aetherix8 wrote: »

Vulkunne wrote: »

And so, ZOS, I realize this may not be well received by all. I know what people think about me. But I also realize, in spite of everything, we cannot continue to PvP by going down this road without accountability. Is some of it on ZOS, why sure it is. But all of it no. Some of the players are contributing to everyone else who's not uh... on their level... as they have said themselves, both on the forums and in game. Make no mistake and listen close. The reason we are not logging into Cyrodiil PvP anymore is not because of ZOS. It's because of you. It's because of your Toxic and un-sportsman like behavior. It's because many of you have to be on top. You have put yourselves on this uh 'clandestine saddle' and rode the faction and ultimately everyone else there into the ground with your Rush of Agony abuse, as well as abusing people's time in other ways such as standing around watching them die while your ball group sits there all smug and coy.

I mostly agree with your OP, but I think that you put too much fault on players and too little on ZOS. I mean, we can complain about “un-sportsman like behaviour” all we want, but it doesn’t change the fact that it is a part of human nature and can be particularly pronounced in some individuals. There will always be trolls, griefers, or people who “have to be on top” for as long as humanity exists. We will encounter them in any version of Cyrodiil.

ZOS can’t change human nature, but they definitely can and should control their own created environment much better than during the first 10 years in order to reign in all the toxic behaviour. Right now, there are just too many broken combinations of systems that give some players, grouped or not, way too much power. In-game imbalance exacerbates the inherent toxicity of PvP (toxicity is also present in PvE, in case that needs to be stated).

That brings me to another thing you mentioned, an example on page 2. I just can’t understand why you hate ballgroups so much. My own experience with ballgroups tells me that the picture is very much nuanced; my parcours, zergling > pug lead > zergsurfer >, is exactly where ballgroups are active too, and I can tell that they are all different. Some of them play mostly for one faction, while others switch factions every day (RW campaign) – one day they help you retake scrolls, the next they farm you. Some of them care about the campaign and the score, others only want to farm AP. Sometimes they chase solos from keep to keep, or run in circles around resource towers, that’s more or less a common trait. Sometimes it is fun to ballgrpsurf as well. And I have some fond memories of my faction ballgroups saving the day from time to time, like when we randoms were outnumbered while defending a temple, and we would have lost this scroll if they didn’t show up and bombed the enemy zerg (spectacular DDK ). I also remember some AD ballgroups trolling their own faction by never bringing scrolls home, but instead using them as bait for farming players all around the map. A behaviour that should be banned as it is destructive to faction cohesion and results in lower population over time for the affected faction.

I believe it is pointless to ask trolls and griefers to become decent people all of a sudden. Rather keep requesting some major balance adjustments from ZOS, to make group play in PvP less powerful than what is required in end game PvE, etc. Also, there is the reporting tool for some particularly egregious toxicity, which can include undermining one’s faction effort for a selfish play style.

Theignson wrote: »

I think Zerodil could be hugely improved with just a few ez changes:
1) RoA: can only cast every 30 seconds, causes cc immunity, 8m range.
2) VD: only procs for solo players. Back to high risk high reward
3) warden charm: delete it and find something else
4) group heals only apply to 3 players, same with shields
5) you can only have two stacked HOTS : one from yourself and one from another player

I would love playing under these conditions. True, ball groups could still 12v1 but the risk reward ratio would be improved

aetherix8 wrote: »

Vulkunne wrote: »

@aetherix8

Thank you for your reply, thanks for sharing your experiences, as well as your thoughtful considerations for this thread.

I have discussed some of what had happened in previous conversations. It is understood that not everyone has umm had to deal with some of the same things. However, I do believe the time has come now to 'move on' from that conversation and offer the matter to karma for resolution. Hopefully ZOS can look at the situation in a very realistic, professional and fair way. Cause you have to remember I'm not alone in this; others are also not happy about it.

That said, I never (or at least very rarely) ask others to do what I am not willing to do myself. In this matter with the ball groups and so forth, I literally can do nothing. My fate in game at least, is not even in my own hands. The first mistake I make is logging in to a server where they are dominant and active. Therefore, the burden of fixing this problem does fall on ZOS, so yes in that you are also right. Because there's literally again, nothing I can do. However, as it where another matter has become problematic, which requires much of my attention for now and so I can and will do something about that.

We all have differing experiences, and even if we happened to live through the exact same situation, we would have reacted to it differently as well. I'm aware that many players complain about ballgroups - there is no way to have any PvP related discussion without it devolving at some point into analyzing the ballgrps issue all over again. And I don't try to undermine your experience; all I'm saying is that ZOS needs to do better to curb toxicity, and balancing the game aka taking away OP tools and broken combinations, would be a step in the right direction.

Vulkunne wrote: »

However, I find it interesting you mention human nature, so on, and then you asked very respectfully regarding my motivations. And so rather than me continue typing on and on umm I'll let a genuine professor of the humanities provide us with a concise and more direct answer...

“If you prick us, do we not bleed? if you tickle us, do we not laugh? if you poison us, do we not die? and if you wrong us, shall we not revenge?”

― William Shakespeare, The Merchant of Venice

In a way, I was relieved to read "I do believe the time has come now to 'move on' from that conversation and offer the matter to karma for resolution." But then you end your post with "revenge". They are mutually exclusive; karma doesn't require you to do anything, while revenge is an action to undertake. Revenge, and associated pain, grudge, disappointment, etc., must be cultivated for it to come to fruition, and it can be more destructive to the person attached to their revenge than to their arch enemy. There is a good example in West Weald - Marcan Caelum

So, to answer your question/quote: personally, I find the mindset "when they go low, we go high" (Michelle Obama) to be a more beneficial approach.