Do you play PK PvP?

spartaxoxo · July 19

As in Cyrodiil, Battlegrounds, etc. For the purposes of this poll, Tales of Tribute doesn't count.

ETA: PK as in Player Killing. So, this poll is not for stuff like contests, leaderboard competitions or Tales of Tribute.

Frayton · July 19

What is PK?

spartaxoxo · July 19

Other

Frayton wrote: »

What is PK?

Player Killing. PvP can technically refer to any form of player vs player content like contests or Tales. This poll is specifically about actually killing other players like in Cyrodiil.

JohnRingo · July 19

Yes, I play regularly

Spend a minute in Grey Host. We will teach you about PK lol.

Zodiarkslayer · July 19

No

I see no point in PvP in this game.

The most important thing in any PvP mode is equal footing. An identical starting point from which only player skill and knowledge make a difference. ESO doesn't have that. It doesn't fulfill this most elementary prerequisite.

When you have so many levels of gatekeeping, PvP turns into VdN, Veterans destroy Newbies.

LunaFlora · July 19

Yes, I play occasionally

i like Battlegrounds sometimes, my favourite modes are Domination and Chaosball.
i do not love Deathmatch and wish i could only queue for the objective modes, but to me Deathmatch is at least better with 2 teams compared to 3 teams.

Battlegrounds as it is only PvP, Cyrodiil and imperial City also have PvE activities which i cannot do calmly because of PvP being enabled.

Toanis · July 19

Yes, I play occasionally

Frayton wrote: »

What is PK?

The term Player Killer dates back to early Ultima Online, where the servers were open pvp, all your inventory was lootable when you died, and after doing a dungeon you had to actually walk to town with your bags full of loot. Of course many avid PVPers roleplayed highwaymen camping the dungeon entrance.

Gabriel_H · July 19

Yes, I play regularly

For MMOs with PvE and PvP content the player base will typically split about:

45% Exclusively PvE
5% Exclusively PvP
50% A Mix of the two

YffresTrill · July 19

Other

Sometimes the urge to try it again hits me and I play for a day or two, but PVP very quickly bores me.

This is so rare that I think even picking "occasionally" would be inaccurate.

Edit to add: I know a lot of people might find it odd to find PVP "boring." From what I can tell, most people who dislike it would be far more likely to describe it as "stressful." So to explain as best I can: I am not a competitive person at all. I am not motivated to improve by losing a fight, nor do I receive a rush from winning one. I see combat in games as a mechanic that plays into other gameplay elements, NOT the main draw of a game itself (and I am perfectly happy to play games with zero combat). As combat is the entire point of (PK) PVP, it cannot maintain my attention.

That all said, I am happy for others to enjoy it and I would never advocate for it to be removed or not continually worked on. I do feel I have given it a fair chance many times over, and clearly it just isn't for me.

Udrath · July 19

Yes, I play regularly

In battlegrounds I play the objectives, usually the ones where the enemy is. That includes picking up the werewolf and vampire chaos balls and NOT sitting at base with it. Pick it up and start slapping people!

Taggund · July 19

Other

I'm a PvP player (preferring RvR. WvW. and AvA games). I'm not a PK. Closest to a PK play style in ESO is a ganker.

DoofusMax · July 19

Other

I do/did Battlegrounds for two reasons. First, to get that blasted "For Glory" quest marker off my map, which probably makes that purpose more OCD-related than activity-related. Second, and this is very limited use-case, I think there was a task in the "Hero's Return" Golden Pursuit which required doing one or more Battleground matches, but that Pursuit only appears for accounts which haven't logged in for a couple of months, so it mostly only applied to my EU characters. Since the DK and WW reworks, I can't be bothered. My DK has better things to do and I don't do WW.

Cyrodiil is "maybe." I'll usually participate in Whitestrake's and will sometimes load into Cyrodiil, especially while The Golden is active with something I want in stock. Whichever character load in for that will often knock out a few board missions as long as they're in the neighborhood, but that's about the extent of it. I don't PvP for the sake of PvP'ing though.

Kartalin · July 19

Yes, I play regularly

Zodiarkslayer wrote: »

I see no point in PvP in this game.

The most important thing in any PvP mode is equal footing. An identical starting point from which only player skill and knowledge make a difference. ESO doesn't have that. It doesn't fulfill this most elementary prerequisite.

When you have so many levels of gatekeeping, PvP turns into VdN, Veterans destroy Newbies.

Yes but some newbies enjoy the combat and eventually figure things out and become veterans themselves. Remember all the veterans started as newbies too.

tomofhyrule · July 19

I don't like to.

I'll do it for rewards (I needed the Legate Black dye and I'm grinding for that shield bash from veterancy), but it's not fun at all. I've never liked PvP in any game, and I've always much preferred playing cooperatively when playing with others - even when I used to play Smash Bros with my friends, I always preferred teaming up versus the computer than playing versus.

IC for me is the worst one since the entire design just incentivizes ganking and preventing other people from doing what they need to do. The "you steal 50% of their Tel Var" concept, while I understand it, means that there's really no risk/reward calculation outside of one specific gear set that basically nobody wears. There's really no incentive to farm if you're going to be liable to lose it all, and there's no incentive to carry your own TV if you're intending to gank and steal from other people.

BGs also got way worse post-rework. I can handle objective modes since it it fun to do them, but a lot of people prefer playing DM instead, which is inconvenient when they specifically go out of their way to fail the objective - like why can't you do your DM fighting on the flags so we can at least get points? But now with the 2-team ones, even the dailies are excruciating since there's no second place, and pretty well every match ends up being a blowout one way or the other... and then you're sitting there for a 15 minute fight in a game with no chance of winning. CTR is an utter fail in the 2-team version, and more often than not will go the whole 15 mins with nobody making more than 300 points and most players ending with 0 medal score.
If you have to play like 4 matches to get a single win, there's severely an issue with matchmaking there.

I actually don't mind Vengeance, but I really hate how they're pushing it over GH. The way the Combat Team treats the PvP community is appalling, and it seems they have a completely different idea of what the community wants than the community itself. It feels like the main goal of the Team is "get lots of people regardless of what needs to be done!" which isn't going to be helpful if they drive off the whole community in the first place.
But even standard Cyrodiil isn't the worst, but I definitely am one of those scrubs who prefers PvD more than anything else. My main issue is just finding out where I can find a zerg to surf, since it feels like EP has completely abandoned Vengeance on PCNA and either it's gated by AD or you run into the DC not-a-ball-group of very good players and I have no chance without at least a 3x numbers advantage. I do like to leave GH to the people who are actually into PvP, so that leaves me without much to do.

There are a few things I think they could do to help Cyrodiil though, but a lot of it comes down to the perennial idea of "should you play objective in BGs or are you just there for your K/D ratio?" In Cyrodiil, that's whether you care about the Campaign score or do you care more about just earning AP, which then comes to the idea of alliance-locking or not.
Personally, I'd rather they give large AP bonuses (not score bonuses) to low pop alliances, and they should do it dynamically. That would encourage people to come in on underpopulated alliances to come in without messing up the scoring for the people who are all in on that idea. It would also be nice if they could dynamically modify power as well - if your alliance is completely gated, there's zero impetus to come in and try to get a foothold because you're super weak and are earning next to nothing, while the alliance that owns everything has a lot of super buffs and gets loads of rewards from killing you. I've seen several times where I was trying to take a resource at one of my home keeps, and then an entire group of 4-5 players just runs up almost immediately (so they either used a recall stone or were just sitting there) to wipe me. That seriously discourages coming in at all.

BardokRedSnow · July 19

Yes, I play regularly

Zodiarkslayer wrote: »

I see no point in PvP in this game.

The most important thing in any PvP mode is equal footing. An identical starting point from which only player skill and knowledge make a difference. ESO doesn't have that. It doesn't fulfill this most elementary prerequisite.

When you have so many levels of gatekeeping, PvP turns into VdN, Veterans destroy Newbies.

Thats BGs, below 50 and above is pretty equal footing with no cp. The only thing limiting you is what you choose to play as and who you choose to play with in the case of groups.

Cyrodiil is not equal and it shouldn't be, its what I like about eso pvp actually, it mimics an actual war and plays pretty closely to how the actual factions would. Something most pvpers dont care a lick about lmao but I like it a lot coming from the main tes titles.

This is something I can't get from anywhere else. Cyrodiil ebbs and flows, its sometimes balanced in numbers, many times, most times even not. One faction is dominating then they're getting their scrolls taken because they overextended. Its a rollercoaster and Cyrodiil is a war simulator, not a balanced pvp gametype. If you want that you play Overwatch or Marvel Rivals, etc. Not an mmo based on stats, sets and builds.

Lore junk you can ignore:

EP before one tamriel had 3 races that all were good at being DK in some way, and that culture hasnt really changed despite any race any alliance etc, so EP tends to have tankier players that move predictably but as a whole. They're difficult to deal with when on a roll but easy to counter since they commit to one direction.

AD loves to pvdoor lol and attack from the rear, they'll horse sim across the map and be in places to troll that make you scratch your head and often take advantage of whatever is the weakest faction regardless of scrolls or anything else, which sometimes works in their favor. They have the most sorcs and nightblades for the same reason that their faction races play better as those. They also probably for that reason arent the best when attacking head on with similar numbers, and especially not the best at keep takes, but they counter siege like no one else lol, oils and coldfire for days.

DC is a mix of both, some of the best and worst players on the same faction. Good groups, good solo players, they adjust pretty fast, they zerg, they hit back keeps, they troll. Jack of all trades, and overall I'd say they're the best faction and the one that AD and EP needs to focus the most to win. Of course they also have the highest daytime pop for some reason and take the map while everyone else is at work lol.

But on PC NA its evident that EP and AD really don't want to fight DC, AD would rather hit EP while they're defending from or attacking DC unless they have ballgroups up, EP would rather beat on AD because they're the easy fight. And we dont like them butter elves lol.

In lore the redguards are said to be stronger scouts/gladiators and individual swordsman than a professional army, while the bretons are known for their knightly orders and battlemages. Orcs fit in small bands or professional armies. So DC naturally fits to the role of their lore.

AD in lore hits fast and quick rather than going head on with the human races who have more numbers, using khajiit and goblin slaves to bolster their numbers where they can, but otherwise they don't do well without surprise attacks, so in game AD also fits their lore, as do the Nords who are the warrior bands, the first human empire, mercenaries, etc. They are strong numerous and stubborn, Argonians ironically are similar when under the control of the hist especially, and Dunmer fill in as the magical bulwark but overall are not especially known for great battle tactics vs just being very powerful with their arcane magic and tough as nails as fighters. So EP also fits pretty well with their lore counterparts.

TLDR: For all the complaining about greyhost pvp, its the closest tes has ever gotten to accurately representing "The Arena", and its a shame more so called tes fans dont embrace and understand that.

The devs especially which is why I hope Bethesda being forced to work with Zos on eso and vice versa will help remind them what tes is.

NovelliESO · July 19

Yes, I play occasionally

Zodiarkslayer wrote: »

I see no point in PvP in this game.

The most important thing in any PvP mode is equal footing. An identical starting point from which only player skill and knowledge make a difference. ESO doesn't have that. It doesn't fulfill this most elementary prerequisite.

When you have so many levels of gatekeeping, PvP turns into VdN, Veterans destroy Newbies.

Have you never played an MMO before? Every single MMO has multiple different ways to progress including items, levels, skills, etc. Why are you playing an MMO if you don't want any progression?

Luneca · July 19

Other

Zodiarkslayer wrote: »

I see no point in PvP in this game.

The most important thing in any PvP mode is equal footing. An identical starting point from which only player skill and knowledge make a difference. ESO doesn't have that. It doesn't fulfill this most elementary prerequisite.

When you have so many levels of gatekeeping, PvP turns into VdN, Veterans destroy Newbies.

Seems pretty fair to me. Then again I just fire siege. 6 coldfires and no one will be escaping. At least until the bust the door down and catch me. But even then, I'm still firing siege.

Danikat · July 19

Yes, but only during events

Only if the game gives me a reason to. For example I'll play battlegrounds occasionally for events or endeavours, or now sometimes for tome points, but it's not something I'd ever choose to do normally.

Even then I much prefer the ones with extra objectives to the ones where you just kill each other, and I'll focus on the objectives and only fight other players when they're stopping me. Death Match battlegrounds are boring, the only good thing about it is they're usually over quickly.

Like someone else said I'm not remotely competitive. If someone thinks they're a better player than me I'm happy to agree without wasting our time on proving it. I can't remember ever caring if I won or lost in PvP because it's just not something that interests me (thankfully you never need to win for events). To be clear: I always do my best to contribute when I'm playing PvP, including fighting other players, I won't just go afk or run around somewhere I think no one will see me, but it's a necessary chore for a separate goal, not something I find fun (or upsetting if I lose or whatever).

I've also done all the PvE stuff in Cyrodiil and the Imperial City at least once. In that case not caring about PvP definitely helps. Dying only bothers me if it means I need to run back out to where I was going again. Sometimes I'll fight back when someone attacks me, but often it's faster to let them kill me and respawn, especially if I've finished what I was doing. Although in Cyrodiil it's also entirely possible to spend hours going around the map and see maybe 1 or 2 enemy players who are also doing their own thing and will avoid you.

katanagirl1 · July 20

Other

I can’t give a definitive response, as it almost sounds like a trick question, despite me knowing you enough to know you are not being malevolent here.

First I would say that killing other players is necessary for me to participate in Cyrodiil and BGs, with the caveat that when I do objective BGs (not deathmatch) that I play the objectives, and fight only while doing those objectives and not just to improve a KDA ratio. Not that I’m great at that anyway, but that I want to play as a team and I want to win, and just indiscriminately killing other players does not necessarily guarantee a win. The team that sticks together and does the objectives is the one that wins.

For Cyrodiil, again not great at 1v1 but often the odds are far worse, more like 10 to 1 against me when taking or defending keeps, so relying on siege is a must. I will push into the keep when the door goes down when attacking, because I have been standing on the ram and providing siege shields, often to my detriment when no one else does. When defending I will be running siege because we never have enough and are usually vastly outnumbered in that case as well.

So I guess the question is whether you think killing other players just means melee fighting or if running siege that kills players counts too.

spartaxoxo · July 20

Other

katanagirl1 wrote: »

I can’t give a definitive response, as it almost sounds like a trick question, despite me knowing you enough to know you are not being malevolent here.

First I would say that killing other players is necessary for me to participate in Cyrodiil and BGs, with the caveat that when I do objective BGs (not deathmatch) that I play the objectives, and fight only while doing those objectives and not just to improve a KDA ratio. Not that I’m great at that anyway, but that I want to play as a team and I want to win, and just indiscriminately killing other players does not necessarily guarantee a win. The team that sticks together and does the objectives is the one that wins.

For Cyrodiil, again not great at 1v1 but often the odds are far worse, more like 10 to 1 against me when taking or defending keeps, so relying on siege is a must. I will push into the keep when the door goes down when attacking, because I have been standing on the ram and providing siege shields, often to my detriment when no one else does. When defending I will be running siege because we never have enough and are usually vastly outnumbered in that case as well.

So I guess the question is whether you think killing other players just means melee fighting or if running siege that kills players counts too.

I meant moreso the overall gameplay of the mode. I know ZOS, for example, describes Tale of Tribute as a PvP activity. And while that is an accurate description, it's not the type of core gameplay I wanted to measure.

I mostly made this poll because the staff shakeup gave me the impression that combat was really something being engaged more often than stories these days. Which I know would be a pretty big swing from pre-Necrom where devs stated the overwhelming majority of players played the story. And I know a lot of what got made these days were systems rather than hand crafted story experiences. So I was curious if maybe it's because a bigger proportion of the playerbase was engaging in stuff like PvP.

I did know PK was a super old term but I didn't realize it was so far out of favor that it would cause confusion. It's just like players engaging in direct combat with one another rather than things line playing cards, racing, etc.

So, not a trick question but maybe I could have worded it better. My bad. I'm just genuinely curious what the playerbase is up to these days as it makes it easier to understand devs and the game.

IZZEFlameLash · July 20

Yes, I play regularly

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

Zodiarkslayer wrote: »

I see no point in PvP in this game.

The most important thing in any PvP mode is equal footing. An identical starting point from which only player skill and knowledge make a difference. ESO doesn't have that. It doesn't fulfill this most elementary prerequisite.

When you have so many levels of gatekeeping, PvP turns into VdN, Veterans destroy Newbies.

Thats BGs, below 50 and above is pretty equal footing with no cp. The only thing limiting you is what you choose to play as and who you choose to play with in the case of groups.

Cyrodiil is not equal and it shouldn't be, its what I like about eso pvp actually, it mimics an actual war and plays pretty closely to how the actual factions would. Something most pvpers dont care a lick about lmao but I like it a lot coming from the main tes titles.

This is something I can't get from anywhere else. Cyrodiil ebbs and flows, its sometimes balanced in numbers, many times, most times even not. One faction is dominating then they're getting their scrolls taken because they overextended. Its a rollercoaster and Cyrodiil is a war simulator, not a balanced pvp gametype. If you want that you play Overwatch or Marvel Rivals, etc. Not an mmo based on stats, sets and builds.

Lore junk you can ignore:

EP before one tamriel had 3 races that all were good at being DK in some way, and that culture hasnt really changed despite any race any alliance etc, so EP tends to have tankier players that move predictably but as a whole. They're difficult to deal with when on a roll but easy to counter since they commit to one direction.

AD loves to pvdoor lol and attack from the rear, they'll horse sim across the map and be in places to troll that make you scratch your head and often take advantage of whatever is the weakest faction regardless of scrolls or anything else, which sometimes works in their favor. They have the most sorcs and nightblades for the same reason that their faction races play better as those. They also probably for that reason arent the best when attacking head on with similar numbers, and especially not the best at keep takes, but they counter siege like no one else lol, oils and coldfire for days.

DC is a mix of both, some of the best and worst players on the same faction. Good groups, good solo players, they adjust pretty fast, they zerg, they hit back keeps, they troll. Jack of all trades, and overall I'd say they're the best faction and the one that AD and EP needs to focus the most to win. Of course they also have the highest daytime pop for some reason and take the map while everyone else is at work lol.

But on PC NA its evident that EP and AD really don't want to fight DC, AD would rather hit EP while they're defending from or attacking DC unless they have ballgroups up, EP would rather beat on AD because they're the easy fight. And we dont like them butter elves lol.

In lore the redguards are said to be stronger scouts/gladiators and individual swordsman than a professional army, while the bretons are known for their knightly orders and battlemages. Orcs fit in small bands or professional armies. So DC naturally fits to the role of their lore.

AD in lore hits fast and quick rather than going head on with the human races who have more numbers, using khajiit and goblin slaves to bolster their numbers where they can, but otherwise they don't do well without surprise attacks, so in game AD also fits their lore, as do the Nords who are the warrior bands, the first human empire, mercenaries, etc. They are strong numerous and stubborn, Argonians ironically are similar when under the control of the hist especially, and Dunmer fill in as the magical bulwark but overall are not especially known for great battle tactics vs just being very powerful with their arcane magic and tough as nails as fighters. So EP also fits pretty well with their lore counterparts.

TLDR: For all the complaining about greyhost pvp, its the closest tes has ever gotten to accurately representing "The Arena", and its a shame more so called tes fans dont embrace and understand that.

The devs especially which is why I hope Bethesda being forced to work with Zos on eso and vice versa will help remind them what tes is.

Didn't know certain EP guilds that constantly end up knocking empty tri keeps were actually AD, huh. Ty for the info.

Stamicka · July 20

Yes, I play regularly

Started this game for the PvP. I’ve never played any of the solo Elder Scrolls games like Skyrim or Oblivion, so I have no connection to the lore. I don’t quest. I only use housing for utility or dueling purposes, it’s empty otherwise.

Pretty much all I do in this game is PvP and formerly endgame PvE. I have pretty low achievement points despite playing for over a decade.

Thoriorz · July 20

Yes, I play regularly

I don't really like PvP, but I have to play Battlegrounds regularly, and of course I end up killing other players there...

SilverBride · July 20

Other

I mostly just do an occasional battleground, but I thought the whole point of PvP was to defeat other players.

I did do a lot of open world PKing in some old MMOs, such as Ultima Online and Asheron's Call. That was my main activity in those games.

Hapexamendios · July 20

No

I go into Cyrodiil and Sewers occasionally, but I don't engage in the PvP actively.

katanagirl1 · July 20

Other

spartaxoxo wrote: »

katanagirl1 wrote: »

I can’t give a definitive response, as it almost sounds like a trick question, despite me knowing you enough to know you are not being malevolent here.

First I would say that killing other players is necessary for me to participate in Cyrodiil and BGs, with the caveat that when I do objective BGs (not deathmatch) that I play the objectives, and fight only while doing those objectives and not just to improve a KDA ratio. Not that I’m great at that anyway, but that I want to play as a team and I want to win, and just indiscriminately killing other players does not necessarily guarantee a win. The team that sticks together and does the objectives is the one that wins.

For Cyrodiil, again not great at 1v1 but often the odds are far worse, more like 10 to 1 against me when taking or defending keeps, so relying on siege is a must. I will push into the keep when the door goes down when attacking, because I have been standing on the ram and providing siege shields, often to my detriment when no one else does. When defending I will be running siege because we never have enough and are usually vastly outnumbered in that case as well.

So I guess the question is whether you think killing other players just means melee fighting or if running siege that kills players counts too.

I meant moreso the overall gameplay of the mode. I know ZOS, for example, describes Tale of Tribute as a PvP activity. And while that is an accurate description, it's not the type of core gameplay I wanted to measure.

I mostly made this poll because the staff shakeup gave me the impression that combat was really something being engaged more often than stories these days. Which I know would be a pretty big swing from pre-Necrom where devs stated the overwhelming majority of players played the story. And I know a lot of what got made these days were systems rather than hand crafted story experiences. So I was curious if maybe it's because a bigger proportion of the playerbase was engaging in stuff like PvP.

I did know PK was a super old term but I didn't realize it was so far out of favor that it would cause confusion. It's just like players engaging in direct combat with one another rather than things line playing cards, racing, etc.

So, not a trick question but maybe I could have worded it better. My bad. I'm just genuinely curious what the playerbase is up to these days as it makes it easier to understand devs and the game.

Oh I get it, I was just overanalyzing the whole question then.

A lot of people complain in Cyrodiil when you siege and that you should just 1v1 all the time so I thought that might be where you were going with this. Thanks for the clarification.

Oftentimes with the huge imbalance in classes and skills, not to mention gear, subclassing, plus grouping, it feels like trying to kill other players directly is pointless.

BardokRedSnow · July 20

Yes, I play regularly

IZZEFlameLash wrote: »

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

Zodiarkslayer wrote: »

I see no point in PvP in this game.

The most important thing in any PvP mode is equal footing. An identical starting point from which only player skill and knowledge make a difference. ESO doesn't have that. It doesn't fulfill this most elementary prerequisite.

When you have so many levels of gatekeeping, PvP turns into VdN, Veterans destroy Newbies.

Thats BGs, below 50 and above is pretty equal footing with no cp. The only thing limiting you is what you choose to play as and who you choose to play with in the case of groups.

Cyrodiil is not equal and it shouldn't be, its what I like about eso pvp actually, it mimics an actual war and plays pretty closely to how the actual factions would. Something most pvpers dont care a lick about lmao but I like it a lot coming from the main tes titles.

This is something I can't get from anywhere else. Cyrodiil ebbs and flows, its sometimes balanced in numbers, many times, most times even not. One faction is dominating then they're getting their scrolls taken because they overextended. Its a rollercoaster and Cyrodiil is a war simulator, not a balanced pvp gametype. If you want that you play Overwatch or Marvel Rivals, etc. Not an mmo based on stats, sets and builds.

Lore junk you can ignore:

EP before one tamriel had 3 races that all were good at being DK in some way, and that culture hasnt really changed despite any race any alliance etc, so EP tends to have tankier players that move predictably but as a whole. They're difficult to deal with when on a roll but easy to counter since they commit to one direction.

AD loves to pvdoor lol and attack from the rear, they'll horse sim across the map and be in places to troll that make you scratch your head and often take advantage of whatever is the weakest faction regardless of scrolls or anything else, which sometimes works in their favor. They have the most sorcs and nightblades for the same reason that their faction races play better as those. They also probably for that reason arent the best when attacking head on with similar numbers, and especially not the best at keep takes, but they counter siege like no one else lol, oils and coldfire for days.

DC is a mix of both, some of the best and worst players on the same faction. Good groups, good solo players, they adjust pretty fast, they zerg, they hit back keeps, they troll. Jack of all trades, and overall I'd say they're the best faction and the one that AD and EP needs to focus the most to win. Of course they also have the highest daytime pop for some reason and take the map while everyone else is at work lol.

But on PC NA its evident that EP and AD really don't want to fight DC, AD would rather hit EP while they're defending from or attacking DC unless they have ballgroups up, EP would rather beat on AD because they're the easy fight. And we dont like them butter elves lol.

In lore the redguards are said to be stronger scouts/gladiators and individual swordsman than a professional army, while the bretons are known for their knightly orders and battlemages. Orcs fit in small bands or professional armies. So DC naturally fits to the role of their lore.

AD in lore hits fast and quick rather than going head on with the human races who have more numbers, using khajiit and goblin slaves to bolster their numbers where they can, but otherwise they don't do well without surprise attacks, so in game AD also fits their lore, as do the Nords who are the warrior bands, the first human empire, mercenaries, etc. They are strong numerous and stubborn, Argonians ironically are similar when under the control of the hist especially, and Dunmer fill in as the magical bulwark but overall are not especially known for great battle tactics vs just being very powerful with their arcane magic and tough as nails as fighters. So EP also fits pretty well with their lore counterparts.

TLDR: For all the complaining about greyhost pvp, its the closest tes has ever gotten to accurately representing "The Arena", and its a shame more so called tes fans dont embrace and understand that.

The devs especially which is why I hope Bethesda being forced to work with Zos on eso and vice versa will help remind them what tes is.

Didn't know certain EP guilds that constantly end up knocking empty tri keeps were actually AD, huh. Ty for the info.

Found the AD lol

I said AD pvdoors the most, not that only AD does lol. It has its uses.

Kendaric · July 20

No

No, I don't enjoy PvP outside of roleplay PvP.
The only games in which I've ever enjoyed PvP were DAoC and WAR and sometimes SWG (unless I was on my Jedi

)

baratron · July 23

Other

I play Healer/Support. Others in my group do the killing.

Edit: Apparently I misunderstood. To be fair, I haven't heard the term "PK" since the text-only MUD I played in the 90s. Back then it was like a ganker but worse. Someone who would ambush you the second you stepped off safe ground, then rob your corpse.

I have always played Healers, and the Cleric role in that particular MUD included responsibility for resurrecting other players' characters. It was always SUPER fun when a PK showed up when you were mid-rez on another player, and proceeded to murder you.

I hated reaching Addict (level 100) because it removed the idea of safe ground from everywhere except about three squares in the game.

mr1sho · July 23

Yes, I play regularly

I love pvp best part of the game now I'm not a fan of zerging

Radiate77 · July 23

Yes, I play regularly

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

IZZEFlameLash wrote: »

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

Zodiarkslayer wrote: »

I see no point in PvP in this game.

The most important thing in any PvP mode is equal footing. An identical starting point from which only player skill and knowledge make a difference. ESO doesn't have that. It doesn't fulfill this most elementary prerequisite.

When you have so many levels of gatekeeping, PvP turns into VdN, Veterans destroy Newbies.

Thats BGs, below 50 and above is pretty equal footing with no cp. The only thing limiting you is what you choose to play as and who you choose to play with in the case of groups.

Cyrodiil is not equal and it shouldn't be, its what I like about eso pvp actually, it mimics an actual war and plays pretty closely to how the actual factions would. Something most pvpers dont care a lick about lmao but I like it a lot coming from the main tes titles.

This is something I can't get from anywhere else. Cyrodiil ebbs and flows, its sometimes balanced in numbers, many times, most times even not. One faction is dominating then they're getting their scrolls taken because they overextended. Its a rollercoaster and Cyrodiil is a war simulator, not a balanced pvp gametype. If you want that you play Overwatch or Marvel Rivals, etc. Not an mmo based on stats, sets and builds.

Lore junk you can ignore:

EP before one tamriel had 3 races that all were good at being DK in some way, and that culture hasnt really changed despite any race any alliance etc, so EP tends to have tankier players that move predictably but as a whole. They're difficult to deal with when on a roll but easy to counter since they commit to one direction.

AD loves to pvdoor lol and attack from the rear, they'll horse sim across the map and be in places to troll that make you scratch your head and often take advantage of whatever is the weakest faction regardless of scrolls or anything else, which sometimes works in their favor. They have the most sorcs and nightblades for the same reason that their faction races play better as those. They also probably for that reason arent the best when attacking head on with similar numbers, and especially not the best at keep takes, but they counter siege like no one else lol, oils and coldfire for days.

DC is a mix of both, some of the best and worst players on the same faction. Good groups, good solo players, they adjust pretty fast, they zerg, they hit back keeps, they troll. Jack of all trades, and overall I'd say they're the best faction and the one that AD and EP needs to focus the most to win. Of course they also have the highest daytime pop for some reason and take the map while everyone else is at work lol.

But on PC NA its evident that EP and AD really don't want to fight DC, AD would rather hit EP while they're defending from or attacking DC unless they have ballgroups up, EP would rather beat on AD because they're the easy fight. And we dont like them butter elves lol.

In lore the redguards are said to be stronger scouts/gladiators and individual swordsman than a professional army, while the bretons are known for their knightly orders and battlemages. Orcs fit in small bands or professional armies. So DC naturally fits to the role of their lore.

AD in lore hits fast and quick rather than going head on with the human races who have more numbers, using khajiit and goblin slaves to bolster their numbers where they can, but otherwise they don't do well without surprise attacks, so in game AD also fits their lore, as do the Nords who are the warrior bands, the first human empire, mercenaries, etc. They are strong numerous and stubborn, Argonians ironically are similar when under the control of the hist especially, and Dunmer fill in as the magical bulwark but overall are not especially known for great battle tactics vs just being very powerful with their arcane magic and tough as nails as fighters. So EP also fits pretty well with their lore counterparts.

TLDR: For all the complaining about greyhost pvp, its the closest tes has ever gotten to accurately representing "The Arena", and its a shame more so called tes fans dont embrace and understand that.

The devs especially which is why I hope Bethesda being forced to work with Zos on eso and vice versa will help remind them what tes is.

Didn't know certain EP guilds that constantly end up knocking empty tri keeps were actually AD, huh. Ty for the info.

Found the AD lol

I said AD pvdoors the most, not that only AD does lol. It has its uses.

AD walks EP on Xbox NA when there are even close to equal numbers.

Farming EP got so boring I went ahead and dissolved my ball group after only 3 campaigns. 🥱

The Elder Scrolls Online

Do you play PK PvP?

Do you play PK PvP? 124 votes