new pvp rule:

ClowdyAllDay

crafted set only. no trial or dungeon or monster sets and def no mythics and oh none of that scribing allowed either

xylena_lazarow

what? no no no

This basically already exists, the Ravenwatch campaign. It's unpopular and sits empty most of the time.

TheMajority

lol

LordGavus

I vote we also make it light and heavy attacks only.

woe

what? no no no

Sounds like you don't play pvp at all..

Jaavaa

what? no no no

I play pvp cause i can waste billions of transmute stones to test different setups. Nmw.

VisitHammerfell

oh yeah lets do that

I voted yes but for a separate campaign. It could be interesting. They should have this rule for u50 BGs & Icereach at the very least if your account is CP 300+ (you can wear reconstructed gear there)

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

This basically already exists, the Ravenwatch campaign. It's unpopular and sits empty most of the time.

Ravenwatch is more like Amber Plasm, Pariah, and a mythic

Theist_VII

what? no no no

Why do you insist on trying to prohibit Scribing from PvP?

Have you tested any of the new skills?

All of them are either worse than their counterparts except for like two of them which are standardized to hell and back and interruptible with multiple second cast times.

Lumsdenml

what? no no no

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

This basically already exists, the Ravenwatch campaign. It's unpopular and sits empty most of the time.

I home Ravenwatch PC NA and can confirm this as being untrue.

Auberon1983

oh yeah lets do that

VisitHammerfell wrote: »

I voted yes but for a separate campaign. It could be interesting. They should have this rule for u50 BGs & Icereach at the very least if your account is CP 300+ (you can wear reconstructed gear there)

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

This basically already exists, the Ravenwatch campaign. It's unpopular and sits empty most of the time.

Ravenwatch is more like Amber Plasm, Pariah, and a mythic

Same reason I voted "yes". Not for PvP as a whole, but a different campaign. However, that could just lead to Fortified Brass + Heartland Conquerer being the only sets really seen. If there has been an "other" option I'd have chosen it.

Either way, OP, interesting question and post. It'd be neat to have some new PvP stuff, heck, anything at this point.

LaintalAy

pfft as if i play pvp

This would actually be better as a gate for normal dungeons.

Desiato

oh yeah lets do that

From my pov, pvp got worse and more cheesy as proc sets were added and was most popular without them.

The core gameplay would be the same, but it's less server intensive and easier to balance.

It would combat power creep.

There would be far less pve overhead.

And although all the options we have should lead to more diversity, do they really among enthusiasts? For the most part, no, most play the meta.

The difference between this and the current no proc cp paradigm is that the rules of the latter are ambiguous and still allow for a lot of op sets.

I'm surprised this idea is so unpopular. I wonder if it would be so unpopular among eso's original pvp audience. I know some OGs still play, but obviously they are more tolerant of what eso pvp has become than those who quit.

Joy_Division

what? no no no

Desiato wrote: »

I'm surprised this idea is so unpopular. I wonder if it would be so unpopular among eso's original pvp audience. I know some OGs still play, but obviously they are more tolerant of what eso pvp has become than those who quit.

It's unpopular for the same reasons Ravenwatch is unpopular. Not sure why this is such a surprise.

TechMaybeHic

what? no no no

They need to just balance what exists. Ravenwatch shows that limitations are not popular because they are not maintained and supported. Might as well have empty dreams about balance in stead

ToRelax

what? no no no

Desiato wrote: »

I'm surprised this idea is so unpopular. I wonder if it would be so unpopular among eso's original pvp audience. I know some OGs still play, but obviously they are more tolerant of what eso pvp has become than those who quit.

Prohibiting scribing would be a complete dealbreaker for me. I've waited ten years for it, much of it in no CP campaigns. Procs were orginally criticized as "playing the game for you", providing the power of an ability without a slot, resources, and most importantly, a GCD. Why then someone would seek to limit the amount of regular, player-activated abilities is beyond me.

CameraBeardThePirate

what? no no no

Ravenwatch is already dead 90% of the time. This proposed campaign would be even worse.

NordSwordnBoard

oh yeah lets do that

I doubt the devs have any focus on releasing new, non proc sets to entice Ravenwatch PvPers into the new dungeon. AFAIK they can't even keep an updated list of no-proc sets in the game. They want to maximize profit, and that means reinforcing the (fotm) idea that you need the new thing to win at PvP. Most guild halls have all the crafted sets the day they get released, so this proposal would help PvPers skip farming altogether. I think the fear is the PvPers might smarten up and finds ways to stop paying for content (chapters & eso+) they don't need anymore. Think of all the extra storage to gain if you decon all your proc sets Anything that even potentially lowers revenue from players will likely never happen.

Bucky_13

what? no no no

I have great new for you, Ravenwatch exists!

kargen27

what? no no no

This wouldn't be good for the game. The health of the game depends in large part on players doing a variety of activities. PvP'rs needing to chase down gear found in PvE activities provides them the incentive to participate in a variety of activities they otherwise might skip.

Desiato

oh yeah lets do that

ToRelax wrote: »

Prohibiting scribing would be a complete dealbreaker for me. I've waited ten years for it, much of it in no CP campaigns. Procs were orginally criticized as "playing the game for you", providing the power of an ability without a slot, resources, and most importantly, a GCD. Why then someone would seek to limit the amount of regular, player-activated abilities is beyond me.

I don't have a credible opinion on scribing yet, I'm speaking more to the current state of the game. My feeling is that it will be difficult to balance in pvp though.

Joy_Division wrote: »

It's unpopular for the same reasons Ravenwatch is unpopular. Not sure why this is such a surprise.

I'm surprised Ravenwatch is unpopular because it seems to solve so many issues that people typically complain about, especially ball groups, pull sets, proc ganks, arena builds and stalemates.

The CP system itself is the source of so many problems on Grey Host, including performance -- calculation overhead aside, just by extending fights by increasing survivability and sustain. When I play my cyro build in battlegrounds, it's clear that the CP system is what is carrying me in Cyro and not the undeath passive.

I should note that the last time I was in a ball group was 2017, but ball group players in this forum seem to say no cp is more challenging for them.

I also think it's a step up from battlegrounds, which also lacks CP, because proc sets are awful there.

It's so common for players to complain about the 'tank meta' and high hp, but a big reason it emerged is because of easy burst from proc sets.

In early cyro, most pve sets had limited viability because they usually didn't have an impen option. But we still had theorycrafting with team synergies. I don't think trait variety increased until around 2.4 or 2.5, but I don't recall exactly when that was. There was a huge influx of proc sets starting around that time too.

JustLovely

what? no no no

The "new rule" in PvP should be that ZOS resumes supporting the PvP portion of their game with dev time and server capacity.

furiouslog

what? no no no

I'd say no overall, but I'd be fine with having one campaign that did this so that there was an option.

Araneae6537

No overland sets either? I would include those, assuming the main goal is to exclude certain proc sets.

As others have pointed out, there’s the Ravenwatch Cyrodiil campaign, but perhaps the sets are too limited for it to be more popular? Otherwise I think it’s good to have options, if there is the population and resources to support such.

I think I would enjoy such an option for Battlegrounds, or at least I’d try it, but I think the population now is sadly too small most of the time. A priority I think would be new maps, maybe even new modes (which some ability to choose deathmatch vs. objective or any) and definitely a better reward track (ideally multiple tracks, like in GW2, where you could work toward rewards normally obtained from specific maps, dungeons, etc. — could even have a furnishing track that awards furnishing mays — so much that could be done with that!) I enjoy Battlegrounds when the matches are close, but no one wants to get steamrolled all the time, I surely do not, and thus the population remains small.

CameraBeardThePirate

what? no no no

Desiato wrote: »

I'm surprised Ravenwatch is unpopular because it seems to solve so many issues that people typically complain about, especially ball groups, pull sets, proc ganks, arena builds and stalemates.

Ravenwatch is unpopular for 2 reasons.

1) It's too restrictive. There are so many sets that shouldn't count as procs because their "proc" merely gives flat stats, yet they are disabled in Ravenwatch and No-CP IC. I mean Jesus, Imperial Physique is literally entirely stat based, and ONLY works in IC, yet it's disabled in No-CP IC. That's absolutely ridiculous.

2) It isn't supported by ZOS at all. It was entirely abandoned by them, which they should quite frankly be ashamed of. There are no in game indicators to tell which sets work. There is no official list that is maintained by ZOS, in game or otherwise. ZOS doesn't advertise no-Proc at all. They take forever to update which sets work there when something is behaving unexpectedly.

The no CP campaigns are a joke.

Desiato

oh yeah lets do that

CameraBeardThePirate wrote: »

Desiato wrote: »

I'm surprised Ravenwatch is unpopular because it seems to solve so many issues that people typically complain about, especially ball groups, pull sets, proc ganks, arena builds and stalemates.

Ravenwatch is unpopular for 2 reasons.

1) It's too restrictive. There are so many sets that shouldn't count as procs because their "proc" merely gives flat stats, yet they are disabled in Ravenwatch and No-CP IC. I mean Jesus, Imperial Physique is literally entirely stat based, and ONLY works in IC, yet it's disabled in No-CP IC. That's absolutely ridiculous.

2) It isn't supported by ZOS at all. It was entirely abandoned by them, which they should quite frankly be ashamed of. There are no in game indicators to tell which sets work. There is no official list that is maintained by ZOS, in game or otherwise. ZOS doesn't advertise no-Proc at all. They take forever to update which sets work there when something is behaving unexpectedly.

The no CP campaigns are a joke.

Yeah, these are reasons why I didn't play there. Although when I return to pvp, I plan to try it anyway because Grey Host is just so awful. I love the core AvA gameplay, but the pvp on Grey Host is probably the worst PVP I've ever experienced in any game.

The main problem for Ravenwatch for me is the lack of players, which I think stems from the reasons you describe.

But I also think a problem in society in general is everyone wants the best of both worlds. They want to eat sugar all day without the health impacts, and they want what the CP system and proc/OP sets give them without having to deal with what they do to them.

Vulkunne

what? no no no

Alright I got this. New PvP Rule, Ball Groups only and uhh everyone else logs off the server. Let's go.

Photosniper89

what? no no no

ClowdyAllDay wrote: »

crafted set only. no trial or dungeon or monster sets and def no mythics and oh none of that scribing allowed either

There is a reason why gray host is the only camp that any population what so ever.

Deimus

what? no no no

I'd much rather see a Cyrodill instance that highly discouraged ball group play. Limits # of unique HoTs to 1 or 2 stacks per player, gives a debuff that cuts damage or removes cc immunity cooldown to 4+ players stacked on each other, and has a unique siege the Ball Buster with a wide area that doesn't do much damage but does 10x the damage as oblivion damage to players within 3 meters of 3 other players of their alliance.

Joy_Division

what? no no no

Desiato wrote: »

I'm surprised Ravenwatch is unpopular because it seems to solve so many issues that people typically complain about, especially ball groups, pull sets, proc ganks, arena builds and stalemates.

The CP system itself is the source of so many problems on Grey Host, including performance -- calculation overhead aside, just by extending fights by increasing survivability and sustain. When I play my cyro build in battlegrounds, it's clear that the CP system is what is carrying me in Cyro and not the undeath passive.

I should note that the last time I was in a ball group was 2017, but ball group players in this forum seem to say no cp is more challenging for them.

I also think it's a step up from battlegrounds, which also lacks CP, because proc sets are awful there.

It's so common for players to complain about the 'tank meta' and high hp, but a big reason it emerged is because of easy burst from proc sets.

In early cyro, most pve sets had limited viability because they usually didn't have an impen option. But we still had theorycrafting with team synergies. I don't think trait variety increased until around 2.4 or 2.5, but I don't recall exactly when that was. There was a huge influx of proc sets starting around that time too.

So you are a long time veteran of many types of PvP styles, the sort of competitive gamer who dislikes being "carried" by mechanics? You don't think that is rather niche, a small subset of the overall playerbase?

We have ten unbroken years of ESO's playerbase preferring to wait in hour+ long ques for the default/zerg campaign. Their preferences should not be surprising at this point..

Necrotech_Master

CameraBeardThePirate wrote: »

Desiato wrote: »

I'm surprised Ravenwatch is unpopular because it seems to solve so many issues that people typically complain about, especially ball groups, pull sets, proc ganks, arena builds and stalemates.

Ravenwatch is unpopular for 2 reasons.

1) It's too restrictive. There are so many sets that shouldn't count as procs because their "proc" merely gives flat stats, yet they are disabled in Ravenwatch and No-CP IC. I mean Jesus, Imperial Physique is literally entirely stat based, and ONLY works in IC, yet it's disabled in No-CP IC. That's absolutely ridiculous.

2) It isn't supported by ZOS at all. It was entirely abandoned by them, which they should quite frankly be ashamed of. There are no in game indicators to tell which sets work. There is no official list that is maintained by ZOS, in game or otherwise. ZOS doesn't advertise no-Proc at all. They take forever to update which sets work there when something is behaving unexpectedly.

The no CP campaigns are a joke.

this is the biggest reason why ravenwatch isnt more popular

the inconsistent rules with procs, like pariah works even though its a scaling flat stat proc, but imperial physique does not work even though its also a scaling flat stat proc

whats even more mind boggling is that the new mythic (torc of the last ayleid king) even though its purely flat stat bonuses, does not work in the no proc environments

for me personally i liked playing in the no cp environment, but not with the no procs, i think no-cp has some merit but no proc to me just makes it boring (along with the other problems that have been mentioned with it)

NordSwordnBoard

oh yeah lets do that

Regarding Ravenwatch - Take a new player perspective, based on conversations I had with a friend:

"The top one is full, what about the others?"
-'One is the same as the top, but 7 days. The other is no CP & No Proc Sets'
"It doesn't show a list of restricted sets, are you sure?"
-'Yes, I'm sure. They did it to GH one time. There's an outdated list on the forums I think"
"I think I'm signed into the first one anyway, so I'm stuck there for 30 days. I have to pay to switch to the others, and even without paying, why would I play in a place with hidden settings?"
-'Early on, you may want to use a group to help you learn, and GH obviously has groups with a locked pop.'

A redesign might help, but does that count as our PvP content for the year?