Maintenance for the week of November 18:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – November 18
• ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – November 19, 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC) - 6:00PM EST (23:00 UTC)
• PlayStation®: EU megaserver for maintenance – November 19, 23:00 UTC (6:00PM EST) - November 20, 17:00 UTC (12:00PM EST)
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/668861
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – November 18
• ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – November 19, 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC) - 6:00PM EST (23:00 UTC)
• PlayStation®: EU megaserver for maintenance – November 19, 23:00 UTC (6:00PM EST) - November 20, 17:00 UTC (12:00PM EST)
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/668861
This game needs smaller scale pvp like arena or 10v10
-
Gohlar✭✭✭✭
It's also a fallacy to assume that all large scale PvP is easier on the individual player.
No. Don't be ridiculous.
edit - I missed the word "all" and that does matter. There are possible situations where you are correct. They are few and far between though.Edited by Gohlar on April 11, 2014 1:46PM0 -
spawn10459 wrote: »
Agreed. The numbers game will wear thin very quickly. I wonder if the people defending it even spend much time there.
[/quote]
Normaly there just Fan boys defending this to there death with out actually being apart of it.
Arena is not needed but small scale PVP 100% is needed. Right now there is 0 Reason to PVP. you cant level in there, your typical out numbered so you cant take any forts, you cant stop one faction from steam rolling the other so its a waste of time.[/quote]
I dont know what campaign your in but I have been in 5 hour battles for 1 keep many times this week. The zerg doesnt steam roll nothing in my campaign wabbajack. Not too include all the small scale pvp that was going on traveling back to keeps- yesterday when I logged on AD only had 3 keeps and we fought for hours, by the time I logged off we had 7 and were being attacked by both EP & DC at Ash. Did we defend it, i wont know til I log on1 -
spawn10459✭✭✭Good for you Mstout. i logged on we had 1 keep. i logged off after 4 hours and had 0 keeps. blue had 100% of the map jst like the night before and the night befoer that and the night before that. well since the game went live.0 -
spawn10459 wrote: »Normaly there just Fan boys defending this to there death with out actually being apart of it.
This is the impression I am getting as well.Arena is not needed but small scale PVP 100% is needed. Right now there is 0 Reason to PVP. you cant level in there, your typical out numbered so you cant take any forts, you cant stop one faction from steam rolling the other so its a waste of time.
And most importantly, how about some basic, balanced competition? It has an entirely different feel than gank parties. For starters, the enemy is always an even match in terms of numbers. That's a huge benefit.
Perhaps there are games out there that fill your needs? this is the first one since daoc that was built this way without bg's or arenas. It fits an entirely different set of communities then you are accustomed to but I promise every group will form there own way of doing something here just as daoc did. if what you want though is given arena or bg's instead of making them then I hate to say it but there are a pluthera of games out there that already do this. And there are enough free ones out there that it wont cost you a thing to get your arena fix without you having to choose not to play this.
There should be a risk though in numbers being against you, or that third faction coming in. its a war not a tournament...
and telling people they aren't actually being a part of it because they like this system so their opinion doesn't matter is ridiculous. you just don't like what they have to say...
ZOS has never promised more then what is here. if you had done what the rest of us had and checked out the game before hand, participated in beta, watched streams, asked the testers, well really any of that you would have known ahead of time this isn't a bg / arena based game. which I am very thankful for. its been since 2001 that a game with this pvp was released... think its about time another was allowed to flourish. the arena / bg crowd has had... well pretty darn near every mmo since then to play in...
1 -
Gohlar✭✭✭✭sk8ingeckoub17_ESO wrote: »Perhaps there are games out there that fill your needs? this is the first one since daoc that was built this way without bg's or arenas.
DAoC has a nice BG. Thid was extremely popular.
0 -
switch campaigns there is a option you know Mrspawnspawn10459 wrote: »Good for you Mstout. i logged on we had 1 keep. i logged off after 4 hours and had 0 keeps. blue had 100% of the map jst like the night before and the night befoer that and the night before that. well since the game went live.
0 -
Also as far as incentive all ZOS really needs to do is add Alliance Ranks or Realm Ranks or whatever they want to call it. you get more points for 1on1 or small scale battles (each person is worth x points divided by the amount of people that hit them) have those realm ability points be spendable on things like increase chance to crit as well as active abilities like cleanse cc or increased speed for x seconds.... and we would have incentive for all forms of pvp... and incentive for pvp in general...0
-
Starnes✭✭✭nerevarine1138 wrote: »This is the main concern, an arena will generate demand for class and skill balancing and balancing in the specific 1v1 or 2v2 setting where balance is easy to measure while its hard in Cyrodil or PvE.
This tend to happen in all games who add arenas
Exactly. More importantly, PvP shouldn't be balanced for 1v1 or 2v2. There should be certain builds that are more effective against other builds (in a very complex version of rock-paper-scissors). Arenas homogenize classes to the point that player choices become obsolete: everyone ends up having the exact same skill loadout, and PvE suffers directly as a consequence.
Most people advocating arenas are not saying they want 1v1 or 2v2 or that they want it balanced around such low numbers, so I don't understand why you are even bothering to toss that around. Personally I want 4v4.
But what they really want is a level playing field where skill and teamwork, not numbers, matters most. Which brings us to this, what numbers do you expect them to use to benchmark class balance?
PvP and the class balancing that follows it will take place, that is inevitable. Should they be using a zerg where a sub-par build gets lost in a collection of sub-par builds? Party based sizes are great benchmarks for balancing pvp and pve skills and the rock, paper, scissors dynamic is still present at this group size.2 -
Zerl✭✭✭
I guess you're not a fan of chocolate cake then?
Oh and if you haven't guessed Fred (mind if I call you Fred? I feel like you are probably a Fred kind of person), I'm not taking your posts with any level of seriousness that you probably believe they should have.
Making baseless accusations to try and validate your argument is only really going to make you look a little silly.1 -
Gohlar✭✭✭✭nerevarine1138 wrote: »This is the main concern, an arena will generate demand for class and skill balancing and balancing in the specific 1v1 or 2v2 setting where balance is easy to measure while its hard in Cyrodil or PvE.
This tend to happen in all games who add arenas
Exactly. More importantly, PvP shouldn't be balanced for 1v1 or 2v2. There should be certain builds that are more effective against other builds (in a very complex version of rock-paper-scissors). Arenas homogenize classes to the point that player choices become obsolete: everyone ends up having the exact same skill loadout, and PvE suffers directly as a consequence.
Most people advocating arenas are not saying they want 1v1 or 2v2 or that they want it balanced around such low numbers, so I don't understand why you are even bothering to toss that around. Personally I want 4v4.
But what they really want is a level playing field where skill and teamwork, not numbers, matters most. Which brings us to this, what numbers do you expect them to use to benchmark class balance?
PvP and the class balancing that follows it will take place, that is inevitable. Should they be using a zerg where a sub-par build gets lost in a collection of sub-par builds? Party based sizes are great benchmarks for balancing pvp and pve skills and the rock, paper, scissors dynamic is still present at this group size.
Very good post.
The game really could use an environment for a group of players to test themselves without having numbers be the deciding factor most of the time. I think using the standard group size, or the raid size etc, as the balancing benchmark makes sense as well.Edited by Gohlar on April 11, 2014 2:00PM0 -
here is an example of small scale pvp maps:
Alderran Swtor Map:
3 nodes 16 people 8 per team. You know the objective of the enemy, you know where they are coming from and where they are going and when, and what to do to stop them. The match starts and 1 guy from your team heads to east node to cap it and one guy from enemy team heads to west node to cap it, one guy from your team stealths to west to stop enemy cap and one enemy staelths to east to stop cap the rest fight over the middle. And may the best geared win.....
In eso or daoc, you dont know where they are going where they are coming from or how many, so you have scouts out reporting info back, while you rush to defend or attack, its on the fly pvp, like being in true combat, not organized war zones where you know exactly what is going to happen. there is nothing fun about doing the same war zone/bg/arena over and over again because there is no suprise nothing to get the blood pumping. I like being suprised attacked and getting away or killing who attacked, but the thrill of not knowing whats going to happen next, or when or where keeps it from not being so repetative
0 -
sk8ingeckoub17_ESO wrote: »Also as far as incentive all ZOS really needs to do is add Alliance Ranks or Realm Ranks or whatever they want to call it. you get more points for 1on1 or small scale battles (each person is worth x points divided by the amount of people that hit them) have those realm ability points be spendable on things like increase chance to crit as well as active abilities like cleanse cc or increased speed for x seconds.... and we would have incentive for all forms of pvp... and incentive for pvp in general...
I totally agree with this
0 -
Jeremy✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭spawn10459 wrote: »
I never said imbalance = fun
But balance doesn't equal fun either. You could give everyone 100 HP/MP and the same ability and everything would be perfectly balanced. But it would also be boring as hell.
Of course getting your butt kicked over and over is no fun. But that's not what I was saying. It is a common mistake for games to place too much emphasis on balancing characters in PvP when their real goal should be to make it fun.
0 -
sk8ingeckoub17_ESO wrote: »Perhaps there are games out there that fill your needs? this is the first one since daoc that was built this way without bg's or arenas.
DAoC has a nice BG. Thid was extremely popular.
DAOC does have below max level battlegrounds... But that is misleading people because the BG's in daoc had no max count for players... they were persistent world bg's that could have zergs, small scale, or group pvp depending on the day, time, month... how is that much different then what zos is offering with multiple different capaigns ranging from full to less full. that can have zergs, small scale and group pvp and allow access at level 10-50...
0 -
Gohlar✭✭✭✭sk8ingeckoub17_ESO wrote: »sk8ingeckoub17_ESO wrote: »Perhaps there are games out there that fill your needs? this is the first one since daoc that was built this way without bg's or arenas.
DAoC has a nice BG. Thid was extremely popular.
DAOC does have below max level battlegrounds... But that is misleading people because the BG's in daoc had no max count for players... they were persistent world bg's that could have zergs, small scale, or group pvp depending on the day, time, month... how is that much different then what zos is offering with multiple different capaigns ranging from full to less full. that can have zergs, small scale and group pvp and allow access at level 10-50...
This was much smaller scale with a single keep. There were also less players, yeah it was still a bit zergy at times, but still a big difference from what ESO offers.
But yeah, it would be better to offer a controlled environment for people who want some good competition. I wasn't suggesting Thid is the answer for eso, it was a bg though for sure. Much smaller scale.
They didn't need to worry about too many players going in, it was single server so the lack of a cap isn't comparable to a game that lets everyone pick the same server to pvp on.
Edited by Gohlar on April 11, 2014 2:23PM0 -
I would bet down the road we'll see expanded options for activities and pvp1
-
spawn10459✭✭✭mstout7419b14_ESO wrote: »
switch campaigns there is a option you know Mrspawnspawn10459 wrote: »Good for you Mstout. i logged on we had 1 keep. i logged off after 4 hours and had 0 keeps. blue had 100% of the map jst like the night before and the night befoer that and the night before that. well since the game went live.
If it didn't take close to 40hrs of game time to make 15k i would.
0 -
spawn10459✭✭✭[/quote]
I never said imbalance = fun
But balance doesn't equal fun either. You could give everyone 100 HP/MP and the same ability and everything would be perfectly balanced. But it would also be boring as hell.
Of course getting your butt kicked over and over is no fun. But that's not what I was saying. It is a common mistake for games to place too much emphasis on balancing characters in PvP when their real goal should be to make it fun.
[/quote]
your talking about Class balance i'm talking about server balance AKA if 1 faction has 100 people, second faction has 1000000000 people and fact 3 has 200 people. Thus the server is imbalanced.
They need to make it so there are close to equal people of each faction on.
AKA if faction 1 has 300 people then faction 2 and 3 should be capped to 300 people. and when faction 1 increase its players then faction 2 and 3 should increase also.
then if faction 3 dropes to 100 people then the other servers should have players removed.0 -
thedemiseraphb14_ESO wrote: »I would bet down the road we'll see expanded options for activities and pvp
because we already have expanded options for pvp? games less then a month on live servers. and already the population is making expanded options and playstyles on their own. we don't need ZOS to hold our hands and make it for us. We are doing fine developing on our own.
1 -
PF1901✭✭✭Getting a tad sick of these kind of threads (pvp, ah, quickslots). When I joined this game I was positively surprised it at least tries to be a bit different than the usual (boring) fodder. Now all these people ask for stuff turning this exactly into the same routine as most other games out there offer. Worst of all the game itself has now been live for how long? A meager two weeks. Give it a rest folks! Let things evolve a bit first. No offence but this seems to me to be the typical "I want and I want it now" syndrome which in all honesty makes me sick.3
-
mutharex✭✭✭✭✭
You know you can switch campaign every 24h without having to make a new character?spawn10459 wrote: »mstout7419b14_ESO wrote: »
switch campaigns there is a option you know Mrspawnspawn10459 wrote: »Good for you Mstout. i logged on we had 1 keep. i logged off after 4 hours and had 0 keeps. blue had 100% of the map jst like the night before and the night befoer that and the night before that. well since the game went live.
If it didn't take close to 40hrs of game time to make 15k i would.
Edited by mutharex on April 11, 2014 2:51PM0 -
Gohlar✭✭✭✭Getting a tad sick of these kind of threads (pvp, ah, quickslots). When I joined this game I was positively surprised it at least tries to be a bit different than the usual (boring) fodder. Now all these people ask for stuff turning this exactly into the same routine as most other games out there offer. Worst of all the game itself has now been live for how long? A meager two weeks. Give it a rest folks! Let things evolve a bit first. No offence but this seems to me to be the typical "I want and I want it now" syndrome which in all honesty makes me sick.
Chat forums are not for you if suggestions make you sick. Also, pretending lack of features is a feature is silly. This game isn't that different, it's just really basic. Not good for longevity. Not good at all.
Edited by Gohlar on April 11, 2014 2:53PM2 -
Getting a tad sick of these kind of threads (pvp, ah, quickslots). When I joined this game I was positively surprised it at least tries to be a bit different than the usual (boring) fodder. Now all these people ask for stuff turning this exactly into the same routine as most other games out there offer. Worst of all the game itself has now been live for how long? A meager two weeks. Give it a rest folks! Let things evolve a bit first. No offence but this seems to me to be the typical "I want and I want it now" syndrome which in all honesty makes me sick.
Chat forums are not for you if suggestions make you sick. Also, pretending lack of features is a feature is silly. This game isn't that different, it's just really basic. Not good for longevity. Not good at all.
This game is different but what is different you see as basic... that doesn't mean its bad for longevity its just different then what you are accustomed to... maybe its not what you like so its not good for you but I don't see this game disappearing because it doesn't cater to the instanced arena / bg crowd...
1 -
mutharex✭✭✭✭✭Getting a tad sick of these kind of threads (pvp, ah, quickslots). When I joined this game I was positively surprised it at least tries to be a bit different than the usual (boring) fodder. Now all these people ask for stuff turning this exactly into the same routine as most other games out there offer. Worst of all the game itself has now been live for how long? A meager two weeks. Give it a rest folks! Let things evolve a bit first. No offence but this seems to me to be the typical "I want and I want it now" syndrome which in all honesty makes me sick.
Chat forums are not for you if suggestions make you sick. Also, pretending lack of features is a feature is silly. This game isn't that different, it's just really basic. Not good for longevity. Not good at all.
It is a feature if it's part of the basic philosophy of the game. You seem to know nothing about what the devs wanted with this game. I suggest you go and watch the quakecon video, it explains most of the stuff you are mostly complaining about. At least you all won't sound so ignorant like when you say stuff like the one you just spouted
there you go
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_oWuw-mo_MQ
in the future, try to not buy on impulse a game you know nothing about and then spending whole days in the official forum trying to make it like you'd like it
it doesn't work like that2 -
Starnes✭✭✭sk8ingeckoub17_ESO wrote: »Getting a tad sick of these kind of threads (pvp, ah, quickslots). When I joined this game I was positively surprised it at least tries to be a bit different than the usual (boring) fodder. Now all these people ask for stuff turning this exactly into the same routine as most other games out there offer. Worst of all the game itself has now been live for how long? A meager two weeks. Give it a rest folks! Let things evolve a bit first. No offence but this seems to me to be the typical "I want and I want it now" syndrome which in all honesty makes me sick.
Chat forums are not for you if suggestions make you sick. Also, pretending lack of features is a feature is silly. This game isn't that different, it's just really basic. Not good for longevity. Not good at all.
This game is different but what is different you see as basic... that doesn't mean its bad for longevity its just different then what you are accustomed to... maybe its not what you like so its not good for you but I don't see this game disappearing because it doesn't cater to the instanced arena / bg crowd...
Having organised pvp is going to retain and draw in players, that cannot be denied, which means it is good for the overall development and growth of this game, which will even benefit the players like you that don't want arenas as more subscription money will come in to support continued growth and development of the game.Edited by Starnes on April 11, 2014 3:01PM0 -
mutharex✭✭✭✭✭sk8ingeckoub17_ESO wrote: »Getting a tad sick of these kind of threads (pvp, ah, quickslots). When I joined this game I was positively surprised it at least tries to be a bit different than the usual (boring) fodder. Now all these people ask for stuff turning this exactly into the same routine as most other games out there offer. Worst of all the game itself has now been live for how long? A meager two weeks. Give it a rest folks! Let things evolve a bit first. No offence but this seems to me to be the typical "I want and I want it now" syndrome which in all honesty makes me sick.
Chat forums are not for you if suggestions make you sick. Also, pretending lack of features is a feature is silly. This game isn't that different, it's just really basic. Not good for longevity. Not good at all.
This game is different but what is different you see as basic... that doesn't mean its bad for longevity its just different then what you are accustomed to... maybe its not what you like so its not good for you but I don't see this game disappearing because it doesn't cater to the instanced arena / bg crowd...
Having organised pvp is going to retain and draw in players, that cannot be denied, which means it is good for the overall development and growth of this game, which will even benefit the players like you that don't want arenas as more subscription money will come in to support continued growth and development of the game.
But.. this game has organized pvp.
You might want to look into it0 -
Kiash✭✭✭sk8ingeckoub17_ESO wrote: »Getting a tad sick of these kind of threads (pvp, ah, quickslots). When I joined this game I was positively surprised it at least tries to be a bit different than the usual (boring) fodder. Now all these people ask for stuff turning this exactly into the same routine as most other games out there offer. Worst of all the game itself has now been live for how long? A meager two weeks. Give it a rest folks! Let things evolve a bit first. No offence but this seems to me to be the typical "I want and I want it now" syndrome which in all honesty makes me sick.
Chat forums are not for you if suggestions make you sick. Also, pretending lack of features is a feature is silly. This game isn't that different, it's just really basic. Not good for longevity. Not good at all.
This game is different but what is different you see as basic... that doesn't mean its bad for longevity its just different then what you are accustomed to... maybe its not what you like so its not good for you but I don't see this game disappearing because it doesn't cater to the instanced arena / bg crowd...
Having organised pvp is going to retain and draw in players, that cannot be denied, which means it is good for the overall development and growth of this game, which will even benefit the players like you that don't want arenas as more subscription money will come in to support continued growth and development of the game.
I disagree, organized PvP has hurt every game it has touched - Rift, WoW, GW2, etc. It breeds a type of community undesirable and ends up being a ghost town in PvP from everything I have seen. Arenas destroyed WoW's PvP community, GW2 may as well not even have an arena PvP mode as on any given night I see about 50-100 people playing the instanced PvP in a game that sold over 3 million copies. It's just not even worth the resources for the amount of negatives it brings into the game.1 -
Starnes✭✭✭sk8ingeckoub17_ESO wrote: »Getting a tad sick of these kind of threads (pvp, ah, quickslots). When I joined this game I was positively surprised it at least tries to be a bit different than the usual (boring) fodder. Now all these people ask for stuff turning this exactly into the same routine as most other games out there offer. Worst of all the game itself has now been live for how long? A meager two weeks. Give it a rest folks! Let things evolve a bit first. No offence but this seems to me to be the typical "I want and I want it now" syndrome which in all honesty makes me sick.
Chat forums are not for you if suggestions make you sick. Also, pretending lack of features is a feature is silly. This game isn't that different, it's just really basic. Not good for longevity. Not good at all.
This game is different but what is different you see as basic... that doesn't mean its bad for longevity its just different then what you are accustomed to... maybe its not what you like so its not good for you but I don't see this game disappearing because it doesn't cater to the instanced arena / bg crowd...
Having organised pvp is going to retain and draw in players, that cannot be denied, which means it is good for the overall development and growth of this game, which will even benefit the players like you that don't want arenas as more subscription money will come in to support continued growth and development of the game.
But.. this game has organized pvp.
You might want to look into it
Cyrodiil, while fun, is not organised pvp, it's pure chaos. Lone wolves, disparate levels/skills, large zergs, several groups with limited coordination, unbalanced populations. I'm not saying it can't be amusing but you're comparing playing "King of the Mountain" to football, and you very well know it.
Edited by Starnes on April 11, 2014 3:10PM0 -
liquid_wolf✭✭✭✭Two people can capture resources unmolested.
Seven people can take a keep unmolested.
When you talk about "15 skilled and organized people in arenas" I think you are just wasting breath.
15 skilled and organized people can take keeps, and will inevitably draw defenders to them. These same people can overcome a group of 30 uncoordinated and unorganized enemy players.
You might not be able to take a keep from them... but that is the fun and challenge... to be one of the few small teams that can.
Why settle for a "15 vs 15 arena" when you can have all of Cyrodiil with 15 people. If you control the map, then switch to a different one where you are the underdog.Edited by liquid_wolf on April 11, 2014 3:11PM1