players that exploit the cheese to the maximum - I've given it a thought, it just feels like this is an issue stemming from the developer team being detached from the real action in GH, as they are the only ones that can really change, the players won't step away from cheese sets or broken solo/group playstyles unless discouraged, demotivated to do so. Give busted stuff a quick fix after seeing how busted it is.

Devs might just have a really low idea of what is happening on the ground, they are basically the new players that don't know the dynamics of GH, trying to fix something they don't know. They just look at data and hope they'll gather some kind of insight, and I hope they do.

But for real, hop into Cyro and just observe how some of the things that have been repeatedly mentioned in the forum is behaving in the game, the good and the bad, experience ROA pulling you, it doesn't matter how fast your reaction is, there will be a time when you slip up and get pulled in without blocking in time, feel the PvP to know what the issue is, devs. Please also change/overhaul the guild recruitment system. Not only for PvP, but your game's economy is failing

Be in the perspectives of both long-time PvPers, as well as new players that are interested in PvP. Understand their perspective and know the difference of what these groups want, and know that devs have an intrinsic responsibility to build an environment that allows nurturing PvP into new players, creating a sustainable PvP model. The current issue I see is the lack of/low numbers of 'middle class' in PvP in this game. Hardware and calculation issues to improve performance are up to the devs. But explaining the playing environment falls to players, both aspects work together to create a whole, and one does not work without the other. Don't be hyperfocused on improving performance but as a result deprive us of a full experience.

Also, demanding fair PvP play in an MMO is counterintuitive. It shows my colors, but, get good. You think in a battlefield setting game, there's telling the opponent to drop their armor, weapon, and forget their martial arts techniques, so that there's fair play? Stop yanking ma pizzle. I see this aspect of the game as inevitable and beautiful. Some will be better than others. Train or get better hardware, we all play in similar laggy situations. Why the whine. My ping is never lower than 250, no complaints from me. Occasional lag spikes, don't bother much. Separating the field to 2 different beginner/expert settings = that makes more sense. When you've crossed the line of supposedly transitioning from tricycle to bicycle, but end up sucking at it.. well that just gives off an impression that some work needs to be put in, everyone has gone through that stage, the speed of progress and improvement depends on the player.

supabicboi

apologies for busting out a long verse.

Mayrael

supabicboi wrote: »

Vengeance works well as a training ground. GH is too hostile, without knowing what is happening, players get demotivated.

I think Vengeance needs a bare-bone upgrade, basically changing it from being a test to a bare-minimum live server. Limit the player level cap to CP 250-500, and from 500-750, GH and Vengeance are available as a middle ground, after CP 750, no more Vengeance/training grounds, so that we don't have highly leveled players that have become more avid PvPers to bully newbies. This is the same kind of subconscious rule sets that dictate trials and dungeons, some DLC contents are built to be harder.

Edit:
OR if not CP, consider alliance ranks - upon reaching - Palatine, Brigadier, Prefect, Preatorian, etc. (Alliance Rank differentiation might be better upon second thought, and makes ton more sense. there are many pve only players that have reached beyond 1000cp, but, still fairly new to pvp, or never really gave it a shot. Alliance ranks also indicate the interest levels of a player in PvP too, more interested players will be inclined to leveling up faster to join the 'major leagues'. shout out to home boi Jackie Welles. btw alliance war General, the 1 star, that could take up to a year or 2 or even more for frequent players. timeline wise, find a sweet spot, balance time to join GH after reaching ____ rank and able to enjoy it. imo, Floor - Tribune, Ceiling - Palatine) there is an issue with this proposal - same account different toons with different alliance rank, as a hindsight consideration. just make alliance rank translate to all toons and its solved, ex. grand overlord across all toons, earned it on 1 toon alrdy, why not make it translate all across.

The structure is good, but here's a few more considerations. Vengeance will need some higher-level players that show the ropes to new PvPers, and the reason why it can't be a task for a guild or a minority is that it gets tiring. No one is hiring coaches or zerglords lol, and the game doesn't have the kind of NPC that would guide people on Cyro PvP (don't even think that is possible unless utilizing AI, which is not feasible to build into ESO's model). That's why the 500-750 CP players are included. Not just simply what to use to siege, but also get familiar with the map, the geography, where and what are advantageous and disadvantageous. This process takes time because it needs to be experienced, observing the chaos; GH does not have the freedom to observe, it is straight sense, therefore no time to learn.

We see very well, there are a ton of players that would be interested in joining PvP from the results of Vengeance, and its one of the few if not only reason why I like vengeance, it shows the game I love is not dead, but needs attention and changes. There is the issue where players that played in Vengeance not wanting to leave the Vengeance setting after reaching the CP level cap, and would rather stay instead of becoming a more avid PvPer in a more hostile environment. TBF, if I see someone in GH, I'll probably give them a few hard pokes love taps to see what they made of, it's PvP without crutches. Just that after 750 CP, it's about time to get those big boy pants on and not hunt new players for entertainment. That's why I think there is a need for the 500-750 CP transition stage, where both Vengeance and GH are available. This fine line between beginner/expert campaign will also make sure that both camps have population, and that there isn't jumping.

Cyro PvP requires crutches to start, especially considering the current knowledge gap in PvP between new and old players, back then there were strong and established guilds with leaders that don't mind teaching and guiding, now that the game has aged, the previous players and guilds that would do that have dwindled, and it's hard to rekindle that kind of motivation, so there needs to be new leaders, this is a consideration of real on-ground gameplay, zone chat interactions, and player movements/motivation to gather, defend, or mobilize within Cyro. Thats why Vengeance felt great to many people, because everyone on the same physique and crutches, we all Timmy's out there. Nothing wrong with needing crutches, a different analogy - tricycle and bicycle lol, makes sense to give a beginner a tricycle to ride right? but dumbing things down for the experienced.. well thats disrespectful.

With the much greater CP level gap now compared to back then, it also shows the levels of experience. It was like CP 800 max? Forgot exactly. It's not just about skill, there's also game sense, and it's really, really important. Even if skill is a stagnant thing and there is a peak for many, game sense can still be further developed. GH is just tough, it's not impossible, we can see just how many 'casuals' would like to join into PvP, but it's hard to survive. Where and where not to place camps and siege, knowing the basics of different playstyles, DPS, tank, heal, etc.

Imagine a Vengeance where it's like Cyrodil when it first came out, with the additions of - limit to old/certain sets, or straight-up ban some meta/new sets up to a period in time, ex. Pre-Greymoor sets, no mythics, etc. Since new players can and should just use the current "A-C" tier gear and set up, get to know building gear, develop interest in theorycrafting, and gaining a better understanding of the plethora of sets available in the game, using unorthodox methods to play, because honestly, that's how PvP is supposed to be. GH is just twisted with salt, sweat, and cheese. With the same alliance, class, and weapon skills as other campaigns would, cuz can't really make much difference in the skill than the versions that are elsewhere in the game, or else there is a lack of consistency, and also would basically mean it's new and independent PvP skills, don't think it'll work well.

I like the current Cyrodil GH, or at least I don't hate it. What I do despise are the poor maintenance and lack of balance updates to unbalanced sets and playstyles, as well as cheesy rat players that exploit the cheese to the maximum - I've given it a thought, it just feels like this is an issue stemming from the developer team being detached from the real action in GH, as they are the only ones that can really change, the players won't step away from cheese sets or broken solo/group playstyles unless discouraged, demotivated to do so. Give busted stuff a quick fix after seeing how busted it is.

Devs might just have a really low idea of what is happening on the ground, they are basically the new players that don't know the dynamics of GH, trying to fix something they don't know. They just look at data and hope they'll gather some kind of insight, and I hope they do.

But for real, hop into Cyro and just observe how some of the things that have been repeatedly mentioned in the forum is behaving in the game, the good and the bad, experience ROA pulling you, it doesn't matter how fast your reaction is, there will be a time when you slip up and get pulled in without blocking in time, feel the PvP to know what the issue is, devs. Please also change/overhaul the guild recruitment system. Not only for PvP, but your game's economy is failing

Be in the perspectives of both long-time PvPers, as well as new players that are interested in PvP. Understand their perspective and know the difference of what these groups want, and know that devs have an intrinsic responsibility to build an environment that allows nurturing PvP into new players, creating a sustainable PvP model. The current issue I see is the lack of/low numbers of 'middle class' in PvP in this game. Hardware and calculation issues to improve performance are up to the devs. But explaining the playing environment falls to players, both aspects work together to create a whole, and one does not work without the other. Don't be hyperfocused on improving performance but as a result deprive us of a full experience.

Also, demanding fair PvP play in an MMO is counterintuitive. It shows my colors, but, get good. You think in a battlefield setting game, there's telling the opponent to drop their armor, weapon, and forget their martial arts techniques, so that there's fair play? Stop yanking ma pizzle. I see this aspect of the game as inevitable and beautiful. Some will be better than others. Train or get better hardware, we all play in similar laggy situations. Why the whine. My ping is never lower than 250, no complaints from me. Occasional lag spikes, don't bother much. Separating the field to 2 different beginner/expert settings = that makes more sense. When you've crossed the line of supposedly transitioning from tricycle to bicycle, but end up sucking at it.. well that just gives off an impression that some work needs to be put in, everyone has gone through that stage, the speed of progress and improvement depends on the player.

This is probably one of the most intelligent posts here. A campaign styled like the one presented to us as Vengeance would have worked great as an introductory campaign to Cyrodiil, but certainly not as a full-fledged endgame PvP.
Why? For a simple reason: to earn Achievements in PvE (trials or dungeons), you need to understand the mechanics of the content, have the right build, and possess the knowledge and skills to make use of it. Simplifying PvP to just joining a server and picking a few skills to slot into your bar is a complete negation of what an MMO is about. It undermines the point of doing anything in the game since you can’t really utilize it. It’s a slap in the face to anyone who values character progression, the freedom to create builds, and the liberty to play the way they want.

Wallar333

Mayrael wrote: »

This is probably one of the most intelligent posts here. A campaign styled like the one presented to us as Vengeance would have worked great as an introductory campaign to Cyrodiil, but certainly not as a full-fledged endgame PvP.
Why? For a simple reason: to earn Achievements in PvE (trials or dungeons), you need to understand the mechanics of the content, have the right build, and possess the knowledge and skills to make use of it. Simplifying PvP to just joining a server and picking a few skills to slot into your bar is a complete negation of what an MMO is about. It undermines the point of doing anything in the game since you can’t really utilize it. It’s a slap in the face to anyone who values character progression, the freedom to create builds, and the liberty to play the way they want.

Vengeance as it was during the test is nonsense, it looks like 80% of people here on forum just dont understand what people like us actually wants. Vengeance should be CHANGED, which was already suggested like 100 times how. Forcing joining to servers by CP makes no sense, most people would just leave PVP anyway when theyll be forced to play your *end game* cyro, cos its just horrible there, and not fun at all. People would rather go doing PVE or go off than playing that **** old cyro is.

I see no reason why enhanced vengeace campaign couldnt be end game, ive had more fun during vengeance, cos i could actually play my own solo game there, which is impossible in old cyro, with exception for camping towers or ganking poor people who just wants to farm sets or do some quests there. Theres no real endgame here, for most people end game is to do achievemts PVE content and leave, no one normal wants to play PVP here, mostly cos its just almost unplayable as a solo player while its not fun no matter what.

I agree about extreme simplification of pvp beeing **, but again, no one normal wants the same vengeance, find my threads about my suggestions about it, and think about it a bit, maybe even you would rather play such campaign instead of old cyro.

I dont agree with builds tho, cos sure, i like to try builds, craft/upragde etc. but this game is extremely unbalanced in everything, and in PVP sets are like 50% of the whole problem. Blocking set bonuses in such campaign could fix MANY problems with one move. Look at ballgroups, i expect youre no newbie, so you can count have many group buff sets there are in this game, and stacking of such bonuses just boosts ballgropus to what they are now, just immortal. Also thanks to crosshealing shielding ofc, but thats another like 30% of the whole problem. Group buff/heal/shield stacking is exactly what killed the whole PVP in this game definitely.

People should also have liberty to choose, as you said, to play the way they want, so why not letting enhanced kind of vengeance to live ? Its not about training for *end game* for me, and for MANY others im sure, THAT could be endgame, cos we have enough of feeding some ballgroups noobs playing their own **** in old cyro. And situation in old cyro would NEVER change, cos of overall game mechanics, only way to fix it, is blocking all set bonuses, class passives and reducing healing shielding. And for those who dont want to see that in old cyro, ok, keep your old cyro, but let us others to have fun in a pure fair play PVP content.

MincMincMinc

Wallar333 wrote: »

Mayrael wrote: »

This is probably one of the most intelligent posts here. A campaign styled like the one presented to us as Vengeance would have worked great as an introductory campaign to Cyrodiil, but certainly not as a full-fledged endgame PvP.
Why? For a simple reason: to earn Achievements in PvE (trials or dungeons), you need to understand the mechanics of the content, have the right build, and possess the knowledge and skills to make use of it. Simplifying PvP to just joining a server and picking a few skills to slot into your bar is a complete negation of what an MMO is about. It undermines the point of doing anything in the game since you can’t really utilize it. It’s a slap in the face to anyone who values character progression, the freedom to create builds, and the liberty to play the way they want.

People should also have liberty to choose, as you said, to play the way they want, so why not letting enhanced kind of vengeance to live ? Its not about training for *end game* for me, and for MANY others im sure, THAT could be endgame, cos we have enough of feeding some ballgroups noobs playing their own **** in old cyro. And situation in old cyro would NEVER change, cos of overall game mechanics, only way to fix it, is blocking all set bonuses, class passives and reducing healing shielding. And for those who dont want to see that in old cyro, ok, keep your old cyro, but let us others to have fun in a pure fair play PVP content.

I feel like some of you misunderstand the cp cap concept I put in the OP. The cp cap is not forced on endgame players. I suppose a better term would be a requirement. Anyone could play in the vengeance campaign, all levels and cps. The only players who can play in greyhost would be CP500+ or whatever discussed value sounds reasonable at the time.

The most important takeaway most people have regardless if they liked participating is that vengeance actually has a potential bright future. Whereas current cyrodil is like trying to unmix chocolate milk.....its just not possible without near infinite resources. Drink it while its here, but pouring a new glass and adding what you want is a better path forward.

Wallar333

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Wallar333 wrote: »

Mayrael wrote: »

This is probably one of the most intelligent posts here. A campaign styled like the one presented to us as Vengeance would have worked great as an introductory campaign to Cyrodiil, but certainly not as a full-fledged endgame PvP.
Why? For a simple reason: to earn Achievements in PvE (trials or dungeons), you need to understand the mechanics of the content, have the right build, and possess the knowledge and skills to make use of it. Simplifying PvP to just joining a server and picking a few skills to slot into your bar is a complete negation of what an MMO is about. It undermines the point of doing anything in the game since you can’t really utilize it. It’s a slap in the face to anyone who values character progression, the freedom to create builds, and the liberty to play the way they want.

People should also have liberty to choose, as you said, to play the way they want, so why not letting enhanced kind of vengeance to live ? Its not about training for *end game* for me, and for MANY others im sure, THAT could be endgame, cos we have enough of feeding some ballgroups noobs playing their own **** in old cyro. And situation in old cyro would NEVER change, cos of overall game mechanics, only way to fix it, is blocking all set bonuses, class passives and reducing healing shielding. And for those who dont want to see that in old cyro, ok, keep your old cyro, but let us others to have fun in a pure fair play PVP content.

I feel like some of you misunderstand the cp cap concept I put in the OP. The cp cap is not forced on endgame players. I suppose a better term would be a requirement. Anyone could play in the vengeance campaign, all levels and cps. The only players who can play in greyhost would be CP500+ or whatever discussed value sounds reasonable at the time.

The most important takeaway most people have regardless if they liked participating is that vengeance actually has a potential bright future. Whereas current cyrodil is like trying to unmix chocolate milk.....its just not possible without near infinite resources. Drink it while its here, but pouring a new glass and adding what you want is a better path forward.

I understand bro, and i agree with you. I reacted on supabicboy s comment about blocking such campaign after certain CP, to not allow veterans to play there.

Yasha

SaffronCitrusflower wrote: »

After so long of basically not supporting the current PvP format in Cyrodiil that ZOS would invest into and maintain a new format and the original format at the same time? In other words, do you think ZOS would go from barely supporting one PvP format to fully supporting two formats at the same time?

In the end it's almost certainly going to be one format or the other. This is why people should oppose any further investment by ZOS into the vengeance format.

In that case I would 100% support the Vengeance format, its way more fun for people who like pvp more than pve. It needs some fleshing out, but I would take it even as is over the current system.

And let's be honest, they have had over 10 years to improve the current system and it has just gotten worse and worse (largely due to power creep) and they have never been able to fix the lag and stuck in combat bug until Vengeance - so ZOS made more progress than in 10 years with this one test.

supabicboi

MincMincMinc wrote: »

I feel like some of you misunderstand the cp cap concept I put in the OP. The cp cap is not forced on endgame players. I suppose a better term would be a requirement. Anyone could play in the vengeance campaign, all levels and cps. The only players who can play in greyhost would be CP500+ or whatever discussed value sounds reasonable at the time.

The most important takeaway most people have regardless if they liked participating is that vengeance actually has a potential bright future. Whereas current cyrodil is like trying to unmix chocolate milk.....its just not possible without near infinite resources. Drink it while its here, but pouring a new glass and adding what you want is a better path forward.

I see the point in all of this. but I want to make sure im understanding what Enhanced Vengeance even is first. first to point out a few facts: the Vengenance we played was only a Test, with literally all possible things that could effect performance, to be disabled and limited, therefore, the version we played was as simple as simple gets in Cyro, even more simple than Cyro 1.0 - this can then be inferred that an Enhanced Vengeance would be in between the test/simplest version of vengeance and the current Cyro GH. But what is in between?...

An Enhanced Vengeance would then inevitably have some kinds of 'things' that would be simplified/limited/disabled, or else it would not differentiate itself from GH. Skills, passives, and the structure of CP MIGHT be different or completely overhauled. A full wardrobe of sets to create diversity in build MIGHT be limited to an extent, because one of the stronger characteristics that was rather well received for Test Vengeance was its template stats; therefore sets MIGHT be different, limited, templated, or given a special status while inside Enhanced Vengeance. If there is no template, there WILL be diversity, and when there is diversity, that edge some players will have due to 'better' sets will show itself. But this isnt all that bad. My assumption of an Enhanced Vengeance is going to have limited(but still a lot of) sets, stats MIGHT be more similar across classes (therefore no more polarized tanks, gankers, or anything that has an extreme), and that is also good. Again, im all supporting for an Enhanced Vengeance to reach Live, so that it can be the consolidation of Blackreach, U-50, no-CP, in its totality.

U-50 camp is useless because within 50 levels, there is no learning, and there arent the more experienced players to play with and guide U-50s. no-CP and Blackreach spreads population thin, rather have them combine to boost numbers, and player expectations in game play would still be relatively congruent. So thats what enhanced vengeance could strive to be, a place for beginners and intermediate players to be able to strive in. (the only way they strive is with sweaty players like me completely gone, Im merely a solo that types in zone chat a lot, sweaty players also include ballgroupers, other 1vX 2vX, GvG all the kinds of players that have become 'veterans' thru experience and TIME)

Some people would prefer a simpler version of Cyro, even way after their ranks/CP/or whatever ways we measure the 'veteran' status. I understand that some people would generally prefer not having to deal with GH issues, and therefore thinks Vengeance is the place for them to go. I have a few issues that I know will happen, and there is no stopping it, if Vengeance is still allowed upon reaching your 'veteran' status threshold. Heres a few reasonings to make Enhanced Vengeance limited to beginner - intermediate players and off limits to players like me.

Scenario 1(completely hypothetical). if I had a 'friend' I used to 1vX with on GH creates a new account, for whatever reason(can be new Alt, banned remaking, etc). I enjoy playing with this friend of mine, and we both only PvP. we are both going to go to Vengeance, because if GH has a cap on it my friend can't join, but GH 'qualified' players like me can jump back and forth.. well that just means I'm probably going to be spending time in Enhanced Vengeance. The issue with this is a player like me is not supposed to be in Enhanced Vengeance, cuz Enhanced Vengeance is supposed to be beginner - intermediate friendly right?

**All the points that make GH unfriendly and a place that Wallar wants to avoid is because: some players in GH play cheesy af; Im a sweatlord, But I still get pulled in from ROA, I still get ganked by wtf NB that could 1 shot, I still have to deal with wtf DKs that perma-cc with 15 dots on you, there is a ton of annoyance in GH, NOT just the ballgroups that ruin solo, pug group, or small group gameplay. SO, if players that do these kind of things are allowed in Vengeance... wouldn't that cause the same 'gatekeeping' effect that many have said is an issue in GH? How are Beginner to Intermediate players going to deal with us? They cant. We need to separate the crowd with some kind of metric so that overly-hostile gameplay is not harassing the Vengeance grounds.

Scenario 2. Some players just like to get their KDA up, they like that satisfying feeling of farming pugs. I do not want that to happen to Beginner - Intermediate players. Do not attempt to deny this is not possible. I know very well in a MMO setting, there are noob bashers, whether or not the player intended to do that. This will intrinsically cause the issue of not having more pvpers being trained up, being developed, because they are discouraged to even start their adventure. therefore there will be no new blood. - one of the issues with current GH

Beginners and Veterans do not coexist well. Beginners and Intermediates do, Intermediates and Veterans do. Veterans like me are built, from overall optimization of sets, skill, and experience, to being able to obliterate beginners. I can combo basically any beginners and OHKO them; Because not only am I fully optimized, the beginners haven't even discovered what PvP is. Imagine you just started your adventure, and there's a level 100 Warlord in front of your doorway? where do you think you're trying to go, tender meat?

The way Test Vengeance evened out the playing field is from making everyone follow a template.

Lemme do some number scaling. The Test Vengeance made it so that everyone's 'power level' is at a stable 40-50, meaning some players can excel in solos because they are mechanically/skillfully better (higher end at 50 and capped at 50 because they can't exceed what is built to have a cap), but even the less skilled or straight up first time PvPers have a baseline of 40 because they got a template, making them less vulnerable, and even without prior PvP knowledge, they are less prone to fatal mistakes/misplays. Low Fluctuation, Low Differentiation between players all across.

The current Cyrodil GH's power level varies too greatly, 1 - 100, and with optimized group play, the levels go way above. you have a mixture of PvP explorers and top tier 1vX sweatlord all in the same pool. it is not forgiving, But the game can't go and limit my power levels, stumping my growth potentials, and reaching my peak, because some regular Andy is just starting their adventure.

Now let me assume, Enhanced Vengeance. would the power levels vary from around 1-50? - 1 being beginners, 50 being the almost near Vengeance-graduate Intermediate players that are now being trained up to be able to compete for GH? Would you want players that are above the power level of 50 to even be in Vengeance, if they are a tipping disruption force? How else would Vengeance be able to limit the power levels to a certain ceiling so that beginners are still able to play strive in a PvP setting? Limiting sets=limiting diversity? Limiting 'veterans' from entering? Simplifying the gameplay with equal stats for everyone so that beginners get crutches while veterans get one of their legs hacked off? Limiting sets is not a bad thing if done well, think of it as the restricted section in the Harry Potter libraries. Limiting stats could be a good thing too, so that there is a lower ceiling, hence avoiding some players to becoming too OP, but that will mean capping anyone from going beyond. Restricted section stays restricted.

Beginners in the Enhanced Vengeance setting and even the current GH setting might be using some really wacky sets, sets that might not make any sense in terms of optimization, but they just trying stuff out, this will inevitably make it so that there is a power level setting. In the forum recently I saw a post that was asking if any sets in Fungal Grotto is any good. I, as a veteran know the answer to that directly by sense and knowing the meta, but the person that asked? That's the same kinds of players that loved Vengeance, and I want them to keep loving the game, and therefore players like me cant be there to bash them in Enhanced Vengeance. Its the same as putting a heavy weight and a feather weight in the same ring.

Unless Enhanced Vengeance rolls out with template stats, or something to limit high-optimization, its hard to limit power levels from going too high. Beginners and Intermediates that tries out the current GH are getting bashed by the 70-100 power level players. If I were a power level 90 player that goes into Enhanced Vengeance, WHICH is the way it will be if a player like me can jump between Enhanced Vengeance and GH, then there needs to be a power leveling ceiling that caps me at 50, or else a player like me will be trampling those beginners.

They need a safer environment to pick up the knowledge gap before being able to, or even choose to play at a higher level. This really showed in the Test Vengeance. There were so many, so many, beginners. That environment cannot allow a player like me in there. If given a choice of being able to step into Enhanced Vengeance, I might go and check it out but wont stay for long. I want other players like me, to be barred so we don't screw things up for the beginners, trampling on young sprouts. Not every 'veteran' can stop themselves from being a shameful player that would rather find entertainment by hunting newcomers, and even worse, you can't stop entire guilds and groups of friends that are long time GH players, to invade Enhanced Vengeance... we cant be limiting group play either, that'll just hinder the fact that this is an MMO.

So if group play is still a feature in any future PvP, how are you gonna stop those veteran groups of people migrating to Enhanced Vengeance? Wallar I get your point, I'm a solo player mostly, solos like me would probably not pose a massive threat in the Enhanced Vengeance setting. But I know for a fact, if players that are like me, but play really cheesy or is in group settings go into Vengeance, with the freedom of set diversity, it might turn into GH version 2. Regardless of what the end result of an imaginary Enhanced Vengeance is, I think it is safe to assume there will be some forced limitations put in place in order to 'even' out the playing field, putting a cap on power levels.

So... in design, the Enhanced Vengeance campaign should be designed so that newer players and less skilled players can find a place they can still PvP... right?

Another consideration that stems from the structure of the game is - population. many many many threads have already pointed out, people are much more inclined in joining the campaign for PvP that has the MOST Population. The games functionality and how fun it is, is strongly influenced by the number of players in each faction. Enhanced Vengeance will be packed as the Test Vengeance has shown us. Now as a veteran, I would be inclined to joining that campaign too. Would GH then be empty, a second Blackreach?

A very fine line needs to be established. If not by limiting players by CP or Alliance Rank, then at the very least, make it so that everyone that goes into Enhance Vengeance has a same power level CAP, everyone can only get to a certain level of power level, or else beginners will not be in there. Do you know why? I'm sure the same thought has crossed your minds cuz I've had it before: How tf did this guy 1 shot me? How tf am I dying so fast? I know the answers now. the beginners need time to grasp that knowledge through a safer environment to observe and experience PvP. That means, on-ground level, even if a god tier player is inside Enhance Vengeance, They should not be able to 1 shot anyone, and neither will they get 1 shot.

So... in design, the Enhanced Vengeance campaign is a better choice for newer players, as well as players that do not mind having a power level cap, suppressing their capabilities that would otherwise make it hard for new players to play in.

This is the best description I can come up with, for what the objective of Enhanced Vengeance should strive to be. If there are no limits, then its GH. If there are limits, you cannot force it upon everyone by making it the only campaign. If there are limits, then players that join Enhanced Vengeance will have to abide by those limitations, if you don't want limits, go GH. IF I can go both GH and Enhanced Vengeance, I will choose the one with the most population, which will most likely be Enhanced Vengeance. Veteran players like me, as well as those other veteran players that frequent GH now, will then be stuck between choosing a less populated GH, or a power level cap limited Enhanced Vengeance. That's why I advocate for a fine line.

This means, 2 cyro.

Enhanced Vengeance is moderated with power level caps - done so with limitations on sets, skills, max stats, etc, and play under a definitive Ceiling.

Unlimited Cyro, GH with its BS fixed - for those that do not want their power levels suppressed.

I'm sure there will be new PvPers being developed in Enhanced Vengeance that will find their place in GH, AFTER they have learned the wheels in the training grounds. GH is not a suitable place for less capable players, this is an objective, not subjective, description.

And Im sure that there will be Veteran PvPers in GH that would prefer to migrate to Enhanced Vengeance, have a power cap on themselves so that the Cyrodil they play in as a whole is more warfare simulation, and less impacted by OP players, with a more 'even' playing field. Even playing field really just mean setting a power level ceiling.



Going off topic to talk a bit on ballgroups - they weren't as big of an issue before, they are at its very peak of disgustingness, there is no need to elaborate on this point as it is very clear, BUT I feel like many people havent really participated in a super optimized ballgroup, and here are some insider insights. Disclaimer: many ballgroups nowadays consist of more than 12 man in a group, meaning within the games setting, they arent in the same group. Therefore it can be assumed that they are so sweaty that they would be in voice chat to follow the lead. What this point really means is = some guilds, groups, are shameless and would zerg group in order to win a fight, and 12 man groups is not enough for them to be effective, cuz, well. they suck. resorting to finding strength in numbers rather than skill.

Zerg ballgrouping, and 12-8 man ballgrouping are 2 different concepts. 12-8 man ballgroups requires a lot more skill, Duh. theres less healers, less room for error, etc etc. it doesn't mean they aren't a nuisance/ trouble maker now in PvP, im just straight up saying they are the ones i would find impressive, while other zerg ball groups are shameless. I want to name guild names, but if you know, you know. I find 'small' ballgroups actually impressive simply because they are the embodiment of peak group play in ESO MMO, you cannot deny this as a fact.

Current problems with ballgroups (zerg balls or small balls) now - Overheal, OP ROA pulling sets, sheild stacks, over optimization leading to Group V Alliance stack, etc.. etc.. I agree Ball groups needs be adjusted so that there are more weaknesses to such groups, create vulnerabilities in them through target nerfs, and their peak annoyance levels will lower back to slightly acceptable standards.

The CORE issue with current ballgroups can be summed up with - combination of sets that have very polarized and specialized utilization in a group setting( that would otherwise be mediocre in a solo setting), meaning, you have 12 players in a group, each player themselves have an effect that would multiple the effectiveness of others in the group, this is not just the trial buff sets; for instance - ball group DPS damage dealers can be hyper-specialized in only dmg, they leave all their health and sustainability to other players in the group that would cover that aspect for them, making them extremely lethal. Healers that are able to overheal the whole group and give a ton of sustain, etc. all of them synergize with each other, a ball group.

Make it so that its harder for them to play, make it so that grouping has a cost. Im sure the peak ballgroupers would actually enjoy the challenge. Weakening ballgroup sets/bonuses/ optimization levels, would also then cull the shameless/weaker 'ball groups', hence making 'real' ball groups that can stand on their own something more rare, and therefore actually impressive, and a good showcase of peak group play in ESO PvP.

Yes, applying a debuff to anyone that groups seems off and punishing those pug and small groups. Perhaps a Nerf like a status given to groupers (like a group nerf that goes up like a vamp cost debuff, the more players in group, the more costs, the more resource heavy. Small groups up to ~5 players should have minimal debuffs)

If its just numbers stacking together, surfing a zerg wave - thats awfully shameful, thats not ball grouping. pointing fingers to all those guilty.

Aside from obnoxious ballgroups, tbh, I dont have any other major issues with GH. cheese tanks can eat dirt, gankers are annoying, the newest addition of not wanting to deal with 'immortal sorcs', but thats the trade off of what no-limitation is (meaning the whole of ESO is in your hands to build, all sets, all skills, all wtv). Thats what player optimization will result into. If I'm allowed to be OP on my spectrum, so should others. Thats why beginners dont belong and need a different playing field.

MincMincMinc

supabicboi wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

I feel like some of you misunderstand the cp cap concept I put in the OP. The cp cap is not forced on endgame players. I suppose a better term would be a requirement. Anyone could play in the vengeance campaign, all levels and cps. The only players who can play in greyhost would be CP500+ or whatever discussed value sounds reasonable at the time.

The most important takeaway most people have regardless if they liked participating is that vengeance actually has a potential bright future. Whereas current cyrodil is like trying to unmix chocolate milk.....its just not possible without near infinite resources. Drink it while its here, but pouring a new glass and adding what you want is a better path forward.

I see the point in all of this. but I want to make sure im understanding what Enhanced Vengeance even is first. first to point out a few facts: the Vengenance we played was only a Test, with literally all possible things that could effect performance, to be disabled and limited, therefore, the version we played was as simple as simple gets in Cyro, even more simple than Cyro 1.0 - this can then be inferred that an Enhanced Vengeance would be in between the test/simplest version of vengeance and the current Cyro GH. But what is in between?...

Well lets theory craft it. I kind of already listed it already before. You go down the list of functions turned off. Start with the easy to rebalance and implement and go from there. Mundus, food, Armor enchants, Jewelry enchants, traits. Basically anything that is a flat buff easily accounted for. Most of these could be passed in one pts cycle.

It gets more complicated when you start looking at effects. Sets, Weapon enchants, Poisons, Potions, Status Effects, certain CP, Passives, abilities. Something as simple as enchants do multiple effects, in essence procs proccing procs which hurts performance if left unchecked. These are way more complex and would have to be introduced one or two at a time.

---

As far as the god tier players and small tier players I think one major factor not seen in GH that we could see in Vengeance was population dilution. Say that there are 100 players in GH currently, maybe 10% are god tier players or 1vXers. If the population increases by 3x suddenly that 10% is only 3% of the population. The vast majority of the time a new player wont run into a god player. This continues if the pvp population actually increases again. I would argue that currently NOT HAVING a functional u50 or NOCP campaign is far worse than a slight chance of running into a good player every now and then on vengeance.

The limitations would be the stat system. With reduced effects and effect proc stacking there is a very small investment difference between players. The new players simply have to slot a different easily changeable stat or skill, whereas in greyhost they need to figure out how the god player is having 20 different invisible effects go off repeatedly. Having clarity in combat would also reduce hackusations and exploiting. Current GH combat at the highest tier is just who knows the latest exploits or bugged set interactions. No cooldowns, Self reviving, parachuting, double/triple/quad ultimate hits, jumping into keeps, bunny hopping 50ft, cc immunity, guaranteed health desyncs, forced regen desyncing......etc.

One of the only reasons I stuck playing the game was because I was trash back in the day and ran into insane players. I remember seeing a vamp sap tank absolutely eating a group of 60+ players and thought that was the coolest *** ever. 2-3 years later I ran into that same player and ran with them for half a decade until cyrodil became truly dysfunctional.

Kungfu

Yasha wrote: »

I agree that consolidating Cyrodiil into two servers (Vengeance and a laggy cheese server) would be a good step. However, I really think Vengeance was on to something with the equalized stats and no gear bonuses.

Instead of trying to go back to the non-proc style server they tried before, I think they should run with the Vengeance idea, but expand on it to allow more player choice and builds. That could include some of the things you mentioned, as well as weapon skill lines, armor type having an impact on health/resistance/regen etc.

I agree but I wanted to tag this because an old friend of mine and VERY experienced Gray Host type player had a GREAT suggestion for Vengeance's future:
When (not yet, and not until last I think) they do add sets back, how about Infinite Archive style? That is to say: each class has 2, 3, maybe up to 4 options for sets to run that are unique to the class.

MincMincMinc

Kungfu wrote: »

Yasha wrote: »

I agree that consolidating Cyrodiil into two servers (Vengeance and a laggy cheese server) would be a good step. However, I really think Vengeance was on to something with the equalized stats and no gear bonuses.

Instead of trying to go back to the non-proc style server they tried before, I think they should run with the Vengeance idea, but expand on it to allow more player choice and builds. That could include some of the things you mentioned, as well as weapon skill lines, armor type having an impact on health/resistance/regen etc.

I agree but I wanted to tag this because an old friend of mine and VERY experienced Gray Host type player had a GREAT suggestion for Vengeance's future:
When (not yet, and not until last I think) they do add sets back, how about Infinite Archive style? That is to say: each class has 2, 3, maybe up to 4 options for sets to run that are unique to the class.

Well realistically what sets are ok to add in?

• Flat stat sets? ................... Hundings? Sure
• Group stat sets.................. RallyingCry? ehhh probably not performative and promotes dense grouping also not performative
• Stat proc sets.................... Clever alch Sure, but I could see non performative sets being an issue on a case by case basis like maybe bloodspawn % chance proc off all damage sources.
• Damage/heal proc sets...... RushOfAgony, there is no way these sets are performative. Sets that are multiple paragraphs of effects and proc conditions are insane. Not to even mention going into how these circumvent the ability gcd system and combat fundamentals. You can't have a PvP combat environment last if you can opt out of the core combat system and still perform or even out perform.

Another option is to gut the rewards for the worthy sets and make all the sets from scratch. You could do the same with all of the crafted set options. Make them simple and performative and enabled in pvp. Inevitably zos needs to sell dlc or something for you to subscribe. They are a business and require money to operate.