Should there be an additional "AOE disabled" campaign ?

Rune_Relic · October 2014

I expect a lot of hate for this suggestion but hear me out at least.
1. Cyrdodiil is a crashfest at the moment. Many cant play for long before constantly being kicked.
2. People are leaving in droves as PVP is currently unplayable.
3. Many are sick to death of scrolls and keeps being won by crashing or similar.

Would it not be an idea to at least have somewhere everyone can have some kind of PVP without all the crashing and related issues ?

This may not even be possible anyway. Just interested in seeing if such a thing would even be popular.

Xeres14 · October 2014

No. I like what we have at present.

No. If anything make the content AOE unfriendly - as in the mobs have a lot of health and simply AOEing them won't cut it.

Sykotical · October 2014

No. I like what we have at present.

Rune_Relic wrote: »

I expect a lot of hate for this suggestion but hear me out at least.
1. Cyrdodiil is a crashfest at the moment. Many cant play for long before constantly being kicked.
2. People are leaving in droves as PVP is currently unplayable.
3. Many are sick to death of scrolls and keeps being won by crashing or similar.

Would it not be an idea to at least have somewhere everyone can have some kind of PVP without all the crashing and related issues ?

This may not even be possible anyway. Just interested in seeing if such a thing would even be popular.

I'm not sure why AOE is in the title/poll when your post seems to be entirely about the game crashing. If it's a performance issue, you could try lowering your video settings while in Cyrodill. I feel like banning abilities would just be a terrible solution.

I wouldn't mind seeing friendly fire enabled with reduced damage. That should moderate mindless AOE ability usage and thin out the hordes who mass spam impulse against stray players.

TheBull · October 2014

Yes. I would like to try and AOE diabled campaign.

Son_Raizen wrote: »

I'm not sure why AOE is in the title/poll when your post seems to be entirely about the game crashing. If it's a performance issue, you could try lowering your video settings while in Cyrodill. I feel like banning abilities would just be a terrible solution.

I wouldn't mind seeing friendly fire enabled with reduced damage. That should moderate reckless AOE ability usage and thin out the hordes who mass spam impulse against stray players.

He's a politician. He's doing a piggy back.

Gythral · October 2014

Typical this is a "what I want" poll, where my answer is (as usual) something else entirely!

bosmern_ESO · October 2014

No. I like what we have at present.

No, we need to get rid of FC's in a campaign if any.

All FC's do is make PvP a zerg/lag fest. The first month when FC's were bugged I was running around randomly in Cyrodiil and I would find other people, now you will only see people in questing zones, keeps/outposts, or dungeons getting skyshards.

I really hope they get rid of FC's and I know I'm not alone, I want to go back to hunting people in the wild, not sitting in front of a keep, kill a guy about 3 times then get a zerg to steam roll me.

Akula · October 2014

Yes. I would like to try and AOE diabled campaign.

Son_Raizen wrote: »

Rune_Relic wrote: »

I expect a lot of hate for this suggestion but hear me out at least.
1. Cyrdodiil is a crashfest at the moment. Many cant play for long before constantly being kicked.
2. People are leaving in droves as PVP is currently unplayable.
3. Many are sick to death of scrolls and keeps being won by crashing or similar.

Would it not be an idea to at least have somewhere everyone can have some kind of PVP without all the crashing and related issues ?

This may not even be possible anyway. Just interested in seeing if such a thing would even be popular.

I'm not sure why AOE is in the title/poll when your post seems to be entirely about the game crashing. If it's a performance issue, you could try lowering your video settings while in Cyrodill.

Probably because large blobs spamming AOEs have been known to crash the server (now reading comes to play here) and not just individual performance. Knowing this, some guilds crash the server on purpose while being ready to quickly come back on to take a scroll when the other side is still hopelessly unorganized.

Sallington · October 2014

I want AOE damage fixed and I don't want a separate campaign based on something silly like that.

Your poll is bad and you should feel bad.

Varicite · October 2014

Didn't vote because none of the options match my opinion. : P

Something should be done (and is being done) about the prevalence of AoE spam in Cyrodiil, but a "no AoE campaign" is not the answer.

eventide03b14a_ESO · October 2014

Rune_Relic wrote: »

I expect a lot of hate for this suggestion but hear me out at least.
1. Cyrdodiil is a crashfest at the moment. Many cant play for long before constantly being kicked.
2. People are leaving in droves as PVP is currently unplayable.
3. Many are sick to death of scrolls and keeps being won by crashing or similar.

Would it not be an idea to at least have somewhere everyone can have some kind of PVP without all the crashing and related issues ?

This may not even be possible anyway. Just interested in seeing if such a thing would even be popular.

This is possibly the most useless poll I have ever seen. So don't fix the problems with AoE, create a new campaign. Seriously? Did you give this more than a minute consideration before you created it?

Inversus · October 2014

No. I like what we have at present.

Impulse and other aoe is only very effective against zergs, without aoe it would be harder* for a smaller group to take on a larger one

Restricting/banning abilities is an awful solution

eventide03b14a_ESO · October 2014

Inversus wrote: »

Impulse and other aoe is only very effective against zergs, without aoe it would be virtually impossible for a smaller group to take on a larger one

Restricting/banning abilities is an awful solution

Are you serious? The only way to beat a larger army is to rush at them with explosions? I think real world history might disagree with you. I think this poll's suggestion is stupid but your argument against it is equally so.

Inversus · October 2014

No. I like what we have at present.

eventide03b14a_ESO wrote: »

Inversus wrote: »

Impulse and other aoe is only very effective against zergs, without aoe it would be virtually impossible for a smaller group to take on a larger one

Restricting/banning abilities is an awful solution

Are you serious? The only way to beat a larger army is to rush at them with explosions? I think real world history might disagree with you. I think this poll's suggestion is stupid but your argument against it is equally so.

Idk about you but I wouldn't really want to go in attacking a well organised larger group with fore pulse or w/e when the rest of the group is free to kill me

I'm no expert in history, but when there are groups of soldiers explosions have been pretty effective...

R1ckyDaMan · October 2014

Yes. I would like to try and AOE diabled campaign.

I voted yes as long as siege still cause AOE.

Would make combat alot more tactical and feel like a war.

purple-magicb16_ESO · October 2014

No. I like what we have at present.

Question could also be phrased, "Do I like getting my butt kicked?" - answer is a resounding no.

eventide03b14a_ESO · October 2014

Inversus wrote: »

eventide03b14a_ESO wrote: »

Inversus wrote: »

Impulse and other aoe is only very effective against zergs, without aoe it would be virtually impossible for a smaller group to take on a larger one

Restricting/banning abilities is an awful solution

Are you serious? The only way to beat a larger army is to rush at them with explosions? I think real world history might disagree with you. I think this poll's suggestion is stupid but your argument against it is equally so.

Idk about you but I wouldn't really want to go in attacking a well organised larger group with fore pulse or w/e when the rest of the group is free to kill me

I'm no expert in history, but when there are groups of soldiers explosions have been pretty effective...

Yeah, but they don't rush in with a flame thrower they throw grenades and rockets and other fancy stuff. Or, I know this sounds crazy, they utilize the terrain to their advantage!

This game has been dumbed down to players in robes with a staff spamming AoEs into large groups and being rewarded for it. This game would be 1000% better if it utilized choke points, elevation advantages, infiltration, organized battlefield tactics and all the other wonderful things that come with actual warfare. How is PvP actually played?

Armor: A dress
Weapon: A stick
Mode of transit: Death
Tactic: Rushing into large groups

Really?!

Inversus · October 2014

No. I like what we have at present.

eventide03b14a_ESO wrote: »

Inversus wrote: »

eventide03b14a_ESO wrote: »

Inversus wrote: »

Impulse and other aoe is only very effective against zergs, without aoe it would be virtually impossible for a smaller group to take on a larger one

Restricting/banning abilities is an awful solution

Are you serious? The only way to beat a larger army is to rush at them with explosions? I think real world history might disagree with you. I think this poll's suggestion is stupid but your argument against it is equally so.

Idk about you but I wouldn't really want to go in attacking a well organised larger group with fore pulse or w/e when the rest of the group is free to kill me

I'm no expert in history, but when there are groups of soldiers explosions have been pretty effective...

Yeah, but they don't rush in with a flame thrower they throw grenades and rockets and other fancy stuff. Or, I know this sounds crazy, they utilize the terrain to their advantage! This game has been dumbed down to players in robes with a staff spamming AoEs into large groups and being rewarded for it. This game would be 1000% better if it utilized choke points, elevation advantages, infiltration, organized battlefield tactics and all the other wonderful things that come with actual warfare. How is PvP actually played?

Armor: A dress
Weapon: A stick
Mode of transit: Death
Tactic: Rushing into large groups

Really?!

Idea for spellcrafting: magic grenades
typing up a /feedback now

I agree that the pvp mechanics could do with some work, and I don't like the fact aoe spam is so effective (this is coming from a vampire who takes double damage

) but (and I know you said you don't agree with the poll) banning aoe isn't a solution
Although I like the pvp I find I get bored by it easily, since I don't see much variation in fights - it's all the same flat-land battles, who will oom first

Rune_Relic · October 2014

Yes. I would like to try and AOE diabled campaign.

Wow.. just wow.
For all these intelligent (?) people so quick to criticise, many of the responses are 'insightful' lol. In like vane I will respond in kind. Stupid people are stupid
L2R ...[does being insulted make you feel better ?]

1. This was an optional campaign (ie you don't have to do it) so post about "having to" do it are ignored.
2. This was not a "ban aoe from all campaigns" poll. So I have ignored all those posts too.
3. This was a "temporary fix" for the lag and crashing caused by "AOE" spam of one sort or another. Especially zergballs and jump on flag scenarios. There would be no need for this "temporary measure" when the lag and crashing is fixed. So anyone who has posted that has no comprehension between the lag, crashing and aoe spam is also ignored.
4. This is a campaign for people who are crashing left right and center and/or are sick of the lag.

There is only a couple of posts that merit response....and they say everything that needs saying anyway. So thanks for those.

eventide03b14a_ESO · October 2014

Rune_Relic wrote: »

Wow.. just wow.
For all these intelligent (?) people so quick to criticise, many of the responses are 'insightful' lol. In like vane I will respond in kind. Stupid people are stupid
L2R ...[does being insulted make you feel better ?]

1. This was an optional campaign (ie you don't have to do it) so post about "having to" do it are ignored.
2. This was not a "ban aoe from all campaigns" poll. So I have ignored all those posts too.
3. This was a "temporary fix" for the lag and crashing caused by "AOE" spam of one sort or another. Especially zergballs and jump on flag scenarios. There would be no need for this "temporary measure" when the lag and crashing is fixed. So anyone who has posted that has no comprehension between the lag, crashing and aoe spam is also ignored.
4. This is a campaign for people who are crashing left right and center and/or are sick of the lag.

There is only a couple of posts that merit response....and they say everything that needs saying anyway. So thanks for those.

What we are telling you is that we do not want the devs to waste their time making a special campaign with no AoE. Your proposition was poorly thought out and we have taken the time to given you intelligent well thought out responses as why we feel opposed to it. If you want to see only opinions that agree with yours then this is not the place for it. What they need to do it adjust how AoE's work, not create a new campaign. The fact that you disagree with this or fail to see logic doesn't make you right.

Merlin13KAGL · October 2014

It should be right beside the campaign with no weapons or armor, where everyone is only able to hug the enemy for AP's.

There is always going to be a counter for any circumstance that comes up, whether it's skill based, sheer numbers, whatever.

Killing AoE just leads to different issues, not no issues.

Someday, specialized campaigns might be interesting - rules campaigns.

For now, I think they have better things to devote their time to.

Garion · October 2014

No. I like what we have at present.

No, we just need an arena.

Melian · October 2014

No. I like what we have at present.

Somebody's computer sucks.

jelliedsoup · October 2014

Yes. I would like to try and AOE diabled campaign.

I would take aoe out of the game if it were my call. Aoes are lazy.

Yusuf · October 2014

You're right about the game crashing OP, or rather the server on highpop-campaigns such as thornblade.
But disabling aoe's won't cut it, dude almost every ultimate is aoe.

Nobody would play there except ALL the wannabe-Legolases with bows, it would be a stealthfest of gankers and no keeptaking whatsoever.

Imagine the "Lagfests" with actually no lag: chaos everywhere and the single-target players could pick the aoe-players player at their leisure and vice-versa i think people would like that.

BTW on the PTS, if you check your map you can ALREADY see your UI telling you your bounty in the city you're in (even though you can't raise it yet) JUSTICE SYSTEM :-D

Nox_Aeterna · October 2014

No. I like what we have at present.

The balance in this game is poor , but there is some balance now (it was really , really bad when it came out lols) , this new cyro would have no balance at all lols.

You cant just remove entire skills of the classes/game and expect it will just work anyway in the end. Doing this in a way some classes arent just plain better or that some weapons arent would require a lot of work.

Work that i atleast believe doesnt need to be done in the first place if they just avoid adding it.

david.haypreub18_ESO · October 2014

Yes. I would like to try and AOE diabled campaign.

AoE has it's place, it is just that I think the damage on them needs to be toned down. You shouldn't have ANY AoE's that do damage comparable to single-target spells; that is just bad game design.

OrangeTheCat · October 2014

Yes. I would like to try and AOE diabled campaign.

I said "yes" only because it think it would be an interesting and likely informative experiment.

eventide03b14a_ESO · October 2014

jelliedsoup wrote: »

I would take aoe out of the game if it were my call. Aoes are lazy.

Maybe AoE's should be limited to ulimates only. The way I can spam pulsar is ridiculous. With Critical Surge it heals me and Destruction Expert makes it very magicka efficient.

The Elder Scrolls Online

Should there be an additional "AOE disabled" campaign ?

Should there be an additional "AOE disabled" campaign ? 72 votes