PvP Podcast (Episode 7 Uploaded)

Sypher

Episode 2 of this Podcast will go live Saturday (tomorrow) @ 7PM US Central / 8PM Eastern on http://www.twitch.tv/sypherpk


See you there!

Publius_Scipio

Sypher wrote: »

Episode 2 of this Podcast will go live Saturday (tomorrow) @ 7PM US Central / 8PM Eastern on http://www.twitch.tv/sypherpk


See you there!

Do yourselves all a favor, dress appropriately this time. Or at least on the same level as FENGRUSH. If FENGRUSH shows up in a Julian Edelman approves suit and tie with tie bar and pocket square.... The other three should surrender and never appear again.

Sypher

Publius_Scipio wrote: »

Sypher wrote: »

Episode 2 of this Podcast will go live Saturday (tomorrow) @ 7PM US Central / 8PM Eastern on http://www.twitch.tv/sypherpk


See you there!

Do yourselves all a favor, dress appropriately this time. Or at least on the same level as FENGRUSH. If FENGRUSH shows up in a Julian Edelman approves suit and tie with tie bar and pocket square.... The other three should surrender and never appear again.

He came back from a wedding! Totally wasn't prepared for that glorious ***.

Minno

Publius_Scipio wrote: »

Sypher wrote: »

Episode 2 of this Podcast will go live Saturday (tomorrow) @ 7PM US Central / 8PM Eastern on http://www.twitch.tv/sypherpk


See you there!

Do yourselves all a favor, dress appropriately this time. Or at least on the same level as FENGRUSH. If FENGRUSH shows up in a Julian Edelman approves suit and tie with tie bar and pocket square.... The other three should surrender and never appear again.

For reference:
[img][/img]

Etaniel

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Etaniel wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Etaniel wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

3) I still don't understand the problem with playing the game however you want to play it. Since when has being effective been bad in eyes other than those competing?

hehehehe, I expected you to say that again.
The problem with playing in a ball, is that's the cause of lag.
It doesn't necessarily always lag when large ball groups play, but whenever they fall upon same sized groups, or bigger groups (isn't that what you are striving for? I doubt you group up 24 guys to defeat smaller groups) then the server starts to hurt, and when someone's playstyle hurts the server, they should seriously question themselves. Is our fun more important than the well being of the whole campaign? And if you say, well ZOS is to blame, not us ! then I will repeat my previous analogy :



"Say someone sells you a gun and advertises that it shoots straight.

Say that, it appears this particular gun is broken, and that every time you shoot it, it backfires and it blows your face apart.
Now, is the person who sold you the gun to blame, because he did false advertising and sold you a broken gun? Yes. Should he strive to fix it? yes

Are you utterly re tar ded for using said gun even though you know it's broken? WOW YES"

If the server peformance didn't drop everytime I see a lagtrain, I wouldn't complain about them as much as I do.

Whether I play in a 24m group a 12m or a 2m there is lag on the server this tells me that it makes no difference so play what you enjoy. And if you can make a group where 23 others also enjoy themselves that's better than not doing it. So the lag argument. Again holds no weight in the argument to me.

I'll say again other than lag which is debatable what's your argument?

When I play on servers when no one is in a ball group, and that my ping stays under 100 ms, and no one ever complains about lag, it tells me I'm doing something right. When such a raid group joins the campaign, and 10 min later people complain about their ping, I silently curse them and log off.

Now, you can make your other 23 people have fun, and ruin the night for 200 others, nice.

Servers don't lag unless there are huge masses of people stacking together. (rare exceptions when maintenance hasn't happened for a while, and it lags anyways, I'll give you that, but it's rare).
It's my only argument really, I couldn't care less that you played in a ball group (given I have a few tools to have a chance of dealing with you) if it didn't lag.

Because you are playing on low population servers (which don't have 200 players across all 3 factions) and when a group joins and holds a location for a long time farming more and more pugs turn up to stop them. Then the lag happens and it's their fault for being too good and not dieing.
That's not a symptom of a 24m raid. I've been on these other servers where you have 1 faction running around in groups of 40 + and then blaming 12 people for lag because they don't die when they are attacked by that many.





P.s I lied about the duck thing being nothing. It does have relevance.

If you aren't going to admit that playing in 24 man stacked group contributes to bad server performance, I'm not gonna continue arguing.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

Etaniel wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Etaniel wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Etaniel wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

3) I still don't understand the problem with playing the game however you want to play it. Since when has being effective been bad in eyes other than those competing?

hehehehe, I expected you to say that again.
The problem with playing in a ball, is that's the cause of lag.
It doesn't necessarily always lag when large ball groups play, but whenever they fall upon same sized groups, or bigger groups (isn't that what you are striving for? I doubt you group up 24 guys to defeat smaller groups) then the server starts to hurt, and when someone's playstyle hurts the server, they should seriously question themselves. Is our fun more important than the well being of the whole campaign? And if you say, well ZOS is to blame, not us ! then I will repeat my previous analogy :



"Say someone sells you a gun and advertises that it shoots straight.

Say that, it appears this particular gun is broken, and that every time you shoot it, it backfires and it blows your face apart.
Now, is the person who sold you the gun to blame, because he did false advertising and sold you a broken gun? Yes. Should he strive to fix it? yes

Are you utterly re tar ded for using said gun even though you know it's broken? WOW YES"

If the server peformance didn't drop everytime I see a lagtrain, I wouldn't complain about them as much as I do.

Whether I play in a 24m group a 12m or a 2m there is lag on the server this tells me that it makes no difference so play what you enjoy. And if you can make a group where 23 others also enjoy themselves that's better than not doing it. So the lag argument. Again holds no weight in the argument to me.

I'll say again other than lag which is debatable what's your argument?

When I play on servers when no one is in a ball group, and that my ping stays under 100 ms, and no one ever complains about lag, it tells me I'm doing something right. When such a raid group joins the campaign, and 10 min later people complain about their ping, I silently curse them and log off.

Now, you can make your other 23 people have fun, and ruin the night for 200 others, nice.

Servers don't lag unless there are huge masses of people stacking together. (rare exceptions when maintenance hasn't happened for a while, and it lags anyways, I'll give you that, but it's rare).
It's my only argument really, I couldn't care less that you played in a ball group (given I have a few tools to have a chance of dealing with you) if it didn't lag.

Because you are playing on low population servers (which don't have 200 players across all 3 factions) and when a group joins and holds a location for a long time farming more and more pugs turn up to stop them. Then the lag happens and it's their fault for being too good and not dieing.
That's not a symptom of a 24m raid. I've been on these other servers where you have 1 faction running around in groups of 40 + and then blaming 12 people for lag because they don't die when they are attacked by that many.





P.s I lied about the duck thing being nothing. It does have relevance.

If you aren't going to admit that playing in 24 man stacked group contributes to bad server performance, I'm not gonna continue arguing.

Ill admit that playing on zos servers in whatever group size contributes to lag and that the bigger the group the bigger the chance of contribution. Dont leave me I need you also I still find your analogy stupid cause but we should probs discuss it on a different thread lol

Derra

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Etaniel wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Etaniel wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Etaniel wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

3) I still don't understand the problem with playing the game however you want to play it. Since when has being effective been bad in eyes other than those competing?

hehehehe, I expected you to say that again.
The problem with playing in a ball, is that's the cause of lag.
It doesn't necessarily always lag when large ball groups play, but whenever they fall upon same sized groups, or bigger groups (isn't that what you are striving for? I doubt you group up 24 guys to defeat smaller groups) then the server starts to hurt, and when someone's playstyle hurts the server, they should seriously question themselves. Is our fun more important than the well being of the whole campaign? And if you say, well ZOS is to blame, not us ! then I will repeat my previous analogy :



"Say someone sells you a gun and advertises that it shoots straight.

Say that, it appears this particular gun is broken, and that every time you shoot it, it backfires and it blows your face apart.
Now, is the person who sold you the gun to blame, because he did false advertising and sold you a broken gun? Yes. Should he strive to fix it? yes

Are you utterly re tar ded for using said gun even though you know it's broken? WOW YES"

If the server peformance didn't drop everytime I see a lagtrain, I wouldn't complain about them as much as I do.

Whether I play in a 24m group a 12m or a 2m there is lag on the server this tells me that it makes no difference so play what you enjoy. And if you can make a group where 23 others also enjoy themselves that's better than not doing it. So the lag argument. Again holds no weight in the argument to me.

I'll say again other than lag which is debatable what's your argument?

When I play on servers when no one is in a ball group, and that my ping stays under 100 ms, and no one ever complains about lag, it tells me I'm doing something right. When such a raid group joins the campaign, and 10 min later people complain about their ping, I silently curse them and log off.

Now, you can make your other 23 people have fun, and ruin the night for 200 others, nice.

Servers don't lag unless there are huge masses of people stacking together. (rare exceptions when maintenance hasn't happened for a while, and it lags anyways, I'll give you that, but it's rare).
It's my only argument really, I couldn't care less that you played in a ball group (given I have a few tools to have a chance of dealing with you) if it didn't lag.

Because you are playing on low population servers (which don't have 200 players across all 3 factions) and when a group joins and holds a location for a long time farming more and more pugs turn up to stop them. Then the lag happens and it's their fault for being too good and not dieing.
That's not a symptom of a 24m raid. I've been on these other servers where you have 1 faction running around in groups of 40 + and then blaming 12 people for lag because they don't die when they are attacked by that many.





P.s I lied about the duck thing being nothing. It does have relevance.

If you aren't going to admit that playing in 24 man stacked group contributes to bad server performance, I'm not gonna continue arguing.

Ill admit that playing on zos servers in whatever group size contributes to lag and that the bigger the group the bigger the chance of contribution. Dont leave me I need you also I still find your analogy stupid cause but we should probs discuss it on a different thread lol

Izanagi best mythical creature living under a metaphorical forum bridge EU.

mrdankles

Nothing about arena pvp. Lame.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

Derra wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Etaniel wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Etaniel wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Etaniel wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

3) I still don't understand the problem with playing the game however you want to play it. Since when has being effective been bad in eyes other than those competing?

hehehehe, I expected you to say that again.
The problem with playing in a ball, is that's the cause of lag.
It doesn't necessarily always lag when large ball groups play, but whenever they fall upon same sized groups, or bigger groups (isn't that what you are striving for? I doubt you group up 24 guys to defeat smaller groups) then the server starts to hurt, and when someone's playstyle hurts the server, they should seriously question themselves. Is our fun more important than the well being of the whole campaign? And if you say, well ZOS is to blame, not us ! then I will repeat my previous analogy :



"Say someone sells you a gun and advertises that it shoots straight.

Say that, it appears this particular gun is broken, and that every time you shoot it, it backfires and it blows your face apart.
Now, is the person who sold you the gun to blame, because he did false advertising and sold you a broken gun? Yes. Should he strive to fix it? yes

Are you utterly re tar ded for using said gun even though you know it's broken? WOW YES"

If the server peformance didn't drop everytime I see a lagtrain, I wouldn't complain about them as much as I do.

Whether I play in a 24m group a 12m or a 2m there is lag on the server this tells me that it makes no difference so play what you enjoy. And if you can make a group where 23 others also enjoy themselves that's better than not doing it. So the lag argument. Again holds no weight in the argument to me.

I'll say again other than lag which is debatable what's your argument?

When I play on servers when no one is in a ball group, and that my ping stays under 100 ms, and no one ever complains about lag, it tells me I'm doing something right. When such a raid group joins the campaign, and 10 min later people complain about their ping, I silently curse them and log off.

Now, you can make your other 23 people have fun, and ruin the night for 200 others, nice.

Servers don't lag unless there are huge masses of people stacking together. (rare exceptions when maintenance hasn't happened for a while, and it lags anyways, I'll give you that, but it's rare).
It's my only argument really, I couldn't care less that you played in a ball group (given I have a few tools to have a chance of dealing with you) if it didn't lag.

Because you are playing on low population servers (which don't have 200 players across all 3 factions) and when a group joins and holds a location for a long time farming more and more pugs turn up to stop them. Then the lag happens and it's their fault for being too good and not dieing.
That's not a symptom of a 24m raid. I've been on these other servers where you have 1 faction running around in groups of 40 + and then blaming 12 people for lag because they don't die when they are attacked by that many.





P.s I lied about the duck thing being nothing. It does have relevance.

If you aren't going to admit that playing in 24 man stacked group contributes to bad server performance, I'm not gonna continue arguing.

Ill admit that playing on zos servers in whatever group size contributes to lag and that the bigger the group the bigger the chance of contribution. Dont leave me I need you also I still find your analogy stupid cause but we should probs discuss it on a different thread lol

Izanagi best mythical creature living under a metaphorical forum bridge EU.

NO Derra you and I can go back to not talking
@Etaniel gets away with being wrong cause I like him for making fun of left click to block guy.

Etaniel

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Etaniel wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Etaniel wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Etaniel wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

3) I still don't understand the problem with playing the game however you want to play it. Since when has being effective been bad in eyes other than those competing?

hehehehe, I expected you to say that again.
The problem with playing in a ball, is that's the cause of lag.
It doesn't necessarily always lag when large ball groups play, but whenever they fall upon same sized groups, or bigger groups (isn't that what you are striving for? I doubt you group up 24 guys to defeat smaller groups) then the server starts to hurt, and when someone's playstyle hurts the server, they should seriously question themselves. Is our fun more important than the well being of the whole campaign? And if you say, well ZOS is to blame, not us ! then I will repeat my previous analogy :



"Say someone sells you a gun and advertises that it shoots straight.

Say that, it appears this particular gun is broken, and that every time you shoot it, it backfires and it blows your face apart.
Now, is the person who sold you the gun to blame, because he did false advertising and sold you a broken gun? Yes. Should he strive to fix it? yes

Are you utterly re tar ded for using said gun even though you know it's broken? WOW YES"

If the server peformance didn't drop everytime I see a lagtrain, I wouldn't complain about them as much as I do.

Whether I play in a 24m group a 12m or a 2m there is lag on the server this tells me that it makes no difference so play what you enjoy. And if you can make a group where 23 others also enjoy themselves that's better than not doing it. So the lag argument. Again holds no weight in the argument to me.

I'll say again other than lag which is debatable what's your argument?

When I play on servers when no one is in a ball group, and that my ping stays under 100 ms, and no one ever complains about lag, it tells me I'm doing something right. When such a raid group joins the campaign, and 10 min later people complain about their ping, I silently curse them and log off.

Now, you can make your other 23 people have fun, and ruin the night for 200 others, nice.

Servers don't lag unless there are huge masses of people stacking together. (rare exceptions when maintenance hasn't happened for a while, and it lags anyways, I'll give you that, but it's rare).
It's my only argument really, I couldn't care less that you played in a ball group (given I have a few tools to have a chance of dealing with you) if it didn't lag.

Because you are playing on low population servers (which don't have 200 players across all 3 factions) and when a group joins and holds a location for a long time farming more and more pugs turn up to stop them. Then the lag happens and it's their fault for being too good and not dieing.
That's not a symptom of a 24m raid. I've been on these other servers where you have 1 faction running around in groups of 40 + and then blaming 12 people for lag because they don't die when they are attacked by that many.





P.s I lied about the duck thing being nothing. It does have relevance.

If you aren't going to admit that playing in 24 man stacked group contributes to bad server performance, I'm not gonna continue arguing.

Ill admit that playing on zos servers in whatever group size contributes to lag and that the bigger the group the bigger the chance of contribution. Dont leave me I need you also I still find your analogy stupid cause but we should probs discuss it on a different thread lol

yeah we've been derailing a lot (sorry @FENGRUSH haha)

Garion

The key thing is that - regardless of our opinions on different play styles or group size choices - PvPers almost universally agree that AOE caps should be removed. It is beyond ridiculous that Zenimax doesn't even bother discussing / communicating with us in respect to the cap. You would expect that at the very least, even if they are dead set against removing it.

FMonk

Sypher wrote: »

Episode 2 of this Podcast will go live Saturday (tomorrow) @ 7PM US Central / 8PM Eastern on http://www.twitch.tv/sypherpk


See you there!

Are you going to have the same panelists as last time?

Joy_Division

Publius_Scipio wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Etaniel wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

3) I still don't understand the problem with playing the game however you want to play it. Since when has being effective been bad in eyes other than those competing?

hehehehe, I expected you to say that again.
The problem with playing in a ball, is that's the cause of lag.
It doesn't necessarily always lag when large ball groups play, but whenever they fall upon same sized groups, or bigger groups (isn't that what you are striving for? I doubt you group up 24 guys to defeat smaller groups) then the server starts to hurt, and when someone's playstyle hurts the server, they should seriously question themselves. Is our fun more important than the well being of the whole campaign? And if you say, well ZOS is to blame, not us ! then I will repeat my previous analogy :



"Say someone sells you a gun and advertises that it shoots straight.

Say that, it appears this particular gun is broken, and that every time you shoot it, it backfires and it blows your face apart.
Now, is the person who sold you the gun to blame, because he did false advertising and sold you a broken gun? Yes. Should he strive to fix it? yes

Are you utterly re tar ded for using said gun even though you know it's broken? WOW YES"

If the server peformance didn't drop everytime I see a lagtrain, I wouldn't complain about them as much as I do.

Whether I play in a 24m group a 12m or a 2m there is lag on the server this tells me that it makes no difference so play what you enjoy. And if you can make a group where 23 others also enjoy themselves that's better than not doing it. So the lag argument. Again holds no weight in the argument to me.

I'll say again other than lag which is debatable what's your argument?

Also what most players don't understand is there is less lag for you when you are playing in a 24m group against 24+ than when you are 12 vs 24+

I checked my ping vs that of players not in the group near the group I was running in during a large fight I was on 2-300 they were on 600+

This argument of playing how you want is literally irrelevant to the points of removing AOE caps. Removing AOE caps has more to do with server performance and gameplay balance. Its not balanced that players are mitigating damage for free. The reality is they should not mitigate any damage, the same way a 4 man group would not mitigate any AOE dealt to them.

It has nothing with fun or playing how you want. It has to do with artificial mitigation that isnt helping the game from a balance or performance perspective. Its pretty straight forward that it needs to go.

Yes, but ZOS is not stupid. They do read the forums, they do know about all the talk about removing AOE caps for a long time now. They know something we do not. I think if the reality was as simple as flipping a switch, "ok guys, the players don't like AOE caps flip the switch" they would do it. The story seems to be much deeper.

ZoS are the same people who think wall of elements will "melt" enemies. They may not be stupid but they are definitely uniformed.

Starshadw

mrdankles wrote: »

Nothing about arena pvp. Lame.

You do realize there is an arena in IC, where if you wanted, you could organize a PvP event? There's even a deed for killing players inside it.

It's there - why not use it?

Publius_Scipio

Joy_Division wrote: »

Publius_Scipio wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Etaniel wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

3) I still don't understand the problem with playing the game however you want to play it. Since when has being effective been bad in eyes other than those competing?

hehehehe, I expected you to say that again.
The problem with playing in a ball, is that's the cause of lag.
It doesn't necessarily always lag when large ball groups play, but whenever they fall upon same sized groups, or bigger groups (isn't that what you are striving for? I doubt you group up 24 guys to defeat smaller groups) then the server starts to hurt, and when someone's playstyle hurts the server, they should seriously question themselves. Is our fun more important than the well being of the whole campaign? And if you say, well ZOS is to blame, not us ! then I will repeat my previous analogy :



"Say someone sells you a gun and advertises that it shoots straight.

Say that, it appears this particular gun is broken, and that every time you shoot it, it backfires and it blows your face apart.
Now, is the person who sold you the gun to blame, because he did false advertising and sold you a broken gun? Yes. Should he strive to fix it? yes

Are you utterly re tar ded for using said gun even though you know it's broken? WOW YES"

If the server peformance didn't drop everytime I see a lagtrain, I wouldn't complain about them as much as I do.

Whether I play in a 24m group a 12m or a 2m there is lag on the server this tells me that it makes no difference so play what you enjoy. And if you can make a group where 23 others also enjoy themselves that's better than not doing it. So the lag argument. Again holds no weight in the argument to me.

I'll say again other than lag which is debatable what's your argument?

Also what most players don't understand is there is less lag for you when you are playing in a 24m group against 24+ than when you are 12 vs 24+

I checked my ping vs that of players not in the group near the group I was running in during a large fight I was on 2-300 they were on 600+

This argument of playing how you want is literally irrelevant to the points of removing AOE caps. Removing AOE caps has more to do with server performance and gameplay balance. Its not balanced that players are mitigating damage for free. The reality is they should not mitigate any damage, the same way a 4 man group would not mitigate any AOE dealt to them.

It has nothing with fun or playing how you want. It has to do with artificial mitigation that isnt helping the game from a balance or performance perspective. Its pretty straight forward that it needs to go.

Yes, but ZOS is not stupid. They do read the forums, they do know about all the talk about removing AOE caps for a long time now. They know something we do not. I think if the reality was as simple as flipping a switch, "ok guys, the players don't like AOE caps flip the switch" they would do it. The story seems to be much deeper.

ZoS are the same people who think wall of elements will "melt" enemies. They may not be stupid but they are definitely uniformed.

Maybe... JUST MAYBE... I will give you that those at ZOS who are present in front of the eyes of players MAYBE as you say might be "uniformed" at times..... But you going to tell me that the hardworking people at ZOS sitting down day after day thinking, creating, and building the skills themselves don't know how the skills work?

ToRelax

Publius_Scipio wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Publius_Scipio wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Etaniel wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

3) I still don't understand the problem with playing the game however you want to play it. Since when has being effective been bad in eyes other than those competing?

hehehehe, I expected you to say that again.
The problem with playing in a ball, is that's the cause of lag.
It doesn't necessarily always lag when large ball groups play, but whenever they fall upon same sized groups, or bigger groups (isn't that what you are striving for? I doubt you group up 24 guys to defeat smaller groups) then the server starts to hurt, and when someone's playstyle hurts the server, they should seriously question themselves. Is our fun more important than the well being of the whole campaign? And if you say, well ZOS is to blame, not us ! then I will repeat my previous analogy :



"Say someone sells you a gun and advertises that it shoots straight.

Say that, it appears this particular gun is broken, and that every time you shoot it, it backfires and it blows your face apart.
Now, is the person who sold you the gun to blame, because he did false advertising and sold you a broken gun? Yes. Should he strive to fix it? yes

Are you utterly re tar ded for using said gun even though you know it's broken? WOW YES"

If the server peformance didn't drop everytime I see a lagtrain, I wouldn't complain about them as much as I do.

Whether I play in a 24m group a 12m or a 2m there is lag on the server this tells me that it makes no difference so play what you enjoy. And if you can make a group where 23 others also enjoy themselves that's better than not doing it. So the lag argument. Again holds no weight in the argument to me.

I'll say again other than lag which is debatable what's your argument?

Also what most players don't understand is there is less lag for you when you are playing in a 24m group against 24+ than when you are 12 vs 24+

I checked my ping vs that of players not in the group near the group I was running in during a large fight I was on 2-300 they were on 600+

This argument of playing how you want is literally irrelevant to the points of removing AOE caps. Removing AOE caps has more to do with server performance and gameplay balance. Its not balanced that players are mitigating damage for free. The reality is they should not mitigate any damage, the same way a 4 man group would not mitigate any AOE dealt to them.

It has nothing with fun or playing how you want. It has to do with artificial mitigation that isnt helping the game from a balance or performance perspective. Its pretty straight forward that it needs to go.

Yes, but ZOS is not stupid. They do read the forums, they do know about all the talk about removing AOE caps for a long time now. They know something we do not. I think if the reality was as simple as flipping a switch, "ok guys, the players don't like AOE caps flip the switch" they would do it. The story seems to be much deeper.

ZoS are the same people who think wall of elements will "melt" enemies. They may not be stupid but they are definitely uniformed.

Maybe... JUST MAYBE... I will give you that those at ZOS who are present in front of the eyes of players MAYBE as you say might be "uniformed" at times..... But you going to tell me that the hardworking people at ZOS sitting down day after day thinking, creating, and building the skills themselves don't know how the skills work?

Exactly that.
To make that clear, I think the guys creating skills and balancing the game do not know how it works. The actual programmers may very well, no idea.

Manoekin

What is there left to talk about that this thread hasn't beaten to death? :P

Joy_Division

Publius_Scipio wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

Publius_Scipio wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Etaniel wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

3) I still don't understand the problem with playing the game however you want to play it. Since when has being effective been bad in eyes other than those competing?

hehehehe, I expected you to say that again.
The problem with playing in a ball, is that's the cause of lag.
It doesn't necessarily always lag when large ball groups play, but whenever they fall upon same sized groups, or bigger groups (isn't that what you are striving for? I doubt you group up 24 guys to defeat smaller groups) then the server starts to hurt, and when someone's playstyle hurts the server, they should seriously question themselves. Is our fun more important than the well being of the whole campaign? And if you say, well ZOS is to blame, not us ! then I will repeat my previous analogy :



"Say someone sells you a gun and advertises that it shoots straight.

Say that, it appears this particular gun is broken, and that every time you shoot it, it backfires and it blows your face apart.
Now, is the person who sold you the gun to blame, because he did false advertising and sold you a broken gun? Yes. Should he strive to fix it? yes

Are you utterly re tar ded for using said gun even though you know it's broken? WOW YES"

If the server peformance didn't drop everytime I see a lagtrain, I wouldn't complain about them as much as I do.

Whether I play in a 24m group a 12m or a 2m there is lag on the server this tells me that it makes no difference so play what you enjoy. And if you can make a group where 23 others also enjoy themselves that's better than not doing it. So the lag argument. Again holds no weight in the argument to me.

I'll say again other than lag which is debatable what's your argument?

Also what most players don't understand is there is less lag for you when you are playing in a 24m group against 24+ than when you are 12 vs 24+

I checked my ping vs that of players not in the group near the group I was running in during a large fight I was on 2-300 they were on 600+

This argument of playing how you want is literally irrelevant to the points of removing AOE caps. Removing AOE caps has more to do with server performance and gameplay balance. Its not balanced that players are mitigating damage for free. The reality is they should not mitigate any damage, the same way a 4 man group would not mitigate any AOE dealt to them.

It has nothing with fun or playing how you want. It has to do with artificial mitigation that isnt helping the game from a balance or performance perspective. Its pretty straight forward that it needs to go.

Yes, but ZOS is not stupid. They do read the forums, they do know about all the talk about removing AOE caps for a long time now. They know something we do not. I think if the reality was as simple as flipping a switch, "ok guys, the players don't like AOE caps flip the switch" they would do it. The story seems to be much deeper.

ZoS are the same people who think wall of elements will "melt" enemies. They may not be stupid but they are definitely uniformed.

Maybe... JUST MAYBE... I will give you that those at ZOS who are present in front of the eyes of players MAYBE as you say might be "uniformed" at times..... But you going to tell me that the hardworking people at ZOS sitting down day after day thinking, creating, and building the skills themselves don't know how the skills work?

I am sure there are very talented people who work at Zenimax and try their hardest to make the game the best it can be. But the direction, leadership, and communication exhibited by the company since BETA - these are the people who thought it was a good idea to have a strict non-disclosure agreement and in essence work in a secret laboratory with little transparency and thus could not get outside input - has been, to put it kindly, uninspiring.

Sypher

FMonk wrote: »

Sypher wrote: »

Episode 2 of this Podcast will go live Saturday (tomorrow) @ 7PM US Central / 8PM Eastern on http://www.twitch.tv/sypherpk


See you there!

Are you going to have the same panelists as last time?

Same core 4 panelists but we will have a couple special guests who can give us different perspectives outside of just small group / solo pvp.

FMonk

Sypher wrote: »

FMonk wrote: »

Sypher wrote: »

Episode 2 of this Podcast will go live Saturday (tomorrow) @ 7PM US Central / 8PM Eastern on http://www.twitch.tv/sypherpk


See you there!

Are you going to have the same panelists as last time?

Same core 4 panelists but we will have a couple special guests who can give us different perspectives outside of just small group / solo pvp.

Cool, that's what I was hoping for. Will try to tune in.

Fruitdog

Sypher wrote: »

FMonk wrote: »

Sypher wrote: »

Episode 2 of this Podcast will go live Saturday (tomorrow) @ 7PM US Central / 8PM Eastern on http://www.twitch.tv/sypherpk


See you there!

Are you going to have the same panelists as last time?

Same core 4 panelists but we will have a couple special guests who can give us different perspectives outside of just small group / solo pvp.

omg, they invited brandon south ga

Ghost-Shot

Fruitdog wrote: »

Sypher wrote: »

FMonk wrote: »

Sypher wrote: »

Episode 2 of this Podcast will go live Saturday (tomorrow) @ 7PM US Central / 8PM Eastern on http://www.twitch.tv/sypherpk


See you there!

Are you going to have the same panelists as last time?

Same core 4 panelists but we will have a couple special guests who can give us different perspectives outside of just small group / solo pvp.

omg, they invited brandon south ga

They should have bulbybear on the show!

Satiar

Glad to hear new guests, will tune in.

Huckdabuck

Fruitdog wrote: »

Sypher wrote: »

FMonk wrote: »

Sypher wrote: »

Episode 2 of this Podcast will go live Saturday (tomorrow) @ 7PM US Central / 8PM Eastern on http://www.twitch.tv/sypherpk


See you there!

Are you going to have the same panelists as last time?

Same core 4 panelists but we will have a couple special guests who can give us different perspectives outside of just small group / solo pvp.

omg, they invited brandon south ga

Damn it Fruity.....

Scamandros

Would like to hear khaz khans opinion

Darnathian

Sypher wrote: »

Episode 2 of this Podcast will go live Saturday (tomorrow) @ 7PM US Central / 8PM Eastern on http://www.twitch.tv/sypherpk


See you there!

Cast?

ScarecrowBoat

Scamandros wrote: »

Would like to hear khaz khans opinion

He would never disgrace himself by appearing aside such dishonorable chesters

Amica

Soooo going to fire some shots and see who i hit :-)

First let me say awesome job the four of you. First time in ages i have watched a full episode of anything. *** the suit makes you look *** not professional :-)

BUT lol always a but.
The champ point cap,
IMO you're over thinking it, which is zos mistake also. To many band-aid ideas and no real fix.
Lets face it, the CPs are fooked in re-guards to A: player having 800 CP and B: player having 289. So zos play is, lets wack a cap on that so people catch up. As you guys mentioned, people are always going to be at the cap when each DLC hits.

This is my thought, and due to leveling a sorc i have 380 give or take CP atm.
Give everyone the 501 CP cap when Orsinium hits, and remove any remaining CP ..... yes wipe the slate clean. Sometimes you just have to know when something is not worth fixing.
Now before you hit reply with your rage tells hear me out :-)
Everyone starts back at 501 if zos is true to their word and content is coming every quarter. Raise the cap by 60 CP for every DLC. But just like normal XP once you hit that cap you stop getting more, its not like you can hit V16 and keep grinding to have 10 more lvls up your sleeve when they are released.
So if you go out get 3 champ points a day you should hit the sixty cap in a month. Then your CP gains stop till the next DLC.
This gives the people with lower CP another two months of CP gain to catch up and to be on par with everyone else. Even if they are a two hour a day player they can still gain that 60 CP over the quarter.

Now at current time a lot of people only log on to run the daily dung for Undaunted. Some of these guys have all the helms etc. At the end give them a choice of the loot from the keys OR 1 CP point.

This in IMO would fix the gains and also give those who have less CP a good chance to catch up and also give people more reason to log on every day.

So in closing sometimes wiping the slate clean is the best way to go rather than try to repair what cant be fixed. Note by the time Orsinium hits i will be over the cap so i will loose out, but its not like i can use the CP once the cap is in place. The only bonus i may have is. Every time a new DLC hits i will already be caped.

Its a simple yet with some tweaking of course i think this approach is much better than trying to implement some of the other things people have been mentioning.

The X Mortician aka Shashu.

Derra

Amica wrote: »

lot of stuff on cp and capping them

Sorry but this is just not working. What you want to implement is a new raised level cap every DLC. There is nothing about progression in your proposal as much as there is nothing about progression in the caps ZOS is introducing. It´s unattractive for anyone hitting the cap and on top of that you want to screw everyone over that hit the cap (some people did it playing the game normally) - are you nuts ?

I´ll quote myself on how i think it should be done:

The first step would be: Hardcap the whole CP system at 900CP. This should not be increased ever - so even a maxed out player (highly unlikely) still has to make decisions regarding passives. Then remove enlightenment from the game.

The second thing would be a different XP curve:

1 to 100 CP are 50.000 XP each
101 to 200 CP are 100.000 XP each
201 to 300 PC are 150.000 XP each
301 to 400 CP are 200.000 XP each
401 to 500 CP are 600.000 XP each
501 to 600 CP are 1.800.000 XP each
601 to 700 CP are 3.600.000 XP each
701 to 800 CP are 5.400.000 XP each
801 to 900 CP are 10.800.000 XP each

Now convert the champion XP every player got under the old system into the new one.
No progression is lost for anyone. Low CP players gain a lot. Very high CP player loose a lot of power. But nothing they did is hidden or lost behind an arbitrairy wall.
As an added bonus grinding over 600cp just becomes so unrewarding and unattractive in terms of powergain only the most dedicated people would do ist - and they would not have the tremendous advantages they have now.

An Example:

In the old system the XP required to reach the cap of 3600CP was 1.440.000.000. Now it would require someone 2.270.000.000 XP to reach the cap of 900.
You would reach 800cp at about ~1.200.000.000 XP (half of the cap xp wise you´d be sitting at 800 of 900 cp).

Someone with 100CP in the old system would now have 350CP.
Someone with 1000CP in the old system would now have 630CP.
Someone with 2000CP now would have 727CP in the new system for example and require 5.4 million XP for the next CP they earn.

This is undeniably still an advantage for a player with very high time investment but instead of having 10 to 20 times the championpoints the "grinder" does merely have double the CP of a normal player.

For someone pickung up on the game it would mean by the time they reach V16 they would have 186CP to spend instead of 34.

This would keep the (for some people enjoyable) grind and longterm goals in the game while at the same time putting people in roughly the same ballpark CP wise. Sure having 700cp compared to 350 is a huge advantage still but imho everyone would have a fighting chance.

After that they´d have to balance out passives.
Eg: Add physical mitigation. Remove dot mitigation. Make light heavy attacks more attractive. Buff magica related 75p and 120p passives etc...

SleepyTroll

Seems like you guys care more about the pvp part of the game then the people who are behind it. You guys even care enough to bring in people who may not share the same views as you. That's awsome!