Best Of
Re: SUPRISE ! People dont like VENGEANCE
If it was only going by that, the only ones that would get content is PvE explorers/questers as it is by far the most popular activity in the game.
Re: SUPRISE ! People dont like VENGEANCE
You complain that I am militant and competitive in a PvP that simulates war?Ah, and now the militant motivation for promoting vengeance is revealed. The problems this poster has is with the player base itself.
The 100-300 remaining GH players are certainly a unique breed of gamer. A bit too unique, because numbers that low are neither sustainable nor proiftable.
xylena
2
Re: Is it time to get rid of roles on Dungeon Finder? (At least for normal mode)
While I'm in the NO faction, I must commend the OP on a well made poll.
1- Preamble (short and to the point)
2- Question (concisely written)
3- Simple poll options
Many Thanks!
1- Preamble (short and to the point)
2- Question (concisely written)
3- Simple poll options
Many Thanks!
Re: April 20th Vengeance Only..
If the intent was to let new players learn the ins and outs of pvp in a build-neutral environment, then why change all the skills and seige? Equipment and maybe multiclassing should be the only variables locked down.
The way things are, if someone plays Vengeance for a while and then decides to give GH a try, they're going to feel like they're in a different game entirely.
Exactly. The argument that vengeance is a good intro to live cyro PvP is not a valid argument.
reazea
2
Re: April 20th Vengeance Only..
They're not getting rid of GH. What are you guys so worried about?
You don't know this to be true. You know what they've said, but what's that worth now that we know vengeance was never a test? And that we now know all those years they said they were working on improving performance that they were, well, who knows what they were doing, but they never improved performance EXCEPT when they replaced the server hardware...which, ironically, improved performance even though they said it wouldn't.
reazea
4
Re: April 20th Vengeance Only..
SaffronCitrusflower wrote: »MincMincMinc wrote: »robertlabrie wrote: »It's interesting that the anti-vengeance camp just wants our old campaigns back and the pro-vengeance camp keeps trying to explain why we're wrong and that we should learn to like it.robertlabrie wrote: »It's interesting that the anti-vengeance camp just wants our old campaigns back and the pro-vengeance camp keeps trying to explain why we're wrong and that we should learn to like it.
The anti-vengeance camp doesn’t just want its campaign back. They want to remove Veangence even as an option. If they asked to keep GreyHost side by side with Veangence majority of Vengeance supporters would agree but for some Vengeance haters preventing others from playing Vengeance is more important than getting GreyHost back.
We do not want to remove Vengeance as an option. We want it to be an Option aside ALL regular PvP campaigns. Instead it will be added and 3 of our campaigns will get closed for good. NoCP gone, Standard gone, below 50 gone. Instead we are stuck with CP, Alliance Lock Grey Host for more than double the current population. That will only create huge Queues, preventing us from playing. Vengeance does take something away from us, it doesn't add. Also ZOS focus should have been to fix the actual PvP, not creating a new gamemode.
PCNA in reality 99% of the time u50 campaign has been dead since like clockwork after the Aussie guilds flipped the map to AD for years in a row. Then they moved to NOCP which combined with the already looming AD guilds inevitably flipping the maps nightly killing the campaigns. Then all of these guilds got bored in their own campaign and moved on to greyhost which luckily has the pop to balance them out. The 7day cp campaign turns into overflow hangout spot for ballgroups and 1vX players who hardly even fight each other, being so sweaty made the casual player guilds prefer going to GH or simply not playing.
If the campaigns are dead are we really losing much when Veng replaces them? 90% of people already sit in ques for greyhost or give up and go into bgs for the night. Atleast there is the slight benefit that the uber casual and new players have an entry point in pvp since for years u50 and nocp have been non functional. If anything it frees up que in GH.
They probably learned they cant fix live pvp because its entirely dependent on all of the proc event functions that are disabled with modern item sets, status effect, poisons, weapon enchants, passives, cp, etc. This is why the loadout perk system was made to only modify your permanent character sheet. Design wise they would have to trim ALOT of fat and then limit themselves in ways like maybe only one proc passive per class on the last unlocked bonus. Maybe only ults get crazy effects. Either way it needs to be split from PvE, then you are talking whether to design from the ground up or designing from the top down by untyng a decade long knotted ball of code.
ZOS built it, they can fix it. It's a lie to say they can't do anything to fix live cyrodiil.
Thank you. You're just stating the obvious, but the obvious seems to be escaping many participating in this discussion.
reazea
2
Re: April 20th Vengeance Only..
SaffronCitrusflower wrote: »SaffronCitrusflower wrote: »to figure out what ZOS needed to do to improve live Cyrodiil.
That bit people seem just to have assumed. Never made any sense though.
It always made sense up until ZOS made the statement there was nothing they could do to fix Cyrodiil. ZOS' origninal statements regarding the purpose of vengeance was specifically and exactly that they were doing vengance tests to see how they could improve live Cyrodiil. ZOS made this statement numerous times, in numerous threads and announcements. And for a decade ZOS vehemently exclaimed they were working on live Cyrodiil performance.
This means ZOS was not putting in the efforts they said they were over all those years and that they were deceptive or flat lied about the purpose of vengeance.
This is what bothers me most about vengeance. It was a lie from the beginning and it appears to be set to replace the reason I log on to play ESO. If ZOS takes away the PvP I purchased the game to play there will be no reason for me to log in anymore, and I've logged in daily for almost 12 years now.
reazea
4
Re: SUPRISE ! People dont like VENGEANCE
I've never seen grown men so afraid of competition.
You are, of course, referring to those who are too afraid to play normal live Cyodiil and are pushing for dumbed down vengeance because they can't hack it in real PvP.
reazea
4
Re: Let's tidy up the numbers a bit
Please stop here. Multiplicative DR works like this:Lets say you have two scenarios. 33k and 50% mitigation, and 26.4k and 40% mitigation. Add Minor Protection (5%).
EHP = (HP / (1-DR1)) * (HP / (1-DR2)) * (HP / (1-DR3))...
So for your example of 26k armor and Minor Protection:
EHP = (HP / (1-0.4)) * (HP / (1-0.05))
So your Armor multiplies your EHP by a factor of 1.66, then your Protection multiples that resulit by a factor of 1.05, meaning your final EHP is 1.75x your base HP. Notice that the increase in EHP factor was 0.09 not 0.05 so it is clearly NOT diminishing returns.Correct.I have no idea what the heck is being said in this. I think this just supports OPs point
Effective Hit Points are irrelevent outside of a spreadsheet. Actual gameplay does not work that way.
A boss hitting for 100,000 unmitigated hits for 45,000 at 33k and no buffs.
A boss hitting for 100,000 unmitigated hits for 42,750 at 33k and Minor Prot - a 2.25% reduction on a 5% buff
A boss hitting for 100,000 unmitigated hits for 38,475 at 33k with Minor Prot and Major Prot - a 4.275% reduction on a 10% buff
i.e. diminishing returns.
