Maintenance for the week of September 1:
• [COMPLETE] Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – September 3, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – September 3, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – September 3, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for patch maintenance – September 3, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
Battlegrounds: Cycle of Self-Destruction
-
Daoin✭✭✭✭not been to BG once since 3 set teams were outed, seems like i made good choice !Edited by Daoin on May 9, 2025 9:08AM1 -
karthrag_inak✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Khajiit did 1 bg recently, to meet the requirements of the most recent golden pursuits, and as a former 3 team bg player and lover....that one bg was the most repuslive, embarrassing, depressing experience this one has had in ESO since he started in beta.
Khajiit did not hurt anyone but died instantly repeatedly, barely upon reaching the ground. Once khajiit rezzed, there was infnite armorbreak and snare still stuck upon him that remained after the frequent 1shot kills.
It was the most unfun and upsetting experience Khajiit has.had in any game in 40+ years of gaming.
So thanks Zos. One more thing that this one used to love that he will never do again.
Look what you did to khajiit's sweet, wonderful game. Khajiit feels old. And sad.PC-NA : 19 Khajiit and 1 Fishy-cat with fluffy delusions. cp3600
GM of Imperial Gold Reserve trading guild (started in 2017) since 2/2022
Come visit Karth's Glitter Box, Khajiit's home. Fully stocked guild hall done in sleek Khajiit stylings, with Grand Master Stations, Transmute, Scribing, Trial Dummies, etc. Also has 2 full bowling alleys, nightclub, and floating maze over Wrothgar.(Pariah's Pinacle)2 -
Jierdanit✭✭✭✭✭
✭
Except I never said 3-sided was popular. It never had the chance to be. Not without the rewards we have right now to lure people in, and a separate DM queue to create the necessary conditions to keep them there.
I know that the collusion of the EU hive mind is a lot easier with just two teams. Believe me, I know. But is it really worth throwing away everything that Battlegrounds could be? Is it really worth the future of PVP itself?
I mean you constantly claim that 4v4v4 would be more popular than 2-team BGs with similar rewards, even though the rewards are still bad and BGs right now (over half a year after the update) still have a lot more people than 4v4v4 had towards the end.
I still have absolutely no idea what you're even trying to say with the "hive mind" stuff.PC/EU, StamSorc Main4 -
Major_Toughness✭✭✭✭✭xylena_lazarow wrote: »
I see no difference.
Destruction of Battlegrounds Chapter 77: Waiting 35 minutes for a non-starter match (Solo 8v8 PC/NA)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J6r18QFNPTw
How long does it usually take to find a match at 6:30-7am?
I can't imagine that's prime time.MAKE AZUREBLIGHT GREAT AGAIN
PC EU > You3 -
Moonspawn✭✭✭✭
The portion of the BG community that likes the challenges of 3-sided would choose it, and veterans would come back for Deathmatch in their thousands. The real growth would happen because incentivizing the newcomers to learn and utilize the anti-seal clubber playstyle, which was favored by the format, is the only way to convert them into PVPers.I mean you constantly claim that 4v4v4 would be more popular than 2-team BGs with similar rewards,
They're good enough for the newcomers, which is the only reason for the increased participation.even though the rewards are still bad and BGs right now (over half a year after the update) still have a lot more people than 4v4v4 had towards the end.
I'm counting on you to relay the message to the others.I still have absolutely no idea what you're even trying to say with the "hive mind" stuff.2 -
Jierdanit✭✭✭✭✭
✭The portion of the BG community that likes the challenges of 3-sided would choose it, and veterans would come back for Deathmatch in their thousands. The real growth would happen because incentivizing the newcomers to learn and utilize the anti-seal clubber playstyle, which was favored by the format, is the only way to convert them into PVPers.
I don't think there was any point at which thousands of veterans played BGs, but ofc you can exaggerate all you want.
Also in the about 2-3 years I spent mainly playing 4v4v4 BGs I don't think I saw a newcomer actually convert into a PvP player even 5 times.
So the mode is clearly not as great for that as you are delusional enough to think.They're good enough for the newcomers, which is the only reason for the increased participation.
And your proof for that is?
I'm counting on you to relay the message to the others.
What???PC/EU, StamSorc Main3 -
Moonspawn✭✭✭✭
I'm not sure what you mean. Where did PvP players come from? Not-newcomers?Also in the about 2-3 years I spent mainly playing 4v4v4 BGs I don't think I saw a newcomer actually convert into a PvP player even 5 times. So the mode is clearly not as great for that as you are delusional enough to think.
The only way to prove it would be to bring back the 3-sided format and let people choose.And your proof for that is?
1 -
Moonspawn✭✭✭✭
7-8 years without the rewards we have right now to lure people in, and a separate DM queue to create the necessary conditions to keep them. Could have been 70-80 years, result would have been the same.xylena_lazarow wrote: »The 7-8 years we had 3s weren't enough of a chance?
My true calling is cracking smiles as I watch the newcomers learn positioning, target selection, teamwork and decision-making from the challenges of the 3-sided format. I do wonder what Cyrodil would be like if they completely removed the ability to group up. Not only would it fix most of its problems, it might also encourage the anti-seal clubber playstyle that is the key to converting newcomers into PvPers.xylena_lazarow wrote: »Maybe your true calling is Cyro ball grouping. It's even a 3-sided format!1 -
Moonspawn✭✭✭✭xylena_lazarow wrote: »
They chose not to play unrewarding and nonsensical BGs that forced players with different objectives into the same matches. Now that the reward problem has been solved, all that's missing is the separate DM queue.Edited by Moonspawn on May 9, 2025 9:21PM1 -
Jierdanit✭✭✭✭✭
✭I'm not sure what you mean. Where did PvP players come from? Not-newcomers?
Thats exactly my point. In that entire time we got barely any new PvP players. The vast majority of PvPers (at least the PvPers I usually interact with) now are almost all people who have been playing the game for at least 5+ years.
Most of those probably got started with big group PvP in Cyro when that was still good and then eventually went to BGs because the PvP there is a lot more balanced.The only way to prove it would be to bring back the 3-sided format and let people choose.
So no proof then got it.Edited by Jierdanit on May 9, 2025 8:46PMPC/EU, StamSorc Main1 -
Moonspawn✭✭✭✭
Whatever alternative you think exists, let us believe that with all might and stop fearing the return of 3-sided.So no proof then got it.
Because it lacks the challenges of 3-sided.xylena_lazarow wrote: »Why can't you do this in 2s?
Edited by Moonspawn on May 10, 2025 12:45PM0 -
xylena_lazarow✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
Your argument is quickly approaching tautology.Because it lacks the challenges of 3-sided.I like 3s because they're 3-sided
This isn't an argument, only a declaration of your personal taste, of which we are aware.I dislike 2s because they aren't 3-sidedPC/NA || Cyro/BGs || RIP old PvP build system || bring Vengeance4 -
Moonspawn✭✭✭✭xylena_lazarow wrote: »
It's because of its challenges that 3-sided favored the anti-seal clubber playstyle, which is easy to learn, easy to use, and perfect for converting newcomers into PVPers.3 -
xylena_lazarow✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
Earlier you stated that 3s encourage ball grouping, so I take it that's the playstyle you're talking about here?It's because of its challenges that 3-sided favored the anti-seal clubber playstyle, which is easy to learn, easy to use, and perfect for converting newcomers into PVPers.PC/NA || Cyro/BGs || RIP old PvP build system || bring Vengeance2 -
Decimus✭✭✭✭✭
✭xylena_lazarow wrote: »
It's because of its challenges that 3-sided favored the anti-seal clubber playstyle, which is easy to learn, easy to use, and perfect for converting newcomers into PVPers.
That's actually blatantly false; during 3-way BGs everyone would just play for KDR since winning the BG mattered much less. This meant doing things like picking up relics and not turning them in, just keeping them and farming kills trying to go for record kills etc because that was the only metric that mattered.
Whether you got 1st place or not wasn't as much a matter of how good you/your team were/played, it was a matter of RNG.
Would that 3rd team run to empty flags while you were trying to have fun actually PvP'ing, would that 3rd team have a mental malfunction and just focus your team and your team alone etc.
I have dozens and dozens of videos from those years.
Also, there was a separate deathmatch queue once upon a time (2017? 2018?)... ZOS condensed the queues into one random one because there weren't enough people queueing for the other game modes.2 -
Moonspawn✭✭✭✭xylena_lazarow wrote: »
Earlier you stated that 3s encourage ball grouping, so I take it that's the playstyle you're talking about here?It's because of its challenges that 3-sided favored the anti-seal clubber playstyle, which is easy to learn, easy to use, and perfect for converting newcomers into PVPers.
I don't think so. Where?0 -
Moonspawn✭✭✭✭xylena_lazarow wrote: »
It's because of its challenges that 3-sided favored the anti-seal clubber playstyle, which is easy to learn, easy to use, and perfect for converting newcomers into PVPers.
That's actually blatantly false; during 3-way BGs everyone would just play for KDR since winning the BG mattered much less. This meant doing things like picking up relics and not turning them in, just keeping them and farming kills trying to go for record kills etc because that was the only metric that mattered.
Whether you got 1st place or not wasn't as much a matter of how good you/your team were/played, it was a matter of RNG.
Would that 3rd team run to empty flags while you were trying to have fun actually PvP'ing, would that 3rd team have a mental malfunction and just focus your team and your team alone etc.
I have dozens and dozens of videos from those years.
Also, there was a separate deathmatch queue once upon a time (2017? 2018?)... ZOS condensed the queues into one random one because there weren't enough people queueing for the other game modes.
What's false? That 3-sided favored the anti-seal clubber playstyle? That it was easy to learn and use? Or that it is perfect for converting newcomers into PVPers? Also, I remember the modes being separated (which was downright insane), but there was never a queue option including all of the objective modes + a separate DM queue. Even if it did, it would be pointless without rewards to draw people in anyway.2 -
Decimus✭✭✭✭✭
✭xylena_lazarow wrote: »
It's because of its challenges that 3-sided favored the anti-seal clubber playstyle, which is easy to learn, easy to use, and perfect for converting newcomers into PVPers.
That's actually blatantly false; during 3-way BGs everyone would just play for KDR since winning the BG mattered much less. This meant doing things like picking up relics and not turning them in, just keeping them and farming kills trying to go for record kills etc because that was the only metric that mattered.
Whether you got 1st place or not wasn't as much a matter of how good you/your team were/played, it was a matter of RNG.
Would that 3rd team run to empty flags while you were trying to have fun actually PvP'ing, would that 3rd team have a mental malfunction and just focus your team and your team alone etc.
I have dozens and dozens of videos from those years.
Also, there was a separate deathmatch queue once upon a time (2017? 2018?)... ZOS condensed the queues into one random one because there weren't enough people queueing for the other game modes.
What's false? That 3-sided favored the anti-seal clubber playstyle? That it was easy to learn and use? Or that it is perfect for converting newcomers into PVPers? Also, I remember the modes being separated (which was downright insane), but there was never a queue option including all of the objective modes + a separate DM queue. Even if it did, it would be pointless without rewards to draw people in anyway.
What is false? Pretty much everything you write here. Just completely detached from reality.
The only ones 3-way BGs were better for were people who'd use the "newcomers" as meat shields to their egos on their grand crusade to 3rd party better players.
There is not enough player base for separate queues (nor is there any need for such even, since objective modes are actually more fun than deathmatch most of the time in team vs team), just like there is not enough player base for a separate 3-way BG queue.
This is reality, I suggest you get used to it and stop spamming.Edited by Decimus on May 9, 2025 11:13PM3 -
Moonspawn✭✭✭✭xylena_lazarow wrote: »
It's because of its challenges that 3-sided favored the anti-seal clubber playstyle, which is easy to learn, easy to use, and perfect for converting newcomers into PVPers.
That's actually blatantly false; during 3-way BGs everyone would just play for KDR since winning the BG mattered much less. This meant doing things like picking up relics and not turning them in, just keeping them and farming kills trying to go for record kills etc because that was the only metric that mattered.
Whether you got 1st place or not wasn't as much a matter of how good you/your team were/played, it was a matter of RNG.
Would that 3rd team run to empty flags while you were trying to have fun actually PvP'ing, would that 3rd team have a mental malfunction and just focus your team and your team alone etc.
I have dozens and dozens of videos from those years.
Also, there was a separate deathmatch queue once upon a time (2017? 2018?)... ZOS condensed the queues into one random one because there weren't enough people queueing for the other game modes.
What's false? That 3-sided favored the anti-seal clubber playstyle? That it was easy to learn and use? Or that it is perfect for converting newcomers into PVPers? Also, I remember the modes being separated (which was downright insane), but there was never a queue option including all of the objective modes + a separate DM queue. Even if it did, it would be pointless without rewards to draw people in anyway.
What is false? Pretty much everything you write here. Just completely detached from reality.
The only ones 3-way BGs were better for were people who'd use the "newcomers" as meat shields to their egos on their grand crusade to 3rd party better players.
There is not enough player base for separate queues (nor is there any need for such even, since objective modes are actually more fun than deathmatch most of the time in team vs team), just like there is not enough player base for a separate 3-way BG queue.
This is reality, I suggest you get used to it and stop spamming.
But you're the one that wrote several texts already explaining why the anti-seal clubber style was favored by the 3-sided format. As for splitting the playerbase, there's no need to worry because the EU hive mind will keep 2-sided BGs alive.1 -
Decimus✭✭✭✭✭
✭xylena_lazarow wrote: »
It's because of its challenges that 3-sided favored the anti-seal clubber playstyle, which is easy to learn, easy to use, and perfect for converting newcomers into PVPers.
That's actually blatantly false; during 3-way BGs everyone would just play for KDR since winning the BG mattered much less. This meant doing things like picking up relics and not turning them in, just keeping them and farming kills trying to go for record kills etc because that was the only metric that mattered.
Whether you got 1st place or not wasn't as much a matter of how good you/your team were/played, it was a matter of RNG.
Would that 3rd team run to empty flags while you were trying to have fun actually PvP'ing, would that 3rd team have a mental malfunction and just focus your team and your team alone etc.
I have dozens and dozens of videos from those years.
Also, there was a separate deathmatch queue once upon a time (2017? 2018?)... ZOS condensed the queues into one random one because there weren't enough people queueing for the other game modes.
What's false? That 3-sided favored the anti-seal clubber playstyle? That it was easy to learn and use? Or that it is perfect for converting newcomers into PVPers? Also, I remember the modes being separated (which was downright insane), but there was never a queue option including all of the objective modes + a separate DM queue. Even if it did, it would be pointless without rewards to draw people in anyway.
What is false? Pretty much everything you write here. Just completely detached from reality.
The only ones 3-way BGs were better for were people who'd use the "newcomers" as meat shields to their egos on their grand crusade to 3rd party better players.
There is not enough player base for separate queues (nor is there any need for such even, since objective modes are actually more fun than deathmatch most of the time in team vs team), just like there is not enough player base for a separate 3-way BG queue.
This is reality, I suggest you get used to it and stop spamming.
But you're the one that wrote several texts already explaining why the anti-seal clubber style was favored by the 3-sided format. As for splitting the playerbase, there's no need to worry because the EU hive mind will keep 2-sided BGs alive.
What you categorize as a "seal clubber" is generally known just as a "good player".
Good players can decide to go after KDR & "club seals" - which is what happened more often in 3-way BGs because no one cared about winning objective - or they can just play each match to win, which is what happens more often in 2-way because it's actually fun to have tangible power over the outcome of a match and you're always PvP'ing over the objectives, not running to empty ones.
Who benefitted the most from 3-way BGs were average players wanting to masquerade as good players by having good KDRs as a result of using their teams as meat shields and running streaking away when those meat shields died.
"Newcomers" ("seals") were the last ones to enjoy 3-way BGs, because they'd always wind up used and/or farmed... and in case these newcomers would just do empty objectives and win... I doubt anyone finds joy queueing into PvP and then winning by doing zero PvP; that's not the experience you get queueing into PvP in any other PvP MMO.Edited by Decimus on May 10, 2025 12:00AM3 -
Moonspawn✭✭✭✭xylena_lazarow wrote: »
It's because of its challenges that 3-sided favored the anti-seal clubber playstyle, which is easy to learn, easy to use, and perfect for converting newcomers into PVPers.
That's actually blatantly false; during 3-way BGs everyone would just play for KDR since winning the BG mattered much less. This meant doing things like picking up relics and not turning them in, just keeping them and farming kills trying to go for record kills etc because that was the only metric that mattered.
Whether you got 1st place or not wasn't as much a matter of how good you/your team were/played, it was a matter of RNG.
Would that 3rd team run to empty flags while you were trying to have fun actually PvP'ing, would that 3rd team have a mental malfunction and just focus your team and your team alone etc.
I have dozens and dozens of videos from those years.
Also, there was a separate deathmatch queue once upon a time (2017? 2018?)... ZOS condensed the queues into one random one because there weren't enough people queueing for the other game modes.
What's false? That 3-sided favored the anti-seal clubber playstyle? That it was easy to learn and use? Or that it is perfect for converting newcomers into PVPers? Also, I remember the modes being separated (which was downright insane), but there was never a queue option including all of the objective modes + a separate DM queue. Even if it did, it would be pointless without rewards to draw people in anyway.
What is false? Pretty much everything you write here. Just completely detached from reality.
The only ones 3-way BGs were better for were people who'd use the "newcomers" as meat shields to their egos on their grand crusade to 3rd party better players.
There is not enough player base for separate queues (nor is there any need for such even, since objective modes are actually more fun than deathmatch most of the time in team vs team), just like there is not enough player base for a separate 3-way BG queue.
This is reality, I suggest you get used to it and stop spamming.
But you're the one that wrote several texts already explaining why the anti-seal clubber style was favored by the 3-sided format. As for splitting the playerbase, there's no need to worry because the EU hive mind will keep 2-sided BGs alive.
What you categorize as a "seal clubber" is generally known just as a "good player".
Good players can decide to go after KDR & "club seals" - which is what happened more often in 3-way BGs because no one cared about winning objective - or they can just play each match to win, which is what happens more often in 2-way because it's actually fun to have tangible power over the outcome of a match and you're always PvP'ing over the objectives, not running to empty ones.
Who benefitted the most from 3-way BGs were average players wanting to masquerade as good players by having good KDRs as a result of using their teams as meat shields and running streaking away when those meat shields died.
"Newcomers" ("seals") were the last ones to enjoy 3-way BGs, because they'd always wind up used and/or farmed... and in case these newcomers would just do empty objectives and win... I doubt anyone finds joy queueing into PvP and then winning by doing zero PvP; that's not the experience you get queueing into PvP in any other PvP MMO.
Two-sided BG will survive no matter what, then. And once the 3-sided format comes back to jump start the growth of the BG community, there will be even more players to choose between them. Our best days are ahead.Edited by Moonspawn on May 10, 2025 12:29PM0 -
Moonspawn✭✭✭✭xylena_lazarow wrote: »
It's because of its challenges that 3-sided favored the anti-seal clubber playstyle, which is easy to learn, easy to use, and perfect for converting newcomers into PVPers.
That's actually blatantly false; during 3-way BGs everyone would just play for KDR since winning the BG mattered much less. This meant doing things like picking up relics and not turning them in, just keeping them and farming kills trying to go for record kills etc because that was the only metric that mattered.
Whether you got 1st place or not wasn't as much a matter of how good you/your team were/played, it was a matter of RNG.
Would that 3rd team run to empty flags while you were trying to have fun actually PvP'ing, would that 3rd team have a mental malfunction and just focus your team and your team alone etc.
I have dozens and dozens of videos from those years.
Also, there was a separate deathmatch queue once upon a time (2017? 2018?)... ZOS condensed the queues into one random one because there weren't enough people queueing for the other game modes.
What's false? That 3-sided favored the anti-seal clubber playstyle? That it was easy to learn and use? Or that it is perfect for converting newcomers into PVPers? Also, I remember the modes being separated (which was downright insane), but there was never a queue option including all of the objective modes + a separate DM queue. Even if it did, it would be pointless without rewards to draw people in anyway.
What is false? Pretty much everything you write here. Just completely detached from reality.
The only ones 3-way BGs were better for were people who'd use the "newcomers" as meat shields to their egos on their grand crusade to 3rd party better players.
There is not enough player base for separate queues (nor is there any need for such even, since objective modes are actually more fun than deathmatch most of the time in team vs team), just like there is not enough player base for a separate 3-way BG queue.
This is reality, I suggest you get used to it and stop spamming.
But you're the one that wrote several texts already explaining why the anti-seal clubber style was favored by the 3-sided format. As for splitting the playerbase, there's no need to worry because the EU hive mind will keep 2-sided BGs alive.
What you categorize as a "seal clubber" is generally known just as a "good player".
Good players can decide to go after KDR & "club seals" - which is what happened more often in 3-way BGs because no one cared about winning objective - or they can just play each match to win, which is what happens more often in 2-way because it's actually fun to have tangible power over the outcome of a match and you're always PvP'ing over the objectives, not running to empty ones.
Who benefitted the most from 3-way BGs were average players wanting to masquerade as good players by having good KDRs as a result of using their teams as meat shields and running streaking away when those meat shields died.
"Newcomers" ("seals") were the last ones to enjoy 3-way BGs, because they'd always wind up used and/or farmed... and in case these newcomers would just do empty objectives and win... I doubt anyone finds joy queueing into PvP and then winning by doing zero PvP; that's not the experience you get queueing into PvP in any other PvP MMO.
I never caught your answer to the question:
Looks like you agree that 3-sided BGs favored the anti-seal clubber style. Why are you so against people having the option to learn it there?Edited by Moonspawn on May 10, 2025 1:08PM1 -
Decimus✭✭✭✭✭
✭xylena_lazarow wrote: »
It's because of its challenges that 3-sided favored the anti-seal clubber playstyle, which is easy to learn, easy to use, and perfect for converting newcomers into PVPers.
That's actually blatantly false; during 3-way BGs everyone would just play for KDR since winning the BG mattered much less. This meant doing things like picking up relics and not turning them in, just keeping them and farming kills trying to go for record kills etc because that was the only metric that mattered.
Whether you got 1st place or not wasn't as much a matter of how good you/your team were/played, it was a matter of RNG.
Would that 3rd team run to empty flags while you were trying to have fun actually PvP'ing, would that 3rd team have a mental malfunction and just focus your team and your team alone etc.
I have dozens and dozens of videos from those years.
Also, there was a separate deathmatch queue once upon a time (2017? 2018?)... ZOS condensed the queues into one random one because there weren't enough people queueing for the other game modes.
What's false? That 3-sided favored the anti-seal clubber playstyle? That it was easy to learn and use? Or that it is perfect for converting newcomers into PVPers? Also, I remember the modes being separated (which was downright insane), but there was never a queue option including all of the objective modes + a separate DM queue. Even if it did, it would be pointless without rewards to draw people in anyway.
What is false? Pretty much everything you write here. Just completely detached from reality.
The only ones 3-way BGs were better for were people who'd use the "newcomers" as meat shields to their egos on their grand crusade to 3rd party better players.
There is not enough player base for separate queues (nor is there any need for such even, since objective modes are actually more fun than deathmatch most of the time in team vs team), just like there is not enough player base for a separate 3-way BG queue.
This is reality, I suggest you get used to it and stop spamming.
But you're the one that wrote several texts already explaining why the anti-seal clubber style was favored by the 3-sided format. As for splitting the playerbase, there's no need to worry because the EU hive mind will keep 2-sided BGs alive.
What you categorize as a "seal clubber" is generally known just as a "good player".
Good players can decide to go after KDR & "club seals" - which is what happened more often in 3-way BGs because no one cared about winning objective - or they can just play each match to win, which is what happens more often in 2-way because it's actually fun to have tangible power over the outcome of a match and you're always PvP'ing over the objectives, not running to empty ones.
Who benefitted the most from 3-way BGs were average players wanting to masquerade as good players by having good KDRs as a result of using their teams as meat shields and running streaking away when those meat shields died.
"Newcomers" ("seals") were the last ones to enjoy 3-way BGs, because they'd always wind up used and/or farmed... and in case these newcomers would just do empty objectives and win... I doubt anyone finds joy queueing into PvP and then winning by doing zero PvP; that's not the experience you get queueing into PvP in any other PvP MMO.
I never caught you answer to the question:
Looks like you agree that 3-sided BGs favored the anti-seal clubber style. Why are you so against people having the option to learn it there?
Read.
Here, let me highlight it for you so it's easier.
And to the second part:There is not enough player base for separate queues (nor is there any need for such even, since objective modes are actually more fun than deathmatch most of the time in team vs team), just like there is not enough player base for a separate 3-way BG queue.
This is reality, I suggest you get used to it and stop spamming.
People can learn whatever they need to learn in the current format. If you can't, that's a you problem.Edited by Decimus on May 10, 2025 1:10PM1 -
Moonspawn✭✭✭✭xylena_lazarow wrote: »
It's because of its challenges that 3-sided favored the anti-seal clubber playstyle, which is easy to learn, easy to use, and perfect for converting newcomers into PVPers.
That's actually blatantly false; during 3-way BGs everyone would just play for KDR since winning the BG mattered much less. This meant doing things like picking up relics and not turning them in, just keeping them and farming kills trying to go for record kills etc because that was the only metric that mattered.
Whether you got 1st place or not wasn't as much a matter of how good you/your team were/played, it was a matter of RNG.
Would that 3rd team run to empty flags while you were trying to have fun actually PvP'ing, would that 3rd team have a mental malfunction and just focus your team and your team alone etc.
I have dozens and dozens of videos from those years.
Also, there was a separate deathmatch queue once upon a time (2017? 2018?)... ZOS condensed the queues into one random one because there weren't enough people queueing for the other game modes.
What's false? That 3-sided favored the anti-seal clubber playstyle? That it was easy to learn and use? Or that it is perfect for converting newcomers into PVPers? Also, I remember the modes being separated (which was downright insane), but there was never a queue option including all of the objective modes + a separate DM queue. Even if it did, it would be pointless without rewards to draw people in anyway.
What is false? Pretty much everything you write here. Just completely detached from reality.
The only ones 3-way BGs were better for were people who'd use the "newcomers" as meat shields to their egos on their grand crusade to 3rd party better players.
There is not enough player base for separate queues (nor is there any need for such even, since objective modes are actually more fun than deathmatch most of the time in team vs team), just like there is not enough player base for a separate 3-way BG queue.
This is reality, I suggest you get used to it and stop spamming.
But you're the one that wrote several texts already explaining why the anti-seal clubber style was favored by the 3-sided format. As for splitting the playerbase, there's no need to worry because the EU hive mind will keep 2-sided BGs alive.
What you categorize as a "seal clubber" is generally known just as a "good player".
Good players can decide to go after KDR & "club seals" - which is what happened more often in 3-way BGs because no one cared about winning objective - or they can just play each match to win, which is what happens more often in 2-way because it's actually fun to have tangible power over the outcome of a match and you're always PvP'ing over the objectives, not running to empty ones.
Who benefitted the most from 3-way BGs were average players wanting to masquerade as good players by having good KDRs as a result of using their teams as meat shields and running streaking away when those meat shields died.
"Newcomers" ("seals") were the last ones to enjoy 3-way BGs, because they'd always wind up used and/or farmed... and in case these newcomers would just do empty objectives and win... I doubt anyone finds joy queueing into PvP and then winning by doing zero PvP; that's not the experience you get queueing into PvP in any other PvP MMO.
I never caught you answer to the question:
Looks like you agree that 3-sided BGs favored the anti-seal clubber style. Why are you so against people having the option to learn it there?
Read.
Here, let me highlight it for you so it's easier.
And to the second part:There is not enough player base for separate queues (nor is there any need for such even, since objective modes are actually more fun than deathmatch most of the time in team vs team), just like there is not enough player base for a separate 3-way BG queue.
This is reality, I suggest you get used to it and stop spamming.
People can learn whatever they need to learn in the current format. If you can't, that's a you problem.
So it's about keeping everyone trapped in your preferred format no matter what. You don't need to worry about too many players choosing to play 3-sided. When the plan works there'll be more than enough to keep 2-sided alive.1 -
xylena_lazarow✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
And which playstyle is this? Ball grouping? Ganking? Stealing empty objectives? Third partying? If you say something like "the unique 3-sided playstyle" again, that's just another meaningless tautology.the anti-seal clubber playstyle
If this is the best you can articulate it, then you don't actually have an argument.The best 3-sided playstyle is the unique 3-sided playstyle.PC/NA || Cyro/BGs || RIP old PvP build system || bring Vengeance3 -
Moonspawn✭✭✭✭xylena_lazarow wrote: »
And which playstyle is this? Ball grouping? Ganking? Stealing empty objectives? Third partying? If you say something like "the unique 3-sided playstyle" again, that's just another meaningless tautology.the anti-seal clubber playstyle
If this is the best you can articulate it, then you don't actually have an argument.The best 3-sided playstyle is the unique 3-sided playstyle.
It's probably not accurate to call it ''playstyle'', since its more like a general set of instructions.
Don't chase, stay together, help teammates (debuff, cc, crossheal, etc...), don't waste resources on wrong targets or pointless fights, focus fire correct targets at the right time. It's pretty straightforward, try to find a way to work with your team, regardless of their skill level.
Seal clubber playstyle would lean more heavily into speed and burst, luring newcomers away and trying to take out targets quickly. It's harder to learn, harder to use and a lot riskier. I believe that trying to use it without learning the anti-seal clubber style first is the main reason most people give up on PVP altogether.
3-sided encouraged everyone, seal clubber- oriented build or no, to not stray from the team.Edited by Moonspawn on May 10, 2025 4:23PM0 -
xylena_lazarow✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
In other words, ball grouping. That's game jargon we've settled on for talking about this strat, a team that stays close and moves together will look like they're rolling around in a ball. Semantic misunderstanding.3-sided encouraged everyone, seal clubber- oriented build or no, to not stray from the team.PC/NA || Cyro/BGs || RIP old PvP build system || bring Vengeance1
This discussion has been closed.