PTS Update 45 - Feedback Thread for Cyrodiil Champions (Vengeance Campaign)

rigu90 · January 31

Could someone explain this?

Patch notes 10.3.1 :
While in Vengeance, the following abilities debuff effects cannot be cleansed

Dragonknight Standard’s Major Defile

Patch notes 10.3.2 :
Vengeance Abilities
... Dragonknight Standard: Fixed an issue where the Major Defile from this ultimate could not be cleansed.

I mean, it wasn't an issue to fix, it was intended considering the previous patch notes...

katorga · January 31

Anyone who heavy attacks triggeres a desyncs. Its a no brainer that with over complicated skills and sets we will have more bugs and issues.

There is a big difference. HA, overload, or other skill desyncs the target.

Balls are using setups that create a field of desync with 28-41m of the ball that desyncs all clients entering the field. I think this is why you can approach a keep with Ball groups running inside, and not even visible to you client, and suddenly disconnect. You don't have to be targeted by the ball group for your client to desync, proximity is enough.

MincMincMinc · January 31

katorga wrote: »

Anyone who heavy attacks triggeres a desyncs. Its a no brainer that with over complicated skills and sets we will have more bugs and issues.

There is a big difference. HA, overload, or other skill desyncs the target.

Balls are using setups that create a field of desync with 28-41m of the ball that desyncs all clients entering the field. I think this is why you can approach a keep with Ball groups running inside, and not even visible to you client, and suddenly disconnect. You don't have to be targeted by the ball group for your client to desync, proximity is enough.

I think you are misusing desync. What you are talking about is more of a clientside crash.

Desync is when there is a mismatch between the server and client. For example I hold light attack slightly longer, but let go. The client sees it as a light attack but the server sees it as a heavy attack. Both do different damage calculations because different buffs apply. Mismatch calculations like this have to recorrect themselves and the server has to push out a decision.

Do widespread desyncs cause server lag? IDK it cant be helping. Problem is how many desyncs are there? Considering they are not being fixed, zos probably cant quantify how many are affecting the server. Its just really hard to tell when a desync happens. On skills like dizzy swing or executes it is very clear.... but not all skills are that high burst. How many aoe dot ticks desync? Imagine 2x the serverload on a aoe dot that hits 10 people x 20s ticks.

Again another reason starting from scratch with skills may be a good idea. 10 years of copy/paste and deleting sections of code just to be patched up must be a mess.

sarahthes · January 31

rigu90 wrote: »

Could someone explain this?

Patch notes 10.3.1 :
While in Vengeance, the following abilities debuff effects cannot be cleansed

Dragonknight Standard’s Major Defile

Patch notes 10.3.2 :
Vengeance Abilities
... Dragonknight Standard: Fixed an issue where the Major Defile from this ultimate could not be cleansed.

I mean, it wasn't an issue to fix, it was intended considering the previous patch notes...

Wasn't the first from the Known Issues list? I.e. a bug they're already aware of and working on?

katorga · February 3

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Anyone who heavy attacks triggeres a desyncs. Its a no brainer that with over complicated skills and sets we will have more bugs and issues.

Intentionally exploiting actions that cause client-wide dsyncs is a different animal.

MincMincMinc wrote: »

katorga wrote: »

Anyone who heavy attacks triggeres a desyncs. Its a no brainer that with over complicated skills and sets we will have more bugs and issues.

There is a big difference. HA, overload, or other skill desyncs the target.

Balls are using setups that create a field of desync with 28-41m of the ball that desyncs all clients entering the field. I think this is why you can approach a keep with Ball groups running inside, and not even visible to you client, and suddenly disconnect. You don't have to be targeted by the ball group for your client to desync, proximity is enough.

I think you are misusing desync. What you are talking about is more of a clientside crash.

Desync is when there is a mismatch between the server and client. For example I hold light attack slightly longer, but let go. The client sees it as a light attack but the server sees it as a heavy attack. Both do different damage calculations because different buffs apply. Mismatch calculations like this have to recorrect themselves and the server has to push out a decision.

Do widespread desyncs cause server lag? IDK it cant be helping. Problem is how many desyncs are there? Considering they are not being fixed, zos probably cant quantify how many are affecting the server. Its just really hard to tell when a desync happens. On skills like dizzy swing or executes it is very clear.... but not all skills are that high burst. How many aoe dot ticks desync? Imagine 2x the serverload on a aoe dot that hits 10 people x 20s ticks.

Again another reason starting from scratch with skills may be a good idea. 10 years of copy/paste and deleting sections of code just to be patched up must be a mess.

Desync the client enough and it will crash, but most commonly I see the players, skills freeze and then boom sync with everything in a new location. My ping/fps don't change at all. It only happens with "some" ball groups, not all have learned the secret sauce yet.

SugaComa · February 5

Don't get hung up on the class skills people, as someone who does a lot of UAT (User Acceptance Testing) but right now that's not what is being tested right now it's about stress testing ...

It's like playing buckaroo seeing what can be added till the donkey kicks back

silky_soft · February 7

So this test is ready to roll or what?

xylena_lazarow · February 7

SugaComa wrote: »

Don't get hung up on the class skills people, as someone who does a lot of UAT (User Acceptance Testing) but right now that's not what is being tested right now it's about stress testing

People are hung up and worried about balance because they didn't just strip the game down to existing class skills, they also put significant resources into a massive complete redesign of all 126 class skills.

And then they went and stapled a burst heal to NB Cloak. Not a good omen.

MJallday · February 7

question - has it fixed "ball groups"?

MincMincMinc · February 7

silky_soft wrote: »

So this test is ready to roll or what?

Basically, yeah. Entering and leaving seems to work. Zos gave us everything we need for combat basics. Seige, pots, repairs, camps

The test should tell us:

Whether the pve and pvp skill split system can work?
What the performance difference is at the current max population?
What is the new max population before performance drops?
Is this a server hardware or combat software issue?
With half the code, can skills still serve their purpose?
Should skills, passives, sets, glyphs, traits, buffs, status effects be reworked and cleaned up?

Future considerations after the test to discuss:

The balance between sets and skills?
Stat imbalances/ tension?
Will powercrept proc sets wildly outpace the skill system from vengeance?
Will powercrept CP outpace skill selection?
Other source of power creep that weren't reigned in?

decairn · February 9

Feedback from a quick mess around on PTS:

Always in combat bug is gone. Combat stops immediately an encounter is done. Yay. Happy dance and all that.

Mount speed feels too slow - Cyrodiil is huge, make mount speed the same as with green CP and major gallop. Whatever the current top speed is.

Running speed is too slow - make character speed the same as with celerity CP and 5x medium

Ultimate generation is too slow - with all but light attack ultigen removed getting that to tick up is a pain. I'm seeing 1m 10s and more. Bring it down to 45s, could do a simple timer triggered by in combat, balance the skill output for per 45s instead of different ultimate point amounts.

Adamus · February 17

EXCITED!!!
As a regular PvPer and raid leader I'm excited for the combat that this test campaign will bring, it will offer unique challenges as a leader & player. The Arcade style of Cyrodiil will be fun for any player, past or present. If you were going to reach out to any of the pvp community that has left the game, this test would be an excellent opportunity to re-introduce them to the game. The Vengeance campaign will be an even field for all levels. I appreciate that the test will be only a week for testing purposes, but would almost push it for the full month. I wouldn't want this to become standard, or be it's own campaign, perhaps a yearly event, similar to MidYear. This suggestion is a bit pre-mature, but from my experience in the pts I believe players will enjoy this campaign. Would note that one of the biggest issues I had getting people on the pts is they didn't have space on their computer for the PTS client.

We tested with a group on three occasions.
Test 1 we took entire map with 1-3 players engaging in combat

https://youtu.be/dlfd_tJ0x1g
Test 2 we split into two groups and fought each other

https://youtu.be/syHzhQXPWeU
Test 3 we encountered another group and focused on fighting them where we could. I did experience a bit of skill delay during a few of these encounters.

https://youtu.be/txQpnxJ-kiI

Takeaways
Everyone that participated had a fun with the changes, challenging but still was good time. Lack of combat and pvp on the pts seemed to be the only discouraging comment. Raid comp will be important and knowing what your skills are doing will be even more important. With the change up in what each skill does and doesn't do, even after reviewing each skill, many of my actions reverted back to using a skill for what it did in it's existing non-test state. As mentioned above, I think this could be a considerable amount of fun and would even push for it to be it's own event, but no more than that.

Recommendations
ZoS Raid I want to fight a ZoS raid during NA Primetime, not on the pts, on live. No one expects you to win, but alot of respect would be earned from just showing up to the big fights at high population.
Increase group sizes back to 24. Players will have a better experience if they're in a group.
Change the crash limit to reset to gate to 2 or 3, most people give up before the current 4th try. In thick battles players will crash trying to log in to the zone, on the 4th try you're sent to the gate. This isn't a condition that can be tested on the pts but happens regularly on live, many players get discouraged and often give up before the 4th try to be reset.
Decrease npc's negate up time. This is a sanity request, disregard if it effects the current testing but if player negates are limited, please limit npc's negates as well. NPC negates are already OP.
Rewards to drive traffic Request for gold crafting materials and columbine. You offer that as a reward and you'll not only have a full server, but a que.

Cautions
Naysayers Players that leverage existing set/stat/comp/server performance imbalances may attack and boycott this test, particularly ones that have issues with deaths in their k/d ratio. While these groups may be very vocal about their discontent, this existing test will require players to rely on their level of skill, that may be reason for some players to boycott with fear of being exposed.
Ballgroups, tanks, gankers and bombers Groups/players most effected will be Ballgroups, tanks, gankers and bombers. Ballgroups will find it extremely difficult to run in their current state, with limited heal/shield stacking, movement speed, cc immunities, and increase in population.
Tanks will exist but they won't be able to face tank large groups the way they do now.
Gankers the high health and absence of set procing will make ganking challenging to even the most experienced player.
Bombers will be non-existent. Lot of respect to the solo bombers out there but most, if not all their tool set is gone.
False negative/positives From the current Tank meta to anywhere is a breath of fresh air. We've been a tank meta for years now, not sure if someone on the team likes pvp tanking, but every new change/update over that past few years have made it tanker and tanker. A good amount of any positive response to this campaign may be from the current stagnated tank meta we're in. This campaign will change player behavior, particularly with ballgroups (optimized groups), which may eliminate factors that cause crashing/lag created by their play styles.

Final notes
I'm excited, planning to have a group up every night of the test, even if all the answers were found before the test started, would still want the test to take place.

xylena_lazarow · February 18

Adamus wrote: »

Raid comp will be important

Thanks for your work! Do you feel that group comp will continue to be the pre-fight game-deciding advantage it is now? Or do you feel that random groups will now have a decent fighting chance against comp groups, provided that they are able to play with sufficient on-field coordination and individual skill?

Turtle_Bot · February 18

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

Adamus wrote: »

Raid comp will be important

Thanks for your work! Do you feel that group comp will continue to be the pre-fight game-deciding advantage it is now? Or do you feel that random groups will now have a decent fighting chance against comp groups, provided that they are able to play with sufficient on-field coordination and individual skill?

From what I noticed in my early testing (and it's still early and I'm still sleepy, so take this with a grain of salt), group coordination will be the big factor for ball groups if they play during the vengeance tests.

It's still possible to wipe groups and be extremely tanky (especially with the right group comp), but the ceiling on that is much lower, allowing for pure numbers (even the low pop caps we currently have) to actually have an impact (assuming a base level of skill).

- There's no free pulls (ball groups will have to use natural choke points and funnels to attempt to bomb zergs)
- All AoEs (heal/damage) only hit 3 max targets (meaning significantly more active use of heals and damage skills needed to achieve what is currently done with 2-3 buttons)
- very limited over time effects (no stacking 12+ vigors + 12 shields + 50+ buffs for such insane passive defense)
- There's a lot less "dead weight" in the class kits, so it's less likely for the random players to have completely useless builds (unless they literally slot no skills)
- Sustain is also a big factor (people will gas out very quickly if they don't conserve resources properly, including organized groups)

That being said, ball groups will still be very strong (well the good ones will be, and this assumes they will play and coordinate during the test), but the more average ball groups will definitely be much more like a typical zerg or a non-ball guild group than what they currently are on live.

Adamus · February 19

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

Adamus wrote: »

Raid comp will be important

Thanks for your work! Do you feel that group comp will continue to be the pre-fight game-deciding advantage it is now? Or do you feel that random groups will now have a decent fighting chance against comp groups, provided that they are able to play with sufficient on-field coordination and individual skill?

Hi Xylena. Group comps will not be a game deciding advantage. Sure some classes are better in some roles, but biggest factor will be size and skill. Any would be "Benny Hill" group running walls won't survive long under constant pressure, due to limited cc immunities, speed, rss regen and lack of defensive shields/proc sets. A Zone General should be able to clear a keep, even with a ballgroup present.

You can run naked, no weapons & punching and you will have the same stats/light/heavy attack as everyone else. Numbers/class/bar slots/player skill/environment will be the deciding factors. Not perfectly balanced but more balanced than current Cyrodiil.

Multiple, dual faction coordinating ballgroups may be another issue, but those should be manageable as well.

xylena_lazarow · February 19

Adamus wrote: »

A Zone General should be able to clear a keep, even with a ballgroup present.

That's good to hear, much as I love the build system, I'd consider giving it up to have big dynamic zerg fights where randoms matter and players care, like we had years ago. Dunno if that's possible but I'm glad we're trying something.

Just_Attivi · February 19

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

Adamus wrote: »

A Zone General should be able to clear a keep, even with a ballgroup present.

That's good to hear, much as I love the build system, I'd consider giving it up to have big dynamic zerg fights where randoms matter and players care, like we had years ago. Dunno if that's possible but I'm glad we're trying something.

Getting players to care is a whole different issue i think. Until populations are stabilized across timezones (which I doubt higher caps will fix that, only make the zergiest faction of the hour even zergier) not too many people seem to care about score as much as individual AP/rewards/just there for fights. As much as I entirely dislike Vengeance and hope it doesn't end up being anything beyond a test (and I hope as a test it helps us get to a better cyrodiil), I will agree that it sounds like it does give the potential for lower skill players to make a more significant impact, which could drive up interest in "winning." Reward structure then needs to be redone to be interesting to more than just new players (seriously, offer alliance change tokens and race change tokens ZOS) and scoring would need to somehow be balanced around populations so that off hours faction locked teams holding the map against 1 opposing flower picker doesnt immediately destroy the interest in "winning" and actually pushing a campaign.

just my 2 Crowns

DrGIggles80 · March 27

What I find to be a joke about this entire test is the only feedback that you guys get and obviously care about is that of PC players.