SUPRISE ! People dont like VENGEANCE

Major_Mangle · April 28

Arrow312 wrote: »

Major_Mangle wrote: »

DeathandDebauchery wrote: »

SneaK wrote: »

What a new type of player really needs, is a better community, and a better outlook on their community.

That's just bad game design in a nutshell. That approach is fine for extremely niche content (like Trifectas) but that mindset is terrible for something you can do at level 10. This is peak PvP player privilege and exactly why Vengeance needs to exist.

Literally the most fundamental concept of an MMO is to interact with other players. It's how I learned, by talking and playing with others. As I continued to play PvP I came in contact with more and more players, I started to try new type of "playstyles" (BGs, small-scale, ballgroup etc etc) and learned more and improved the way I PvP. Literally every single time I felt I got better at PvP was because I interacted and talked to other people who knew more than me.

It's not bad design because you might dislike it, that's not how that definition works.

Sneak is 100% correct that the absence of community teaching people is astonishing these days. They exist sure, but not to the same extent they did in the earlier days of ESO.

why should i help someone when the second sentence is i dont change my build. I copy and paste it from YT it is a good build...you hear this 2-3 times and then give up and dont help anymore.

You know the famous saying:
"You can lead a horse to water but can't make it drink"

Shourrs · April 28

Surprise, I finally could enjoy PVP again. No bombers, no unkillable tower runners, no ball groups, no "let the set do all the work" less lag/loading screens (there was both in big fights but it was okay compared to the old mode). Finally some action with big sieges, long def fights and at least on my campaign no clear wipe - even if reds dominated.

I do understand PVP players missing the challenge. I understand that they prefer the old mode. Many of them do like long tower fights and crazy burst combos killing noobs instantly, apparently.

From my perspective Cyrodiil was just toxic for mediocre people like me. You spend more time waiting for being resurrected or riding back to the fight than actually fighting. And you are often killed by some ganker on your way there. It's just frustrating. You go from noob campaign to pro or empty map. No mid game.

Just imagine PVE being story mode and then god-slayer or worse. Who would play the game? This is how PVP felt for me. So I dropped it outside of events. Which, if you believe zone chat, pros didn't like as noobs took up all the spots within the campaigns disrupting strategy, ...

This mode solves this issue. People who don't want to join the big guys, can play Vengeance. [Wannabe] Pros can join classic mode. I would appreciate having both modes so pros don't get bored. I don't want their fun being taken by my wishes. But being told that "people don't like vengeance" seems to be a very self-centered view of things, to say the least.

Shourrs · April 28

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

Imagine if your trials and dungeons got replaced with a pve template for damage dealer, healer and tank, no sets to gain or earn, just vanilla template slop where everyone's the same and the difficulty was set to normal.

Worse, the player counts are tripled in number.

Would you like that? That's essentially what is happening here. Ultra snoozefest casual mode not even entertaining to pvers longer than two days.

No. I wouldn't. But PVP currently is a trial in Vet with HM-Bosses only which has to be accomplished within speedrun time and without a group member dying. So I don't enjoy it. I'd like to have some option to either learn and move on to harder content or to stay in a simple "casual" mode to have fun. I'd like to have a choice. Vengeance gave it to me and I enjoyed it.

And again, I don't want the classic mode to be removed. I like Vengeance to be an alternative to it, not its replacement.

Shourrs · April 28

Major_Mangle wrote: »

Literally the most fundamental concept of an MMO is to interact with other players. It's how I learned, by talking and playing with others. As I continued to play PvP I came in contact with more and more players, I started to try new type of "playstyles" (BGs, small-scale, ballgroup etc etc) and learned more and improved the way I PvP. Literally every single time I felt I got better at PvP was because I interacted and talked to other people who knew more than me.

It's not bad design because you might dislike it, that's not how that definition works..

Sneak is 100% correct that the absence of community teaching people is astonishing these days. They exist sure, but not to the same extent they did in the earlier days of ESO.

This is true for people playing PVP often and having the real-life skills to learn it properly. There are people who don't have the time, are too old or have a disability to keep up with the good players. Or some who just are okay with not being good. For those, a mid-game-mode would be perfect.

I've learned PVP like you. Nice group of people. Help with tactics, builds and hints (block when turning resource). Then I lost interest due to server lags and extreme builds. I tried so come back several times. With help from friends and without, but realized that it was just frustrating and turned my back on Cyrodiil. I came back for Vengeance 2 (skipped the first) and was surprised that it actually was fun for me to play.

I think it was the old feeling that you group up and ride together, fight together, win together. There isn't one guy carrying everyone or killing whole groups just because he can. At least not in an extreme way.

Major_Mangle wrote: »

Edit: I personally think sub 50 PvP should straight up be removed from the game. Only allow PvP once you hit lvl 50 (which takes a few hours at most if you want to). Sub 50 lost its purpose a long time ago and is a waste of server space imo.

You're right about the lost of purpose. Most people learn to play far later than L50. But I think ESO needs more beginner-friendly modes for PVP. Vengeance could take care of it, an ELO-System, leagues, ... some are suited better for BGs, some for IC, some for Cyro. And I'm sure that there are tons of options I don't see.

Going all in from the beginning is too much for people that are just curious.

spartaxoxo · April 28

The Uninvited wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

The Uninvited wrote: »

Let me ask a question to the Vengeance players, who say Vengeance is more about skill and less about builds.

IF (and that's a big IF) everyone, as you proclaim, is running the meta in Gray Host (so essentially running the same sets, combined with the same subclass setup), wouldn't that automatically make Gray Host also about skill?

I mean, everyone running the meta would make it rougly the same as Vengeance (same loadout), right?

Everyone is not running the meta. Everyone knows that. When people say that they mean that people in off-meta, niche, or just plain bad builds can go up against someone who they can't win against because they're in a meta set before either player even does anything. Mistakes in builds are much more brutally punished as a result than mistakes in gameplay.

ETA
In the games where builds are less important (or don't have builds), mistakes in gameplay are more important than mistakes in build. The person with the better setup will usually win but if they make an error, the new person can punish them for that mistake and defeat them. In those games, skill is more important than builds.

And that's why I asked the question. You're right, not everyone is running the meta. Our whole guild is not running the meta. Still, we'd rather play Gray Host than watered down Vengeance.

Like I said somewhere earlier, for me there's only 2 things that are a plague on Gray Host. One is critical damage (way too high), the other one is healstacking.

Either preference is fine and fair. Some people enjoy the build having the higher impact because it unlocks a lot of options and variety in gameplay that isn't available with everyone being in cookie cutter states. There's a skill to build making. Others prefer their gameplay be the highest impact because they want a more even playing field. This is why options are good even if one doesn't like GH or Vengeance it is good that we have both.

I'd be totally opposed to having GH permanently removed.

LadyGP · April 28

I think a lot of things can be true at the same time - yet everyones posts tend to be "this" or "that".

After reading an insane amount of responses the bulk of what I'm seeing is this.

People who like Vengence:
- Mainly self described "casuals" or "medicore" players
- Dislike for "bombers", "ball groups", "tower humpers", "burst combos"
- Enjoy the "zerg" aspect of it
- Little lag
- Larger player count
- Simplified "builds"

People who dislike Vengence:
- No theory crafting or "build" options
- Dislike the "zergs only" aspect of it
- Way too "simplified"
- Little mention of ball groups (pro or anti)
- Overall consider it a "cheese" version of PvP

Here is my "both can be true" take:

First, and most importantly IMO, PVP in MMOs is supposed to be hard. There are simply players who are better than me and will kick my butt everytime I run into them - that is just a fact. I know there are people who if I try to 1v1 them I'll get dominated everytime - and that is perfectly fine and healthy for a game. Having a skill gap forces me to want to improve, look at logs and figure out were my weakness is, etc. It's the same as hardcore trial groups who min/man the crap out of things.

With that being said, not everyone is like me - and that is okay too. There are people in my friend group who are coming into cyrodiil right now for the first time and are having a rough go at it. The barrier to entry to GH is a bit too difficult at the moment and I applaude ZoS for trying to make it easier. Vengence is a great campaign for an U50/"heres how you PvP" but that is where it stops. For the core audince its strongly disliked. I wrote an extremly lengthy post in the feedback thread covering some of those reasons.. you can read it here if you'd like (https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/8464907/#Comment_8464907)

GH has the zergs, the smallman fights, the permablock tanks, the tower humpers, the ball groups, etc - vengence has pretty much one thing - 200+ person zergs. You allienate the overwhelming majority of player types to cater to one core group - casuals - are casuals going to show up every night and keep the campaign alive - I don't know that answer but I have a hunch on what it is....and I think a lot of other people doo as well.

Anyways, back to my both things can be true comment.

GH in general needs a hard balance pass.. and followed up balance passes.

I say this as someone who ran in ball groups for many many years - they are too damn OP at the moment. They need to be tuned down significantly. EVERY MMO that has successful PvP has ball groups in some shame/form so ZoS would be fooling themself if they tried to eliminate them - and honestly for a 10+ year old game why would you want to push away any paying customer you have (yes ball groups buy things on the crown store/sub).

We also need to work on the tower humpers a bit but they aren't as big of a problem as ball groups. Pull sets in lag is a really big problem that hasn't been fixed, shield stacking, heal stacking (good change there zos keep this mindset up), etc are good places to start.

You can absolutley have a GH that has zergs, ball groups, small man fights all over the map, tower humpers doing their thing, etc, without having to gut the entire PvP experience that we have come to know and love.

Peoples opinions on what makes a good mode, IMO, are warped too much from ball groups in their current form and not from a "what if we nerfed ball groups a bit and balanced things out a bit" perspective.

Last point: When your core PvP player base, who has stuck with you through years and years even after feeling neglected or disrespect from certain studio members, takes a week off instead of playing a test where they can provide feedback/shape the future of the mode they love.... you know you've got a bigger problem and have missed the mark entirely.

/end rambling

moderatelyfatman · April 28

@xyl

Shourrs wrote: »

Surprise, I finally could enjoy PVP again. No bombers, no unkillable tower runners, no ball groups, no "let the set do all the work" less lag/loading screens (there was both in big fights but it was okay compared to the old mode). Finally some action with big sieges, long def fights and at least on my campaign no clear wipe - even if reds dominated.

I do understand PVP players missing the challenge. I understand that they prefer the old mode. Many of them do like long tower fights and crazy burst combos killing noobs instantly, apparently.

From my perspective Cyrodiil was just toxic for mediocre people like me. You spend more time waiting for being resurrected or riding back to the fight than actually fighting. And you are often killed by some ganker on your way there. It's just frustrating. You go from noob campaign to pro or empty map. No mid game.

Just imagine PVE being story mode and then god-slayer or worse. Who would play the game? This is how PVP felt for me. So I dropped it outside of events. Which, if you believe zone chat, pros didn't like as noobs took up all the spots within the campaigns disrupting strategy, ...

This mode solves this issue. People who don't want to join the big guys, can play Vengeance. [Wannabe] Pros can join classic mode. I would appreciate having both modes so pros don't get bored. I don't want their fun being taken by my wishes. But being told that "people don't like vengeance" seems to be a very self-centered view of things, to say the least.

I don't think the issue here is Vengeance itself: I think it would be a great idea to have a permanent Vengeance for newer and casual PvPers to cut their teeth with an eye on something bigger (Grey Host and Blackreach).

What most people object to is ZOS treating this like a zero sum game: Vengeance or regular Cyrodiil. Not letting players access the latter smacks of the devs insecurity because they don't want people making side by side comparisons on the popularity of both modes.

Add to this that regular Cyrodiil has apparently gone into Maintenance Mode with no meaningful changes in the last year since Vengeance began, and you have a very unhappy playerbase.

LadyGP · April 28

moderatelyfatman wrote: »

@xyl

Shourrs wrote: »

Surprise, I finally could enjoy PVP again. No bombers, no unkillable tower runners, no ball groups, no "let the set do all the work" less lag/loading screens (there was both in big fights but it was okay compared to the old mode). Finally some action with big sieges, long def fights and at least on my campaign no clear wipe - even if reds dominated.

I do understand PVP players missing the challenge. I understand that they prefer the old mode. Many of them do like long tower fights and crazy burst combos killing noobs instantly, apparently.

From my perspective Cyrodiil was just toxic for mediocre people like me. You spend more time waiting for being resurrected or riding back to the fight than actually fighting. And you are often killed by some ganker on your way there. It's just frustrating. You go from noob campaign to pro or empty map. No mid game.

Just imagine PVE being story mode and then god-slayer or worse. Who would play the game? This is how PVP felt for me. So I dropped it outside of events. Which, if you believe zone chat, pros didn't like as noobs took up all the spots within the campaigns disrupting strategy, ...

This mode solves this issue. People who don't want to join the big guys, can play Vengeance. [Wannabe] Pros can join classic mode. I would appreciate having both modes so pros don't get bored. I don't want their fun being taken by my wishes. But being told that "people don't like vengeance" seems to be a very self-centered view of things, to say the least.

I don't think the issue here is Vengeance itself: I think it would be a great idea to have a permanent Vengeance for newer and casual PvPers to cut their teeth with an eye on something bigger (Grey Host and Blackreach).

What most people object to is ZOS treating this like a zero sum game: Vengeance or regular Cyrodiil. Not letting players access the latter smacks of the devs insecurity because they don't want people making side by side comparisons on the popularity of both modes.

Add to this that regular Cyrodiil has apparently gone into Maintenance Mode with no meaningful changes in the last year since Vengeance began, and you have a very unhappy playerbase.

THIS.

Vengence is the perfect mode for casuals/entry PvPers but your core audience of PvPers won't fill this campaign so you'll still be left with an emptyish secondary camp with long queues in GH.

Which brings me to this question - what did we really achieve in all the years of tests/dev effort? We are still back where we started... GH being the main campaign for the core PvP audience, massive queues, performance issues, ball group complains, and secondary camps that are ghost towns.

Now what...?

SneaK · April 28

Arrow312 wrote: »

Major_Mangle wrote: »

DeathandDebauchery wrote: »

SneaK wrote: »

What a new type of player really needs, is a better community, and a better outlook on their community.

That's just bad game design in a nutshell. That approach is fine for extremely niche content (like Trifectas) but that mindset is terrible for something you can do at level 10. This is peak PvP player privilege and exactly why Vengeance needs to exist.

Literally the most fundamental concept of an MMO is to interact with other players. It's how I learned, by talking and playing with others. As I continued to play PvP I came in contact with more and more players, I started to try new type of "playstyles" (BGs, small-scale, ballgroup etc etc) and learned more and improved the way I PvP. Literally every single time I felt I got better at PvP was because I interacted and talked to other people who knew more than me.

It's not bad design because you might dislike it, that's not how that definition works.

Sneak is 100% correct that the absence of community teaching people is astonishing these days. They exist sure, but not to the same extent they did in the earlier days of ESO.

why should i help someone when the second sentence is i dont change my build. I copy and paste it from YT it is a good build...you hear this 2-3 times and then give up and dont help anymore.

It’s not for everyone. I rarely group up with anyone anymore. But, back when I had hours and hours to play, there were several people in my PvP guild who would break out and start a Zerg group from ZC, if we were pushing emp or had a lot of people on, we’d simple start another group and pick up randos to basically be the auxiliary group and the death squad would come swoop in. It was highly effective and we taught a lot of people the ins and outs of Cyro by doing this. It was also fun to be in some rag tag group of instigators knowing big bro was coming to the fight. Frankly speaking, ZOS creating such bad imbalance is what has pushed the community further from this, picking up a random 5 years ago wasn’t as big of a liability as it is now. It’s no players fault, it’s a scenario created by the devs repeated bad decisions. The hope here, is that the refreshes will balance some things out. They still need to address certain sets and things like Charm but tbh if the refreshes create some form of balance the liability of creating a pug shrinks. Which is good for everyone.

Vengeance doesn’t get any of these updates, it’ll likely be more of a (class) meta dominated camp than GH when it’s all said and done.

LadyGP · April 28

Also, people who think you won't have "ball groups" if they force Vengence only aren't thinking clearly. There will still be 12 man groups in coms that min/max like crazy, look at logs after raid, theory craft, and will seem "unkillable" and dominate like they do now.

They might not have pull sets but they will figure out other ways to "harass" you and we will be right back where we are.

Just keep that in mind when you're pro vengence.

Shourrs · April 28

LadyGP wrote: »

First, and most importantly IMO, PVP in MMOs is supposed to be hard. There are simply players who are better than me and will kick my butt everytime I run into them - that is just a fact. I know there are people who if I try to 1v1 them I'll get dominated everytime - and that is perfectly fine and healthy for a game. Having a skill gap forces me to want to improve, look at logs and figure out were my weakness is, etc. It's the same as hardcore trial groups who min/man the crap out of things.

Most of your post is absolutely okay. No, it is good, actually. The only part I disagree is the quote here. Strongly.
Most sports are organised in a way where beginners and pros don't compete with one another. The pro would be bored and the beginner just frustrated. If a good player breaks this rule to take advantage of the skill gap, he is considered a bad sportsman. Quickly nobody - neither the noobs nor the pros - are playing with him.

GH until now is that: You get killed without having a chance to counter it as you lack experience. If you're lucky, someone is resurrecting or a camp is up. Most often you are not. You have to ride. You arrive and get killed fast. If you arrive and aren't ganked on your way. You ride again. Until you don't and just give up. It would be okay if this would happen every now and then. Bad luck on the battlefield. But it happens all the time. The time needed to close the gap is too much for me and for many of my friends. So we don't play the mode. I accepted this long time ago (except painful events to get some stupid goodies because I refuse learing from my mistakes) and was very surprised to see that ZoS might be working on a solution.

In your comparison to hardcore trial groups you forget the way to get there: open world, normal dungeons, vet dungeons, normal trials, vet trials, hms, speedruns, no deaths, triples starting with easy trials finishing the really hard ones. You don't have this in PVP. You have <50, empty maps and GH. You cannot say "vet trials" or "easy hms" are fine for me. I don't need more. You need to decide if you go all in or nothing.

Again: I do want GH to remain. I do want ZoS to spend time solving issues there, too. But Vengeance can become the casual mode PVP I am missing in ESO.

hhk · April 28

It's aweseome. I hope they will implement a server that stays. No need for lame grinds, no need to build craft. Just go and have fun.

Shourrs · April 28

LadyGP wrote: »

Also, people who think you won't have "ball groups" if they force Vengence only aren't thinking clearly. There will still be 12 man groups in coms that min/max like crazy, look at logs after raid, theory craft, and will seem "unkillable" and dominate like they do now.

They might not have pull sets but they will figure out other ways to "harass" you and we will be right back where we are.

Just keep that in mind when you're pro vengence.

Well maybe I am not thinking clearly, but I am able to enjoy things when they are good (which Vengeance isn't) or at least much better fitted to my playstyle (which Vengeance is). And yes, people find new ways to dominate. That is why I'd like to see both GH and VGC. Then balance can focus on the respective problems - lags in GH and freshly appearing gaps in VGC.

Yes, they always will be a gap between players. But for mid-game a small gap is better than the large one we have right now. And it is easier to manage if you have different modes.

PS: I would be fine with other solutions. ELO/Leagues/... The way it is, I think that the game would be better off without any link between PVP and PVE (events, gear, skills, ...) as balancing one does impact the other too much too often.

LadyGP · April 28

Shourrs wrote: »

LadyGP wrote: »

First, and most importantly IMO, PVP in MMOs is supposed to be hard. There are simply players who are better than me and will kick my butt everytime I run into them - that is just a fact. I know there are people who if I try to 1v1 them I'll get dominated everytime - and that is perfectly fine and healthy for a game. Having a skill gap forces me to want to improve, look at logs and figure out were my weakness is, etc. It's the same as hardcore trial groups who min/man the crap out of things.

Most of your post is absolutely okay. No, it is good, actually. The only part I disagree is the quote here. Strongly.
Most sports are organised in a way where beginners and pros don't compete with one another. The pro would be bored and the beginner just frustrated. If a good player breaks this rule to take advantage of the skill gap, he is considered a bad sportsman. Quickly nobody - neither the noobs nor the pros - are playing with him.

GH until now is that: You get killed without having a chance to counter it as you lack experience. If you're lucky, someone is resurrecting or a camp is up. Most often you are not. You have to ride. You arrive and get killed fast. If you arrive and aren't ganked on your way. You ride again. Until you don't and just give up. It would be okay if this would happen every now and then. Bad luck on the battlefield. But it happens all the time. The time needed to close the gap is too much for me and for many of my friends. So we don't play the mode. I accepted this long time ago (except painful events to get some stupid goodies because I refuse learing from my mistakes) and was very surprised to see that ZoS might be working on a solution.

In your comparison to hardcore trial groups you forget the way to get there: open world, normal dungeons, vet dungeons, normal trials, vet trials, hms, speedruns, no deaths, triples starting with easy trials finishing the really hard ones. You don't have this in PVP. You have <50, empty maps and GH. You cannot say "vet trials" or "easy hms" are fine for me. I don't need more. You need to decide if you go all in or nothing.

Again: I do want GH to remain. I do want ZoS to spend time solving issues there, too. But Vengeance can become the casual mode PVP I am missing in ESO.

I hear you - sports ins't a good comparison though.

Ganking is a legit play style, and I've been ganked more times than I can count.. and it pisses me off every single time it happens but.. it's a valid play style.

I agree 100% it's a brutal player experience if you've never played GH before - vengence is great to get your feet wet and then step up to GH when you're ready. You're still going to get slapped around a bit.. but a person who has been playing in Cyrodiil since the begining should always have the advantage on someone who has never and just stepped in.. sorry but thats just the honest fact.

A begginer isn't going to understand how pull sets work, how ball groups work (they are going to mindlessly chase the ball group and they are "running away" into a choke point to get bombed), they are going to get ganked, etc.

Now, with that being said... I 100% think there needs to be multiple passed on ball groups, ganking sets, TTK, one shot builds, etc. I think if they make these adjustments it would make it so people like you and your friends can have a more enjoyable time, stay alive longer, while not nerfing ball groups to the ground where you end up just making them quit.

Sure, some people would love if ball group people quit the game.. many would probablly.. but do you really want even more people to leave Cyro? I'd argue the hate for ball groups isn't because of the players themself but their skill and ability to use sets that frankly should have been fixed many many years ago. Blame zos for the systems, not the player.

As for the trial comment.. I was just making an off the cuff comment about min/maxing, looking at logs, theory crafting, etc. I'm with you there is a big difference in pvp vs the trial community.

SneaK · April 28

Shourrs wrote: »

LadyGP wrote: »

First, and most importantly IMO, PVP in MMOs is supposed to be hard. There are simply players who are better than me and will kick my butt everytime I run into them - that is just a fact. I know there are people who if I try to 1v1 them I'll get dominated everytime - and that is perfectly fine and healthy for a game. Having a skill gap forces me to want to improve, look at logs and figure out were my weakness is, etc. It's the same as hardcore trial groups who min/man the crap out of things.

Most of your post is absolutely okay. No, it is good, actually. The only part I disagree is the quote here. Strongly.
Most sports are organised in a way where beginners and pros don't compete with one another. The pro would be bored and the beginner just frustrated. If a good player breaks this rule to take advantage of the skill gap, he is considered a bad sportsman. Quickly nobody - neither the noobs nor the pros - are playing with him.

GH until now is that: You get killed without having a chance to counter it as you lack experience. If you're lucky, someone is resurrecting or a camp is up. Most often you are not. You have to ride. You arrive and get killed fast. If you arrive and aren't ganked on your way. You ride again. Until you don't and just give up. It would be okay if this would happen every now and then. Bad luck on the battlefield. But it happens all the time. The time needed to close the gap is too much for me and for many of my friends. So we don't play the mode. I accepted this long time ago (except painful events to get some stupid goodies because I refuse learing from my mistakes) and was very surprised to see that ZoS might be working on a solution.

In your comparison to hardcore trial groups you forget the way to get there: open world, normal dungeons, vet dungeons, normal trials, vet trials, hms, speedruns, no deaths, triples starting with easy trials finishing the really hard ones. You don't have this in PVP. You have <50, empty maps and GH. You cannot say "vet trials" or "easy hms" are fine for me. I don't need more. You need to decide if you go all in or nothing.

Again: I do want GH to remain. I do want ZoS to spend time solving issues there, too. But Vengeance can become the casual mode PVP I am missing in ESO.

The analogies are getting worse.

I’ve never played competitive soccer, but I drive by fields on my way to work, I’m gonna stop in tomorrow and play goalie. It’s really gonna leave a bad taste in my mouth if they score on me, I’ll probably say the soccer community is toxic and won’t play it again until they promise not to score when I play goalie.

Shourrs · April 28

LadyGP wrote: »

I hear you - sports ins't a good comparison though.

Ganking is a legit play style, and I've been ganked more times than I can count.. and it pisses me off every single time it happens but.. it's a valid play style.

I agree 100% it's a brutal player experience if you've never played GH before - vengence is great to get your feet wet and then step up to GH when you're ready. You're still going to get slapped around a bit.. but a person who has been playing in Cyrodiil since the begining should always have the advantage on someone who has never and just stepped in.. sorry but thats just the honest fact.

A begginer isn't going to understand how pull sets work, how ball groups work (they are going to mindlessly chase the ball group and they are "running away" into a choke point to get bombed), they are going to get ganked, etc.

Now, with that being said... I 100% think there needs to be multiple passed on ball groups, ganking sets, TTK, one shot builds, etc. I think if they make these adjustments it would make it so people like you and your friends can have a more enjoyable time, stay alive longer, while not nerfing ball groups to the ground where you end up just making them quit.

Sure, some people would love if ball group people quit the game.. many would probablly.. but do you really want even more people to leave Cyro? I'd argue the hate for ball groups isn't because of the players themself but their skill and ability to use sets that frankly should have been fixed many many years ago. Blame zos for the systems, not the player.

As for the trial comment.. I was just making an off the cuff comment about min/maxing, looking at logs, theory crafting, etc. I'm with you there is a big difference in pvp vs the trial community.

I think we are on the same page here. I think that all those tactics, yes, including those *#=@!§ gankers, should have their place as trifectas have in PVE. Yes, some adjustments would be maybe sufficient to get me back in PVP. The main thing would be lags. The announcement that there should be more port points (didn't follow if there are details or if it was a rumor only) was a good start, too.

My preferred solution: both. Vengeance (adjusted im many ways) for casuals (events, ...) and GH (adjusted especially for lags) so you can challenge yourself if you like.

My second solution: leagues. If you are good, you play your way up. You take your team with you. There you get better rewards, more AP, some honorable mention or even a statue of your player for being Platinum League Emp. Then you play with players on your level with smaller gaps.

There must be more ways not to lose PVP pros and making the mode more attractive for casuals.
We'll see.

I honestly wish that GH won't be abandoned for Vengeance even if I like the new mode.

Shourrs · April 29

SneaK wrote: »

The analogies are getting worse.

Do they?

SneaK wrote: »

I’ve never played competitive soccer, but I drive by fields on my way to work, I’m gonna stop in tomorrow and play goalie. It’s really gonna leave a bad taste in my mouth if they score on me, I’ll probably say the soccer community is toxic and won’t play it again until they promise not to score when I play goalie.

Ah. Sarcasm. A skill weaponized very easily with great impact in the right hands.

Let's try it without analogies:

PVP doesn't have a mid-game. It doesn't even have a real early-game. It's end game from the start. You can decide not to play or to play against the best from the start.

Vengeance gives you two benefits:
1. You learn how PVP does work. Ram, oil, second breach, choke points. It prepares you for GH-PVP where on top of base mechanics you have setups and gear added.
2. You can play casually while having a core PVP-experience: fighting for keeps. There is nothing wrong about it.

You seem to be above that. You know how to play and you don't need casual mode as PVP is what you are doing in ESO.
That's fine. That's why I repeatedly wrote that I don't want GH being replaced by Vengeance.

But please accept that people do find different things challenging and that some need to work harder to achieve less than you did. They might just be less talented, have less time, or just have another balance between challenge and fun. Do you really want to tell them not to play ESO PVP or worse - that they need to play your kind of PVP?

Before I forget: I never wrote that the community was toxic. I wrote that Cyrodiil was. Big difference.

Shourrs · April 29

moderatelyfatman wrote: »

What most people object to is ZOS treating this like a zero sum game: Vengeance or regular Cyrodiil. Not letting players access the latter smacks of the devs insecurity because they don't want people making side by side comparisons on the popularity of both modes.

I see. I mean, I don't. I can compare without playing it side by side. Take old experiences and compare them to new ones.

But why comparing popularity (and how? just logged-in people? quantity over quality?) and why over such a short time (a good sample would take much longer) and why long standing systems with work in progress?

Wouldn't it be better to make a poll about the things they were actually testing + the overall experience compared to GH or other non-vengeance campaigns?

For me Vengeance (unready, unbalanced as it is) is already is better than what ZoS made of Cyrodill over the last years. I can easily accept that others don't share this opinion or do so partially, only. This is to expect with work in progress ...

moderatelyfatman wrote: »

Add to this that regular Cyrodiil has apparently gone into Maintenance Mode with no meaningful changes in the last year since Vengeance began, and you have a very unhappy playerbase.

Yes. That's an absolutely fair point. That's one of the reasons I've stopped playing Cyrodiil a while ago. It was getting old. It absolutely does need a rework.

Al_Ex_Andre · April 29

Seems that a fair bit of the community WILL like Vengeance though... because apparently there will be exclusive goodies for participating to Vengeance.... So see you soon in Vengeance.

Bernz007 · April 29

I'm calling it now, the newbies/casuals will be complaining in Vengeance when zerg groups become organized by the GH ball group guilds.

BardokRedSnow · April 29

..

Al_Ex_Andre wrote: »

Seems that a fair bit of the community WILL like Vengeance though... because apparently there will be exclusive goodies for participating to Vengeance.... So see you soon in Vengeance.

When the population is dead after the well runs dry of meaningless titles, cosmetics etc, we’ll see you in greyhost.

SneaK · April 29

Shourrs wrote: »

SneaK wrote: »

The analogies are getting worse.

Do they?

SneaK wrote: »

I’ve never played competitive soccer, but I drive by fields on my way to work, I’m gonna stop in tomorrow and play goalie. It’s really gonna leave a bad taste in my mouth if they score on me, I’ll probably say the soccer community is toxic and won’t play it again until they promise not to score when I play goalie.

Ah. Sarcasm. A skill weaponized very easily with great impact in the right hands.

Let's try it without analogies:

PVP doesn't have a mid-game. It doesn't even have a real early-game. It's end game from the start. You can decide not to play or to play against the best from the start.

Vengeance gives you two benefits:
1. You learn how PVP does work. Ram, oil, second breach, choke points. It prepares you for GH-PVP where on top of base mechanics you have setups and gear added.
2. You can play casually while having a core PVP-experience: fighting for keeps. There is nothing wrong about it.

You seem to be above that. You know how to play and you don't need casual mode as PVP is what you are doing in ESO.
That's fine. That's why I repeatedly wrote that I don't want GH being replaced by Vengeance.

But please accept that people do find different things challenging and that some need to work harder to achieve less than you did. They might just be less talented, have less time, or just have another balance between challenge and fun. Do you really want to tell them not to play ESO PVP or worse - that they need to play your kind of PVP?

Before I forget: I never wrote that the community was toxic. I wrote that Cyrodiil was. Big difference.

I just disagree, and I keep seeing people talk about Vengeance being some casual mode, that is NOT the intent of Vengeance. It won’t be less sweaty, !remindme 90 days. I personally think it’ll be worse and more frustrating than GH once all the refreshes are nearing completion and we see some resemblance of balance restored.

Cyro, normal campaign, Cyro’s system, is already designed in a way to accommodate every tier of player. New to PvP, hop in with the Zerg and defend a keep, or follow them
take a keep. Decent, go try your hand at X’ing, or Ganking, or tanking, or whatever. Top tier PvPer, do the above successfully 95% of time, chase emp/leaderboard or stars, or the very very top, lead a comped group successfully. I just can’t get onboard with this mindset of PvP as a system needs to be made easier because people don’t have the desire to learn. And again, Vengeance is not being designed to be an on ramp it’s created focus is about performance. ZOS doesn’t care about our “feelings”.

dcrush · April 29

Since there’s no official feedback thread about this test I’ll post a summary here… I spent a lot more time in Vengeance during this test than during the other ones and after playing almost every day during that week my thoughts/opinions are:

Good.
* Big fights, lots of players, long battles at keeps and outposts.
* Double AP

Bad.
* No faction lock means players will flock to the winning side and zerg the map. On PC NA this was (unsurprisingly) EP, on other platforms it was a different faction. IMHO this is the biggest potential pitfall if ZOS wants Vengeance to be successful. If faction lock is not introduced, Vengeance will very quickly be a dead campaign just like the other campaigns that they are closing. Whenever the factions were (mostly) equal in terms of population it was fun. Whenever a faction was outnumbered it was worse than GH. Trying to take a resource with three people and sixty (not even exaggerating) people show up to steamroll you gets stale quickly.
* While it can be fun getting 20 killing blows by just clickety clicking some oils or spamming caltrops on a breach… it gets boring very quickly. Nice AP though.
* There is no counter to being outzerged. I’m not saying everyone should be able to 1v10 but on GH a few exceptionally good players can turn the tide of a battle. In VG the battle is won by whoever shows up with more.

I do understand what people mean when they say that there is no low-tier or medium-tier PvP to get introduced to the endgame that is GH. I just… don’t think Vengeance as it is now is the way to do it.

CatalinaWineMixer2 · April 29

I dont know that its possible to really stop Zergs. Or even ball groups. I dont like to compare games because its not really fair to the developers. FFXIV has the right idea, Frontline is a large scale PvP but assigned at random by factions. Its similar to Eso 3 vs 3 team battlegrounds on a very large instanced scale with 24 man teams instead (Might be worth a limited BG campaign test). They are full of surprises and fun. With similar skill/Class rules as Vengeance.

It still isnt Cyrodiil though and there really is something special about Cyrodiil. There is also PvE stuff in Cyrodiil so it is more than just PvP. The idea of Vengeance is large scale PvP. And a rules based order for fair play. It achieves this.

How do we really prevent them (Zergs)? We would have to find a way to have people placed by the system rather than people choosing or simply switching at will when they feel like their alliance is losing. And it would prohibit people from playing with their guilds/friends or from alliance of their choosing. Basically the developers would have to assign us by the rules of their choosing. I honestly dont know what the answer is concerning that but it is an issue as far as Vengeance.

Vengeance is a good thing. I have played it every time it has come about. My Guilds have do and will. I am excited to see the finished product and even more excited that my Guildies will be there once again. They will not PvP anymore otherwise.

I still do play GH but when Vengeance is permanent, im probably going to be done with it. Its a no rules, out of control dps meta pond. With the same people splashing around in it. Its not really our characters in there anymore anyway, they all have special stipulations that only work or dont work in PvP. Even the gear does. Build the build and do it until your hands hurt. Thats boring and painful after 10 years.

moderatelyfatman · April 29

Shourrs wrote: »

I see. I mean, I don't. I can compare without playing it side by side. Take old experiences and compare them to new ones.

But why comparing popularity (and how? just logged-in people? quantity over quality?) and why over such a short time (a good sample would take much longer) and why long standing systems with work in progress?

Wouldn't it be better to make a poll about the things they were actually testing + the overall experience compared to GH or other non-vengeance campaigns?

Yes. That's an absolutely fair point. That's one of the reasons I've stopped playing Cyrodiil a while ago. It was getting old. It absolutely does need a rework.

No. The best way to determine the popularity of something is to offer both at the same time and see where they go. No needs for polls or surveys, just let people vote with their feet.

amiiegee · April 29

I hate Vengeance and when ever it comes up i quit the game while it lasts and till the population recovered, so always like 3 weeks up to a month.

BXR_Lonestar · April 29

CatalinaWineMixer2 wrote: »

I dont know that its possible to really stop Zergs. Or even ball groups. I dont like to compare games because its not really fair to the developers. FFXIV has the right idea, Frontline is a large scale PvP but assigned at random by factions. Its similar to Eso 3 vs 3 team battlegrounds on a very large instanced scale with 24 man teams instead (Might be worth a limited BG campaign test). They are full of surprises and fun. With similar skill/Class rules as Vengeance.

It still isnt Cyrodiil though and there really is something special about Cyrodiil. There is also PvE stuff in Cyrodiil so it is more than just PvP. The idea of Vengeance is large scale PvP. And a rules based order for fair play. It achieves this.

How do we really prevent them (Zergs)? We would have to find a way to have people placed by the system rather than people choosing or simply switching at will when they feel like their alliance is losing. And it would prohibit people from playing with their guilds/friends or from alliance of their choosing. Basically the developers would have to assign us by the rules of their choosing. I honestly dont know what the answer is concerning that but it is an issue as far as Vengeance.

Vengeance is a good thing. I have played it every time it has come about. My Guilds have do and will. I am excited to see the finished product and even more excited that my Guildies will be there once again. They will not PvP anymore otherwise.

I still do play GH but when Vengeance is permanent, im probably going to be done with it. Its a no rules, out of control dps meta pond. With the same people splashing around in it. Its not really our characters in there anymore anyway, they all have special stipulations that only work or dont work in PvP. Even the gear does. Build the build and do it until your hands hurt. Thats boring and painful after 10 years.

There's no need to stop zergs or ballgroups, and any efforts to do so is just going to empower someone else. Ballgroups are the answer to zergs. They are the counter. A coordinated ballgroup can wipe a group of 30-50+ uncoordinated randoms, but as a competitve person, nothing is better than Ball on ball fights. You know its a heavyweight fight when the groups clash, people get pulled, and nobody from either side dies - and then it comes down to maneuvering, timing, and knowing when to press your advantage. Some of the funnest fights out there.

Bombs are the small-scale counter to zergs. A coordinated small group of bombers can annihilate groups of zergs.

And if there aren't any ballgroups or bombers on, then the Zergs are going to have the map just due to sheer numbers advantage.

So I don't really understand the need to eliminate ball groups or bombers. If you did that, the only thing left will be zerging. Open field seiging is not mobile enough or deadly enough to give you an advantage against a zerg unless you happen to be able to get them in a choke point.

And if you are a solo or small-scale player, you can easily avoid these by going elsewhere on the map.

LadyGP · April 29

Shourrs wrote: »

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

Imagine if your trials and dungeons got replaced with a pve template for damage dealer, healer and tank, no sets to gain or earn, just vanilla template slop where everyone's the same and the difficulty was set to normal.

Worse, the player counts are tripled in number.

Would you like that? That's essentially what is happening here. Ultra snoozefest casual mode not even entertaining to pvers longer than two days.

No. I wouldn't. But PVP currently is a trial in Vet with HM-Bosses only which has to be accomplished within speedrun time and without a group member dying. So I don't enjoy it. I'd like to have some option to either learn and move on to harder content or to stay in a simple "casual" mode to have fun. I'd like to have a choice. Vengeance gave it to me and I enjoyed it.

And again, I don't want the classic mode to be removed. I like Vengeance to be an alternative to it, not its replacement.

You do have a choice. You can totally just sit inside a keep on siege and pew pew people from a mile away. Or, you can try to pull people in and fight them, or you can zerg surf (support from others) and fight people and learn.

The problem is people expect to just load into cyrodiil.. charge right at someone.. and kill them with a few clicks and that simply isn't how it works.

I remember when ESO first launched and I went to the lvl 30 zone when I was lvl 15 and I got my butt handed to me... I went back to the right zone, got some gear... learned some things.. came back to the lvl 30 zone and had a blast.

The whole mindset of.. I've hardly ever been in cyro (or am a casual) and expect to charge headfirst and get 20+ kills in a few minutes is just... it's just not it fam. Thats not how any successfull MMORPG PvP system works.

They are gritty, hard, boot in your face, pick yourself out of the mud, kind of systems.. and I say this as someone who gets my butt handed to me all the time by people in Cyro.

xR3ACTORx · April 29

There was this game many many years ago. It was called UFC 3. I really enjoyed this game despite it's complex controls. I started pvping in this game but I was new to the game, my character was at level 50 while anyone else somehow reached max level 95. I got wiped so badly and then I decided to learn this game by pvping as much as I could. After 2-3 months I was number 2 in the world ranks. I leveled my character and the amount of hate message I got from other players was insane.

So Yea... People can't expect to kick butts of players who play this game for years without putting some effort in the game and without mastering the mechanics.

LadyGP · April 29

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

..

Al_Ex_Andre wrote: »

Seems that a fair bit of the community WILL like Vengeance though... because apparently there will be exclusive goodies for participating to Vengeance.... So see you soon in Vengeance.

When the population is dead after the well runs dry of meaningless titles, cosmetics etc, we’ll see you in greyhost.

My dude.

Preach.

Wait.. you're EP. BOOO your opinion sucks!!!!