I personally choose not to engage in PvP in Elder Scrolls, as it’s not something I enjoy. In my opinion, and I want to stress that this is just my perspective, the current setup leaves both communities a little unsatisfied. PvP players don’t get the full, dedicated PvP experience they might want, and PvE players, who often play Elder Scrolls primarily for its rich story and world, also don’t get a fully PvE-focused game. It feels like both groups only receive half of what they could have.
I don’t mean this as criticism of PvP or PvE players, I respect both communities. I also don’t claim to know what ZOS should or could do to improve PvP. But from my own point of view, I believe the best way to strengthen the game would be to focus more on PvE, because that’s what has always made Elder Scrolls truly amazing.
PvE makes Elder Scrolls amazing. Not PvP!
Urzigurumash wrote: »I personally choose not to engage with the above comment. Other comments make this forum amazing. Not the one above this one!
edward_frigidhands wrote: »I personally choose not to engage in PvP in Elder Scrolls, as it’s not something I enjoy. In my opinion, and I want to stress that this is just my perspective, the current setup leaves both communities a little unsatisfied. PvP players don’t get the full, dedicated PvP experience they might want, and PvE players, who often play Elder Scrolls primarily for its rich story and world, also don’t get a fully PvE-focused game. It feels like both groups only receive half of what they could have.
I don’t mean this as criticism of PvP or PvE players, I respect both communities. I also don’t claim to know what ZOS should or could do to improve PvP. But from my own point of view, I believe the best way to strengthen the game would be to focus more on PvE, because that’s what has always made Elder Scrolls truly amazing.
PvE makes Elder Scrolls amazing. Not PvP!
I don't understand why you're posting that in a thread about the Vengeance campaign. It has nothing to do with this topic.
I think this comment shows very good what a real PvE player with no interest in PvP looks like and how he differs from Vengeance PvP „PvE“ players.
StihlReign wrote: »edward_frigidhands wrote: »
You can tell yourself that its not that many people and they will accept a different version of the game that has all the things you dont like disabled and everyone will just accept it. But you know thats not true and the developers do too.
Think what you wish. You can tell yourself everyone wants to play Grey Host while the zone's population continues to drop until you're the last one left. Play the test. Contribute to the data, or don't.
From the yesterday's (Friday) evening.
This is all fake news, right? It can't be real?
According to some forum members here, server has 80 pop cap, no?
120+ AD players at siege.
80+ AD players at castle defense.
110+ AD players at castle defense.
There wasnt a queue because Vengeance has 3 times the capacity of GreyHost and would barely reach 3 bars when it has same number of players than GreyHost with 50 queue.ToddIngram wrote: »StihlReign wrote: »edward_frigidhands wrote: »
You can tell yourself that its not that many people and they will accept a different version of the game that has all the things you dont like disabled and everyone will just accept it. But you know thats not true and the developers do too.
Think what you wish. You can tell yourself everyone wants to play Grey Host while the zone's population continues to drop until you're the last one left. Play the test. Contribute to the data, or don't.
Grey Host live has a more stable and higher population than vengeance has. There wasn't even a queue last night during prime time on a weekend. There would have been a queue of at least 50 if it weren't for vengeance.
There wasnt a queue because Vengeance has 3 times the capacity of GreyHost and would barely reach 3 bars when it has same number of players than GreyHost with 50 queue.ToddIngram wrote: »StihlReign wrote: »edward_frigidhands wrote: »
You can tell yourself that its not that many people and they will accept a different version of the game that has all the things you dont like disabled and everyone will just accept it. But you know thats not true and the developers do too.
Think what you wish. You can tell yourself everyone wants to play Grey Host while the zone's population continues to drop until you're the last one left. Play the test. Contribute to the data, or don't.
Grey Host live has a more stable and higher population than vengeance has. There wasn't even a queue last night during prime time on a weekend. There would have been a queue of at least 50 if it weren't for vengeance.
ToddIngram wrote: »There wasnt a queue because Vengeance has 3 times the capacity of GreyHost and would barely reach 3 bars when it has same number of players than GreyHost with 50 queue.ToddIngram wrote: »StihlReign wrote: »edward_frigidhands wrote: »
You can tell yourself that its not that many people and they will accept a different version of the game that has all the things you dont like disabled and everyone will just accept it. But you know thats not true and the developers do too.
Think what you wish. You can tell yourself everyone wants to play Grey Host while the zone's population continues to drop until you're the last one left. Play the test. Contribute to the data, or don't.
Grey Host live has a more stable and higher population than vengeance has. There wasn't even a queue last night during prime time on a weekend. There would have been a queue of at least 50 if it weren't for vengeance.
You don't know that. It's an assumption on your part.
ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »
- We were able to hit triple the amount of players that is currently possible in a single Cyrodiil campaign.
- We had three times the number of players in a single Cyrodiil campaign with little to no performance problems.
ToddIngram wrote: »There wasnt a queue because Vengeance has 3 times the capacity of GreyHost and would barely reach 3 bars when it has same number of players than GreyHost with 50 queue.ToddIngram wrote: »StihlReign wrote: »edward_frigidhands wrote: »
You can tell yourself that its not that many people and they will accept a different version of the game that has all the things you dont like disabled and everyone will just accept it. But you know thats not true and the developers do too.
Think what you wish. You can tell yourself everyone wants to play Grey Host while the zone's population continues to drop until you're the last one left. Play the test. Contribute to the data, or don't.
Grey Host live has a more stable and higher population than vengeance has. There wasn't even a queue last night during prime time on a weekend. There would have been a queue of at least 50 if it weren't for vengeance.
You don't know that. It's an assumption on your part.
Sure I have Source: It was stated by ZOS.
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/675548ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »
- We were able to hit triple the amount of players that is currently possible in a single Cyrodiil campaign.
- We had three times the number of players in a single Cyrodiil campaign with little to no performance problems.
I personally choose not to engage in PvP in Elder Scrolls, as it’s not something I enjoy. In my opinion, and I want to stress that this is just my perspective, the current setup leaves both communities a little unsatisfied. PvP players don’t get the full, dedicated PvP experience they might want, and PvE players, who often play Elder Scrolls primarily for its rich story and world, also don’t get a fully PvE-focused game. It feels like both groups only receive half of what they could have.
I don’t mean this as criticism of PvP or PvE players, I respect both communities. I also don’t claim to know what ZOS should or could do to improve PvP. But from my own point of view, I believe the best way to strengthen the game would be to focus more on PvE, because that’s what has always made Elder Scrolls truly amazing.
PvE makes Elder Scrolls amazing. Not PvP!
The whole point of my thread was to make the argument that the pops seen during V1, V2, and during primetime weekend V3 is not sustainable over a full week and over months.From the yesterday's (Friday) evening.
This is all fake news, right? It can't be real?
According to some forum members here, server has 80 pop cap, no?
120+ AD players at siege.
80+ AD players at castle defense.
110+ AD players at castle defense.
I still see posts (see below) that some members here still vehemently deny that Vengeance has increased pop cap.Nobody said it was. The whole point of my thread was to make the argument that the pops seen during V1, V2, and during primetime weekend V3 is not sustainable over a full week and over months.
At least not for PC NA. Maybe for PC EU it will be. But from my experience logging in all week all I saw on other factions not named EP was to log out due to being flat out zerged down.
I still see posts (see below) that some members here still vehemently deny that Vengeance has increased pop cap.Nobody said it was. The whole point of my thread was to make the argument that the pops seen during V1, V2, and during primetime weekend V3 is not sustainable over a full week and over months.
At least not for PC NA. Maybe for PC EU it will be. But from my experience logging in all week all I saw on other factions not named EP was to log out due to being flat out zerged down.
At least 1 bar in Vengeance = 2x bars GH which I demonstrated, but I still believe in Kevin's statement from V1 test that it's 3x.
Still, 2x can't be denied, and for PC EU, there are more Cyrodiil player in V3 in the Prime time than all campaigns together in regular Cyrodiil.
Population on PC EU mega server which is the biggest population wise is stable whole week despite one the biggest PvE events with attached GP, and ths tme there are zero incentives for normie PvE players to play Vengeance.
I plan to open thread with voting tomorrow dedicated PC EU V3.
There are still things which I can't explain why it's success here in the contrast to underperforming (PC NA) and failing (consoles) on other mega servers.