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

Tommy_The_Gun · January 22

Turtle_Bot wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Turtle_Bot wrote: »

Speed:
- I noted how clunky bolt escape is. It is literally as slow on PTS as mist form is on live server where it takes min half a second of doing nothing before it teleports. ZOS has clearly changed something within the code for that ability on PTS. Just straight movement speed is already more than enough to keep up with streak on live servers (as has been proven countless times with video evidence on other threads) where streak is significantly faster than what bolt escape is on the PTS.
- Bolt escape is also a very unreliable stun on PTS, I ended up switching it to back bar to use exclusively as an escape tool since the stun is no longer along the entire length of the teleport, but only in a small AoE on landing point (another thing that makes the skill clunky to use compared to live).
- Why do people think the other classes don't have any stuns or CC on top of their speed to catch sorc (not just PTS but on live too), it's almost like CC abilities, gap closers and speed buffs just vanish from the other classes kits when players complain about sorc/streak.

I dont think streak on pts is any slower, on live I think they just move your character model and camera faster that it actually happens. Its why you can still attack sorcs at the origin location, even though they have already moved to the end. Pretty sure zos put this change on live to help players not get confused when they streak into a new environment. Basically if they move the camera before it actually happens, players can look around for the rest of the gcd to prepare for the next gcd.

I'm not sure exactly what they've done, but on PTS it was very noticeable for me where the character (and camera) just stood there for a solid half second before being teleported.

Live streak is much faster than what BE was on PTS, even if it is just the camera moving on the live servers. Like I said, it actually felt like I was casting mist form or live version of Arc portal instead of BE when testing on the PTS. The stutter/delay with the skill was horrible for the flow of combat if I was trying to cast more than just streak.

What made it even more noticeable was that Arc portal was legitimately instant cast for me (same conditions). I do have auto cast ground AoEs turned on, but even then I basically cast portal while running and just auto ported (camera and character) instantly through the portal as fast as streak does on live.

Thinking on it, it actually seems likely that ZOS might have accidentally switched some of the code of the 2 skills during the process of porting them over to the new campaign. Might be something to double check?

Streak will be actually very strong in this mode as there aren't really many ways to boost mobility. So Sorc will be way harder to catch up with than in regular pvp.

Estin · January 22

MincMincMinc wrote: »

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Honestly do we really need to use 3-4 seige at the same time? 99% of pvp is just everyone sitting at the ram on an empty keep.

Yeah it's pretty key to fighting outnumbered at keeps, and getting into keeps with small groups in the first place. I like to smallscale at actual objectives, not just troll towers, not be forced into ball strat, this ruleset completely nukes a lot of what I do with my groups. So that brings the game mode down to whether fighting in zergs will be fun.

Zerg sieges often rely on only a few players who actually know siege tactics while the other 80 zergers derp around. So nerfing the best siege players is gonna be a huge stealth buff to either the ball group strat, or to a big flat dumb player count check. Especially on top of the nerf to individual build power. I'm out unless large scale somehow works.

You are clearly missing the entire purpose of the test....... they dont want you to go pvdoor random keeps with 5 people. They solely want large 100v100v100 fights to test the server loads. They aren't redesigning and tailoring pvp at all levels for a single week of testing. Its silly to cry for balance changes or niche playstyle changes. All I do is solo/duo 1vX and I am not crying, my fun over the next year to 5 years is more important than how perfectly balanced one or two nights of pvp is during a scheduled test.

The test solely needs basic core functions which it has. The fact that they are somewhat even close after a few weeks or making essentially a whole new game solely for test purposes is astounding. We have been struggling for 8 years to get involvement from the devs and the second they want to test something people freak out wanting to cancel testing because they don't have a minor buff on a skill they only have for a week.

It's more than that. They want to bring the caps back to original cyrodiil which was around 600 per alliance. 1800 players in one zone. It's saddening to see so many players, especially big PvP names, complaining because they can't X anymore in a campaign that is watered down for the sole purpose of stress testing. So many of them think this is the final version moving forward despite ZOS articulating more than once that it is not. A lot have already said they don't plan on participating in this test because PvP is now dead.

Really, I feel bad for ZOS and am siding with them this time. This may be the only chance to fix PvP for good, and all the players who have been calling for PvP to be fixed are the ones actively destroying that chance because they're too focused on petty issues like balance and X-ing in a stress test. The test needs participants. If only 200 people show up because everyone else complained their favourite class can't 1vX with bare bones skills, ZOS won't get the data they need, and we can all say goodbye to any chances of PvP being fixed. It's truly disappointing that these players can't focus on what's important.

Kickimanjaro · January 22

I would like to know what the player caps will be set at for this test.

@ZOS_Kevin, is this something you can share with us? I think this knowledge could help boost enthusiasm for participation in the test if people know it's 2x, 3x, or 10x current caps or something.

Freelancer_ESO · January 22

Do you have any general feedback?

The text for Vengeance Daedric Summoning gets slightly cropped on the skill window.

The Red Mundus Stone on the character page is mildly annoying when you can't equip a mundus stone. If this is planned as more of a long term function you might add a Mundus that does nothing/disable the red in the mode.

It might be beneficial to have some visual differentiation on the skill bar for Vengance skills so that it's easier to memorize them and avoid confusing them with PvE skills.

It might be better to start players off with both skill bars filled rather than empty from the standpoint that some players might not like having to immediately make a ton of choices.

KiltMaster · January 22

I know this is a test but wow this is horrible. So much for “play your way”.

You mentioned how “you actually have to use skill this way” but frankly you have to use skill now. You can put someone who’s never been in PVP before in the best gear with the best setup in skills and if they’re not skilled enough to play it, it won’t work.

You also mentioned how the goal of making everything simplified is to increase the size for fights and amount of players allowed in the campaign, but then so many of the skills are capped to only three players. I’m not sure where the disconnect is with that.

One person, one siege is also yikes. It will take forever to take down keep walls, now.

Though I guess there won’t be any lag if no one is playing in PVP anymore.

Estin · January 22

KiltMaster wrote: »

I know this is a test but wow this is horrible. So much for “play your way”.

You mentioned how “you actually have to use skill this way” but frankly you have to use skill now. You can put someone who’s never been in PVP before in the best gear with the best setup in skills and if they’re not skilled enough to play it, it won’t work.

You also mentioned how the goal of making everything simplified is to increase the size for fights and amount of players allowed in the campaign, but then so many of the skills are capped to only three players. I’m not sure where the disconnect is with that.

One person, one siege is also yikes. It will take forever to take down keep walls, now.

Though I guess there won’t be any lag if no one is playing in PVP anymore.

The disconnect is with yourself, and with other players who think the same. Please understand that this isn't what cyrodiil will be moving forward. It is only like this for 1 week for the sake of testing performance. Classes are given the bare minimum to do damage and heal so the overhead can be as low as possible to fit in as many players as possible. If the servers can handle original population caps with this baseline, they will add more to it.

xylena_lazarow · January 22

Estin wrote: »

It's saddening to see so many players, especially big PvP names, complaining because they can't X anymore in a campaign that is watered down for the sole purpose of stress testing.

I've mentioned before that if I'm wrong and Vengeance turns out to be awesome, I'll happily join. But as of now, this offers me nothing that Rivals or whatever doesn't also offer, if I'm going to be learning another entirely new game.

AngryPenguin · January 22

Why is ZOS apparently giving up on Cyrodiil as is with some basic changes we've been asking for for years?

After trying this a little I can say this rule set will not work. It will not retain customers, it will drive them away.

Why can't ZOS try limiting HoT and shield stacking in groups while battlespirit is active and make some adjustments to a few sets, like RoA and other free pull sets? Just pull RoA out of PvP and if that's not enough, remove sets that have stacking conditions, like reliquin and mechanical acuity?

These changes alone would massively reduce server side calculations without destroying the premier end game activity in ESO.

And we don't need destructible bridges and milegates. And we don't need keeps that upgrade and downgrade depending on what resources are held by the keep. (this was a great idea in my opinion, but it's constant server side calculations for every building in Cyro, so if removing the feature helps performance, then let it be done please)

What ZOS is asking the customers to accept, conceptually, is that ZOS can't fix Cyrodiil as it is, so we should trust ZOS to create a whole new system. If ya'll can't make what's already built work better or comparable to how it used to with much higher populations, why should we trust in the development of an entire new system? Sets like RoA very much reduce the player confidence in ZOS' ability to develop new sets and rule sets as it is.

I can't say it enough, the player base I know very strongly feels if ZOS can't fix what we already have there is no reason to have any confidence in the development of an entire new system.

AngryPenguin · January 22

Estin wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Honestly do we really need to use 3-4 seige at the same time? 99% of pvp is just everyone sitting at the ram on an empty keep.

Yeah it's pretty key to fighting outnumbered at keeps, and getting into keeps with small groups in the first place. I like to smallscale at actual objectives, not just troll towers, not be forced into ball strat, this ruleset completely nukes a lot of what I do with my groups. So that brings the game mode down to whether fighting in zergs will be fun.

Zerg sieges often rely on only a few players who actually know siege tactics while the other 80 zergers derp around. So nerfing the best siege players is gonna be a huge stealth buff to either the ball group strat, or to a big flat dumb player count check. Especially on top of the nerf to individual build power. I'm out unless large scale somehow works.

You are clearly missing the entire purpose of the test....... they dont want you to go pvdoor random keeps with 5 people. They solely want large 100v100v100 fights to test the server loads. They aren't redesigning and tailoring pvp at all levels for a single week of testing. Its silly to cry for balance changes or niche playstyle changes. All I do is solo/duo 1vX and I am not crying, my fun over the next year to 5 years is more important than how perfectly balanced one or two nights of pvp is during a scheduled test.

The test solely needs basic core functions which it has. The fact that they are somewhat even close after a few weeks or making essentially a whole new game solely for test purposes is astounding. We have been struggling for 8 years to get involvement from the devs and the second they want to test something people freak out wanting to cancel testing because they don't have a minor buff on a skill they only have for a week.

It's more than that. They want to bring the caps back to original cyrodiil which was around 600 per alliance. 1800 players in one zone. It's saddening to see so many players, especially big PvP names, complaining because they can't X anymore in a campaign that is watered down for the sole purpose of stress testing. So many of them think this is the final version moving forward despite ZOS articulating more than once that it is not. A lot have already said they don't plan on participating in this test because PvP is now dead.

Really, I feel bad for ZOS and am siding with them this time. This may be the only chance to fix PvP for good, and all the players who have been calling for PvP to be fixed are the ones actively destroying that chance because they're too focused on petty issues like balance and X-ing in a stress test. The test needs participants. If only 200 people show up because everyone else complained their favourite class can't 1vX with bare bones skills, ZOS won't get the data they need, and we can all say goodbye to any chances of PvP being fixed. It's truly disappointing that these players can't focus on what's important.

This isn't fixing Cyrodiil. It's making it something entirely different that, i'm pretty sure, would result in the death of the zone.

DrGIggles80 · January 22

@ZOS_Kevin tell me why completely gut everything all at once and hope you can tell what the issues are? wouldn't it make more sense to eliminate one or two things per test? also as a year one player, I have always enjoyed theory crafting, playing my own way as has always been eso moto.. now i get this is only a test but you are literally looking at ways to take all the options away from the pvp community. wrong direction. Think you also need to look at the drag the old gen consoles are causing... only mmo this old that doesnt have a minimum operating system requirement...

xylena_lazarow · January 22

AngryPenguin wrote: »

This isn't fixing Cyrodiil. It's making it something entirely different that, i'm pretty sure, would result in the death of the zone.

It's such a radically different format that it might as well be an entirely new game. We'll have no idea how it'll play out until the main server test when the zergs and ball groups collide.

katorga · January 22

VixxVexx wrote: »

Maybe limit the test to 3 classes(NB, DK, Warden) because the others won't be remotely viable.

This.

At this point I doubt I'll even bother to participate in the test because it still has to be moderately fun. This....dunno.

Cyro populations are soooo low right now, are there even enough pvp'ers left to provide enough load to test with. It would help if they put the population cap is on the screen with a counter of how many players are in zone per faction. Not the "bars" they have today.

KiltMaster · January 22

Estin wrote: »

KiltMaster wrote: »

I know this is a test but wow this is horrible. So much for “play your way”.

You mentioned how “you actually have to use skill this way” but frankly you have to use skill now. You can put someone who’s never been in PVP before in the best gear with the best setup in skills and if they’re not skilled enough to play it, it won’t work.

You also mentioned how the goal of making everything simplified is to increase the size for fights and amount of players allowed in the campaign, but then so many of the skills are capped to only three players. I’m not sure where the disconnect is with that.

One person, one siege is also yikes. It will take forever to take down keep walls, now.

Though I guess there won’t be any lag if no one is playing in PVP anymore.

The disconnect is with yourself, and with other players who think the same. Please understand that this isn't what cyrodiil will be moving forward. It is only like this for 1 week for the sake of testing performance. Classes are given the bare minimum to do damage and heal so the overhead can be as low as possible to fit in as many players as possible. If the servers can handle original population caps with this baseline, they will add more to it.

Guess you missed the part where I said “I get this is a test BUT”

Estin · January 22

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

Estin wrote: »

It's saddening to see so many players, especially big PvP names, complaining because they can't X anymore in a campaign that is watered down for the sole purpose of stress testing.

I've mentioned before that if I'm wrong and Vengeance turns out to be awesome, I'll happily join. But as of now, this offers me nothing that Rivals or whatever doesn't also offer, if I'm going to be learning another entirely new game.

Vengeance cannot turn out to be awesome if everyone avoids it simply because it's barebones. ZOS has to start from square 1 if they want to rebuild PvP, and players are going to have to understand and accept that. It's not hard to do that either since it's only for 1 week to gather data. You're not going to have to learn a new game.

I cannot stress this enough. If nobody shows up for this test, we will be stuck with the laggy and stagnated pvp forever. Please stop being concerned with temporary class imbalance, templates, limited siege, and other minor issues. They cannot move forward if everyone is so caught up on that.

KiltMaster · January 22

AngryPenguin wrote: »

Why is ZOS apparently giving up on Cyrodiil as is with some basic changes we've been asking for for years?

After trying this a little I can say this rule set will not work. It will not retain customers, it will drive them away.

Why can't ZOS try limiting HoT and shield stacking in groups while battlespirit is active and make some adjustments to a few sets, like RoA and other free pull sets? Just pull RoA out of PvP and if that's not enough, remove sets that have stacking conditions, like reliquin and mechanical acuity?

These changes alone would massively reduce server side calculations without destroying the premier end game activity in ESO.

And we don't need destructible bridges and milegates. And we don't need keeps that upgrade and downgrade depending on what resources are held by the keep. (this was a great idea in my opinion, but it's constant server side calculations for every building in Cyro, so if removing the feature helps performance, then let it be done please)

What ZOS is asking the customers to accept, conceptually, is that ZOS can't fix Cyrodiil as it is, so we should trust ZOS to create a whole new system. If ya'll can't make what's already built work better or comparable to how it used to with much higher populations, why should we trust in the development of an entire new system? Sets like RoA very much reduce the player confidence in ZOS' ability to develop new sets and rule sets as it is.

I can't say it enough, the player base I know very strongly feels if ZOS can't fix what we already have there is no reason to have any confidence in the development of an entire new system.

This is exactly it thank you for articulating that so perfectly.

ZOS_Kevin · January 22

DrGIggles80 wrote: »

@ZOS_Kevin tell me why completely gut everything all at once and hope you can tell what the issues are? wouldn't it make more sense to eliminate one or two things per test? also as a year one player, I have always enjoyed theory crafting, playing my own way as has always been eso moto.. now i get this is only a test but you are literally looking at ways to take all the options away from the pvp community. wrong direction. Think you also need to look at the drag the old gen consoles are causing... only mmo this old that doesnt have a minimum operating system requirement...

There seems to be a misunderstanding here about the test. The point of this test is purely for the sake of performance, and getting calculations as low as possible on the server. So eliminating one or two things at a time will not help in the data we are trying to gather. This test for March as of right now, is purely for performance data on the live server so that we have a baseline when exploring pathways to improve Cyrodiil. That is also why we mentioned that class and skill balance is not a focus here. Because that is still several steps ahead of where we are, especially for a test that will last one week.

Estin · January 22

KiltMaster wrote: »

Estin wrote: »

KiltMaster wrote: »

I know this is a test but wow this is horrible. So much for “play your way”.

You mentioned how “you actually have to use skill this way” but frankly you have to use skill now. You can put someone who’s never been in PVP before in the best gear with the best setup in skills and if they’re not skilled enough to play it, it won’t work.

You also mentioned how the goal of making everything simplified is to increase the size for fights and amount of players allowed in the campaign, but then so many of the skills are capped to only three players. I’m not sure where the disconnect is with that.

One person, one siege is also yikes. It will take forever to take down keep walls, now.

Though I guess there won’t be any lag if no one is playing in PVP anymore.

The disconnect is with yourself, and with other players who think the same. Please understand that this isn't what cyrodiil will be moving forward. It is only like this for 1 week for the sake of testing performance. Classes are given the bare minimum to do damage and heal so the overhead can be as low as possible to fit in as many players as possible. If the servers can handle original population caps with this baseline, they will add more to it.

Guess you missed the part where I said “I get this is a test BUT”

If you understood it was a test, there wouldn't be any need for the complaints. They're testing it for performance only, not whether basic skills and templated stats should be the thing moving forward.

KiltMaster · January 22

Estin wrote: »

KiltMaster wrote: »

Estin wrote: »

KiltMaster wrote: »

I know this is a test but wow this is horrible. So much for “play your way”.

You mentioned how “you actually have to use skill this way” but frankly you have to use skill now. You can put someone who’s never been in PVP before in the best gear with the best setup in skills and if they’re not skilled enough to play it, it won’t work.

You also mentioned how the goal of making everything simplified is to increase the size for fights and amount of players allowed in the campaign, but then so many of the skills are capped to only three players. I’m not sure where the disconnect is with that.

One person, one siege is also yikes. It will take forever to take down keep walls, now.

Though I guess there won’t be any lag if no one is playing in PVP anymore.

The disconnect is with yourself, and with other players who think the same. Please understand that this isn't what cyrodiil will be moving forward. It is only like this for 1 week for the sake of testing performance. Classes are given the bare minimum to do damage and heal so the overhead can be as low as possible to fit in as many players as possible. If the servers can handle original population caps with this baseline, they will add more to it.

Guess you missed the part where I said “I get this is a test BUT”

If you understood it was a test, there wouldn't be any need for the complaints. They're testing it for performance only, not whether basic skills and templated stats should be the thing moving forward.

Welp there’s a feedback thread for a reason so people are gonna leave feedback 👍

UrQuan · January 22

KiltMaster wrote: »

Estin wrote: »

KiltMaster wrote: »

I know this is a test but wow this is horrible. So much for “play your way”.

You mentioned how “you actually have to use skill this way” but frankly you have to use skill now. You can put someone who’s never been in PVP before in the best gear with the best setup in skills and if they’re not skilled enough to play it, it won’t work.

You also mentioned how the goal of making everything simplified is to increase the size for fights and amount of players allowed in the campaign, but then so many of the skills are capped to only three players. I’m not sure where the disconnect is with that.

One person, one siege is also yikes. It will take forever to take down keep walls, now.

Though I guess there won’t be any lag if no one is playing in PVP anymore.

The disconnect is with yourself, and with other players who think the same. Please understand that this isn't what cyrodiil will be moving forward. It is only like this for 1 week for the sake of testing performance. Classes are given the bare minimum to do damage and heal so the overhead can be as low as possible to fit in as many players as possible. If the servers can handle original population caps with this baseline, they will add more to it.

Guess you missed the part where I said “I get this is a test BUT”

Maybe because everything else you said shows that you actually don't get that this is a test. It's strictly a performance test to see what can be done if everything is pared down. That's it. It's not meant to be balanced, it's not meant to be representative of upcoming changes to Cyrodiil, it's not anything but a pure performance test.

PVPers will whine until the cows come home about performance being bad, but as soon as ZOS wants to run a test to gather data that will help them improve performance, instead the PVPers start whining about how it's not how they want to play so they won't participate. The next time you complain about the performance in Cyrodiil, remember that it's your fault that ZOS can't get the data they need to improve it. You are the problem.

xylena_lazarow · January 22

UrQuan wrote: »

PVPers will whine until the cows come home about performance being bad, but as soon as ZOS wants to run a test

Goomba fallacy. Some PvPers prioritize balance. Others performance. That doesn't mean every PvPer is a walking contradiction of both of those things. I care a lot about the quality of balance in the product I'm testing. I'm not interested in whether a low quality unbalanced product performs well or not. This is not worth my time.

ZOS_Kevin · January 22

Hey all, just a reminder to keep the conversation civil and specifically about feedback for the test. We know folks are passionate about the topic and have differing viewpoints, but please remember that we all want the same end result. So keeping the thread to the PTS test feedback and making it easier for the team to read through will be helpful to all.

DrGIggles80 · January 22

MincMincMinc wrote: »

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

@ZOS_Kevin

After reviewing all of the skill lines in pts I have some concerns. Mainly the whole point is to run this test by removing bloated complicated skills and have only core essentials. While I understand that necro and arc have their stacking systems as some sort of "identity", the skill lines were basically ignoring the whole purpose of the test.

To top it off these two classes have extra buffs needlessly tacked on to some skills that other classes have. A general rule of thumb that should have been followed was that a skills shouldn't have multiple AND statements in them "Does damage AND generates a corpse AND does a dot AND does a debuff AND gives a buff AND does offbalance AND.......AND........AND........."

If a skill is more than a paragraph long, it needs to be simplified.
Also I think it would be best to make sure the status effect system was turned off. I didnt get to check this tonight, but it is essentially added procs on every single action done in the game. Can't be healthy for the server. Probably why phys damage and mag damage didnt have status effects for so long, as they were the most common forms of damage.

There aren't going to be any Necros on during the test anyway if you look at their actual toolkit vs. NB or DK.

Tru lol, NB is going to be cracked, DK is going to be impossible to 1v1 with the pressure, sorc doesnt have a spammable or an ult, arc+necro may only be strong from the sheer number of buffs they get, templar is lol just like on live.

Decimus wrote: »

PvP has devolved into slow stalemate heavy attack spam, running out of resources before you can finish off your opponent who switched to defense until one person gets bored or makes a mistake. I don't see anyone surviving when fighting outnumbered after these changes since the sustain is just not there, nor is the burst damage.

Class balance is also wayyy off, with necromancer (ironically) and nightblade being a lot stronger than the rest.

Good thing there's BGs, but if this is some long-term direction for PvP in Cyrodiil it just feels like wasted development time.

Yeah atleast tweaking the regen to the point where you can cast 20-30 skills before starting to gas out would be nice.

Balance is obviously not the focus on this, not sure why people are so fixated on the balance for a week long test.

I cannot possibly see this as their longterm direction nor have they ever stated that. I could see them finishing stat standardizations like combining spell and weapon damage or the crits. Then would come class reworks. Before they rework classes I am sure they want to know whether the game can handle one skill being an aoe+dot+effect+debuff+........ Not every skill needs to be paragraphs long to be fun to use. Compare old dizzy swing vs new dizzy swing, I'd much rather the longer cast time knockup. It was especially fun when they fixed the aim check problems before ruining the skill with the terrible offbalance concept.

EDIT: Honestly you should get worried if zos starts really trying to balance these skill lines out.

peopleare focused on balance because the weak classes will not be played, therefore affecting the whole test.

MincMincMinc · January 22

MincMincMinc wrote: »

@ZOS_Kevin

After reviewing all of the skill lines in pts I have some concerns. Mainly the whole point is to run this test by removing bloated complicated skills and have only core essentials. While I understand that necro and arc have their stacking systems as some sort of "identity", the skill lines were basically ignoring the whole purpose of the test.

To top it off these two classes have extra buffs needlessly tacked on to some skills that other classes have. A general rule of thumb that should have been followed was that a skills shouldn't have multiple AND statements in them "Does damage AND generates a corpse AND does a dot AND does a debuff AND gives a buff AND does offbalance AND.......AND........AND........."

If a skill is more than a paragraph long, it needs to be simplified.
Also I think it would be best to make sure the status effect system was turned off. I didnt get to check this tonight, but it is essentially added procs on every single action done in the game. Can't be healthy for the server. Probably why phys damage and mag damage didnt have status effects for so long, as they were the most common forms of damage.

@ZOS_Kevin Sorry for repost as this got lost to early morning discussion, but I think for the integrity of the test it is important to address these two topics.

DrGIggles80 · January 22

MincMincMinc wrote: »

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

Reminder that this isn't testing "procs" as we already know that proc sets have zero effect on performance, because they already did the no proc main camp test, and performance was still terrible. Not sure why they're trying to nerf both skills and siege at the same time, how will they know which one is helping the performance?

The point of the test is to see if any option zos balance team has will affect performance. If the server still fails, the only option is better hardware or give up. If the test is a success it means the hardware is fine and the balance team has to do a better job at streamlining skill structure.

Also the last tests had improvements, just nothing significant enough to rework 300+sets alone. Considering they also did skill structure tests too they probably saw that multiple aspects of the game are bloated unnecessarily.
Honestly do we really need to use 3-4 seige at the same time? 99% of pvp is just everyone sitting at the ram on an empty keep.

its not only the weak servers but the ancient engine they use for coding.

DrGIggles80 · January 22

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

DrGIggles80 wrote: »

@ZOS_Kevin tell me why completely gut everything all at once and hope you can tell what the issues are? wouldn't it make more sense to eliminate one or two things per test? also as a year one player, I have always enjoyed theory crafting, playing my own way as has always been eso moto.. now i get this is only a test but you are literally looking at ways to take all the options away from the pvp community. wrong direction. Think you also need to look at the drag the old gen consoles are causing... only mmo this old that doesnt have a minimum operating system requirement...

There seems to be a misunderstanding here about the test. The point of this test is purely for the sake of performance, and getting calculations as low as possible on the server. So eliminating one or two things at a time will not help in the data we are trying to gather. This test for March as of right now, is purely for performance data on the live server so that we have a baseline when exploring pathways to improve Cyrodiil. That is also why we mentioned that class and skill balance is not a focus here. Because that is still several steps ahead of where we are, especially for a test that will last one week.

what is the current population cap on cyrodill campaigns? I have google searched a million times and there is no clarification on this.

acastanza_ESO · January 22

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Hey @acastanza_ESO, we understand why the balance topics you are calling out are important to you. We want to stress that for PTS specifically, this is a functionality test only, ahead of the live test and the test overall is designed to prioritize game performance to see what is possible. For this functionality test on the PTS, we are focused on the questions in the first post. Remember, the core point of this test is to see how Cyrodiil performs overall in a barebones environment, rather than on class kit focus.

I just want to follow up that this response is grossly misleading. @ZOS_GinaBruno popped into PainintheAxe's stream while he was on PTS and I had the opportunity to ask her if there was any possibility of seeing balance changes before this makes it to the live server, this is her response:

So, saying this is "for PTS specifically" is false. We do actually need to have the balance conversation right now.

KiltMaster · January 22

UrQuan wrote: »

KiltMaster wrote: »

Estin wrote: »

KiltMaster wrote: »

I know this is a test but wow this is horrible. So much for “play your way”.

You mentioned how “you actually have to use skill this way” but frankly you have to use skill now. You can put someone who’s never been in PVP before in the best gear with the best setup in skills and if they’re not skilled enough to play it, it won’t work.

You also mentioned how the goal of making everything simplified is to increase the size for fights and amount of players allowed in the campaign, but then so many of the skills are capped to only three players. I’m not sure where the disconnect is with that.

One person, one siege is also yikes. It will take forever to take down keep walls, now.

Though I guess there won’t be any lag if no one is playing in PVP anymore.

The disconnect is with yourself, and with other players who think the same. Please understand that this isn't what cyrodiil will be moving forward. It is only like this for 1 week for the sake of testing performance. Classes are given the bare minimum to do damage and heal so the overhead can be as low as possible to fit in as many players as possible. If the servers can handle original population caps with this baseline, they will add more to it.

Guess you missed the part where I said “I get this is a test BUT”

Maybe because everything else you said shows that you actually don't get that this is a test. It's strictly a performance test to see what can be done if everything is pared down. That's it. It's not meant to be balanced, it's not meant to be representative of upcoming changes to Cyrodiil, it's not anything but a pure performance test.

PVPers will whine until the cows come home about performance being bad, but as soon as ZOS wants to run a test to gather data that will help them improve performance, instead the PVPers start whining about how it's not how they want to play so they won't participate. The next time you complain about the performance in Cyrodiil, remember that it's your fault that ZOS can't get the data they need to improve it. You are the problem.

I just feel as though you won’t get decent data regarding ALL the classes and all the things that siege might bring. You gotta start somewhere might as well start with straight up fist fighting no skills etc. right?.

Also no where did I say I wasn’t going to test it. Of course I will. They need feedback right? Apologies for attempting to provide feedback based on PTS data as requested.

Also go read what AngryPenguin said - that sums it up the best way better than I could’ve articulated. I apologize and I will spend more time on my dissertation/essay for the forum folk who think they can read my mind. 🙏

UrQuan · January 22

DrGIggles80 wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

@ZOS_Kevin

After reviewing all of the skill lines in pts I have some concerns. Mainly the whole point is to run this test by removing bloated complicated skills and have only core essentials. While I understand that necro and arc have their stacking systems as some sort of "identity", the skill lines were basically ignoring the whole purpose of the test.

To top it off these two classes have extra buffs needlessly tacked on to some skills that other classes have. A general rule of thumb that should have been followed was that a skills shouldn't have multiple AND statements in them "Does damage AND generates a corpse AND does a dot AND does a debuff AND gives a buff AND does offbalance AND.......AND........AND........."

If a skill is more than a paragraph long, it needs to be simplified.
Also I think it would be best to make sure the status effect system was turned off. I didnt get to check this tonight, but it is essentially added procs on every single action done in the game. Can't be healthy for the server. Probably why phys damage and mag damage didnt have status effects for so long, as they were the most common forms of damage.

There aren't going to be any Necros on during the test anyway if you look at their actual toolkit vs. NB or DK.

Tru lol, NB is going to be cracked, DK is going to be impossible to 1v1 with the pressure, sorc doesnt have a spammable or an ult, arc+necro may only be strong from the sheer number of buffs they get, templar is lol just like on live.

Decimus wrote: »

PvP has devolved into slow stalemate heavy attack spam, running out of resources before you can finish off your opponent who switched to defense until one person gets bored or makes a mistake. I don't see anyone surviving when fighting outnumbered after these changes since the sustain is just not there, nor is the burst damage.

Class balance is also wayyy off, with necromancer (ironically) and nightblade being a lot stronger than the rest.

Good thing there's BGs, but if this is some long-term direction for PvP in Cyrodiil it just feels like wasted development time.

Yeah atleast tweaking the regen to the point where you can cast 20-30 skills before starting to gas out would be nice.

Balance is obviously not the focus on this, not sure why people are so fixated on the balance for a week long test.

I cannot possibly see this as their longterm direction nor have they ever stated that. I could see them finishing stat standardizations like combining spell and weapon damage or the crits. Then would come class reworks. Before they rework classes I am sure they want to know whether the game can handle one skill being an aoe+dot+effect+debuff+........ Not every skill needs to be paragraphs long to be fun to use. Compare old dizzy swing vs new dizzy swing, I'd much rather the longer cast time knockup. It was especially fun when they fixed the aim check problems before ruining the skill with the terrible offbalance concept.

EDIT: Honestly you should get worried if zos starts really trying to balance these skill lines out.

peopleare focused on balance because the weak classes will not be played, therefore affecting the whole test.

"Weak" classes not being played won't affect the test at all. It doesn't matter what classes are played. It doesn't matter what skills are used. It doesn't matter what siege is used. The only thing that matters is how many people join the test.

UrQuan · January 22

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Hey @acastanza_ESO, we understand why the balance topics you are calling out are important to you. We want to stress that for PTS specifically, this is a functionality test only, ahead of the live test and the test overall is designed to prioritize game performance to see what is possible. For this functionality test on the PTS, we are focused on the questions in the first post. Remember, the core point of this test is to see how Cyrodiil performs overall in a barebones environment, rather than on class kit focus.

I just want to follow up that this response is grossly misleading. @ZOS_GinaBruno popped into PainintheAxe's stream while he was on PTS and I had the opportunity to ask her if there was any possibility of seeing balance changes before this makes it to the live server, this is her response:

So, saying this is "for PTS specifically" is false. We do actually need to have the balance conversation right now.

No, we absolutely don't need to have a balance conversation now. When this comes to the live servers it will be specifically for the purposes of doing a full-scale population test for a limited time. Balance doesn't matter.

ZOS_Kevin · January 22

acastanza_ESO wrote: »

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Hey @acastanza_ESO, we understand why the balance topics you are calling out are important to you. We want to stress that for PTS specifically, this is a functionality test only, ahead of the live test and the test overall is designed to prioritize game performance to see what is possible. For this functionality test on the PTS, we are focused on the questions in the first post. Remember, the core point of this test is to see how Cyrodiil performs overall in a barebones environment, rather than on class kit focus.

I just want to follow up that this response is grossly misleading. @ZOS_GinaBruno popped into PainintheAxe's stream while he was on PTS and I had the opportunity to ask her if there was any possibility of seeing balance changes before this makes it to the live server, this is her response:

So, saying this is "for PTS specifically" is false. We do actually need to have the balance conversation right now.

There is nothing misleading here. We have stated this several times in this thread. The testing on PTS is for functionality testing. Making sure that the core systems works. When this goes to live for one week, it is to test for server performance. We have also said that balance is not the focus here.

What Gina noted is in line with that. Unless there is something horrific that needs to be fixed, the focus is on getting server performance data, not on class/skill balance, as previously stated.