all pvp should be non-cp?

IndorilArwynLlethran

You don't like CP PVP? DO NOT ENTER CP CAMPAIGN. Solved.

iiYuki

I only play none-CP PvP so I can't talk for people who play CP campaigns but I hope they do remove it, I feel as if CP is the cause of some nerfs that are obviously pvp orientated.

ezio45

No

MajBludd

Do you currently play on a non cp server and are bored because there is no pop and want your preferred server to have pop?

Sheezabeast

Ertosi wrote: »

There's a reason why there are multiple campaigns with different settings. Feel free to use the campaign that suits your playstyle and quit trying to rain on other people's parade.

Yes, I agree! CP replaced vet ranks, it’s nice to use your end game advancement in the tangible form.

Parrot1986

Kel wrote: »

Parrot1986 wrote: »

If CP didn’t contribute so much to poor performance and insane impact damage output/mitigation then I’d play it. It makes sense that you have PVP that includes the only real progression the game has. I wouldn’t go so far as to say remove it all together, I just wouldn’t play in it. Non CP is much smoother a performance all round.

How is that possible when there would be a rise in proc set use and AoE ball groups, because it's harder to mitigate that damage.

I'd say you experience smoother game play because there's a lack of players, and performance has absolutely nothing to do with CP or lack of it...

Do Sotha and Vivec have different pop lock caps? Sotha at peak is always locked out and even during the event I had no crashes, and rarely dropped below 50FPs 100+ping. I can bar swap and use skills without issue
When i played vivec and during an event, I’d lose sound, fail to be able to bar swap, ping would be 200+. Even clearing a resource without any players would result in lag and something I’ve never experienced in Sotha.

Unless there’s a difference in population caps I’m not sure that’s solely down to players but agree it would have a benefit.
Zos’ own test where CP was disabled has also proven an improvement in performance.

Mayrael

VaranisArano wrote: »

No thanks.

Having tried both, I prefer No CP in Battlegrounds, but definitely prefer CP in Cyrodiil.

What is it with people and asking for gameplay modes and playstyles they don't like to be removed lately?

This. Both environments require adjustments and getting used to them. If one of them is to hard for you OP simply avoid it, I like both ways of playing and I don't agree to taking away any of them.

mb10

I totally agree

I never used to agree with this though but I recently have been playing only BGs and find the combat in it so SO much better than combat when CP is involved.

• CP also makes players lazy in regards to creativity of their builds as CP carries them
• It creates lag in cyrodiil
• Creates ridiculously overpowered builds
• Its very daunting for a new player to have to get at least 600cp+ to be able to compete in cyrodiil

Having said that though, I think there should be new skills introduced that you gain by earning either achievements or alliance points or some form of challenge that rewards players for playing and makes players have an incentive to play/improve

Emmagoldman

@Kel

Your examples are pretty poor. The first one is bgs from morrowind. whole different game. HA has had some nerfs since then, such as wraith passive. He also ended with 4 kills...... The second you have an awesome pvper that can amount huge kills in either cp or non cp.
bgs under cp became a tank fest. A Templar takes the relic and could literally run it back without being killed. Or a Magk sitting on a flag. The general conscencious was non cp was better because people enjoy bgs more fast paced. Though people who like to tank preferred cp.

Generally, without question, it is far easier to be tanky in cp campaigns then non cp because you have way more regen, reduced block cost, around 6% healing received and 6% healing done (12% additional heals). That’s pretty significant. Again, some people like tanky game play.

Overall, leave it.
Lower vivecs population cap to move people to shor
Add a 7 day non cp campaign.

As much as I won’t the game balanced on non cp, most changes will come because of cp and pve.

Emma_Overload

If there were as many No-CP lovers in the game as there are on the forums, Sotha Sil would be full and Vivec would be empty.

Raammzzaa

This is the worst idea I’ve read on the forums this morning.

teladoy

I think it would be a good change. I don't like CP pvp it is too crazy.

Vapirko

JaZ2091 wrote: »

Vapirko wrote: »

MartiniDaniels wrote: »

I think it's better to remove it. Basically you can't use same toon both for PVP and PVE because of those PVP-specific CP points.. and there will be much less broken exploiting builds. I mean you will never see some crazy sh*t like 10 people can't kill one for a 30 seconds in BG.
And proc sets should be nerfed accordingly.

Ahhh there’s no CP in BGs lol. BGs is a mess all on its own. Also you currently have Sotha and BGs for no CP. I personally like the change of pace having both CP and no CP. I cannot understand why people who don’t like CP keep bitching about it instead of just going to a no CP environment. And I say this as someone who wouldn’t miss a beat if they did remove CP from PvP. I just happen to like both, and as someone who plays both I find them equally unbalanced in different ways.

So then you would agree that CP doesn't affect game play performance?

It does a little, but no CP lags as well and outside of prime time CP campaigns are fine. And again, if you don’t like go play in Sotha/BGs. There’s literally no reason to force other people to not play CP just because it’s doesnt work for you lol.

Skander

The damage is too high in non-cp to solo or smallscale correctly sadly. That's a big turn off

eklhaftb16_ESO

Maybe a better solution: separate PVP builds from PVE builds entirely. Give everybody who enters PVP max PVP CP, a full pool of PVP skillpoints to use in their PVP build, and open access to PVP variants of any gear available in game. Or, in other words, make PVE progression entirely irrelevant in PVP.

Kel

Emmagoldman wrote: »

@Kel

Your examples are pretty poor. The first one is bgs from morrowind. whole different game. HA has had some nerfs since then, such as wraith passive. He also ended with 4 kills...... The second you have an awesome pvper that can amount huge kills in either cp or non cp.
bgs under cp became a tank fest. A Templar takes the relic and could literally run it back without being killed. Or a Magk sitting on a flag. The general conscencious was non cp was better because people enjoy bgs more fast paced. Though people who like to tank preferred cp.

Generally, without question, it is far easier to be tanky in cp campaigns then non cp because you have way more regen, reduced block cost, around 6% healing received and 6% healing done (12% additional heals). That’s pretty significant. Again, some people like tanky game play.

Overall, leave it.
Lower vivecs population cap to move people to shor
Add a 7 day non cp campaign.

As much as I won’t the game balanced on non cp, most changes will come because of cp and pve.

First, the examples were listed in the first place because another poster said you don't see that type of game play in no CP, and you absolutely still do. It has nothing to do with the actual playstyle, or how CP affects that game play at all. He/She said flat out that you don't see it...the point is that yes, even with no CP you will.

Secondly....

Emma_Overload wrote: »

If there were as many No-CP lovers in the game as there are on the forums, Sotha Sil would be full and Vivec would be empty.

^
Exactly this....

Ariavellon

russelmmendoza wrote: »

I think this should seperate the pvp and pve crowd.
Lots of power creep is introduce by cp, remove it entirely from pvp.
and keep cp for pve areas.
removing cp from pvp in cyro would also help in the lag problem there.
Less calculations is needed less lag produce.
or am I totally off on this one?
no hating please, I'm just asking.

Where did you get that information from that it's the cp that causes lag. Obviously you weren't around few years back when they disabled cp in pvp to test if has any impact on server performance...there is no diference really cp or no cp server performance is the same.
You have no cp campaign if you like no cp, why would be other people be forced to play there?
People who like cp pvp don't have the option to chose cp/no cp battlegrounds, everyone is forced to go no cp
Not sure what you trying to acomplish here but it's a big no from me

Jeremy

Mr_Walker wrote: »

If only there were a campaign I could play that CP was disabled in....

Yeah, they need to add one.

Jeremy

Kel wrote: »

MartiniDaniels wrote: »

Vapirko wrote: »

MartiniDaniels wrote: »

I think it's better to remove it. Basically you can't use same toon both for PVP and PVE because of those PVP-specific CP points.. and there will be much less broken exploiting builds. I mean you will never see some crazy sh*t like 10 people can't kill one for a 30 seconds in BG.
And proc sets should be nerfed accordingly.

Ahhh there’s no CP in BGs lol. BGs is a mess all on its own. Also you currently have Sotha and BGs for no CP. I personally like the change of pace having both CP and no CP. I cannot understand why people who don’t like CP keep bitching about it instead of just going to a no CP environment. And I say this as someone who wouldn’t miss a beat if they did remove CP from PvP. I just happen to like both, and as someone who plays both I find them equally unbalanced in different ways.

Ahaha, "thanks" for clarification about BG. Sorry, probably too long sentence:
you will never see some crazy sh*t like 10 people can't kill one for a 30 seconds in BG.

You still see that in BG's though...having no CP doesn't fix that issue.
Not to mention no CP often is a heaven for proc set cheesy builds. Not that Cyrodiil isn't, it's just far more prevalent and effective in no CP.

https://youtu.be/I5SrOe-vc0Y
https://youtu.be/DsIz7L830Ks

Just some examples of "some of that crazy ***" you said you never see in no CP...

Edit: Also don't understand the need to take away choice because someone doesn't personally like something. There's already a no CP campaign you can play in.
Never understood why so many players call out for no cp, yet they don't set foot in Sotha Sil. As many who say that's the way to play, that campaign sure is empty.

I see 3 terrible players trying to kill one well-played person.

That's hardly someone who is unkillable by 10 people.

Emmagoldman

@Kel there was a HUGE difference between BGs being cp and non cp. Without a doubt, cp lead to tanks being the meta as you could steal a relic and not be killed, get the chaos ball and not be killed.

Also, that 1st video made me laugh. For that time, he was attempting to run tremorscale ransack build from a previous patch. Yes, he didnt die....but didnt add much for his team either. In short, non cp bgs are faster pace then cp. Yes you can find an example but we are looking at the overal general game play.

And fully agree, why get rid of both? People like it. I think vivecs performance would improve by shifting some of the population to shor by lowering the cap. Im repeating that haha. Why all or nothing? Like cp, play cp, like non cp play non cp

Girl_Number8

russelmmendoza wrote: »

I think this should seperate the pvp and pve crowd.
Lots of power creep is introduce by cp, remove it entirely from pvp.
and keep cp for pve areas.
removing cp from pvp in cyro would also help in the lag problem there.
Less calculations is needed less lag produce.
or am I totally off on this one?
no hating please, I'm just asking.

Yes you're off by a lot since you're hating cp when you have the choice to be in cp or non-cp campaigns in the game now. Having more choices in a mmo is a good thing. Stop using spin words because you don't like a certain part of the game that you don't even have to play. The power creep is these whining nerf threads, smh.

Skwor

NO

vamp_emily

I'm thinking OP is really wanting population balance in non-cp campaigns because if someone wanted to play non-cp then they would go play in a non-cp campaign. I don't see the problem.

Skwor

vamp_emily wrote: »

I'm thinking OP is really wanting population balance in non-cp campaigns because if someone wanted to play non-cp then they would go play in a non-cp campaign. I don't see the problem.

Most people play the CP campaign, ergo most want CP in PVP, population is low in non-CP campaign because most prefer to have CP.

OP'S solution is to force others to play his/her way by removing all CP thus not allowing the majority who prefer to play on a CP server to have CP. This is a problem and it is a selfish solution. The problem is forcing others to play your way because you don't like something, that does not give a person the right to make everyone else change what they prefer.

There are non-CP servers, those who don't like CP in PVP should just play on those and be content and NOT try to force those who play on the CP servers to give up their CP just because so few prefer to not play on a non-CP server.

frostz417

Non cp PvP is ruled by siege. No thanks. I don’t feel like having battles dictated by proc sets and who can lay down the most coldfires and meatbags.

Kel

Emmagoldman wrote: »

@Kel there was a HUGE difference between BGs being cp and non cp. Without a doubt, cp lead to tanks being the meta as you could steal a relic and not be killed, get the chaos ball and not be killed.

Also, that 1st video made me laugh. For that time, he was attempting to run tremorscale ransack build from a previous patch. Yes, he didnt die....but didnt add much for his team either. In short, non cp bgs are faster pace then cp. Yes you can find an example but we are looking at the overal general game play.

And fully agree, why get rid of both? People like it. I think vivecs performance would improve by shifting some of the population to shor by lowering the cap. Im repeating that haha. Why all or nothing? Like cp, play cp, like non cp play non cp

Again, the poster stated you don't see tanky unkillable builds in no CP. He's not looking at overall gameplay, he had a specific example.
You do.
Nothing was stated that in CP that effect wasn't worse...of course it is. Damage is also jacked up in CP.
So ultimately, there is a wash happening where mitigation is lessened, but so is damage.

The point is, no matter what mode, you are going to see the same things...to a lesser degree, sure, but saying these builds don't exsist? They absolutely do...that's the point....not sure why there's backlash on that idea. You can go to YouTube and pick more appropriate examples if you'd like, but that changes nothing about what I'm saying or the truth of the matter....

Rake

NO

Girl_Number8

vamp_emily wrote: »

I'm thinking OP is really wanting population balance in non-cp campaigns because if someone wanted to play non-cp then they would go play in a non-cp campaign. I don't see the problem.

Because they have the choice to play cp or non-cp and since they don't like cp they made this thread. It is better to have both. If people are too lazy to earn cp or know how to properly allocate it for their builds then that is on them. This is a nerf thread, nothing to do with improving game performance because they are not qualified with the technical information at all. Only Zos has that information and they are not sharing the whole picture.

RogueShark

MartiniDaniels wrote: »

I think it's better to remove it. Basically you can't use same toon both for PVP and PVE

It's a measly 3k to change up your CP. You have to change it for different trials anyway, no big deal to change it for PvP.
If you don't want to change your CP, you have the option of BGs as well as the no-CP campaign in Cyro.

Deep_01

I'm all for nonCp pvp, if proc sets and cancers like bleeds, sloads etc. are adjusted accordingly.