The Gold Road Chapter – which includes the Scribing system – and Update 42 is now available to test on the PTS! You can read the latest patch notes here: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/656454/
Maintenance for the week of April 22:
• PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – April 22, 4:00AM EDT (08:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC)
• Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – April 24, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – April 24, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – April 22, 4:00AM EDT (08:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC)
• Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – April 24, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – April 24, 6:00AM EDT (10:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
No CP PvP is a 1 shot frenzy
-
Firstmep✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭
Things are going to change one way or another though and it seems like the player base won't be able to handle it no matter what. At least they could organize the variability into different sagas, rather than just being the same thing over and over with where the PvE meta continuously breaks PvP and vice versa. Then at least, if there's a bad PvP meta it's restricted to say a 2 week campaign and they can try a new formula, and battlespirit as a blanket mechanism for balance would be more practical, instead of just like an old gross bandaid.
Then they can do things like bring together story themes into PvP. Where for example they could hard slant vampire abilities through battlespirit for the duration of a campaign.
In principle and general, I like your suggestions. But in practice, as an example, if they would cycle between CP and no CP Cyrodiil, I wouldn't bother to log in during the CP time at all. Shaking the combat up too much every few weeks would just annoy me.
As far as I care, you could change the scoring, maybe now and then cycle the home territory for the factions and stuff like this. But this would need dedication from ZOS' side (not going to happen...), and don't forget that even now, six years in the game, a lot of players don't seem to know basic Cyrodiil rules. Especially the part of the playerbase that cares about scoring and the campaign are the ones that value continuity the most, if I'm not reading it wrong.
Maybe a couple more daedric artefacts could make things interesting, if they weren't such damn zerg beacons...
Well that's something to think about at the very least, that it would be easily applied to scoring principles, and that perhaps the entering cyrodiil prompt should outline the current campaigns scoring principles.
With regard to shaking up combat, I understand your feelings about it, I think at some level a lot of players feel that way, but by the same token combat WILL inevitably change as a result of balance changes and so then perhaps the issue isn't so much that affecting combat at all is the problem as much as ensuring that combat related adjustments occur at a longer term, more regulated pace. So, say for example you have varied campaigns with varied rules, 7 to 31 day scheduled basis, but the overarching adjustments through battlespirit, cp, and skill changes occur over a longer period.
The issue I see in it though is that the cp vs no cp balance is inherently broken, and so cp vs no cp might also have to balance on a campaign to campaign basis.
ZOS doesn't do "balance". They do wholesale meta shifts. There is a big difference.
The game is already balanced. CP or noCP, it is an equal playing field. Sets and races are balanced by a formula. Unless you are pushing one facet to an extreme, you can get basically the same stats on a build with any race with minor tweaking. The only area that is not 100% even are skill "kits", some classes lack major pieces of kit. For example, all stam having easy access to a weapon independent HOT and an instant AOE stun, vs some mag classes being stuck with resto staff or using the horrible vampire stun.
Wholesale meta shifts mean some classes/builds thrive and others don't. It is a crap shoot. It is not like this has not happened once to twice a year since release.
Nord says hello.1 -
OBJnoob✭✭✭✭✭
✭I think it's so funny that some players think they are in a high MMR bracket. There's only one bracket bro. Look around you >_<
0 -
katorga✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
Things are going to change one way or another though and it seems like the player base won't be able to handle it no matter what. At least they could organize the variability into different sagas, rather than just being the same thing over and over with where the PvE meta continuously breaks PvP and vice versa. Then at least, if there's a bad PvP meta it's restricted to say a 2 week campaign and they can try a new formula, and battlespirit as a blanket mechanism for balance would be more practical, instead of just like an old gross bandaid.
Then they can do things like bring together story themes into PvP. Where for example they could hard slant vampire abilities through battlespirit for the duration of a campaign.
In principle and general, I like your suggestions. But in practice, as an example, if they would cycle between CP and no CP Cyrodiil, I wouldn't bother to log in during the CP time at all. Shaking the combat up too much every few weeks would just annoy me.
As far as I care, you could change the scoring, maybe now and then cycle the home territory for the factions and stuff like this. But this would need dedication from ZOS' side (not going to happen...), and don't forget that even now, six years in the game, a lot of players don't seem to know basic Cyrodiil rules. Especially the part of the playerbase that cares about scoring and the campaign are the ones that value continuity the most, if I'm not reading it wrong.
Maybe a couple more daedric artefacts could make things interesting, if they weren't such damn zerg beacons...
Well that's something to think about at the very least, that it would be easily applied to scoring principles, and that perhaps the entering cyrodiil prompt should outline the current campaigns scoring principles.
With regard to shaking up combat, I understand your feelings about it, I think at some level a lot of players feel that way, but by the same token combat WILL inevitably change as a result of balance changes and so then perhaps the issue isn't so much that affecting combat at all is the problem as much as ensuring that combat related adjustments occur at a longer term, more regulated pace. So, say for example you have varied campaigns with varied rules, 7 to 31 day scheduled basis, but the overarching adjustments through battlespirit, cp, and skill changes occur over a longer period.
The issue I see in it though is that the cp vs no cp balance is inherently broken, and so cp vs no cp might also have to balance on a campaign to campaign basis.
ZOS doesn't do "balance". They do wholesale meta shifts. There is a big difference.
The game is already balanced. CP or noCP, it is an equal playing field. Sets and races are balanced by a formula. Unless you are pushing one facet to an extreme, you can get basically the same stats on a build with any race with minor tweaking. The only area that is not 100% even are skill "kits", some classes lack major pieces of kit. For example, all stam having easy access to a weapon independent HOT and an instant AOE stun, vs some mag classes being stuck with resto staff or using the horrible vampire stun.
Wholesale meta shifts mean some classes/builds thrive and others don't. It is a crap shoot. It is not like this has not happened once to twice a year since release.
Nord says hello.
Lol yeah, There is always Nord.0 -
Waffennacht✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭I think it's so funny that some players think they are in a high MMR bracket. There's only one bracket bro. Look around you >_<
Last I played I was in the Uber low bracket. I mean haven't played since the MMR reset new.
So if you don't see me; you're probably not low MMR lol0 -
OBJnoob✭✭✭✭✭
✭I guess I'm 100% wrong in a technical sense. Not sure why I said that. I just... sometimes... get the feeling... that MMR doesn't mean crap. I'm on Xbox NA also, Waffen, and I would assume most of my older characters are in a high-ish MMR unless they haven't re-qualified or whatever which may be the case.
The huge variance in skill levels of my teammates and the huge variance in skill level of my opponents. It's night and day what a BG might or might not be like at any given que. I see no rhyme or reason to any of it. And I'm tired of hearing people discredit other people's clips cuz the opponents might be bad. Of course they're bad... full on 95% of players are bad. I'm not sure 'good' players complain about being 1-shotted.1 -
Goregrinder✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Goregrinder wrote: »No more sitting in healing for 3 minutes wearing only Med armor, as it should be.
i just had a deathmatch end with 260 points on highest team so....
That is good news!0 -
BaiterOfZergs✭✭✭✭✭I guess I'm 100% wrong in a technical sense. Not sure why I said that. I just... sometimes... get the feeling... that MMR doesn't mean crap. I'm on Xbox NA also, Waffen, and I would assume most of my older characters are in a high-ish MMR unless they haven't re-qualified or whatever which may be the case.
The huge variance in skill levels of my teammates and the huge variance in skill level of my opponents. It's night and day what a BG might or might not be like at any given que. I see no rhyme or reason to any of it. And I'm tired of hearing people discredit other people's clips cuz the opponents might be bad. Of course they're bad... full on 95% of players are bad. I'm not sure 'good' players complain about being 1-shotted.
Good players are the biggest complainers in the game, a lot of the terrible double edge sword changes happens because people don’t think their complaints out. Then zos does heavy handed changes as a result.
As far as mmr it’s very noticeable. The meta shifts and how people play together changes. Of course there’s multiple factors to consider like low mmr being thrown into high or high into low, classes not complimenting each other, poor teammates even in high mmr and things like there being a stack of one class on a team.
Deaths and kill scoring drastically change too.Zerg of House Smallscale, First of his name, wielder of Volendrung, battleground hero, Cyrodiil butcher, the swifft footed, OG of the Templars and first pvpers, defender of scrolls and baiter of zergs.2 -
OBJnoob✭✭✭✭✭
✭Yea, you’re right. Just like Waffen was right. But if one of your factors is low mmr players in high mmr battlegrounds then I’m sorry but there are no real brackets. It’s because of low population and dwindling bg interest and que times— yea, I know— there are effectively no mmr brackets.
I’m being halfway sarcastic I think you know. But there’s some truth to it.0 -
Volckodav✭✭✭Playing almost all my time in no CP cyro for better (less worst) performance or BG and I have my best result with my good old mDK that I love playing!
No extra feature that new classes got, but still work very well!
and btw dont use elf bane, the 5 piece bonuses really not worth it in pvp in my opinion vs a mythics or another 5 piece bonuses.0 -
exeeter702✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭BaiterOfZergs wrote: »I guess I'm 100% wrong in a technical sense. Not sure why I said that. I just... sometimes... get the feeling... that MMR doesn't mean crap. I'm on Xbox NA also, Waffen, and I would assume most of my older characters are in a high-ish MMR unless they haven't re-qualified or whatever which may be the case.
The huge variance in skill levels of my teammates and the huge variance in skill level of my opponents. It's night and day what a BG might or might not be like at any given que. I see no rhyme or reason to any of it. And I'm tired of hearing people discredit other people's clips cuz the opponents might be bad. Of course they're bad... full on 95% of players are bad. I'm not sure 'good' players complain about being 1-shotted.
Good players are the biggest complainers in the game, a lot of the terrible double edge sword changes happens because people don’t think their complaints out. Then zos does heavy handed changes as a result.
As far as mmr it’s very noticeable. The meta shifts and how people play together changes. Of course there’s multiple factors to consider like low mmr being thrown into high or high into low, classes not complimenting each other, poor teammates even in high mmr and things like there being a stack of one class on a team.
Deaths and kill scoring drastically change too.
I think you overestimate the effect of "good players" complaints in relation to their influence on what changes zos decides to make to the game just a little.1 -
Cathexis✭✭✭✭✭
✭
Things are going to change one way or another though and it seems like the player base won't be able to handle it no matter what. At least they could organize the variability into different sagas, rather than just being the same thing over and over with where the PvE meta continuously breaks PvP and vice versa. Then at least, if there's a bad PvP meta it's restricted to say a 2 week campaign and they can try a new formula, and battlespirit as a blanket mechanism for balance would be more practical, instead of just like an old gross bandaid.
Then they can do things like bring together story themes into PvP. Where for example they could hard slant vampire abilities through battlespirit for the duration of a campaign.
In principle and general, I like your suggestions. But in practice, as an example, if they would cycle between CP and no CP Cyrodiil, I wouldn't bother to log in during the CP time at all. Shaking the combat up too much every few weeks would just annoy me.
As far as I care, you could change the scoring, maybe now and then cycle the home territory for the factions and stuff like this. But this would need dedication from ZOS' side (not going to happen...), and don't forget that even now, six years in the game, a lot of players don't seem to know basic Cyrodiil rules. Especially the part of the playerbase that cares about scoring and the campaign are the ones that value continuity the most, if I'm not reading it wrong.
Maybe a couple more daedric artefacts could make things interesting, if they weren't such damn zerg beacons...
Well that's something to think about at the very least, that it would be easily applied to scoring principles, and that perhaps the entering cyrodiil prompt should outline the current campaigns scoring principles.
With regard to shaking up combat, I understand your feelings about it, I think at some level a lot of players feel that way, but by the same token combat WILL inevitably change as a result of balance changes and so then perhaps the issue isn't so much that affecting combat at all is the problem as much as ensuring that combat related adjustments occur at a longer term, more regulated pace. So, say for example you have varied campaigns with varied rules, 7 to 31 day scheduled basis, but the overarching adjustments through battlespirit, cp, and skill changes occur over a longer period.
The issue I see in it though is that the cp vs no cp balance is inherently broken, and so cp vs no cp might also have to balance on a campaign to campaign basis.
ZOS doesn't do "balance". They do wholesale meta shifts. There is a big difference.
The game is already balanced. CP or noCP, it is an equal playing field. Sets and races are balanced by a formula. Unless you are pushing one facet to an extreme, you can get basically the same stats on a build with any race with minor tweaking. The only area that is not 100% even are skill "kits", some classes lack major pieces of kit. For example, all stam having easy access to a weapon independent HOT and an instant AOE stun, vs some mag classes being stuck with resto staff or using the horrible vampire stun.
Wholesale meta shifts mean some classes/builds thrive and others don't. It is a crap shoot. It is not like this has not happened once to twice a year since release.
.. Really splitting hairs here I think on definitions. A wholesale meta shift is essentially just balance. We are saying the same thing. The point here I'm trying to get at here is that they could use pre-existing mechanisms to more particularly control the meta in a simplified way and that this might diffuse the larger issues with the pvp playerbase by setting a precedent.Edited by Cathexis on June 23, 2020 5:51AMThe Tomb of FPS Alteration Magic - Everything You Need to Know About FPS
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/520903/tomb-of-fps-alteration-magic-everything-you-need-to-know-about-fps
Praise Malacath.1 -
BaiterOfZergs✭✭✭✭✭exeeter702 wrote: »BaiterOfZergs wrote: »I guess I'm 100% wrong in a technical sense. Not sure why I said that. I just... sometimes... get the feeling... that MMR doesn't mean crap. I'm on Xbox NA also, Waffen, and I would assume most of my older characters are in a high-ish MMR unless they haven't re-qualified or whatever which may be the case.
The huge variance in skill levels of my teammates and the huge variance in skill level of my opponents. It's night and day what a BG might or might not be like at any given que. I see no rhyme or reason to any of it. And I'm tired of hearing people discredit other people's clips cuz the opponents might be bad. Of course they're bad... full on 95% of players are bad. I'm not sure 'good' players complain about being 1-shotted.
Good players are the biggest complainers in the game, a lot of the terrible double edge sword changes happens because people don’t think their complaints out. Then zos does heavy handed changes as a result.
As far as mmr it’s very noticeable. The meta shifts and how people play together changes. Of course there’s multiple factors to consider like low mmr being thrown into high or high into low, classes not complimenting each other, poor teammates even in high mmr and things like there being a stack of one class on a team.
Deaths and kill scoring drastically change too.
I think you overestimate the effect of "good players" complaints in relation to their influence on what changes zos decides to make to the game just a little.
That’s because you probably think zos doesn’t listen to feedback but they do, just not when people want them to and how they want them to. They see feedback and I guarantee you can find threads about most major changes before they happened even if it was months or years later.
Zerg of House Smallscale, First of his name, wielder of Volendrung, battleground hero, Cyrodiil butcher, the swifft footed, OG of the Templars and first pvpers, defender of scrolls and baiter of zergs.1 -
MurderMostFoul✭✭✭✭✭
✭BaiterOfZergs wrote: »exeeter702 wrote: »BaiterOfZergs wrote: »I guess I'm 100% wrong in a technical sense. Not sure why I said that. I just... sometimes... get the feeling... that MMR doesn't mean crap. I'm on Xbox NA also, Waffen, and I would assume most of my older characters are in a high-ish MMR unless they haven't re-qualified or whatever which may be the case.
The huge variance in skill levels of my teammates and the huge variance in skill level of my opponents. It's night and day what a BG might or might not be like at any given que. I see no rhyme or reason to any of it. And I'm tired of hearing people discredit other people's clips cuz the opponents might be bad. Of course they're bad... full on 95% of players are bad. I'm not sure 'good' players complain about being 1-shotted.
Good players are the biggest complainers in the game, a lot of the terrible double edge sword changes happens because people don’t think their complaints out. Then zos does heavy handed changes as a result.
As far as mmr it’s very noticeable. The meta shifts and how people play together changes. Of course there’s multiple factors to consider like low mmr being thrown into high or high into low, classes not complimenting each other, poor teammates even in high mmr and things like there being a stack of one class on a team.
Deaths and kill scoring drastically change too.
I think you overestimate the effect of "good players" complaints in relation to their influence on what changes zos decides to make to the game just a little.
That’s because you probably think zos doesn’t listen to feedback but they do, just not when people want them to and how they want them to. They see feedback and I guarantee you can find threads about most major changes before they happened even if it was months or years later.
ZOS also plays the game. So between player feedback and ZOS's own experience as players, they KNOW what players want.
On the other hand, players DON'T KNOW what constraints (time, talent, budget, etc.) ZOS is under regarding making changes. Nor do players know what changes are feasible from a programming/networking standpoint. So players' desires will rarely match ZOS's efforts.“There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so.”4 -
BaiterOfZergs✭✭✭✭✭MurderMostFoul wrote: »BaiterOfZergs wrote: »exeeter702 wrote: »BaiterOfZergs wrote: »I guess I'm 100% wrong in a technical sense. Not sure why I said that. I just... sometimes... get the feeling... that MMR doesn't mean crap. I'm on Xbox NA also, Waffen, and I would assume most of my older characters are in a high-ish MMR unless they haven't re-qualified or whatever which may be the case.
The huge variance in skill levels of my teammates and the huge variance in skill level of my opponents. It's night and day what a BG might or might not be like at any given que. I see no rhyme or reason to any of it. And I'm tired of hearing people discredit other people's clips cuz the opponents might be bad. Of course they're bad... full on 95% of players are bad. I'm not sure 'good' players complain about being 1-shotted.
Good players are the biggest complainers in the game, a lot of the terrible double edge sword changes happens because people don’t think their complaints out. Then zos does heavy handed changes as a result.
As far as mmr it’s very noticeable. The meta shifts and how people play together changes. Of course there’s multiple factors to consider like low mmr being thrown into high or high into low, classes not complimenting each other, poor teammates even in high mmr and things like there being a stack of one class on a team.
Deaths and kill scoring drastically change too.
I think you overestimate the effect of "good players" complaints in relation to their influence on what changes zos decides to make to the game just a little.
That’s because you probably think zos doesn’t listen to feedback but they do, just not when people want them to and how they want them to. They see feedback and I guarantee you can find threads about most major changes before they happened even if it was months or years later.
ZOS also plays the game. So between player feedback and ZOS's own experience as players, they KNOW what players want.
On the other hand, players DON'T KNOW what constraints (time, talent, budget, etc.) ZOS is under regarding making changes. Nor do players know what changes are feasible from a programming/networking standpoint. So players' desires will rarely match ZOS's efforts.
Yeah I agree. And when I say changes happen because of certain people I don’t also mean they favor those people, they don’t. Changes usually favor the average player, that’s why they’re double edged changes.
A healing nerf might sound terrible for the average player in a 1v1 against someone good but the more numbers you add to a confrontation the more it favors the average player. Now that healing change isn’t so bad in a 1v4.
Zerg of House Smallscale, First of his name, wielder of Volendrung, battleground hero, Cyrodiil butcher, the swifft footed, OG of the Templars and first pvpers, defender of scrolls and baiter of zergs.0