Vengeance test key metric - player interest

JustLovely · September 7

Stridig wrote: »

I think they should do a "vengeance test" in PvE. No gear sets, no passives, no choices. Just a group of 12 people in a trial with boilerplate builds. Just to see if lag is reduced there too. Oh, and to see if people enjoy it.

If it's good for the goose, it's good for the gander.

If ZOS is going to force templated builds on PvP, then they should do it for PvE too. The PvE players have been posting for months how much better it is that way, so that's apparently what they want for themselves in PvE zones too.

SolarRune · September 7

So what template builds are being forced? There is a limited range of skills, so they can perform a performance test, and they are adding more and more skill trees back in to see the impact. Saying it's template is untrue, and suggesting that the current vengeance is a gamemode is also false - what ZOS need to do is share the roadmap for vengeance in more detail so we can see what they currently are proposing is the end goal. I've said before, I expect the final vengeance product will be very close to the current live, but with everything recoded and optimised for that environment.

Stridig · September 8

JustLovely wrote: »

Stridig wrote: »

I think they should do a "vengeance test" in PvE. No gear sets, no passives, no choices. Just a group of 12 people in a trial with boilerplate builds. Just to see if lag is reduced there too. Oh, and to see if people enjoy it.

If it's good for the goose, it's good for the gander.

If ZOS is going to force templated builds on PvP, then they should do it for PvE too. The PvE players have been posting for months how much better it is that way, so that's apparently what they want for themselves in PvE zones too.

100%

Stridig · September 8

SolarRune wrote: »

So what template builds are being forced? There is a limited range of skills, so they can perform a performance test, and they are adding more and more skill trees back in to see the impact. Saying it's template is untrue, and suggesting that the current vengeance is a gamemode is also false - what ZOS need to do is share the roadmap for vengeance in more detail so we can see what they currently are proposing is the end goal. I've said before, I expect the final vengeance product will be very close to the current live, but with everything recoded and optimised for that environment.

If you're unable to "play how you want" as advertised, then it's template. And based in the survey questions (which had little to do with performance) it's not hard to imagine what the future may hold.

SolarRune · September 8

Traditionally speaking, 'Template' builds are where you have no choice in any of the skills you run, hence asking the question, because vengeance has plenty of choice in that area.

I think the point about a formal road map is important. Whilst people may imply things from questions asked, understanding a more detailed picture of what vengeance tests will come and properly understanding what they are shooting for - then people can have real opinions on vengeance. All they have really said is making epic fights and increasing performance, like there were X years ago. Great, but what are you planning on testing what, when are glyphs, mundus, armor etc being tested? I'm fully expecting ZoS to do tests with these in due course.

SolarRune · September 8

My underlying reason for mentioning a road map is my biggest fear is that what they produce ends up falling on an audience that doesn't exist.

Those calling for vengeance now, may be disappointed by how close to current live PvP it gets, and in the process it may alienate the current PvP community.

aetherix8 · September 8

JustLovely wrote: »

It's not "the outspoken few who want to continue dominating a small number of players...." That's what players who don't want to tackle the huge learning curve that is Cyrodiil PvP like to cry about.

If I want to learn to swim, is throwing me out to the deep sea (vet cyro) the most efficient way, or should I rather start learning in a more adapted environment, like a swimming pool?

SolarRune wrote: »

Traditionally speaking, 'Template' builds are where you have no choice in any of the skills you run, hence asking the question, because vengeance has plenty of choice in that area.

I think the point about a formal road map is important. Whilst people may imply things from questions asked, understanding a more detailed picture of what vengeance tests will come and properly understanding what they are shooting for - then people can have real opinions on vengeance. All they have really said is making epic fights and increasing performance, like there were X years ago. Great, but what are you planning on testing what, when are glyphs, mundus, armor etc being tested? I'm fully expecting ZoS to do tests with these in due course.

A formal road map would definitely help cure all the paranoia and conspiracy. Just that I doubt such a thing even exists. At this point, I'm fairly uncertain whether the testing itself follows a clear plan, or are those tests adjusted every time? And even ZOS might not yet know whether they will ever be enabling an alternative campaign.

SolarRune · September 8

Equally that would be good to know, then people can't argue over vengeance because the developers don't know what it will be.

JohnRingo · September 8

Stridig wrote: »

I think they should do a "vengeance test" in PvE. No gear sets, no passives, no choices. Just a group of 12 people in a trial with boilerplate builds. Just to see if lag is reduced there too. Oh, and to see if people enjoy it.

Brilliant and well stated. This is, in my opinion, an opportunistic attack on the PvP community from the lounge chair comfort of PVE loyalists who largely find live Cyrodil PvP distasteful. No concerns at all for the PvP dedicated player's toil over the years to endlessly optimize in the margins for victory in Cyrodil (precisely the PVE approach to their game). Now they get to weigh in on our future. Can you imagine the reaction if we encroached on their PVE world world with a "template vengeance test"?

With all respect to each of us showing deep compassion about the game we love, It would be massively helpful if we could get, at the very least, some assurance that the current Live Cyrodil, playing freely and without restrictions, will exist alongside with whatever Vengeance format takes form. Surely, there must be room for both of us in this amazing game.

aetherix8 · September 8

JohnRingo wrote: »

Stridig wrote: »

I think they should do a "vengeance test" in PvE. No gear sets, no passives, no choices. Just a group of 12 people in a trial with boilerplate builds. Just to see if lag is reduced there too. Oh, and to see if people enjoy it.

Brilliant and well stated. This is, in my opinion, an opportunistic attack on the PvP community from the lounge chair comfort of PVE loyalists who largely find live Cyrodil PvP distasteful. No concerns at all for the PvP dedicated player's toil over the years to endlessly optimize in the margins for victory in Cyrodil (precisely the PVE approach to their game). Now they get to weigh in on our future. Can you imagine the reaction if we encroached on their PVE world world with a "template vengeance test"?

This is a bit overreacting imo; I don't really see many pure pveers posting in these vengeance threads. I mean, in the official feedback thread just after live tests, yes, but in the meantime, it is rather the hardcore and casual pvpers who are having conversations across several threads.

JohnRingo wrote: »

With all respect to each of us showing deep compassion about the game we love, It would be massively helpful if we could get, at the very least, some assurance that the current Live Cyrodil, playing freely and without restrictions, will exist alongside with whatever Vengeance format takes form. Surely, there must be room for both of us in this amazing game.

I certainly hope so too, that we may get 2 modes at the same time. I just wouldn't bet my account on the current live cyrodiil staying exactly as it is once the testing is concluded. It is laggy right now, something will have to change for it to run smoothly, but perhaps it can be fixed without being radically dumbed down.

It is important to have this vet version alongside a simpler, learner version: it is something to aspire to, it is the reason to strive for improving one's skill and understanding of the game so one day we can enjoy competing with/against the veteran pvpers.

valenwood_vegan · September 8

It's really sad how some always seek division and to blame other groups of players for things that zos is doing.

Perhaps this is a result of zos refusing to communicate or respond, so people feel the need to lash out at *someone*.

But guess what... actual pve players largely don't *care* what zos is doing in cyro, did *not* request vengeance testing, have not been demanding every day that zos "fix cyro" for years, and would be totally fine with zos stopping vengeance and putting that effort back into other aspects of the game that are of interest to them.

And it's also not the fault of pve players that zos asked *everyone* for feedback. So yeah, some may have tried vengeance and offered feedback on it like they were asked to do. One would think the pvp community, which has been dwindling and could really use some new blood and renewed interest from outside of its core community, could see this as an opportunity rather than an attack. Sorry not sorry that some players expressed outside opinions from beyond the echo chamber - but I promise you pve players didn't arrange this as some kind of "opportunistic attack" on pvp. It was literally promoted to them.

Go place the blame where it belongs. Zos has pretty much always decided what they're gonna do, ignored detailed and valuable feedback from devoted players, and refused to communicate effectively or interactively about what they're doing.

Blaming and provoking other players might feel good in the short term, but does absolutely nothing to move the issue forward, offers no actionable feedback, and indeed, takes accountability away from those who should be accountable.

MincMincMinc · September 8

SolarRune wrote: »

So what template builds are being forced? There is a limited range of skills, so they can perform a performance test, and they are adding more and more skill trees back in to see the impact. Saying it's template is untrue, and suggesting that the current vengeance is a gamemode is also false - what ZOS need to do is share the roadmap for vengeance in more detail so we can see what they currently are proposing is the end goal. I've said before, I expect the final vengeance product will be very close to the current live, but with everything recoded and optimised for that environment.

This is literally the main issue and source of all the vengeance complaints. People have no idea what is going on and what is on the table.

@ZOS_Kevin are there any plans for the team to give more insight on vengeance and clear up the hysteria? In particular the playerbase wants to hear directly from wheeler or the members directly overseeing the test. I respect the community managers, but y'all need to be careful with sensitive topics like this. Especially on livestreams. You could have Wheeler or Rich spend 40 mins explaining and one side comment from Gina saying " oh maybe it'll be its own gamemode" completely derails the playerbase into conspiracy theory land.

What are the next couple of tests?
How will each tests results potentially change said plan? (a simple flow chart explains this)
Does the team plan on implementing skills scaling with stats?
Will vengeance eventually have stat modifiers like passives, mundus, armor weights?
Will vengeance eventually have set bonus tests?
Will vengeance eventually have rule change tests like: no out of group cross healing? No hot/dot/effect stacking? Aoe cap tests?

ZOS_Kevin · September 8

MincMincMinc wrote: »

SolarRune wrote: »

So what template builds are being forced? There is a limited range of skills, so they can perform a performance test, and they are adding more and more skill trees back in to see the impact. Saying it's template is untrue, and suggesting that the current vengeance is a gamemode is also false - what ZOS need to do is share the roadmap for vengeance in more detail so we can see what they currently are proposing is the end goal. I've said before, I expect the final vengeance product will be very close to the current live, but with everything recoded and optimised for that environment.

This is literally the main issue and source of all the vengeance complaints. People have no idea what is going on and what is on the table.

@ZOS_Kevin are there any plans for the team to give more insight on vengeance and clear up the hysteria? In particular the playerbase wants to hear directly from wheeler or the members directly overseeing the test. I respect the community managers, but y'all need to be careful with sensitive topics like this. Especially on livestreams. You could have Wheeler or Rich spend 40 mins explaining and one side comment from Gina saying " oh maybe it'll be its own gamemode" completely derails the playerbase into conspiracy theory land.
What are the next couple of tests?

How will each tests results potentially change said plan? (a simple flow chart explains this)

Does the team plan on implementing skills scaling with stats?

Will vengeance eventually have stat modifiers like passives, mundus, armor weights?

Will vengeance eventually have set bonus tests?

Will vengeance eventually have rule change tests like: no out of group cross healing? No hot/dot/effect stacking? Aoe cap tests?

There are plans to talk about the next Vengeance test and Vengeance generally soon. We will have an announce to share. Can't confirm more than that at the moment. But we will relay some of the concerns listed here to the team.

Joy_Division · September 8

JustLovely wrote: »

Stridig wrote: »

I think they should do a "vengeance test" in PvE. No gear sets, no passives, no choices. Just a group of 12 people in a trial with boilerplate builds. Just to see if lag is reduced there too. Oh, and to see if people enjoy it.

If it's good for the goose, it's good for the gander.

If ZOS is going to force templated builds on PvP, then they should do it for PvE too. The PvE players have been posting for months how much better it is that way, so that's apparently what they want for themselves in PvE zones too.

If PVE had zero population, terrible performance, and a decade long track record of failed attempts to improve both, then such a test would be warranted.

Vengeance critics always miss this part, acting as if ZOS has nothing better to do than torment them, and not subject the rest of the community to these sorts of tests.

CatoUnchained · September 8

JustLovely wrote: »

Iriidius wrote: »

JustLovely wrote: »

Darethran wrote: »

aetherix8 wrote: »

I did benefit from those tests that led to no-proc RW - it resulted in a new player friendly environment to learn pvp and I was able to improve, although not as far as I would like to because it got aborted.

Am I the only one who thinks vengeance tests are radically different from other tests that zos have run in the past?

Edit spelling

No you're not, it's just the outspoken few who want to continue dominating a small number of players with silly broken sets & skills (always the new stuff that came with the latest DLC...) don't want that changed.

As someone who has played on/off since 2016 ZoS has done nothing like this with PvP before. I'm still so thirsty for third vengeance now that I got a taste of what PvP could have been all these years.

It's not "the outspoken few who want to continue dominating a small number of players...." That's what players who don't want to tackle the huge learning curve that is Cyrodiil PvP like to cry about. I agree it's a lot different than PvE, but it's supposed to be. There is supposed to be a skill gap. The daily PvP main players are supposed to be better and stronger than the "on and off" players such as yourself.

ZOS is going to lose most of the PvP vets if they mandate vengeance mode, and the PvE mains are not going to backfill the losses. Vengeance will be the end of Cyrodiil PvP for the most part. At least your admitting that you're only an off and on player. Those of us that PvP every day and that's what we log in to play will not play vengeance in any iteration.

The daily PvP players should be better than „on and off“ players by making better incombat decisions not by having better stats.
If you swap their accounts than you also swap their strength.

Not true.

Part of the skill gap in PvP comes from learning how to make strong builds and play to that builds strengths. It's not just get a couple OP sets and you automatically win....as the PvE mains keep saying is the only trick to being successful in Cyrodiil. Those that say the only trick is to get OP sets are saying that they don't PvP or understand the system as it's set up.

This^

The guys that are best at PvP aren't just good players, they're good builders. So yes, the gear can and does make a notable difference. But a bad player can have the best build and they'll get rolled over and over again to a skilled player with a lesser build every time.

xR3ACTORx · September 8

I really don't know what people mean with hysteria and paranoia. It's basically that people stopped playing because vengeance was boring ***.

I got to add that on Xbox EU the timing for vengeance was really really bad and killed every momentum in cyro.

When subclassing was added to pc the pc folks had a double xp event which was also on xbox at the same time. But subclassing came to Xbox 2 weeks later. So xbox got subclassing, no double xp event during that time and then right with subclassing started vengeance.
So ZOS was basically giving subclassing to players to open up classes while at the same time ZOS restricted every classes in cyro.
On top of that when all the people were trying to buy cyro gear for subclassing, the traders in cyro were deactivated.
(Remember.. Subclassing started with vengeance on xbox.. Bad timing)

Whoever planned this "event" didn't planned this well and it was obvious that whoever planned this didn't give a *** about console players or was even thinking about consoles.

There is no hysteria, no paranoia. Vengeance was just boring *** and not well planned by ZOS on consoles.

Edit:to be honest i would really appreciate if ZOS would sell server change tokens, so I can just move over to NA with all my houses and Chars and ***.

To the guy who asked how people could already decide to be not Interested in vengeance already... Free will, buddy.

ShutUpitsRed · September 8

Stridig wrote: »

I think they should do a "vengeance test" in PvE. No gear sets, no passives, no choices. Just a group of 12 people in a trial with boilerplate builds. Just to see if lag is reduced there too. Oh, and to see if people enjoy it.

Overlap it with a PvP event with some of the best rewards in the game, too. Really make the grind worthwhile. (I am VERY salty about Undaunted completely overlapping with Vengeance)

ShutUpitsRed · September 8

Joy_Division wrote: »

If PVE had zero population, terrible performance, and a decade long track record of failed attempts to improve both, then such a test would be warranted.

Vengeance critics always miss this part, acting as if ZOS has nothing better to do than torment them, and not subject the rest of the community to these sorts of tests.

PvE having a huge population with few issues is why DPS dungeon queues are so long? Trials are difficult for which to find groups? Personally I've been server kicked from PvE instances far more than in PvP and have had equally bad performance issues in trials as PvP. Don't even get me started on the quest bugs. Meanwhile, Cyrodiil is population locked during primetime and PUGs are almost always running. There's good and bad aspects of both PvE and PvP.

What's annoying PvPers is PvEers coming into Vengeance and saying it's better and "outvoting" what actual PvPers say; there's more PvEer than PvPers. People who main PvP have to do a LOT of PvE to get their sets and resources et cetera, so why can't we do something like a Vengeance test there too? PvPers should be able to go into vet trials without creating and testing and spending resources on an appropriate PvE build then, right? It's about skill after all, isn't it? Personally, I would highly prefer not having to spend resources and time figuring out a PvE build, it feels fair since I don't care about PvE besides what I can get out of it.

Joy_Division · September 9

ShutUpitsRed wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

If PVE had zero population, terrible performance, and a decade long track record of failed attempts to improve both, then such a test would be warranted.

Vengeance critics always miss this part, acting as if ZOS has nothing better to do than torment them, and not subject the rest of the community to these sorts of tests.

PvE having a huge population with few issues is why DPS dungeon queues are so long? Trials are difficult for which to find groups? Personally I've been server kicked from PvE instances far more than in PvP and have had equally bad performance issues in trials as PvP. Don't even get me started on the quest bugs. Meanwhile, Cyrodiil is population locked during primetime and PUGs are almost always running. There's good and bad aspects of both PvE and PvP.

What's annoying PvPers is PvEers coming into Vengeance and saying it's better and "outvoting" what actual PvPers say; there's more PvEer than PvPers. People who main PvP have to do a LOT of PvE to get their sets and resources et cetera, so why can't we do something like a Vengeance test there too? PvPers should be able to go into vet trials without creating and testing and spending resources on an appropriate PvE build then, right? It's about skill after all, isn't it? Personally, I would highly prefer not having to spend resources and time figuring out a PvE build, it feels fair since I don't care about PvE besides what I can get out of it.

Your DPS ques are long because nobody wants to tank and healing is only necessary for the hardest content such that healers are often seen as an afterthought.

It is not hard to find a trials group. Craglorn is full of people looking to PUG them and there are far more PvE oriented guilds that run them regularly. I would hope Cyrodiil would lock its tiny pop cap for a few hours on prime time, and they manage to do this - barely. As a DC, I often get a single digit que if I have to wait at all. Not a ringing endorsement.

There are more PvEers than PvPers for a reason, which is essentially the crux of the issue here. If not enough PvPers are coming out to support the game or vote enough to convince ZOS that PvP in its current weight is worth investing in, that speaks for itself.

Ideally, no, you shouldn't be able to walk into a vet trial without investing any resources in an appropriate build. But the reality of the situation is that you can, right now, without any need for a Vengeance test. The BIS PvE gear is only a few percentage points better than craftable crit oriented gear setup based on something like Order's Wrath. A skilled played with Order's will out DPS a noob with the best gear by quite a bit. Besides, because PvE is more about outputting enough DPS to defeat the final boss rather than playing better than a human opponent, as long as you are good enough (or with ten other really good players), you can win PVE all the time, regardless of gear. So, there isn't a need for BIS gear unless you are looking to finish first on a leaderboard. PvE is much more about player skill than it is about gear. You already have your wish; you need not worry about spending time and resources figuring out a PvE build (not that it was particularly hard to do so: 30 second Google search or just go to SkinnyCheek's website).

As much as the Vengeance critics keep bagging on Vengeance as EZ mode or dumbed down for PvEers, the reality is that it also is much more about player skill than anything else. A mid player can not and will not beat a very good player in Vengeance. This was especially true in the second Vengeance test because Vengeance isn't what its critics keep saying - everyone in the same build (even if it was, players being exactly equal would be the ultimate test of player skill) - and those who have the knowledge, skill, and experience were able to use all that to take advantage of the more options that were available in the second test.

So, no, I don't buy that player skill is the crux of the reason behind the criticism of Vengeance. I think it's exactly what you said: more people are voicing their preference for a different version of PvP than what the few remaining regulars prefer and play. They thus feel threatened that what they prefer will be replaced by what has greater appeal to the ESO population. Which is legit. These regulars are paying customers and deserve to have their feelings/concerns voiced. That's fine. But that is the reality of being a paying customer to a strictly niche product. What ZOS is doing isn't motivated by anything personal against PvPers. The idea that ZOS should just pull a Vengeance test on PvEers is not a good comparison as doing so would be primarily motived by personal reasons.

xR3ACTORx · September 9

I think having a vengeance like test for PvE would be an awesome idea since pve has serious lag and performance issues for months now.

I mean for me as an avid pvp player pve is unfortunately just a unnecessary but mandatory grind to farm gear and unlock skills. How about making it easier accessible to PvPers who don't enjoy PvE by making template PvE builds too? That's really a good idea.

Thanks for inspiring.

ShutUpitsRed · September 9

xR3ACTORx wrote: »

I think having a vengeance like test for PvE would be an awesome idea since pve has serious lag and performance issues for months now.

I mean for me as an avid pvp player pve is unfortunately just a unnecessary but mandatory grind to farm gear and unlock skills. How about making it easier accessible to PvPers who don't enjoy PvE by making template PvE builds too? That's really a good idea.

Thanks for inspiring.

This! I think PvE should be more about skill than sets. Just figure out the best set up using only your class and weapon abilities; why bother with all that set farming and leveling or gear or anything? If you can light attack weave and push all your buttons before the little timer runs out that'll get you through the trifectas eventually! Think about how much more accessible it is if someone can log on without ever doing anything but join a veteran trial, as long as they have the skills. It's not like that makes it a completely different game or anything. Just think about all the players who will find this version of PvE better! PvErs who disliked PvP just avoided it before, then returned for vengeance and discovered they liked that better, so imagine how much people might come to like Vengeance PvE!

This might be a little hard for that tiny number of existing endgame PvErs who put time and effort into getting gear sets and unlocking skill lines mastering their build and coordinating with their groups and playing the actual game et cetera but the people want what the people want, and what I want is to walk into a trial butt nekkid and do the same dps as a 3600cp trifecta collecting sweat.

Heavy attack builds for everyone!

ceruulean · September 10

Man, these arguments against Vengeance are weird. Nobody is going in naked to veteran trials. There's multiple times more normal mode trials listed in the group finder than there are veteran trials. So, for PvE, normal mode is more popular than veteran. Why? Because normal mode is easier, and you can literally enter them naked, starting at level 10, and have a fair chance at completing. I'd argue most of the PvE population already prefers "template PvE" where "gear doesn't matter."

I mean, I can see why some PvPers are upset that "veteran Cyrodiil" is being taken down for 1 week, but Cyrodiil is also more complicated than instanced trials, and its nature of being a shared server with hundred of players means it cannot be compared to instanced trials, of which only 12 players are needed. Cyrodiil is actually more similar to the PvE overworld, which is scaled to your level and "equalized" to the point of being trivial.

aetherix8 · 9:22AM

ceruulean wrote: »

Man, these arguments against Vengeance are weird. Nobody is going in naked to veteran trials. There's multiple times more normal mode trials listed in the group finder than there are veteran trials. So, for PvE, normal mode is more popular than veteran. Why? Because normal mode is easier, and you can literally enter them naked, starting at level 10, and have a fair chance at completing. I'd argue most of the PvE population already prefers "template PvE" where "gear doesn't matter."

I mean, I can see why some PvPers are upset that "veteran Cyrodiil" is being taken down for 1 week, but Cyrodiil is also more complicated than instanced trials, and its nature of being a shared server with hundred of players means it cannot be compared to instanced trials, of which only 12 players are needed. Cyrodiil is actually more similar to the PvE overworld, which is scaled to your level and "equalized" to the point of being trivial.

Well said.

I was wondering about this sudden raging at PvEers, but I guess it must be down to Vengeance haters running out of arguments.

MincMincMinc · 2:22PM

aetherix8 wrote: »

ceruulean wrote: »

Man, these arguments against Vengeance are weird. Nobody is going in naked to veteran trials. There's multiple times more normal mode trials listed in the group finder than there are veteran trials. So, for PvE, normal mode is more popular than veteran. Why? Because normal mode is easier, and you can literally enter them naked, starting at level 10, and have a fair chance at completing. I'd argue most of the PvE population already prefers "template PvE" where "gear doesn't matter."

I mean, I can see why some PvPers are upset that "veteran Cyrodiil" is being taken down for 1 week, but Cyrodiil is also more complicated than instanced trials, and its nature of being a shared server with hundred of players means it cannot be compared to instanced trials, of which only 12 players are needed. Cyrodiil is actually more similar to the PvE overworld, which is scaled to your level and "equalized" to the point of being trivial.

Well said.

I was wondering about this sudden raging at PvEers, but I guess it must be down to Vengeance haters running out of arguments.

The arguments against vengeance are valid, but don't give any reason to stop vengeance.

"I dont like the combat, its stale or boring" - Well the mechanical combat or the building? The combat is nearly the same, all its core elements are there. Building wise though you are limited to only the skill system which does have a fair bit of variability considering we only have access to one system. If you want to play dot builds it is possible, healer possible, direct possible, melee possible. If I could make a melee 2h dizzy stamsorc work without the ability to change regen, there is enough there.
"Combat is just a numbers game" - are we going to pretend that zerg groups and ball groups dont outpower solo players? What about the fact that group sets can provide upwards of 5k+ weapon damage when solo player sets can at best reach around 700wd with a cooldown.
"zos is going to implement this as is" - Highly unlikely and just a hysterical conspiracy at this point. Doing this across the board would make it so pvp players which make up a significant portion of the consistent playerbase would suddenly not need ESO+ or any DLC chapters. The only way current unmorphed skills vengeance gets released on live would be as a learning campaign to replace the dysfunctional u50 and nocp campaigns. Even then we would still see more vengeance tests because live cyrodil is on the verge of needing another pop cap reduction.
"The test failed, it still lagged lets stop" - The point of the test is TO CAUSE LAG.....they did that successfully already and measured it. How would that ever be a failed test or a reason to stop. The test did exactly what it was supposed to do, if anything it is more reason to keep developing and test more systems. Not to mention that lag was only experienced around the 4x live population, which gives alot of headroom to start adding systems back into the game. Current live estimates are around 100 players per faction compared to the release quoted peak of around 600 players per faction during testing. If you followed the data streams they said vengeance supported around 4x the live 100 players consistently and showed the fluctuations of performance being stabilized. Even if the data helps them not lag with abysmal live population that would be a success.

AngryPenguin · 4:02PM

MincMincMinc wrote: »

aetherix8 wrote: »

ceruulean wrote: »

Man, these arguments against Vengeance are weird. Nobody is going in naked to veteran trials. There's multiple times more normal mode trials listed in the group finder than there are veteran trials. So, for PvE, normal mode is more popular than veteran. Why? Because normal mode is easier, and you can literally enter them naked, starting at level 10, and have a fair chance at completing. I'd argue most of the PvE population already prefers "template PvE" where "gear doesn't matter."

I mean, I can see why some PvPers are upset that "veteran Cyrodiil" is being taken down for 1 week, but Cyrodiil is also more complicated than instanced trials, and its nature of being a shared server with hundred of players means it cannot be compared to instanced trials, of which only 12 players are needed. Cyrodiil is actually more similar to the PvE overworld, which is scaled to your level and "equalized" to the point of being trivial.

Well said.

I was wondering about this sudden raging at PvEers, but I guess it must be down to Vengeance haters running out of arguments.

The arguments against vengeance are valid, but don't give any reason to stop vengeance.
"I dont like the combat, its stale or boring" - Well the mechanical combat or the building? The combat is nearly the same, all its core elements are there. Building wise though you are limited to only the skill system which does have a fair bit of variability considering we only have access to one system. If you want to play dot builds it is possible, healer possible, direct possible, melee possible. If I could make a melee 2h dizzy stamsorc work without the ability to change regen, there is enough there.

"Combat is just a numbers game" - are we going to pretend that zerg groups and ball groups dont outpower solo players? What about the fact that group sets can provide upwards of 5k+ weapon damage when solo player sets can at best reach around 700wd with a cooldown.

"zos is going to implement this as is" - Highly unlikely and just a hysterical conspiracy at this point. Doing this across the board would make it so pvp players which make up a significant portion of the consistent playerbase would suddenly not need ESO+ or any DLC chapters. The only way current unmorphed skills vengeance gets released on live would be as a learning campaign to replace the dysfunctional u50 and nocp campaigns. Even then we would still see more vengeance tests because live cyrodil is on the verge of needing another pop cap reduction.

"The test failed, it still lagged lets stop" - The point of the test is TO CAUSE LAG.....they did that successfully already and measured it. How would that ever be a failed test or a reason to stop. The test did exactly what it was supposed to do, if anything it is more reason to keep developing and test more systems. Not to mention that lag was only experienced around the 4x live population, which gives alot of headroom to start adding systems back into the game. Current live estimates are around 100 players per faction compared to the release quoted peak of around 600 players per faction during testing. If you followed the data streams they said vengeance supported around 4x the live 100 players consistently and showed the fluctuations of performance being stabilized. Even if the data helps them not lag with abysmal live population that would be a success.

If you believed the arguments against vengeance were valid then you'd understand why ZOS shouldn't be developing a whole new game mode. It's one or the other.

And PvE'rs aren't victims in this. The PvP players are.

aetherix8 wrote: »

ceruulean wrote: »

Man, these arguments against Vengeance are weird. Nobody is going in naked to veteran trials. There's multiple times more normal mode trials listed in the group finder than there are veteran trials. So, for PvE, normal mode is more popular than veteran. Why? Because normal mode is easier, and you can literally enter them naked, starting at level 10, and have a fair chance at completing. I'd argue most of the PvE population already prefers "template PvE" where "gear doesn't matter."

I mean, I can see why some PvPers are upset that "veteran Cyrodiil" is being taken down for 1 week, but Cyrodiil is also more complicated than instanced trials, and its nature of being a shared server with hundred of players means it cannot be compared to instanced trials, of which only 12 players are needed. Cyrodiil is actually more similar to the PvE overworld, which is scaled to your level and "equalized" to the point of being trivial.

Well said.

I was wondering about this sudden raging at PvEers, but I guess it must be down to Vengeance haters running out of arguments.

aetherix8 · 4:03PM

@MincMincMinc

There are many valid arguments indeed; you mention some, but your list isn't exhaustive.

Anyways, I was referring to the "PvE should get its own Vengeance testing" posts.

These aren't even arguments against Vengeance test, and those who suggest some PvE performance tests should open a dedicated thread, as it doesn't add anything constructive to the discussion about PvP performance tests.

aetherix8 · 4:17PM

AngryPenguin wrote: »

And PvE'rs aren't victims in this. The PvP players are.

Oh my goodness. So the discussion completely degenerated into let's screw the PvEers and "we are victims".

Obviously, legit points are out of stock for now. We've basically covered it all it seems, both in favor and against, and we're now at a stage of some very sophisticated mental acrobatics to come up with a delirium tremens level of an "argument".

See y'all after run3 when we have actual valid points to discuss again.

SeaGtGruff · 4:57PM

I haven't read all of the posts in this thread, so the following is intended more as general comments about Vengeance and all of the hullabaloo over it rather than responses to any specific comments.

I think it's unfortunate that there are players who want Vengeance to be implemented as the new PvP mode, for reasons I'll explain in a moment.

I think it's equally unfortunate that other players are so defiantly against Vengeance.

Why? Because both sides of that contentious argument are losing sight of one simple but important fact-- that Vengeance is not a destination, but is instead a road to a possible destination. Gina tried to make it clear several months ago, during a live stream, that the Vengeance test campaign was just one idea, and that they might be testing out other ideas as well as they try to improve the PvP experience in Cyrodiil and work on getting player numbers back up to the kinds of levels they like seeing. Those weren't her words per se, but she did mention trying out other ideas if need be, and it should be obvious to anyone who pays attention to what ZOS says here and there that they want players to be having fun playing the game, and they would love to see Cyrodiil become more populated and active on a regular basis.

As far as people who say Vengeance should be the permanent campaign-- which Vengeance? Vengeance test 1 where we had only limited (i.e., morphless) class skills and nothing else? Vengeance test 2 where we had limited weapon skills added in? Or some future version of Vengeance where even more things get added back in? There is no "Vengeance campaign" as such, because it is a test mode which has had different specifics each time a test has been conducted.

As far as people who say they refuse to play in Cyrodiil during a Vengeance test-- do you want to sabotage Vengeance tests? If so, why? Don't you want Cyrodiil to get fixed for the better? I mean, a lot of you say you do, so why would you be against an attempt to improve Cyrodiil performance?

Given the fact that ZOS wants players to have fun and wants to see more players in Cyrodiil, do you honestly think they would permanently replace all of the existing Cyrodiil campaigns with "the Vengeance campaign" (whatever "the" is supposed to mean, since Vengeance has had different enabled features for each test) if a large number of players are so vocal about how much they don't like playing with such simplified and scaled-back skills? Do you really think they are wanting to just abandon all of the PvP gear sets that they've spent years adding into the game-- in the hopes that players will have fun acquiring and using those sets-- and with new PvP sets still being added? What other zone in the game has so many zone sets, with more added on a regular basis?

It might be my imagination, but it seems to me that Cyrodiil performance has been getting better during the past year. I don't know if that's because of coding changes being made in the background as a result of discoveries made during Vengeance testing, or if it's just a side effect of me playing on a better computer and faster internet than before. But I haven't been having a lot of the really bad lagging, rubber banding, disconnecting, and other issues that I used to experience. Issues may crop up, especially near ball groups that are stacking AOE skills for healing or damage purposes, but not to the degree nor frequency as before. But as I said, maybe it's just due to improvements on my end. Have others noticed improvements, or is it just me?

Anyway, we now return to our regular (and, IMO, misguided) back-and-forth bickering about Vengeance...