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?
-
TheGrandAlliance✭✭✭✭No.Imperator_Clydus wrote: »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.
/overturnedonappeal
WEll SOMEONE IS GOING TO JAIL!!!!
The other thread doesn't have a date posted on it just a time (although that could mean today I suppose) but alas no matter...
He did do a bad job of it: Messed up the poll question Indeeed.Edited by TheGrandAlliance on June 17, 2014 3:42AMIndeed it is so...0 -
TheGrandAlliance✭✭✭✭No.@Imperator_Clydus
Hey check out the thread I linked: It has been deleted. SOME ONE WENT TO JAIL FINALLY GOOD RIDDENS!...
On behalf of the "United States Justice Department":
/appolgize
/casecloseEdited by TheGrandAlliance on June 17, 2014 5:32AMIndeed it is so...0 -
Yes.Imperator_Clydus wrote: »
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.
Not even sure if I should give a "LOL" because your lack reasonability is sad.
WAR was not a failure, the people in charge were failures.
You were never part of the WAR-community otherwise you wouldve known that.
The stable end-of-game community was very active and they were hardly any complaints about balance etc even though there were no mirrored classes.
(mara op btw
)Imperator_Clydus wrote: »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.
Assuming RvR was more than a zergfest in any other rvr MMO.Imperator_Clydus wrote: »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.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5oIqHPQvz58
Because it required skill and a good team to be successful?Imperator_Clydus wrote: »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.
"When RvR is like I want to have it *cough* *cough* I mean like Zenimax intended it to be, then I will stop writing my pseudo pvp player opinions here."
Its very entertaining keep on going please dont let the lack of support by other players disturb you "argumentation".
Edited by nan.jieb17_ESO on June 17, 2014 7:27AM1 -
rodolphe.moscab16_ESOSoul ShrivenYes.i think 4 vs 4 vs 4 will be a great game and original in PVP world2
-
Yes.I really like the idea. I am tired about laggy AvAvA.Debon Templar VR14 Thorn Blade (EU)
Gaunnes DK VR14 Haderus (EU)3 -
SBR_QuorTek✭✭✭No.Imperator_Clydus wrote: »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.
One word premade groups queing in together
1 -
SBR_QuorTek✭✭✭No.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?
Again one word... premade groups queuing in together
1 -
Gravord✭✭✭✭✭Yes.SBR_QuorTek wrote: »Again one word... premade groups queuing in together
And thats how you get organized groups providing challenging gameplay instead zergfest of bads pretending orvr is the part of pvp based on player skills.
1 -
SBR_QuorTek✭✭✭No.SBR_QuorTek wrote: »Again one word... premade groups queuing in together
And thats how you get organized groups providing challenging gameplay instead zergfest of bads pretending orvr is the part of pvp based on player skills.
Premade would be a zergfest, randoms would be the ones suffering.1 -
Preachan✭✭✭Yes.And thats how you get organized groups providing challenging gameplay instead zergfest of bads pretending orvr is the part of pvp based on player skills.
Yeah, Premade vs Premade vs Premade are some of the best PvP fights I ever experienced... they are a real challenge and fun.
Sure, farming PUGs isn't fun, for no one. Not the premade, nor the PUGs.
But forming their own groups would help them in their struggle. Even a half decent team can bring some real competition, if they choose to do so.
If they just go in random, don't adapt, and don't communicate - well, no wonder they loose.
But I saw some really cool PUG action, when they tried to cooperate against a Premade - they can do it, if they want to.3 -
Nijjion✭✭✭✭No.Make it pre-made only ( 6-8 vs 6-8 )... better yet guild vs guild only. No random arenas(solo queue)... they are a cancer to mmos and games in general look at LoL.
No need for random arenas anyway...want random fights we have Cyradiil already.Edited by Nijjion on June 17, 2014 12:11PMNijjijjioN - DK - AR27NijjioN - NB -Daggerfall CovenantThe Nice Guys GuildEverQuest -> Dark Age of Camelot -> Ragnarok Online -> Cabal Online -> Guild Wars 1 -> Warhammer Online -> Vindictus -> SWTOR -> Tera -> Guild Wars 2 -> Elder Scrolls Online ->
Eagerly awaiting Camelot Unchained.2 -
Gravord✭✭✭✭✭Yes.Aa i suggested in this topic twice already:
- 4vs4 only for premades
- 8vs8 (or 12vs12) only for solo queue2 -
Yasha✭✭✭✭✭Yes.Imperator_Clydus wrote: »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.
You prove my point since the only rebuttable you have is to spend half a page slagging off other mmos, that were/are great and have made huge contributions to the genre. You no longer have any reasoning to support your view, but just cling on to it spouting irrelevancies.
However, even the content of your post is laughable- You say GW2 and WAR AvA were failures- but ESO is already consolidating its AvA servers! What a joke.
GW2 "failed due to performance, culling, AOE zergs, and the like", lol. GW2 never had the level of problems in its version of AvA that ESO has. I mean you pretty much just described why the population in ESO's AvA has crashed, but pls add disconnects, grouping causing lags and disconnects, huge lag spikes, endless loading screens etc.
One thing I do agree with you on however, is that we should learn from past mmos. And one thing that is clear from the two past mmos that had both an AvA system and battlegrounds is that BGs didn't negatively impact those games and added another fun level of gameplay for people who liked to do that kind of thing.
A 3vs3vs3 set up sounds like an interesting new take on it; hope we can get our hands on the new toy soon.
2 -
Yes.I suggest matchmaking with ELO system so randoms will not suffer.
3vs3 / 4vs4 seems to be a good number for arenas and 12vs12 for battlegrounds, but I would say only random queue (as Gravord said) for 12vs12 to not make it like in RvR.Edited by nan.jieb17_ESO on June 17, 2014 12:20PM0 -
Dudis✭✭✭No.I just can't see why you'd want to REMOVE variables from pvp by making it structured like an arena. It's just (simply put) a small room, so no unexpected use of terrain, no unexpected adds, allways the same cookie cutter builds etc.
And in an MMO too, which is inherently unbalanced. When I want this kind of gameplay (and I do, trust me), I'll go play a real competative FPS/RTS/MOBA.
But I give up, to each their own. You won't be seeing me in there though.2 -
Lowbei✭✭✭✭✭Yes."bads will always vote against anything that may require skill, to prevent their future failures."
4 -
SBR_QuorTek✭✭✭No."bads will always vote against anything that may require skill, to prevent their future failures."
Actually I think it is the bad players that is voting yes for the most part... trying to escape where they run into the best and worst players at the same time.... think it would be better for people wanting a change to go back the MMOs they played before this one that obviously offer what they need.
You can't balance down current system to fit what it would be for Arena alike content..
5 -
Lowbei✭✭✭✭✭Yes.SBR_QuorTek wrote: »"bads will always vote against anything that may require skill, to prevent their future failures."
Actually I think it is the bad players that is voting yes for the most part... trying to escape where they run into the best and worst players at the same time.... think it would be better for people wanting a change to go back the MMOs they played before this one that obviously offer what they need.
You can't balance down current system to fit what it would be for Arena alike content..
lol, no. cyrodiil is full of bads, and arenas would have some competition,
soon
Edited by Lowbei on June 17, 2014 2:49PM1 -
Lorkhan✭✭✭✭✭Yes.SBR_QuorTek wrote: »"bads will always vote against anything that may require skill, to prevent their future failures."
Actually I think it is the bad players that is voting yes for the most part... trying to escape where they run into the best and worst players at the same time.... think it would be better for people wanting a change to go back the MMOs they played before this one that obviously offer what they need.
You can't balance down current system to fit what it would be for Arena alike content..
rly no0 -
SBR_QuorTek✭✭✭No.Aa i suggested in this topic twice already:
- 4vs4 only for premades
- 8vs8 (or 12vs12) only for solo queue
First of all this game has 3 factions so it would always be like 12v12v12 else it make no sense.
No you got to be able to offer the full package with guilds and known people being able to queu in together... people are backing out now from Arena idea once the premade thing came up and coming with lame excuses it should be for 4v4 only, that is utter ***.... and showing the problem or problems especially with how this game work...
If getting Arenas I don't want to support the minority that just want their little 4v4 game only... nonono if arenas will be an option it should be 12v12v12 only being pugged in or encountering full premades... This is a big game and to get the widest support from all classes and possible skill lines you really need to have high up numbers.
But if the case I wonder if people can handle the competetion... and also the game is not really designed for small scale pvp either.
Edited by SBR_QuorTek on June 17, 2014 2:53PM2 -
Anilahation✭✭✭✭Yes.I can already taste the structured PvP, if you think we aren't going to have structured PvP but we are going to compete on the console market then you are living in a dream world.0 -
Dudis✭✭✭No.JoseDelgadoCub17_ESO wrote: »I can already taste the structured PvP, if you think we aren't going to have structured PvP but we are going to compete on the console market then you are living in a dream world.
I wonder if the console players would get their own bracket or if the game comes with a mouse and keyboard... :P0 -
Lowbei✭✭✭✭✭Yes.consoles cant handle cyrodiil with the # of players we are use to seeing.
consoles will want arenas0 -
Yes.SBR_QuorTek wrote: »"bads will always vote against anything that may require skill, to prevent their future failures."
Actually I think it is the bad players that is voting yes for the most part... trying to escape where they run into the best and worst players at the same time.... think it would be better for people wanting a change to go back the MMOs they played before this one that obviously offer what they need.
You can't balance down current system to fit what it would be for Arena alike content..
If it is "LOL"s you want to get keep on writing that stuff. 0 -
FiQSoul ShrivenYes.Imperator_Clydus wrote: »I notice people tend to throw the term "zerg" around a lot and smaller groups having more "skill." AvA is large scale PvP. Both sides have large groups of players fighting each other at the same time. How can it be any less skill if two coordinated large groups are fighting each other versus two coordinated small
groups?
Its less skill 'cos higher amount of random players in the team. Example; in 4vs4 you need to know exactly what your teammates (also enemys) are up to, so you need to discus with them in VOIP. Bigger the team gets, harder it will be discus what you do and when. With bigger zergs you can only discus where to go and what to do. Hard to say who to target (if there is 30player zerg against you) and harder to do max dps simultaneously on the target.Imperator_Clydus wrote: »Either way, people seem to continue to ignore that smaller scale PvP can actually happen in Cyrodiil. My guild runs a small group of players that generally doesn't exceed eight in Cyrodiil and they are able to find plenty of smaller skirmishes. I can already envision arena outcomes will be based solely on who is faster at spamming impulse, AOEs, and ultimates.
I'am also playing with group of 4. Rarely get "good" fights in Cyrodiil (Auriel's Bow and Dawnbreaker). Mostly someone ambush us or we do it to someone else. Also, sometimes when you get good 2vs2 with someone it turns to be 2vs50.
That last sentence is just rubbish. I can already see how zergfights are won by who only spamms impulse, AOEs, and ultimates fastest..
I still see no good reason to leave out Arena from this game. If Cyrodiil is going to be only PvP, even more players will quit. Hopefully ZOS realises this before its too late.2 -
SBR_QuorTek✭✭✭No.nan.jieb17_ESO wrote: »SBR_QuorTek wrote: »"bads will always vote against anything that may require skill, to prevent their future failures."
Actually I think it is the bad players that is voting yes for the most part... trying to escape where they run into the best and worst players at the same time.... think it would be better for people wanting a change to go back the MMOs they played before this one that obviously offer what they need.
You can't balance down current system to fit what it would be for Arena alike content..
If it is "LOL"s you want to get keep on writing that stuff.
Then lol this... I believe both yes and no voters are morons (including myself).... let the developers decide what they want to do and we should have no say to it... other then proposing actual fixes and letting them know about certain problems.
If was my game, I would not bend down to actual changes and make it like any other MMO, that is about it, would watch in and listen to what kind of actual bugs there would be and focus on those solely and be balancing the current system + adding to it instead of adding new game modes.
Personally because I think, you can only DO this much... and yet you can run into an impossible task to balance out mainly because of the skill based system, and people forget that.
1 -
SBR_QuorTek✭✭✭No.consoles cant handle cyrodiil with the # of players we are use to seeing.
consoles will want arenas
The new consoles can, I highly doubt they are going to add it onto the old PS3 and XBOX... but new generation one only, and also those things is solely designed to run games only pretty much and keep in mind... on the PC version you can turn so much eyecandy on, the consoles would be restricted to one mode only.
It doesn't take that much to run this game smoothly either.... even with everything on.0 -
Lowbei✭✭✭✭✭Yes.no, the new consoles cant run nearly as many players on a server.
i look forward to seeing it, but it hasnt been done yet.0 -
Gisgo✭✭✭✭✭No.no, the new consoles cant run nearly as many players on a server.
i look forward to seeing it, but it hasnt been done yet.
Check planetside 2 console (ps4 i think) videos, its about to be released.
2000 players cap per continent, 666 per faction.
Edited by Gisgo on June 17, 2014 5:29PM0