Item Set Testing in Vengeance

Marto · July 16

reazea wrote: »

Marto wrote: »

reazea wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

reazea wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

Why are we doing this again?

To make Vengeance as appealing to Gray Host players as possible. Eventually Vengeance will be nearly identical to Gray Host but with better performance under the hood.

No, it wont. Not ever.

If ZOS can't fix normal live GH then they can't make vengeance work properly either.

Vengeance is already working properly, though. It has the target population cap. Now ZOS is making it more and more like Gray Host by adding the features from it (like Item Sets) that Gray Host players want to see in Cyrodiil.

If the test goes well, then Vengeance is one step closer to being something Gray Host players would actually want to play. We see some players in this thread in approval of Item Sets being added to Vengeance, even.

If the test doesn't go well, then we'll see what compromise that entails. Maybe that means Item Sets get Vengeance-only set bonus counterparts, the way skills in Vengeance are counterparts of the original skills. In other words, more performant Item Sets to go alongside more performant skills.

What is clear, is that certain beloved elements of Gray Host, such as the unrestricted target cap, cannot exist if we want a Cyrodiil campaign to have this heightened population cap. That was previously tested.

ZOS told us vengeance was a test to learn how to fix performance in Grey Host. Now we know that vengeance was never a test. There is no reason any of us who will never play vengeance should have to put up with being treated this disrespectfully. Vengeance is a fail by every measure. I'll think about helping ZOS test something again as soon as they actually improve performance in GH, which is what they said vengeance was created to do.

I'm done being punked. No more vengeance for me, not ever again, ever. Most of the PvP community feels the same way. You can expect next week's forced vengeance to have the lowest population of any forced vengeance instance since it's inception.

I am baffled that players, upon testing a new PVP ruleset, somehow came to the conclusion that its purpose wasn't to test a new PVP ruleset.

When there's a new item set in the PTS, do you think they're actually testing a different item? When there's a new quest being tested, do you interpret that as a hidden way to test changes to a different zone's quest?

When a restaurant tells you they're testing a new sauce for their fries, do you think they're doing that to improve the quality of their soda?

It was obvious to anyone who knows how to read that the purpose of the Vengeance tests was to test Vengeance.

No.

ZOS sold vengeance as a test to learn how to improve performance in Grey Host. This is what ZOS said the purpose of vengeance was at it's inception. This is how they tricked the PvP community into helping develop vengeance. Going forward I have no intention of helping ZOS take away the game mode I log in to play.

And since I will never play vengeance for any reason ever again, at least not until I see first hand how ZOS has used data gained from vengeance to improve GH like they said they were doing. There is no reason that I or anyone else should be forced to play vengeance. It's akin to forcing all PvE zones to have PvP enabled for a week and ignoring all the complaints doing such a thing would legitimately generate.

I will not help ZOS test a game mode I didn't buy and will never play.

I don't know what words to say to explain to you that the purpose of testing a thing is testing said thing.

Artisian0001 · July 16

Marto wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

No.

ZOS sold vengeance as a test to learn how to improve performance in Grey Host. This is what ZOS said the purpose of vengeance was at it's inception. This is how they tricked the PvP community into helping develop vengeance. Going forward I have no intention of helping ZOS take away the game mode I log in to play.

And since I will never play vengeance for any reason ever again, at least not until I see first hand how ZOS has used data gained from vengeance to improve GH like they said they were doing. There is no reason that I or anyone else should be forced to play vengeance. It's akin to forcing all PvE zones to have PvP enabled for a week and ignoring all the complaints doing such a thing would legitimately generate.

I will not help ZOS test a game mode I didn't buy and will never play.

I don't know what words to say to explain to you that the purpose of testing a thing is testing said thing.

I don't know what words to say to explain to you that hurting the larger player base of people to appease a random minority of players who spend more time crying on the forums than that do actually playing is a bad use of dev resources.

tomofhyrule · July 16

Marto wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

No.

ZOS sold vengeance as a test to learn how to improve performance in Grey Host. This is what ZOS said the purpose of vengeance was at it's inception. This is how they tricked the PvP community into helping develop vengeance. Going forward I have no intention of helping ZOS take away the game mode I log in to play.

And since I will never play vengeance for any reason ever again, at least not until I see first hand how ZOS has used data gained from vengeance to improve GH like they said they were doing. There is no reason that I or anyone else should be forced to play vengeance. It's akin to forcing all PvE zones to have PvP enabled for a week and ignoring all the complaints doing such a thing would legitimately generate.

I will not help ZOS test a game mode I didn't buy and will never play.

I don't know what words to say to explain to you that the purpose of testing a thing is testing said thing.

The point that they're making is that Vengeance was originally sold as a way to make Grey Host better. And then it ended up releasing as its own mode with the threat of Vengeance as is potentially being the replacement for Grey Host and every non-GH Campaign deleted from the game.

People originally thought they were helping test something to improve the thing they had. They did not want the test mode to be the replacement for the mode they liked.

This new test is starting to smell the same. Vengeance released. It needs no more testing since it is an existing game mode. What would be the purpose of testing a change to it... unless the goal would be to put item sets into Vengeance so they could remove the "but why farm gear if I can't use it in Vengeance!" argument?

This is obviously a way to try to entice Grey Host players into Vengeance by dangling some theorycrafting. What they don't understand is that this will drive off the population Vengeance has because they like not having procs, and it will not make the Grey Host crowd any more likely to come in. The fear is that then they'll just pressure everyone into new-Vengeance regardless... by deleting all other non-Vengeance modes.

Stamicka · July 16

Marto wrote: »

reazea wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

reazea wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

Why are we doing this again?

To make Vengeance as appealing to Gray Host players as possible. Eventually Vengeance will be nearly identical to Gray Host but with better performance under the hood.

No, it wont. Not ever.

If ZOS can't fix normal live GH then they can't make vengeance work properly either.

Vengeance is already working properly, though. It has the target population cap. Now ZOS is making it more and more like Gray Host by adding the features from it (like Item Sets) that Gray Host players want to see in Cyrodiil.

If the test goes well, then Vengeance is one step closer to being something Gray Host players would actually want to play. We see some players in this thread in approval of Item Sets being added to Vengeance, even.

If the test doesn't go well, then we'll see what compromise that entails. Maybe that means Item Sets get Vengeance-only set bonus counterparts, the way skills in Vengeance are counterparts of the original skills. In other words, more performant Item Sets to go alongside more performant skills.

What is clear, is that certain beloved elements of Gray Host, such as the unrestricted target cap, cannot exist if we want a Cyrodiil campaign to have this heightened population cap. That was previously tested.

ZOS told us vengeance was a test to learn how to fix performance in Grey Host. Now we know that vengeance was never a test. There is no reason any of us who will never play vengeance should have to put up with being treated this disrespectfully. Vengeance is a fail by every measure. I'll think about helping ZOS test something again as soon as they actually improve performance in GH, which is what they said vengeance was created to do.

I'm done being punked. No more vengeance for me, not ever again, ever. Most of the PvP community feels the same way. You can expect next week's forced vengeance to have the lowest population of any forced vengeance instance since it's inception.

I am baffled that players, upon testing a new PVP ruleset, somehow came to the conclusion that its purpose wasn't to test a new PVP ruleset.

When there's a new item set in the PTS, do you think they're actually testing a different item? When there's a new quest being tested, do you interpret that as a hidden way to test changes to a different zone's quest?

When a restaurant tells you they're testing a new sauce for their fries, do you think they're doing that to improve the quality of their soda?

It was obvious to anyone who knows how to read that the purpose of the Vengeance tests was to test Vengeance.

Yea it's frustrating dealing with these people, probably a waste of time too. I think they want to be outraged and they are completely unable to grasp what's going on because of it. They just cling to bizarre conspiracy theories that make no sense.

ZOS has made their thought process regarding Vengeance very clear:

What are the next steps after the Cyrodiil Champions testing? For example, if maxing player population is the performance goal, and it's met, will the next step be adding additional skills to the character template and seeing where it breaks? How would that be done? E.g., adding a few weapon skills or adding a few sets. – kiheikat
A. The whole goal of the test is to prove out if the complexity of abilities is a core problem performance-wise. We've run a number of tests looking at various other things over the last few years on live, (CP/No-CP, Proc sets, group healing, population caps, target caps, hardware...etc.) and this is the next step in that progression.

The results of the test will determine our next steps - either way, though, what is on PTS today is not even close to a full feature. Anything we move forward with will need loads of work to flesh out.

Source: here

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

The Goals
To recap where we started and where we’ve been with the Vengeance tests, earlier this year we set out to try some new things with Cyrodiil to address the following specific goals:
Significantly increase the player cap in a Cyrodiil campaign so that campaigns feel lively, full, and there’s lots of action to enjoy.
Cyrodiil was originally designed to support 900 total concurrent players (300 per alliance.) We have not been able to support those target numbers in the current non-Vengeance Cyrodiil campaigns. We are able to hit 900 total concurrent players with the Vengeance ruleset.

Reduce frustrating latency and related game performance issues in Cyrodiil, especially during large, sustained battles. And in turn, increase the fun and enjoyment.

Through testing, determine if overall Ability complexity is the main cause of server stress and game performance issues in Cyrodiil, especially during mass battles and in high-population campaigns.
We did test other potential causes of server stress and game performance issues in Cyrodiil during the Vengeance tests, such as item sets and procs, consumable items, siege weapons, quests, vendors, etc. Ability complexity was our primary suspected main cause factor, though.

...

Test Learnings
Throughout the first three tests, we learned with certainty that in order to deliver a performant Cyrodiil, to support a large-scale PvP zone with mass-scale battles, the abilities, procs, passives, etc. must be lighter versions of the ones that exist in the rest of the game.

They are approaching Vengeance with scientific method like thinking. They're eliminating variables, establishing baselines, then seeing how new additions impact that baseline that they've established. I am not thrilled about this test and I'm hoping it does not become permanent for Vengeance. However, the logic behind it makes total sense to me. If ZOS gets enough participation they will leave this test knowing exactly how much of a role sets have in worsening performance.

So to put it simply, ZOS first massively reduced all types of complexity and saw performance benefits. They established a baseline and figured out how many people they could fit into Cyrodiil with the reduced complexity.

Now it's time for them to figure out which categories of complexity matter most. So they are gradually adding pieces back and then seeing what breaks. If this set test has awful performance, that's a smoking gun. If it doesn't, they'll know that they don't have to strip the game down as much as they thought to deliver performant PvP.

The end result of all of this testing is that ZOS will know exactly what pieces of Cyrodiil can remain in place without causing unacceptable performance.

It's useful data, but it's not going to be fun to test.

Vengeance is permanent now because ZOS got feedback that some people actually liked it... exactly what happened with Ravenwatch.

Vengeance is still a way for ZOS to get valuable data though. I don't know why people don't get this.

Stamicka · July 16

Marto wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

No.

ZOS sold vengeance as a test to learn how to improve performance in Grey Host. This is what ZOS said the purpose of vengeance was at it's inception. This is how they tricked the PvP community into helping develop vengeance. Going forward I have no intention of helping ZOS take away the game mode I log in to play.

And since I will never play vengeance for any reason ever again, at least not until I see first hand how ZOS has used data gained from vengeance to improve GH like they said they were doing. There is no reason that I or anyone else should be forced to play vengeance. It's akin to forcing all PvE zones to have PvP enabled for a week and ignoring all the complaints doing such a thing would legitimately generate.

I will not help ZOS test a game mode I didn't buy and will never play.

I don't know what words to say to explain to you that the purpose of testing a thing is testing said thing.

This isn't a quote from me at all, not sure what's going on there.

Erickson9610 · July 16

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Marto wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

No.

ZOS sold vengeance as a test to learn how to improve performance in Grey Host. This is what ZOS said the purpose of vengeance was at it's inception. This is how they tricked the PvP community into helping develop vengeance. Going forward I have no intention of helping ZOS take away the game mode I log in to play.

And since I will never play vengeance for any reason ever again, at least not until I see first hand how ZOS has used data gained from vengeance to improve GH like they said they were doing. There is no reason that I or anyone else should be forced to play vengeance. It's akin to forcing all PvE zones to have PvP enabled for a week and ignoring all the complaints doing such a thing would legitimately generate.

I will not help ZOS test a game mode I didn't buy and will never play.

I don't know what words to say to explain to you that the purpose of testing a thing is testing said thing.

The point that they're making is that Vengeance was originally sold as a way to make Grey Host better. And then it ended up releasing as its own mode with the threat of Vengeance as is potentially being the replacement for Grey Host and every non-GH Campaign deleted from the game.

People originally thought they were helping test something to improve the thing they had. They did not want the test mode to be the replacement for the mode they liked.

This new test is starting to smell the same. Vengeance released. It needs no more testing since it is an existing game mode. What would be the purpose of testing a change to it... unless the goal would be to put item sets into Vengeance so they could remove the "but why farm gear if I can't use it in Vengeance!" argument?

This is obviously a way to try to entice Grey Host players into Vengeance by dangling some theorycrafting. What they don't understand is that this will drive off the population Vengeance has because they like not having procs, and it will not make the Grey Host crowd any more likely to come in. The fear is that then they'll just pressure everyone into new-Vengeance regardless... by deleting all other non-Vengeance modes.

The no-proc nature of Vengeance wasn't meant to be a permanent feature. Those people who prefer Vengeance without procs (like me, who posted such sentiment as the first reply in this thread) aren't supposed to treat Vengeance like it is Ravenwatch. I see now that Vengeance aspires to be as close to Gray Host as possible, and now it makes sense why all of this development time has been put into making Vengeance at all.

Once again, Vengeance isn't meant to be a secondary mode to Cyrodiil PvP. It's not meant to be that campaign where under 50 players go to learn the basics of Cyrodiil. It's not even meant for the people who preferred no-proc PvP. It's meant to be as feature complete as the primary mode of Cyrodiil PvP.

Stamicka · July 16

Erickson9610 wrote: »

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Marto wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

No.

ZOS sold vengeance as a test to learn how to improve performance in Grey Host. This is what ZOS said the purpose of vengeance was at it's inception. This is how they tricked the PvP community into helping develop vengeance. Going forward I have no intention of helping ZOS take away the game mode I log in to play.

And since I will never play vengeance for any reason ever again, at least not until I see first hand how ZOS has used data gained from vengeance to improve GH like they said they were doing. There is no reason that I or anyone else should be forced to play vengeance. It's akin to forcing all PvE zones to have PvP enabled for a week and ignoring all the complaints doing such a thing would legitimately generate.

I will not help ZOS test a game mode I didn't buy and will never play.

I don't know what words to say to explain to you that the purpose of testing a thing is testing said thing.

The point that they're making is that Vengeance was originally sold as a way to make Grey Host better. And then it ended up releasing as its own mode with the threat of Vengeance as is potentially being the replacement for Grey Host and every non-GH Campaign deleted from the game.

People originally thought they were helping test something to improve the thing they had. They did not want the test mode to be the replacement for the mode they liked.

This new test is starting to smell the same. Vengeance released. It needs no more testing since it is an existing game mode. What would be the purpose of testing a change to it... unless the goal would be to put item sets into Vengeance so they could remove the "but why farm gear if I can't use it in Vengeance!" argument?

This is obviously a way to try to entice Grey Host players into Vengeance by dangling some theorycrafting. What they don't understand is that this will drive off the population Vengeance has because they like not having procs, and it will not make the Grey Host crowd any more likely to come in. The fear is that then they'll just pressure everyone into new-Vengeance regardless... by deleting all other non-Vengeance modes.

The no-proc nature of Vengeance wasn't meant to be a permanent feature. Those people who prefer Vengeance without procs (like me, who posted such sentiment as the first reply in this thread) aren't supposed to treat Vengeance like it is Ravenwatch. I see now that Vengeance aspires to be as close to Gray Host as possible, and now it makes sense why all of this development time has been put into making Vengeance at all.

Once again, Vengeance isn't meant to be a secondary mode to Cyrodiil PvP. It's not meant to be that campaign where under 50 players go to learn the basics of Cyrodiil. It's not even meant for the people who preferred no-proc PvP. It's meant to be as feature complete as the primary mode of Cyrodiil PvP.

ZOS muddied the waters a bit when they decided to make Vengeance permanent. I think they genuinely thought that their surveys indicated that a lot of the community wanted it to be permanent, so they listened.

So now there's Vengeance the permanent environment and Vengeance the test. Adding back all sets into Vengeance the permanent environment is a terrible idea that makes no sense and ruins the potential of the environment. So they should avoid doing that.

For Vengeance the test though? This set addition test makes sense to me as a way to gather valuable information. It's the logical next step. Only problem is that I can't see this being fun to play, so it may not get enough participation to give the most accurate results.

CannedChicken · July 16

Are you guys really trying to force vengeance on us again? Just let the poor horse die already.

tomofhyrule · July 16

Erickson9610 wrote: »

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Marto wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

No.

ZOS sold vengeance as a test to learn how to improve performance in Grey Host. This is what ZOS said the purpose of vengeance was at it's inception. This is how they tricked the PvP community into helping develop vengeance. Going forward I have no intention of helping ZOS take away the game mode I log in to play.

And since I will never play vengeance for any reason ever again, at least not until I see first hand how ZOS has used data gained from vengeance to improve GH like they said they were doing. There is no reason that I or anyone else should be forced to play vengeance. It's akin to forcing all PvE zones to have PvP enabled for a week and ignoring all the complaints doing such a thing would legitimately generate.

I will not help ZOS test a game mode I didn't buy and will never play.

I don't know what words to say to explain to you that the purpose of testing a thing is testing said thing.

The point that they're making is that Vengeance was originally sold as a way to make Grey Host better. And then it ended up releasing as its own mode with the threat of Vengeance as is potentially being the replacement for Grey Host and every non-GH Campaign deleted from the game.

People originally thought they were helping test something to improve the thing they had. They did not want the test mode to be the replacement for the mode they liked.

This new test is starting to smell the same. Vengeance released. It needs no more testing since it is an existing game mode. What would be the purpose of testing a change to it... unless the goal would be to put item sets into Vengeance so they could remove the "but why farm gear if I can't use it in Vengeance!" argument?

This is obviously a way to try to entice Grey Host players into Vengeance by dangling some theorycrafting. What they don't understand is that this will drive off the population Vengeance has because they like not having procs, and it will not make the Grey Host crowd any more likely to come in. The fear is that then they'll just pressure everyone into new-Vengeance regardless... by deleting all other non-Vengeance modes.

The no-proc nature of Vengeance wasn't meant to be a permanent feature. Those people who prefer Vengeance without procs (like me, who posted such sentiment as the first reply in this thread) aren't supposed to treat Vengeance like it is Ravenwatch. I see now that Vengeance aspires to be as close to Gray Host as possible, and now it makes sense why all of this development time has been put into making Vengeance at all.

Once again, Vengeance isn't meant to be a secondary mode to Cyrodiil PvP. It's not meant to be that campaign where under 50 players go to learn the basics of Cyrodiil. It's not even meant for the people who preferred no-proc PvP. It's meant to be as feature complete as the primary mode of Cyrodiil PvP.

Which.
People.
DO.
NOT.
WANT.

It's clear that they want to test it because they want Vengeance to be performant and the main Cyrodiil mode. BUT WHY? Why are they so hell-bent on looking at the majority of PvPers who like GH and saying "we fully intend to take this away from you, but keep giving us money regardless."? And even if Vengeance wasn't intended to be the on-ramp or the no-CP-no-Proc zone, that's how it released and there are people who like it because of that. Again, why is the team looking at the positive feedback there and saying "yeah, but that wasn't intended so now we'll just take this away from you and turn it into something you hate, but you'll still play it, right?"

They clearly want Cyrodiil to have 900 players again, which is not possible with the current level of complexity in GH. But if their goal to reduce complexity in GH is to remove what people like about it, then what's the point? Is it going to be worth it for them to kill off the mode and just hope that the players don't care? It won't matter if the server can hold 900 players if only like 60 players are left since the rest got driven off.

This all is feeling like the argument when Tales of Tribute came out: they touted it as a PvP feature (which, technically it is since you can play against another person) and then were suprised that the PvPers weren't super into it... because they weren't looking for "play literally anything against another person," they were looking for a specific playstyle.

They also let slip mentioned their goal of a new PvP mode to allow for a small-scale Cyrodiil-esque thing in the Jeralls, but (as is typical with the Combat Team), we have not heard a single word about it. As such, nobody thinks it's coming. The obvious plan is that the 'new mode' is designed for the ballgroups and their sets, while Cyrodiil becomes all-Vengeance-all-the-time.

In essence, they are 100% throwing out the audiences they have because they don't understand why those audiences like what they like.

Tallon_IV · July 16

ZOS_Amy wrote: »

Hello All,

As part of our ongoing PvP work in ESO, we will be testing the addition of Item Sets in the Vengeance campaign next week. For this test, most Item Set "final bonuses" will be active as we look at server performance. This includes Mythics, Monster masks and shoulders, and five- or three-piece set "final bonuses." Other stats from Item Set bonuses will not be active during this test, even though the UI displays them as enabled.

Some sets are currently not providing bonuses, and this is a known issue, though the majority are.

With this test, both the Gray Host and Blackreach Cyrodiil campaigns will be closed from July 20th to July 27th, unless it is determined that we need to turn them back on due to performance issues in Vengeance.

As always, please let us know your thoughts and feedback during the testing period.

@ZOS_Amy Will double AP be active like during previous tests?

Necrotech_Master · July 16

Erickson9610 wrote: »

reazea wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

reazea wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

Why are we doing this again?

To make Vengeance as appealing to Gray Host players as possible. Eventually Vengeance will be nearly identical to Gray Host but with better performance under the hood.

No, it wont. Not ever.

If ZOS can't fix normal live GH then they can't make vengeance work properly either.

Vengeance is already working properly, though. It has the target population cap. Now ZOS is making it more and more like Gray Host by adding the features from it (like Item Sets) that Gray Host players want to see in Cyrodiil.

If the test goes well, then Vengeance is one step closer to being something Gray Host players would actually want to play. We see some players in this thread in approval of Item Sets being added to Vengeance, even.

If the test doesn't go well, then we'll see what compromise that entails. Maybe that means Item Sets get Vengeance-only set bonus counterparts, the way skills in Vengeance are counterparts of the original skills. In other words, more performant Item Sets to go alongside more performant skills.

What is clear, is that certain beloved elements of Gray Host, such as the unrestricted target cap, cannot exist if we want a Cyrodiil campaign to have this heightened population cap. That was previously tested.

ZOS told us vengeance was a test to learn how to fix performance in Grey Host. Now we know that vengeance was never a test. There is no reason any of us who will never play vengeance should have to put up with being treated this disrespectfully. Vengeance is a fail by every measure. I'll think about helping ZOS test something again as soon as they actually improve performance in GH, which is what they said vengeance was created to do.

I'm done being punked. No more vengeance for me, not ever again, ever. Most of the PvP community feels the same way. You can expect next week's forced vengeance to have the lowest population of any forced vengeance instance since it's inception.

I think people are looking at the Vengeance testing wrong. You can go to Bethesda's Twitch channel and see that someone recently made a clip of ZOS claiming Vengeance was just a test, presumably to mock the notion.

Yes, Vengeance was just a test.

It's a test to see if it was even possible to have a heightened population cap. The test went well and we know it's possible. ZOS continues to develop Vengeance — they're not going back on their word of the first Vengeance campaign being just a test by doing so, because that Vengeance campaign wasn't feature complete and thus was just a test.

Simply put, ZOS is trying to improve Gray Host... by rewriting it from scratch with Vengeance. Vengeance is meant to be Gray Host but optimized and future-proofed.

Vengeance is currently unfinished. We lack several skill lines (like Werewolf/Vampire, Racial, and others) and Item Set functionality. This next test is to see if Item Sets can be added while maintaining this population cap. When Vengeance is finally finished, it will be a completely revamped Cyrodiil experience. This doesn't make the first Vengeance any less of a test.

Again, it doesn't matter if Gray Host players hate Vengeance and Vengeance players hate Gray Host — the goal is to make a new, optimized Cyrodiil experience. Vengeance isn't going away, because ZOS actually wants to improve PvP in this game, and their approach is to not waste their time like they did with the Ravenwatch tests and instead start with a functional product (Vengeance) and iterate on it until it's feature complete.

As for the Vengeance-only "roles", I presume this is the answer to complaints about builds being able to do everything — massive healing, damage, and tankiness all in one — by more clearly separating possible builds into one of these categories. Similarly, the PvP-only versions of skills found in Vengeance are the answer to complaints about PvE balancing affecting PvP, and vice versa.

It sucks to have to learn that your skills work differently in PvP (just look at the Werewolf skill line with Savage Cruelty, Werewolf Berserker, and Bloodclaws and how each is different with Battle Spirit applied) but other MMOs take a similar approach to separating PvP and PvE balancing.

if vengeance gets set bonuses back in full, those roles will be meaningless as the counter balance they provide would be negligible as every "downside" of the role could be negated by said set bonuses

i think the problem really isnt that vengeance is dead, its that the overall problem is that the pvp poulation just isnt there

i mean they added blackreach back, but its still dead 80% of the time, so theres barely enough people to fill grey host as is (though even when there is a queue to GH, hardly anyone plays BR cause there could be a 1 hour queue in GH and blackreach barely reaches 2 bars)

TheAwesomeChimpanzee · July 16

Stamicka wrote: »

Marto wrote: »

reazea wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

reazea wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

Why are we doing this again?

To make Vengeance as appealing to Gray Host players as possible. Eventually Vengeance will be nearly identical to Gray Host but with better performance under the hood.

No, it wont. Not ever.

If ZOS can't fix normal live GH then they can't make vengeance work properly either.

Vengeance is already working properly, though. It has the target population cap. Now ZOS is making it more and more like Gray Host by adding the features from it (like Item Sets) that Gray Host players want to see in Cyrodiil.

If the test goes well, then Vengeance is one step closer to being something Gray Host players would actually want to play. We see some players in this thread in approval of Item Sets being added to Vengeance, even.

If the test doesn't go well, then we'll see what compromise that entails. Maybe that means Item Sets get Vengeance-only set bonus counterparts, the way skills in Vengeance are counterparts of the original skills. In other words, more performant Item Sets to go alongside more performant skills.

What is clear, is that certain beloved elements of Gray Host, such as the unrestricted target cap, cannot exist if we want a Cyrodiil campaign to have this heightened population cap. That was previously tested.

ZOS told us vengeance was a test to learn how to fix performance in Grey Host. Now we know that vengeance was never a test. There is no reason any of us who will never play vengeance should have to put up with being treated this disrespectfully. Vengeance is a fail by every measure. I'll think about helping ZOS test something again as soon as they actually improve performance in GH, which is what they said vengeance was created to do.

I'm done being punked. No more vengeance for me, not ever again, ever. Most of the PvP community feels the same way. You can expect next week's forced vengeance to have the lowest population of any forced vengeance instance since it's inception.

I am baffled that players, upon testing a new PVP ruleset, somehow came to the conclusion that its purpose wasn't to test a new PVP ruleset.

When there's a new item set in the PTS, do you think they're actually testing a different item? When there's a new quest being tested, do you interpret that as a hidden way to test changes to a different zone's quest?

When a restaurant tells you they're testing a new sauce for their fries, do you think they're doing that to improve the quality of their soda?

It was obvious to anyone who knows how to read that the purpose of the Vengeance tests was to test Vengeance.

Yea it's frustrating dealing with these people, probably a waste of time too. I think they want to be outraged and they are completely unable to grasp what's going on because of it. They just cling to bizarre conspiracy theories that make no sense.

ZOS has made their thought process regarding Vengeance very clear:

What are the next steps after the Cyrodiil Champions testing? For example, if maxing player population is the performance goal, and it's met, will the next step be adding additional skills to the character template and seeing where it breaks? How would that be done? E.g., adding a few weapon skills or adding a few sets. – kiheikat
A. The whole goal of the test is to prove out if the complexity of abilities is a core problem performance-wise. We've run a number of tests looking at various other things over the last few years on live, (CP/No-CP, Proc sets, group healing, population caps, target caps, hardware...etc.) and this is the next step in that progression.

The results of the test will determine our next steps - either way, though, what is on PTS today is not even close to a full feature. Anything we move forward with will need loads of work to flesh out.

Source: here

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

The Goals
To recap where we started and where we’ve been with the Vengeance tests, earlier this year we set out to try some new things with Cyrodiil to address the following specific goals:
Significantly increase the player cap in a Cyrodiil campaign so that campaigns feel lively, full, and there’s lots of action to enjoy.
Cyrodiil was originally designed to support 900 total concurrent players (300 per alliance.) We have not been able to support those target numbers in the current non-Vengeance Cyrodiil campaigns. We are able to hit 900 total concurrent players with the Vengeance ruleset.

Reduce frustrating latency and related game performance issues in Cyrodiil, especially during large, sustained battles. And in turn, increase the fun and enjoyment.

Through testing, determine if overall Ability complexity is the main cause of server stress and game performance issues in Cyrodiil, especially during mass battles and in high-population campaigns.
We did test other potential causes of server stress and game performance issues in Cyrodiil during the Vengeance tests, such as item sets and procs, consumable items, siege weapons, quests, vendors, etc. Ability complexity was our primary suspected main cause factor, though.

...

Test Learnings
Throughout the first three tests, we learned with certainty that in order to deliver a performant Cyrodiil, to support a large-scale PvP zone with mass-scale battles, the abilities, procs, passives, etc. must be lighter versions of the ones that exist in the rest of the game.

They are approaching Vengeance with scientific method like thinking. They're eliminating variables, establishing baselines, then seeing how new additions impact that baseline that they've established. I am not thrilled about this test and I'm hoping it does not become permanent for Vengeance. However, the logic behind it makes total sense to me. If ZOS gets enough participation they will leave this test knowing exactly how much of a role sets have in worsening performance.

So to put it simply, ZOS first massively reduced all types of complexity and saw performance benefits. They established a baseline and figured out how many people they could fit into Cyrodiil with the reduced complexity.

Now it's time for them to figure out which categories of complexity matter most. So they are gradually adding pieces back and then seeing what breaks. If this set test has awful performance, that's a smoking gun. If it doesn't, they'll know that they don't have to strip the game down as much as they thought to deliver performant PvP.

The end result of all of this testing is that ZOS will know exactly what pieces of Cyrodiil can remain in place without causing unacceptable performance.

It's useful data, but it's not going to be fun to test.

Vengeance is permanent now because ZOS got feedback that some people actually liked it... exactly what happened with Ravenwatch.

Vengeance is still a way for ZOS to get valuable data though. I don't know why people don't get this.

Incorrect. These tests were originally advertised as a means of identifying and isolating the causes of Cyrodiil's performance issues, not as an effort to fundamentally redesign PvP into an entirely different game mode.

There is a significant difference between:

"We are temporarily stripping systems away to determine what causes lag,"

and

"We are gradually building a new ruleset from the ground up that may eventually replace or supersede traditional Cyrodiil."

And right now this IS the latter.

Vengeance has now been tested repeatedly for over a year, and despite that, whenever players are given a choice, the overwhelming majority still choose Gray Host and Blackreach. That suggests that, for most of the PvP community, the gameplay, build diversity, and overall experience of traditional Cyrodiil are still preferred, even with its performance issues.

Unless Vengeance eventually reaches a point where players voluntarily choose it over Gray Host, it is difficult to argue that this direction aligns with what the broader PvP community actually wants.

Most players are not asking for a new PvP game mode. They are asking for the PvP game mode they already love to simply function properly.

Ostonoha · July 16

Stamicka wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Marto wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

No.

ZOS sold vengeance as a test to learn how to improve performance in Grey Host. This is what ZOS said the purpose of vengeance was at it's inception. This is how they tricked the PvP community into helping develop vengeance. Going forward I have no intention of helping ZOS take away the game mode I log in to play.

And since I will never play vengeance for any reason ever again, at least not until I see first hand how ZOS has used data gained from vengeance to improve GH like they said they were doing. There is no reason that I or anyone else should be forced to play vengeance. It's akin to forcing all PvE zones to have PvP enabled for a week and ignoring all the complaints doing such a thing would legitimately generate.

I will not help ZOS test a game mode I didn't buy and will never play.

I don't know what words to say to explain to you that the purpose of testing a thing is testing said thing.

The point that they're making is that Vengeance was originally sold as a way to make Grey Host better. And then it ended up releasing as its own mode with the threat of Vengeance as is potentially being the replacement for Grey Host and every non-GH Campaign deleted from the game.

People originally thought they were helping test something to improve the thing they had. They did not want the test mode to be the replacement for the mode they liked.

This new test is starting to smell the same. Vengeance released. It needs no more testing since it is an existing game mode. What would be the purpose of testing a change to it... unless the goal would be to put item sets into Vengeance so they could remove the "but why farm gear if I can't use it in Vengeance!" argument?

This is obviously a way to try to entice Grey Host players into Vengeance by dangling some theorycrafting. What they don't understand is that this will drive off the population Vengeance has because they like not having procs, and it will not make the Grey Host crowd any more likely to come in. The fear is that then they'll just pressure everyone into new-Vengeance regardless... by deleting all other non-Vengeance modes.

The no-proc nature of Vengeance wasn't meant to be a permanent feature. Those people who prefer Vengeance without procs (like me, who posted such sentiment as the first reply in this thread) aren't supposed to treat Vengeance like it is Ravenwatch. I see now that Vengeance aspires to be as close to Gray Host as possible, and now it makes sense why all of this development time has been put into making Vengeance at all.

Once again, Vengeance isn't meant to be a secondary mode to Cyrodiil PvP. It's not meant to be that campaign where under 50 players go to learn the basics of Cyrodiil. It's not even meant for the people who preferred no-proc PvP. It's meant to be as feature complete as the primary mode of Cyrodiil PvP.

ZOS muddied the waters a bit when they decided to make Vengeance permanent. I think they genuinely thought that their surveys indicated that a lot of the community wanted it to be permanent, so they listened.

So now there's Vengeance the permanent environment and Vengeance the test. Adding back all sets into Vengeance the permanent environment is a terrible idea that makes no sense and ruins the potential of the environment. So they should avoid doing that.

For Vengeance the test though? This set addition test makes sense to me as a way to gather valuable information. It's the logical next step. Only problem is that I can't see this being fun to play, so it may not get enough participation to give the most accurate results.

Well the survey did have questions like.....

How much fun did you have?
1. fun
2. a lot of fun
3. amazing fun
4. SOOO MUCH FUN KEEP IT
5. I WOULD PAY MORE MONEY FOR THIS FUN

it really did not leave much space for negative feedback.

BardokRedSnow · July 16

@ZOS_Kevin bro, you are the most consistent one here. Pass this on to the rest of the team. We. Do. Not. Want. This.

I dont know why there seems to be such a disconnect between the pvp team and the pve team in quality both in game design as well as communication but greyhost fans overall HATE these tests, and HATE vengeance. I dont want any part of it, at all.

Have your tests, stop making them mandatory for everyone, make a beta or something but stop robbing us of the main reason we log into this game in the first place!

After the news with Asha and Xbox seriously its amazing to me this is even being considered. Priorities for real, Vengeance pcna is deader than disco and it doesnt appeal to pvers or pvpers, leave greyhost and blackreach be, do whatever you want with Vengeance but killing off Greyhost when yall had to reinstate Blackreach to have spillover for the Greyhost queue is insane.

What is even the point of disabling Greyhost for these tests? To raise the population in Vengeance? Doesn't that tell you all what we already know, that its not popular enough to sustain itself? The last times y'all did this, it still didnt give you populations to make the campaign sustainable, everyone logged in on ep toons and zerged the entire map and then started the cycle over again on another faction, y'all dont even lock it to prevent this, how do you expect it to ever be competitive long term?

The pvp side of zenimax does not understand the game and what its become over the years. This needs to be addressed.

Immediately or Zos will be further pushing this game off a cliff when things are already so tumultuous as is.

NO MORE MANDATORY TESTS.

BardokRedSnow · July 16

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Marto wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

No.

ZOS sold vengeance as a test to learn how to improve performance in Grey Host. This is what ZOS said the purpose of vengeance was at it's inception. This is how they tricked the PvP community into helping develop vengeance. Going forward I have no intention of helping ZOS take away the game mode I log in to play.

And since I will never play vengeance for any reason ever again, at least not until I see first hand how ZOS has used data gained from vengeance to improve GH like they said they were doing. There is no reason that I or anyone else should be forced to play vengeance. It's akin to forcing all PvE zones to have PvP enabled for a week and ignoring all the complaints doing such a thing would legitimately generate.

I will not help ZOS test a game mode I didn't buy and will never play.

I don't know what words to say to explain to you that the purpose of testing a thing is testing said thing.

The point that they're making is that Vengeance was originally sold as a way to make Grey Host better. And then it ended up releasing as its own mode with the threat of Vengeance as is potentially being the replacement for Grey Host and every non-GH Campaign deleted from the game.

People originally thought they were helping test something to improve the thing they had. They did not want the test mode to be the replacement for the mode they liked.

This new test is starting to smell the same. Vengeance released. It needs no more testing since it is an existing game mode. What would be the purpose of testing a change to it... unless the goal would be to put item sets into Vengeance so they could remove the "but why farm gear if I can't use it in Vengeance!" argument?

This is obviously a way to try to entice Grey Host players into Vengeance by dangling some theorycrafting. What they don't understand is that this will drive off the population Vengeance has because they like not having procs, and it will not make the Grey Host crowd any more likely to come in. The fear is that then they'll just pressure everyone into new-Vengeance regardless... by deleting all other non-Vengeance modes.

The no-proc nature of Vengeance wasn't meant to be a permanent feature. Those people who prefer Vengeance without procs (like me, who posted such sentiment as the first reply in this thread) aren't supposed to treat Vengeance like it is Ravenwatch. I see now that Vengeance aspires to be as close to Gray Host as possible, and now it makes sense why all of this development time has been put into making Vengeance at all.

Once again, Vengeance isn't meant to be a secondary mode to Cyrodiil PvP. It's not meant to be that campaign where under 50 players go to learn the basics of Cyrodiil. It's not even meant for the people who preferred no-proc PvP. It's meant to be as feature complete as the primary mode of Cyrodiil PvP.

Which.
People.
DO.
NOT.
WANT.

It's clear that they want to test it because they want Vengeance to be performant and the main Cyrodiil mode. BUT WHY? Why are they so hell-bent on looking at the majority of PvPers who like GH and saying "we fully intend to take this away from you, but keep giving us money regardless."

And I'm not doing that, not anymore. Mandatory tests for me means mandatory unsubscribe. Its outrageous and unacceptable. Disrespectful, tone deaf, downright spiteful. I've had enough.

BardokRedSnow · July 16

@ZOS_Amy

Do yall see how long this thread has been going on? Probably not so here:

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/691763/suprise-people-dont-like-vengeance/p22

Please, take the hint y'all. The only people going hard for vengeance is the pvp development team for whatever reason, and a small vocal minority of forum goers that have a chip on their shoulder from bad experiences with "sweats" a term used very loosely here, who have an agenda to pretend their game mode is more popular than it actually is and want greyhost gone because they dont get it.

You listen to people like that, this game is done.

TheAwesomeChimpanzee · July 16

@ZOS_Kevin, please read through this thread and listen to your community. The feedback could not be any clearer.

Gabriel_H · July 16

React wrote: »

Is this test going to help pinpoint the performance issues that translate to Grey Host? Will that data be used to benefit Grey Host? The population indicates vengeance is not popular whatsoever amongst most PVP players, and as someone who has no interest in vengeance, continuing to participate in tests which will not be used to better my preferred PVP environment feels pointless.

Further, enabling these sets within the vengeance ruleset feels absolutely unhinged. How exactly is that going to work? Everything is standardized in vengeance, but suddenly we have rallying cry, vicious death, balorgh, acuity, null arca, monomyth, etc? That sounds like it is going to be an miserable experience.

Vengeance is a test ruleset. It is not a permanent fixture. They have moved it to Live to get it off the internal servers and have greater amounts of data. Over the time the ruleset will be changing. i.e. addition of things like proc sets. And the ruleset will be moving closer towards that of GH because they have already identified the problem in GH - the server calcs. Hence the vastly paired back server calcs in Vengeance that they are very cautiously increasing each time they update it.

Things like stats weren't standardised in Vengeance because that was the intent of the ruleset, they were standardised to reduce the server calcs. Those standardisations and templates may stay, may be tweaked, or maybe gone all together by the time this is over.

TLDR; What is on Live now as Vengeance, is and will remain for a long time, a testing environment with an evolving ruleset.The goal is to get as close as possible to the GH ruleset without incurring the same performance issues.

Erickson9610 · July 16

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Marto wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

No.

ZOS sold vengeance as a test to learn how to improve performance in Grey Host. This is what ZOS said the purpose of vengeance was at it's inception. This is how they tricked the PvP community into helping develop vengeance. Going forward I have no intention of helping ZOS take away the game mode I log in to play.

And since I will never play vengeance for any reason ever again, at least not until I see first hand how ZOS has used data gained from vengeance to improve GH like they said they were doing. There is no reason that I or anyone else should be forced to play vengeance. It's akin to forcing all PvE zones to have PvP enabled for a week and ignoring all the complaints doing such a thing would legitimately generate.

I will not help ZOS test a game mode I didn't buy and will never play.

I don't know what words to say to explain to you that the purpose of testing a thing is testing said thing.

The point that they're making is that Vengeance was originally sold as a way to make Grey Host better. And then it ended up releasing as its own mode with the threat of Vengeance as is potentially being the replacement for Grey Host and every non-GH Campaign deleted from the game.

People originally thought they were helping test something to improve the thing they had. They did not want the test mode to be the replacement for the mode they liked.

This new test is starting to smell the same. Vengeance released. It needs no more testing since it is an existing game mode. What would be the purpose of testing a change to it... unless the goal would be to put item sets into Vengeance so they could remove the "but why farm gear if I can't use it in Vengeance!" argument?

This is obviously a way to try to entice Grey Host players into Vengeance by dangling some theorycrafting. What they don't understand is that this will drive off the population Vengeance has because they like not having procs, and it will not make the Grey Host crowd any more likely to come in. The fear is that then they'll just pressure everyone into new-Vengeance regardless... by deleting all other non-Vengeance modes.

The no-proc nature of Vengeance wasn't meant to be a permanent feature. Those people who prefer Vengeance without procs (like me, who posted such sentiment as the first reply in this thread) aren't supposed to treat Vengeance like it is Ravenwatch. I see now that Vengeance aspires to be as close to Gray Host as possible, and now it makes sense why all of this development time has been put into making Vengeance at all.

Once again, Vengeance isn't meant to be a secondary mode to Cyrodiil PvP. It's not meant to be that campaign where under 50 players go to learn the basics of Cyrodiil. It's not even meant for the people who preferred no-proc PvP. It's meant to be as feature complete as the primary mode of Cyrodiil PvP.

Which.
People.
DO.
NOT.
WANT.

It's clear that they want to test it because they want Vengeance to be performant and the main Cyrodiil mode. BUT WHY? Why are they so hell-bent on looking at the majority of PvPers who like GH and saying "we fully intend to take this away from you, but keep giving us money regardless."? And even if Vengeance wasn't intended to be the on-ramp or the no-CP-no-Proc zone, that's how it released and there are people who like it because of that. Again, why is the team looking at the positive feedback there and saying "yeah, but that wasn't intended so now we'll just take this away from you and turn it into something you hate, but you'll still play it, right?"

They clearly want Cyrodiil to have 900 players again, which is not possible with the current level of complexity in GH. But if their goal to reduce complexity in GH is to remove what people like about it, then what's the point? Is it going to be worth it for them to kill off the mode and just hope that the players don't care? It won't matter if the server can hold 900 players if only like 60 players are left since the rest got driven off.

This all is feeling like the argument when Tales of Tribute came out: they touted it as a PvP feature (which, technically it is since you can play against another person) and then were suprised that the PvPers weren't super into it... because they weren't looking for "play literally anything against another person," they were looking for a specific playstyle.

They also let slip mentioned their goal of a new PvP mode to allow for a small-scale Cyrodiil-esque thing in the Jeralls, but (as is typical with the Combat Team), we have not heard a single word about it. As such, nobody thinks it's coming. The obvious plan is that the 'new mode' is designed for the ballgroups and their sets, while Cyrodiil becomes all-Vengeance-all-the-time.

In essence, they are 100% throwing out the audiences they have because they don't understand why those audiences like what they like.

If Gray Host as we know it could support a higher population cap, wouldn't people want that? One of the biggest complaints about Gray Host is that the queue takes hours to get into during prime time. Having a higher population cap would mean shorter queues, which every Gray Host player should want.

So the plan is to make a version of Gray Host that is as similar to it as it can be while supporting a higher population cap. It can have just enough complexity to feel engaging, while still remaining performant enough to support that population cap without unacceptable levels of lag.

Adding back Item Sets is the next step in this process. Gray Host isn't Gray Host without the theorycrafting and builds. I imagine we'll have tests for passives, Champion Points, and other skill lines. If ZOS can pull this off, then it will become something that players want to play.

Is it really that hard to imagine a version of Vengeance that is just like Gray Host? If the issue is that skills are too simple — adjust the skills so they're more similar to their counterparts.

People still played during every previous Vengeance test, so it's clear that even if it's the only option, players still want to play in Cyrodiil. There may be some who absolutely don't want this, but it's just not true that nobody wants this.

We just want a shorter queue into the campaign everyone else is playing in, but with less lag and a higher population cap for large scale battles; we are not asking for dumbed down PvP to hold our hands for us. Vengeance is not meant for PvE players to skip the theorycrafting required to be good at PvP.

TheAwesomeChimpanzee · July 16

Erickson9610 wrote: »

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Marto wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

No.

ZOS sold vengeance as a test to learn how to improve performance in Grey Host. This is what ZOS said the purpose of vengeance was at it's inception. This is how they tricked the PvP community into helping develop vengeance. Going forward I have no intention of helping ZOS take away the game mode I log in to play.

And since I will never play vengeance for any reason ever again, at least not until I see first hand how ZOS has used data gained from vengeance to improve GH like they said they were doing. There is no reason that I or anyone else should be forced to play vengeance. It's akin to forcing all PvE zones to have PvP enabled for a week and ignoring all the complaints doing such a thing would legitimately generate.

I will not help ZOS test a game mode I didn't buy and will never play.

I don't know what words to say to explain to you that the purpose of testing a thing is testing said thing.

The point that they're making is that Vengeance was originally sold as a way to make Grey Host better. And then it ended up releasing as its own mode with the threat of Vengeance as is potentially being the replacement for Grey Host and every non-GH Campaign deleted from the game.

People originally thought they were helping test something to improve the thing they had. They did not want the test mode to be the replacement for the mode they liked.

This new test is starting to smell the same. Vengeance released. It needs no more testing since it is an existing game mode. What would be the purpose of testing a change to it... unless the goal would be to put item sets into Vengeance so they could remove the "but why farm gear if I can't use it in Vengeance!" argument?

This is obviously a way to try to entice Grey Host players into Vengeance by dangling some theorycrafting. What they don't understand is that this will drive off the population Vengeance has because they like not having procs, and it will not make the Grey Host crowd any more likely to come in. The fear is that then they'll just pressure everyone into new-Vengeance regardless... by deleting all other non-Vengeance modes.

The no-proc nature of Vengeance wasn't meant to be a permanent feature. Those people who prefer Vengeance without procs (like me, who posted such sentiment as the first reply in this thread) aren't supposed to treat Vengeance like it is Ravenwatch. I see now that Vengeance aspires to be as close to Gray Host as possible, and now it makes sense why all of this development time has been put into making Vengeance at all.

Once again, Vengeance isn't meant to be a secondary mode to Cyrodiil PvP. It's not meant to be that campaign where under 50 players go to learn the basics of Cyrodiil. It's not even meant for the people who preferred no-proc PvP. It's meant to be as feature complete as the primary mode of Cyrodiil PvP.

Which.
People.
DO.
NOT.
WANT.

It's clear that they want to test it because they want Vengeance to be performant and the main Cyrodiil mode. BUT WHY? Why are they so hell-bent on looking at the majority of PvPers who like GH and saying "we fully intend to take this away from you, but keep giving us money regardless."? And even if Vengeance wasn't intended to be the on-ramp or the no-CP-no-Proc zone, that's how it released and there are people who like it because of that. Again, why is the team looking at the positive feedback there and saying "yeah, but that wasn't intended so now we'll just take this away from you and turn it into something you hate, but you'll still play it, right?"

They clearly want Cyrodiil to have 900 players again, which is not possible with the current level of complexity in GH. But if their goal to reduce complexity in GH is to remove what people like about it, then what's the point? Is it going to be worth it for them to kill off the mode and just hope that the players don't care? It won't matter if the server can hold 900 players if only like 60 players are left since the rest got driven off.

This all is feeling like the argument when Tales of Tribute came out: they touted it as a PvP feature (which, technically it is since you can play against another person) and then were suprised that the PvPers weren't super into it... because they weren't looking for "play literally anything against another person," they were looking for a specific playstyle.

They also let slip mentioned their goal of a new PvP mode to allow for a small-scale Cyrodiil-esque thing in the Jeralls, but (as is typical with the Combat Team), we have not heard a single word about it. As such, nobody thinks it's coming. The obvious plan is that the 'new mode' is designed for the ballgroups and their sets, while Cyrodiil becomes all-Vengeance-all-the-time.

In essence, they are 100% throwing out the audiences they have because they don't understand why those audiences like what they like.

If Gray Host as we know it could support a higher population cap, wouldn't people want that? One of the biggest complaints about Gray Host is that the queue takes hours to get into during prime time. Having a higher population cap would mean shorter queues, which every Gray Host player should want.

So the plan is to make a version of Gray Host that is as similar to it as it can be while supporting a higher population cap. It can have just enough complexity to feel engaging, while still remaining performant enough to support that population cap without unacceptable levels of lag.

Adding back Item Sets is the next step in this process. Gray Host isn't Gray Host without the theorycrafting and builds. I imagine we'll have tests for passives, Champion Points, and other skill lines. If ZOS can pull this off, then it will become something that players want to play.

Is it really that hard to imagine a version of Vengeance that is just like Gray Host? If the issue is that skills are too simple — adjust the skills so they're more similar to their counterparts.

People still played during every previous Vengeance test, so it's clear that even if it's the only option, players still want to play in Cyrodiil. There may be some who absolutely don't want this, but it's just not true that nobody wants this.

We just want a shorter queue into the campaign everyone else is playing in, but with less lag and a higher population cap for large scale battles; we are not asking for dumbed down PvP to hold our hands for us. Vengeance is not meant for PvE players to skip the theorycrafting required to be good at PvP.

Let’s be realistic here. Even setting aside the fact that these week-long mandatory tests are frustrating and driving away a large number of consistent PvP players, we are now more than a year into Vengeance testing, and the campaign still resembles nothing like Gray Host. It is not even 10% of the way toward offering the combat depth, build diversity, progression, and overall gameplay that make Gray Host appealing.

Now tell me with a straight face that ESO will still have a PvP population large enough to fill a 900-player campaign by the time Vengeance comes remotely close to replicating Gray Host. I am not convinced we even have half that number actively playing Cyrodiil today, and with decisions like this latest one, people will simply continue leaving.

The scenario you are describing is not realistic. Vengeance is eons away from becoming something the loyal PvP community would accept as a worthwhile replacement for Gray Host. ZOS is spending limited development time and resources on a project that, even assuming the ultimate goal really is a lag-free version of Gray Host, may never reach that point—and may no longer have the population required to justify it by the time it does.

Erickson9610 · July 16

TheAwesomeChimpanzee wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Marto wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

No.

ZOS sold vengeance as a test to learn how to improve performance in Grey Host. This is what ZOS said the purpose of vengeance was at it's inception. This is how they tricked the PvP community into helping develop vengeance. Going forward I have no intention of helping ZOS take away the game mode I log in to play.

And since I will never play vengeance for any reason ever again, at least not until I see first hand how ZOS has used data gained from vengeance to improve GH like they said they were doing. There is no reason that I or anyone else should be forced to play vengeance. It's akin to forcing all PvE zones to have PvP enabled for a week and ignoring all the complaints doing such a thing would legitimately generate.

I will not help ZOS test a game mode I didn't buy and will never play.

I don't know what words to say to explain to you that the purpose of testing a thing is testing said thing.

The point that they're making is that Vengeance was originally sold as a way to make Grey Host better. And then it ended up releasing as its own mode with the threat of Vengeance as is potentially being the replacement for Grey Host and every non-GH Campaign deleted from the game.

People originally thought they were helping test something to improve the thing they had. They did not want the test mode to be the replacement for the mode they liked.

This new test is starting to smell the same. Vengeance released. It needs no more testing since it is an existing game mode. What would be the purpose of testing a change to it... unless the goal would be to put item sets into Vengeance so they could remove the "but why farm gear if I can't use it in Vengeance!" argument?

This is obviously a way to try to entice Grey Host players into Vengeance by dangling some theorycrafting. What they don't understand is that this will drive off the population Vengeance has because they like not having procs, and it will not make the Grey Host crowd any more likely to come in. The fear is that then they'll just pressure everyone into new-Vengeance regardless... by deleting all other non-Vengeance modes.

The no-proc nature of Vengeance wasn't meant to be a permanent feature. Those people who prefer Vengeance without procs (like me, who posted such sentiment as the first reply in this thread) aren't supposed to treat Vengeance like it is Ravenwatch. I see now that Vengeance aspires to be as close to Gray Host as possible, and now it makes sense why all of this development time has been put into making Vengeance at all.

Once again, Vengeance isn't meant to be a secondary mode to Cyrodiil PvP. It's not meant to be that campaign where under 50 players go to learn the basics of Cyrodiil. It's not even meant for the people who preferred no-proc PvP. It's meant to be as feature complete as the primary mode of Cyrodiil PvP.

Which.
People.
DO.
NOT.
WANT.

It's clear that they want to test it because they want Vengeance to be performant and the main Cyrodiil mode. BUT WHY? Why are they so hell-bent on looking at the majority of PvPers who like GH and saying "we fully intend to take this away from you, but keep giving us money regardless."? And even if Vengeance wasn't intended to be the on-ramp or the no-CP-no-Proc zone, that's how it released and there are people who like it because of that. Again, why is the team looking at the positive feedback there and saying "yeah, but that wasn't intended so now we'll just take this away from you and turn it into something you hate, but you'll still play it, right?"

They clearly want Cyrodiil to have 900 players again, which is not possible with the current level of complexity in GH. But if their goal to reduce complexity in GH is to remove what people like about it, then what's the point? Is it going to be worth it for them to kill off the mode and just hope that the players don't care? It won't matter if the server can hold 900 players if only like 60 players are left since the rest got driven off.

This all is feeling like the argument when Tales of Tribute came out: they touted it as a PvP feature (which, technically it is since you can play against another person) and then were suprised that the PvPers weren't super into it... because they weren't looking for "play literally anything against another person," they were looking for a specific playstyle.

They also let slip mentioned their goal of a new PvP mode to allow for a small-scale Cyrodiil-esque thing in the Jeralls, but (as is typical with the Combat Team), we have not heard a single word about it. As such, nobody thinks it's coming. The obvious plan is that the 'new mode' is designed for the ballgroups and their sets, while Cyrodiil becomes all-Vengeance-all-the-time.

In essence, they are 100% throwing out the audiences they have because they don't understand why those audiences like what they like.

If Gray Host as we know it could support a higher population cap, wouldn't people want that? One of the biggest complaints about Gray Host is that the queue takes hours to get into during prime time. Having a higher population cap would mean shorter queues, which every Gray Host player should want.

So the plan is to make a version of Gray Host that is as similar to it as it can be while supporting a higher population cap. It can have just enough complexity to feel engaging, while still remaining performant enough to support that population cap without unacceptable levels of lag.

Adding back Item Sets is the next step in this process. Gray Host isn't Gray Host without the theorycrafting and builds. I imagine we'll have tests for passives, Champion Points, and other skill lines. If ZOS can pull this off, then it will become something that players want to play.

Is it really that hard to imagine a version of Vengeance that is just like Gray Host? If the issue is that skills are too simple — adjust the skills so they're more similar to their counterparts.

People still played during every previous Vengeance test, so it's clear that even if it's the only option, players still want to play in Cyrodiil. There may be some who absolutely don't want this, but it's just not true that nobody wants this.

We just want a shorter queue into the campaign everyone else is playing in, but with less lag and a higher population cap for large scale battles; we are not asking for dumbed down PvP to hold our hands for us. Vengeance is not meant for PvE players to skip the theorycrafting required to be good at PvP.

Let’s be realistic here. Even setting aside the fact that these week-long mandatory tests are frustrating and driving away a large number of consistent PvP players, we are now more than a year into Vengeance testing, and the campaign still resembles nothing like Gray Host. It is not even 10% of the way toward offering the combat depth, build diversity, progression, and overall gameplay that make Gray Host appealing.

Now tell me with a straight face that ESO will still have a PvP population large enough to fill a 900-player campaign by the time Vengeance comes remotely close to replicating Gray Host. I am not convinced we even have half that number actively playing Cyrodiil today, and with decisions like this latest one, people will simply continue leaving.

The scenario you are describing is not realistic. Vengeance is eons away from becoming something the loyal PvP community would accept as a worthwhile replacement for Gray Host. ZOS is spending limited development time and resources on a project that, even assuming the ultimate goal really is a lag-free version of Gray Host, may never reach that point—and may no longer have the population required to justify it by the time it does.

Some effort into PvP is better than no effort into PvP. Especially after the layoffs, ZOS is still allocating resources to get PvP into an acceptable state. ZOS is convinced that using Gray Host as a starting point for fixing PvP is not doable. We saw this with the tests done in the Ravenwatch campaign, which yielded no improvements to Gray Host at all. If Gray Host is truly stuck the way it is, then these Vengeance efforts are at least an attempt to show the PvP community that they are committed to fixing long-term issues with PvP as a whole.

We could argue that ESO itself may not be around by the time Vengeance resembles Gray Host, or that all of the PvP community will vanish by that time. I think features like Veterancy are good steps for retaining the PvP population, and the team at ZOS is still committed to ESO and supporting it. It may be unrealistic to hope that changes happen sooner than later, but that applies to all areas of the game with their current budget.

CatalinaWineMixer2 · July 16

reazea wrote: »

CatalinaWineMixer2 wrote: »

Artisian0001 wrote: »

Marto wrote: »

TheAwesomeChimpanzee wrote: »

Marto wrote: »

BigPlays420 wrote: »

What I want is simple: I want my main campaign and preferred game mode to remain available while I continue supporting this game.

Your main campaign and preferred game mode are a terrible experience and need to be improved. And this is the best that can be done to improve them. I'm sorry but that's just how it is. If there were better options, they would've been discovered during the countless 2019-2023 Cyrodiil tests.

BigPlays420 wrote: »

spend them on improving and balancing the main campaign

That is not on the list. And even if it was, option 1 (Continued Vengeance development) provides a far more balanced experience.
You want things to be balanced and tuned to have the correct PVP performance? That's Vengeance.

BigPlays420 wrote: »

There are countless issues affecting Cyrodiil right now that could likely be addressed with relatively small amounts of attention: broken queues, faction imbalance, and long-standing PvP concerns that players have been discussing for years.

That is also not on the list. And each time changes like these have been made, it led to performance being worse.

You do not get to decide which game mode is a "terrible experience" and which one isn't. The playerbase has already answered that question repeatedly.

Every single time players are given a choice, Gray Host and Blackreach become populated while Vengeance becomes nearly deserted. If Vengeance truly provided the superior and more balanced experience you claim it does, players would voluntarily play there. They don't.

People being forced into Vengeance when it is the only available option is not evidence that people want it. It simply proves that people want to play Cyrodiil and have no other choice.

Also, what exactly is this mysterious "list" you keep referring to? You do not dictate what is or is not on ZOS's internal priority list, and neither do I. ZOS has never publicly stated that queue issues, faction balance, or long-standing campaign concerns are somehow off the table.

The confidence with which you state personal opinions as undeniable facts is honestly impressive. Unfortunately, population numbers consistently contradict your entire argument.

The reality is simple: whenever players are allowed to vote with their feet, they overwhelmingly choose Gray Host over Vengeance. Ignoring years of observable player behavior to insist that Vengeance is somehow the superior experience is, frankly, absurd.

I never said these are my preferences, my wishes for PVP, or what I believe the devs should focus on.
I said these are the only realistic and reasonable options.

They spent over 5 years trying to fix the standard Cyrodiil experience, and it didn't work. They spent 2 years developing Vengeance and it works. Is it perfect? No. Is it better? In some ways, no. Does it work? Yes. And I'm sorry, but I'm going to go for the option that works. And it makes perfect sense that the devs do as well.

BigPlays420 wrote: »

You do not get to decide which game mode is a "terrible experience" and which one isn't. The playerbase has already answered that question repeatedly.

What about the people who are not part of the current PVP playerbase? The people who used to PVP for years before leaving? Or the countless players who try out Cyrodiil, realize it's a terrible experience, and leave?

Listening exclusively to what the PVP playerbase wants is a terrible idea becaise PVP is not meant for them. It's meant for all of us. It's meant to be a balanced, performant, and enjoyable experience for us all. Vengeance has the potential to be that, and standard Cyrodiil does not.

Here comes the second guy of 5 who plays vengeance and thinks the entire population should kowtow to them. We don't like vengeance bud. Keep your vengeance over there and stop having it impact what the VAST majority of people actually want to play. If you wanna do testing, go test it between the 5 of you.

Here's the problem, everyone is tired of 11 years of nerfs brought to you by GH. Im one of them. Un nerf my Warden. And stop calling for nerfs to everything that can kill you. More people will engage in PvP if they stop catering to GH. It's a broken record playing the same old song, "Nerf THEM! Just not ME" And it needs to stop. Ive 12 Guilds most of which are a husk of them former selves that everyone saying things like this quit BG, IC and GH over. I dont think you're in the majority, but I think we are going to find out. And everyone who has said they don't and won't play Vengeance should not have any say whatsoever about its future.

No set was ever nerfed because it was abused in PvP. Sets get nerfed because they are OP in every environment. Stop being upset with the PvP community for mistakes made by ZOS.

Nobody in this thread has said vengeance shouldn't exist. We've said we shouldn't be forced to play vengeance, and we won't be strong armed into activities we don't enjoy.

Shattered Path needs to apply, as it did before in PvP. And then, it needs not be held back by the bear and its Class Passive after the fact. Lets just keep it to Wardens.

BigPlays420 · July 16

Erickson9610 wrote: »

TheAwesomeChimpanzee wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Marto wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

No.

ZOS sold vengeance as a test to learn how to improve performance in Grey Host. This is what ZOS said the purpose of vengeance was at it's inception. This is how they tricked the PvP community into helping develop vengeance. Going forward I have no intention of helping ZOS take away the game mode I log in to play.

And since I will never play vengeance for any reason ever again, at least not until I see first hand how ZOS has used data gained from vengeance to improve GH like they said they were doing. There is no reason that I or anyone else should be forced to play vengeance. It's akin to forcing all PvE zones to have PvP enabled for a week and ignoring all the complaints doing such a thing would legitimately generate.

I will not help ZOS test a game mode I didn't buy and will never play.

I don't know what words to say to explain to you that the purpose of testing a thing is testing said thing.

The point that they're making is that Vengeance was originally sold as a way to make Grey Host better. And then it ended up releasing as its own mode with the threat of Vengeance as is potentially being the replacement for Grey Host and every non-GH Campaign deleted from the game.

People originally thought they were helping test something to improve the thing they had. They did not want the test mode to be the replacement for the mode they liked.

This new test is starting to smell the same. Vengeance released. It needs no more testing since it is an existing game mode. What would be the purpose of testing a change to it... unless the goal would be to put item sets into Vengeance so they could remove the "but why farm gear if I can't use it in Vengeance!" argument?

This is obviously a way to try to entice Grey Host players into Vengeance by dangling some theorycrafting. What they don't understand is that this will drive off the population Vengeance has because they like not having procs, and it will not make the Grey Host crowd any more likely to come in. The fear is that then they'll just pressure everyone into new-Vengeance regardless... by deleting all other non-Vengeance modes.

The no-proc nature of Vengeance wasn't meant to be a permanent feature. Those people who prefer Vengeance without procs (like me, who posted such sentiment as the first reply in this thread) aren't supposed to treat Vengeance like it is Ravenwatch. I see now that Vengeance aspires to be as close to Gray Host as possible, and now it makes sense why all of this development time has been put into making Vengeance at all.

Once again, Vengeance isn't meant to be a secondary mode to Cyrodiil PvP. It's not meant to be that campaign where under 50 players go to learn the basics of Cyrodiil. It's not even meant for the people who preferred no-proc PvP. It's meant to be as feature complete as the primary mode of Cyrodiil PvP.

Which.
People.
DO.
NOT.
WANT.

It's clear that they want to test it because they want Vengeance to be performant and the main Cyrodiil mode. BUT WHY? Why are they so hell-bent on looking at the majority of PvPers who like GH and saying "we fully intend to take this away from you, but keep giving us money regardless."? And even if Vengeance wasn't intended to be the on-ramp or the no-CP-no-Proc zone, that's how it released and there are people who like it because of that. Again, why is the team looking at the positive feedback there and saying "yeah, but that wasn't intended so now we'll just take this away from you and turn it into something you hate, but you'll still play it, right?"

They clearly want Cyrodiil to have 900 players again, which is not possible with the current level of complexity in GH. But if their goal to reduce complexity in GH is to remove what people like about it, then what's the point? Is it going to be worth it for them to kill off the mode and just hope that the players don't care? It won't matter if the server can hold 900 players if only like 60 players are left since the rest got driven off.

This all is feeling like the argument when Tales of Tribute came out: they touted it as a PvP feature (which, technically it is since you can play against another person) and then were suprised that the PvPers weren't super into it... because they weren't looking for "play literally anything against another person," they were looking for a specific playstyle.

They also let slip mentioned their goal of a new PvP mode to allow for a small-scale Cyrodiil-esque thing in the Jeralls, but (as is typical with the Combat Team), we have not heard a single word about it. As such, nobody thinks it's coming. The obvious plan is that the 'new mode' is designed for the ballgroups and their sets, while Cyrodiil becomes all-Vengeance-all-the-time.

In essence, they are 100% throwing out the audiences they have because they don't understand why those audiences like what they like.

If Gray Host as we know it could support a higher population cap, wouldn't people want that? One of the biggest complaints about Gray Host is that the queue takes hours to get into during prime time. Having a higher population cap would mean shorter queues, which every Gray Host player should want.

So the plan is to make a version of Gray Host that is as similar to it as it can be while supporting a higher population cap. It can have just enough complexity to feel engaging, while still remaining performant enough to support that population cap without unacceptable levels of lag.

Adding back Item Sets is the next step in this process. Gray Host isn't Gray Host without the theorycrafting and builds. I imagine we'll have tests for passives, Champion Points, and other skill lines. If ZOS can pull this off, then it will become something that players want to play.

Is it really that hard to imagine a version of Vengeance that is just like Gray Host? If the issue is that skills are too simple — adjust the skills so they're more similar to their counterparts.

People still played during every previous Vengeance test, so it's clear that even if it's the only option, players still want to play in Cyrodiil. There may be some who absolutely don't want this, but it's just not true that nobody wants this.

We just want a shorter queue into the campaign everyone else is playing in, but with less lag and a higher population cap for large scale battles; we are not asking for dumbed down PvP to hold our hands for us. Vengeance is not meant for PvE players to skip the theorycrafting required to be good at PvP.

Let’s be realistic here. Even setting aside the fact that these week-long mandatory tests are frustrating and driving away a large number of consistent PvP players, we are now more than a year into Vengeance testing, and the campaign still resembles nothing like Gray Host. It is not even 10% of the way toward offering the combat depth, build diversity, progression, and overall gameplay that make Gray Host appealing.

Now tell me with a straight face that ESO will still have a PvP population large enough to fill a 900-player campaign by the time Vengeance comes remotely close to replicating Gray Host. I am not convinced we even have half that number actively playing Cyrodiil today, and with decisions like this latest one, people will simply continue leaving.

The scenario you are describing is not realistic. Vengeance is eons away from becoming something the loyal PvP community would accept as a worthwhile replacement for Gray Host. ZOS is spending limited development time and resources on a project that, even assuming the ultimate goal really is a lag-free version of Gray Host, may never reach that point—and may no longer have the population required to justify it by the time it does.

Some effort into PvP is better than no effort into PvP. Especially after the layoffs, ZOS is still allocating resources to get PvP into an acceptable state. ZOS is convinced that using Gray Host as a starting point for fixing PvP is not doable. We saw this with the tests done in the Ravenwatch campaign, which yielded no improvements to Gray Host at all. If Gray Host is truly stuck the way it is, then these Vengeance efforts are at least an attempt to show the PvP community that they are committed to fixing long-term issues with PvP as a whole.

We could argue that ESO itself may not be around by the time Vengeance resembles Gray Host, or that all of the PvP community will vanish by that time. I think features like Veterancy are good steps for retaining the PvP population, and the team at ZOS is still committed to ESO and supporting it. It may be unrealistic to hope that changes happen sooner than later, but that applies to all areas of the game with their current budget.

Then allocate those resources into balancing and updating Gray Host instead.

Right now, development resources are being spent on features that may never see the light of day or ever achieve their intended purpose. Support what people are actively playing and enjoying right now.

If fixing Gray Host performance truly is impossible, then fine, accept that reality. Every night you still have a full 360-player campaign, another 150 players sitting in queue, and likely even more who simply give up trying to get in. The playerbase has already demonstrated that they are willing to tolerate lag in exchange for the gameplay experience that Gray Host provides.

At some point, you have to ask whether spending years trying to build a theoretical “lag-free Gray Host” is worth it. ESO is too late into its lifespan for Vengeance to realistically become the long-term replacement being envisioned, especially when it still resembles only a tiny fraction of what players currently enjoy.

Instead of chasing a hypothetical future campaign that may never reach its goals, invest those limited resources into improving, balancing, and maintaining the PvP experience that still has hundreds of players logging in every single night.

CAB_Life · July 16

Why are they even spending resources—time, staff—on this? Surely there are more important priorities on which to focus the team? Why is it always two steps forward, one back?

Marto · July 16

TheAwesomeChimpanzee wrote: »

Let’s be realistic here. Even setting aside the fact that these week-long mandatory tests are frustrating and driving away a large number of consistent PvP players, we are now more than a year into Vengeance testing, and the campaign still resembles nothing like Gray Host. It is not even 10% of the way toward offering the combat depth, build diversity, progression, and overall gameplay that make Gray Host appealing.

Let's be realistic here.

Greyhost is on its 7th year of continuous performance improvements without major content additions. And it's not even 1% of the way to getting the performance and population numbers of Vengeance.

Improving Vengeance into something GH players might want is a considerably easier task than trying to fix Greyhost performance.

This is not my opinion or my prerogative. We already know what it looks like for ZOS to focus exclusively on standard Cyrodiil. We know it doesn't work. We have years of proof.

I want the game to get better. And I have no reason to believe pouring resources into Greyhost will ever achieve that. If it did, it would've already done so.

ceruulean · July 16

If it's just a test it would be fun, but it kinda sucks that all sets will be enabled. The powercreep of having 10+ trial sets is going to cause unkillable ballgroups. Healers in snow treaders again, Balorgh and monomyth on 1vX builds. I wonder who is going to be excited about dying to a coldfire siege triggering Vicious Death and Rush of Agony cheese, or pyreband DKs contributing to the dot meta.

I do think Vengeance needs item sets, but I hope that enabling ALL final set bonuses is just for giggles and experiment sake. Please for real devs, limit sets to Cyrodiil drops only, and disallow mythics and trial sets. Otherwise it's not going to be classic ESO PvP, it's going back to unbalanced gearfest.

Edit: pyreband might not work in Vengeance since class masteries don't exist. Well, this is going to cause a lot of confusion...

Erickson9610 · July 16

ceruulean wrote: »

If it's just a test it would be fun, but it kinda sucks that all sets will be enabled. The powercreep of having 10+ trial sets is going to cause unkillable ballgroups. Healers in snow treaders again, Balorgh and monomyth on 1vX builds. I wonder who is going to be excited about dying to a coldfire siege triggering Vicious Death and Rush of Agony cheese, or pyreband DKs contributing to the dot meta.

I do think Vengeance needs item sets, but I hope that enabling ALL final set bonuses is just for giggles and experiment sake. Please for real devs, limit sets to Cyrodiil drops only, and disallow mythics and trial sets. Otherwise it's not going to be classic ESO PvP, it's going back to unbalanced gearfest.

Edit: pyreband might not work in Vengeance since class masteries don't exist. Well, this is going to cause a lot of confusion...

What's the point of doing other content in the game if you can't use the rewards from that content in Cyrodiil?

merevie · July 16

Can Zos please let us know what the vision for Vengeance is now?

Is this a change after combat lead was removed that other devs wanted?

Is this to remove GH in the future?

We all understood sets would not be a factor and yet this 'test' is announced?

Some communication please.

Treeshka · July 16

I specifically played Vengeance because i do not need to craft sets. Maybe instead of the actual sets, how about adding set bonuses as perks? Each player can choose two of them. Then one monster set perk. If you choose a mythic set, you can not choose monster set perk maybe?

Stamicka · July 16

TheAwesomeChimpanzee wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

Marto wrote: »

reazea wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

reazea wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

Why are we doing this again?

To make Vengeance as appealing to Gray Host players as possible. Eventually Vengeance will be nearly identical to Gray Host but with better performance under the hood.

No, it wont. Not ever.

If ZOS can't fix normal live GH then they can't make vengeance work properly either.

Vengeance is already working properly, though. It has the target population cap. Now ZOS is making it more and more like Gray Host by adding the features from it (like Item Sets) that Gray Host players want to see in Cyrodiil.

If the test goes well, then Vengeance is one step closer to being something Gray Host players would actually want to play. We see some players in this thread in approval of Item Sets being added to Vengeance, even.

If the test doesn't go well, then we'll see what compromise that entails. Maybe that means Item Sets get Vengeance-only set bonus counterparts, the way skills in Vengeance are counterparts of the original skills. In other words, more performant Item Sets to go alongside more performant skills.

What is clear, is that certain beloved elements of Gray Host, such as the unrestricted target cap, cannot exist if we want a Cyrodiil campaign to have this heightened population cap. That was previously tested.

ZOS told us vengeance was a test to learn how to fix performance in Grey Host. Now we know that vengeance was never a test. There is no reason any of us who will never play vengeance should have to put up with being treated this disrespectfully. Vengeance is a fail by every measure. I'll think about helping ZOS test something again as soon as they actually improve performance in GH, which is what they said vengeance was created to do.

I'm done being punked. No more vengeance for me, not ever again, ever. Most of the PvP community feels the same way. You can expect next week's forced vengeance to have the lowest population of any forced vengeance instance since it's inception.

I am baffled that players, upon testing a new PVP ruleset, somehow came to the conclusion that its purpose wasn't to test a new PVP ruleset.

When there's a new item set in the PTS, do you think they're actually testing a different item? When there's a new quest being tested, do you interpret that as a hidden way to test changes to a different zone's quest?

When a restaurant tells you they're testing a new sauce for their fries, do you think they're doing that to improve the quality of their soda?

It was obvious to anyone who knows how to read that the purpose of the Vengeance tests was to test Vengeance.

Yea it's frustrating dealing with these people, probably a waste of time too. I think they want to be outraged and they are completely unable to grasp what's going on because of it. They just cling to bizarre conspiracy theories that make no sense.

ZOS has made their thought process regarding Vengeance very clear:

What are the next steps after the Cyrodiil Champions testing? For example, if maxing player population is the performance goal, and it's met, will the next step be adding additional skills to the character template and seeing where it breaks? How would that be done? E.g., adding a few weapon skills or adding a few sets. – kiheikat
A. The whole goal of the test is to prove out if the complexity of abilities is a core problem performance-wise. We've run a number of tests looking at various other things over the last few years on live, (CP/No-CP, Proc sets, group healing, population caps, target caps, hardware...etc.) and this is the next step in that progression.

The results of the test will determine our next steps - either way, though, what is on PTS today is not even close to a full feature. Anything we move forward with will need loads of work to flesh out.

Source: here

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

The Goals
To recap where we started and where we’ve been with the Vengeance tests, earlier this year we set out to try some new things with Cyrodiil to address the following specific goals:
Significantly increase the player cap in a Cyrodiil campaign so that campaigns feel lively, full, and there’s lots of action to enjoy.
Cyrodiil was originally designed to support 900 total concurrent players (300 per alliance.) We have not been able to support those target numbers in the current non-Vengeance Cyrodiil campaigns. We are able to hit 900 total concurrent players with the Vengeance ruleset.

Reduce frustrating latency and related game performance issues in Cyrodiil, especially during large, sustained battles. And in turn, increase the fun and enjoyment.

Through testing, determine if overall Ability complexity is the main cause of server stress and game performance issues in Cyrodiil, especially during mass battles and in high-population campaigns.
We did test other potential causes of server stress and game performance issues in Cyrodiil during the Vengeance tests, such as item sets and procs, consumable items, siege weapons, quests, vendors, etc. Ability complexity was our primary suspected main cause factor, though.

...

Test Learnings
Throughout the first three tests, we learned with certainty that in order to deliver a performant Cyrodiil, to support a large-scale PvP zone with mass-scale battles, the abilities, procs, passives, etc. must be lighter versions of the ones that exist in the rest of the game.

They are approaching Vengeance with scientific method like thinking. They're eliminating variables, establishing baselines, then seeing how new additions impact that baseline that they've established. I am not thrilled about this test and I'm hoping it does not become permanent for Vengeance. However, the logic behind it makes total sense to me. If ZOS gets enough participation they will leave this test knowing exactly how much of a role sets have in worsening performance.

So to put it simply, ZOS first massively reduced all types of complexity and saw performance benefits. They established a baseline and figured out how many people they could fit into Cyrodiil with the reduced complexity.

Now it's time for them to figure out which categories of complexity matter most. So they are gradually adding pieces back and then seeing what breaks. If this set test has awful performance, that's a smoking gun. If it doesn't, they'll know that they don't have to strip the game down as much as they thought to deliver performant PvP.

The end result of all of this testing is that ZOS will know exactly what pieces of Cyrodiil can remain in place without causing unacceptable performance.

It's useful data, but it's not going to be fun to test.

Vengeance is permanent now because ZOS got feedback that some people actually liked it... exactly what happened with Ravenwatch.

Vengeance is still a way for ZOS to get valuable data though. I don't know why people don't get this.

Incorrect. These tests were originally advertised as a means of identifying and isolating the causes of Cyrodiil's performance issues, not as an effort to fundamentally redesign PvP into an entirely different game mode.

There is a significant difference between:

"We are temporarily stripping systems away to determine what causes lag,"

and

"We are gradually building a new ruleset from the ground up that may eventually replace or supersede traditional Cyrodiil."

And right now this IS the latter.

If they’re testing what happens when they add item sets back, how is that not still testing what causes lag?

As of right now the data that they have is that if they strip the game way down to its bare bones, PvP performs pretty well at large scale. So this suggests that too many calculations were the problem. However, since they stripped so much they don’t know which of the things that they stripped down were actually necessary to get the same performance.

So if this test has serious performance issues, then they’ve found out that sets are a big part of what causes the lag. If this test performs well, then they’ve found out that sets are not a big contributor to the lag.

Either way this is still clearly in line with determining what causes lag.

All the other narratives about Grey Host getting replaced permanently and ZOS having a secret agenda are totally made up. Also I literally quoted how they talked about Vengeance like a year ago. Idk what to tell you at this point.