PVP Deserves More Respect

colossalvoids

Soarora wrote: »

People want the rewards without getting outside of their comfort zone and ZOS tends to cater to bad players instead of pushing them to get better.

Kinda why I think no reward would bring much satisfaction there. It would be either a long pointless grind of some sorts locked by once per day formula or something people would outright get having hundreds of millions of ap stashed for years, especially now when you're even getting ap without PvP from logins and stuff.

For pve it's easier as you do scripted sequences which can be tracked for obscure achievements, trifectas etc. and still you're getting most stuff for simple clears on an easier side and not for actual meaningful achievements. Can't imagine them trying to figure out how to award skilled play in PvP the same way, or even track it and evaluate as it's miles more complex. Still only thing that personally matters is if PvP is played and bringing joy, no rewards would change a thing if PvP stays leaking players and no one willing to fill the old boots. This 60v60v60 is embarrassing downscale from launch and currently unable to grow or even have a stable pop to even start talking about rewards. In pve bribing can work to an extent, for pvp it's different.

PathosDante

Most people said my ideas were wrong, but just like the current situation, easily farming AP and reaching level 50 doesn’t make someone a real PvP player. There shouldn’t be 5-star PvP players with zero skill — those 5 stars should truly belong to people who deserve them. If necessary, even their level could drop when they die too often. That’s when the true value of a 5-star rank would be understood.


It’s really pathetic that 5-star players with over 2500+ CP die in a 1v1 just from someone spamming a single skill.

Four_Fingers

It takes 64,000,000 AP to reach alliance rank 50 which takes long enough now if you play proper PvP.
We do not need a reduction in ap gain, if anything we need to gain more ap.

PathosDante

Four_Fingers wrote: »

It takes 64,000,000 AP to reach alliance rank 50 which takes long enough now if you play proper PvP.
We do not need a reduction in ap gain, if anything we need to gain more ap.

For example, if we earned +500 AP for defeating each player but lost -1000 AP when we died to one, reaching 5 stars on the server would be extremely challenging — but that’s exactly what would make it meaningful. People would spend hours defending or attacking keeps just to achieve that 5-star rank. Unfortunately, in the current system, you automatically get 5 stars after spending a certain amount of time in PVP, and in my opinion, that makes it completely meaningless.

Warhawke_80

I guess it's a numbers game...most MMO's has a tiny PVP Community, so there just isn't much of a financial return for catering to them.


Right now I'm testing this retro medieval/fantasy FPS and if MMO PVP was like that more folks would play...to me MMO PVP is just boring, and I don't think it's anyone's fault...it's just boring.

Overamera

Only crossplay can save PvP now since they never add new PvP content for years with such small PvP community we have now.

DenverRalphy

Overamera wrote: »

Only crossplay can save PvP now since they never add new PvP content for years with such small PvP community we have now.

All crossplay would achieve is guaranteeing fewer console players playing PvP. There's not one singular example of crossplay PvP that didn't result in console players getting the short end of the stick.

Iriidius

PathosDante wrote: »

Four_Fingers wrote: »

It takes 64,000,000 AP to reach alliance rank 50 which takes long enough now if you play proper PvP.
We do not need a reduction in ap gain, if anything we need to gain more ap.

For example, if we earned +500 AP for defeating each player but lost -1000 AP when we died to one, reaching 5 stars on the server would be extremely challenging — but that’s exactly what would make it meaningful. People would spend hours defending or attacking keeps just to achieve that 5-star rank. Unfortunately, in the current system, you automatically get 5 stars after spending a certain amount of time in PVP, and in my opinion, that makes it completely meaningless.

That would encourage choosing only fights that you can’t loose more than it already is.
It is totally possible to get bad KD by getting repeatedly zerged without doing anything wrong over than being in the wrong place and team at the wrong time.

How would new ap be generated if everytime a player gets 500ap for a kill another looses 1000? That means 500 ap are annihilated for every kill and soon oftenkilled players are out of ap. 500ap for kills is much less than we get now. Mainly ballgroups would get 5stars.

IC already makes you loose tel car when you get killed and is therefore unpopular so how popular would Cyrodiil be if you loose even morefor getting killed.

Never dying players killing everyone already get the best playing experience and rewards and don’t need extra motivation and rewards to not quit. Players getting killed all the time need motivation/reward to not quit the game.

Overamera

DenverRalphy wrote: »

Overamera wrote: »

Only crossplay can save PvP now since they never add new PvP content for years with such small PvP community we have now.

All crossplay would achieve is guaranteeing fewer console players playing PvP. There's not one singular example of crossplay PvP that didn't result in console players getting the short end of the stick.

Console PvP is already dead. Having more people to actually PvP with and against at anytime and not only during prime time on a weekend. Sounds like a dream to me.

PathosDante

Iriidius wrote: »

PathosDante wrote: »

Four_Fingers wrote: »

It takes 64,000,000 AP to reach alliance rank 50 which takes long enough now if you play proper PvP.
We do not need a reduction in ap gain, if anything we need to gain more ap.

For example, if we earned +500 AP for defeating each player but lost -1000 AP when we died to one, reaching 5 stars on the server would be extremely challenging — but that’s exactly what would make it meaningful. People would spend hours defending or attacking keeps just to achieve that 5-star rank. Unfortunately, in the current system, you automatically get 5 stars after spending a certain amount of time in PVP, and in my opinion, that makes it completely meaningless.

That would encourage choosing only fights that you can’t loose more than it already is.
It is totally possible to get bad KD by getting repeatedly zerged without doing anything wrong over than being in the wrong place and team at the wrong time.

How would new ap be generated if everytime a player gets 500ap for a kill another looses 1000? That means 500 ap are annihilated for every kill and soon oftenkilled players are out of ap. 500ap for kills is much less than we get now. Mainly ballgroups would get 5stars.

IC already makes you loose tel car when you get killed and is therefore unpopular so how popular would Cyrodiil be if you loose even morefor getting killed.

Never dying players killing everyone already get the best playing experience and rewards and don’t need extra motivation and rewards to not quit. Players getting killed all the time need motivation/reward to not quit the game.

Since there’s no AP loss, people can jump into the Zergs without hesitation.

If there were a penalty for dying, players would be more encouraged to form groups, and we’d see more organized fighting groups.

I still stand by my opinion. It’s all about competition. Besides, competition makes players improve, and as a result, we’d have more skilled players.

SneaK

DenverRalphy wrote: »

Overamera wrote: »

Only crossplay can save PvP now since they never add new PvP content for years with such small PvP community we have now.

All crossplay would achieve is guaranteeing fewer console players playing PvP. There's not one singular example of crossplay PvP that didn't result in console players getting the short end of the stick.

At least cross play between PS and Xbox if that’s easier. I know the PC crowd isn’t pushing for crossplay, but console crossplay is required at this point.

And if you’re insinuating PC players are better or something, no. It’s not an FPS where people are clicking heads, lots of pc people play on controllers as well.

fizzybeef

Overamera wrote: »

Only crossplay can save PvP now since they never add new PvP content for years with such small PvP community we have now.

i agree.

But its the same on pc ngl.
Just look at the current steam charts hahaha



Eso has probably like 20k players daily in total on pc and thats generous calculating in the people who launch eso not by steam.
And of all these we get like 300 people to fill into pvp at prime time but not while these events for example then its just 2 bars maybe JUST 3 bars.

So literally the pvp community is so small, if these dedicated people are getting more fed up (vengeance lol) or moving to other games pc will have the same issues like consoles too.

On console PS EU we had 1 bar each today at 9 pm on a saturday.




So even if they would add crossplay tomorrow - which will not happen - we are still on thin ice.

And crossüöay will not be even added next year, mark my words.

They said they took 9 months to code swimming mounts, wich are basically the normal running anmimations but under water

MasterSpatula

So wait, do you want in incentivize more people to PVP or do you want to penalize people for losing in one the most unbalanced, troll-build-friendly PVPs on the entire market--one that happens to allow level 10s to play against CP3600s?

Cause you really only get one of those.

Overamera

fizzybeef wrote: »

Overamera wrote: »

Only crossplay can save PvP now since they never add new PvP content for years with such small PvP community we have now.

i agree.

But its the same on pc ngl.
Just look at the current steam charts hahaha



Eso has probably like 20k players daily in total on pc and thats generous calculating in the people who launch eso not by steam.
And of all these we get like 300 people to fill into pvp at prime time but not while these events for example then its just 2 bars maybe JUST 3 bars.

So literally the pvp community is so small, if these dedicated people are getting more fed up (vengeance lol) or moving to other games pc will have the same issues like consoles too.

On console PS EU we had 1 bar each today at 9 pm on a saturday.




So even if they would add crossplay tomorrow - which will not happen - we are still on thin ice.

And crossüöay will not be even added next year, mark my words.

They said they took 9 months to code swimming mounts, wich are basically the normal running anmimations but under water

Yup barely any PvP community left. Nobody to hold tournaments anymore, nobody in IC etc. Crossplay would make the community alot bigger and surely even bring back so many players.

ArchMikem

PathosDante wrote: »

Four_Fingers wrote: »

It takes 64,000,000 AP to reach alliance rank 50 which takes long enough now if you play proper PvP.
We do not need a reduction in ap gain, if anything we need to gain more ap.

For example, if we earned +500 AP for defeating each player but lost -1000 AP when we died to one, reaching 5 stars on the server would be extremely challenging — but that’s exactly what would make it meaningful. People would spend hours defending or attacking keeps just to achieve that 5-star rank. Unfortunately, in the current system, you automatically get 5 stars after spending a certain amount of time in PVP, and in my opinion, that makes it completely meaningless.

I've been playing in Cyrodiil, Imp City, and BGs on and off for 8 years now. My Main is just shy of her second Star and still millions of AP away from the full 5. I have toiled, struggled, and swore my way toward that second star, but if your system were in place, I'd still be a Captain.

If even that.

Radiate77

DenverRalphy wrote: »

Overamera wrote: »

Only crossplay can save PvP now since they never add new PvP content for years with such small PvP community we have now.

All crossplay would achieve is guaranteeing fewer console players playing PvP. There's not one singular example of crossplay PvP that didn't result in console players getting the short end of the stick.

New World is fully Crossplay and I was having a blast in 3v3 on controller.

PvP in ESO has much bigger problems, like no role-queue for PvP. You can have 2-3 healers/tanks on your team for 4v4, and land in a never ending Deathmatch, it’s garbage. And on the flip side, if it’s obj… that team has the most free win imaginable.

Another area where New World did it better, was they applied a 30% healing debuff to people in heavy armor, and a 30% healing buff to people in light armor. They determine it by your loadout’s weight, so I’m not sure how ESO could pull it off, but healing, or, self-healing, is a huge problem in this game, players can live indefinitely. This needs to change if PvP in ESO were to succeed.

MISTFORMBZZZ

Radiate77 wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

Overamera wrote: »

Only crossplay can save PvP now since they never add new PvP content for years with such small PvP community we have now.

All crossplay would achieve is guaranteeing fewer console players playing PvP. There's not one singular example of crossplay PvP that didn't result in console players getting the short end of the stick.

New World is fully Crossplay and I was having a blast in 3v3 on controller.

The devs were also saying in the reddit AMA that they dont see how console people would be left behind, based on their data.
Wich makes me think, the data must show somehow that consoleros are the better players, maybe because we didnt get carried by addon´s for years

JustLovely

More respect?

I'd settle for some respect.

Vengeance is just a kick to the crotch for the PvP community and that's coming after years and years of neglect.

aetherix8

JustLovely wrote: »

More respect?

I'd settle for some respect.

Vengeance is just a kick to the crotch for the PvP community and that's coming after years and years of neglect.

But this discussion isn’t about Vengeance. It’s about better rewards for PvP that would be much harder to obtain, and basically about making PvP in Cyro just as appealing to a wider audience as IC is rn.

JustLovely

aetherix8 wrote: »

JustLovely wrote: »

More respect?

I'd settle for some respect.

Vengeance is just a kick to the crotch for the PvP community and that's coming after years and years of neglect.

But this discussion isn’t about Vengeance. It’s about better rewards for PvP that would be much harder to obtain, and basically about making PvP in Cyro just as appealing to a wider audience as IC is rn.

I didn't realize IC even had a regular population outside of events that force players to the zone.

The point was that ZOS has been less than helpful to the PvP community for most of the existence of the game, and vengeance is even worse than what we were/are getting now.

soelslaev

DenverRalphy wrote: »

PvP is waaay outside that casual comfort zone.

And this is what I just don't get. Is something wrong with my brain?

A long while back, I tried out ESO because they advertised this fancy new expansion that triggered my nostalgia. It was called Morrowind, but you probably haven't heard about it.

Anyway, back then, in the first few months, I was just doing different things trying out the game. And some banners or in-game notice or something drew me into this big zone called Cyrodiil. And I was not entirely ignorant. I knew it was PvP in a general sense, but no more. And, after a long hike, I found myself in the town of Cheydinhal standing in front of a lady with a cyan quest marker. Suddenly, a skeleton appeared out of thin air and killed me in one hit. The camera showed me my dead body and the skeleton walked backwards and disappeared with an ominous sound effect. From that moment, I was hooked.

Now, we all know what was really going on. Someone was camping the daily quest grind spots during the Whitestrake event. I was just an unlucky young foal who wandered onto a busy highway at night.

But who could experience that and not want to figure out what was going on and participate and get more skilled at whatever was needed to play in this kind of game?

Then again, my father never ever let me win a game of chess. I had to get old enough for my mind to mature, buy a book on chess, read it, practice the principles, and then finally at the age of 12 or so, I finally beat him in a game. And I grew up on quarter-eating video games like Defender. Was it shaping experiences like that? Or just some inborn thing? 🤷

Illmatic

MISTFORMBZZZ wrote: »

Radiate77 wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

Overamera wrote: »

Only crossplay can save PvP now since they never add new PvP content for years with such small PvP community we have now.

All crossplay would achieve is guaranteeing fewer console players playing PvP. There's not one singular example of crossplay PvP that didn't result in console players getting the short end of the stick.

New World is fully Crossplay and I was having a blast in 3v3 on controller.

The devs were also saying in the reddit AMA that they dont see how console people would be left behind, based on their data.
Wich makes me think, the data must show somehow that consoleros are the better players, maybe because we didnt get carried by addon´s for years

I played PvP on both and yeah i can tell it, the average level in PvP is above on consoles. When i came to PC EU from XBOX EU, i saw the difference : 1vX was easier for just one example..I don't know why tbh

QB1

Would be great to get more than 10-30K gold at the end of a 30-DAY campaign….

DenverRalphy

soelslaev wrote: »

DenverRalphy wrote: »

PvP is waaay outside that casual comfort zone.

And this is what I just don't get. Is something wrong with my brain?

A long while back, I tried out ESO because they advertised this fancy new expansion that triggered my nostalgia. It was called Morrowind, but you probably haven't heard about it.

Anyway, back then, in the first few months, I was just doing different things trying out the game. And some banners or in-game notice or something drew me into this big zone called Cyrodiil. And I was not entirely ignorant. I knew it was PvP in a general sense, but no more. And, after a long hike, I found myself in the town of Cheydinhal standing in front of a lady with a cyan quest marker. Suddenly, a skeleton appeared out of thin air and killed me in one hit. The camera showed me my dead body and the skeleton walked backwards and disappeared with an ominous sound effect. From that moment, I was hooked.

Now, we all know what was really going on. Someone was camping the daily quest grind spots during the Whitestrake event. I was just an unlucky young foal who wandered onto a busy highway at night.

But who could experience that and not want to figure out what was going on and participate and get more skilled at whatever was needed to play in this kind of game?

Then again, my father never ever let me win a game of chess. I had to get old enough for my mind to mature, buy a book on chess, read it, practice the principles, and then finally at the age of 12 or so, I finally beat him in a game. And I grew up on quarter-eating video games like Defender. Was it shaping experiences like that? Or just some inborn thing? 🤷

Hey, I'm right there with you. I know exactly what you're saying. But have you seen the explosion of anger that happens on these forums whenever there's a juicy morsel tied to that very scenario?

soelslaev

DenverRalphy wrote: »

But have you seen the explosion of anger that happens on these forums whenever there's a juicy morsel tied to that very scenario?

LOL. Not yet. Links? I love to read drama posts.

cuddles_with_wroble

SneaK wrote: »

They need to incentivize objectives and come up with some fresh additions to Cyro. The fights are mostly meaningless nowadays because the 1vX mentality has overtaken objective Cyro. One Tamriel really killed it honestly. People just hop all over factions and don’t care about winning camps anymore. Peak Cyro was when people were loyal to factions and played for each other, their guilds, etc, rather than “AP” or clipping a 1vX.

There’s really just been so many random changes along with boredom that has destroyed the PvP community. I say community cause the bones of Cyro are still there, it’s the “why” that’s changed and it’s cause ZOS has pushed people away from objective play.

Couple examples-

I could care less if Goliath420xv1 gets emperor on AD when they had emperor for 15 days on EP last month. Doesn’t make me want to play the obj.

Why go from the southern gate to capture Arrius Mine after EP night capped with hammer, for 3k AP, when I could just go repair walls that randomly degrade overtime for the same amount.

this has ALWAYS been the case, you get the exact same or close to the exact same rewards for winning as you do for losing the camp.

people have also ALWAYS changed factions based on population and most pvpers i know used to have 3 of ever class ( 1 for each faction) back before faction locks became a thing, any real pvp wants to fight against the zerg and not with the zerg and therefore will almost always swap to the lowest population faction.

there is absolutely no incentive to play the map or try to win the camp esp when the score is vastly manipulated by night time pvdoor guilds who take the whole map and every scroll while no one is around to contest them

1 good player can kill 5 or 6 casual players pretty easily most of the time, for that level of player there is virtually no fun in running around in a zerg or sieging keeps bcs theres no skill expression or real pvp that happens in zerg vs zergs fights and any good zerg leader knows that siege and numbers is superior to any amount of skill

new players become -> zerglings learn to play and become -> 1vx's get zerged to many times and form -> ballgroups ruin cyrodil with lag and make zerglings quit.

CalamityCat

I honestly don't think the rewards for PvP are that bad compared to PvE. Most of PvE just feels like sets and gold as a reward too! I can't remember the last time I did PvE for the rewards unless it was during an event or Golden Pursuit. I haven't been in a dungeon or trial in months. I take new chars through dungeons for the quest skill point then that's them done now lol. Considering how few sets are really useful in game, most of my PvP time has rewarded me with nothing of real use.

In comparison PvP can actually be fun and far less predictable than the same old boss fights. Winning a fight, especially one I didn't expect to is usually enough of a reward for me. I play games to have fun, and PvP is where I find my fun in ESO now. But I do get the point that players want better rewards. I just find PvE is too much of a snoozefest in ESO now.

It would be nice if there was more we could buy with AP, but otherwise I'm more concerned about balance and lag than rewards.

PathosDante

ArchMikem wrote: »

PathosDante wrote: »

Four_Fingers wrote: »

It takes 64,000,000 AP to reach alliance rank 50 which takes long enough now if you play proper PvP.
We do not need a reduction in ap gain, if anything we need to gain more ap.

For example, if we earned +500 AP for defeating each player but lost -1000 AP when we died to one, reaching 5 stars on the server would be extremely challenging — but that’s exactly what would make it meaningful. People would spend hours defending or attacking keeps just to achieve that 5-star rank. Unfortunately, in the current system, you automatically get 5 stars after spending a certain amount of time in PVP, and in my opinion, that makes it completely meaningless.

I've been playing in Cyrodiil, Imp City, and BGs on and off for 8 years now. My Main is just shy of her second Star and still millions of AP away from the full 5. I have toiled, struggled, and swore my way toward that second star, but if your system were in place, I'd still be a Captain.

If even that.

My purpose is to make sure everyone’s rank actually reflects their real skill level.

You said it yourself — then you don’t really deserve to be a 2-star.

If the system I’m talking about were in place, stars would actually mean something. Right now, both rank and AP are just pointless grind numbers.

Pinja

PathosDante wrote: »

ArchMikem wrote: »

PathosDante wrote: »

Four_Fingers wrote: »

It takes 64,000,000 AP to reach alliance rank 50 which takes long enough now if you play proper PvP.
We do not need a reduction in ap gain, if anything we need to gain more ap.

For example, if we earned +500 AP for defeating each player but lost -1000 AP when we died to one, reaching 5 stars on the server would be extremely challenging — but that’s exactly what would make it meaningful. People would spend hours defending or attacking keeps just to achieve that 5-star rank. Unfortunately, in the current system, you automatically get 5 stars after spending a certain amount of time in PVP, and in my opinion, that makes it completely meaningless.

I've been playing in Cyrodiil, Imp City, and BGs on and off for 8 years now. My Main is just shy of her second Star and still millions of AP away from the full 5. I have toiled, struggled, and swore my way toward that second star, but if your system were in place, I'd still be a Captain.

If even that.

My purpose is to make sure everyone’s rank actually reflects their real skill level.

You said it yourself — then you don’t really deserve to be a 2-star.

If the system I’m talking about were in place, stars would actually mean something. Right now, both rank and AP are just pointless grind numbers.

There was a Legendary and absolute renowned Blue five star who wore light hundings and yielded a resto staff repairing walls. While others fled to battle, they stayed and toiled. Someone had to repair those upgraded walls, a true hero.

While I would agree that an mmr rank could be added and displayed the five star rank is truly a grind that should not be touched. I would not have made the bold all melee build I use to dominate and farm Imperial City with now if I lost rank with each death. An enemy could choose to ignore my five stars thinking I'm some easy achievement, but it'll be to there detriment.

Katahdin

PathosDante wrote: »

Major_Mangle wrote: »

PathosDante wrote: »

One more thing: Alliance Points are way too easy to get. I feel like if you earn points for killing someone, you should lose points when you die too. This would let characters with zero points try to earn them back in battlegrounds rather than hanging around the big PVP zones.

I believe dying in PVP should cost you points too.

A better approach imo would be to reduce the amount of AP for taking objectives like resourcs and keeps, but increase it for killing players, and the more people who attacked a target the less AP each participants gets (afaik that's how it currently works). We need less incentives for PvDoor and more for PvP.

Losing currency is fine for IC with the telvar system but I don't see any need for AP to behave the same way.

I definitely think there should be a penalty for dying in PvP. What makes Imperial fun is the risk of losing Tel Var — we try to avoid dying, flee to stay alive, or attack to earn Tel Var. IC is perfect in that sense.

And how is that working out? Aside from when there are events, the place is dead because people HATE to lose half their tel var on death. Its been complained about over and over and over when IC was newer