April 20th Vengeance Only..

acastanza_ESO · April 14

tomofhyrule wrote: »

moderatelyfatman wrote: »

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Poss wrote: »

Brace yourself for an influx of pvers about to give you their wisdom on why Vengeance is better

Is Greyhost disabled again? Please say it isn’t

It is disabled again, for that week only.

It has also been confirmed that permaVengeance will drop in U50 alongside Grey Host as the two options

Will Blackreach still be up? It's going to really suck if there is nowhere for people to go if there is a queue to get into GH.

They said that only Vengeance and GH would be the options.

They did say that they'd look at adding a new campaign if the population demanded it, and gave the example of if both Vengeance and GH had long queues to get in. I do think a more realistic scenario is that GH has an hourslong queue and Vengeance is still at one bar, but they didn't say anything about that case.

My hope is that that new midsize area they gave us a quick preview of becomes the effective GH waiting room. With the smaller size, assuming the queue is 30ish like it normally is, if most of those people are there it could be a pretty great place to do some causal play while queueing. But Vengeance is DoA. The fact that they need to entirely close GH to get anyone to go there is pretty telling. The rather patronizing tone they took in the stream telling us they need us to play there during the test was... not it. I know I won't be. For that week I'll be in GW2 instead.

licenturion · April 14

BXR_Lonestar wrote: »

And people also wised up to the tactics that we had to use to make vengeance fun and worthwhile. We used to lure people into Resource Tower battles to farm them with a combination of stuns and oils. Or lure people into fighting in battles were you could impact the battle using seige. But people have wised up to those tactics and have figured out how to avoid them, and without the ability to have coordinated pulls to kill groups of players, there isn't really any counterplay beyond that. So the game mode is also extremely limited, and overall, not as fun as the first Vengeance experience.

This post caught my eye.

Translated: Vengeance was fun when we could gank,grief and farm new solo PvP players trying out the new mode with our seasoned PvP veteran group (probably in Discord voice chat too). But those players either left PvP quickly again or avoid us all together. So now we no longer have fun, so Vengeance development should be dropped entirely.

A lot of anti-vengeance posts usually sound exactly the same if you read between the lines.

That said; they should keep everything there is now and run Vengeance along side it. That way people can keep playing the things they enjoy already and new players, casual players and people who like a more balanced and monitored playground can get converted to regular PvP players. That won’t happen if they get invisible group shotted 5 times a row when they try PvP for the first time.

SneaK · April 14

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Still think vengeance could have been better if they simply just brought basic gear back and consumables. More performative streamlined skills and gear could have gotten us back to the oldschool pvp before we had 3-4 proc sets on builds where skills do 5 different paragraphs of effects.

It would have been a good datapoint to see what happens when all the normal game build systems are brought back with those performative skills.

Using the split pvp and pve design could have made the inventory easier too so more pve players wouldnt have that hurdle of gear management to even try pvp.

100% agree, even just base game crafted sets as the only options would have been a better investment to test the reasonings of performance issues. IIRC, that was the original logic, strip away and add more back in as they learn the limitations. Instead they decided to just scrap any original Cyro concept for a trash style loadout mode that doesn’t fit into an MMO genre, especially on a game that is beyond a decade old with an established grinder playerbase. It really is mind boggling, Vengeance isn’t going to be popular and they know this..

MincMincMinc · April 14

SneaK wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Still think vengeance could have been better if they simply just brought basic gear back and consumables. More performative streamlined skills and gear could have gotten us back to the oldschool pvp before we had 3-4 proc sets on builds where skills do 5 different paragraphs of effects.

It would have been a good datapoint to see what happens when all the normal game build systems are brought back with those performative skills.

Using the split pvp and pve design could have made the inventory easier too so more pve players wouldnt have that hurdle of gear management to even try pvp.

100% agree, even just base game crafted sets as the only options would have been a better investment to test the reasonings of performance issues. IIRC, that was the original logic, strip away and add more back in as they learn the limitations. Instead they decided to just scrap any original Cyro concept for a trash style loadout mode that doesn’t fit into an MMO genre, especially on a game that is beyond a decade old with an established grinder playerbase. It really is mind boggling, Vengeance isn’t going to be popular and they know this..

Yeah just kinda goes to show zos already had this planned out and chosen probably a year or two ago. Considering they already began working on the subclassing>class rework before concluding the vengeance testing kinda tells it all. Why would you begin reworking all of the skills and animations in the game BEFORE knowing whether it is the cause of the lag.....unless they already decided to avoid the lag by downsizing and removing cyrodil.

They did this many times in the past already when performance tanked with the expanding game. Instead of fixing it or reversing releases they just cut the pvp population down and avoided incentivizing it. It happened like 3-4 times until now Cyrodil is simply too big if they down size population again. Which is why vet pvp is being forced into a one keep mini campaign.

ceruulean · April 14

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

l
They offered double ap for vengeance only alongside greyhost and people still flocked to greyhost... No amount of meaningless titles or the like would get people to move over, and offering rewards like cosmetics and developing the campaign people right now dont wanna play would only ostracize and push more returning players out yet again.

Trying to force customers to like something vs improving upon what they already like is the worst business strategy possible.

What forum goers don't understand overall, because these players don't typically go to the forums, is that most pvpers come from other games like WoW where the actual gameplay and combat is more important to them than anything else. The game mode that gives them the most build diversity and complexity will always win out over what is simple and available to everyone to access out the jump.
...
And a bigger point on that is, if the social aspect was the most important thing, more pvpers would be doing PVE, as PvE is a far bigger social pool than PVP ever could be.

1. So according to you, AP and rewards are not the main motivator for the majority of pvp players. I agree. People who hate pvp will never be enticed no matter how much cosmetics and dyes and AP are offered.
2. ZOS is not forcing customers into Vengeance. They offer incentives to play vengeance. When they're tired of supporting a service, they can disconnect it. Just like how no one forces you to use any kind of software if a dev gets tired of maintaining it. As a customer, you can play or not play. Pretty simple.
3. "Most PvPers come from other games like WoW where actual gameplay and combat is more important than anything else"? Very bold statement. I highly doubt this is the case, but okay. Gameplay and combat mechanics are different from build diversity/gear complexity.
4. "If the social aspect was the most important thing, more PvPers would be doing PvE." These don't logically connect.

Let's just take a look at the minute-to-minute gameplay of Greyhost:

"This. Logged in last night during prime time, 60+ queue, 3 bars across all alliances and the map was so *** dead. No one doing a single thing. Maybe a resource flagged here and there but it felt like people would log in and just go afk on purpose. I stuck around for a hour and dipped, lol"

"When I logged on to PCNA in grayhost on AD, I’d just sit there and talk to people in zone chat. No reason to actually try anything when a Zerg attempts to take a keep and you and 3 other people show up to try to defend."

https://www.reddit.com/r/elderscrollsonline/s/Tl5LHIkd1h

Greyhost is failing to provide meaningful combat for the average player. So why do people still queue in? Socializing and afking is what the majority of players do in Greyhost. This is not a bad thing. Human beings are social creatures, you can't force them to unsocialize in a multiplayer game, and realistically speaking, people need breaks and cannot be battling 24/7. It makes more sense for ZOS to lean into the socialization aspect and make grouping and coordination easier and more meaningful, and implement underdog bonuses to address population imbalances and entice participation. They cannot reach a critical population in Greyhost anymore, so they have to switch to Vengeance.

Kaelvorn_Stormrend · April 14

xylena wrote: »

LPapirius wrote: »

It's not a viable alternative to the normal live GH the PvP community logs in to play.

Who exactly is logging in for lag, ball groups, proc sets, and one shots? Not me.

I'm hearing they are moving forward with GH and Vengeance as the only two campaigns. I think this is a sound move, we are long overdue to condense the queue.

Spot on. This is really that all needs to be said in regards to GH.

Logged on this weekend after not playing all week and it was atrocious. Waited in a queue in the 50's, got in, joined a massive fight over a scroll and last emp keep, entire server started rubberbanding all over the place, I got kicked out of GH entirely back to the login menu. Logged back in, back in a queue in the higher 50's now, lmao. Finally get in, attempt a scroll run/dethrone attempt again, proceed to get gated by the emp and the server instead with 3+ ball groups at one of our home keeps farming our scroll. Everyone wipes, gate opens, we lose a second scroll since there's not enough numbers or even sheer power to defend last scroll against 3 stacked ball groups with the server behind them.

I logged out and went to play something else for the night. I'm over it. I'm tired of ball/comped groups running the show in GH and I'm tired of Zos refusing to bring forth any viable counter to them. I even swapped to a negate build to slow their pushes down, it did nothing. Server performance is still awful, most of the time it feels like your skills either don't register, you're stuck in quicksand and bar swapping is incredibly laggy. My PS5 is even hard wired and I have fantastic Internet speeds.

I don't know what to even call this current state of GH. Whatever it is, it's terrible. It's stale. Veteran guilds and solo's have long abandoned it and pretty soon it's just going to be ball/comped groups fighting each other. Look at this thread and others. Most of the responses are literally "I quit because of ball groups", lol.

As far as Vengeance goes. I agree. Make it a separate server and let the players decide what they want to play on. I tested it when it was last around on console and honestly, it was fun. Fair fights, server performance even felt improved. It did feel like how Cyrodiil used to be. The only ones that suffered (supposedly) were the ball/comped groups, and if that's the case, they can stick to GH farming empty keeps when most solos swap to Vengeance

ioResult · April 14

Major_Mangle wrote: »

Remove offensive AoE caps and I can guarantee you that the ballgroups you claim gets clapped will wreck havoc in Vengeance.

LMAO "offensive AoE caps"? Tell us you run in a human centipede in Gray Host without telling us you're a ball grouper. See? The highly vocal minority who thinks their silly niche play style actually takes skill.

Kaelvorn_Stormrend · April 14

ioResult wrote: »

Major_Mangle wrote: »

Remove offensive AoE caps and I can guarantee you that the ballgroups you claim gets clapped will wreck havoc in Vengeance.

LMAO "offensive AoE caps"? Tell us you run in a human centipede in Gray Host without telling us you're a ball grouper. See? The highly vocal minority who thinks their silly niche play style actually takes skill.

They want anything and everything removed that might make them struggle just a lil bit, lol.

Major_Mangle · April 14

ioResult wrote: »

Major_Mangle wrote: »

Remove offensive AoE caps and I can guarantee you that the ballgroups you claim gets clapped will wreck havoc in Vengeance.

LMAO "offensive AoE caps"? Tell us you run in a human centipede in Gray Host without telling us you're a ball grouper. See? The highly vocal minority who thinks their silly niche play style actually takes skill.

Nice ad hominem
but haven't played in a ballgroup since maybe early 2016-2017 (and it wasn't really my thing if I'm gonna be honest). Spent 99% of my time in PvP as a 2-3 man ever since. That and battlegrounds whenever I felt like it.

But yes, the offensive AoE caps of 3 in Vengeance is what allows for the highly "tactical and skillful" zerg play to exist without any counter measures (aside from showing up with more numbers) and is the main reason you don't see the choo choo trains all over the place (they all play NB instead which is the only really playable/viable class in Vengeance)

blktauna · April 14

I'm glad vengence is back. I don't do GH anymore because I am weary of the giant queues, getting kicked when the ball groupd show up, getting desynched by the new busted each update and the attitude of many of the people in it. I look forward to a relatively more playable option I can enjoy without stupid queues

SneaK · April 14

ceruulean wrote: »

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

l
They offered double ap for vengeance only alongside greyhost and people still flocked to greyhost... No amount of meaningless titles or the like would get people to move over, and offering rewards like cosmetics and developing the campaign people right now dont wanna play would only ostracize and push more returning players out yet again.

Trying to force customers to like something vs improving upon what they already like is the worst business strategy possible.

What forum goers don't understand overall, because these players don't typically go to the forums, is that most pvpers come from other games like WoW where the actual gameplay and combat is more important to them than anything else. The game mode that gives them the most build diversity and complexity will always win out over what is simple and available to everyone to access out the jump.
...
And a bigger point on that is, if the social aspect was the most important thing, more pvpers would be doing PVE, as PvE is a far bigger social pool than PVP ever could be.

1. So according to you, AP and rewards are not the main motivator for the majority of pvp players. I agree. People who hate pvp will never be enticed no matter how much cosmetics and dyes and AP are offered.
2. ZOS is not forcing customers into Vengeance. They offer incentives to play vengeance. When they're tired of supporting a service, they can disconnect it. Just like how no one forces you to use any kind of software if a dev gets tired of maintaining it. As a customer, you can play or not play. Pretty simple.
3. "Most PvPers come from other games like WoW where actual gameplay and combat is more important than anything else"? Very bold statement. I highly doubt this is the case, but okay. Gameplay and combat mechanics are different from build diversity/gear complexity.
4. "If the social aspect was the most important thing, more PvPers would be doing PvE." These don't logically connect.

Let's just take a look at the minute-to-minute gameplay of Greyhost:

"This. Logged in last night during prime time, 60+ queue, 3 bars across all alliances and the map was so *** dead. No one doing a single thing. Maybe a resource flagged here and there but it felt like people would log in and just go afk on purpose. I stuck around for a hour and dipped, lol"

"When I logged on to PCNA in grayhost on AD, I’d just sit there and talk to people in zone chat. No reason to actually try anything when a Zerg attempts to take a keep and you and 3 other people show up to try to defend."

https://www.reddit.com/r/elderscrollsonline/s/Tl5LHIkd1h

Greyhost is failing to provide meaningful combat for the average player. So why do people still queue in? Socializing and afking is what the majority of players do in Greyhost. This is not a bad thing. Human beings are social creatures, you can't force them to unsocialize in a multiplayer game, and realistically speaking, people need breaks and cannot be battling 24/7. It makes more sense for ZOS to lean into the socialization aspect and make grouping and coordination easier and more meaningful, and implement underdog bonuses to address population imbalances and entice participation. They cannot reach a critical population in Greyhost anymore, so they have to switch to Vengeance.

This dissertation would have set you back to Freshman year.

The entire point of Vengeance was supposedly performance driven, and yes on April 20th we are forced into Vengeance. Many of us only play ESO for the PvP.

The basis of Vengeance doesn’t even offer the current state of ESO, you can gripe about ballgroups or certain sets all you want, whatever, but to pretend Vengeance is a healthy option for ESO PvP is a lie. You can’t play any new system put out in Vengeance, WW mains be damned. It’s like a demo of the game but worse. It’s not a fair or realistic replacement for a system that has been enjoyed for a decade despite a dev team doing anything and everything to make it worse and not better.

blktauna · April 15

I very much look forward to the return of Vengence.

Aristodemus · April 15

Vengeance was a ghost town after day 1 the past 2 runs. I won't play this time around nor am I likely to play when it goes permament. I certainly hope there are major improvements to GH or it will have 3 hour Q's in prime.

xR3ACTORx · April 15

SneaK wrote: »

ceruulean wrote: »

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

l
They offered double ap for vengeance only alongside greyhost and people still flocked to greyhost... No amount of meaningless titles or the like would get people to move over, and offering rewards like cosmetics and developing the campaign people right now dont wanna play would only ostracize and push more returning players out yet again.

Trying to force customers to like something vs improving upon what they already like is the worst business strategy possible.

What forum goers don't understand overall, because these players don't typically go to the forums, is that most pvpers come from other games like WoW where the actual gameplay and combat is more important to them than anything else. The game mode that gives them the most build diversity and complexity will always win out over what is simple and available to everyone to access out the jump.
...
And a bigger point on that is, if the social aspect was the most important thing, more pvpers would be doing PVE, as PvE is a far bigger social pool than PVP ever could be.

1. So according to you, AP and rewards are not the main motivator for the majority of pvp players. I agree. People who hate pvp will never be enticed no matter how much cosmetics and dyes and AP are offered.
2. ZOS is not forcing customers into Vengeance. They offer incentives to play vengeance. When they're tired of supporting a service, they can disconnect it. Just like how no one forces you to use any kind of software if a dev gets tired of maintaining it. As a customer, you can play or not play. Pretty simple.
3. "Most PvPers come from other games like WoW where actual gameplay and combat is more important than anything else"? Very bold statement. I highly doubt this is the case, but okay. Gameplay and combat mechanics are different from build diversity/gear complexity.
4. "If the social aspect was the most important thing, more PvPers would be doing PvE." These don't logically connect.

Let's just take a look at the minute-to-minute gameplay of Greyhost:

"This. Logged in last night during prime time, 60+ queue, 3 bars across all alliances and the map was so *** dead. No one doing a single thing. Maybe a resource flagged here and there but it felt like people would log in and just go afk on purpose. I stuck around for a hour and dipped, lol"

"When I logged on to PCNA in grayhost on AD, I’d just sit there and talk to people in zone chat. No reason to actually try anything when a Zerg attempts to take a keep and you and 3 other people show up to try to defend."

https://www.reddit.com/r/elderscrollsonline/s/Tl5LHIkd1h

Greyhost is failing to provide meaningful combat for the average player. So why do people still queue in? Socializing and afking is what the majority of players do in Greyhost. This is not a bad thing. Human beings are social creatures, you can't force them to unsocialize in a multiplayer game, and realistically speaking, people need breaks and cannot be battling 24/7. It makes more sense for ZOS to lean into the socialization aspect and make grouping and coordination easier and more meaningful, and implement underdog bonuses to address population imbalances and entice participation. They cannot reach a critical population in Greyhost anymore, so they have to switch to Vengeance.

This dissertation would have set you back to Freshman year.

The entire point of Vengeance was supposedly performance driven, and yes on April 20th we are forced into Vengeance. Many of us only play ESO for the PvP.

The basis of Vengeance doesn’t even offer the current state of ESO, you can gripe about ballgroups or certain sets all you want, whatever, but to pretend Vengeance is a healthy option for ESO PvP is a lie. You can’t play any new system put out in Vengeance, WW mains be damned. It’s like a demo of the game but worse. It’s not a fair or realistic replacement for a system that has been enjoyed for a decade despite a dev team doing anything and everything to make it worse and not better.

It's like going to a nice steak house to order a kids menu.

BardokRedSnow · April 15

xFocused wrote: »

xylena wrote: »

LPapirius wrote: »

It's not a viable alternative to the normal live GH the PvP community logs in to play.

Who exactly is logging in for lag, ball groups, proc sets, and one shots? Not me.

I'm hearing they are moving forward with GH and Vengeance as the only two campaigns. I think this is a sound move, we are long overdue to condense the queue.

Spot on. This is really that all needs to be said in regards to GH.

Logged on this weekend after not playing all week and it was atrocious. Waited in a queue in the 50's, got in, joined a massive fight over a scroll and last emp keep

This highlights all thats wrong about these forums and why Zos should ignore them overall.

Xylena made a claim that no one's logging in for lagfest greyhost etc right. Then you go spot on, probably popped a like on there, then proceeded to contradict her very statement by explaining that greyhost was locked out, you had a queue of 50, which is small really for the weekend so you got in early, and that it was very active when you got in, so active the lag was superb, which contrary to what most say, the lag really isnt as bad as what is being described except in these scenarios where all factions are in one place or ballgroups enter the scene.

So clearly greyhost is very popular, especially now and you cant try and sweep a whole community of people under the rug and pretend its not when vengeance was dead upon arrival and especially next to greyhost when made available on the same test.

Y'all are simply agreeing with the vocal minority that agrees with you about vengeance but in reality not enough of you here can populate and maintain that campaign. It will be proven again with the next test, matter of time.

DarkStrifeYT · April 15

Zos should really make it a separate campaign...

SneaK · April 15

xR3ACTORx wrote: »

SneaK wrote: »

ceruulean wrote: »

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

l
They offered double ap for vengeance only alongside greyhost and people still flocked to greyhost... No amount of meaningless titles or the like would get people to move over, and offering rewards like cosmetics and developing the campaign people right now dont wanna play would only ostracize and push more returning players out yet again.

Trying to force customers to like something vs improving upon what they already like is the worst business strategy possible.

What forum goers don't understand overall, because these players don't typically go to the forums, is that most pvpers come from other games like WoW where the actual gameplay and combat is more important to them than anything else. The game mode that gives them the most build diversity and complexity will always win out over what is simple and available to everyone to access out the jump.
...
And a bigger point on that is, if the social aspect was the most important thing, more pvpers would be doing PVE, as PvE is a far bigger social pool than PVP ever could be.

1. So according to you, AP and rewards are not the main motivator for the majority of pvp players. I agree. People who hate pvp will never be enticed no matter how much cosmetics and dyes and AP are offered.
2. ZOS is not forcing customers into Vengeance. They offer incentives to play vengeance. When they're tired of supporting a service, they can disconnect it. Just like how no one forces you to use any kind of software if a dev gets tired of maintaining it. As a customer, you can play or not play. Pretty simple.
3. "Most PvPers come from other games like WoW where actual gameplay and combat is more important than anything else"? Very bold statement. I highly doubt this is the case, but okay. Gameplay and combat mechanics are different from build diversity/gear complexity.
4. "If the social aspect was the most important thing, more PvPers would be doing PvE." These don't logically connect.

Let's just take a look at the minute-to-minute gameplay of Greyhost:

"This. Logged in last night during prime time, 60+ queue, 3 bars across all alliances and the map was so *** dead. No one doing a single thing. Maybe a resource flagged here and there but it felt like people would log in and just go afk on purpose. I stuck around for a hour and dipped, lol"

"When I logged on to PCNA in grayhost on AD, I’d just sit there and talk to people in zone chat. No reason to actually try anything when a Zerg attempts to take a keep and you and 3 other people show up to try to defend."

https://www.reddit.com/r/elderscrollsonline/s/Tl5LHIkd1h

Greyhost is failing to provide meaningful combat for the average player. So why do people still queue in? Socializing and afking is what the majority of players do in Greyhost. This is not a bad thing. Human beings are social creatures, you can't force them to unsocialize in a multiplayer game, and realistically speaking, people need breaks and cannot be battling 24/7. It makes more sense for ZOS to lean into the socialization aspect and make grouping and coordination easier and more meaningful, and implement underdog bonuses to address population imbalances and entice participation. They cannot reach a critical population in Greyhost anymore, so they have to switch to Vengeance.

This dissertation would have set you back to Freshman year.

The entire point of Vengeance was supposedly performance driven, and yes on April 20th we are forced into Vengeance. Many of us only play ESO for the PvP.

The basis of Vengeance doesn’t even offer the current state of ESO, you can gripe about ballgroups or certain sets all you want, whatever, but to pretend Vengeance is a healthy option for ESO PvP is a lie. You can’t play any new system put out in Vengeance, WW mains be damned. It’s like a demo of the game but worse. It’s not a fair or realistic replacement for a system that has been enjoyed for a decade despite a dev team doing anything and everything to make it worse and not better.

It's like going to a nice steak restaurant to order a kids menu.

More like getting Golden Corral to-go.

MincMincMinc · April 15

Aristodemus wrote: »

Vengeance was a ghost town after day 1 the past 2 runs. I won't play this time around nor am I likely to play when it goes permament. I certainly hope there are major improvements to GH or it will have 3 hour Q's in prime.

GH as you know it is going to be forced into the new 1 keep campaign they showcased in one of the previous livestreams. Basically 3 spawns, 1 keep with a river around it and bridges, then a lumber/farm/mine outside the river for side objectives. In the options below the 3rd option is obviously the ideal where we slightly tone back the build system for pvp to become performative......however we already know zos is going with option 2 since they announced the new map and already started working the class reworks BEFORE vengeance testing even concluded.

The dilema is current pvp is already at 1/3 the capacity and still lagging. As the game expands and sets/skills get more complex with more complex animations the performance limitations for one server obviously struggle to handle the new load.

Zos can leave greyhost as is and inevitably keep reducing cyrodil population to match the performance from the 900-600-300(current)-150-75 until the campaign is literally nonfunctional. We already saw with the u50, nocp, and other vet campaigns that as the population in cyrodil diminishes the keep seige concept falls apart because there is not enough player distribution. In this current state there is no new player entry to pvp except BGs which have no functional MMR ranking and are riddled with smurfing mmr resets weekly.
Zos creates a new map for pvp based around the ~150 or ~75 playercap and ditches cyrodil except for special events or vengeance to get new people into pvp in some form or another
Zos could wait for the vengeance tests to be over to rework classes and change skills to be in more streamlined performative ways. Use the PvE and PvP gear split system they made to isolate PvP specific gear which could be tailored for performance, while also driving a whole new economy and separate inventory system that makes it easy for new players or PvE players to get involved without the entry cost burden.

Eskibidus · April 15

Oh no we are again in that period of the year where we are forced to play that thing

SneaK · April 15

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Aristodemus wrote: »

Vengeance was a ghost town after day 1 the past 2 runs. I won't play this time around nor am I likely to play when it goes permament. I certainly hope there are major improvements to GH or it will have 3 hour Q's in prime.

GH as you know it is going to be forced into the new 1 keep campaign they showcased in one of the previous livestreams. Basically 3 spawns, 1 keep with a river around it and bridges, then a lumber/farm/mine outside the river for side objectives. In the options below the 3rd option is obviously the ideal where we slightly tone back the build system for pvp to become performative......however we already know zos is going with option 2 since they announced the new map and already started working the class reworks BEFORE vengeance testing even concluded.

The dilema is current pvp is already at 1/3 the capacity and still lagging. As the game expands and sets/skills get more complex with more complex animations the performance limitations for one server obviously struggle to handle the new load.
Zos can leave greyhost as is and inevitably keep reducing cyrodil population to match the performance from the 900-600-300(current)-150-75 until the campaign is literally nonfunctional. We already saw with the u50, nocp, and other vet campaigns that as the population in cyrodil diminishes the keep seige concept falls apart because there is not enough player distribution. In this current state there is no new player entry to pvp except BGs which have no functional MMR ranking and are riddled with smurfing mmr resets weekly.

Zos creates a new map for pvp based around the ~150 or ~75 playercap and ditches cyrodil except for special events or vengeance to get new people into pvp in some form or another

Zos could wait for the vengeance tests to be over to rework classes and change skills to be in more streamlined performative ways. Use the PvE and PvP gear split system they made to isolate PvP specific gear which could be tailored for performance, while also driving a whole new economy and separate inventory system that makes it easy for new players or PvE players to get involved without the entry cost burden.

Really saddening to read this cause it’s likely what will happen. It’s a shame the people in charge of PvP never enjoyed PvP the way many of us did/do in Cyro. You don’t know what you got until it’s gone type of thing.

MincMincMinc · April 15

SneaK wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Aristodemus wrote: »

Vengeance was a ghost town after day 1 the past 2 runs. I won't play this time around nor am I likely to play when it goes permament. I certainly hope there are major improvements to GH or it will have 3 hour Q's in prime.

GH as you know it is going to be forced into the new 1 keep campaign they showcased in one of the previous livestreams. Basically 3 spawns, 1 keep with a river around it and bridges, then a lumber/farm/mine outside the river for side objectives. In the options below the 3rd option is obviously the ideal where we slightly tone back the build system for pvp to become performative......however we already know zos is going with option 2 since they announced the new map and already started working the class reworks BEFORE vengeance testing even concluded.

The dilema is current pvp is already at 1/3 the capacity and still lagging. As the game expands and sets/skills get more complex with more complex animations the performance limitations for one server obviously struggle to handle the new load.
Zos can leave greyhost as is and inevitably keep reducing cyrodil population to match the performance from the 900-600-300(current)-150-75 until the campaign is literally nonfunctional. We already saw with the u50, nocp, and other vet campaigns that as the population in cyrodil diminishes the keep seige concept falls apart because there is not enough player distribution. In this current state there is no new player entry to pvp except BGs which have no functional MMR ranking and are riddled with smurfing mmr resets weekly.

Zos creates a new map for pvp based around the ~150 or ~75 playercap and ditches cyrodil except for special events or vengeance to get new people into pvp in some form or another

Zos could wait for the vengeance tests to be over to rework classes and change skills to be in more streamlined performative ways. Use the PvE and PvP gear split system they made to isolate PvP specific gear which could be tailored for performance, while also driving a whole new economy and separate inventory system that makes it easy for new players or PvE players to get involved without the entry cost burden.

Really saddening to read this cause it’s likely what will happen. It’s a shame the people in charge of PvP never enjoyed PvP the way many of us did/do in Cyro. You don’t know what you got until it’s gone type of thing.

idk its like zos is moving the game more towards a singleplayer coop game feeling and cutting back on all the MMO aspects. For instance even look at building, back in the day youd have 3-4 viable builds per class per stam/mag......nearly 32+ playstyles that were unique. Now adays its the generic acuity+merciless+deep fissure combo.....or I guess DK now. Sure there is visual differences, but everything PLAYS the same.

Kickimanjaro · April 15

I just wish they didn't take away my favorite part of my favorite game on a holiday when I had plans to do a lot of gaming... but whatever, I'll manage.

SneaK · April 15

MincMincMinc wrote: »

SneaK wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Aristodemus wrote: »

Vengeance was a ghost town after day 1 the past 2 runs. I won't play this time around nor am I likely to play when it goes permament. I certainly hope there are major improvements to GH or it will have 3 hour Q's in prime.

GH as you know it is going to be forced into the new 1 keep campaign they showcased in one of the previous livestreams. Basically 3 spawns, 1 keep with a river around it and bridges, then a lumber/farm/mine outside the river for side objectives. In the options below the 3rd option is obviously the ideal where we slightly tone back the build system for pvp to become performative......however we already know zos is going with option 2 since they announced the new map and already started working the class reworks BEFORE vengeance testing even concluded.

The dilema is current pvp is already at 1/3 the capacity and still lagging. As the game expands and sets/skills get more complex with more complex animations the performance limitations for one server obviously struggle to handle the new load.
Zos can leave greyhost as is and inevitably keep reducing cyrodil population to match the performance from the 900-600-300(current)-150-75 until the campaign is literally nonfunctional. We already saw with the u50, nocp, and other vet campaigns that as the population in cyrodil diminishes the keep seige concept falls apart because there is not enough player distribution. In this current state there is no new player entry to pvp except BGs which have no functional MMR ranking and are riddled with smurfing mmr resets weekly.

Zos creates a new map for pvp based around the ~150 or ~75 playercap and ditches cyrodil except for special events or vengeance to get new people into pvp in some form or another

Zos could wait for the vengeance tests to be over to rework classes and change skills to be in more streamlined performative ways. Use the PvE and PvP gear split system they made to isolate PvP specific gear which could be tailored for performance, while also driving a whole new economy and separate inventory system that makes it easy for new players or PvE players to get involved without the entry cost burden.

Really saddening to read this cause it’s likely what will happen. It’s a shame the people in charge of PvP never enjoyed PvP the way many of us did/do in Cyro. You don’t know what you got until it’s gone type of thing.

idk its like zos is moving the game more towards a singleplayer coop game feeling and cutting back on all the MMO aspects. For instance even look at building, back in the day youd have 3-4 viable builds per class per stam/mag......nearly 32+ playstyles that were unique. Now adays its the generic acuity+merciless+deep fissure combo.....or I guess DK now. Sure there is visual differences, but everything PLAYS the same.

Unfortunate, there’s a big difference in missed opportunities and wasted talent. One being much much worse than the other. ESO PvP was/is IMO the most unique PvP formula I’ve ever played, I would never say that if it didn’t have unique builds, strategies, expansive terrain, and multiple POI’s where anything could happen.

The thought of some midsized map being a replacement for Cyro is sickening to me. Might be fun as a deathmatch here and there, but I highly doubt I’ll ever feel invested into an alliance or campaign like that. It’ll likely feel like a shell of what used to be and no real reason to do it other than mindless pug stomping.

BardokRedSnow · April 15

ceruulean wrote: »

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

They offered double ap for vengeance only alongside greyhost and people still flocked to greyhost... No amount of meaningless titles or the like would get people to move over, and offering rewards like cosmetics and developing the campaign people right now dont wanna play would only ostracize and push more returning players out yet again.

Trying to force customers to like something vs improving upon what they already like is the worst business strategy possible.

What forum goers don't understand overall, because these players don't typically go to the forums, is that most pvpers come from other games like WoW where the actual gameplay and combat is more important to them than anything else. The game mode that gives them the most build diversity and complexity will always win out over what is simple and available to everyone to access out the jump.
...
And a bigger point on that is, if the social aspect was the most important thing, more pvpers would be doing PVE, as PvE is a far bigger social pool than PVP ever could be.

2. ZOS is not forcing customers into Vengeance.

Greyhost is failing to provide meaningful combat for the average player.

Two only things worth addressing, and the first one's a lie. April 20th they're literally putting greyhost on ice for a week which is the pvp we've had for the majority of the game cycle by 99%, for yet another test that even the target audience, pvers and a few jaded greyhost zergers, do not actually enjoy enough to have competitive pvp there.

As was said, a large, very sizeable portion of the population in greyhost either pvp exclusively, primarily or are motivated solely by pvp in Greyhost and do not do much of anything else unless it is with the goal of aiding pvp, in greyhost, battlegrounds, IC, or occupying their time inbetween. You'd be surprised for instance how many people do housing and also pvp, and spend a lot of money for it. For those people, like myself who do not wish to even touch Vengeance, you are being forced to either go pve, quit for a week, or help with this test.

I have the option to not play the game and give zos money? Bet. Thats not being forced at all wow my mistake. Its a huge mistake to tell end game players who spend a lot of money on cosmetics, crates, houses etc to go play something else because we want to switch focus to non end game players, who already have the most content as is.

And that brings me to the next point, Greyhost is an endgame pvp campaign, it is not and never was for the average player, its for those who have done enough to be able to min max for end game content a la pvp.

If they allowed Greyhost to be up as well during these tests you'd see a lot less complaining here, but the only reason zos is forcing all pvp campaigns down in favor of Vengeance for a week is because they know it cant sustain the population its being boasted to have, and so do you because otherwise you wouldn't care so much here.

The Vengeance enjoyers need the greyhost players, not the other way around because they know without that player base its dead. Why, because pvers cannot, have not and will not sustain it because they are not pvpers and the majority of them never will be.

Meanwhile the same players have been holding down greyhost for years and it brings in new players even still. Greyhost is the best end game content zos has because it is dynamic thanks to the large and dedicated population it has. Very minimal effort on their part is required to keep it fresh, which is why its been going for over a decade while the other campaigns are dead, vengeance included as of the last two tests.

Telling that player base which spends lots of money on cosmetics and the like to go play something else for any period of time is a terrible business decision.

BardokRedSnow · April 15

Kickimanjaro wrote: »

I just wish they didn't take away my favorite part of my favorite game on a holiday when I had plans to do a lot of gaming... but whatever, I'll manage.

You and me both man it sucks, no other part of the eso community has to deal with this but boy I wish they did.

Al_Ex_Andre · April 16

What I can tell, is that the 20th of this month, I am in Cyrodiil, in vengeance mode. And because there will be other skills than in GH, I will play another PvP experience, which I am glad to do. Hopefully the OP will soon have his GH again, so there is no worry.

Cheers

aetherix8 · April 17

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

ceruulean wrote: »

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

They offered double ap for vengeance only alongside greyhost and people still flocked to greyhost... No amount of meaningless titles or the like would get people to move over, and offering rewards like cosmetics and developing the campaign people right now dont wanna play would only ostracize and push more returning players out yet again.

Trying to force customers to like something vs improving upon what they already like is the worst business strategy possible.

What forum goers don't understand overall, because these players don't typically go to the forums, is that most pvpers come from other games like WoW where the actual gameplay and combat is more important to them than anything else. The game mode that gives them the most build diversity and complexity will always win out over what is simple and available to everyone to access out the jump.
...
And a bigger point on that is, if the social aspect was the most important thing, more pvpers would be doing PVE, as PvE is a far bigger social pool than PVP ever could be.

2. ZOS is not forcing customers into Vengeance.

Greyhost is failing to provide meaningful combat for the average player.

Two only things worth addressing, and the first one's a lie. April 20th they're literally putting greyhost on ice for a week which is the pvp we've had for the majority of the game cycle by 99%, for yet another test that even the target audience, pvers and a few jaded greyhost zergers, do not actually enjoy enough to have competitive pvp there.

As was said, a large, very sizeable portion of the population in greyhost either pvp exclusively, primarily or are motivated solely by pvp in Greyhost and do not do much of anything else unless it is with the goal of aiding pvp, in greyhost, battlegrounds, IC, or occupying their time inbetween. You'd be surprised for instance how many people do housing and also pvp, and spend a lot of money for it. For those people, like myself who do not wish to even touch Vengeance, you are being forced to either go pve, quit for a week, or help with this test.

I have the option to not play the game and give zos money? Bet. Thats not being forced at all wow my mistake. Its a huge mistake to tell end game players who spend a lot of money on cosmetics, crates, houses etc to go play something else because we want to switch focus to non end game players, who already have the most content as is.

And that brings me to the next point, Greyhost is an endgame pvp campaign, it is not and never was for the average player, its for those who have done enough to be able to min max for end game content a la pvp.

If they allowed Greyhost to be up as well during these tests you'd see a lot less complaining here, but the only reason zos is forcing all pvp campaigns down in favor of Vengeance for a week is because they know it cant sustain the population its being boasted to have, and so do you because otherwise you wouldn't care so much here.

The Vengeance enjoyers need the greyhost players, not the other way around because they know without that player base its dead. Why, because pvers cannot, have not and will not sustain it because they are not pvpers and the majority of them never will be.

Meanwhile the same players have been holding down greyhost for years and it brings in new players even still. Greyhost is the best end game content zos has because it is dynamic thanks to the large and dedicated population it has. Very minimal effort on their part is required to keep it fresh, which is why its been going for over a decade while the other campaigns are dead, vengeance included as of the last two tests.

Telling that player base which spends lots of money on cosmetics and the like to go play something else for any period of time is a terrible business decision.

Here we go again with the artificial PvE/PvP divide. Most players do both, IMHO.

Vengeance enjoyers don't need greyhosters at all. We will build our own population by making sure PvErs stay in Cyro long enough to become PvPers.

BardokRedSnow · April 17

aetherix8 wrote: »

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

ceruulean wrote: »

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

They offered double ap for vengeance only alongside greyhost and people still flocked to greyhost... No amount of meaningless titles or the like would get people to move over, and offering rewards like cosmetics and developing the campaign people right now dont wanna play would only ostracize and push more returning players out yet again.

Trying to force customers to like something vs improving upon what they already like is the worst business strategy possible.

What forum goers don't understand overall, because these players don't typically go to the forums, is that most pvpers come from other games like WoW where the actual gameplay and combat is more important to them than anything else. The game mode that gives them the most build diversity and complexity will always win out over what is simple and available to everyone to access out the jump.
...
And a bigger point on that is, if the social aspect was the most important thing, more pvpers would be doing PVE, as PvE is a far bigger social pool than PVP ever could be.

2. ZOS is not forcing customers into Vengeance.

Greyhost is failing to provide meaningful combat for the average player.

Two only things worth addressing, and the first one's a lie. April 20th they're literally putting greyhost on ice for a week which is the pvp we've had for the majority of the game cycle by 99%, for yet another test that even the target audience, pvers and a few jaded greyhost zergers, do not actually enjoy enough to have competitive pvp there.

As was said, a large, very sizeable portion of the population in greyhost either pvp exclusively, primarily or are motivated solely by pvp in Greyhost and do not do much of anything else unless it is with the goal of aiding pvp, in greyhost, battlegrounds, IC, or occupying their time inbetween. You'd be surprised for instance how many people do housing and also pvp, and spend a lot of money for it. For those people, like myself who do not wish to even touch Vengeance, you are being forced to either go pve, quit for a week, or help with this test.

I have the option to not play the game and give zos money? Bet. Thats not being forced at all wow my mistake. Its a huge mistake to tell end game players who spend a lot of money on cosmetics, crates, houses etc to go play something else because we want to switch focus to non end game players, who already have the most content as is.

And that brings me to the next point, Greyhost is an endgame pvp campaign, it is not and never was for the average player, its for those who have done enough to be able to min max for end game content a la pvp.

If they allowed Greyhost to be up as well during these tests you'd see a lot less complaining here, but the only reason zos is forcing all pvp campaigns down in favor of Vengeance for a week is because they know it cant sustain the population its being boasted to have, and so do you because otherwise you wouldn't care so much here.

The Vengeance enjoyers need the greyhost players, not the other way around because they know without that player base its dead. Why, because pvers cannot, have not and will not sustain it because they are not pvpers and the majority of them never will be.

Meanwhile the same players have been holding down greyhost for years and it brings in new players even still. Greyhost is the best end game content zos has because it is dynamic thanks to the large and dedicated population it has. Very minimal effort on their part is required to keep it fresh, which is why its been going for over a decade while the other campaigns are dead, vengeance included as of the last two tests.

Telling that player base which spends lots of money on cosmetics and the like to go play something else for any period of time is a terrible business decision.

Here we go again with the artificial PvE/PvP divide. Most players do both, IMHO.

Vengeance enjoyers don't need greyhosters at all. We will build our own population by making sure PvErs stay in Cyro long enough to become PvPers.

Its not artificial, there's a pvp community and a pve community, that some do other things is irrelevant, most of yall here on the forums are pve majority and have no idea what cyrodiil greyhost is even actually like because they quit after being ganked in bruma or something. And its very evident from the responses.

Yall failed to build a population even after these tests, and if ravenwatch hasn't been able to sustain a population despite that being very accessible to beginners, there's no reason vengeance will be any different and given its performance the last few times, it won't be.

If zos played more pvp they'd have realized this also and never bothered with vengeance. It is a waste of resources. Vengeance needs the greyhost population to move over to survive, it was clear as day when they put greyhost and vengeance side by side.

If it weren't the case, these tests wouldn't shut down every other campaign.

aetherix8 · April 17

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

aetherix8 wrote: »

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

ceruulean wrote: »

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

They offered double ap for vengeance only alongside greyhost and people still flocked to greyhost... No amount of meaningless titles or the like would get people to move over, and offering rewards like cosmetics and developing the campaign people right now dont wanna play would only ostracize and push more returning players out yet again.

Trying to force customers to like something vs improving upon what they already like is the worst business strategy possible.

What forum goers don't understand overall, because these players don't typically go to the forums, is that most pvpers come from other games like WoW where the actual gameplay and combat is more important to them than anything else. The game mode that gives them the most build diversity and complexity will always win out over what is simple and available to everyone to access out the jump.
...
And a bigger point on that is, if the social aspect was the most important thing, more pvpers would be doing PVE, as PvE is a far bigger social pool than PVP ever could be.

2. ZOS is not forcing customers into Vengeance.

Greyhost is failing to provide meaningful combat for the average player.

Two only things worth addressing, and the first one's a lie. April 20th they're literally putting greyhost on ice for a week which is the pvp we've had for the majority of the game cycle by 99%, for yet another test that even the target audience, pvers and a few jaded greyhost zergers, do not actually enjoy enough to have competitive pvp there.

As was said, a large, very sizeable portion of the population in greyhost either pvp exclusively, primarily or are motivated solely by pvp in Greyhost and do not do much of anything else unless it is with the goal of aiding pvp, in greyhost, battlegrounds, IC, or occupying their time inbetween. You'd be surprised for instance how many people do housing and also pvp, and spend a lot of money for it. For those people, like myself who do not wish to even touch Vengeance, you are being forced to either go pve, quit for a week, or help with this test.

I have the option to not play the game and give zos money? Bet. Thats not being forced at all wow my mistake. Its a huge mistake to tell end game players who spend a lot of money on cosmetics, crates, houses etc to go play something else because we want to switch focus to non end game players, who already have the most content as is.

And that brings me to the next point, Greyhost is an endgame pvp campaign, it is not and never was for the average player, its for those who have done enough to be able to min max for end game content a la pvp.

If they allowed Greyhost to be up as well during these tests you'd see a lot less complaining here, but the only reason zos is forcing all pvp campaigns down in favor of Vengeance for a week is because they know it cant sustain the population its being boasted to have, and so do you because otherwise you wouldn't care so much here.

The Vengeance enjoyers need the greyhost players, not the other way around because they know without that player base its dead. Why, because pvers cannot, have not and will not sustain it because they are not pvpers and the majority of them never will be.

Meanwhile the same players have been holding down greyhost for years and it brings in new players even still. Greyhost is the best end game content zos has because it is dynamic thanks to the large and dedicated population it has. Very minimal effort on their part is required to keep it fresh, which is why its been going for over a decade while the other campaigns are dead, vengeance included as of the last two tests.

Telling that player base which spends lots of money on cosmetics and the like to go play something else for any period of time is a terrible business decision.

Here we go again with the artificial PvE/PvP divide. Most players do both, IMHO.

Vengeance enjoyers don't need greyhosters at all. We will build our own population by making sure PvErs stay in Cyro long enough to become PvPers.

Its not artificial, there's a pvp community and a pve community, that some do other things is irrelevant, most of yall here on the forums are pve majority and have no idea what cyrodiil greyhost is even actually like because they quit after being ganked in bruma or something. And its very evident from the responses.

It's definitely more nuanced than the black and white you describe. I think there are very few people who do exclusively one and never the other. Most players do both, and the only difference is how much more they are playing PvE as compared to their PvP time, and vice versa.

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

Yall failed to build a population even after these tests, and if ravenwatch hasn't been able to sustain a population despite that being very accessible to beginners, there's no reason vengeance will be any different and given its performance the last few times, it won't be.

Don't shift ZOS' responsibility to players who liked the no-proc ruleset more than any other. How were players supposed to build anything in this half-baked mess that no-proc was? Obviously everyone got tired eventually of not knowing what worked and what didn't, of sets that should work but were not working, and of new stat sets added to the game that didn't work there for months. And I'm mentioning just the most prominent issues. One can only cling to whatever shred of hope remains that this time ZOS will implement a ruleset designed much more thoroughly, and that they will keep improving it.

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

If zos played more pvp they'd have realized this also and never bothered with vengeance. It is a waste of resources. Vengeance needs the greyhost population to move over to survive, it was clear as day when they put greyhost and vengeance side by side.

If it weren't the case, these tests wouldn't shut down every other campaign.

Testing an unfinished product where nothing solid is on offer is less attractive than playing a familiar setup with continuity and social structure already in place. It's beyond my belief that people quote it as an accurate reflection of the popularity of any of those campaigns.

MincMincMinc · April 17

SneaK wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

SneaK wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Aristodemus wrote: »

Vengeance was a ghost town after day 1 the past 2 runs. I won't play this time around nor am I likely to play when it goes permament. I certainly hope there are major improvements to GH or it will have 3 hour Q's in prime.

GH as you know it is going to be forced into the new 1 keep campaign they showcased in one of the previous livestreams. Basically 3 spawns, 1 keep with a river around it and bridges, then a lumber/farm/mine outside the river for side objectives. In the options below the 3rd option is obviously the ideal where we slightly tone back the build system for pvp to become performative......however we already know zos is going with option 2 since they announced the new map and already started working the class reworks BEFORE vengeance testing even concluded.

The dilema is current pvp is already at 1/3 the capacity and still lagging. As the game expands and sets/skills get more complex with more complex animations the performance limitations for one server obviously struggle to handle the new load.
Zos can leave greyhost as is and inevitably keep reducing cyrodil population to match the performance from the 900-600-300(current)-150-75 until the campaign is literally nonfunctional. We already saw with the u50, nocp, and other vet campaigns that as the population in cyrodil diminishes the keep seige concept falls apart because there is not enough player distribution. In this current state there is no new player entry to pvp except BGs which have no functional MMR ranking and are riddled with smurfing mmr resets weekly.

Zos creates a new map for pvp based around the ~150 or ~75 playercap and ditches cyrodil except for special events or vengeance to get new people into pvp in some form or another

Zos could wait for the vengeance tests to be over to rework classes and change skills to be in more streamlined performative ways. Use the PvE and PvP gear split system they made to isolate PvP specific gear which could be tailored for performance, while also driving a whole new economy and separate inventory system that makes it easy for new players or PvE players to get involved without the entry cost burden.

Really saddening to read this cause it’s likely what will happen. It’s a shame the people in charge of PvP never enjoyed PvP the way many of us did/do in Cyro. You don’t know what you got until it’s gone type of thing.

idk its like zos is moving the game more towards a singleplayer coop game feeling and cutting back on all the MMO aspects. For instance even look at building, back in the day youd have 3-4 viable builds per class per stam/mag......nearly 32+ playstyles that were unique. Now adays its the generic acuity+merciless+deep fissure combo.....or I guess DK now. Sure there is visual differences, but everything PLAYS the same.

Unfortunate, there’s a big difference in missed opportunities and wasted talent. One being much much worse than the other. ESO PvP was/is IMO the most unique PvP formula I’ve ever played, I would never say that if it didn’t have unique builds, strategies, expansive terrain, and multiple POI’s where anything could happen.

The thought of some midsized map being a replacement for Cyro is sickening to me. Might be fun as a deathmatch here and there, but I highly doubt I’ll ever feel invested into an alliance or campaign like that. It’ll likely feel like a shell of what used to be and no real reason to do it other than mindless pug stomping.

Well like i theorized in the PVP threads section. If I was zos I would make a new pvp campaign system using a mesh server system to distribute the lag. Instead of having one cyrodil with 18 keeps on it. Why not make 18 servers with one keep each? Cyro is so large you could break it down. Plenty of other games do this like Albion or even Ashes of Creation planned a similar system.