Some Essential Changes for 1vX Play

TimeDazzler

This game is already a laggy mess and unfortunately, a lot of these suggestions are going to just make it laggier due to the server having to do more calculations, but, in-case the 2020 Q1 performance update has an impact, here we go.

Also, note a lot of these changes will make the gaming experience for casuals and ball group players more difficult, so, an anonymous poll has been created for you to vote But, you could try to play solo and then have the tools for you to do so, essentially a loss turned to a win.

1. Increase in damage linearly of AoE damage based abilities based on # of targets hit. This one is simple and is best explained with an example. Currently, steel tornado and a lot of AoE abilities hit for 80% of the damage a single target spammable does based on ZOS skill audit rule set. Doesn't matter if you hit 1 person or 10 the damage is always 80%. Simply increase the damage by 6% for each person beyond 1 that the ability hits. So, it hits 6 people it now deals 110% damage and so forth up to an appropriate cap. Do a similar thing with every AoE ability there is and change up the scaling/cap fine-tuned to each ability.

2. Increase the duration of CC immunity based on how many targets beyond 1 that you have been hit by in the last X amount of seconds. Let's say the current duration of CC immunity in-game is 6 seconds. Well with this change the duration is increased by 0.5 seconds for each person beyond 1 that hit you up to a maximum of 10 seconds of immunity. To reach a maximum of 10 seconds, you would have to have taken damage from 9 different players within an X amount of seconds. If you fight 3 people your CC immunity duration is 7 seconds. Similarly, if it is a 5v5 fight and in the perfect scenario where everyone has been tagged with damage, it is 8 seconds for each player. Of course in a 1v10 scenario, you will give people stun immunity for 6s as usual, and gain stun immunity for 10s (again a perfect scenario assuming everyone hits you).

3. Increased ult generation. This one is a little more difficult to calculate or implement. But, say someone has a 100% ratio of ultimate generation. And that minor and major heroism does not affect this ratio because they are not a percent increase but instead raw numbers of ultimate, i.e. +1 Ultimate every 1.5 seconds and +3 Ultimate every 1.5 seconds like on live server. Similarly, every time you light attack or heal you gain some number of ultimate, typically 3. Nightblade passive drink a potion and get 20 and so forth, right, all of these are flat values. So, that ratio is increased by, say a linear 3% per additional enemy beyond 1 who has damaged you in the past X amount of seconds, up to a cap (11 enemies, perfect scenario, 30%). Or can also be an exponential value increased at higher rates (i.e. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7) percent increase per additional enemy (6 enemies, perfect scenario, 25%). Note that this is increasing the ratio you gain ultimate from natural sources, not flat values from said buffs. So, normally you do a light attack with 100% ult gen ratio you get 3 ult, you fight 10 enemies and now have 130% ratio, for that light attack, you get 130% ratio so 1.3 x 3 = 3.9 or 4 ultimate. I know, what you are thinking all that math for 1 additional ultimate, but of course the scaling can be increased or decreased as balance dictates and decimal increases of ultimate (which I think the game currently does not have), could be introduced.

4. "Smart Abilities". Smart abilities are similar to the new formula for AoE abilities in the sense that they calculate how many enemies will be hit within the radius and adjust their damage accordingly, but they also adjust their damage and healing based on how many allies are also within the radius. A good example of this will be proxy det, an ability once intended to take out large groups that is literally only ever used by them. "alright everybody proxy in 3, 2, 1" for huge burst all at once that takes not a sliver of skill. Just like on live the damage will be increased based on how many enemies are around you, but also decreased by how many allies are around the radius too. The same will go for AoE healing, for the sake of this example, let's use the AoE morph of vigor no one is using. You cast it and you are the only person within the radius you get the 100% of the heal, which is the same as vigor, the other morph. Now, if you have allies around that ratio is decreased by 5% per ally down to some minimum cap. So, you use it to heal 7 players the strength of the heal will be 70%, whereas the strength for that same skill being used by someone solo fighting those 7 players will be 100%. No longer will morphs of healing abilities be "take this for single target heal or this for group play heal" which the skill audit recently implemented, instead, both morphs viable for solo and group and some actual meaningful differences introduced in healing morphs.

5. Finally, the champion points system. The reworked champion point system (whenever it arrives) has to have meaningful tracts that are only invested in with a playstyle in mind and has options for every playstyle. Want to be a ball group healer, cool, there are lines and choices that will benefit you, want to 1vX, there are options for that too. NOT you have X amount of points in THIS so you gain X amount of damage mitigation in THAT. Here is what I was thinking, there are 6 tracts for you to choose from 2 from each: red, blue, and green. As a general rule of thumb, red for damage, green for healing, blue for utility. You can only pick 3 tracts total and you can do any combination, meaning if you want to do the 2 red tracts then 1 green tract, and miss out on the other 1 green tract and both 2 blue tracts you can do that, or you can go 1:1:1. Additionally, you pick a tract, you finish that tract (since you can only pick 3), each tract has 100 points so that's 300 CP limit, and ZOS scales CP accordingly, 900 CP on live = 300 from this suggestion. Finally, there is a unique active ability awarded based on the combination of tracts you selected and completed for you to slot on a new keybind (similar to drinking a potion how it's shared between both bars). So if you want to use your champion point ability (as we will call it), you press something like T, and it goes on cooldown similar to a potion. Now here is the twist and where choice matters, each combination has a different active ability, since there are 6 possible tracts and you can pick a total of 3, the total # of combinations and thus total # of active abilities that vary based on what you've selected is 20, for math folks: 6! / 3!(6 – 3)! There will be tons of variety and meaningfulness because if you change a single tract you change an entire ability. Of course, the active ability will parallel with the 3 tracts that you've chosen and kind of combine the 3 in a meaningful way. So you could have an ability that instantly heals in an AoE around you or a buff ability that increased your AoE damage by a % or even just an AoE ability. ZOS could go wild with this one and sort of implement pseudo-spell crafting with 20 different skills.

MerguezMan

1) You'd one-shot that giant crab boss in Fungal Grotto 1. Add damage from the sum of target remaining health ? (ie. 1% of the health of targets hit added as dot damage, 1s after)

2) Well, current immunity is more 3-4s-ish. I'd also like 6s as minimum. But increasing it depending on the number of attackers leads to a clunky timing on skill triggering (for both attacker and target).

3) Rather not. Once again, pve ... you would be able to "spam" ultimates on that poor crab.

4) That's an interesting idea, but efficiency has to be capped at some point (even proxy deto had a cap). That'd probably be 6-12 players on aoe heal, because of how Trials work.

5) Erm... about CP and pvp... well, there are enough treads

Emma_Overload

ZOS will never do any of this stuff because they hate 1vXers and love zergs of casuals.

ChimpyChumpy

Holy thesis batman waaaaaaay tldr

ThePhantomThorn

I think there should be more skills like proxy det. Like steel tornado and pulsar would have similar effects

VaranisArano

Remember the Morrowind sustain nerfs? Remember the poor, dead Blazeplars?

That tells you what ZOS thinks about players being able to 1vX large groups of players when the X aren't complete potatoes who let themselves be pulled apart into 1v1s or 1v2s via LOS and choke points.

Iskiab

1 and 5 maybe. 2 will help groups more than solo players. 3 is clunky. 4 is silly.

idk

Not going to hit all points and I only read the first three. OP's ideas overall are seem to be designed for when the attack a group that is not complete potatoes and does not want to die to them. It does not seem to have large zergs in mind.

As someone that does not zerg surf, we run in a small group who in part likes to bust zergs. When I am not with them I am running solo. Additionally, I see the last point is about CP. Besides Zos reviewing (reworking) CP in some manner I do not think it should be as restrictive as OP seems to want it to me.

Just my opinion.

Major_Lag

The OP's suggestions are some the most stupid things I've seen so far this year, and I've seen quite a few already.

ESO being an MMO, its instanced PvP is balanced around, as well as centered around, group play.
For those who want to fight 1v1 specifically, that's what duels are for.

Battlegrounds are group vs group vs group activites.
The fact that you can queue for BGs solo does not mean or imply that you are intended to play them as a solo player - in fact this is no different from PvE dungeons, where players can queue solo but are nonetheless placed in a group of 4 and expected to perform as a team.

Cyrodiil, being a large scale war zone, is also intended for group vs group play.
Of course there are many things a solo player can still usefully do there (to name just a few possibilities: bombing, ganking arriving reinforcements, placing/burning camps, creating distractions in various ways...), but to actually play the objectives and make any significant impact on the map you need a group, even if it's only 2-3 players.

Yet what the OP is proposing effectively amounts to "groups are overpowered, teamwork is overperforming, outnumbering the oponent(s) is unfair, waaaaaaaaah, pls nerf!!!1111!1".

The whole point of 1vX'ing is to prevail in an outnumbered situations while subject to the exact same rules as your opponents: everyone involved is subject to the same game mechanics (GCDs, ultimates, blocking, dodging, mobility, LoS, and so on) - so clearly if one player wins in an outnumbered situations, that is a result of differences in player skill, which is as it should be.

But what the OP is saying is basically "1vX'ing is too difficult, pls nerf":
No. Learn how to play the game properly first, instead of complaining and trying to change the rules to your advantage.

I happen to know a few very skilled 1vX'ers on PCEU, who have no problems dealing with 12+ weaker players trying (and failing miserably) to kill the 1vXer at a resource or keep tower.
Similarly, there are a couple of players who usually run in groups of 3-4 and are perfectly capable of wrecking 12 man raids all day long.
These players are doing perfectly fine without needing to crutch on the game specifically giving them any extra advantage in those situations.

Joinovikova

First ZOS need to work on balancing this game make to fun to play for more buids not only no lifers explioters macro users etc... In balanced game something like 1vs 20 can not exist.

brtomkin

Adding active abilities to CP system is an interesting idea, just not specifically to enable easier 1vXing.

Daemonai

This is the only game I know of where 1vX is a thing people think should be possible and is healthy for gameplay.

Except in cases of extreme skill disparities, one player shouldn't be able to go toe to toe with a group of players.
-

Major_Lag

Daemonai wrote: »

This is the only game I know of where 1vX is a thing people think should be possible and is healthy for gameplay.

Except in cases of extreme skill disparities, one player shouldn't be able to go toe to toe with a group of players.

Because that's exactly what's happening.

There's nothing particularly special about the builds 1vX'ers are using.
Sure, they are considerably tankier than most - but a lot of that tankiness comes from avoiding a lot of incoming damage through positioning and LoSing, and mitigating the remainder with strong heals and high resistances.

I can guarantee you that if you made a character who's an exact copy of one of the successful 1vX'ers builds, and have a weak (or even average) player control said character, there sure wouldn't be much successful 1vXing going on in that particular case.

Rather, it would be much more insightful to turn the whole issue around and instead ask the following question:
Why is the average ESO PvP'er so bad at the game?
If you start from that premise, then it becomes entirely unsurprising that a highly skilled player can take on a dozen bad enemies and win.

NBrookus

Major_Lag wrote: »

Rather, it would be much more insightful to turn the whole issue around and instead ask the following question:
Why is the average ESO PvP'er so bad at the game?
If you start from that premise, then it becomes entirely unsurprising that a highly skilled player can take on a dozen bad enemies and win.

• Nothing PVE prepares players for PVP.
• Nothing in PVP rewards players for improving their skill.
• Skilled PVP'ers play games with better PVP performance unless they have a wide streak of masochism.

Joy_Division

Daemonai wrote: »

This is the only game I know of where 1vX is a thing people think should be possible and is healthy for gameplay.

Except in cases of extreme skill disparities, one player shouldn't be able to go toe to toe with a group of players.
-

There's only so much the devs can do to try and make bad players semi-competent Vs. people who are actually decent.

I'd say 1vX is actually the norm for any game worth it's salt in skill. Every shooter game I've played since Doom was 1vX fodder. The devs can try to level the playing field by putting in noob weapons like rocket launchers, but at the end of the day, the devs can't aim guns and players who aren't very good are going to be pressing the re-spawn button repeatedly.

brandonv516

Cool in theory but the servers could never handle all these calculations.

TheBonesXXX

Daemonai wrote: »

This is the only game I know of where 1vX is a thing people think should be possible and is healthy for gameplay.

Except in cases of extreme skill disparities, one player shouldn't be able to go toe to toe with a group of players.
-

1 player killing a group of 20 players makes that group of twenty bad.

2 competent players can kill a 1 v Xr.

AoEs should always increase in damage vs more players without limit, like an explosive.

It will force players to spread out and be mindful.

Iskiab

Major_Lag wrote: »

Daemonai wrote: »

This is the only game I know of where 1vX is a thing people think should be possible and is healthy for gameplay.

Except in cases of extreme skill disparities, one player shouldn't be able to go toe to toe with a group of players.

Because that's exactly what's happening.

There's nothing particularly special about the builds 1vX'ers are using.
Sure, they are considerably tankier than most - but a lot of that tankiness comes from avoiding a lot of incoming damage through positioning and LoSing, and mitigating the remainder with strong heals and high resistances.

I can guarantee you that if you made a character who's an exact copy of one of the successful 1vX'ers builds, and have a weak (or even average) player control said character, there sure wouldn't be much successful 1vXing going on in that particular case.

Rather, it would be much more insightful to turn the whole issue around and instead ask the following question:
Why is the average ESO PvP'er so bad at the game?
If you start from that premise, then it becomes entirely unsurprising that a highly skilled player can take on a dozen bad enemies and win.

I’ve thought about this too. I think it’s because so many players go straight to cyrodiil instead of doing BGs.

Players want to be a ‘dps’ and rarely heal themselves, don’t get any practice in before grouping, plus there’s no parser that works well in cyrodiil. In pve you can see, this isn’t working, this player is doing 4x more then I am. There’s nothing like that for pvp.

In other games pvp guilds always formed from BGs. In this game a lot of people skip that step. Instead it’s like two separate kinds of pvp, maybe larger group BG pvp would help... like 12v12v12.

Davadin

lol let everyone be able to 1vX then there's no more X to fight.

ecru

I agree about the cc especially, with cc attached to so many abilities as a secondary effect, brainless enemies are chain ccing you on cooldown, even without the intention to do so. There's no skill or coordination involved, you just get stunned and rooted over and over again because they're hitting their buttons once in awhile. We need longer immunity timers regardless of how many extra players someone is facing. 4-6 seconds is so out of step with basically every other game, and for good reason. It seems like devs are making ESO pvp different from successful systems in other games solely on principle, rather than for balance reasons or fun gameplay.

We rarely have players groups of players who aren't going through rotations properly, much less setting up burst combos, they're just piling on and probably spamming some aoe ability when their opponent is cc'd and getting a kill. When I'm soloing in Cyrodiil, it's almost always a cc and then sometimes a cc break that just doesn't work properly or fast enough that ends up getting me killed, not necessarily being overwhelmed by damage.

juhislihis19

IMO 1vsX'rs don't need game mechanic help. They are Xers for a reason. I do it myself a little, and I think the following is the problem.

What X'rs need is this game to fix its lag and bug issues. If a small group is fighting a zerg, guaranteed that the small group will suffer more from the lag than the zerg.

Snipe desyncs from a zerg, ultis not released when cast, snare/CC immunity not working.. common issues everyone gets, except someone in a big zerg.

Luede

6. lern how to play 1 vs x with the given tools...

Rahar

1vX is meant to be difficult. Let's not add handicaps unless your fix is to make tankiness harder to obtain to the average player.

Jabbs_Giggity

Cries wrote: »

This game is already a laggy mess and unfortunately, a lot of these suggestions are going to just make it laggier due to the server having to do more calculations, but, in-case the 2020 Q1 performance update has an impact, here we go.

Also, note a lot of these changes will make the gaming experience for casuals and ball group players more difficult, so, an anonymous poll has been created for you to vote But, you could try to play solo and then have the tools for you to do so, essentially a loss turned to a win.

1. Increase in damage linearly of AoE damage based abilities based on # of targets hit. This one is simple and is best explained with an example. Currently, steel tornado and a lot of AoE abilities hit for 80% of the damage a single target spammable does based on ZOS skill audit rule set. Doesn't matter if you hit 1 person or 10 the damage is always 80%. Simply increase the damage by 6% for each person beyond 1 that the ability hits. So, it hits 6 people it now deals 110% damage and so forth up to an appropriate cap. Do a similar thing with every AoE ability there is and change up the scaling/cap fine-tuned to each ability.

2. Increase the duration of CC immunity based on how many targets beyond 1 that you have been hit by in the last X amount of seconds. Let's say the current duration of CC immunity in-game is 6 seconds. Well with this change the duration is increased by 0.5 seconds for each person beyond 1 that hit you up to a maximum of 10 seconds of immunity. To reach a maximum of 10 seconds, you would have to have taken damage from 9 different players within an X amount of seconds. If you fight 3 people your CC immunity duration is 7 seconds. Similarly, if it is a 5v5 fight and in the perfect scenario where everyone has been tagged with damage, it is 8 seconds for each player. Of course in a 1v10 scenario, you will give people stun immunity for 6s as usual, and gain stun immunity for 10s (again a perfect scenario assuming everyone hits you).

3. Increased ult generation. This one is a little more difficult to calculate or implement. But, say someone has a 100% ratio of ultimate generation. And that minor and major heroism does not affect this ratio because they are not a percent increase but instead raw numbers of ultimate, i.e. +1 Ultimate every 1.5 seconds and +3 Ultimate every 1.5 seconds like on live server. Similarly, every time you light attack or heal you gain some number of ultimate, typically 3. Nightblade passive drink a potion and get 20 and so forth, right, all of these are flat values. So, that ratio is increased by, say a linear 3% per additional enemy beyond 1 who has damaged you in the past X amount of seconds, up to a cap (11 enemies, perfect scenario, 30%). Or can also be an exponential value increased at higher rates (i.e. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7) percent increase per additional enemy (6 enemies, perfect scenario, 25%). Note that this is increasing the ratio you gain ultimate from natural sources, not flat values from said buffs. So, normally you do a light attack with 100% ult gen ratio you get 3 ult, you fight 10 enemies and now have 130% ratio, for that light attack, you get 130% ratio so 1.3 x 3 = 3.9 or 4 ultimate. I know, what you are thinking all that math for 1 additional ultimate, but of course the scaling can be increased or decreased as balance dictates and decimal increases of ultimate (which I think the game currently does not have), could be introduced.

4. "Smart Abilities". Smart abilities are similar to the new formula for AoE abilities in the sense that they calculate how many enemies will be hit within the radius and adjust their damage accordingly, but they also adjust their damage and healing based on how many allies are also within the radius. A good example of this will be proxy det, an ability once intended to take out large groups that is literally only ever used by them. "alright everybody proxy in 3, 2, 1" for huge burst all at once that takes not a sliver of skill. Just like on live the damage will be increased based on how many enemies are around you, but also decreased by how many allies are around the radius too. The same will go for AoE healing, for the sake of this example, let's use the AoE morph of vigor no one is using. You cast it and you are the only person within the radius you get the 100% of the heal, which is the same as vigor, the other morph. Now, if you have allies around that ratio is decreased by 5% per ally down to some minimum cap. So, you use it to heal 7 players the strength of the heal will be 70%, whereas the strength for that same skill being used by someone solo fighting those 7 players will be 100%. No longer will morphs of healing abilities be "take this for single target heal or this for group play heal" which the skill audit recently implemented, instead, both morphs viable for solo and group and some actual meaningful differences introduced in healing morphs.

5. Finally, the champion points system. The reworked champion point system (whenever it arrives) has to have meaningful tracts that are only invested in with a playstyle in mind and has options for every playstyle. Want to be a ball group healer, cool, there are lines and choices that will benefit you, want to 1vX, there are options for that too. NOT you have X amount of points in THIS so you gain X amount of damage mitigation in THAT. Here is what I was thinking, there are 6 tracts for you to choose from 2 from each: red, blue, and green. As a general rule of thumb, red for damage, green for healing, blue for utility. You can only pick 3 tracts total and you can do any combination, meaning if you want to do the 2 red tracts then 1 green tract, and miss out on the other 1 green tract and both 2 blue tracts you can do that, or you can go 1:1:1. Additionally, you pick a tract, you finish that tract (since you can only pick 3), each tract has 100 points so that's 300 CP limit, and ZOS scales CP accordingly, 900 CP on live = 300 from this suggestion. Finally, there is a unique active ability awarded based on the combination of tracts you selected and completed for you to slot on a new keybind (similar to drinking a potion how it's shared between both bars). So if you want to use your champion point ability (as we will call it), you press something like T, and it goes on cooldown similar to a potion. Now here is the twist and where choice matters, each combination has a different active ability, since there are 6 possible tracts and you can pick a total of 3, the total # of combinations and thus total # of active abilities that vary based on what you've selected is 20, for math folks: 6! / 3!(6 – 3)! There will be tons of variety and meaningfulness because if you change a single tract you change an entire ability. Of course, the active ability will parallel with the 3 tracts that you've chosen and kind of combine the 3 in a meaningful way. So you could have an ability that instantly heals in an AoE around you or a buff ability that increased your AoE damage by a % or even just an AoE ability. ZOS could go wild with this one and sort of implement pseudo-spell crafting with 20 different skills.

Group all of these under Battle Spirit so changes do not effect PVE and looks pretty solid to me. Would rather start with smaller increments on all numbers and adjust higher as needed.

Xvorg

Joy_Division wrote: »

Daemonai wrote: »

This is the only game I know of where 1vX is a thing people think should be possible and is healthy for gameplay.

Except in cases of extreme skill disparities, one player shouldn't be able to go toe to toe with a group of players.
-

There's only so much the devs can do to try and make bad players semi-competent Vs. people who are actually decent.

I'd say 1vX is actually the norm for any game worth it's salt in skill. Every shooter game I've played since Doom was 1vX fodder. The devs can try to level the playing field by putting in noob weapons like rocket launchers, but at the end of the day, the devs can't aim guns and players who aren't very good are going to be pressing the re-spawn button repeatedly.

That from a competitive point of view. From a business PoV... well, I think we are currently at that spot.

In the end everything goes back once and again to Incredibles 1 and Syndrome's quote "When everyone is super..."

Regardinng OP's suggestions, I don't like them, but I think they have a clear message: lowering the ceiling and raising the floor is one of the worst ideas ZoS have come up with.

Xvorg

TheBonesXXX wrote: »

Daemonai wrote: »

This is the only game I know of where 1vX is a thing people think should be possible and is healthy for gameplay.

Except in cases of extreme skill disparities, one player shouldn't be able to go toe to toe with a group of players.
-

1 player killing a group of 20 players makes that group of twenty bad.

2 competent players can kill a 1 v Xr.

AoEs should always increase in damage vs more players without limit, like an explosive.

It will force players to spread out and be mindful.

I just enjoy when you guys make me go to my history book.

The year, 2015. The idea: "let's make a magicka bomb, that increases dmg based on objectives hit". The bomb: Magicka detonation. The results? Proxy Deto became the strongest and most widely used skill in the hands on a zerg/ball group.

You don't want to stumble over the same stone again...

Xvorg

ecru wrote: »

I agree about the cc especially, with cc attached to so many abilities as a secondary effect, brainless enemies are chain ccing you on cooldown, even without the intention to do so. There's no skill or coordination involved, you just get stunned and rooted over and over again because they're hitting their buttons once in awhile. We need longer immunity timers regardless of how many extra players someone is facing. 4-6 seconds is so out of step with basically every other game, and for good reason. It seems like devs are making ESO pvp different from successful systems in other games solely on principle, rather than for balance reasons or fun gameplay.

We rarely have players groups of players who aren't going through rotations properly, much less setting up burst combos, they're just piling on and probably spamming some aoe ability when their opponent is cc'd and getting a kill. When I'm soloing in Cyrodiil, it's almost always a cc and then sometimes a cc break that just doesn't work properly or fast enough that ends up getting me killed, not necessarily being overwhelmed by damage.

Let's be fair, though that's true in mostly 50% of the cases, there's another 50% of the cases in which it has more to do with game's performance rather than actual skill. There are many good players that prefer to run on a zerg since the zerg protects them from key mistakes derived from the performance.

In any case, I do believe this game future should move from AvAvA (un)balance towards battlegrounds balance (?)

Iskiab

Xvorg wrote: »

ecru wrote: »

I agree about the cc especially, with cc attached to so many abilities as a secondary effect, brainless enemies are chain ccing you on cooldown, even without the intention to do so. There's no skill or coordination involved, you just get stunned and rooted over and over again because they're hitting their buttons once in awhile. We need longer immunity timers regardless of how many extra players someone is facing. 4-6 seconds is so out of step with basically every other game, and for good reason. It seems like devs are making ESO pvp different from successful systems in other games solely on principle, rather than for balance reasons or fun gameplay.

We rarely have players groups of players who aren't going through rotations properly, much less setting up burst combos, they're just piling on and probably spamming some aoe ability when their opponent is cc'd and getting a kill. When I'm soloing in Cyrodiil, it's almost always a cc and then sometimes a cc break that just doesn't work properly or fast enough that ends up getting me killed, not necessarily being overwhelmed by damage.

Let's be fair, though that's true in mostly 50% of the cases, there's another 50% of the cases in which it has more to do with game's performance rather than actual skill. There are many good players that prefer to run on a zerg since the zerg protects them from key mistakes derived from the performance.

In any case, I do believe this game future should move from AvAvA (un)balance towards battlegrounds balance (?)

It is isn’t it? In a BG against good opponents the spread between last and first place will usually be less than 200 points. Especially if no team gets stuck with a NB (except titanbrand, he has kill stealing down to an art).

In AvAvA you can get 100:1+ KvD ratio pretty easily in an organized group.

evoniee

1vxer exist because of the x

Xvorg

Iskiab wrote: »

Xvorg wrote: »

ecru wrote: »

I agree about the cc especially, with cc attached to so many abilities as a secondary effect, brainless enemies are chain ccing you on cooldown, even without the intention to do so. There's no skill or coordination involved, you just get stunned and rooted over and over again because they're hitting their buttons once in awhile. We need longer immunity timers regardless of how many extra players someone is facing. 4-6 seconds is so out of step with basically every other game, and for good reason. It seems like devs are making ESO pvp different from successful systems in other games solely on principle, rather than for balance reasons or fun gameplay.

We rarely have players groups of players who aren't going through rotations properly, much less setting up burst combos, they're just piling on and probably spamming some aoe ability when their opponent is cc'd and getting a kill. When I'm soloing in Cyrodiil, it's almost always a cc and then sometimes a cc break that just doesn't work properly or fast enough that ends up getting me killed, not necessarily being overwhelmed by damage.

Let's be fair, though that's true in mostly 50% of the cases, there's another 50% of the cases in which it has more to do with game's performance rather than actual skill. There are many good players that prefer to run on a zerg since the zerg protects them from key mistakes derived from the performance.

In any case, I do believe this game future should move from AvAvA (un)balance towards battlegrounds balance (?)

It is isn’t it? In a BG against good opponents the spread between last and first place will usually be less than 200 points. Especially if no team gets stuck with a NB (except titanbrand, he has kill stealing down to an art).

In AvAvA you can get 100:1+ KvD ratio pretty easily in an organized group.

True to that.

I really like the concept of AvAvA, but in the end you play much less than in a BG match

mav1234

Not a fan at all on most of these suggestions.

I would be OK with Battle Spirit having a small buff to ult gen depending on number of enemies recently engaged in combat with the player. Lots of ults flying around in big battles is fun for groups, and it would also help 1vX'ing.

But, tankyness must be addressed; way too easy right now to take advantage of strong tankiness at almost no penalty...