Will ZOS consider 24 man raids again in Cyrodiil?

iamDemi

I'm not quite sure how breaking the group down to 12 man raids help resolve the issues in Cyrodiil. Some of those same issues are still there (lag). When you essentially have the same number of players from a guild or same amount of players (period), you are only pushing them into separate groups, not changing the amount of skills going off. If anything, it hurts Guild Groups and the Community because then you are forced who to bring and who to leave behind or put in Group 2. I understand that smaller guilds or even smaller groups of players may not ever be up to 24 man raids but there are some that do have over 12 players and you are actually hurting the community player base more than helping far as on a social level/skill level. Just my thoughts and opinions and wanted to share with ZOS as I don't feel PVP Players should be punished for wanting to group together as a 24 man raid. Please reconsider this and compare your data on the back end because from what I can see, it isn't helping far as performance so shouldn't we revert back and try to resolve the issue in another fashion. Thank you for all you do.

iamDemi

P.S. On a side note: When you do have 2 x 12 man/woman groups it's easy to lose one another and then you are running around like chickens saying where did x go. Not fun. If you do keep it as 12 man raids then make it where you can MARK someone from the same guild as a LEADER for both groups or some kind of Mark Target key so we don't lose them.

Jierdanit

I doubt that they are going to change that in the near future as they did it to help with current performance issues.

geonsocal

i'm freezing everywhere now...

as far as the changes, it sure feels like we're at the mercy of some ZOS non-pvp type person's whim...

due to attrition of the cyrodiil player base over the years - it was hard to find good group leaders before the change - now - it's twice as hard...

Earthewen

Jierdanit wrote: »

I doubt that they are going to change that in the near future as they did it to help with current performance issues.

That's just it though. It didn't change a thing. People are experiencing disconnects for no apparent reason. They are still experiencing lag even when small crowds are there and no zergs are seen anywhere. If anything, now zergs are bigger and faction stacks more prevalent because there is strength in numbers. I'm not really sure what behavior ZOS was trying to encourage unless it is the massive log offs that pvp players are now doing because PvP just doesn't have the same fun as it used to.

Jierdanit

Earthewen wrote: »

Jierdanit wrote: »

I doubt that they are going to change that in the near future as they did it to help with current performance issues.

That's just it though. It didn't change a thing. People are experiencing disconnects for no apparent reason. They are still experiencing lag even when small crowds are there and no zergs are seen anywhere. If anything, now zergs are bigger and faction stacks more prevalent because there is strength in numbers. I'm not really sure what behavior ZOS was trying to encourage unless it is the massive log offs that pvp players are now doing because PvP just doesn't have the same fun as it used to.

I never said that change worked xD
but i also doubt that ZOS is going to admit that their changes do basically nothing.

oXI_Viper_IXo

Jierdanit wrote: »

I doubt that they are going to change that in the near future as they did it to help with current performance issues.

No, they literally said there weren't any noticeable performance gains and they were only implementing it because they liked the "behavior."

Jierdanit

oXI_Viper_IXo wrote: »

Jierdanit wrote: »

I doubt that they are going to change that in the near future as they did it to help with current performance issues.

No, they literally said there weren't any noticeable performance gains and they were only implementing it because they liked the "behavior."

I suppose that change in behavior was supposed to help with performance though.

But as i already said i never said that those plans worked out.

iamDemi

I don't see how ZOS can say they like the changes in behavior? What behavior? Which Campaign? PVP is equally as important as those who go spend hours in Trials, I feel that as PVP players, we've been shafted over the years since the beginning. I took a break from game to come back to this 12 player nonsense. I get that if it would of made a SIGNIFIGANT change in Performance but it did not. Last night, so many of my guild mates disconnected or what is equally as fun, your skills not wanting to go off or bar not changing over. This was happening to multiple players not only in our own guild/group.

Secondly, this 12 man instead of 24 man player is causing Guild Issues. So, ZOS has FORCED Guilds to do is only select their best players to run or core members. That means making others in guild sit out or be in a small 4 man group instead of being able to truly participate with their guild members which seems to cause more internal conflict than help. Does anyone from ZOS go into Cyrodiil on all sides and Campaigns? You have ball groups, meaning players who are 12 man that simply are dps but have healing bars (all of them) on their back bar. These existed prior to this reducing raid size from 24 to 12 man versus where Guild Groups typically have DPS, 3-4 heals and maybe 1-2 tanks (maybe).

So what happens when you force 12 man? Guild stop recruiting, new players who would of normally been invited get forced to fend for themselves or look elsewhere. It's UNFAIR to be honest. You have to take the WHOLE of Cyro not just a few squeaky wheels. My point is, there was nothing wrong with 24 man raids. Give us factual data why you won't change it back or consider it? How many voices need to speak up to revert it? I'm here because more often than thought we become complacent and I will not idly sit by when I feel something is more HARMFUL than helpful.

Just my opinions. I really wish someone from ZOS would send this up and take players opinions into account. Get more feedback from people who actually play in Cyro as serious players versus casual. It's a whole different ballgame when you go from Campaigns like 30 day to No CP to CP etc. They all have their own little differences which need to be taken into account.

Soul_Demon

*Re-post of earlier comment on the matter*

"Well, when you look at it objectively you see that forcing small groups of 12 players creates an environment where if a new player tries to get into one of those groups they are nothing more than a liability until they are performing at top level. 12 mans can only carry maybe two players at anytime who are not fully trained- larger groups of 24 can carry much more new and learning players at a time......so the result of shifting to 12 mans is casual/new players will really not have many opportunities to learn how to play or improve outside of solo play.

If you play solo you stand no chance to take on these ball groups at all..No chance and even more so with healers not able to heal the random groups or others sharing buffs. Most of the new and learning players will not stay in cyro long or bother to try and learn- the result is the new players will stop coming to cyro and being able to improve without being farmed or pushed out - the game experience for them will be horrible. Ganked or run over and farmed by ball groups until they leave and no 12 mans can tolerate to pick them up in meaningful numbers- its just not fun to be farmed or ganked non stop till you finally quit because no one is picking up players and teaching them how to play out in that environment, and make no mistake no one will.

By reducing group size and also taking away heals/buffs outside those groups what they have done is really removed most opportunities for new players to be learn how to play, as casual players....most players start as casual and become more involved as they learn......this removes that chance almost entirely as 12 mans can only tolerate so much and the new players are nothing more than bombs- Its quite inevitable that the zone will die eventually and become ball groups and gankers- nothing more. There is no other play this change can possibly cause beyond that end result.

But if you are a ballgroup this is godsend. Its the perfect storm for them for sure- ungrouped players who dont know much are not a threat at all to them, most will perish in first wave of sub assault, fear, fear, fear- dead. Stunlock and no one will be able to pick up newer players to explain what to try to avoid that due to them being liabilities with VD bombs they rely on after the stun locks so no one will pick them up in groups."

Outside these issues you have already noted the internal issues in a guild this causes---Any guild will be forced to select players and exclude others for the sake of meeting an arbitrary cap ZOS placed on existing guilds. This is not only changes carried out without showing the community any tangible benefit but clearly penalizing those wishing to group beyond 12 players. Players tend to enjoy raids where they fit in with the group running, but now ZOS by virtue of locking us at 12 demands guilds conform to their idea of 'behavior' they want----but to my knowledge not only do none of them run PvP guilds, I have not seen a "Z" symbol on the cyro map in PvP since 2015---so it would seem to me they are not playing but making decisions about behaviors without playing at all in PvP. That is not a very solid base to work from and refusing to explain exactly what you mean with "behaviors" you leave the players in the dark on why this had to be done.

What kind of reasoning could one be using without even potential benefit downstream mentioned to effect such changes?

Serjustin19

I believe we will get 24 group again. I feel there was something wrong with the updated and decided to test the 12man instead. Surprisingly the block walking no longer works. I know it used to not walk while block. I was surprised about the change couple days ago. So maybe 24 man group will make a comeback. (maybe healing without group to) Just like how the no block walking again for me.

Batgirl32

IamDemi makes numerous great comments! I recently joined a PvP Guild and have learned so much from running with a great team. However, once PvP changed from 24-person to 12-person it has noticeably become extremely detrimental to run a coordinated, cohesive raid. If you need to have us in 12-person groups for performance issues, then please put something in the game so that groups from the same guild can somehow follow each other. Verbal communication and visually trying to follow a small character on a screen can only go so far. However, with all the testing, I have seen hardly any improvements to PvP performance, in fact I find it to be much worse; there are many more people crashing to desktop or DCing when opposing teams run into each other on the battlefield. Which when it was a 24-person group and people DCed you may have lost 1/4 to 1/2 of your team, now in 12-person groups and you loose that many players you are basically dead. Please make improvements to PvP so that it can be an enjoyable experience for veterans, newbies, and casual PvPers.

idk

It would make less sense to return to 24 man groups than it did to eliminate them. Zos made the change for behavioral reasons, not server performance, even though the goal of all the testing was to improve performance. We do not know what that behavioral justification was.

The reason it would make less sense to return to the 24 man raids is it would mean Zos is admitting they made a very poor decision to start with. I doubt they will eat crow.

ThreeXB

This 12 person group for "behavior" is the worst excuse and not enough reason given by Zos team ☹ . 12 man and non healing outside of group killing major pvp guilds and toxicity and rage at all time high

VaranisArano

Jierdanit wrote: »

oXI_Viper_IXo wrote: »

Jierdanit wrote: »

I doubt that they are going to change that in the near future as they did it to help with current performance issues.

No, they literally said there weren't any noticeable performance gains and they were only implementing it because they liked the "behavior."

I suppose that change in behavior was supposed to help with performance though.

But as i already said i never said that those plans worked out.

It really wasn't.

Here's the actual quote from:
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/544305/details-for-aoe-testing-in-cyrodiil

"In reviewing the data for all the different tests, we did see some marked improvements in performance – on average, there was approximately a 25% reduction in the magnitude of server frame spikes and a slight reduction in the frequency of those spikes. While these improvements look good on a spreadsheet, they do not have a significant enough impact on improving the overall player experience. As a result, we will not be making any major changes at this time.

That said, there were a few elements from the various tests that we’ve decided to enable for both PC and console for the foreseeable future, as we liked the behavioral changes they brought. Starting on Monday, November 9 for consoles and November 16 for PC, we will be limiting group sizes in Cyrodiil to 12 players, and all ally-targeted abilities will only apply to those in your group."

If the changes, which were based on the testing, had resulted in performance improvements for players, rather than spreadsheets, they could have said so. They said the opposite - they made no major changes based on performance, but did make changes based on behavior.

VaranisArano

idk wrote: »

It would make less sense to return to 24 man groups than it did to eliminate them. Zos made the change for behavioral reasons, not server performance, even though the goal of all the testing was to improve performance. We do not know what that behavioral justification was.

The reason it would make less sense to return to the 24 man raids is it would mean Zos is admitting they made a very poor decision to start with. I doubt they will eat crow.

This is depressingly likely. My only hope is that ZOS didn't actually intend to make PUGs quite that disadvantaged vs 12 man ball groups and comes around to the idea that, hey, maybe PUGs really do need strength in numbers to take on coordinated groups!

But when ZOS does decide to address that, I think we'll see the cross-group healing reinstated first before ZOS considers reverting the group size nerf.

LarsS

As usual ZOS is lacking in their communication, that they liked the change in behavior is a useless info. At a minimum they should have informed us about what form of change they saw.

My guess is that they saw that the zergs became weaker with heal only in groups. I am at loss for what reason they reduced the group size. I have one big X-mas wish for our community, and that is that ZOS start to have a serious communication with us, together we may find a solution for the lag.

idk

VaranisArano wrote: »

Jierdanit wrote: »

oXI_Viper_IXo wrote: »

Jierdanit wrote: »

I doubt that they are going to change that in the near future as they did it to help with current performance issues.

No, they literally said there weren't any noticeable performance gains and they were only implementing it because they liked the "behavior."

I suppose that change in behavior was supposed to help with performance though.

But as i already said i never said that those plans worked out.

It really wasn't.

Here's the actual quote from:
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/544305/details-for-aoe-testing-in-cyrodiil

"In reviewing the data for all the different tests, we did see some marked improvements in performance – on average, there was approximately a 25% reduction in the magnitude of server frame spikes and a slight reduction in the frequency of those spikes. While these improvements look good on a spreadsheet, they do not have a significant enough impact on improving the overall player experience. As a result, we will not be making any major changes at this time.

That said, there were a few elements from the various tests that we’ve decided to enable for both PC and console for the foreseeable future, as we liked the behavioral changes they brought. Starting on Monday, November 9 for consoles and November 16 for PC, we will be limiting group sizes in Cyrodiil to 12 players, and all ally-targeted abilities will only apply to those in your group."

If the changes, which were based on the testing, had resulted in performance improvements for players, rather than spreadsheets, they could have said so. They said the opposite - they made no major changes based on performance, but did make changes based on behavior.

This is correct. It really seems Zos distanced the change they did make from the performance improvements as they do not even try to suggest there was any notable server performance with the changes they did implement.

idk

LarsS wrote: »

As usual ZOS is lacking in their communication, that they liked the change in behavior is a useless info. At a minimum they should have informed us about what form of change they saw.

My guess is that they saw that the zergs became weaker with heal only in groups. I am at loss for what reason they reduced the group size. I have one big X-mas wish for our community, and that is that ZOS start to have a serious communication with us, together we may find a solution for the lag.

Zos has acknowledged several times over the years that communicating with us is not something they are strong with.

Ironically, it was with the former class rep program that Zos communicated with us the most. However, Zos revamped that program into more of a clandestine group and put all the reps under an NDA. Sadly Zos returned to their old ways after that.

Joy_Division

VaranisArano wrote: »

idk wrote: »

It would make less sense to return to 24 man groups than it did to eliminate them. Zos made the change for behavioral reasons, not server performance, even though the goal of all the testing was to improve performance. We do not know what that behavioral justification was.

The reason it would make less sense to return to the 24 man raids is it would mean Zos is admitting they made a very poor decision to start with. I doubt they will eat crow.

This is depressingly likely. My only hope is that ZOS didn't actually intend to make PUGs quite that disadvantaged vs 12 man ball groups and comes around to the idea that, hey, maybe PUGs really do need strength in numbers to take on coordinated groups!

But when ZOS does decide to address that, I think we'll see the cross-group healing reinstated first before ZOS considers reverting the group size nerf.

I don't think ZOS intended to make PUGs play / fight at a disadvantage. That would be at odds with their admitted goal of "raising the floor" that they have articulated several times and what is probably the reason for a lot of the balance changes they do make.

That being said, I also don't think it took a Nostradamus to see that it would be the "floor" that would struggle most with these changes, whereas the "ceiling" would be the beneficiaries. So I doubt they gave this change much thought and perhaps implemented it because their test results were disappointing and thus felt pressure to do something.