3v3 PvP at E3!?!?

drktksnub18_ESO

http://www.reddit.com/r/elderscrollsonline/comments/27typs/3v3_pvp_at_e3/
is this true Zeni?
If so please implement this.
Soon.
Please.
(not my post, posted for more view)

Catches_the_Sun

Please No.

Arsenic_Touch

And so the downfall begins. Now you doomsayers can put up your signs.

http://wow.joystiq.com/2009/11/13/blizzard-arenas-were-a-mistake/

Food for thought. Given how badly the balance issues are now, you do not want any small scale pvp like this except maybe a 1v1 dueling system because you do not need to balance around that.

1. A fraction of players would even participate.
1a. A fraction of players already participate in the current pvp system. This is asking for more separation of the playerbase and the previous system would suffer because of the addition.
2. Balance would be a nightmare. If you think the balance is bad now, adding this would make it worse and there's no way around it.
3. Itemization would be ruined.
4. Pillar humping is bad.

JoyEnergiser

I used to be against arena's, but lately I don't have time to traipse around in cyrodil for 1-2 hours to get anything fun and meaningful out of it.Get online, do some 3vs3 with friends if I can only play 30-60 min.

Go Cyrodil if I can play longer.

Sallakat

oh boy oh boy oh boy!!! I'm keeping my fingers crossed for sure!

drktksnub18_ESO

shameless plug for why small scale pvp can be beneficial. http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/discussion/96312/duels-improve-the-pvp-social-and-fun-of-eso#latest

Aballister

Depends on how it's implemented, could be a good addition.

Adrastes

arenas are good idea. i wont touch pvp before arenas happen. i have no wish to get ganked.

canghai

shoot, i wish the whole dam game was open pvp so i can camp and grief the first two repliers

Blackwidow

Yes! And add dueling next!

I just might cancel my cancelation!

No, wait. Fix banks and add an AH.

Mephos

would make me come back if it actually get rewarded PROPERLY (not some *** like the pve gear that you craft)

Reykice

If it gets good rewards so a reason to grind it i`d be playing it for months... i know many more who would.

If not then why even add it...

Ragekniv

Battlegrounds could be fun if implemented with some progressive game design.

What would I enjoy more? Game stability and balanced class sustained DPS and resource mechanics!

Gisgo

Hmmm all i see is three blurred photos and one guy swearing it was an arena.

Arsenic_Touch

canghai wrote: »

shoot, i wish the whole dam game was open pvp so i can camp and grief the first two repliers

Are you a glutton for punishment? Oh, you actually thought you were capable of griefing someone? that's so cute. I just want to pinch your cheeks.

drktksnub18_ESO

Arsenic_Touch wrote: »

And so the downfall begins. Now you doomsayers can put up your signs.

http://wow.joystiq.com/2009/11/13/blizzard-arenas-were-a-mistake/

Food for thought. Given how badly the balance issues are now, you do not want any small scale pvp like this except maybe a 1v1 dueling system because you do not need to balance around that.

1. A fraction of players would even participate.
1a. A fraction of players already participate in the current pvp system. This is asking for more separation of the playerbase and the previous system would suffer because of the addition.
2. Balance would be a nightmare. If you think the balance is bad now, adding this would make it worse and there's no way around it.
3. Itemization would be ruined.
4. Pillar humping is bad.

1.lol what is this "fraction" you speak of? Wabbajack in NA is full every single day to the point it lags the game.
2.To me balance is a non-issue.. just an excuse because you dont want this? Cyrodiil should always be the main focus of balance for PvP. Why cant we just have fun in arenas? if you dont like them dont play them. simple.
3. please explain yourself.
4. The idea is to have small scale combat. the mechanic of hiding behind terrain in combat is irrelevant to arena gameplay. To me it is a part of level design that can be changed or altered.

drktksnub18_ESO

alexandru987eb17_ESO wrote: »

If it gets good rewards so a reason to grind it i`d be playing it for months... i know many more who would.

If not then why even add it...

lol for fun?

Gern_Verkheart

Arsenic_Touch wrote: »

And so the downfall begins. Now you doomsayers can put up your signs.

http://wow.joystiq.com/2009/11/13/blizzard-arenas-were-a-mistake/

Food for thought. Given how badly the balance issues are now, you do not want any small scale pvp like this except maybe a 1v1 dueling system because you do not need to balance around that.

1. A fraction of players would even participate.
1a. A fraction of players already participate in the current pvp system. This is asking for more separation of the playerbase and the previous system would suffer because of the addition.
2. Balance would be a nightmare. If you think the balance is bad now, adding this would make it worse and there's no way around it.
3. Itemization would be ruined.
4. Pillar humping is bad.

Your argument makes no sense; it's a 3v3 arena, if you don't' like it, you don't have to participate in it. And a lot of us actually like this kind of PvP, and hate the huge zergfest that is Cyrodil's type of PvP.

Arsenic_Touch

drktksnub18_ESO wrote: »

1.lol what is this "fraction" you speak of? Wabbajack in NA is full every single day to the point it lags the game.
2.To me balance is a non-issue.. just an excuse because you dont want this? Cyrodiil should always be the main focus of balance for PvP. Why cant we just have fun in arenas? if you dont like them dont play them. simple.
3. please explain yourself.
4. The idea is to have small scale combat. the mechanic of hiding behind terrain in combat is irrelevant to arena gameplay. To me it is a part of level design that can be changed or altered.

Yes, a fraction, do you understand the word? a fraction of the total player population players actually engage in pvp, that is pretty much uniform across all mmorpgs. You use one server (when so many are practically empty) as your argument? that's pretty funny. I actually play on wabbajack so it's quite amusing that you're using that one server to base your entire defense on. By the way, even when the populations are low, cyrodill lags.

Your opinion on balance is irrelevant. If you think an entirely new pvp system wouldn't require balance and wouldn't affect balance in pve and cyrodill, I got a bridge for sale.

Itemization as in rewards for playing because people are not going to be interested in an arena system with no rewards. You can claim that it's just for fun, but people are going to want exclusive rewards and leaderboards so they can show off. This will lead to an even worse power creep.

The last one was thrown in for a bit of snark, because that is all wow arena is, pillar humping. When even the developers say arena was a mistake, that tells you something.

Gern_Verkheart wrote: »

Your argument makes no sense; it's a 3v3 arena, if you don't' like it, you don't have to participate in it. And a lot of us actually like this kind of PvP, and hate the huge zergfest that is Cyrodil's type of PvP.

Actually, my argument makes perfect sense. The whole "don't like it, don't do it" argument has absolutely zero standing here so don't pretend that it invalidates anything I have said. Your likes and dislikes are ultimately irrelevant.

Vendersleigh

That remark by Blizzard is interesting as it is something I have seen and thought for around 9 years now. Through several games I have seen how trying to balance classes for PvP ruins the PvE game by constant changes/balances/nerfs to classes.

Arsenic_Touch

Vendersleigh wrote: »

That remark by Blizzard is interesting as it is something I have seen and thought for around 9 years now. Through several games I have seen how trying to balance classes for PvP ruins the PvE game by constant changes/balances/nerfs to classes.

Ding ding ding. You win the internet for the day for pointing out one of the largest issues with balance when they introduce another pvp system on top of an existing pvp system that isn't separate from pve.

Blackwidow

Arsenic_Touch wrote: »

Vendersleigh wrote: »

That remark by Blizzard is interesting as it is something I have seen and thought for around 9 years now. Through several games I have seen how trying to balance classes for PvP ruins the PvE game by constant changes/balances/nerfs to classes.

Ding ding ding. You win the internet for the day for pointing out one of the largest issues with balance when they introduce another pvp system on top of an existing pvp system that isn't separate from pve.

If you think the balance issue can get any worse, I have ocean front property in Arizona to sell you.

ganja.mullarwb17_ESO

I think its a strategy to keep the burden on the team as low as possible as balancing is something that takes ages (often results in many leavers) to get right. We all know that its a small company that overcharges for its services, however i am happy to pay it simply because i am a huge fan of the concept of ES. A nice idea would be (when they eventually get to a place in the balancing process where atleast tactics, gear and build would contribute to the Win and not just a banner coming out of my a**) to have smaller instanced version of pvp events inside cyrodil. For example, maybe the gates in cyro could be turned into an event where its 20v20 and some mutual objectives are involved, it could be a good way to integrate it into the game current style of play.
Cheers guys

Artemiisia

join urban pvp warfare, its freaking fun.

where some of the small quest hubs are used for smaller parties to sneak and kill each other