Maintenance for the week of December 23:
· [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 14:00 UTC (9:00AM EST)
· [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – December 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 14:00 UTC (9:00AM EST)
ZOS - battlegrounds is unbelievably bad now
-
DaniimalsSF✭✭1. Convert IC to PvE. Save money on development. Make PvEers happy. Anger approximately 20 gankers.
2. Make duels able to be 1v1 up to 4v4. Give this a public leaderboard. Make the competitive folks concerned with fair fights happy.
3. Make BGs only 2 queues. Solo only 16 person free for all deathmatch. Solo/group 4v4v4 objectives.
4. Spend all PvP resources moving forward on Cyrodill.
Bonus ideas to limit PvPers from spending time in PvE:
1. Make all gear craftable.
2. Convert all AP to gold.0 -
Thumbless_Bot✭✭✭✭ZOS seems to design PVP content in a bubble without an awareness of the greater PVP gaming community. I think this is because they are trying *SO HARD* to get PVE players into a game mode that is antithetical to their gaming interests.
If you've ever wondered why there are so many squishy players in BGs and Cyro, it's because they just don't care. They are going through the motions for rewards. Probably transmutes.
As small as we tend to think the PVP community is, I think it's far smaller than most realize in terms of people legitimately interested in good PVP.
So part of the way I think they've tried to make PVP appealing to their core audience of ultra-casual PVE players is with novel "wacky" game modes. They should scrap all of these and implement basic tried and trued CTF, Capture and Hold and other PVP game modes that are popular outside of ESO. Stop trying to reinvent the wheel.
And the maps look great, but they are poorly designed. They need to hire some experienced PVP map designers. This is crucial.
But then, even if the game had better implemented modes and maps, the gameplay sucks. The TTK is way too high. Resource regen is basically unlimited. If a decent player doesn't want to die, chances are they won't.
If the gameplay didn't suck, it still wouldn't be popular. Why? ESO PVP isn't accessible to gamers who only want to PVP. A competitive-minded ESO PVP player has to spend way more time in PVE than they want to. PVP gamers want to spend their time PVPing, not grinding ezmode PVE dungeons for sets and the dozens of other PVE hoops ESO forces them to jump through.
tl;dr:
- stop trying to reinvent the wheel and give us basic tried and true implementations of game modes
- hire experienced pvp map designers
- fix the gameplay
- make it accessible to actual pvp enthusiasts outside of eso
These bgs are so bad it's hard to put into words. They took an arguably not so great format to begin with and made them 10 times worse for both casual players and sweaties.
It really is like they distilled most of what was good out of bgs and left all the bad parts and even found a way to add in more bad parts. I mean, it's like they took proactive steps to find ways to make them worse and added them to the game. It's mind boggling how and why decisions were made that ended with this content change.
The big maps are cool though.
Edited by Thumbless_Bot on December 24, 2024 9:43PM4 -
Decimus✭✭✭✭✭I do think the resources spent on this update would have been much better spent elsewhere in regards to pvp.
The reason "BG mains" are a small portion of an already small player base is because battlegrounds got zero updates from developers for over half a decade. These game modes (Arenas/Battlegrounds) are extremely popular in other MMOs where they just so happen to be in the team vs team format.
The "significant portion of the general BG population" seems to be players I never encountered even once in BGs... as in: players who didn't even actively play the previous three way format, which had maybe 20 active players still queueing for it towards the end.
Cyrodiil has its own issues for sure, but things can co-exist... especially when Cyrodiil currently provides that 3-way PvP experience that people seem to be so happy about.
Cyrodiil hasn't had content updates in a similar time frame, and yet maintains a much healthier population than battlegrounds - because the majority prefers open world PVP when it comes to ESO. I think a big part of that is because the game simply is not designed or balanced for competitive PVP, which is what battlegrounds in other games are known for and a big part of the reason why they're successful.
You play battlegrounds the vast majority of the time you spend on the game, so with the old system your characters all would have been outside of the low-mmr bracket which houses the majority of the casual players that prefer the more casual-oriented 3 team system. It's no wonder you didn't encounter them frequently, and essentially matched the same 20 people repetitively.
I do agree things can co-exist. I'm not saying they should never have reworked battlegrounds, but I think that it is undeniable that the majority of the playerbase would not have chosen a battleground rework if they'd been faced with a poll offering open world content/reworks, a new zone, or a battlegrounds update. I think especially at this point in time, where they game is reaching new low player counts and desperately needs something to draw people in, an open world update would have gone much further towards bolstering the PVP population than this buggy, poorly balanced battleground update has.
I wouldn't be too sure about majority of PvPers preferring open world at the moment... atleast PC EU has been struggling to even have one campaign locked while every BG I see players I've never seen before.
Also, no MMO is balanced for competitive PvP... I'd go as far as to say that even games that have huge e-sports scenes are not balanced - you don't see every champion being played in games like LoL etc
ESO is not some outlier in this regard.
Also, I've been playing BGs daily on my characters since the rework and if anything I'm seeing more new names each day rather than the opposite. This will of course eventually stop happening as these new would-be BG players tire of repeatedly jumping down from base and instantly dying due to lack of team shuffling, hence the urgency & my frustration of ZOS not taking the appropriate steps to prevent this from happening.
I fail to see how anyone who actually played the 3-way BGs would prefer them over the two way format - they had all these same issues on top of 3rd partying, running to empty objectives (which is NOT PvP) etc... the only explanation I can think of is the daily reward and it being easier to achieve with 3 teams & 2nd place getting you the xp/box.
Easy solution to this "problem" as well: give people participation reward for losing as well. This is something most other MMOs do - in Throne and Liberty for example you get a participation box even if you don't manage to get first place or do most dmg to a boss etc.
Doesn't take a rocket scientist to find solutions, rather than wanting to roll back content to where it was completely dead and most of the time unfun - simply a little bit less unfun than getting streamsniped, lagging your brains out & being ran after by ball groups in Cyrodiil.
Apparently next year they're working on Cyrodiil - hopefully something good comes out of that... but they really should change a few simple things to fix the very obvious issues with BGs.4 -
Vonnegut2506✭✭✭✭✭I don't really play battlegrounds very often, but I definitely am enjoying the new 8v8 solo option much more than the old 3-way dance of death.2 -
Desiato✭✭✭✭✭
✭Thumbless_Bot wrote: »hese bgs are so bad it's hard to put into words. They took an arguably not so great format to begin with and made them 10 times worse for both casual players and sweaties.
I don't disagree. I used to absolutely love eso pvp, but I think it's pretty terrible across the board right now. I feel it's the worst pvp I've ever played.
However, I felt the same about the old bgs. Everything I wrote about the current state of pvp applies to it. So I don't think going back to that for the sake of appealing to the niche audience that for some reason enjoyed it makes any sense.
It's not rocket science. We've had almost 30 years of epic online pvp to draw from. There are game modes that have stood the test of time. There are classic pvp games that people keep going back to year after year.
The problem is that ZOS is ignoring that because their entire focus the past 10 years has been making ESO appealing to Skyrim players.
Just think about how ridiculous the concept of unkillable builds are in a pvp game. It makes no sense. Time to go back to the drawing board and start over completely.
Edited by Desiato on December 24, 2024 10:05PMspending a year dead for tax reasons1 -
Moonspawn✭✭✭This will of course eventually stop happening as these new would-be BG players tire of repeatedly jumping down from base and instantly dying due to lack of team shuffling, hence the urgency & my frustration of ZOS not taking the appropriate steps to prevent this from happening.
I understand how team shuffling would work on DM with rounds, but what about the other modes?
Capture the Relic:
Chaosball:
Domination:
Crazy King:
DM without rounds? Would still exist?
0 -
Decimus✭✭✭✭✭This will of course eventually stop happening as these new would-be BG players tire of repeatedly jumping down from base and instantly dying due to lack of team shuffling, hence the urgency & my frustration of ZOS not taking the appropriate steps to prevent this from happening.
I understand how team shuffling would work on DM with rounds, but what about the other modes?
Capture the Relic:
Chaosball:
Domination:
Crazy King:
DM without rounds? Would still exist?
Yes - there's a lot of games that do this. You have round 1 of capturing flags, then round 2 and so on... teams can be shuffled inbetween. It's just a question of finding the right round duration to prevent it from being too fast/too slow (currently it'd be too slow, maybe doubling flag tick rates/fixing bugs would solve that).
Personally I don't think 8v8 is struggling as much with matchmaking due to larger player pools in each team (a lot more has to go wrong for a one-sided situation to develop basically), but if necessary you could apply this to Chaosball or Capture the Relic as well (double the point/dmg tick rate of Chaosball for faster rounds, limit amount of relic captures required to 1-2 etc).0 -
Chrisilis✭✭I do think the resources spent on this update would have been much better spent elsewhere in regards to pvp.
I fail to see how anyone who actually played the 3-way BGs would prefer them over the two way format - they had all these same issues on top of 3rd partying, running to empty objectives (which is NOT PvP) etc... the only explanation I can think of is the daily reward and it being easier to achieve with 3 teams & 2nd place getting you the xp/box
I actually played 3-way Bg's and vastly, overwhelmingly preferred them to this new two team format because I enjoyed competition, strategy, tactics and teamwork. I enjoyed short queue times and being able to play back to back matches all day long. I enjoyed being an underdog and pulling out a win by out maneuvering the other teams. I enjoyed having to earn my victories and I enjoyed squeaking out a win by one kill in a DM that lasted an entire 15 minutes and not 5. I enjoyed maps with terrain you could use to your advantage and room to escape, regroup and try again.
What I don't enjoy is getting 5 games out of a 3 hour sugar skull because the queue time is like waiting to get on a ride at Disneyland. I definitely don't enjoy 20 minute queues for 4 minute games with zero tactics, teamwork or competition, just smash or be smashed on a 20x20 square with some pillars for terrain.
I enjoyed refining my build and trying out different sets and testing them against the battlefield and I enjoyed seeing my performance improve and my kill count get higher. I don't enjoy the sense that it no longer matters what build you have, what gear you have, why bother to get any better the game you're playing just abruptly got so much worse.
I started battlegrounds around CP300 and I'm at CP2100 now. 95 percent of those levels were earned in battlegrounds. In February I'll have played this game for two years and I'm 4700 hours in. Those hours were spent in battlegrounds.
I am beyond upset at the direction this game took when they discontinued 4v4v4 and I want them back.Edited by Chrisilis on December 24, 2024 10:49PM0 -
Chrisilis✭✭[I do think the resources spent on this update would have been much better spent elsewhere in regards to pvp.
The reason "BG mains" are a small portion of an already small player base is because battlegrounds got zero updates from developers for over half a decade. These game modes (Arenas/Battlegrounds) are extremely popular in other MMOs where they just so happen to be in the team vs team format.
The "significant portion of the general BG population" seems to be players I never encountered even once in BGs... as in: players who didn't even actively play the previous three way format, which had maybe 20 active players still queueing for it towards the end.
Cyrodiil has its own issues for sure, but things can co-exist... especially when Cyrodiil currently provides that 3-way PvP experience that people seem to be so happy about.
Cyrodiil hasn't had content updates in a similar time frame, and yet maintains a much healthier population than battlegrounds - because the majority prefers open world PVP when it comes to ESO. I think a big part of that is because the game simply is not designed or balanced for competitive PVP, which is what battlegrounds in other games are known for and a big part of the reason why they're successful.
You play battlegrounds the vast majority of the time you spend on the game, so with the old system your characters all would have been outside of the low-mmr bracket which houses the majority of the casual players that prefer the more casual-oriented 3 team system. It's no wonder you didn't encounter them frequently, and essentially matched the same 20 people repetitively.
I do agree things can co-exist. I'm not saying they should never have reworked battlegrounds, but I think that it is undeniable that the majority of the playerbase would not have chosen a battleground rework if they'd been faced with a poll offering open world content/reworks, a new zone, or a battlegrounds update. I think especially at this point in time, where they game is reaching new low player counts and desperately needs something to draw people in, an open world update would have gone much further towards bolstering the PVP population than this buggy, poorly balanced battleground update has.
I wouldn't be too sure about majority of PvPers preferring open world at the moment... atleast PC EU has been struggling to even have one campaign locked while every BG I see players I've never seen before.
Also, no MMO is balanced for competitive PvP... I'd go as far as to say that even games that have huge e-sports scenes are not balanced - you don't see every champion being played in games like LoL etc
ESO is not some outlier in this regard.
Also, I've been playing BGs daily on my characters since the rework and if anything I'm seeing more new names each day rather than the opposite. This will of course eventually stop happening as these new would-be BG players tire of repeatedly jumping down from base and instantly dying due to lack of team shuffling, hence the urgency & my frustration of ZOS not taking the appropriate steps to prevent this from happening.
I fail to see how anyone who actually played the 3-way BGs would prefer them over the two way format - they had all these same issues on top of 3rd partying, running to empty objectives (which is NOT PvP) etc... the only explanation I can think of is the daily reward and it being easier to achieve with 3 teams & 2nd place getting you the xp/box.
Easy solution to this "problem" as well: give people participation reward for losing as well. This is something most other MMOs do - in Throne and Liberty for example you get a participation box even if you don't manage to get first place or do most dmg to a boss etc.
Doesn't take a rocket scientist to find solutions, rather than wanting to roll back content to where it was completely dead and most of the time unfun - simply a little bit less unfun than getting streamsniped, lagging your brains out & being ran after by ball groups in Cyrodiil.
Apparently next year they're working on Cyrodiil - hopefully something good comes out of that... but they really should change a few simple things to fix the very obvious issues with BGs.
I actually played 3-way Bg's and vastly, overwhelmingly preferred them to this new two team format because I enjoyed competition, strategy, tactics and teamwork. I enjoyed short queue times and being able to play back to back matches all day long. I enjoyed being an underdog and pulling out a win by out maneuvering the other teams. I enjoyed having to earn my victories and I enjoyed squeaking out a win by one kill in a DM that lasted an entire 15 minutes and not 5. I enjoyed maps with terrain you could use to your advantage and room to escape, regroup and try again.
What I don't enjoy is getting 5 games out of a 3 hour sugar skull because the queue time is like waiting to get on a ride at Disneyland. I definitely don't enjoy 20 minute queues for 4 minute games with zero tactics, teamwork or competition, just smash or be smashed on a 20x20 square with some pillars for terrain.
I enjoyed refining my build and trying out different sets and testing them against the battlefield and I enjoyed seeing my performance improve and my kill count get higher. I don't enjoy the sense that it no longer matters what build you have, what gear you have, why bother to get any better the game you're playing just abruptly got so much worse.
I started battlegrounds around CP300 and I'm at CP2100 now. 95 percent of those levels were earned in battlegrounds. In February I'll have played this game for two years and I'm 4700 hours in. Those hours were spent in battlegrounds.
I am beyond upset at the direction this game took when they discontinued 4v4v4 and I want them back.3 -
Thumbless_Bot✭✭✭✭[I do think the resources spent on this update would have been much better spent elsewhere in regards to pvp.
The reason "BG mains" are a small portion of an already small player base is because battlegrounds got zero updates from developers for over half a decade. These game modes (Arenas/Battlegrounds) are extremely popular in other MMOs where they just so happen to be in the team vs team format.
The "significant portion of the general BG population" seems to be players I never encountered even once in BGs... as in: players who didn't even actively play the previous three way format, which had maybe 20 active players still queueing for it towards the end.
Cyrodiil has its own issues for sure, but things can co-exist... especially when Cyrodiil currently provides that 3-way PvP experience that people seem to be so happy about.
Cyrodiil hasn't had content updates in a similar time frame, and yet maintains a much healthier population than battlegrounds - because the majority prefers open world PVP when it comes to ESO. I think a big part of that is because the game simply is not designed or balanced for competitive PVP, which is what battlegrounds in other games are known for and a big part of the reason why they're successful.
You play battlegrounds the vast majority of the time you spend on the game, so with the old system your characters all would have been outside of the low-mmr bracket which houses the majority of the casual players that prefer the more casual-oriented 3 team system. It's no wonder you didn't encounter them frequently, and essentially matched the same 20 people repetitively.
I do agree things can co-exist. I'm not saying they should never have reworked battlegrounds, but I think that it is undeniable that the majority of the playerbase would not have chosen a battleground rework if they'd been faced with a poll offering open world content/reworks, a new zone, or a battlegrounds update. I think especially at this point in time, where they game is reaching new low player counts and desperately needs something to draw people in, an open world update would have gone much further towards bolstering the PVP population than this buggy, poorly balanced battleground update has.
I wouldn't be too sure about majority of PvPers preferring open world at the moment... atleast PC EU has been struggling to even have one campaign locked while every BG I see players I've never seen before.
Also, no MMO is balanced for competitive PvP... I'd go as far as to say that even games that have huge e-sports scenes are not balanced - you don't see every champion being played in games like LoL etc
ESO is not some outlier in this regard.
Also, I've been playing BGs daily on my characters since the rework and if anything I'm seeing more new names each day rather than the opposite. This will of course eventually stop happening as these new would-be BG players tire of repeatedly jumping down from base and instantly dying due to lack of team shuffling, hence the urgency & my frustration of ZOS not taking the appropriate steps to prevent this from happening.
I fail to see how anyone who actually played the 3-way BGs would prefer them over the two way format - they had all these same issues on top of 3rd partying, running to empty objectives (which is NOT PvP) etc... the only explanation I can think of is the daily reward and it being easier to achieve with 3 teams & 2nd place getting you the xp/box.
Easy solution to this "problem" as well: give people participation reward for losing as well. This is something most other MMOs do - in Throne and Liberty for example you get a participation box even if you don't manage to get first place or do most dmg to a boss etc.
Doesn't take a rocket scientist to find solutions, rather than wanting to roll back content to where it was completely dead and most of the time unfun - simply a little bit less unfun than getting streamsniped, lagging your brains out & being ran after by ball groups in Cyrodiil.
Apparently next year they're working on Cyrodiil - hopefully something good comes out of that... but they really should change a few simple things to fix the very obvious issues with BGs.
I actually played 3-way Bg's and vastly, overwhelmingly preferred them to this new two team format because I enjoyed competition, strategy, tactics and teamwork. I enjoyed short queue times and being able to play back to back matches all day long. I enjoyed being an underdog and pulling out a win by out maneuvering the other teams. I enjoyed having to earn my victories and I enjoyed squeaking out a win by one kill in a DM that lasted an entire 15 minutes and not 5. I enjoyed maps with terrain you could use to your advantage and room to escape, regroup and try again.
What I don't enjoy is getting 5 games out of a 3 hour sugar skull because the queue time is like waiting to get on a ride at Disneyland. I definitely don't enjoy 20 minute queues for 4 minute games with zero tactics, teamwork or competition, just smash or be smashed on a 20x20 square with some pillars for terrain.
I enjoyed refining my build and trying out different sets and testing them against the battlefield and I enjoyed seeing my performance improve and my kill count get higher. I don't enjoy the sense that it no longer matters what build you have, what gear you have, why bother to get any better the game you're playing just abruptly got so much worse.
I started battlegrounds around CP300 and I'm at CP2100 now. 95 percent of those levels were earned in battlegrounds. In February I'll have played this game for two years and I'm 4700 hours in. Those hours were spent in battlegrounds.
I am beyond upset at the direction this game took when they discontinued 4v4v4 and I want them back.
Preach. Could not have said it more eloquently or completely or succinctly.
@ZOS_Kevin3 -
fizzylu✭✭✭✭✭
✭
Allll of this^^I actually played 3-way Bg's and vastly, overwhelmingly preferred them to this new two team format because I enjoyed competition, strategy, tactics and teamwork. I enjoyed short queue times and being able to play back to back matches all day long. I enjoyed being an underdog and pulling out a win by out maneuvering the other teams. I enjoyed having to earn my victories and I enjoyed squeaking out a win by one kill in a DM that lasted an entire 15 minutes and not 5. I enjoyed maps with terrain you could use to your advantage and room to escape, regroup and try again.
What I don't enjoy is getting 5 games out of a 3 hour sugar skull because the queue time is like waiting to get on a ride at Disneyland. I definitely don't enjoy 20 minute queues for 4 minute games with zero tactics, teamwork or competition, just smash or be smashed on a 20x20 square with some pillars for terrain.
It has nothing to do with winning or losing more. Nothing to do with not getting rewards I don't care about to begin with. 4v4v4 was simply way more fun, 3rd partying and all, and didn't leave me feeling like I'm in some kind of comatose state like the two team format does. Even if I got a match where I had a team steamrolling the others in the three team setup, it still took thought and tactics to secure a win unlike with 4v4/8v8. And clearly some enjoy just beating the other team into the ground, not having to worry about getting flanked and separating from the safety of their team to defend/capture a different objective.... but I much preferred the more dynamic gameplay and find that there is little reason to play ESO without it.
Edited by fizzylu on December 25, 2024 3:09AM3 -
Urzigurumash✭✭✭✭✭
✭I asked Santa for empty flags so I can be good at pvp againXbox NA AD / Day 1 ScrubDK / Wood Orc Cuisine Enthusiast2 -
ceruulean✭✭✭I believe it'll be easier for the devs to balance pvp if they can collect data from a 2-team format. The 3-team formats are too chaotic to make meaningful conclusions, other than the obvious (undeath, heal stacking, RoA). So new BGs are easier to form a baseline on what is consistently over-performing.
I do hope ZoS adds some anti-spawn camping measures for the flag and land games though.
Oh, and reset ultimate points at the beginning of each game/round.
Edited by ceruulean on December 25, 2024 7:00AM0 -
Haki_7✭Shuffling the players of the two-teams custom lobbies would probably remove the need to restrict the rewards to bragging rights. But the priority right now is, of course, reducing the critical healing badge from 100 to 20. Not only would it solve the queue time problem, but would also allow DPS players to compete against healers in the leaderboards.0
-
Major_Mangle✭✭✭✭Shuffling the players of the two-teams custom lobbies would probably remove the need to restrict the rewards to bragging rights. But the priority right now is, of course, reducing the critical healing badge from 100 to 20. Not only would it solve the queue time problem, but would also allow DPS players to compete against healers in the leaderboards.
The critical heal medal is supposed to reward 5 points, just check the ingame help section under battlegrounds and deathmatch. It doesn't really matter anyway since leaderboards are meaningless due to the lack of appropriate rewards based on leaderboard placement (and a proper ranking/mmr system which is the main reason to all the things people complain about when it comes to the poor bg experience of one sided games).Ps4 EU 2016-2020
PC/EU: 2020 -0 -
Haki_7✭Major_Mangle wrote: »Shuffling the players of the two-teams custom lobbies would probably remove the need to restrict the rewards to bragging rights. But the priority right now is, of course, reducing the critical healing badge from 100 to 20. Not only would it solve the queue time problem, but would also allow DPS players to compete against healers in the leaderboards.
The critical heal medal is supposed to reward 5 points, just check the ingame help section under battlegrounds and deathmatch. It doesn't really matter anyway since leaderboards are meaningless due to the lack of appropriate rewards based on leaderboard placement (and a proper ranking/mmr system which is the main reason to all the things people complain about when it comes to the poor bg experience of one sided games).
It still says 100 points for all the other modes. Correcting the critical healing medal (for all the modes) needs to come before the existence of appropriate rewards anyway.huskandhunger wrote: »@Decimus Even with the increased rewards, my queue times have increased fivefold since they removed the old BGs. I've been posting my torture sessions here: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/670165/battlegrounds-cycle-of-self-destruction/p1 . This can be our diary of how BGs die.
lob you Haki
0
