Community Update – Vengeance Testing & Cyrodiil

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO · December 9

xylena wrote: »

LPapirius wrote: »

On PC NA 18:00 Grey Host is 4-3-4 population
On PC NA 18:00 Vengeance is 1-2-1 population

Each Vengeance bar is about 3x as many players as each Live bar. So it's more like 4/3/4 vs 3/6/3. The weird faction split is bad for the health of both campaigns. They need to commit.

On PC there is always 1 bar shown, there can be 0 players on a campaign and it will still show 1 bar, additionally bars 1&2 fill faster than bar 3&4 (we tested this in the old days we queued in with multiple 12m to see when the bars changed.

So I would suggest it's likely the same now, on vengeance that would be: 1 bar is 0-40 players 2 bars 40-80 players and 3 bars 80-150, lock would show at 150-300 (if zos wasn't misleading with their 300 player cap) ofc this is just a guess based on how the bars used to perform at scaled down numbers.

aetherix8 · December 10

dcrush wrote: »

FireSoul wrote: »

So I don't know if anyone realizes this, but we're not going to be testing GH and Vengeance correctly.

If Vengeance is 2x AP and GH is 1x AP, then the general populace of players are going to pick where it benefits them most: Vengeance. For The AP. This test is tainted and faulty if all you're doing is testing popularity.

BOTH have to have the same AP bonuses if you want to treat these equally.

Wait, only Vengeance is double AP and GH is not? That’s ridiculous and indeed a misleading way to test popularity.

AFAIK only the players talk about a popularity test, and I didn’t see a single statement from ZOS that such a test is taking place. More likely, both are enabled because of GH enthusiasts being very upset about being “guinea pigs”.

As for a double AP, atm Vengeance is still a test and those who help ZOS by participating are earning more points. This is consistent with the previous iterations.

StihlReign · December 10

Lastly, the Gray Host campaign (as it is now) will be up during the second half of this Vengeance test and will monitor server performance for both campaigns. This comparison will allow us valuable side-by-side data. This will be our final “adding new things” test where we compare the game performance of Vengeance with what a campaign looks like with all the systems turned on.

Is this the final "adding new things" test, and the final test where you compare Vengeance to Grey Host?

Interesting.

heaven13 · December 10

Yeah, having one campaign give 50 transmutes a day and double AP and compare the popularity with another campaign without the same is pretty flawed from the start.

I think both campaigns have problems. One is solely based on how many people you have. If you’re outnumbered, not really anything you can do about it. And lack of faction locks mean people just swap the faction with the most bars. It gets boring pretty quickly. The other is that individuals and organized groups have all the things and are nigh unkillable regardless of the size of the group you get together. This is also boring after all and I just avoid those groups and go elsewhere.

There should be some attempts at finding a middle ground. Individuality with builds and skills that allow more freedom and choice but without all the crazy proc/pull sets and all the cross healing and shield stacking we see in Gray Host. Might not get to the exact same population Vengeance could get to, but more than we have now.

Lucasl402 · December 10

aetherix8 wrote: »

dcrush wrote: »

FireSoul wrote: »

So I don't know if anyone realizes this, but we're not going to be testing GH and Vengeance correctly.

If Vengeance is 2x AP and GH is 1x AP, then the general populace of players are going to pick where it benefits them most: Vengeance. For The AP. This test is tainted and faulty if all you're doing is testing popularity.

BOTH have to have the same AP bonuses if you want to treat these equally.

Wait, only Vengeance is double AP and GH is not? That’s ridiculous and indeed a misleading way to test popularity.

AFAIK only the players talk about a popularity test, and I didn’t see a single statement from ZOS that such a test is taking place. More likely, both are enabled because of GH enthusiasts being very upset about being “guinea pigs”.

As for a double AP, atm Vengeance is still a test and those who help ZOS by participating are earning more points. This is consistent with the previous iterations.

Even with the incentives to play vengeance, last night prime time PC NA all three faction in Grey Host were pop locked. While all three factions in vengeance had one bar. That's with vengeance giving double XP and a 50 crystal transmute stone daily as well. People still play Grey Host when given the choice.

TheSherryOnTop · December 10

Lucasl402 wrote: »

aetherix8 wrote: »

dcrush wrote: »

FireSoul wrote: »

So I don't know if anyone realizes this, but we're not going to be testing GH and Vengeance correctly.

If Vengeance is 2x AP and GH is 1x AP, then the general populace of players are going to pick where it benefits them most: Vengeance. For The AP. This test is tainted and faulty if all you're doing is testing popularity.

BOTH have to have the same AP bonuses if you want to treat these equally.

Wait, only Vengeance is double AP and GH is not? That’s ridiculous and indeed a misleading way to test popularity.

AFAIK only the players talk about a popularity test, and I didn’t see a single statement from ZOS that such a test is taking place. More likely, both are enabled because of GH enthusiasts being very upset about being “guinea pigs”.

As for a double AP, atm Vengeance is still a test and those who help ZOS by participating are earning more points. This is consistent with the previous iterations.

Even with the incentives to play vengeance, last night prime time PC NA all three faction in Grey Host were pop locked. While all three factions in vengeance had one bar. That's with vengeance giving double XP and a 50 crystal transmute stone daily as well. People still play Grey Host when given the choice.

To be fair though, 1 bar in Vengeance is still a lot more than 1 bar in Grey Host as stated by the devs. There's no possibility to actually verify that other than joining yourself, taking one ressource or whatnot and checking your overall place among all three fractions (which of course does not taking into account that not everyone on the leaderboard is active at the moment). From my observation, Vengenace does have a lot less frequency during the day, but during prime time (PCEU) you get your nice zergfest among every fraction. Yesterday it was on two bars, which (if I understood correctly) can be everything up to 450 people across three fractions (so 150 players per fraction).

Lucasl402 · December 10

TheSherryOnTop wrote: »

Lucasl402 wrote: »

aetherix8 wrote: »

dcrush wrote: »

FireSoul wrote: »

So I don't know if anyone realizes this, but we're not going to be testing GH and Vengeance correctly.

If Vengeance is 2x AP and GH is 1x AP, then the general populace of players are going to pick where it benefits them most: Vengeance. For The AP. This test is tainted and faulty if all you're doing is testing popularity.

BOTH have to have the same AP bonuses if you want to treat these equally.

Wait, only Vengeance is double AP and GH is not? That’s ridiculous and indeed a misleading way to test popularity.

AFAIK only the players talk about a popularity test, and I didn’t see a single statement from ZOS that such a test is taking place. More likely, both are enabled because of GH enthusiasts being very upset about being “guinea pigs”.

As for a double AP, atm Vengeance is still a test and those who help ZOS by participating are earning more points. This is consistent with the previous iterations.

Even with the incentives to play vengeance, last night prime time PC NA all three faction in Grey Host were pop locked. While all three factions in vengeance had one bar. That's with vengeance giving double XP and a 50 crystal transmute stone daily as well. People still play Grey Host when given the choice.

To be fair though, 1 bar in Vengeance is still a lot more than 1 bar in Grey Host as stated by the devs. There's no possibility to actually verify that other than joining yourself, taking one ressource or whatnot and checking your overall place among all three fractions (which of course does not taking into account that not everyone on the leaderboard is active at the moment). From my observation, Vengenace does have a lot less frequency during the day, but during prime time (PCEU) you get your nice zergfest among every fraction. Yesterday it was on two bars, which (if I understood correctly) can be everything up to 450 people across three fractions (so 150 players per fraction).

That's what people are claiming, but nobody knows because ZOS hasn't told us what the pop caps are for either live Cyrodiil or any instance of vengeance other than the first run.

So to be fair, if people can't tell us accurately, for sure, what the caps are for both Grey Host and vengeance right now their just making assumptions as to what the pop caps actually are. Then there is the problem ZOS has with credibility now that they've stated they won't even try to fix normal live cyrodiil just a few months after telling us vengeance was a test to learn how to improve performance in Grey Host.

heaven13 · December 10

TheSherryOnTop wrote: »

Lucasl402 wrote: »

aetherix8 wrote: »

dcrush wrote: »

FireSoul wrote: »

So I don't know if anyone realizes this, but we're not going to be testing GH and Vengeance correctly.

If Vengeance is 2x AP and GH is 1x AP, then the general populace of players are going to pick where it benefits them most: Vengeance. For The AP. This test is tainted and faulty if all you're doing is testing popularity.

BOTH have to have the same AP bonuses if you want to treat these equally.

Wait, only Vengeance is double AP and GH is not? That’s ridiculous and indeed a misleading way to test popularity.

AFAIK only the players talk about a popularity test, and I didn’t see a single statement from ZOS that such a test is taking place. More likely, both are enabled because of GH enthusiasts being very upset about being “guinea pigs”.

As for a double AP, atm Vengeance is still a test and those who help ZOS by participating are earning more points. This is consistent with the previous iterations.

Even with the incentives to play vengeance, last night prime time PC NA all three faction in Grey Host were pop locked. While all three factions in vengeance had one bar. That's with vengeance giving double XP and a 50 crystal transmute stone daily as well. People still play Grey Host when given the choice.

To be fair though, 1 bar in Vengeance is still a lot more than 1 bar in Grey Host as stated by the devs. There's no possibility to actually verify that other than joining yourself, taking one ressource or whatnot and checking your overall place among all three fractions (which of course does not taking into account that not everyone on the leaderboard is active at the moment). From my observation, Vengenace does have a lot less frequency during the day, but during prime time (PCEU) you get your nice zergfest among every fraction. Yesterday it was on two bars, which (if I understood correctly) can be everything up to 450 people across three fractions (so 150 players per fraction).

Before Grey Host was back, I was regularly in the top 5 of players on Vengeance even on the weekend. Which is absolutely crazy to me because I don't hit the top 100 in Grey Host. So regardless of whatever population is showing on the bars, it's not people that are staying in the campaign for long.

TheSherryOnTop · December 10

Totally agree with you on that. I too am very disappointed that they don't even try to fix the issues of Vengeance after they told us it's just a test. Stability in Vengeance is nice and all, but zerging around isn't fun in the long run.

heaven13 wrote: »

Before Grey Host was back, I was regularly in the top 5 of players on Vengeance even on the weekend. Which is absolutely crazy to me because I don't hit the top 100 in Grey Host. So regardless of whatever population is showing on the bars, it's not people that are staying in the campaign for long.

I doubt that the population cap really is as high as ZOS is claiming as well. When I logged into Vengeance today it was on two bars but taking a keep and a ressource (15k AP in total) made me rank 89 in total. Which either means there's players that don't have Vengenace as base - which makes little sense considerin the perks you get from it by literally just taking one ressource - or that the overall population isn't that high either. Haven't checked my position after switching to GH, but I doubt that it's very low.

ADawg · December 11

R A V E N W A T C H 2.0

No proc sets, NO CP, except add faction locking.

Expand the set list to include anything that improves stats, or while food buff, etc. No sets that fire off some new ability that isn't found within skill trees.

THE PERFECT CAMPAIGN!

Please no scenario 2. I've taken a massive break from this game to see what this vengeance nonsense would amount to...I knew it...i just knew it.

ADawg · December 11

SneaK wrote: »

tomofhyrule wrote: »

It seems pretty glaringly obvious to me, they are going to force Vengeance and give some small deathmatch map to the rest of us. They don’t understand PvPers. There are many of us that go to Cyrodiil strictly cause it’s a big open world with random encounters, multiple objectives, and you can seek out gameplay specific to your builds. If I make a good 1v1 type build, I want to go find small scale encounters, and I can do that most of the time, while still playing objectively. If I want to Zerg surf on a build I’m testing to see how it plays, I can do that. The only reason I PvE is to theorycraft PvP builds, literally it. I’m not alone.

This team doesn’t understand. I’m sorry but nothing in the form of good news has come from them, I cannot think of anything. Scenario 2 which is ultimately what they’ll do, gives no reason for people like me to play ESO. It’s sad. I’m not some crazy 1vXr god, I’m a decent player, but getting kills isn’t even what drives me to play this game. It’s competing at various levels in all the situations Cyrodiil has, with builds I made and grinded my butt off for. They don’t get it. Turning off GH type Cyro turns off ESO as a whole for a lot of us.

100% you are not alone brother!
And agreed, they do not understand PVP. Which is apparent as massive PVP streamers have left ESO permanently.

ADawg · December 11

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

L_Nici wrote: »

I am a bit shocked, that scenario 2 is even communicated, that means its an actual possibility, that you consider to drop all usual campaigns...I am not sure how I feel about that

I'd like to clarify this, then, if that's the concern. With this message, we wanted to be transparent and define what the only options are. It's those two. There are no others - that also does not mean we're considering both. Scenario 2 is not our end goal or what we want for everyone.

OR

OPTION 3:
You could revive RAVENWATCH which played fine and people actually died when you unloaded alpha strikes on them with pure DPS builds.

The gear list was simpler, allowing easier gearing for new players and you still retained full customization with your build.

Remember this was pre-sub-classing, so it would be even more interesting now given that most buffs had to come from CLASS and not gear/CP.

SneaK · December 11

Erissime wrote: »

I used to own real estate behind Arrius Mine, ZOS foreclosed on it cause I couldn’t pay the bills anymore.

No you don't. You never have. That tower has Bubosh's name on it in years, and after his departure not a one has been able to hold it like he did - alone. Everyone else trying to copy him is coming in groups from 3 to 12 and more, much like pests invading the master's house in his absence. And it just so happens the lad is far too decent to even say it - because true heroes do - don't talk!

Regards,
just another Pact pleb aware of his true neighbours!

Sounds like this Bubo fella rented his tower to a bunch of college kids, shame.

I was more of a rural type, no business with towers. Had a nice trail in my yard with a serene lake just off one side. Until ZOS forestry moved in anyways.

aetherix8 · December 11

Lucasl402 wrote: »

aetherix8 wrote: »

dcrush wrote: »

FireSoul wrote: »

So I don't know if anyone realizes this, but we're not going to be testing GH and Vengeance correctly.

If Vengeance is 2x AP and GH is 1x AP, then the general populace of players are going to pick where it benefits them most: Vengeance. For The AP. This test is tainted and faulty if all you're doing is testing popularity.

BOTH have to have the same AP bonuses if you want to treat these equally.

Wait, only Vengeance is double AP and GH is not? That’s ridiculous and indeed a misleading way to test popularity.

AFAIK only the players talk about a popularity test, and I didn’t see a single statement from ZOS that such a test is taking place. More likely, both are enabled because of GH enthusiasts being very upset about being “guinea pigs”.

As for a double AP, atm Vengeance is still a test and those who help ZOS by participating are earning more points. This is consistent with the previous iterations.

Even with the incentives to play vengeance, last night prime time PC NA all three faction in Grey Host were pop locked. While all three factions in vengeance had one bar. That's with vengeance giving double XP and a 50 crystal transmute stone daily as well. People still play Grey Host when given the choice.

Last night prime time PC EU Vengeance, EP had steady 2 bars around 6pm, DC 2 bars around 7pm, and AD too hit 2 bars briefly and had a sizable zerg. That means that every faction had at least 100 players. That is GH pop locked.
Meanwhile, at 8 pm GH had pop-locked EP and 3 bars DC and AD.

Yesterday, there were similar numbers of players on both campaigns PC EU.

Double AP is nice but obviously it won’t discourage people from playing a campaign that has a continuity (permanent), where it makes sense to engage with the campaign (30 days, as opposed to 1 day). Vengeance will be gone in a few days so our actions don’t really matter atm, while player’s absence in GH would make a difference for their faction.

JustLovely · December 11

Lucasl402 wrote: »

aetherix8 wrote: »

dcrush wrote: »

FireSoul wrote: »

So I don't know if anyone realizes this, but we're not going to be testing GH and Vengeance correctly.

If Vengeance is 2x AP and GH is 1x AP, then the general populace of players are going to pick where it benefits them most: Vengeance. For The AP. This test is tainted and faulty if all you're doing is testing popularity.

BOTH have to have the same AP bonuses if you want to treat these equally.

Wait, only Vengeance is double AP and GH is not? That’s ridiculous and indeed a misleading way to test popularity.

AFAIK only the players talk about a popularity test, and I didn’t see a single statement from ZOS that such a test is taking place. More likely, both are enabled because of GH enthusiasts being very upset about being “guinea pigs”.

As for a double AP, atm Vengeance is still a test and those who help ZOS by participating are earning more points. This is consistent with the previous iterations.

Even with the incentives to play vengeance, last night prime time PC NA all three faction in Grey Host were pop locked. While all three factions in vengeance had one bar. That's with vengeance giving double XP and a 50 crystal transmute stone daily as well. People still play Grey Host when given the choice.

Same last night. All three factions Grey Host pop locked. All three factions vengeance one bar.

Hea1y · December 12

If Vengeance takes over as the only main PvP campaign. PvP is lost forever on this game, its as simple as that.

If you can't see that then fair enough

Turtle_Bot · December 12

Radiate77 wrote: »

Faster TTK is the middle ground.

Right now DoTs are the name of the game, because you need your opponent around 50% health to get a kill with perfect timing, where on Live you can consistently 100-0 people if built properly.

If Vengeance health was reduced by around 25%, or if Perks were doubled or tripled in efficiency, burst builds would feel more viable without taking away from DoT builds.

You can crit on everything and still not kill someone from 60% and I’d imagine that’s not very fun for them.

Vengeance should welcome all playstyles.

I'm just catching up on this thread, so a bit late on this reply, but I have been having decent success bursting people from 60% or higher lately with my 2h stamden (think the old arctic blast brawler playstyle of stamden that had lower health but lots of damage, not the 50k health tank that wields a 2h weapon that it's become on current live servers), especially with so many following the scout NB build making themselves uber squishy into the brawler burst build that Warden can run. Sure, not everyone can be burst down, but that's how it should, be, you burst down those that you can (the ones that are stupidly squishy and/or not doing basics such as buffs/heals), those that you can't (the tanks and better players) you need to adapt your playstyle around and wear them down some before attempting a burst.

The main issue I've seen with the burst playstyle is that burst is limited in options/choices. There's the old school 2h stamden that can stack dizzy + shulks + executioner and that's about it.
- Sorcs curse has too long of a delay to enable this playstyle and it can be cleansed
- Blastbones could be decent but I haven't played vengeance cro since the first test and would have to test it
- NB doesn't have a delayed burst in the traditional sense
- DK in general is a DoT focused class
- Templar could work, but like cro I haven't played it in vengeance since the first test and would have to test it
- Arc delayed burst is beam, so has issues enabling that playstyle like NB does
- Dual wield doesn't have a burst spammable
- Destro doesn't have a strong enough spammable
- 1 hand + shield doesn't have a strong enough burst spammable
- resto has no damage ability
- Snipe is ok for range burst version, but most bow users are on NB, so the good ones just shift to the meta DoT setup instead anyway

This is likely why we see a shift towards the DoT meta currently, especially with NB being the strongest class in vengeance, not only on it's own merit, but also using and fighting against the current DoT meta thanks to cloak and spec bow. There's only really 1 setup/class that enables that traditional burst playstyle, but I would suspect that most players wardens are locked into the greyhost campaign so aren't being brought into vengeance and are probably sick of warden being the meta going by the threads on the forums.

ceruulean · December 12

Turtle_Bot wrote: »

Radiate77 wrote: »

Faster TTK is the middle ground.

Right now DoTs are the name of the game, because you need your opponent around 50% health to get a kill with perfect timing, where on Live you can consistently 100-0 people if built properly.

If Vengeance health was reduced by around 25%, or if Perks were doubled or tripled in efficiency, burst builds would feel more viable without taking away from DoT builds.

You can crit on everything and still not kill someone from 60% and I’d imagine that’s not very fun for them.

Vengeance should welcome all playstyles.

I'm just catching up on this thread, so a bit late on this reply, but I have been having decent success bursting people from 60% or higher lately with my 2h stamden (think the old arctic blast brawler playstyle of stamden that had lower health but lots of damage, not the 50k health tank that wields a 2h weapon that it's become on current live servers), especially with so many following the scout NB build making themselves uber squishy into the brawler burst build that Warden can run. Sure, not everyone can be burst down, but that's how it should, be, you burst down those that you can (the ones that are stupidly squishy and/or not doing basics such as buffs/heals), those that you can't (the tanks and better players) you need to adapt your playstyle around and wear them down some before attempting a burst.

The main issue I've seen with the burst playstyle is that burst is limited in options/choices. There's the old school 2h stamden that can stack dizzy + shulks + executioner and that's about it.
- Sorcs curse has too long of a delay to enable this playstyle and it can be cleansed
- Blastbones could be decent but I haven't played vengeance cro since the first test and would have to test it
- NB doesn't have a delayed burst in the traditional sense
- DK in general is a DoT focused class
- Templar could work, but like cro I haven't played it in vengeance since the first test and would have to test it
- Arc delayed burst is beam, so has issues enabling that playstyle like NB does
- Dual wield doesn't have a burst spammable
- Destro doesn't have a strong enough spammable
- 1 hand + shield doesn't have a strong enough burst spammable
- resto has no damage ability
- Snipe is ok for range burst version, but most bow users are on NB, so the good ones just shift to the meta DoT setup instead anyway

This is likely why we see a shift towards the DoT meta currently, especially with NB being the strongest class in vengeance, not only on it's own merit, but also using and fighting against the current DoT meta thanks to cloak and spec bow. There's only really 1 setup/class that enables that traditional burst playstyle, but I would suspect that most players wardens are locked into the greyhost campaign so aren't being brought into vengeance and are probably sick of warden being the meta going by the threads on the forums.

Sorc can continue to try to burst you with curse+ overload since it's a cheap ult that recharges fast.

Templar purge is too expensive, necro is chronically better at purging. A tanky DoT attrition necro works very well too.

Templar can burst with backlash but they need to time the javelin, which is awkward to use with a melee spammable. The other unblockable stun, Eclipse, tends to be expensive.

Wardens are actually not that great in an open 1v1. Their burst is an aoe so it's good for enclosed fight, but the positional desync in an open field means that they miss their shalks often.

Dks have the short end of the stick. They're all pressure yet they don't have sustain or battle roar passive, and necros outdo them in this regard. The chain pull works good in groups, but yeah...

Snipe can be bashed if fighting in melee. Wrecking blow... I haven't seen anyone bash a wrecking blow.

ToddIngram · December 12

Hea1y wrote: »

If Vengeance takes over as the only main PvP campaign. PvP is lost forever on this game, its as simple as that.

If you can't see that then fair enough

Couldn't agree more.

The way fewer and fewer players come back after every mandated vengeance may mean the damage is already beyond repair, but we'll see. If ESO keeps bleeding players from PvP and PvE at the rate it is now the game has less than a year left in it most likely.

Anomander72 · December 13

I think it is safe to say based on prime time last night on NA server that GH blew Vengeance out in population by a wide margin. Locked, Locked, Locked to 1, 1,1 in Vengeance. Case seems closed to me. Vengeance will be another Ravenwatch

MorallyBipolar · December 13

Anomander72 wrote: »

I think it is safe to say based on prime time last night on NA server that GH blew Vengeance out in population by a wide margin. Locked, Locked, Locked to 1, 1,1 in Vengeance. Case seems closed to me. Vengeance will be another Ravenwatch

Last three nights, including Friday night, prime time PC NA has seen all three factions pop locked for Grey Host, and only one bar pop for vengeance.

If ZOS ignores this undeniable side by side popularity test it will be the same as telling us they want us to leave the game.

spartaxoxo · December 14

MorallyBipolar wrote: »

Anomander72 wrote: »

I think it is safe to say based on prime time last night on NA server that GH blew Vengeance out in population by a wide margin. Locked, Locked, Locked to 1, 1,1 in Vengeance. Case seems closed to me. Vengeance will be another Ravenwatch

Last three nights, including Friday night, prime time PC NA has seen all three factions pop locked for Grey Host, and only one bar pop for vengeance.

If ZOS ignores this undeniable side by side popularity test it will be the same as telling us they want us to leave the game.

They've already explained that the pop bars are different because the population sizes are different.

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Hi all, thanks for the continued discussion here. We want to share a point of consideration as we are seeing some comments around population when talking about the in-game graphs. The in-game population bar is representative of the current participants in a campaign, relative to the max cap of that campaign. So for example, if Gray Host is at 360/360, but Vengeance is 450/900, the graph will show Gray Host as 100% capacity while Vengeance is at 50%, even though Vengeance has more players. We wanted to provide that as you continue your conversations about population overall.

reazea · December 14

LPapirius wrote: »

Ph1p wrote: »

Sarannah wrote: »

Correction: The OP/ZOS post states two possible options, and that ZOS is leaning towards option one. Which is to keep grey host and have a vengeance campaign running at the same time. And that they can't fix the performance issues in grey host without massive buildcompromises. But grey host does not seem to be going anywhere.

I think people are just disappointed that option 1 sounds very much like: "Dear tenants, we won't repair the building's plumbing after all, because it's too difficult. Instead, we suggest you move to this apartment that's half the size, one hour away by car, and in a worse neighborhood. But if you're fine living without running water, you can of course stay here."

Personally, I'm kind of neutral on this, but I get that even if Grey Host remains, it's not really great news for those who were hoping for any kind of improvement of the existing gameplay.

Sarannah wrote: »

Maybe, maybe not. The difference in audiences may actually lead to a new population for a healthy vengeance campaign. As also stated in the OP, vengeance was received quite positive based on the survey. If the survey for vengeance was positive but grey host PvPers are overwhelmingly against vengeance, that means there is a new population that differs from the current PvP population that actually likes vengeance.

OP states that the first two tests received positive feedback, although the only actual number given is that 80% of participants rated the skill lines in test #2 favorably. Honestly, if the player feedback was so positive, I would have expected ZOS to throw around a lot more numbers to make a point, but perhaps I'm reading too much into what's (not) been said.

But more importantly, the enthusiasm for Vengeance does not seem to stick. They explicitly say that for the third test, the feedback results "were more mixed than the results following the first two and we saw less positivity overall. More survey participants noted fatigue with the tests and a desire to be able to play their own unique characters and builds in Cyrodiil, and frustration that the test ran during another in-game event." And they still have 2-3 more tests planned...

ZOS ran that PvP related Golden Pursuit for the first test for a reason. Now we know that reason was so they could present the graphs in the OP and present artificially inflated participation numbers. Not because they think vengeance will ever be popular. In fact, the action shows they know already that nobody wants to play vengeance. That's why they didn't give the PvE players a carrot to encourage participation, they gave them a five star full four course steak dinner, and now ZOS is trying to say "look how many people liked their free steak dinner!". Sadly the end result is to pit the PvE and PvP communities against each other over this issue.

Yes. This was a strategy from the beginning to get people to accept vengeance. It didn't work.

reazea · December 14

SaffronCitrusflower wrote: »

Anomander72 wrote: »

The only vet players championing Vengeance are those that ran small scale, never played solo, and consistently got their tail handed to them as soon as they ventured away from their pocket healer. These are the same people that consistently trolled factions in zone, fancied themselves elite and feasted on pugs. At least they said one sensible thing in that nobody 1vx's good players. People that talk about throughputs, apms, etc are the ones that get blown up with three hits in GCD because they are not moving, rolling, dodging, and weaving and thinking they can sword and board through the damage with glass cannons that they fancy actually have defense. Sure, spend time theory crafting a build in Vengeance that feels closer to old school ESO, until you realize towers are not destructible, do not have doors, and only Magblades are viable, which is basically not far removed from the GH meta. Congrats.

Not to mention whole vengeance thing was sold to us on a, well, at this point lets just call it a misdirection I guess to be judicious.

I'll never believe ZOS put an honest effort into improving the current live Grey Host experience. They haven't even tried simply limiting heal stacking. How hard could that be?

No, we don't need vengeance. We need ZOS to do their jobs and fix the game they created, not create some new distraction that will never pan out in the long run. Meanwhile, they'll likely use the distraction to take away the game mode many of us purchased and payed to play for a decade.

This is some serious corporate mismanagement.

Couldn't have said it better myself. GJ.

reazea · December 14

spartaxoxo wrote: »

MorallyBipolar wrote: »

Anomander72 wrote: »

I think it is safe to say based on prime time last night on NA server that GH blew Vengeance out in population by a wide margin. Locked, Locked, Locked to 1, 1,1 in Vengeance. Case seems closed to me. Vengeance will be another Ravenwatch

Last three nights, including Friday night, prime time PC NA has seen all three factions pop locked for Grey Host, and only one bar pop for vengeance.

If ZOS ignores this undeniable side by side popularity test it will be the same as telling us they want us to leave the game.

They've already explained that the pop bars are different because the population sizes are different.

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Hi all, thanks for the continued discussion here. We want to share a point of consideration as we are seeing some comments around population when talking about the in-game graphs. The in-game population bar is representative of the current participants in a campaign, relative to the max cap of that campaign. So for example, if Gray Host is at 360/360, but Vengeance is 450/900, the graph will show Gray Host as 100% capacity while Vengeance is at 50%, even though Vengeance has more players. We wanted to provide that as you continue your conversations about population overall.

What did they say today's pop cap is for vengeance and what is it for GH then exactly?

Exactly. They haven't said, so nobody knows but ZOS. They're expecting us to take their word for these things even after selling vengeance as a test bed to improve GH, which we now know was never their intention based on ZOS' public statement in the OP of this thread.

Treeshka · December 14

Probably it is a bit stretch but. Is it possible to create some sort of game client where one can download that only allows Vengeance? Far smaller than the entire game.
Since one does not need any sort of set to participate. If a person just wants to play they can download this small client and join the fights.
This was suggested by a friend of mine who played the game a few years ago and now not playing. They said they would download the game, but it is too big just to play new Cyrodiil.

TheSherryOnTop · December 14

spartaxoxo wrote: »

They've already explained that the pop bars are different because the population sizes are different.

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Hi all, thanks for the continued discussion here. We want to share a point of consideration as we are seeing some comments around population when talking about the in-game graphs. The in-game population bar is representative of the current participants in a campaign, relative to the max cap of that campaign. So for example, if Gray Host is at 360/360, but Vengeance is 450/900, the graph will show Gray Host as 100% capacity while Vengeance is at 50%, even though Vengeance has more players. We wanted to provide that as you continue your conversations about population overall.

While this might be true, playing Vengeance clearly shows that with time population shrinks immensly, at least during day/early evening (not prime time). With mere 100 AP you will get a spot in top 100. Of course this might be different during prime time but I doubt that population is even close to 450.

StihlReign · December 14

Tons of PvE lag...This is soo embarrassing. Where are the huge marketing incentives to PvP for the 2 campaign test?

Feels like the team dropped the ball on this. Vengeance Pop appears to be low everyday all day and GH still isn't full most of the day.

Why isn't marketing keeping up with the event? Shouldn't there be full pop for both Campaign's? Do they know the test schedule?

This feels off...

MorallyBipolar · 3:53PM

I wonder if we'll ever hear from ZOS about this last instance of vengeance. This time around I never saw more than one bar of vengeance population, though I've read that at least a couple factions hit two bars but only in the first couple days, and only while vengeance was the only option. As soon as GH came back essentially nobody played vengeance.

There is no way to spin the massive unpopularity of vengeance now.

LarsS · 4:00PM

Vengeance in PC/EU were better populated than Gray Host until one faction started to dominate outside of prime time. This starkly illustrates a serious design flaw of Cyrodiil that will continue to haunt all forms of Cyrodiil like pvp. Still, it would be easy to address.

I am speaking about the fact that the dominant faction receives all the buffs and gets the advantage of defending. Presently the hope is that double AP should encourage people from other alliances to come in in numbers, there is ample proof that it doesn’t work.

We need a new system that buffs the underdogs combat power, while owning enemy keeps could give extra AP for example.