Maintenance for the week of October 13:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – October 13
• NA megaservers for maintenance – October 15, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• EU megaservers for maintenance – October 15, 8:00 UTC (4:00AM EDT) - 16:00 UTC (12:00PM EDT)
• ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – October 15, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/683901
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – October 13
• NA megaservers for maintenance – October 15, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• EU megaservers for maintenance – October 15, 8:00 UTC (4:00AM EDT) - 16:00 UTC (12:00PM EDT)
• ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – October 15, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/683901
Do you really want arena PvP?
-
Thechemicals✭✭✭✭✭No.This poll got put it its place. Arena is yesterdays news.Vr14 Templar since release- dual resto
Vr14 Dk bow/2h
Brayan Blackthunder
Goddick
Daggerfall Covenant1 -
Yes.SBR_QuorTek wrote: »nan.jieb17_ESO wrote: »SBR_QuorTek wrote: »nan.jieb17_ESO wrote: »
Couple of things:
1) The bolded parts were taken way out of context. I'm not saying people won't play arenas. On the contrary, I believe arenas might be the doom of Cyrodiil simply because of the convenience of the queue system, not having to find a group, go look for action etc, etc... NOT because everyone enjoys it more.I don't think people will play arenas
?
So you say the people shouldnt have a queue system because its too convenient? I think fat people shouldnt drive in a wheelchair. :P (little joky)
But srsly when people rate queue and arenas over rvr why should it be bad to give them what they want? It might be bad for the rvr players but if they are not enough people or the rvr is *** why continue?
you can see it as a worst-case-scenario2) That 4k number is a lot larger. Just because there's only 6000 people online pvping doesn't mean there's only 6000 pvpers. I remember some old estimate saying that peak population times 10-15 roughly equal number of subscribers to an MMO. Of course, very few MMOs actually show online numbers anymore.3) I want smallscale pvp in an open world, I don't think I contradicted myself by saying that. I only run solo or duo in ESO.
I am pretty sure you can have both. Smallscale in Cyro and arenas.
To buff smallscale you actually have to make small grps able to impact on the campaign like capping small battelobjects (farm, mine etc)
Reducing the number of npcs seems valid.
Right now 1-2 people alone can only gank and hope the enemy comes 1 by 1.
As long as they keep the rank gain system to cyrodiil only it is fine, else you will find the entire playerbase grinding rank in Arenas, where as it should be earned on the big battlefield... makes sense as well.
Completely new ranksystem for arenas would be fine.
I think no serious arenaplayer wants to be mistaken for someone who made his points easily in rvr. :P
People say it is for E-Sport so no new ranks other than maybe top 10 players get a title and an armor look for being a champ in top 10 or something... that will reset each month or something including title and use of special armor look... or something..
Can go all anime style with You are numbeeer one!!!
You dont want to play it but you want to tell us what our reward should be? Fine lets make it like in GW1 the best 100 get silver cape and the best one gets gold.
But unfortunately there was a title for gvg/4v4/12v12 too
So no titel Sir? You dont allow us to have a title? .... ok 1 -
Yes.Thechemicals wrote: »This poll got put it its place. Arena is yesterdays news.
If I would make a poll asking if ESO should be f2p what do you think will happen? Its not about the majority be reasonable :P
0 -
SBR_QuorTek✭✭✭No.nan.jieb17_ESO wrote: »SBR_QuorTek wrote: »nan.jieb17_ESO wrote: »SBR_QuorTek wrote: »nan.jieb17_ESO wrote: »
Couple of things:
1) The bolded parts were taken way out of context. I'm not saying people won't play arenas. On the contrary, I believe arenas might be the doom of Cyrodiil simply because of the convenience of the queue system, not having to find a group, go look for action etc, etc... NOT because everyone enjoys it more.I don't think people will play arenas
?
So you say the people shouldnt have a queue system because its too convenient? I think fat people shouldnt drive in a wheelchair. :P (little joky)
But srsly when people rate queue and arenas over rvr why should it be bad to give them what they want? It might be bad for the rvr players but if they are not enough people or the rvr is *** why continue?
you can see it as a worst-case-scenario2) That 4k number is a lot larger. Just because there's only 6000 people online pvping doesn't mean there's only 6000 pvpers. I remember some old estimate saying that peak population times 10-15 roughly equal number of subscribers to an MMO. Of course, very few MMOs actually show online numbers anymore.3) I want smallscale pvp in an open world, I don't think I contradicted myself by saying that. I only run solo or duo in ESO.
I am pretty sure you can have both. Smallscale in Cyro and arenas.
To buff smallscale you actually have to make small grps able to impact on the campaign like capping small battelobjects (farm, mine etc)
Reducing the number of npcs seems valid.
Right now 1-2 people alone can only gank and hope the enemy comes 1 by 1.
As long as they keep the rank gain system to cyrodiil only it is fine, else you will find the entire playerbase grinding rank in Arenas, where as it should be earned on the big battlefield... makes sense as well.
Completely new ranksystem for arenas would be fine.
I think no serious arenaplayer wants to be mistaken for someone who made his points easily in rvr. :P
People say it is for E-Sport so no new ranks other than maybe top 10 players get a title and an armor look for being a champ in top 10 or something... that will reset each month or something including title and use of special armor look... or something..
Can go all anime style with You are numbeeer one!!!
You dont want to play it but you want to tell us what our reward should be? Fine lets make it like in GW1 the best 100 get silver cape and the best one gets gold.
But unfortunately there was a title for gvg/4v4/12v12 too
So no titel Sir? You dont allow us to have a title? .... ok
Well some of ya guys want to tell us that we must have arenas.... as for titles its all fine, but the actual rank system where you get corporal, sergent... etc.. + skill points should be prohibited for cyrodiil only as it would the the only place where actually TESO military actions is held.0 -
ErilAq✭✭✭Yes.I said yes because there was no "other" or "depends" option. If the arena is an instanced battleground pitting 4v4 or 8v8 (or something greater than 1v1 or 2v2) with either set objectives (like capture the flag) or even just a team death match I would be excited for it. If it's a 1v1 or 2v2 arena from say WoW's book then I am completely against it.Internet armchair warriors attack! Yayayayayayaaaaaah!!!!1 -
Imperator_Clydus✭✭✭✭No.I'd actually love an arena system. I'd actually be able to experiment with various abilities and learn to PvP with my class in a non-laggy, non-zergy environment.
If ZOS is worried about players leaving AvA then they can simply implement an arena system with no experience or substantial rewards. Maybe some cosmetics or a title, but nothing substantial. Hell, I wouldn't mind if they just implemented arena for fun/practice with no reward system. AvA will always be more rewarding if ZOS implements Arena correctly, and people who love AvA will have no reason to do arena.
Also, balance is always an issue for PvP, but ZOS wouldn't have to worry about striking a perfect balance if Arena exists solely for fun/practice. I just want to play my class in a setting where I won't get punished severely for trying unique builds. Right now I'd be stupid to try sub-par builds or abilities in AvA because I'd spend most of my time running back after being wtfpwnd repeatedly.
This will not happen. People will complain and want rewards for competing in Arenas. If there is no incentive, people will flame and rage on the forums.The First Daggerfall Emperor of Tamriel on Bloodthorn and Guild Leader of Shehai0 -
Preachan✭✭✭Yes.I said yes because there was no "other" or "depends" option. If the arena is an instanced battleground pitting 4v4 or 8v8 (or something greater than 1v1 or 2v2) with either set objectives (like capture the flag) or even just a team death match I would be excited for it. If it's a 1v1 or 2v2 arena from say WoW's book then I am completely against it.
Yes, that sums it up pretty much for me.
I would love some Battlegrounds, about 4 - 15 players per faction.
0 -
Imperator_Clydus✭✭✭✭No.nan.jieb17_ESO wrote: »For you it was SWTOR and which other game?
Don't mention WoW because there are many people playing arenas and having fun there.
Then why did you vote "no"? Do you think that people that voted "yes" dont want the rest of the game fixed?
You are fighting pretty hard for less endcontent I wonder where all this hate comes from. Disappointment in Huttball?
You never played WAR right? This is how RvR should be like and how battlegrounds should work. And WAR was introduced as a PvP/RvR game with only 2 factions and without mirrored classes, was awesome though.
So it can actually work out without considering all the stuff perfectionists would want.....
Why not take stuff from other games which were good?
Ah right, because a handful dont want it. Cheers mate. :P
About 200 people were voting here thats like 10% of one campaign on 1 server (NA/NA-EU) which is very representative, if we get 2000 vote will Obama deal with the problem? Or is he afraid of receiving a long answer from Imperator_Clydus without arguments. :P
GW1, SWG, AoC, DFO, SWTOR, GW2, and ESO are the ones I played more extensively. I've dabbled and tested virtually every major AAA MMORPG.
Yes, as I have stated before, WoW has a terrible PvP system. Real life friends and guildies who have played WoW since launch have all been rather unanimous that there is no skill involved, each season elicits new FOTM classes and compositions, and that it's a vicious, unfulfilling cycle.
I voted "no" because I believe a traditional arena would be bad for this game. The concept would need to be reworked and incorporated in such a way, my idea as an example in the OP, that it would make sense for ESO.
I believe that many who voted yes want to avoid AvA because it's broken and has various issues. I would prefer ZOS to fix AvA and make improvements so it works as intended before adding other PvP systems. I think players will find they enjoy AvA a lot more when it's actually stable and not being abused or exploited.
I am fighting for ZOS to fix their game before adding new features that will inevitably cause more problems. I created this post so that ZOS does not repeat the mistakes that BioWare and many other developers have, ignoring issues with the game, and adding other content hoping to appease the player base. This will not work. Especially if the feature doesn't work for the game considering how classes and skill lines are built, ZOS must be cautious.
I do not understand why people continue to use WAR as a crowning achievement of MMORPGs. The game was shut down. It was a dismal failure. Having only two factions was a large reason why the game was bad, and class balance was atrocious. I had many friends who played DAoC that went to WAR, and they were incredibly disappointed by the results.The First Daggerfall Emperor of Tamriel on Bloodthorn and Guild Leader of Shehai0 -
Imperator_Clydus✭✭✭✭No.SBR_QuorTek wrote: »Imperator_Clydus wrote: »SBR_QuorTek wrote: »Uh Starwars Galaxies PvP had it all, and no actual arenas you would queu into at all and you could pvp everywhere you wanted to.. the specific zones... you would just walk into and be flagged for pvp.
For balance... original SWG was skill based as well meaning no actual classes either other than those paths you wanted to go and class/hybrid class you wanted to be, SWG had one of the best communities where as players made up PvP events where the big battle should be. SWG also had the space part of the game xwing vs tiefighter alike combat which also was heavy involved in pvp.
What killed swg was the constant combat upgrades and complete reworks of how classes/gameplay should work out, if knew how to play there would be no real differences between classes either... gear wise... all armor was crafted with the most and best crafting system I have ever seen in ANY mmo out there, but meaning you could hit this or that cap and that would be it and not able to exceed that, but then meaning you would had gathered the best amount of mats as well... not having a legendary tag... epic tag or whichever onto it... but each mat would drop for like 3 weeks or something like titanium steel (insert 2/6 stats ranging from 1 to 1000) after that period a new titanium steel with a new set of stats onto it.
Player cities with player houses was a thing as well.. you could 100% decorate your house meaning you could use cordinates to move around the painting you had looted/bought and place it where you want it to be.
Anyhow it involved grinds, quests and more... this more cool items you wanted like mandalorian armor this harder the struggle, but was really engageing and fun... going hunting with a couple of friends for something big... and in the old days getting a 20man group totally owned in the deathwatch bunker lol.
The pvp sort of get close to the old SWG system but more advanced in ESO though, PvE system even share some of the same traits... guess it is what attracted me to TESO, well being a TES fan too.
You obviously did not play SWG after the NGE. Initially with Pre-CU, there was only open world and there were various zones on planets designated for more structured death matching. After the NGE went live, SOE turned Restuss into a PvP zone and later added battlegrounds that you had to queue up for with a group.
I don't really want to get off topic and start reminiscing about how amazing a game SWG was. It's fair to say in general anyone who played it loved it and many were discouraged by the changes SOE implemented with the Combat Upgrade and then the infamous New Game Enhancement. My point in regards to SWG was that what made the PvP shine was the fact that it was open world and completely player-driven, and Cyrodiil has some similarities to that.
The reason I even play ESO, besides the fact I have been an avid TES fan since Morrowind, was because of the sandbox nature of the franchise and the overall promise of incredible, sandbox, open world PvP. That's what Cyrodiil offers, albeit not perfect, but it has a great amount of potential and it sets ESO apart from many other MMORPGs on the market.
I just want to ensure that ZOS does not neglect its most enticing feature in favor of adding something that generally ruins PvP in a lot of MMORPGs. I'm fine with arenas when the rest of the game is functioning and running smoothly. I'm fine with arenas if they are implemented in a way that makes sense and does not further convolute balance and stability. As it stands, the game is still very new and needs time to develop and mature. Battlegrounds weren't added in SWG until 2009, and that was six years after the game was launched.
Actually I did... spendt a week or two with the NGE active... held 4-5 month break and returned again.... space was my the most active part.... but when they actually made ground classes useable again I returned to dirtside now and then.
Battlegrounds were added years after the NGE went live. You appeared to have played it briefly when it first came out. SWG at the end of its life cycle with the NGE was very different from how it began.The First Daggerfall Emperor of Tamriel on Bloodthorn and Guild Leader of Shehai0 -
Imperator_Clydus✭✭✭✭No.SBR_QuorTek wrote: »nelsonus_ESO wrote: »SBR_QuorTek wrote: »Then why did you leave for playing TESO.. it make no sense, especially since the main playerbase support TES ways and not WoW/SWtor ways
Why does it have to be one or the other? Think about WAR, it had battlegrounds and open world pvp. People did both, and people loved it. Some days I wanted open world action, sometimes I wanted battleground option.
Here is the key:
Either way, I was still playing WAR. In ESO if I want small man instanced action? I have to go play another game. How is that good for ESO? It's not.
Now I don't know anything about other ESO players, neither do you. So all I can talk about is myself. But MMO populations are made up of players so if an MMO is making ME not want to play because of lack of options, that is a BAD thing. ESPECIALLY if the 3v3 arena is already created, just not implemented.
This is not 'WAR?' This is TESO another ruleset another setting..
The point is that WAR is very similar to this game in many ways, while the people giving reasons for why they do not want Arena/battlegrounds are drawing reference to games like SWTOR and WoW which have very little in common with ESO's pvp set up.
If you look at WAR and GW2, the two recentish games that had AvA (similar to ESO) and also had battlegrounds, you will see that both forms of pvp worked well together and AvA was/is actually the most popular form of pvp in those games.
All these issues that people talk about with how battlegrounds destroy AVA etc, did/do not exist in the two games most similar to ESO in terms of pvp (and which also have battlegrounds).
WAR is a terrible example. For one, it didn't even have three factions for PvP. It's more like WoW than ESO.
Don't even use GW2 as an example for fantastic battlegrounds as they were terrible. The only decent PvP feature was WvW, and ArenaNet's engine couldn't even handle all the players on screen. Not to mention, unlike ESO, GW2 was really nothing more than a zerg fest because the map was too small.
The only MMO ESO remotely resembles would be DAoC, because it is the main MMO that inspired how this game works.The First Daggerfall Emperor of Tamriel on Bloodthorn and Guild Leader of Shehai1 -
Gisgo✭✭✭✭✭No.And its still alive and pay to play after what... fifteen years?
Meanwhile dozens of arena games went f2p and failed.Edited by Gisgo on June 16, 2014 10:13PM2 -
Imperator_Clydus✭✭✭✭No.Imperator_Clydus wrote: »I can already envision arena outcomes will be based solely on who is faster at spamming impulse, AOEs, and ultimates.
That statement says all. You have not a single clue what arena/scenario combat is about if you think impulse will be key ability in 4vs4...
Considering 15 players all using impulse, CC, and spamming ultimates can destroy 60+ players in a matter of seconds, I'm fairly certain it will be a rather effective tactic. Arenas are nothing more than building whichever composition will destroy the other team faster. This is part of the reason I do not believe the system will not work well in ESO, given how classes are built and the variety of skills with weapons and armor.The First Daggerfall Emperor of Tamriel on Bloodthorn and Guild Leader of Shehai1 -
Gravord✭✭✭✭✭Yes.Imperator_Clydus wrote: »Considering 15 players all using impulse, CC, and spamming ultimates can destroy 60+ players in a matter of seconds, I'm fairly certain it will be a rather effective tactic. Arenas are nothing more than building whichever composition will destroy the other team faster. This is part of the reason I do not believe the system will not work well in ESO, given how classes are built and the variety of skills with weapons and armor.
And you think impulse coming out from 4 man group vs another 4 man group is the fastest way possible to kill enemy? Mate, get a clue about small scale not only zerging before speaking about it.
1 -
No.
I dont support it at the moment because there are to many balance issues already; small group play is very different that large group and pvp is the latter. balance is already different in dungeons/pve/pvp/and 12 man raid. some skills are better in some than in others and balances have to take each game format into account. bringing in yet another format is just a nightmare. I want to see improvements on balance between existing formats and classes, not a format that will widen the gap.
unless balanced perfect, the arena will push people to play pre moulded builds even more. dont want even more content that makes everyone want to roll sorc dk. I think 3v3v3 will hurt this game a lot until being sorc/dk dosent blow other classes out of the water. balance the classes so that the 3 do not need to be all sorc and a dk to be competitive.
ALL PVP in this game needs to directly relate to alliance points and emporership; If you absolutely must make arena please have it directly related to the pvp system so the campaigns are not even more empty than they already are.
IF the skill and class balance are improved first, I would support some form of arena that is a part of the larger war effort0 -
Yasha✭✭✭✭✭Yes.Imperator_Clydus wrote: »SBR_QuorTek wrote: »nelsonus_ESO wrote: »SBR_QuorTek wrote: »Then why did you leave for playing TESO.. it make no sense, especially since the main playerbase support TES ways and not WoW/SWtor ways
Why does it have to be one or the other? Think about WAR, it had battlegrounds and open world pvp. People did both, and people loved it. Some days I wanted open world action, sometimes I wanted battleground option.
Here is the key:
Either way, I was still playing WAR. In ESO if I want small man instanced action? I have to go play another game. How is that good for ESO? It's not.
Now I don't know anything about other ESO players, neither do you. So all I can talk about is myself. But MMO populations are made up of players so if an MMO is making ME not want to play because of lack of options, that is a BAD thing. ESPECIALLY if the 3v3 arena is already created, just not implemented.
This is not 'WAR?' This is TESO another ruleset another setting..
The point is that WAR is very similar to this game in many ways, while the people giving reasons for why they do not want Arena/battlegrounds are drawing reference to games like SWTOR and WoW which have very little in common with ESO's pvp set up.
If you look at WAR and GW2, the two recentish games that had AvA (similar to ESO) and also had battlegrounds, you will see that both forms of pvp worked well together and AvA was/is actually the most popular form of pvp in those games.
All these issues that people talk about with how battlegrounds destroy AVA etc, did/do not exist in the two games most similar to ESO in terms of pvp (and which also have battlegrounds).
WAR is a terrible example. For one, it didn't even have three factions for PvP. It's more like WoW than ESO.
Don't even use GW2 as an example for fantastic battlegrounds as they were terrible. The only decent PvP feature was WvW, and ArenaNet's engine couldn't even handle all the players on screen. Not to mention, unlike ESO, GW2 was really nothing more than a zerg fest because the map was too small.
The only MMO ESO remotely resembles would be DAoC, because it is the main MMO that inspired how this game works.
Again you totally miss the point.
Your personal opinion of the quality of other games makes no difference. WAR and GW2 had/have an AvA like pvp set up, with GW2 having no Owpvp. They also had/have battlegrounds and both forms of pvp worked well togther- there was/is no fear that "battlegrounds" will destroy the AvA.
On the other hand games like WoW/Tera etc have Owpvp. There is a valid argument that battlegrounds could negatively impact in that kind of situation.
Most people saying battlegrounds will detract from AvA are drawing reference to games that have a pvp set up like WoW/Tera, and so come to the wrong conclusion that battlegrounds could hurt AvA.
Of the two main reasons people are against battlegrounds in ESO, one (hurt AvA) is based on false assumptions, and two (balance issues) is crying about the possibility that classes could become more balanced.
People that don't want to play in battlegrounds wouldn't be forced to and would not be impacted by them, while those that do want BGs would have their game experience enhanced.
In short clamouring against the implementation of battlegrounds seems totally irrational to me, it is just a miserly being against something for the sake of it.2 -
Ifthir_ESO✭✭✭✭✭Yes.It's kind of baffling to me that people like the current zergfest, then I realized players get tangible in game benefits for having the whole map and bullying the 10-20 guys on their server from other alliances. Boring, but undoubtedly will eventually make your character stronger.
For those of us whose alliance is constantly getting owned, Arena PvP is really all I want from this game right now. I can try and do gank-squads etc, but the chances of getting even remotely fair fights consistently is impossible outside of the LEGEND guild or other coordination via tells.4 -
Ifthir_ESO✭✭✭✭✭Yes.shanersimms_ESO wrote: »Adding arenas is a terrible idea until the game gets more population.
The reason the population for PvP isn't bigger is that there is typically one alliance owning the whole map on almost every server. You can't complain more casuals aren't PvPing when half the time they do, they get ganked into the ground without even getting a command off.
Arena addition removes that problem because it instantly allows far more even odds.3 -
Ifthir_ESO✭✭✭✭✭Yes.Imperator_Clydus wrote: »AvA is dying. ZOS is reducing campaigns because they overestimated how many people would participate them, and most of the current campaigns are dead. On the contrary, if you've actually participated in Cyrodiil, you would see all the players who mindlessly kill and farm AP at the expense of AvA. These are likely the same players who will participate in Arena PvP.
AvA is only dying because every map is a complete swing to one alliance or another. I don't think the mindless players who farm easy AP will join Arena PvP because it takes some skill and doesn't let Joe who exploited to V12 continue to bully people since he has been AvA'ing non-stop since maxing level well before most other players. I think those players will avoid small-scale arena because it does take skill.
This will NOT be true if they provide rewards for Arena matches. If arena provides tangible, in-game benefits, you will get bots dumping matches just to let people build up rewards.
Arena should not provide rewards. AvA should.
1 -
SBR_QuorTek✭✭✭No.Imperator_Clydus wrote: »SBR_QuorTek wrote: »nelsonus_ESO wrote: »SBR_QuorTek wrote: »Then why did you leave for playing TESO.. it make no sense, especially since the main playerbase support TES ways and not WoW/SWtor ways
Why does it have to be one or the other? Think about WAR, it had battlegrounds and open world pvp. People did both, and people loved it. Some days I wanted open world action, sometimes I wanted battleground option.
Here is the key:
Either way, I was still playing WAR. In ESO if I want small man instanced action? I have to go play another game. How is that good for ESO? It's not.
Now I don't know anything about other ESO players, neither do you. So all I can talk about is myself. But MMO populations are made up of players so if an MMO is making ME not want to play because of lack of options, that is a BAD thing. ESPECIALLY if the 3v3 arena is already created, just not implemented.
This is not 'WAR?' This is TESO another ruleset another setting..
The point is that WAR is very similar to this game in many ways, while the people giving reasons for why they do not want Arena/battlegrounds are drawing reference to games like SWTOR and WoW which have very little in common with ESO's pvp set up.
If you look at WAR and GW2, the two recentish games that had AvA (similar to ESO) and also had battlegrounds, you will see that both forms of pvp worked well together and AvA was/is actually the most popular form of pvp in those games.
All these issues that people talk about with how battlegrounds destroy AVA etc, did/do not exist in the two games most similar to ESO in terms of pvp (and which also have battlegrounds).
WAR is a terrible example. For one, it didn't even have three factions for PvP. It's more like WoW than ESO.
Don't even use GW2 as an example for fantastic battlegrounds as they were terrible. The only decent PvP feature was WvW, and ArenaNet's engine couldn't even handle all the players on screen. Not to mention, unlike ESO, GW2 was really nothing more than a zerg fest because the map was too small.
The only MMO ESO remotely resembles would be DAoC, because it is the main MMO that inspired how this game works.
Again you totally miss the point.
Your personal opinion of the quality of other games makes no difference. WAR and GW2 had/have an AvA like pvp set up, with GW2 having no Owpvp. They also had/have battlegrounds and both forms of pvp worked well togther- there was/is no fear that "battlegrounds" will destroy the AvA.
On the other hand games like WoW/Tera etc have Owpvp. There is a valid argument that battlegrounds could negatively impact in that kind of situation.
Most people saying battlegrounds will detract from AvA are drawing reference to games that have a pvp set up like WoW/Tera, and so come to the wrong conclusion that battlegrounds could hurt AvA.
Of the two main reasons people are against battlegrounds in ESO, one (hurt AvA) is based on false assumptions, and two (balance issues) is crying about the possibility that classes could become more balanced.
People that don't want to play in battlegrounds wouldn't be forced to and would not be impacted by them, while those that do want BGs would have their game experience enhanced.
In short clamouring against the implementation of battlegrounds seems totally irrational to me, it is just a miserly being against something for the sake of it.
What he relate to is true, played some of the MMOs he did and yes... it become very dull when you win all the time, for the pvp/pve scene I went to TESO pvp wise I really really enjoy that I do not have to put myself down to be playing those simple minded and would even say idiotic Arena/warzone or whichever word you want to use for it but for once having open scale war... where tactics and strategy actually play a more huge role especially when it is 100 v 100.... not all of it is a zerg as many people see it, zerg is just a fragment of it.. the other thing is turning the map taking keeps quickly before the reinforcements arrive and ruin transit lines and having people picking up their reinforcements from here and there with it all working over voIP cordination.
People only remember the bad things about current system.... but in fact if they took their time to organize as well it would be damn nice and often been in battles where a keep is fought over for like 1 hour due to heavy opposition... both losing and winning, from major walk arounds and ambushes to being trapped one way or another but fighting to the bitter end.
This more the map turn to the three factions giving emperors this better... yes some of the moments you take stuff without risk of getting attacked by the opponents because they are busy dealing with group 3-4 and 5 it is like swapping around who is taking the beating and who do the undercover work and the other way around, which is the beautyfull thing with cyrodiil, you never know when the tide change... and also I do love being the underdog for quite a while for then turning the tide and back to underdog again... makes it more meaningfull and fun.
We write 2014, not 2004 and if Arena alike content is the only thing one want to do, there is so many alternatives out there to pick from, if not coming from those games already.
What if someone went to ones house and said... hey only 3 chairs is allowed in a house hold we are going to remove the12 other ones so it is all good and fine...
4 -
Yasha✭✭✭✭✭Yes.SBR_QuorTek wrote: »Imperator_Clydus wrote: »SBR_QuorTek wrote: »nelsonus_ESO wrote: »SBR_QuorTek wrote: »Then why did you leave for playing TESO.. it make no sense, especially since the main playerbase support TES ways and not WoW/SWtor ways
Why does it have to be one or the other? Think about WAR, it had battlegrounds and open world pvp. People did both, and people loved it. Some days I wanted open world action, sometimes I wanted battleground option.
Here is the key:
Either way, I was still playing WAR. In ESO if I want small man instanced action? I have to go play another game. How is that good for ESO? It's not.
Now I don't know anything about other ESO players, neither do you. So all I can talk about is myself. But MMO populations are made up of players so if an MMO is making ME not want to play because of lack of options, that is a BAD thing. ESPECIALLY if the 3v3 arena is already created, just not implemented.
This is not 'WAR?' This is TESO another ruleset another setting..
The point is that WAR is very similar to this game in many ways, while the people giving reasons for why they do not want Arena/battlegrounds are drawing reference to games like SWTOR and WoW which have very little in common with ESO's pvp set up.
If you look at WAR and GW2, the two recentish games that had AvA (similar to ESO) and also had battlegrounds, you will see that both forms of pvp worked well together and AvA was/is actually the most popular form of pvp in those games.
All these issues that people talk about with how battlegrounds destroy AVA etc, did/do not exist in the two games most similar to ESO in terms of pvp (and which also have battlegrounds).
WAR is a terrible example. For one, it didn't even have three factions for PvP. It's more like WoW than ESO.
Don't even use GW2 as an example for fantastic battlegrounds as they were terrible. The only decent PvP feature was WvW, and ArenaNet's engine couldn't even handle all the players on screen. Not to mention, unlike ESO, GW2 was really nothing more than a zerg fest because the map was too small.
The only MMO ESO remotely resembles would be DAoC, because it is the main MMO that inspired how this game works.
Again you totally miss the point.
Your personal opinion of the quality of other games makes no difference. WAR and GW2 had/have an AvA like pvp set up, with GW2 having no Owpvp. They also had/have battlegrounds and both forms of pvp worked well togther- there was/is no fear that "battlegrounds" will destroy the AvA.
On the other hand games like WoW/Tera etc have Owpvp. There is a valid argument that battlegrounds could negatively impact in that kind of situation.
Most people saying battlegrounds will detract from AvA are drawing reference to games that have a pvp set up like WoW/Tera, and so come to the wrong conclusion that battlegrounds could hurt AvA.
Of the two main reasons people are against battlegrounds in ESO, one (hurt AvA) is based on false assumptions, and two (balance issues) is crying about the possibility that classes could become more balanced.
People that don't want to play in battlegrounds wouldn't be forced to and would not be impacted by them, while those that do want BGs would have their game experience enhanced.
In short clamouring against the implementation of battlegrounds seems totally irrational to me, it is just a miserly being against something for the sake of it.
What he relate to is true, played some of the MMOs he did and yes... it become very dull when you win all the time, for the pvp/pve scene I went to TESO pvp wise I really really enjoy that I do not have to put myself down to be playing those simple minded and would even say idiotic Arena/warzone or whichever word you want to use for it but for once having open scale war... where tactics and strategy actually play a more huge role especially when it is 100 v 100.... not all of it is a zerg as many people see it, zerg is just a fragment of it.. the other thing is turning the map taking keeps quickly before the reinforcements arrive and ruin transit lines and having people picking up their reinforcements from here and there with it all working over voIP cordination.
People only remember the bad things about current system.... but in fact if they took their time to organize as well it would be damn nice and often been in battles where a keep is fought over for like 1 hour due to heavy opposition... both losing and winning, from major walk arounds and ambushes to being trapped one way or another but fighting to the bitter end.
This more the map turn to the three factions giving emperors this better... yes some of the moments you take stuff without risk of getting attacked by the opponents because they are busy dealing with group 3-4 and 5 it is like swapping around who is taking the beating and who do the undercover work and the other way around, which is the beautyfull thing with cyrodiil, you never know when the tide change... and also I do love being the underdog for quite a while for then turning the tide and back to underdog again... makes it more meaningfull and fun.
We write 2014, not 2004 and if Arena alike content is the only thing one want to do, there is so many alternatives out there to pick from, if not coming from those games already.
What if someone went to ones house and said... hey only 3 chairs is allowed in a house hold we are going to remove the12 other ones so it is all good and fine...
I will try to summarize your points to discuss it more easily, I think you are saying:
1) You think battlegrounds are boring (not sure what you mean by "win all the time", certainly nearly impossible in a decent BG system)
2) You like AvA, you think it is a highly skilled and strategic pvp experience.
3) Battlegrounds are something that belongs it 2004 not 2014
4) Battlegrounds would be taking 12 chairs out of a house that is only allowed three.
In response I would say on point 1) many people like BGs, especially players that like to pvp, and you wouldn't have to do them but those players that like them could- win-win situation there right?
2) I like AvA too, its cool, and I think the upcoming AvA changes will make it even better. However, I also like battlegrounds- the two can coexist in harmony.
3) I don't agree. Just because something is old doesn't mean its bad. You can also have new takes on old ideas.
4) Not exactly sure what you mean, but adding BGs would not affect you in any way so there is no reason to be against it. Also it would make many players happy to have them, so why would you vote against something that would make other players happy and has no negative impact on you?
2 -
TheGrandAlliance✭✭✭✭No.@Imperator_Clydus ==Plagerizer.
Time to put the Imperator in jail for copyright infringement.
/guiltyaschargedEdited by TheGrandAlliance on June 17, 2014 3:14AMIndeed it is so...0 -
Imperator_Clydus✭✭✭✭No.And you think impulse coming out from 4 man group vs another 4 man group is the fastest way possible to kill enemy? Mate, get a clue about small scale not only zerging before speaking about it.
I never actually said that. What I did say is it will likely be an effective tactic. This is a pointless debate because you are entirely missing the point of the thread. Traditional arenas will not improve the experience, they will only worsen it. This game is not a traditional theme park with stringent class structure. There are too many builds and hybrids are a norm of the system. With how exploitable and broken some aspects of the game appear to be, arenas would merely make an unpolished experience even worse.The First Daggerfall Emperor of Tamriel on Bloodthorn and Guild Leader of Shehai1 -
Imperator_Clydus✭✭✭✭No.Again you totally miss the point.
Your personal opinion of the quality of other games makes no difference. WAR and GW2 had/have an AvA like pvp set up, with GW2 having no Owpvp. They also had/have battlegrounds and both forms of pvp worked well togther- there was/is no fear that "battlegrounds" will destroy the AvA.
On the other hand games like WoW/Tera etc have Owpvp. There is a valid argument that battlegrounds could negatively impact in that kind of situation.
Most people saying battlegrounds will detract from AvA are drawing reference to games that have a pvp set up like WoW/Tera, and so come to the wrong conclusion that battlegrounds could hurt AvA.
Of the two main reasons people are against battlegrounds in ESO, one (hurt AvA) is based on false assumptions, and two (balance issues) is crying about the possibility that classes could become more balanced.
People that don't want to play in battlegrounds wouldn't be forced to and would not be impacted by them, while those that do want BGs would have their game experience enhanced.
In short clamouring against the implementation of battlegrounds seems totally irrational to me, it is just a miserly being against something for the sake of it.
There is no point to miss. WAR was a failure of an MMO and is no longer in existence. It's PvP system did not live up to the hype and expectations and it suffered the worst fate any MMORPG can have. GW2 was a B2P MMO with more ambition than funding to support it. The game could never handle true RvR and many left because of how much of a disaster WvW actually was.
To not recognize these realities is to be delusion and live in a fantasy world. I do not want ESO to be another WAR or GW2 because they were both failures. In order for that to be possible, ZOS must learn from the past mistakes of other MMORPGs and not repeat them.
Again, the battlegrounds in GW2 are absolutely terrible. They were clearly an afterthought and they always paled in comparison to WvW, which also inevitably failed due to performance, culling, AOE zergs, and the like. It is beyond me why you continue to use two horrendous MMORPGs to support a system they failed miserably in.
There will be a time and a place for ZOS to explore other opportunities. The game is still brand new and there are an exuberant amount of issues ZOS needs to fix with the base game. AvA, is still the only PvP system in the game, and needs immense tweaking to resolve the issues it has. I am not against the idea of an arena, but the examples of MMOs you have supported who had such a system are not comforting to inspire this game.
The First Daggerfall Emperor of Tamriel on Bloodthorn and Guild Leader of Shehai2 -
Imperator_Clydus✭✭✭✭No.Ifthir_ESO wrote: »It's kind of baffling to me that people like the current zergfest, then I realized players get tangible in game benefits for having the whole map and bullying the 10-20 guys on their server from other alliances. Boring, but undoubtedly will eventually make your character stronger.
For those of us whose alliance is constantly getting owned, Arena PvP is really all I want from this game right now. I can try and do gank-squads etc, but the chances of getting even remotely fair fights consistently is impossible outside of the LEGEND guild or other coordination via tells.
Absolutely incorrect. What ZOS needs to do is fix AvA, remove half the campaigns, increase the costs of transfers, discourage guesting, and filter players to ensure all three alliances on campaigns are high to full at peak hours.
Having arenas as an "escape" would only further escalate the issues of AvA and turn a bad situation into something worse. It is imperative that ZOS address the issues of the current PvP system before even considering others.
Once AvA is actually working as intended and the example you have suggested is no longer possible, then it would be a perfect opportunity to perhaps consider other avenues.The First Daggerfall Emperor of Tamriel on Bloodthorn and Guild Leader of Shehai2 -
Imperator_Clydus✭✭✭✭No.Ifthir_ESO wrote: »shanersimms_ESO wrote: »Adding arenas is a terrible idea until the game gets more population.
The reason the population for PvP isn't bigger is that there is typically one alliance owning the whole map on almost every server. You can't complain more casuals aren't PvPing when half the time they do, they get ganked into the ground without even getting a command off.
Arena addition removes that problem because it instantly allows far more even odds.
The solution, again, is to fix the issues with AvA. As I have stated various times, it would not require much effort on ZOS' part to fix the current quagmire that is AvA. Re-balancing populations is an easy fix and ZOS just needs to start regulating more strictly what players can and cannot do.The First Daggerfall Emperor of Tamriel on Bloodthorn and Guild Leader of Shehai1 -
Fi'yra✭✭✭Yes.I really don't see any issues towards there being a 3v3v3 arena.
Whether the players want it or not, if Zenimax feel that it's going to become something to lure players towards PvP, that's something they're going to implement -
I'm sorry, but for all you saying no, you're being very selfish towards the others, not everyone enjoys hardcore PvP 24/7, it's nice to a have break to group up with 2 others players to vs 3 members from each Alliance.
Everyone has their own opinion, and anyone saying otherwise is a complete hypocrite/.2 -
Imperator_Clydus✭✭✭✭No.Ifthir_ESO wrote: »AvA is only dying because every map is a complete swing to one alliance or another. I don't think the mindless players who farm easy AP will join Arena PvP because it takes some skill and doesn't let Joe who exploited to V12 continue to bully people since he has been AvA'ing non-stop since maxing level well before most other players. I think those players will avoid small-scale arena because it does take skill.
This will NOT be true if they provide rewards for Arena matches. If arena provides tangible, in-game benefits, you will get bots dumping matches just to let people build up rewards.
Arena should not provide rewards. AvA should.
I believe you would be mistaken then. I would actually argue the ones who are exploiting Cyrodiil and farming AP all day will be the very same individuals who do participate in arenas. "Skill" is a very subjective thing in an MMO because measuring skill cannot really be determined due to diversity of builds and abilities.
What it then comes down to is finding the most efficient ways possible to defeat the other player. Given the lack of diminishing returns and cooldowns in the game, it's almost a given arenas would be dominated by constant CC, ultimate spamming, and two-button mashing. How much "skill" do you really believe is involved in arenas?
Again, ZOS would only receive criticism and complaints if arena did not provide some sort of a reward. Look at any arena system in an MMO. They all give some sort of special reward based on your rating, whether it's special gear, mounts, etc. Adding a system with zero benefits would be foolish on their part.The First Daggerfall Emperor of Tamriel on Bloodthorn and Guild Leader of Shehai0 -
Imperator_Clydus✭✭✭✭No.TheGrandAlliance wrote: »@Imperator_Clydus ==Plagerizer.
Time to put the Imperator in jail for copyright infringement.
/guiltyascharged
Check the date, buddy. This guy is attempting to troll by taking my OP and turning it in support of arenas. He did a rather terrible job at it as well.The First Daggerfall Emperor of Tamriel on Bloodthorn and Guild Leader of Shehai0