Soul gem resurrecting in PVP zones

UndeniablyAVG

Soul gem resurrecting in PVP, what’s everyone’s thoughts on it?

I personally think this needs to go while in combat, once your team wins the fight they can get you up.

Camps already give a second chance to get back into the fight, this to me is much more beneficial to larger groups, who already have the advantage of numbers yet they can just resurrect everyone who dies?

To the PVE players, this would be a ridiculous and unacceptable change to PVE and I would never suggest it was implemented there. This is purely while in a PVP zone.

That's my opinion, what's everyone elses?

Hämähäkki

Nah...it's ok how it is. You can interrupt the rezzing player at any time, so it's no big deal

UndeniablyAVG

Hämähäkki wrote: »

Nah...it's ok how it is. You can interrupt the rezzing player at any time, so it's no big deal

It's not quite as easy as that when you're heavily outnumbered, but fair enough if you like the system as is. I just want to see if on the whole people like the current system or would like a shake up.

Hämähäkki

UndeniablyAVG wrote: »

while in combat

90% of the time in cyrodiil you're in combat, bug or not, imagine the people going enrage for not beeing able to get people up.

I get your point, but thats actually one thing that's working as intended so I would leave it alone

Sanct16

I think the system should be reworked. The easiest solution would be to reduce the automatic respawn timer. Currently it takes a very long time (10 minutes?) before you get ported back to base, which never really happens. As a result large fights tend to be prolonged as people always wait for either a camp to come up, their camp respawn timer to run out or someone to simply soulgem res them.

I would suggest to reduce the automatic respawn timer to 30-60 seconds. This way you can still be resurrected after you got ganked etc and you can still res your friends however it will make it possible to end large fights because you don't have to camp corpses for an excessive amount of time.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

I would rather see a res charge system.
Players for example would have 2 charges with a certain rolling recharge rate. (Let's say 45s).
Resing or being interrupted would deplete a charge and when res'd you would have no charges.

Zer0_CooL

Make something like: "while resurecting a friendly player, players take 100% more damage." , would be interesting.

UndeniablyAVG

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

I would rather see a res charge system.
Players for example would have 2 charges with a certain rolling recharge rate. (Let's say 45s).
Resing or being interrupted would deplete a charge and when res'd you would have no charges.

I quite like this idea, would definitely help the problem and stop people spamming res after multiple interruptions.

Res is also far to quick in my eyes, even just upping the duration to 8-10 seconds would be a great change.

Royaji

Didn't ZOS try restricting resurrection in Elsweyr PTS? It was up for one week and was swiftly removed after as far as I remember.

UndeniablyAVG

Hämähäkki wrote: »

UndeniablyAVG wrote: »

while in combat

90% of the time in cyrodiil you're in combat, bug or not, imagine the people going enrage for not beeing able to get people up.

I get your point, but thats actually one thing that's working as intended so I would leave it alone

We shouldn't be debating future changes based around current bugs. ZOS needs to fix the in combat bug for a multitude of reasons.

I do agree this would be irritating with the current stuck in combat bug though.

UndeniablyAVG

Royaji wrote: »

Didn't ZOS try restricting resurrection in Elsweyr PTS? It was up for one week and was swiftly removed after as far as I remember.

I believe they added the 'ghost' like delay phase that we get when we resurrect ourselves to 'other' player resurrections.

I'm not sure why it didn't work but it's not really what I'm after here.

NordSwordnBoard

What about the necro ultimate?

VaranisArano

I don't see the problem.

For one, death comes quickly and easily in PVP. When you add extra penalties to dying (and an extra time-out or a longer rez is a penalty), what you do is encourage players not to die. Aka, build tanky and play very cautiously.

Second, some of these complaints seem aimed at the ability of organized groups to rez their members. Um, duh? The benefit of running with a team instead of zergsurfing is that your teammates might actually rez you. Since Cyrodiil is largely designed for groups of 2 to 24 players, it should come as no surprise that groups are better at rezzing their players.


Quick and Easy rezzes benefit the majority of players. I'm far more likely to stop and rez a random player if its quick and easy. Small groups can pull off combat rezzes much easier when they are quick. Moreover, players have some incentive to get out and fight since they know their allies can quickly get them back in the fight if they go down.

If you make rezzing harder or have it take longer, the only people who can do it reliably are going to be the large organized raids who can afford to protect their players while they stop and rez - and that's the opposite impact the OP seems to want. Not to mention that the incentive will be for players to Not Die since they effectively won't get rezzed, so you'll see even more emphasis on tanky builds, and probably even more cautious fighting with siege weapons from keep walls.

Wizunas

Naah leave it alone as it is! Think about when u have 10 people defending against 40... at least those 10 people have a chance to slow enemy down or hold it till more help arrives (if it arrives).

Messing with the rez system would just forfeit that little defense chance 10v40 have. Those large attacking groups will guard doors, burn camps.

I know people were thinking about large groups rezzing...but think about smaller defending numbers all the same > they would be at a bad disadvantage. Keeps would fall within minutes... battles would be just simply: "short". Probably would encourage even more zerging. Just sayin

Rianai

Wizunas wrote: »

Naah leave it alone as it is! Think about when u have 10 people defending against 40... at least those 10 people have a chance to slow enemy down or hold it till more help arrives (if it arrives).

Messing with the rez system would just forfeit that little defense chance 10v40 have. Those large attacking groups will guard doors, burn camps.

I know people were thinking about large groups rezzing...but think about smaller defending numbers all the same > they would be at a bad disadvantage. Keeps would fall within minutes... battles would be just simply: "short". Probably would encourage even more zerging. Just sayin

The current system favours those 40, because they have a much easier time stopping those 10 from rezzing each other, while those 10 can't do anything to prevent the zerglings from picking anyone up, who somehow managed to die. If resurrection would be more limited, those 10 would actually have a chance to decimate those 40 if they are good enough. But as it is, killing some players in a zerg is futile.

Imo the worst thing about rezzing is that there is zero penalty for getting interrupted. You can just go for the rez over and over again while your friends keep you alive/pressure the enemy. But someone who is outnumbered can't afford to spend all his time and resources on bashing some reztard.

Wizunas

Rianai wrote: »

Wizunas wrote: »

Naah leave it alone as it is! Think about when u have 10 people defending against 40... at least those 10 people have a chance to slow enemy down or hold it till more help arrives (if it arrives).

Messing with the rez system would just forfeit that little defense chance 10v40 have. Those large attacking groups will guard doors, burn camps.

I know people were thinking about large groups rezzing...but think about smaller defending numbers all the same > they would be at a bad disadvantage. Keeps would fall within minutes... battles would be just simply: "short". Probably would encourage even more zerging. Just sayin

The current system favours those 40, because they have a much easier time stopping those 10 from rezzing each other, while those 10 can't do anything to prevent the zerglings from picking anyone up, who somehow managed to die. If resurrection would be more limited, those 10 would actually have a chance to decimate those 40 if they are good enough. But as it is, killing some players in a zerg is futile.

Imo the worst thing about rezzing is that there is zero penalty for getting interrupted. You can just go for the rez over and over again while your friends keep you alive/pressure the enemy. But someone who is outnumbered can't afford to spend all his time and resources on bashing some reztard.

Well then go ahead an change it. From my part they can do whatever they want with their game. But there are many scenarios need to be considered when making changes.

We will see how we deal with ball groups plowing through dozens and dozens and dozens killing hundreds over and over for 1 hour just running in circles up and down the stairs constantly wiping everything in their path. Oh well.

VaranisArano

Rianai wrote: »

Wizunas wrote: »

Naah leave it alone as it is! Think about when u have 10 people defending against 40... at least those 10 people have a chance to slow enemy down or hold it till more help arrives (if it arrives).

Messing with the rez system would just forfeit that little defense chance 10v40 have. Those large attacking groups will guard doors, burn camps.

I know people were thinking about large groups rezzing...but think about smaller defending numbers all the same > they would be at a bad disadvantage. Keeps would fall within minutes... battles would be just simply: "short". Probably would encourage even more zerging. Just sayin

The current system favours those 40, because they have a much easier time stopping those 10 from rezzing each other, while those 10 can't do anything to prevent the zerglings from picking anyone up, who somehow managed to die. If resurrection would be more limited, those 10 would actually have a chance to decimate those 40 if they are good enough. But as it is, killing some players in a zerg is futile.

Imo the worst thing about rezzing is that there is zero penalty for getting interrupted. You can just go for the rez over and over again while your friends keep you alive/pressure the enemy. But someone who is outnumbered can't afford to spend all his time and resources on bashing some reztard.

Of course the current system favors the 40 in a 40 v 10. Its an AvAvA game. Obviously the side with the most numbers is going to have the advantage in battle, especially when there's a massive difference.

But even in the case of an extremely good group of ten, they benefit from having quick, easy rezzes because then they might possibly be able to rez their own dead if they get a couple seconds breather. Make rezzing harder, and the outnumbered players have no chance whatsoever, while the 40 can still rez people or still have overwhelming numbers as they pick off members of the 10.


Honestly, I don't think using examples of players who fight while massively outnumbered is a convincing argument that resurrection needs to be changed. Cyrodiil is primarily built for groups of 2 to 24, so "bring more players to the fight" is a valid tactic if your group of 10 can't kill & stop 40 players from rezzing each other.

Rianai

Ofc more numbers will always have an advantage. That's exactly why they shouldn't need additional benefits such as unlimited rezzing.

Your second paragraph doesn't make sense at all. The current system clearly favours numbers and i have also explained why.

And this whole "just bring more numbers" isn't always a good option, because 1. populations aren't balanced, and 2. at high pop times it results in stupid faction stacks that lag everything out and make the game unplayable.

UndeniablyAVG

Rianai wrote: »

2. at high pop times it results in stupid faction stacks that lag everything out and make the game unplayable.

Couldn't agree more with you on this one, I play on console, if more than 30+ people are in a close vicinity the game drops to about 5 FPS and all you can do is spam AOE's as you can't target anyone. I do not want to play that way, also a lot of the time there just isn't any others from my faction on. I play in the 7 day campaign on PS4 EU and the population isn't balanced at all.

Add a minute cooldown after being interrupted while resurrecting, or something along those lines.

I truly cannot believe that you regularly fight outnumbered if you say that the current resurrection system benefits a smaller group more than a large group.

Sephyr

VaranisArano wrote: »

I don't see the problem.

For one, death comes quickly and easily in PVP. When you add extra penalties to dying (and an extra time-out or a longer rez is a penalty), what you do is encourage players not to die. Aka, build tanky and play very cautiously.

Second, some of these complaints seem aimed at the ability of organized groups to rez their members. Um, duh? The benefit of running with a team instead of zergsurfing is that your teammates might actually rez you. Since Cyrodiil is largely designed for groups of 2 to 24 players, it should come as no surprise that groups are better at rezzing their players.


Quick and Easy rezzes benefit the majority of players. I'm far more likely to stop and rez a random player if its quick and easy. Small groups can pull off combat rezzes much easier when they are quick. Moreover, players have some incentive to get out and fight since they know their allies can quickly get them back in the fight if they go down.

If you make rezzing harder or have it take longer, the only people who can do it reliably are going to be the large organized raids who can afford to protect their players while they stop and rez - and that's the opposite impact the OP seems to want. Not to mention that the incentive will be for players to Not Die since they effectively won't get rezzed, so you'll see even more emphasis on tanky builds, and probably even more cautious fighting with siege weapons from keep walls.

All of this. Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaall of this. Not to mention the fact that this will kill a lot of incentive for healers because that's what they usually do. The system is working as intended, so I'm in favor of not changing it. I've not had any problems bashing/interrupting rez attempts even in primetime pop-locked campaigns after Elsweyr dropped in last keep-last stand scenarios/popular keep fight action.

Rianai

I thought healers were supposed to heal people and prevent them from dieing. That's why they are called healer after all, no?
If anything rezzing is a disincentive for playing healer, because why bother keeping others alive, when dieing doesn't matter at all and you can just pick them up anyway with a lot less effort?

Sephyr

Rianai wrote: »

I thought healers were supposed to heal people and prevent them from dieing. That's why they are called healer after all, no?

Bringing a dead ally back to life isn't part of the healer package? What's your @name so I never group with you.

Edit: And due to stealth edits (not cool, bruh) I'll answer the other things with another question.

Why does the system need changing if dying doesn't matter at all according to you?

Rianai

There is nothing about a healer's package that makes them the primary rezzers.

And i have already explained why i'd like to see changes. Dieing should matter - at least a little bit - regardless of numbers.

Sephyr

Rianai wrote: »

There is nothing about a healer's package that makes them the primary rezzers.

And i have already explained why i'd like to see changes. Dieing should matter - at least a little bit - regardless of numbers.

Cool story, bro. I didn't say that they were primary rezzers, I said that that's what they usually do. As in, I see healers doing most of the rezzing in large scaled fights. There's quite a distinction, but okay what ever. I totally said that was their primary usage (/s).

And I've already explained why I don't. Am I supposed to change my opinion because you say so? I don't recall telling you what to think.

Rianai

Your only argument was that limiting rezzing "will kill a lot of incentive for healers" but when it isn't a healer's job to rez, how does it matter for them?
Those players that i usually see rezzing in large scale fights, aren't actual healers. They are rezbots that failed to do anything else useful. Would limiting rezzing put those off? Definitely. But again, this has nothing to do with healers. They would only become more important.

Sephyr

Rianai wrote: »

Your only argument was that limiting rezzing "will kill a lot of incentive for healers" but when it isn't a healer's job to rez, how does it matter for them?
Those players that i usually see rezzing in large scale fights, aren't actual healers. They are rezbots that failed to do anything else useful. Would limiting rezzing put those off? Definitely. But again, this has nothing to do with healers. They would only become more important.

You clearly didn't read my response, so I'm just going to use the ignore function. Have fun foil hatting.

UndeniablyAVG

I see considerably more 50k health tanks ressing than healers.

Also, what is the point of debate about something if the aim is not to change the other persons mind?

Also back to the point mentioned about it 'working as intended', plenty of things that are working as intended are changed all the time it's such a weak argument. Soul gem resurrections are overperforming in imbalanced population campaigns, giving whichever faction has the highest population a free pass to just steam through everyone else. It should be looked into just as an overpowered set is looked into, despite the fact that it is working as intended.

My experience seems to differ from everyone elses as everyone i fight is already built tanky with over 40k health, so I'm not really worried about that.

Sephyr

UndeniablyAVG wrote: »

I see considerably more 50k health tanks ressing than healers.

And that's your experience. 1+1=2. Therefore it's safe to deduce that 'healbots' aren't always doing the resurrecting.

UndeniablyAVG wrote: »

Also, what is the point of debate about something if the aim is not to change the other persons mind?

I wasn't aware this was a 'debate' thread. I was simply agreeing with another's post and adding my experience. The fact that it differs from their experience, that person felt they needed to put words in my mouth so I ended it. It's that simple. It makes my life easier.

UndeniablyAVG wrote: »

Also back to the point mentioned about it 'working as intended', plenty of things that are working as intended are changed all the time it's such a weak argument. Soul gem resurrections are overperforming in imbalanced population campaigns, giving whichever faction has the highest population a free pass to just steam through everyone else. It should be looked into just as an overpowered set is looked into, despite the fact that it is working as intended.

My experience seems to differ from everyone elses as everyone i fight is already built tanky with over 40k health, so I'm not really worried about that.

That's your experience though. In my experience, using the appropriate counters work and they work well enough where I wipe 40k+ tanks or deter healbots from healing through it. They usually give up after the third or fourth try and move on. Just like I'm doing from this thread as apparently even relating to someone on the forum automatically means I'm seeking a debate.

VaranisArano

Rianai wrote: »

Ofc more numbers will always have an advantage. That's exactly why they shouldn't need additional benefits such as unlimited rezzing.

Your second paragraph doesn't make sense at all. The current system clearly favours numbers and i have also explained why.

And this whole "just bring more numbers" isn't always a good option, because 1. populations aren't balanced, and 2. at high pop times it results in stupid faction stacks that lag everything out and make the game unplayable.

So lets break this down. Right now, anyone can rez if they get a couple seconds break in the battle. Obviously, this benefits the larger group, because duh, Cyrodiil favors larger groups. The smaller group might pull off a rez if they are lucky, so cheap, quick rezzes are pretty good for them.

But lets make battle rezzes harder, longer, or impossible. Dead players are dead. The group with more players still has more players. The group with less is still getting whittled down and those players are dead, dead. The largest group still benefits! The smaller group is even more screwed because anyone who goes down is dead, dead (and has zero chance of riding back to the fight, to boot).

And the real losers are everyone who stuck their neck out to fight and died because now they have to sit in time out while dead or riding back to the fight. Not much fun.

Cheap, quick rezzes give smaller groups the chance to get their members back in the fight. Without that, every battle becomes a war of attrition and one side has a lot more players.


Thing is, if you are struggling with situations where you can kill x members of a large group but can't finish them off and so the large group rezzes them up, your problem isnt resurrection.

Its that Cyrodiil is designed for large scale combat over objectives, and your group simply isnt large enough or effective enough to finish off the enemy. The resurrections happen because you can't muster enough force to prevent them. There's counterplay to rezzers, but you arent large enough or organized enough to use that counterplay. Solution? Get larger, get more organized, or be realistic about the outcome when you fight massively outnumbered.

Oh, and did I mention that players want to have fun and not sit in "You died" time out? So like I've said, players will build tankier and play more cautiously. That playstyle makes it even harder for small groups to wipe larger groups by killing players quickly. So in making the change to resurrection, small groups have a much harder time winning fights as their members get killed, have a much smaller chance of battle rezzing their own fallen, and have a much harder time killing their tankier or more cautious opponents who also don't want to die.


I realize that's not the answer you want, but if you fight outnumbered, you've got to accept that Cyrodiil gives advantages to the largest and the most organized team, and that as Cyrodiil is designed, skill win not always win against overwhelming numbers. When you pit a small scale group against a large raid or a horde of PUGs, you've got to realize that Cyrodiil's design is not in your favor. That's how Cyrodiil is designed, and its not about giving large groups "more" advantages. Cheap, quick rezzes give smaller groups a fighting chance to get their own members back in the fight, and mean that overall players build less tanky because they can get back in the fight if they die.


But bottom line, I don't expect ZOS to make changes for a situation that's basically "My small group is fighting massively outnumbered and we lost!"

When the answer is: "What did you expect in an AvAvA game?"

Katahdin

I'm a DPS and I rez people all the time and see other DPS rez others all the time. It's not just healers and tanks doing most of the rezzing. A 24 man group might have 2 tanks, 4 heals and 18 dps, so Yea let's make a healer keeping everyone else alive rez when one of the other 17 DPS could do it without significant loss to group damage.

The system is fine as is.
As @VaranisArano said, if you're outnumbered you're at the disadvantage in the fight and you should be, cause you're outnumbered. You cant expect to have the upper hand in that fight.

Rianai

I don't expect to have the upper hand in an outnumbered fight. But i'd like to see kills - that can still happen occasionally despite being at a disadvantage - to not be as worthless.

VaranisArano wrote: »

So lets break this down. Right now, anyone can rez if they get a couple seconds break in the battle. Obviously, this benefits the larger group, because duh, Cyrodiil favors larger groups. The smaller group might pull off a rez if they are lucky, so cheap, quick rezzes are pretty good for them.

But lets make battle rezzes harder, longer, or impossible. Dead players are dead. The group with more players still has more players. The group with less is still getting whittled down and those players are dead, dead. The largest group still benefits! The smaller group is even more screwed because anyone who goes down is dead, dead (and has zero chance of riding back to the fight, to boot).

That's not how those fights usually play out. But ofc if your strategy is to "just bring more numbers" you can't know that.

VaranisArano wrote: »

[...]Cheap, quick rezzes give smaller groups the chance to get their members back in the fight. Without that, every battle becomes a war of attrition and one side has a lot more players.

Small grps rarely have an opportunity to rez while being outnumbered. If they start dieing, they usually lost the fight. And rezzing is what tends to drag fights out endlessly. But as it is, attrittion only works for larger numbers, since it is impossible for a few to wittle down zergs.

VaranisArano wrote: »

[...]Its that Cyrodiil is designed for large scale combat over objectives, and your group simply isnt large enough or effective enough to finish off the enemy. [...]

Cyrodiil is designed as open world PvP zone that gives players a lot of freedom and let's them choose how to play. That means players can zerg as much as they like, but that doesn't make it the only or "right" way to play.
And as i already mentioned - this "just zerg harder" strategy you are promoting leads to issues such as bad performance and population imbalance - stuff even zerglings complain about from time to time. Aside from this it simply isn't fun for everyone. So that's not a solution to anything.

VaranisArano wrote: »

Oh, and did I mention that players want to have fun and not sit in "You died" time out? So like I've said, players will build tankier and play more cautiously. [...]

That could happen, yes. But i don't think it would make a big difference. Even now players spend quite some time laying arround dead while waiting for a rez if they don't get picked up instantly for whatever reason and it doesn't seem to bother them much. Being able to instantly rez nearby also don't make players more likely to fight - otherwise i wouldn't constantly see so many sitting on unsieged keep walls. Players who want to fight are going to fight regardless.