@zos but sloads is fun and permablockers and shield stackers are not fun!

generalmyrick

1. sloads is fun in pve and pvp
2. permablockers and shield stacking sorcs are not fun--they name call others and only are good when they pick some slow zergling off when they get separated.
3. caving to the pressure of the above will just lead to a game where people will move on after getting bored of the above and then you'll have a game where noone dies.
4. #makesloadsgreatagain

Minno

Dot pressure = counter to block/shield builds but weak against purge
CC = counter to ensure shield builds don't recast and certain cc go through block now but no direct counter for unblocked cc.
Sloads = unmitigated dot DMG that stacks with multiple users and clogs up purge.

In order for the game to become a game about responsive game play unblocked cc must become dodgable (having both is OP unless of course additional counters exist) and Oblivion DMG must be deleted or changed to a DMG you can actually mitigate (have major/minor protection actually mitigate it or add Oblivion armor to nirnhoned traits).

OdinForge

generalmyrick wrote: »

1. sloads is fun in pve and pvp
2. permablockers and shield stacking sorcs are not fun--they name call others and only are good when they pick some slow zergling off when they get separated.
3. caving to the pressure of the above will just lead to a game where people will move on after getting bored of the above and then you'll have a game where noone dies.
4. #makesloadsgreatagain

People are going to move on because they don't want to learn how to get better?

Confused at the logic here.

Zerglings do not move on from the game, they huddle together and attack keeps and form guilds among each other. Sload's wasn't designed or implemented to prevent zerglings from getting bored of ESO, it's just a badly designed and poorly thought out set that happens to benefit them unfairly.

Perma blocking does not exist anymore, high HP tanks can be defiled and broken down. Stop chasing sorcs and burning your resources against their shields, and learn to DoT them up and time your burst around their offense window.

Or better yet just make a sorc and realize you have nothing else to complain about when you die as one.

DeadlyRecluse

generalmyrick wrote: »

1. sloads is fun in pve

How.

The mechanics that make it strong in PvP don't really exist in PvE, the damage is lackluster in that context, and the visual effect of the proc looks like a purple fart.

zyk

DeadlyRecluse wrote: »

generalmyrick wrote: »

1. sloads is fun in pve

How.

The mechanics that make it strong in PvP don't really exist in PvE, the damage is lackluster in that context, and the visual effect of the proc looks like a purple fart.

To be fair, the average ESO player would spend a *lot* of crowns on purple farts.

ak_pvp

Permablock has counters in dots, unblockable abilities, below/above player (logically, things like destro above shalks below) AoEs, and a double counter in bleeds since it ignores resists too. Shields whilst incredibly low in soft counters are not that strong either.

Git gud nd lrn 2 kill skrub.

zyk

ZOS created a game with incredible depth to its combat system. But:

- they barely documented it
- don't have decent tutorials
- don't gradually scale the difficulty PVE content to teach players how to use it; in fact 99.9% of PVE is so easy, learning to play is *completely* optional

So the average single player gamer from Skyrim is completely lost and without a clue in ESO. So to compensate, they completely nerfed PVE content to oblivion and added layers of cheese that completely bypass mechanics in PVP like Shieldbreaker and Sload.

Instead of nerfing its own mechanics, ZOS should implement proper documentation, proper tutorials, and create PVE content that teaches players how to play as they progress.

Further, instead of throwing all players in the same PVP arenas -- whether in Cyrodiil, BGs or IC -- regardless of aptitude, they should create mechanisms and interfaces that segment players based on interest level; so that hardcore gamers are fighting hardcore gamers more often and casuals fight casuals.

This evening the odds 'raising the floor, lowering the ceiling' BS is destroying PVP.

IcyDeadPeople

generalmyrick wrote: »

1. sloads is fun in pve and pvp
2. permablockers and shield stacking sorcs are not fun--they name call others and only are good when they pick some slow zergling off when they get separated.
3. caving to the pressure of the above will just lead to a game where people will move on after getting bored of the above and then you'll have a game where noone dies.
4. #makesloadsgreatagain

To be able to truly permablock these days, you must sacrifice quite a lot in other areas of your build, for example instead of offensive damage, recovery stat and crit resistance you are going for block cost reduction, choosing certain defensive sets instead of offensive sets, etc. The few remaining extreme permablock tanks still around in Cyrodiil are not doing much damage. They are filling a role of PVP tank while their allies kill you.

To achieve relatively large 10k-15k dampen magic or hardened ward, you are not sacrificing offensive damage, as these scale based on your max magicka offensive stat. However, you are putting a lot of points into Bastion and sacrificing a bit some of the red champion tree passives.

Sylosi

zyk wrote: »

So the average single player gamer from Skyrim is completely lost and without a clue in ESO. So to compensate, they completely nerfed PVE content to oblivion and added layers of cheese that completely bypass mechanics in PVP like Shieldbreaker and Sload..

They added cheese as a band-aid to fix cheese like shield stacking, excessive blocking, etc.

A pretty standard concept in PvP games is if you build for attack you should have weak defence, if you build for defence you should have weak attack, that is balance, that helps promote skilled play, because you have to make trade-offs and learn to play with real weaknesses.

Now in ESO there are things that to various extents are the opposite of this, one of which is shields, where your main defence is non-critable, scaled off the same resource you want for sustain (and that also contributes to damage), has a skill that then restores that resource when you get hit and then to top it off you can stack this defence, so essentially your main defence scales and sustains off building for attack.

This is known (to use your word) as 'cheese', now baddies love this because they can have it all without any real trade-off or drawback and is an example of why people mock PvP in games like ESO, especially when the person is silly enough to go on about skill.

OdinForge

Sylosi wrote: »

This is known (to use your word) as 'cheese', now baddies love this because they can have it all without any real trade-off or drawback and is an example of why people mock PvP in games like ESO, especially when the person is silly enough to go on about skill.

Are baddies the ones that people struggle to kill, or the one's struggling to kill someone?

In other words if I'm 1vX'ing players, it's because I'm playing the game right with a viable build. And my targets are losing for any number of reasons, down to having poor builds and not knowing how to play the game.

So which is the baddie?

zyk

Sylosi wrote: »

zyk wrote: »

So the average single player gamer from Skyrim is completely lost and without a clue in ESO. So to compensate, they completely nerfed PVE content to oblivion and added layers of cheese that completely bypass mechanics in PVP like Shieldbreaker and Sload..

They added cheese as a band-aid to fix cheese like shield stacking, excessive blocking, etc.

A pretty standard concept in PvP games is if you build for attack you should have weak defence, if you build for defence you should have weak attack, that is balance, that helps promote skilled play, because you have to make trade-offs and learn to play with real weaknesses.

Now in ESO there are things that to various extents are the opposite of this, one of which is shields, where your main defence is non-critable, scaled off the same resource you want for sustain (and that also contributes to damage), has a skill that then restores that resource when you get hit and then to top it off you can stack this defence, so essentially your main defence scales and sustains off building for attack.

This is known (to use your word) as 'cheese', now baddies love this because they can have it all without any real trade-off or drawback and is an example of why people mock PvP in games like ESO, especially when the person is silly enough to go on about skill.

I don't entirely disagree with you, but your response is really a can of worms. The combat system does have other faults. I've never liked that attributes that contribute to high damage also contribute to high defense. But that's beside my point about Sload and the ZOS mission to 'raise the floor and lower the ceiling' -- which isn't my phrase, it's verbatim from Rich Lambert.

If shield stacking is OP, and strong sorcs on both NA and EU debate this, then that should be addressed directly, not by adding sets that completely bypass the mechanic such as Shieldbreaker and Sload. The same goes for cloak. All of these are nuanced debates unto themselves that don't justify dumbing down the game.

Feanor

@Sylosi

The difference is that the people on the other side of the fence think that a player shouldn’t win outnumbered fights regardless of skill and that’s why sets that are made for Xv1 are fine. Which is a hilarious argument on so many levels.

Of course 1vX is all about a skill gap. Always.

Sylosi

OdinForge wrote: »

Sylosi wrote: »

This is known (to use your word) as 'cheese', now baddies love this because they can have it all without any real trade-off or drawback and is an example of why people mock PvP in games like ESO, especially when the person is silly enough to go on about skill.

Are baddies the ones that people struggle to kill, or the one's struggling to kill someone?

In other words if I'm 1vX'ing players, it's because I'm playing the game right with a viable build. And my targets are losing for any number of reasons, down to having poor builds and not knowing how to play the game.

So which is the baddie?

Well, you see that right there is one of the reasons people mock players in games like this, take SC2, guys that are GM, played the game for years, hours nearly every day, etc wouldn't get excited at playing a bronze ranked player or consider it skilled, to the point if they got a match against a bronze ranked player they'd think the game was broken, because of course what would be the point.

Where as the baddies of games like ESO think fighting players who might have a fraction of the time played, might only play PvP on occasion, could be of a vastly different age, etc (let's not even go into the joke that is differences in CP, gear, etc) is "skilled PvP", rather than the laughable "PvP" it actually is.

I realise this is going to come as a shock, but the basis for skilled PvP in games is competitive play, which is why most games have some sort of matchmaking and modes and balance designed around that, ESO on the other hand is to skilled competitive PvP what Jeffrey Dahmer was to fine cuisine.

Mureel

Do not make me turn this thread around!

(ZOS mod inc in 3.2.1...)

arkansas_ESO

generalmyrick wrote: »

1. sloads is fun in pve and pvp

OdinForge

Sylosi wrote: »

OdinForge wrote: »

Sylosi wrote: »

This is known (to use your word) as 'cheese', now baddies love this because they can have it all without any real trade-off or drawback and is an example of why people mock PvP in games like ESO, especially when the person is silly enough to go on about skill.

Are baddies the ones that people struggle to kill, or the one's struggling to kill someone?

In other words if I'm 1vX'ing players, it's because I'm playing the game right with a viable build. And my targets are losing for any number of reasons, down to having poor builds and not knowing how to play the game.

So which is the baddie?

Well, you see that right there is one of the reasons people mock players in games like this, take SC2, guys that are GM, played the game for years, hours nearly every day, etc wouldn't get excited at playing a bronze ranked player or consider it skilled, to the point if they got a match against a bronze ranked player they'd think the game was broken, because of course what would be the point.

Where as the baddies of games like ESO think fighting players who might have a fraction of the time played, might only play PvP on occasion, could be of a vastly different age, etc (let's not even go into the joke that is differences in CP, gear, etc) is somehow "skilled" play, rather than the laughable "PvP" it actually is.

I realise this is going to come as a shock, but the basis for skilled PvP in games is competitive play, which is why most games have some sort of matchmaking and modes and balance designed around that, ESO on the other hand is to skilled competitive PvP what Jeffrey Dahmer was to fine cuisine.

ESO drew people to the PvP because it isn't like games like SC2, it's a modernized take on action combat. If you think ESO is a joke of a game, why do you play it? If you don't think ESO is a joke of a game, why do you care what other people might think that don't play it?

In a game time played generally and directly correlates with your understanding of said game, which is part of the skill at being good at a video game. So if those five people who for whatever varying reason do not have the same time investment in the game, they should not experience the same level of success as someone who does.

This isn't a concept unique to ESO. In real life battles were won by outnumbered parties, you see it constantly in movies or or shows. If you don't put in the same time investment in something as I do, why should you be as successful as I?

The game gives these players all of the tools they need to be successful. They can spend more time at learning how to play better, they can spend more time learning how to make a stronger build. They generally will have a numbers advantage so that's more combined damage, healing and ultimates.

If they don't know how to take advantage of those things, they aren't "skilled" in ESO and should fail. I routinely beat players outnumbered in many games outside of ESO. If you don't like this concept maybe ESO isn't for you.

Grimhallow

@Sylosi

Sylosi wrote: »

They added cheese as a band-aid to fix cheese like shield stacking, excessive blocking, etc.

Now in ESO there are things that to various extents are the opposite of this, one of which is shields, where your main defence is non-critable, scaled off the same resource you want for sustain (and that also contributes to damage), has a skill that then restores that resource when you get hit and then to top it off you can stack this defence, so essentially your main defence scales and sustains off building for attack.

This is known (to use your word) as 'cheese', now baddies love this because they can have it all without any real trade-off or drawback and is an example of why people mock PvP in games like ESO, especially when the person is silly enough to go on about skill.

Except that the "trade-off" you have to build ridiculous sustain to compensate for the huge cost of shields, which means that shield stacking builds lose a lot of damage compared to other playstyles. Unlike other forms of defense, shields also don't scale well at all with the number of people hitting you, and have a cast time to boot.

In an MMO, "balance" is not the difference between offense and defence. It's an equation with multiple variables, which includes offence and defense, but also sustain, ease of use, cool downs, damage types, healing, and group size.

You also can't forget that many people playing don't build for offense or defense, because they're honestly just clueless as to how they should build to counter the games many challenges. It's part of the experience gap.

Shield stacking and perma blocking are issues that were already adequately addressed long before the introduction of sloads.

Sylosi wrote: »

Where as the baddies of games like ESO think fighting players who might have a fraction of the time played, might only play PvP on occasion, could be of a vastly different age, etc (let's not even go into the joke that is differences in CP, gear, etc) is somehow "skilled" play, rather than the laughable "PvP" it actually is.

This is an inherent drawback of having an open playing field like cyrodiil, there is no matchmaking based on skill, but there is also no limit to party size. Everyone has the equal opportunity to play alone or huddle in a group. This is the appropriate response to the skill gap. The other one of course is to learn how to play effectively.

Furthermore the appropriate response to addressing a skill gap is not to introduce a set that is equally effective regardless of skill or technique. That takes all the potential balance away and reduces PvP to a numbers game, which isn't fun for anyone. Skill and experience should have a place in the outcome of a fight.

Sylosi

OdinForge wrote: »

Sylosi wrote: »

OdinForge wrote: »

Sylosi wrote: »

This is known (to use your word) as 'cheese', now baddies love this because they can have it all without any real trade-off or drawback and is an example of why people mock PvP in games like ESO, especially when the person is silly enough to go on about skill.

Are baddies the ones that people struggle to kill, or the one's struggling to kill someone?

In other words if I'm 1vX'ing players, it's because I'm playing the game right with a viable build. And my targets are losing for any number of reasons, down to having poor builds and not knowing how to play the game.

So which is the baddie?

Well, you see that right there is one of the reasons people mock players in games like this, take SC2, guys that are GM, played the game for years, hours nearly every day, etc wouldn't get excited at playing a bronze ranked player or consider it skilled, to the point if they got a match against a bronze ranked player they'd think the game was broken, because of course what would be the point.

Where as the baddies of games like ESO think fighting players who might have a fraction of the time played, might only play PvP on occasion, could be of a vastly different age, etc (let's not even go into the joke that is differences in CP, gear, etc) is somehow "skilled" play, rather than the laughable "PvP" it actually is.

I realise this is going to come as a shock, but the basis for skilled PvP in games is competitive play, which is why most games have some sort of matchmaking and modes and balance designed around that, ESO on the other hand is to skilled competitive PvP what Jeffrey Dahmer was to fine cuisine.

ESO drew people to the PvP because it isn't like games like SC2, it's a modernized take on action combat.

That it is action combat is irrelevant to the point, just as SC2 being a isometric point and click type combat is...

OdinForge wrote: »

If you think ESO is a joke of a game, why do you play it?

I think of it as a joke when it comes to skilled, competitive PvP, but for other things like as a casual game I can play when I'm too tired to play something more demanding, it is fine.

OdinForge wrote: »

If you don't think ESO is a joke of a game, why do you care what other people might think that don't play it?

You really didn't get the point did you...

OdinForge wrote: »

In a game time played generally and directly correlates with your understanding of said game, which is part of the skill at being good at a video game. So if those five people who for whatever varying reason do not have the same time investment in the game, they should not experience the same level of success as someone who does.

Whoosh... I never stated any different, the difference is in skilled PvP games (whatever their combat system), the big reason they have what is considered skilled PvP is that the PvP is competitive, putting a player who has played the game a week against someone who has played 4 years is not competitive, it is not 'skilled PvP', it is trash tier PvP which is what you get in ESO (and a lot of MMORPGs), it is why lots of games have matchmaking, no one other than clueless MMORPG baddies think playing against opponents who are significantly worse than them (for whatever reason) is skilled PvP.

Grimhallow

@Sylosi

I think you're confusing the idea of being "skilled" with being "impressive".

Obviously if I beat a brand new player with no armor, it isn't impressive, but it also doesn't mean that they way I defeated them wasn't skillful, nor does it mean I couldn't do the same thing against a much better, well prepared player.

Defeating several low level players might sometimes take a ton of skill, which would make it impressive. But that is relative.

"Skilled PvP" just means that whatever you are doing takes a lot of skill, and fighting ten potatoes sometimes does.

OdinForge

Sylosi wrote: »

OdinForge wrote: »

Sylosi wrote: »

OdinForge wrote: »

Sylosi wrote: »

This is known (to use your word) as 'cheese', now baddies love this because they can have it all without any real trade-off or drawback and is an example of why people mock PvP in games like ESO, especially when the person is silly enough to go on about skill.

Are baddies the ones that people struggle to kill, or the one's struggling to kill someone?

In other words if I'm 1vX'ing players, it's because I'm playing the game right with a viable build. And my targets are losing for any number of reasons, down to having poor builds and not knowing how to play the game.

So which is the baddie?

Well, you see that right there is one of the reasons people mock players in games like this, take SC2, guys that are GM, played the game for years, hours nearly every day, etc wouldn't get excited at playing a bronze ranked player or consider it skilled, to the point if they got a match against a bronze ranked player they'd think the game was broken, because of course what would be the point.

Where as the baddies of games like ESO think fighting players who might have a fraction of the time played, might only play PvP on occasion, could be of a vastly different age, etc (let's not even go into the joke that is differences in CP, gear, etc) is somehow "skilled" play, rather than the laughable "PvP" it actually is.

I realise this is going to come as a shock, but the basis for skilled PvP in games is competitive play, which is why most games have some sort of matchmaking and modes and balance designed around that, ESO on the other hand is to skilled competitive PvP what Jeffrey Dahmer was to fine cuisine.

ESO drew people to the PvP because it isn't like games like SC2, it's a modernized take on action combat.

That it is action combat is irrelevant to the point, just as SC2 being a isometric point and click type combat is...

OdinForge wrote: »

If you think ESO is a joke of a game, why do you play it?

As a skilled PvP game it is a joke.

OdinForge wrote: »

If you don't think ESO is a joke of a game, why do you care what other people might think that don't play it?

You really didn't get the point did you...

OdinForge wrote: »

In a game time played generally and directly correlates with your understanding of said game, which is part of the skill at being good at a video game. So if those five people who for whatever varying reason do not have the same time investment in the game, they should not experience the same level of success as someone who does.

Whoosh... I never stated any different, the difference is in skilled PvP games (whatever their combat system), the big reason they have what is considered skilled PvP is that the PvP is competitive, putting a player who has played the game a week against someone who has played 4 years is not competitive, it is not 'skilled PvP', it is trash tier PvP which is what you get in ESO (and a lot of MMORPGs), it is why lots of games have matchmaking, no one other than clueless MMORPG baddies think playing against opponents who are significantly worse than them (for whatever reason) is skilled PvP.

ESO PvP is just RvRvR in an open-world sandbox style environment.

When you say ESO has "worse PvP" than a game featuring a matchmaking system, that's more or less just your opinion. I play a lot of games with matchmaking and even in those games success generally boils down to time-played and your understanding of the game within that time.

The same thing applies to ESO regardless of if you want to accept it or not.

Waffennacht

Fyi no first person shooter game is skill based.

In my Oh so many years of playing them.

FPS = cross hair (aka a dot on screen) on head (another dot on screen) push button = not skill

Sylosi

OdinForge wrote: »

ESO PvP is just RvRvR in an open-world sandbox style environment.

When you say ESO has "worse PvP" than a game featuring a matchmaking system, that's more or less just your opinion. I play a lot of games with matchmaking and even in those games success generally boils down to time-played and your understanding of the game within that time.

Well I agree that in a general sense what is better or worse PvP is somewhat subjective (though objectively I'd point you to how PvP has basically failed miserably in MMORPGs and literally a single successful PvP game like DOTA, Overwatch, etc has vastly more players than every MMORPG PvPer combined, which speaks volumes).

However in terms of things being competitive and skilled, then no ESO (and MMORPGs in general) fail miserably at that compared to RTS, Shooters, MOBAs, etc.

OdinForge wrote: »

The same thing applies to ESO regardless of if you want to accept it or not.

The difference is if I go play SC2 or whatever, then for the most part I play against other players of a similar skill level, I don't face Bronze players in Platinum nor do I face Grandmaster league players, so for the most part that makes the PvP competitive and requires me to perform well, where as in Cyrodil for example competitively it is largely a joke, one minute I can roll my face across the keyboard against some guy who has played the game a week, the next I can get ganked by 4 guys on TS/Discord who have played since beta, neither of which is skilled, competitive, quality PvP in my book, maybe for you it is...

Grimhallow

Sylosi wrote: »

one minute I can roll my face across the keyboard against some guy who has played the game a week, the next I can get ganked by 4 guys on TS/Discord who have played since beta, neither of which is skilled, competitive, quality PvP in my book, maybe for you it is...

It would have been skilled, competitive, quality PvP if you had defeated the 4 guys in TS/Discord that ganked you.

Sylosi

Grimick wrote: »

Sylosi wrote: »

one minute I can roll my face across the keyboard against some guy who has played the game a week, the next I can get ganked by 4 guys on TS/Discord who have played since beta, neither of which is skilled, competitive, quality PvP in my book, maybe for you it is...

It would have been skilled, competitive, quality PvP if you had defeated the 4 guys in TS/Discord that ganked you.

It would have been a 'skilled, competitive, quality' fight if based on our ability the outcome had a roughly 50% chance either way, the vast majority of fights aren't that, which is one of the reasons the game is a joke as a 'skilled, competitive, quality' PvP game.

Grimick wrote: »

I think you're confusing the idea of being "skilled" with being "impressive".

Obviously if I beat a brand new player with no armor, it isn't impressive, but it also doesn't mean that they way I defeated them wasn't skillful, nor does it mean I couldn't do the same thing against a much better, well prepared player.

Defeating several low level players might sometimes take a ton of skill, which would make it impressive. But that is relative.

"Skilled PvP" just means that whatever you are doing takes a lot of skill, and fighting ten potatoes sometimes does.

And I think you are confusing something that has some level of skill with something that is considered 'skilled' in the wider context.

For instance, I can play the piano a bit, that requires some degree of skill, however that doesn't make me a skilled musician.

OdinForge

Sylosi wrote: »

OdinForge wrote: »

ESO PvP is just RvRvR in an open-world sandbox style environment.

When you say ESO has "worse PvP" than a game featuring a matchmaking system, that's more or less just your opinion. I play a lot of games with matchmaking and even in those games success generally boils down to time-played and your understanding of the game within that time.

Well I agree that in a general sense what is better or worse PvP is somewhat subjective (though objectively I'd point you to how PvP has basically failed miserably in MMORPGs and literally a single successful PvP game like DOTA, Overwatch, etc has vastly more players than every MMORPG PvPer combined, which speaks volumes).

However in terms of things being competitive and skilled, then no ESO (and MMORPGs in general) fail miserably at that compared to RTS, Shooters, MOBAs, etc.

OdinForge wrote: »

The same thing applies to ESO regardless of if you want to accept it or not.

The difference is if I go play SC2 or whatever, then for the most part I play against other players of a similar skill level, I don't face Bronze players in Platinum nor do I face Grandmaster league players, so for the most part that makes the PvP competitive and requires me to perform well, where as in Cyrodil for example competitively it is largely a joke, one minute I can roll my face across the keyboard against some guy who has played the game a week, the next I can get ganked by 4 guys on TS/Discord who have played since beta, neither of which is skilled, competitive, quality PvP in my book, maybe for you it is...

Games like Overwatch and Fortnite have "more" players because those games appeal to the widest range of players. That's not a good comparison of which PvP is better or more "skilled". Games like Fortnite are especially simple to kids and kids will play whatever is gathering the most media attention. My niece and all her friends are playing Fortnite, not because of how "skilled" the PvP is but because Ninja plays it and everyone at school is talking about it.

When you say ESO fails miserably in comparison to RTS, Shooters, Mobas that is once again probably just your opinion. You also should be playing against players of a similar ranking to you, but we all know that doesn't happen and isn't a measure of success.

Pro level players in Overwatch for example make smurf accounts, so they can play against entry level players. The same thing happens in For Honor as well, these games don't rely on level mechanics making one player artificially more powerful than another.

In Dark Souls you can only play against players a certain level below and above you, and that range can change slightly depending on certain factors. In Dark Souls if you took very skilled player at level 3 with just the starting gear versus a total noob at level 120, the skilled player would probably lose because the noob has endgame stats.

This to a degree applies to ESO, but because ESO is an MMO you cannot restrict players of different levels. The player must invest the time in leveling up, maybe playing in the lowbie campaign or no cp campaign.

But alongside time investment is comprehension. Someone could play ESO for years and never comprehend the concepts required to play at the level of another player. Just like at endgame PvP in Dark Souls I can constantly beat 2-3 players by myself, because despite the fact that we both invested the time to reach endgame with endgame gear, some players cannot comprehend PvP.

Grimhallow

Sylosi wrote: »

It would have been a 'skilled, competitive, quality' fight if based on our ability the outcome had a roughly 50% chance either way, the vast majority of fights aren't that, which is one of the reasons the game is a joke as a 'skilled, competitive, quality' PvP game.

If you had won it would have been fun, but you lost so it sucked.

Maybe the odds were 50/50, but since you died you'll never know. Bring a friend next time so you can fight 2v4, or build to survive ganks and run away. That's what small scale is all about.

What makes this game's PvP fun isn't that everyone starts out on the same foot. It's that you can theorycraft and strategize ahead of time to even the odds, then execute based on your skill.

Sylosi

OdinForge wrote: »

Sylosi wrote: »

However in terms of things being competitive and skilled, then no ESO (and MMORPGs in general) fail miserably at that compared to RTS, Shooters, MOBAs, etc.

When you say ESO fails miserably in comparison to RTS, Shooters, Mobas that is once again probably just your opinion.

Okay, yes you are right ESO is as competitive as DOTA 2, CS:GO, etc, requires the precision aiming and reflexes of Halo, the mechanical ability of SC2 and has a playerbase the size of LoL, topped off with devs that balance exclusively around a competitive game mode designed to keep the skill cap high.

OdinForge

Sylosi wrote: »

OdinForge wrote: »

Sylosi wrote: »

However in terms of things being competitive and skilled, then no ESO (and MMORPGs in general) fail miserably at that compared to RTS, Shooters, MOBAs, etc.

When you say ESO fails miserably in comparison to RTS, Shooters, Mobas that is once again probably just your opinion.

Okay, yes you are right ESO is as competitive as DOTA 2, CS:GO, etc, requires the precision aiming and reflexes of Halo, the mechanical ability of SC2 and has a playerbase the size of LoL, topped off with devs that balance exclusively around a competitive game mode designed to keep the skill cap as high as possible.

ESO requires you to have an understanding of using the right gear for the meta, making a viable build that can compete with other players, getting the right stats and using skills properly.

Players that can do all of the above better than players who cannot is part of how you identify skill in ESO, maybe you should just play DOTA2 or CS:GO where your only objective is to shoot someone.

IZZEFlameLash

L2P. That is all there's to say about this. Permablock is gone. Shields are easy to take off without Oblivion damage AND/OR Shattering Blow CP.

Dredlord

Waffennacht wrote: »

Fyi no first person shooter game is skill based.

In my Oh so many years of playing them.

FPS = cross hair (aka a dot on screen) on head (another dot on screen) push button = not skill

Actually that is the very definition of skill. He who joins the dots fastest and most consistently is....wait for it.... more skilled at it.

Vapirko

zyk wrote: »

ZOS created a game with incredible depth to its combat system. But:

- they barely documented it
- don't have decent tutorials
- don't gradually scale the difficulty PVE content to teach players how to use it; in fact 99.9% of PVE is so easy, learning to play is *completely* optional

So the average single player gamer from Skyrim is completely lost and without a clue in ESO. So to compensate, they completely nerfed PVE content to oblivion and added layers of cheese that completely bypass mechanics in PVP like Shieldbreaker and Sload.

Instead of nerfing its own mechanics, ZOS should implement proper documentation, proper tutorials, and create PVE content that teaches players how to play as they progress.

Further, instead of throwing all players in the same PVP arenas -- whether in Cyrodiil, BGs or IC -- regardless of aptitude, they should create mechanisms and interfaces that segment players based on interest level; so that hardcore gamers are fighting hardcore gamers more often and casuals fight casuals.

This evening the odds 'raising the floor, lowering the ceiling' BS is destroying PVP.

They tried that with BGs MMR... it sucks.