Maintenance for the week of November 3:
• [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – November 3, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – November 3, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 17:00 UTC (12:00PM EST)
• [COMPLETE] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – November 3, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/684716
• [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – November 3, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – November 3, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 17:00 UTC (12:00PM EST)
• [COMPLETE] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – November 3, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/684716
Future of Battlegrounds
-
Radiate77✭✭✭✭✭ImpostorSyndrome wrote: »
Yet, for the entirety of New World’s last 2 weeks before an EoS announcement, 3v3 Arena had role-queue, and matches were made in less than 3 minutes each.
I’d go back and play it for another year but who wants to play a game on EoS?0 -
ImpostorSyndrome wrote: »
Yet, for the entirety of New World’s last 2 weeks before an EoS announcement, 3v3 Arena had role-queue, and matches were made in less than 3 minutes each.
I’d go back and play it for another year but who wants to play a game on EoS?
Roles in ESO mean nothing because people don't care about them. Most people will register matches on fake roles.Ubi facta loquuntrur nоn opus est verbis0 -
Radiate77✭✭✭✭✭ImpostorSyndrome wrote: »ImpostorSyndrome wrote: »
Yet, for the entirety of New World’s last 2 weeks before an EoS announcement, 3v3 Arena had role-queue, and matches were made in less than 3 minutes each.
I’d go back and play it for another year but who wants to play a game on EoS?
Roles in ESO mean nothing because people don't care about them. Most people will register matches on fake roles.
Yeah, if the game let’s them. You don’t just add role-queue to PvP and not add any restrictions to who can queue for what. And you can have 3 DDs on a team for their 3v3, and it works.
In New World damage dealer roles have no restrictions, healer roles need 300 focus(healing stat) and tanks need a specific gem in their weapons.
They could add a resistance requirements to tank role queue, and a max magicka requirement to the healer one, I’m surprised this hasn’t been done for Random Matchmaking problems already.Edited by Radiate77 on 31 October 2025 19:060 -
ImpostorSyndrome wrote: »ImpostorSyndrome wrote: »
Yet, for the entirety of New World’s last 2 weeks before an EoS announcement, 3v3 Arena had role-queue, and matches were made in less than 3 minutes each.
I’d go back and play it for another year but who wants to play a game on EoS?
Roles in ESO mean nothing because people don't care about them. Most people will register matches on fake roles.
Yeah, if the game let’s them. You don’t just add role-queue to PvP and not add any restrictions to who can queue for what. And you can have 3 DDs on a team for their 3v3, and it works.
In New World damage dealer roles have no restrictions, healer roles need 300 focus(healing stat) and tanks need a specific gem in their weapons.
They could add a resistance requirements to tank role queue, and a max magicka requirement to the healer one, I’m surprised this hasn’t been done for Random Matchmaking problems already.
Considering how flexible the build system is in ESO, resistance and base resource values don't mean anything. Even a DD can have high resistance stats, or any DD can have max magic.Ubi facta loquuntrur nоn opus est verbis1 -
Radiate77✭✭✭✭✭ImpostorSyndrome wrote: »ImpostorSyndrome wrote: »ImpostorSyndrome wrote: »
Yet, for the entirety of New World’s last 2 weeks before an EoS announcement, 3v3 Arena had role-queue, and matches were made in less than 3 minutes each.
I’d go back and play it for another year but who wants to play a game on EoS?
Roles in ESO mean nothing because people don't care about them. Most people will register matches on fake roles.
Yeah, if the game let’s them. You don’t just add role-queue to PvP and not add any restrictions to who can queue for what. And you can have 3 DDs on a team for their 3v3, and it works.
In New World damage dealer roles have no restrictions, healer roles need 300 focus(healing stat) and tanks need a specific gem in their weapons.
They could add a resistance requirements to tank role queue, and a max magicka requirement to the healer one, I’m surprised this hasn’t been done for Random Matchmaking problems already.
Considering how flexible the build system is in ESO, resistance and base resource values don't mean anything. Even a DD can have high resistance stats, or any DD can have max magic.
Just suggestions, there are other ways to go about making it work, there is a track record of it working elsewhere, in other MMOs with complex gearing systems and builds.0 -
Moonspawn✭✭✭✭ImpostorSyndrome wrote: »ImpostorSyndrome wrote: »ImpostorSyndrome wrote: »
Yet, for the entirety of New World’s last 2 weeks before an EoS announcement, 3v3 Arena had role-queue, and matches were made in less than 3 minutes each.
I’d go back and play it for another year but who wants to play a game on EoS?
Roles in ESO mean nothing because people don't care about them. Most people will register matches on fake roles.
Yeah, if the game let’s them. You don’t just add role-queue to PvP and not add any restrictions to who can queue for what. And you can have 3 DDs on a team for their 3v3, and it works.
In New World damage dealer roles have no restrictions, healer roles need 300 focus(healing stat) and tanks need a specific gem in their weapons.
They could add a resistance requirements to tank role queue, and a max magicka requirement to the healer one, I’m surprised this hasn’t been done for Random Matchmaking problems already.
Considering how flexible the build system is in ESO, resistance and base resource values don't mean anything. Even a DD can have high resistance stats, or any DD can have max magic.
Just suggestions, there are other ways to go about making it work, there is a track record of it working elsewhere, in other MMOs with complex gearing systems and builds.
Dealing with certain situations often requires changing builds after the match has already begun. Wouldn't that allow for bypassing restrictions?Can you help solve any of the FOUR critical flaws of Two-Teams BGs ?
Looking for feedback on How to fix the Three-Teams objective modes0 -
Haki_7✭✭✭Team didn't want to grab the chaosballs, so the FUN went on and on for almost 14 minutes.
99 out of 100 matches seem handcrafted to drive people away.1 -
Kelenan7368✭✭✭My opinion is the 3 alliance team PVP needs to return. I am not bashing the new 2 team format, I like it but variety make the game better.
So keep the 2 team matches but retore the 3 team games as well.
And a wish for the future, make a 2 team Chaos Ball BG with obstacles and traps with say 3 to 4 different maps!
That would be a welcome addition to PVP!
And maybe an open world PVP toggle?0 -
Kelenan7368 wrote: »My opinion is the 3 alliance team PVP needs to return. I am not bashing the new 2 team format, I like it but variety make the game better.
So keep the 2 team matches but retore the 3 team games as well.
And a wish for the future, make a 2 team Chaos Ball BG with obstacles and traps with say 3 to 4 different maps!
That would be a welcome addition to PVP!
And maybe an open world PVP toggle?
The current number of players participating in Battlegrounds does not allow them to be spread even further across other modes. As you can see, ZOS already allows matches to start even when the number of players on each team is unequal, which further supports the theory of a player shortage.
The only solution that could preserve the current state of Battlegrounds, without making the already poor situation worse, is the introduction of cross-platform gameplay — which, most likely, will not happen anytime soon.Ubi facta loquuntrur nоn opus est verbis1 -
cuddles_with_wroble✭✭✭✭✭this has been said a million times but ill say it again, it doesnt matter if you make them 2 team or 3 team bgs will always be dead unless you:
A ) revamp the maps and game modes to incentivize pvp
and
B ) add a real mmr system so we can have somewhat balanced matches that arent 1 sided stomps
currently all of the game modes we have aside from maybe chaos ball can be won almost entirely without pvping at all and just running away from other players, this fundamentally should not be allowed in a PvP game mode where the entire goal should be to PVP.
PvP is about competition and the satisfaction of knowing you outplayed someone who can critically think and outsmart you, unlike PvE where the mobs always do the same thing and the fight never changes. people adapt and thats what makes PvP interestingEdited by cuddles_with_wroble on 1 November 2025 19:402 -
Haki_7✭✭✭
@cuddles_with_wroble but hasn't it already been formally demonstrated that all of the worst problems of two-teams bgs would remain even if population was infinite and matchmaking was perfect?cuddles_with_wroble wrote: »B ) add a real mmr system so we can have somewhat balanced matches that arent 1 sided stomps
0 -
cuddles_with_wroble✭✭✭✭✭
@cuddles_with_wroble but hasn't it already been formally demonstrated that all of the worst problems of two-teams bgs would remain even if population was infinite and matchmaking was perfect?cuddles_with_wroble wrote: »B ) add a real mmr system so we can have somewhat balanced matches that arent 1 sided stomps
All of the problems of 3 team would also remain with infinite pop and matchmaking.
Both versions are fine imo, if you fixed the game modes and the team balance than 2 team wouldn’t feel nearly as bad and might actually be fun.
Ultimately I don’t care if the bgs are 2 sided or 3 sides, if you had equal team balance and real pvp game modes than I think it would be personal preference4 -
Haki_7✭✭✭
What were the problems with 3-teams BGs? Was it just forcing people who only wanted to play deathmatch into the objective modes?cuddles_with_wroble wrote: »
@cuddles_with_wroble but hasn't it already been formally demonstrated that all of the worst problems of two-teams bgs would remain even if population was infinite and matchmaking was perfect?cuddles_with_wroble wrote: »B ) add a real mmr system so we can have somewhat balanced matches that arent 1 sided stomps
All of the problems of 3 team would also remain with infinite pop and matchmaking.
Edited by Haki_7 on 2 November 2025 15:151 -
Decimus✭✭✭✭✭
✭
What were the problems with 3-teams BGs? Was it just forcing people who only wanted to play deathmatch into the objective modes?cuddles_with_wroble wrote: »
@cuddles_with_wroble but hasn't it already been formally demonstrated that all of the worst problems of two-teams bgs would remain even if population was infinite and matchmaking was perfect?cuddles_with_wroble wrote: »B ) add a real mmr system so we can have somewhat balanced matches that arent 1 sided stomps
All of the problems of 3 team would also remain with infinite pop and matchmaking.
The very same problems 2-way BGs have, and a billion other ones including, but not limited to:- Teaming. People ganging up on the weakest team, or a mutually disliked player. Teaming is technically unavoidable in 3-way BGs, because one team will always get focused more than the others.
- People with combined <1000 CPs winning battlegrounds by running back empty Relics and standing on empty flags while other two teams fight.
- A team having a healer having an even bigger advantage than they do right now as there were less targets to heal (=more effective heals).
Some amazing balanced 3-way BGs:
[snip]
...and there were literally thousands more like these. So let's maybe stop misrepresenting things.
BGs have a problem with matchmaking, they have problems with map design, lack of map variety, lack of rewards (once again), problems with game mode design... muddying the waters and pretending the team vs team format utilized by League of Legends, World of Warcraft, GW2, CS, DOTA 2, Valorant etc etc is the problem only makes it less likely that actual problems are addressed.
[edited for spamming]Edited by ZOS_Icy on 3 November 2025 11:114 -
Moonspawn✭✭✭✭
What were the problems with 3-teams BGs? Was it just forcing people who only wanted to play deathmatch into the objective modes?cuddles_with_wroble wrote: »
@cuddles_with_wroble but hasn't it already been formally demonstrated that all of the worst problems of two-teams bgs would remain even if population was infinite and matchmaking was perfect?cuddles_with_wroble wrote: »B ) add a real mmr system so we can have somewhat balanced matches that arent 1 sided stomps
All of the problems of 3 team would also remain with infinite pop and matchmaking.
Another one was that it was far too easy for the third team to complete the objective uncontested.
@cuddles_with_wroble if you'd like to know why two teams working together against the third was almost never a problem in 4v4v4 just give me a heads up. I'd be more than happy to explain. We have two issues so far, can you think of another?
Edited by Moonspawn on 2 November 2025 19:45Can you help solve any of the FOUR critical flaws of Two-Teams BGs ?
Looking for feedback on How to fix the Three-Teams objective modes0 -
Haki_7✭✭✭
What were the problems with 3-teams BGs? Was it just forcing people who only wanted to play deathmatch into the objective modes?cuddles_with_wroble wrote: »
@cuddles_with_wroble but hasn't it already been formally demonstrated that all of the worst problems of two-teams bgs would remain even if population was infinite and matchmaking was perfect?cuddles_with_wroble wrote: »B ) add a real mmr system so we can have somewhat balanced matches that arent 1 sided stomps
All of the problems of 3 team would also remain with infinite pop and matchmaking.
Another one was that it was far too easy for the third team to complete the objective uncontested.
@cuddles_with_wroble if you'd like to know why two teams working together against the third was almost never a problem in 4v4v4 just give me a heads up. I'd be more than happy to explain. We have two issues so far, can you think of another?
The third problem would be low rewards. I believe that's the last one?0 -
Moonspawn✭✭✭✭
I vote to phrase it: Rewards did not include endeavors, golden pursuits, tokens and obscene amounts of transmutation crystals.
What were the problems with 3-teams BGs? Was it just forcing people who only wanted to play deathmatch into the objective modes?cuddles_with_wroble wrote: »
@cuddles_with_wroble but hasn't it already been formally demonstrated that all of the worst problems of two-teams bgs would remain even if population was infinite and matchmaking was perfect?cuddles_with_wroble wrote: »B ) add a real mmr system so we can have somewhat balanced matches that arent 1 sided stomps
All of the problems of 3 team would also remain with infinite pop and matchmaking.
Another one was that it was far too easy for the third team to complete the objective uncontested.
@cuddles_with_wroble if you'd like to know why two teams working together against the third was almost never a problem in 4v4v4 just give me a heads up. I'd be more than happy to explain. We have two issues so far, can you think of another?
The third problem would be low rewards.
Can you help solve any of the FOUR critical flaws of Two-Teams BGs ?
Looking for feedback on How to fix the Three-Teams objective modes0 -
silentxthreat✭✭✭did 5 battlegrounds yesterday. got afk/bots at least 2 per game every time it popped up. zos needs to ban these 15k hp people sitting afk at the spawn whole game when you see the same characters 5 times in a row1
-
Moonspawn✭✭✭✭silentxthreat wrote: »did 5 battlegrounds yesterday. got afk/bots at least 2 per game every time it popped up. zos needs to ban these 15k hp people sitting afk at the spawn whole game when you see the same characters 5 times in a row
Did they die a lot before going afk?Can you help solve any of the FOUR critical flaws of Two-Teams BGs ?
Looking for feedback on How to fix the Three-Teams objective modes0 -
silentxthreat✭✭✭
Did they die a lot before going afk?[/quote]
not even the case afk from start to end 0 dam 0 heals
same person will be in 5 games in a row so its not like they accidentally had a addon accept queue. its like the old dolmen bots0 -
Decimus✭✭✭✭✭
✭silentxthreat wrote: »did 5 battlegrounds yesterday. got afk/bots at least 2 per game every time it popped up. zos needs to ban these 15k hp people sitting afk at the spawn whole game when you see the same characters 5 times in a row
Did they die a lot before going afk?
Who cares if someone died a lot or not - leave the BG or stop wasting everyone else's (and their own) time. If people did that in almost any other team vs team game they would be banned for inting.1 -
Moonspawn✭✭✭✭silentxthreat wrote: »Did they die a lot before going afk?
not even the case afk from start to end 0 dam 0 heals
same person will be in 5 games in a row so its not like they accidentally had a addon accept queue. its like the old dolmen bots
So they were only there because of the rewards?Edited by Moonspawn on 3 November 2025 20:54Can you help solve any of the FOUR critical flaws of Two-Teams BGs ?
Looking for feedback on How to fix the Three-Teams objective modes0 -
silentxthreat wrote: »did 5 battlegrounds yesterday. got afk/bots at least 2 per game every time it popped up. zos needs to ban these 15k hp people sitting afk at the spawn whole game when you see the same characters 5 times in a row
Did they die a lot before going afk?
Who cares if someone died a lot or not - leave the BG or stop wasting everyone else's (and their own) time. If people did that in almost any other team vs team game they would be banned for inting.
Great example of behavior that would also be punished with a ban. People who leave a match after the first death, or because they consider their team unworthy, should have at least a one-hour penalty(account-wide) before the next queue.Edited by ImpostorSyndrome on 3 November 2025 22:08Ubi facta loquuntrur nоn opus est verbis0 -
MoonlightShadow✭✭✭Maybe one of the easiest ways is to make it 3 queues.
Queue 1: solo queue for deathmatch
Queue 2: solo queue for objective (no ap / rewards for player kills, no list of kills or assistant kills, score and ap are only objective based)
Queue 3: 4v4 group deathmatch queue
To me nothing is more annoying then a group making an objective match into their own personal deathmatch. Make it so they get no rewards or ap if they don't achieve objectives.1 -
Decimus✭✭✭✭✭
✭ImpostorSyndrome wrote: »silentxthreat wrote: »did 5 battlegrounds yesterday. got afk/bots at least 2 per game every time it popped up. zos needs to ban these 15k hp people sitting afk at the spawn whole game when you see the same characters 5 times in a row
Did they die a lot before going afk?
Who cares if someone died a lot or not - leave the BG or stop wasting everyone else's (and their own) time. If people did that in almost any other team vs team game they would be banned for inting.
Great example of behavior that would also be punished with a ban. People who leave a match after the first death, or because they consider their team unworthy, should have at least a one-hour penalty(account-wide) before the next queue.
In an ideal world there'd be a functioning MMR system and it'd be the MMR/ranking that gets punished by the BG dip out. This is how it works in every other game after all.
People leaving BGs are much less of a problem than the ones who sit in spawn and waste everyone's (including their team mates) time out of spite... which is something that could also be corrected with proper game design (i.e. kicking people down from spawn a lot sooner).
There is a myriad of reasons people leave battlegrounds and it's not always for a toxic or ego centered reason... one good example of this would be just the person being bugged and not able to play their character, performance issues like suddenly having a 10 FPS slideshow etc. At that point I'd rather have the team mate leave as quick as possible and hopefully get a person who is able to play as a replacement than have your team play with a handicap basically.0 -
lostineternity✭✭✭✭ImpostorSyndrome wrote: »silentxthreat wrote: »did 5 battlegrounds yesterday. got afk/bots at least 2 per game every time it popped up. zos needs to ban these 15k hp people sitting afk at the spawn whole game when you see the same characters 5 times in a row
Did they die a lot before going afk?
Who cares if someone died a lot or not - leave the BG or stop wasting everyone else's (and their own) time. If people did that in almost any other team vs team game they would be banned for inting.
Great example of behavior that would also be punished with a ban. People who leave a match after the first death, or because they consider their team unworthy, should have at least a one-hour penalty(account-wide) before the next queue.
In an ideal world there'd be a functioning MMR system and it'd be the MMR/ranking that gets punished by the BG dip out. This is how it works in every other game after all.
People leaving BGs are much less of a problem than the ones who sit in spawn and waste everyone's (including their team mates) time out of spite... which is something that could also be corrected with proper game design (i.e. kicking people down from spawn a lot sooner).
There is a myriad of reasons people leave battlegrounds and it's not always for a toxic or ego centered reason... one good example of this would be just the person being bugged and not able to play their character, performance issues like suddenly having a 10 FPS slideshow etc. At that point I'd rather have the team mate leave as quick as possible and hopefully get a person who is able to play as a replacement than have your team play with a handicap basically.
What an amazing story with pink ponies and hobbits.
Next time try to write such a delusional story from your backup account. You did quit hundreds of times on your stream from BGs due to low chances to win and then you usualre was talking *** about your teammates and their builds.
Yeah yeah poor performance and lags and some other mythical issues.
What a bs this post is, like no one knows who you are.0 -
ImpostorSyndrome wrote: »silentxthreat wrote: »did 5 battlegrounds yesterday. got afk/bots at least 2 per game every time it popped up. zos needs to ban these 15k hp people sitting afk at the spawn whole game when you see the same characters 5 times in a row
Did they die a lot before going afk?
Who cares if someone died a lot or not - leave the BG or stop wasting everyone else's (and their own) time. If people did that in almost any other team vs team game they would be banned for inting.
Great example of behavior that would also be punished with a ban. People who leave a match after the first death, or because they consider their team unworthy, should have at least a one-hour penalty(account-wide) before the next queue.
In an ideal world there'd be a functioning MMR system and it'd be the MMR/ranking that gets punished by the BG dip out. This is how it works in every other game after all.
People leaving BGs are much less of a problem than the ones who sit in spawn and waste everyone's (including their team mates) time out of spite... which is something that could also be corrected with proper game design (i.e. kicking people down from spawn a lot sooner).
There is a myriad of reasons people leave battlegrounds and it's not always for a toxic or ego centered reason... one good example of this would be just the person being bugged and not able to play their character, performance issues like suddenly having a 10 FPS slideshow etc. At that point I'd rather have the team mate leave as quick as possible and hopefully get a person who is able to play as a replacement than have your team play with a handicap basically.
96% of the reasons are purely "toxic" and "ego-centered", especially on PC-UE. And we all know those people very well
Ubi facta loquuntrur nоn opus est verbis0