Why do groups have limits?

Lord_Bashu

Why do groups have limits in this game?

Are there limits in the real world like that?

Why do magic's spells impart no negative effects to caster, like in a real magical world?

Why does ZOS, have guild houses, that only hold 24 people? and have Guilds that have 500 people?

Why are you allowed to have endless stam, but able to cast magic spells?

Why in my house can't I have Guild v Guild events? I mean its my house, why don't I have the freedom to allow such things in "my house"

Is the home not mine?

How can I carry, 24 Siege weapons and yet only 24 apples?

Why can't I ride to Cyro?

Why can't I have a home in Cyro?

Why can I invite friends to my house, they go to sleep and then awaken in my home? Why are they ported some where else?

Why can i take a way shine every where in the game, but in Cyro, I have to use Transit Shrine?

Why can I duel, every where but Cyro?

Why when I hit a skill, it does not work?

Why can I adjust my health, Magic and Stam? I can't do that in real life? Dang I wish I could.. and for only 7k gold.

How can you change your skills with Gold? I mean, where is that possible? What am I a micro chip? and u erasing my memory and then injecting new skills and knowledge...

Why do inventories have limits? I mean I can make a storage shed?

Why so many limits? and so many illogical features? Where is there any logic in this game? Why has this game become so unrealistic. so far from reality.

How many illogical features did I miss? Can you name a few?

VaranisArano

It's a game. Most of what you list is that way precisely because it's a game, with certain limitations from hardware (a lot of housing complaints) or from the design intentions of the Developers (a lot of the gameplay and inventory complaints.)

I mean, there is a certain suspension of disbelief that comes with games. It's absurd that I can cook every dish in the game by stirring a single bowl and occasionally licking my finger, but I deal with it because I neither need a detailed scene of making Longfin Pastry vs making Bewithched Sugar Skulls, nor were the Devs ever going to spend money on that.

Lord_Bashu

Many if not most of the items listed, are not based on any sort of hardware or software limitations.


design intentions humm..

Sandman929

I don't understand why the group cap of 12 remains, and is spreading, when group limited healing/buffing was reverted.
The cap no longer serves a purpose at 12 besides reducing the social aspect of the game.

Amottica

Lord_Bashu wrote: »

Are there limits in the real world like that?

If the real world was an MMORPG played on physical servers then we would likely have group size limitations. Theoretically, the answer to your question as it could relate to ESO is YES.

Adding here. As for the changes to group size in PvE, I cannot recall a serious MMORPG that has such a small group cap. I wonder what the justification is.

Elsonso

What is a "real magical world", again?

Kwoung

Elsonso wrote: »

What is a "real magical world", again?

It's when my wife makes prime rib for dinner!

neferpitou73

Because then entire factions could group up with all the buffs that includes and you'd have an unkillable zerg.

Honestly though I wish they'd bring the 24-man groups back. My pvp guild lost so many players after that change. And honestly 12man makes it harder to get newer players into pvp because groups no longer have any room to spare for inexperienced players. It also cuts down on build diversity. No more room for unique/troll-y builds.

Lord_Bashu

I keep thinking of more items, that are not logical in this game. I mean most games have some degree of logic...

This one changes so many things so often, and so many things are just not logical.. its amazing.... frankly.

Can you name some other non logical items or features?

colossalvoids

It's a videogame. Also if you cannot see for yourself why something is the way it is it doesn't make it illogical.

Lord_Bashu

It is video game.. of course.. but for a video game.. does it not have a great deal of non logical changes, features.. quirks.. more so than any other major game...

I mean.. how does a Class, like Templar.. for what 5 years.. a feature.. then lose it? From even a design standpoint.. who does that... if u were one of those people.. and that happen to you..

You can go on and on.. In real magical world, U can't wear heavy armor and cast spells.. not effectively.. I mean even gandalf knows that.. right?

So.. the discussion is can u name other items.. in the game.. that just have no basis...

And the central question.. is.. why do groups have to any limits..??? If guild has 500 possible members.. its not a software or hardware issue. So... why don't we demand.. that groups have no limits.. I mean would not improve the social exp.. to make this a better exp.

I mean.. once again.. a guild house can only have 24 ppl... they say.. get this big house for your guild.. ESO words.. not mine and only small percent can go to it..

What about in Cyro.. why did they reduce group size.. it did not improve anything.. what they say.. they liked the behavior?? What did that mean? Did u like the Behavior.. this forum is full of.. no it did nothing to change what happens.. other than NEW ppl have a lot less chance to join a group in cyro.. and Guilds have to make groups where 12 are in the main one.. and 3 or 5 ppl are a smaller little one.. How do those smaller groups feel...???? not good.. I can tell you that.. To me.. well.. I can't say.. cause it might cause this Post to be terminated.. But its not good for anybody.. except for some ZOS folks.. i guess.. and yet they won't tell us why.. does that not seem strange to you all?

Also will this now change to 12 for house's? u can only have 12 ppl in your house in the new patch? with all groups going to 12..

Groups should not have limits.. I know lots of other games.. where they do not.. time to demand!!! We are the ones paying for it.. reminder that!!!

@colossalvoids

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

Sandman929 wrote: »

I don't understand why the group cap of 12 remains, and is spreading, when group limited healing/buffing was reverted.
The cap no longer serves a purpose at 12 besides reducing the social aspect of the game.

The cap is 12 because it reduces the amount of calculations made by group buffs which also have a cap of 12. Now it only needs to be 'in range yes/no' (Also sets)

Also with the reduced max player count smaller groups are needed to make the numbers add up in a better way. When it was 24cap 1 group was around 1/4 of your whole faction.

Sandman929

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

I don't understand why the group cap of 12 remains, and is spreading, when group limited healing/buffing was reverted.
The cap no longer serves a purpose at 12 besides reducing the social aspect of the game.

The cap is 12 because it reduces the amount of calculations made by group buffs which also have a cap of 12. Now it only needs to be 'in range yes/no' (Also sets)

Also with the reduced max player count smaller groups are needed to make the numbers add up in a better way. When it was 24cap 1 group was around 1/4 of your whole faction.

Hard to say what's a "rule" when there are sets like Meritorious that buffs 6. Maybe 6 is the better number.
It was 24, then 12 with group limited healing..now 12 without group limited healing. Now for some reason it's supposed to be 12 everywhere, so I'd think all buff sets should conform to 12

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

Sandman929 wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

I don't understand why the group cap of 12 remains, and is spreading, when group limited healing/buffing was reverted.
The cap no longer serves a purpose at 12 besides reducing the social aspect of the game.

The cap is 12 because it reduces the amount of calculations made by group buffs which also have a cap of 12. Now it only needs to be 'in range yes/no' (Also sets)

Also with the reduced max player count smaller groups are needed to make the numbers add up in a better way. When it was 24cap 1 group was around 1/4 of your whole faction.

Hard to say what's a "rule" when there are sets like Meritorious that buffs 6. Maybe 6 is the better number.
It was 24, then 12 with group limited healing..now 12 without group limited healing. Now for some reason it's supposed to be 12 everywhere, so I'd think all buff sets should conform to 12

@Sandman929 I believe ZOS said it, I would try and find the link to the patch notes but it was quite some time ago and now all new sets have been 12 for a while (at least since they started to standardise buffs also for 12 people). Meritorius kind of makes sense to hit only 6 because that's also purges cap but equally ZOS normally is very slow to update older sets.

@Lord_Bashu replied to your questions:

Why do groups have limits in this game? - Because of game mechanics and server load

Are there limits in the real world like that? - Yes look at any form of team sports.

Why do magic's spells impart no negative effects to caster, like in a real magical world? - Because it's magic and there is a cost - it uses magicka

Why does ZOS, have guild houses, that only hold 24 people? and have Guilds that have 500 people? - Because guild houses aren't implemented in ESO only individual players have houses. Also supposedly a server problem with instance crashing.

Why are you allowed to have endless stam, but able to cast magic spells? - mechanics of the game

Why in my house can't I have Guild v Guild events? I mean its my house, why don't I have the freedom to allow such things in "my house" - I agree it would be nice.

Is the home not mine? - no its ZOS's

How can I carry, 24 Siege weapons and yet only 24 apples? - Magic

Why can't I ride to Cyro? - You can you just can't enter

Why can't I have a home in Cyro? - they were destroyed or are owned by NPC's already

Why can I invite friends to my house, they go to sleep and then awaken in my home? Why are they ported some where else? - server mechanics

Why can i take a way shine every where in the game, but in Cyro, I have to use Transit Shrine? - The wayshrine systems are broken (you can see ruined ones in cyro)

Why can I duel, every where but Cyro? - Dueling is for practice, cyro is an 'active' war zone.

Why when I hit a skill, it does not work? - There's a cost to skills, sometimes that stamina or magicka, sometimes its your real life sanity.

Why can I adjust my health, Magic and Stam? I can't do that in real life? Dang I wish I could.. and for only 7k gold. - Magic

How can you change your skills with Gold? I mean, where is that possible? What am I a micro chip? and u erasing my memory and then injecting new skills and knowledge... - the god that you pray to for money is more magical than you.

Why do inventories have limits? I mean I can make a storage shed? - You can but then you wouldn't have it with you all the time. Thats what the bank / storage boxes are.

Why so many limits? and so many illogical features? Where is there any logic in this game? Why has this game become so unrealistic. so far from reality. - It's a game.

VaranisArano

Lord_Bashu wrote: »

It is video game.. of course.. but for a video game.. does it not have a great deal of non logical changes, features.. quirks.. more so than any other major game...

I mean.. how does a Class, like Templar.. for what 5 years.. a feature.. then lose it? From even a design standpoint.. who does that... if u were one of those people.. and that happen to you..

You can go on and on.. In real magical world, U can't wear heavy armor and cast spells.. not effectively.. I mean even gandalf knows that.. right?

So.. the discussion is can u name other items.. in the game.. that just have no basis...

And the central question.. is.. why do groups have to any limits..??? If guild has 500 possible members.. its not a software or hardware issue. So... why don't we demand.. that groups have no limits.. I mean would not improve the social exp.. to make this a better exp.

I mean.. once again.. a guild house can only have 24 ppl... they say.. get this big house for your guild.. ESO words.. not mine and only small percent can go to it..

What about in Cyro.. why did they reduce group size.. it did not improve anything.. what they say.. they liked the behavior?? What did that mean? Did u like the Behavior.. this forum is full of.. no it did nothing to change what happens.. other than NEW ppl have a lot less chance to join a group in cyro.. and Guilds have to make groups where 12 are in the main one.. and 3 or 5 ppl are a smaller little one.. How do those smaller groups feel...???? not good.. I can tell you that.. To me.. well.. I can't say.. cause it might cause this Post to be terminated.. But its not good for anybody.. except for some ZOS folks.. i guess.. and yet they won't tell us why.. does that not seem strange to you all?

Also will this now change to 12 for house's? u can only have 12 ppl in your house in the new patch? with all groups going to 12..

Groups should not have limits.. I know lots of other games.. where they do not.. time to demand!!! We are the ones paying for it.. reminder that!!!

colossalvoids

I'm sorry that Tamriel doesn't meet your logical standards as a "real magical world". This isn't Arda, this magic isn't Gandalf's magic, and on Nirn, trained battlemages wear enchanted armor that let them be effective spellcasters in Arena, Daggerfall, Morrowind, and so on. That's a gripe you have with TES in general, not just ESO.

You also say that Guild size is neither a hardware nor software thing, yet ignore that Guild size is closely tied to Guild Trader access, where 500 players may list a maximum of 15,000 items. We have seen numerous times that Guild Histories has an impact on performance and that loading the items in Guild Traders is impacted by performance. Like it or not, the number of players you have in Guilds does impact the hardware/software side of ESO as evidenced most clearly when ZOS had problems with the Guild History after more players joined Guilds due to the introduction of the Guildfinder.

Housing, I direct you to ZOS' statement: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/512076/february-2020-furnishing-limit-status-update/p1
"The number of guests in a home also impacts performance. At the moment, increasing the population limit would require reducing furnishing limits." It might be illogical from an in-universe position, but that's not what really matters to the hardware/software side of a video game, now is it?


Cyrodiil Group size and the new group size changes for PVE? Well, there ZOS hasn't given any reason aside from design intentions, and like you, I find that insufficient reason to compensate for the loss of gameplay I enjoyed.


I'm somewhat sympathetic to your non-LotR complaints, but in the end, I don't think "it's illogical from an in-universe perspective" is a very helpful way to approach complaints about why the game is designed the way it is.

If you want the Devs to increase guild size, you have to look at how that's going to impact the game, particularly trading guilds, and performance.

If you want the Devs to increase housing group sizes, then you have to grapple with the performance concerns that caused those limitations, as outlined in the linked post. Are you willing to reduce your item slots to have more friends over? Is the Housing Community as a whole willing to do so?

If you want the Devs to remove all limits from groups, then you have to consider that the game was designed for 24-player groups, and that it has to be recorded for larger groups, including an expandable UI, better tracking for group members, and so on...

None of those hardware/software/performance things are a concern in-universe in a "real magical world". They are definitely a concern in a Video Game made by Developers, who are less concerned with representing a real world with 100% faithfulness than they are with making a (mostly) working video game product to sell. When in-universe logic collides with the keeping the game (mostly) functioning according to the Devs' intentions, performance wins.

Look no farther than Companions, a major selling point and only new feature of their brand new Chapter. It makes no logical sense that faithful companion Bastian or Mirri takes off the moment more players show up or we enter a city, but that's exactly what ZOS is testing on the PTS because of performance concerns. Performance really is that much of a priority.

Elsonso

VaranisArano wrote: »

Cyrodiil Group size and the new group size changes for PVE? Well, there ZOS hasn't given any reason aside from design intentions, and like you, I find that insufficient reason to compensate for the loss of gameplay I enjoyed.

I think we can guess that this is going to come down to performance, like it did in Cyrodiil.

In a 24 person group, everything you do has to be communicated to 23 other people, plus anyone who happens to be standing nearby. You are also receiving updates from 23 other players, plus anyone who happens to be standing nearby.

Reducing groups to 12 reduces these lines of communication to 1/4 of what they were. That is a huge change.

The place where companions fit into the performance mix is that the server has to decide what the companion is going to do. A group of 12 players with 12 companions is more of a server load than a group of 24 players. With 24 players, the server is just telling everyone what the other players are doing. With companions, the server has to decide what to do, then tell 12 people what just happened.

My guess is that 6 players with 6 companions is what they determined the servers could handle. Thus, group size is 12 across the board. Big performance boost for groups without companions, with little or no performance hit with groups that do.

Sandman929

So once again we're just a bunch of players of different sides of guessing at reasons....if only there were some way for ZOS to communicate with the player base and explain the decision to standardize 12 everywhere instead of reverting back to 24 in Cyrodiil.
Sadly, there is no such technology and all of our communication must be one directional.

Elsonso

Sandman929 wrote: »

So once again we're just a bunch of players of different sides of guessing at reasons....if only there were some way for ZOS to communicate with the player base and explain the decision to standardize 12 everywhere instead of reverting back to 24 in Cyrodiil.
Sadly, there is no such technology and all of our communication must be one directional.

If Gina trots out and says, "Yup, group size to 12 is because of performance", will you nod with understanding and wander off in search of some other bit of trivia? Will you dig in and demand more? Argue? Dispute the claim? Rage?

Sandman929

Elsonso wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

So once again we're just a bunch of players of different sides of guessing at reasons....if only there were some way for ZOS to communicate with the player base and explain the decision to standardize 12 everywhere instead of reverting back to 24 in Cyrodiil.
Sadly, there is no such technology and all of our communication must be one directional.

If Gina trots out and says, "Yup, group size to 12 is because of performance", will you nod with understanding and wander off in search of some other bit of trivia? Will you dig in and demand more? Argue? Dispute the claim? Rage?

I assume she'd have some detail about how it improves performance, but I'd accept an answer even if it wasn't too detailed. At the moment, I'm in the camp thinking it seems like an arbitrary choice. Any explanation is better than none.
There have been a lot of valid concerns from players who want to group with more of their guild for overland, delves, socializing...whatever. I don't have to do what they do to think their concerns are valid.
The group size reduction to 12 seemed to coincide with the decision to limit healing to group members, and that decision has been reverted because it didn't significantly improve performance. If the group size, but not the healing cap, is a significant enough performance improvement, I'm happy it's in place.
However, I think if ZOS found it to be a significant factor in improving performance they'd be shouting their victory from the mountaintops. Which leads me back to "it's an arbitrary choice".

Elsonso

Sandman929 wrote: »

Elsonso wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

So once again we're just a bunch of players of different sides of guessing at reasons....if only there were some way for ZOS to communicate with the player base and explain the decision to standardize 12 everywhere instead of reverting back to 24 in Cyrodiil.
Sadly, there is no such technology and all of our communication must be one directional.

If Gina trots out and says, "Yup, group size to 12 is because of performance", will you nod with understanding and wander off in search of some other bit of trivia? Will you dig in and demand more? Argue? Dispute the claim? Rage?

I assume she'd have some detail about how it improves performance, but I'd accept an answer even if it wasn't too detailed. At the moment, I'm in the camp thinking it seems like an arbitrary choice. Any explanation is better than none.
There have been a lot of valid concerns from players who want to group with more of their guild for overland, delves, socializing...whatever. I don't have to do what they do to think their concerns are valid.
The group size reduction to 12 seemed to coincide with the decision to limit healing to group members, and that decision has been reverted because it didn't significantly improve performance. If the group size, but not the healing cap, is a significant enough performance improvement, I'm happy it's in place.
However, I think if ZOS found it to be a significant factor in improving performance they'd be shouting their victory from the mountaintops. Which leads me back to "it's an arbitrary choice".

It is extremely unlikely to be "arbitrary". I mean, do you really think these people are psychopaths?

They aren't going to shout about performance improvements. They've done that before, but because performance issues are generally targeted at particular situations, they don't affect all users. The ones who do not get to see any improvement are quick to come here and say so. There are also people who say that ZOS did nothing because some other performance problem is still there. Even as players take advantage of these improvements, the story in here is generally about how improvement is bad.

"The little lights, they aren't twinkling".

Lord_Bashu

ESO is a “Mechanical Machine” which creates a system. System design and testing has been around more than 2000 years. The basic’s of it are fairly straight forward, when your designing for a Performance System, i.e. a System that needs to perform at high level, you need to design it to meet certain metrics and tolerances to maintain the desired performance level. PvP combat in a game is an example of something that needs to meet a desired performance level.

When designing the system you must take into account all the limitations in your design. You must ensure you design to those limitations. If you do not, then the system will be flawed. You use testing procedures to ensure compliance with the desired metrics and tolerances. Then you have a process of sizing and “refining” the system until it meets the desired metrics and tolerances. Or you find you have to change your metrics and tolerances because your unable to design the system to the desired metrics. So after proper testing is concluded certifying that your system is meeting the design criteria, you can then put the system into production.

As the system is updated and change’s are made by design, each new feature must be viewed as to its effect on the total system. You must then retest to ensure compliance to the metrics before implementing the new updated system.

Management of the performance system
If the system mangers deviate from the above process typically by not ensuring proper testing for the desired metrics for any reason, or changing the metrics, then the system could and will likely start to degenerate with each new change.

None of us in this forum, has the required inside knowledge and research to determine why we have a specific issue with ESO. We can’t even determine if the current performance fits the desired metrics. The only thing we can do, is decide if it good enough for us on personal level, if its not acceptable we can try to express that to the system managers or move to another system.

I see a lot of assumptions being made, without the proper internal knowledge.

As an end user:
I want to see unlimited Group sizes (i.e. my org post)
House’s that can hold larger amount’s of folks. i.e. my entire guild
House’s where groups can fight each other
When I hit a key, the skill goes off.
Significantly less change to long standing items, i.e. skills, etc i.e. A stable world! One where significant changes are not made on an almost a quarterly basis.
I do not want to be a tester/system designer unless I am really well paid for it, 150k plus real dollars yearly. btdt

Jaraal

Elsonso wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

So once again we're just a bunch of players of different sides of guessing at reasons....if only there were some way for ZOS to communicate with the player base and explain the decision to standardize 12 everywhere instead of reverting back to 24 in Cyrodiil.
Sadly, there is no such technology and all of our communication must be one directional.

If Gina trots out and says, "Yup, group size to 12 is because of performance", will you nod with understanding and wander off in search of some other bit of trivia? Will you dig in and demand more? Argue? Dispute the claim? Rage?

They've already said that lowering the group size did nothing to improve performance, so, no.... she's not going to come out and say that.

She said they kept the 12 man limit after the tests because they "liked the behavioral changes."

VaranisArano

Lord_Bashu wrote: »

ESO is a “Mechanical Machine” which creates a system. System design and testing has been around more than 2000 years. The basic’s of it are fairly straight forward, when your designing for a Performance System, i.e. a System that needs to perform at high level, you need to design it to meet certain metrics and tolerances to maintain the desired performance level. PvP combat in a game is an example of something that needs to meet a desired performance level.

When designing the system you must take into account all the limitations in your design. You must ensure you design to those limitations. If you do not, then the system will be flawed. You use testing procedures to ensure compliance with the desired metrics and tolerances. Then you have a process of sizing and “refining” the system until it meets the desired metrics and tolerances. Or you find you have to change your metrics and tolerances because your unable to design the system to the desired metrics. So after proper testing is concluded certifying that your system is meeting the design criteria, you can then put the system into production.

As the system is updated and change’s are made by design, each new feature must be viewed as to its effect on the total system. You must then retest to ensure compliance to the metrics before implementing the new updated system.

Management of the performance system
If the system mangers deviate from the above process typically by not ensuring proper testing for the desired metrics for any reason, or changing the metrics, then the system could and will likely start to degenerate with each new change.

None of us in this forum, has the required inside knowledge and research to determine why we have a specific issue with ESO. We can’t even determine if the current performance fits the desired metrics. The only thing we can do, is decide if it good enough for us on personal level, if its not acceptable we can try to express that to the system managers or move to another system.

I see a lot of assumptions being made, without the proper internal knowledge.

As an end user:
I want to see unlimited Group sizes (i.e. my org post)
House’s that can hold larger amount’s of folks. i.e. my entire guild
House’s where groups can fight each other
When I hit a key, the skill goes off.
Significantly less change to long standing items, i.e. skills, etc i.e. A stable world! One where significant changes are not made on an almost a quarterly basis.
I do not want to be a tester/system designer unless I am really well paid for it, 150k plus real dollars yearly. btdt

This would be why I keep pointing out examples of when ZOS themselves acknowledged performance problems with what you want.

I mean, as an end user, you can ask for houses that can hold up to 500 people. Go for it! But none of that changes the limitations ZOS talks about in this article: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/512076/february-2020-furnishing-limit-status-update/p1

Sandman929

Jaraal wrote: »

Elsonso wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

So once again we're just a bunch of players of different sides of guessing at reasons....if only there were some way for ZOS to communicate with the player base and explain the decision to standardize 12 everywhere instead of reverting back to 24 in Cyrodiil.
Sadly, there is no such technology and all of our communication must be one directional.

If Gina trots out and says, "Yup, group size to 12 is because of performance", will you nod with understanding and wander off in search of some other bit of trivia? Will you dig in and demand more? Argue? Dispute the claim? Rage?

They've already said that lowering the group size did nothing to improve performance, so, no.... she's not going to come out and say that.

She said they kept the 12 man limit after the tests because they "liked the behavioral changes."

Well, apparently it is a performance improvement. So now we've see that it both is and isn't. At least this is some elaboration:

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Hi everyone,

First, we wanted to thank you all for providing so much valuable feedback on the change to group sizes in this update. We understand there are situations where having a larger group size is desired and makes some activities more enjoyable.

As some of you have guessed, this change ultimately comes down to performance. We’ve been continually looking at ways to improve performance and stability across the game and we found reducing the group size was an effective way to ensure there would be fewer situations where you hit critical memory. Additionally, there’s a fair amount of data that has to be exchanged on the backend for every person in your group. By limiting the group size to 12, we’re introducing additional performance gains.

Thanks again for taking the time to share your thoughts with us on this topic. We appreciate it, and we hope this helps provide additional context for the change.

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/570511/12-person-group-limit-whaaaaaat#latest

Jaraal

Sandman929 wrote: »

Well, apparently it is a performance improvement. So now we've see that it both is and isn't.

I learned long ago to take what they say with a grain of salt. I'd rather trust what I see in-game than what I read on a forum. And for me, performance has only gotten worse in Cyrodill since they cut group sizes in half.

Actions speak louder than words.