deleted

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Just to take this a step further, any opinions on having a non-CP standard Campaign are also welcome in this thread. EG. One that allows veterans and non-veterans, but no CP abilities.

^ where is my like button?

pppontus wrote: »

1. A No-CP campaign would by definition be the hardcore campaign. The CP campaigns is the easymode cozytime goblin grinders campaigns. So thanks for suggesting that the no-cp campaign offer greater rewards! Much helpful.

2. Diminishing returns? LMAO. After 30ish points into any star there are 0 diminishing returns. None. Nothing. Additionally you get max stats for every point spent, you get powerful passives, etc. Having 1K CP vs. 200 is like wearing 5 additional 5-piece sets of gear. The difference is massive.

All in all, I think you should maybe worry about understanding the system that you're arguing about.

So folks not wanting to be in campaigns with veteran players and now no CP is hardcore? LOL Crying and whining about how unfair the system is, is hardcore mode? Guess that depends on what your definition of is is. :-) funny logic.

I love how the most bizarrely extreme examples are given such as pointing to players with 2500 and 3000 points THAT DON'T exist! At this point nobody is sporting a point spread like that. And if you call getting .1%. That's 1/10th of 1% per Champion Point spread around over 9 categories with multiple subcategories is making the difference your're deluded. Especially at this point in the game. The more I read this the more I'm seeing folks that just want an excuse when they die. After the QQ'rs get what they want (and they probably will) it will be something else. From my perspective this crowd isn't much different than the crowd that wants to toggle PvE and PvP mode while in Cyrodiil.

The failure on ZoS's part in all this is not getting rid of VR yet, which the CP system was designed to replace. So now there is a prohibitive grind which keeps newer players from being at least on equal level especially if they like to experiment with multiple classes and builds. And because they are not motivated to stay in middle-school they earn XP, AP and CP at reduced rates. Additionally ZoS can't really get a good look at the impact of CP until they remove VR and subsequently the uber gear differences as a result. Not only are the values of this gear much higher at the base level it's also upgraded whereas lower level players typically don't upgrade beyond green with some blue. So the differences are exacerbated even more.

For folks to be talking about CP now when most players are probably below 500 points is a bit premature IMO. And I see no reason at this point a primary feature of the game should be removed so as to limit those that would like to use what they earned in game.

Agree, CP's should be negated in set PvP scenarios.

There should be sub-Vet and Vet options to enter PvP without the influence of CP's.

I know I suck at PvP but I should not have to struggle at V10+ against a lvl 15 toon who has just entered Cyrodil.

I like the Champion Point system idea, but it only seems fit for PvE. Maybe PvP should have a separate system or like the OP said none at all.

no lifers that can grind all day and wreck everyone who has jobs and other hobbies

that's plain rude




correct, but rude

I haven't read all posts, but thanks to @RoamingRiverElk for pinging me here.

My take on this is simple, it's like this:

1) Non-Vet PVP shouldn't even have CPs in the first place. You want your CPs on that char? Go vet...

2) Vet PVP absolutely needs a campaign where CPs are a) Limited, perhaps 360 or so max, and b) If not possible to limit them, disable them entirely. You'll still keep earning them as you pvp and all that, they're just either limited or disabled, whatever is possible.

The CP system itself needs a lot of work on, the strength unbalance is too obvious. CP system is something that needs to be greatly limited anyway, 3.6K points is too much. 600 points should be absolute max in my opinion.

I dont think disabling CP in one vet campaign shows a problem with the progression system. (although i do believe that grinding is a problem, but to each their own i guess). I think by disabling them in one campaign shows that this game has a huge waive of new players that may never catch up to those of us who have been around for awhile. As it stands right now i know of at least 3 guilds in non-vet that do not plan on leaving non-vet. The problem is that a person that pvps a lot is not able to be effective in vet campaigns right now b/c of all the champion points. even at v14. You get roughly what 2.5-3.5 champion points per vet level. That is hardly enough to be viable by the time you reach v14. not to mention the amount of time it takes a casual player to do so or even one that does not like to grind such as myself. Many new players are never going to be able to catch up with the veterans. there will always be a large gap. This is a causing a problem like we see with the questing and leveling once players hit veteran rank. that is to say that the experience that one has in a vet campaign is very much departed form the experience that one has in a non-vet campaign. Many players will stay in the vet campaigns. Providing a vet with no cp gives the hugs wave of new players that came to this game a platform to continue progressing their players rather than a feeling of complete uselessness forcing them back into non-vet. Right now the game has two tiers of players with no middle ground. A vet campaign with no cp will close that gap by providing a third, middle tier, of players.

I spent 14 + hours in BWB over the weekend and I can really see this problem has no where to go but towards being worse unless something is done about it.

Multiple times we encountered a handful of players that could be attacked by my group of 5 or more, plus other friendlies in the vicinity and it would take minutes to take down that single target.

I can't point to it being a level difference, as other 40+ and even a VR1 in the Non-vet went down much quicker. All I can point to is CPs= Nothing else can really lead to the near endless resource regens AND mitigation combined.

1 group of people who have been playing for months, and have been working together for a while now, who are not inexperienced when it comes to Cyrodiil shouldn't have this sort of problem fighting a SINGLE player.


I wont link it here because of NSFW language, but you can check my most recent twitch highlight (if you care to see)from over this past weekend for an example. I'll be working on highlighting more instances of this but it is a chore sifting through 13 some hours of video.

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Just to take this a step further, any opinions on having a non-CP standard Campaign are also welcome in this thread. EG. One that allows veterans and non-veterans, but no CP abilities.

I would be all over this in a heartbeat. But you would probably need more than one, because I could definitely see that thing getting population capped fast lol

Amazing suggestion. Thank you for that.

Thanks @pppontus for stopping some of the more misleading arguments with the right answers. I think pretty much everything has been said at this point, but I would like to add two more thoughts that occurred to me after reading the posts by @Vizier.

He has been voicing the opinions of the more conservative "RPGs have grind, deal with it" faction. I've already commented that I believe these pre-conceived notions are out-dated, so I don't have to elaborate on that again. Shooters and sports games are adopting many RPG elements as well. The game industry is evolving away from strict genres, and towards creating the best possible games - no matter in which genre individual elements originated.

About the "deal with it" part, it should be mentioned that this is not a purely game-focused discussion any longer. I personally, and I suppose there are many players like me, don't have a problem with the Champion System. I play as long as I enjoy the game. When I don't have fun any longer, I leave the game. No problem there. I like this game too much, to see it fall victim to bad mechanics. And the devs should be happy that we worry.

Frustration Levels
So, about the hypothesis that people complain in this thread because they got beat, and they should "suck it up". Let's assume for a second that is the case. I noticed something in everyone I every watched play video games and in myself as well: The degree of frustration resulting from defeat, is strongly correlated with the perceived fairness of the scenario. That means the more fair a game scenario is perceived, the less frustrated the player will be and vice versa.

Two examples:

• Hearthstone - If you lose with your basic deck to another basic deck, your reaction will likely be: "I got beat, I need to learn this better, let's try this again." If you lose to a deck that has 5 legendary minions while you have none, then the frustration will be much higher and the probabilty that the player will quit the game is much higher. And that's something the developers don't want.
• Fifa - Fifa also has an RPG element when you play the Ultimate Team mode, because you build and improve your team over time - the equivalent of improving your character. If you built a good team but without superstar players, and you lose to a similar team, then you're much more likely to accept the defeat and try to learn from it, than if you lose a game in which Messi scores 5 goals against you. It's the exact same mechanic as above. (@ZOS_BrianWheeler, if you guys haven't already checked out Fifa's progression curve, please do so. It's shaped like an inverted hockey stick. It gets players to competition level within days and then switches to an open-ended very, very slow progression. It works really well.)

The problem with the Champion System is that by it's non-catchup nature, it gives players something to get mad about. And that's what a game developer should avoid.

Game developers need to find that sweet spot, where give players the chance to earn power increases, but to not make them so strong that everyone else will rage-quit. In Fifa, for example, Messi and Christiano Ronaldo, are 5% better in most attributes than the next best player, maybe 10% better than the normal players get after a few days. And that's enough, because for good players these 5-10% are quite enough to make a difference.

Too Much Vertical Progression
One problem with ESO PvP is that there are too many vertical progression systems that are stackable, and most of them are time-based. Now each single one is not terrible (apart from being vertical in the first place), but together they offer too much power increase.

Let's look at the time based ones first:

• First there are the Veteran Ranks, which take time to get.
• Then there are the endgame gear sets you can buy by paying AP, which takes time to get.
• Then there are some skills which are just more powerful than others (Proximity Detonation, Vigor, Barrier).
• And now there is the Champion System with it's open-ended, non-catchup mechanic.

All these power buffs take a long time to get, which means newer players have none of them and older players have them all. The gap is huge. If you mix in the "good" (as in more horizontal) progression mechanics such as

• Map/Scroll based campaign buffs.
• Using the right skill synergies.

and add the better player skill of experienced and talented players, the gap becomes an insurmountable chasm. And identifying this chasm leads to frustration, and eventually casual players will leave the game.

If I play Fifa once a week and I play against someone who plays it for 8 hours every, that player is going to give me a good beating, but AT LEAST he will be doing it with a team that is roughly equivalent to mine, and just has a few players who are 5-10% better than mine - not with a team where every player is X times as good as mine.

So @Vizier, this whole debate is not about anyone who complains about being beaten in PvP. Those players suck it up or leave the game. This thread is more about answering the (albeit slightly academic) question of "how to build the best possible game on top of the ESO franchise", and offering concrete suggestions for improvement.

pppontus wrote: »

Vizier wrote: »

pppontus wrote: »

1. A No-CP campaign would by definition be the hardcore campaign. The CP campaigns is the easymode cozytime goblin grinders campaigns. So thanks for suggesting that the no-cp campaign offer greater rewards! Much helpful.

2. Diminishing returns? LMAO. After 30ish points into any star there are 0 diminishing returns. None. Nothing. Additionally you get max stats for every point spent, you get powerful passives, etc. Having 1K CP vs. 200 is like wearing 5 additional 5-piece sets of gear. The difference is massive.

All in all, I think you should maybe worry about understanding the system that you're arguing about.

So folks not wanting to be in campaigns with veteran players and now no CP is hardcore? LOL Crying and whining about how unfair the system is, is hardcore mode? Guess that depends on what your definition of is is. :-) funny logic.

I love how the most bizarrely extreme examples are given such as pointing to players with 2500 and 3000 points THAT DON'T exist! At this point nobody is sporting a point spread like that. And if you call getting .1%. That's 1/10th of 1% per Champion Point spread around over 9 categories with multiple subcategories is making the difference your're deluded. Especially at this point in the game. The more I read this the more I'm seeing folks that just want an excuse when they die. After the QQ'rs get what they want (and they probably will) it will be something else. From my perspective this crowd isn't much different than the crowd that wants to toggle PvE and PvP mode while in Cyrodiil.

The failure on ZoS's part in all this is not getting rid of VR yet, which the CP system was designed to replace. So now there is a prohibitive grind which keeps newer players from being at least on equal level especially if they like to experiment with multiple classes and builds. And because they are not motivated to stay in middle-school they earn XP, AP and CP at reduced rates. Additionally ZoS can't really get a good look at the impact of CP until they remove VR and subsequently the uber gear differences as a result. Not only are the values of this gear much higher at the base level it's also upgraded whereas lower level players typically don't upgrade beyond green with some blue. So the differences are exacerbated even more.

For folks to be talking about CP now when most players are probably below 500 points is a bit premature IMO. And I see no reason at this point a primary feature of the game should be removed so as to limit those that would like to use what they earned in game.

Obviously it's harder to play without CP = hardcore. Sorry, you lost this argument already.

600 champion points would for example give you:
-10% magicka costs
-10% stamina costs
+15% magicka recovery
+15% stamina recovery
+25% elemental damage
+25% magic/poison damage
-15% elemental damage taken
-15% magic/poison damage taken
+10% healing received
+15% spell resistance

And this doesn't include passives like doubling your ultimate regen at low health, setting enemies off balance when roll dodging, etc etc.

Now you tell me;

1. How is it more hardcore to have these perks than not have them?
2. How is this not unbalanced when 600 CP is a fairly reasonable number that a large amount of the grinders will have achieved long before IC is released, not to mention that people already have beyond this?
3. Also.. what gear sets can give me these bonuses? I really, really want to know because then I don't have to care about CP. As long as you just point me in the general direction of the set combinations!

Give us one campaign with no CP, then we'll see.. when there's 1000+ people in queue for that campaign maybe ZOS will realise that everyone hates their *** """progression""" system.

It's more hardcore because I only have 179 points. And it's...a little harder to play vs folks with more CP..shrug. It's also harder to play against people with more experience and that are higher level etc. It's a challenge. Additionally the population will be increasing in average CP daily so play will be more dangerous. The cool thing is as I play I'll be getting more points so the advantages stacked against me will diminish and I for having been pushed will be a better player for meeting the challenge.

The funny thing about your argument is the assumption of victim-hood by those with less CP. And typically "hardcore" refers to gameplay that is less forgiving. You know. BwB right now is pretty forgiving PvP with everyone running around with 30k HP and battle leveled to what, V12? It's a little more warm and fuzzy with a rainbow in it's tummy. .. Hardcore..pfft. The very reason everyone is WTF QQ is because they "feeeeealll" like CP is making them more vulnerable. And your acting like only a handful of people have CP as if the vast majority don't and they are just prey. LOL . Honestly these "predators" are at least as likely as not just better players. You guys can act like victims if you want to but. I'm thinking the glass is half full. Not half empty.

I knew going into this game that those that played more, such as those that played all through beta would be better than I. And I knew that should I play I'd get better and my characters will progress. That's is the nature of Roleplay games. If I wanted arena style twitch combat (which I like very much) I'd have made a different choice in how to spend my time. I didn't come into this game demanding a ton of accommodations being made for me and voicing a bunch of excuses as to why I'm dying. (Well, perhaps I cried about broken Cloak a bit. I then adapted my play and found how to at least use it as a positive by not utterly relying on it, but rather letting it augment my build..that's a different story though) Point is...

Does the community QQ much? ... Ya. I think it does.

@Woman Honestly you and I aren't that far apart here. I understand the appeal for the pre-vet campaign. I pal around there with a couple of my lowbie toons there too. It's a change of pace and it's nice.

What gets me most about this thread is the notion that CP is the new boogie man of ESO, when, as you point out, it's intended to replace the vet system. From what I've seen the folks supporting No CP for BwB aren't content there. They want Veteran campaigns with no CP too. They want all around battle leveling in veteran campaigns and some even speaking of pealing off skills to bring them down to levels less powerful toons would be buffed to. This is all symptomatic of a greater problem. The point is it just doesn't stop there.

There are guys playing right now with far less time but with more CP than I (that's ok)or in possession of a significant percentage of the CP I have. To me that indicates the ease in which CP is obtained and the difference between my 180 points and someones 100 points or their 300 points just doesn't seem that significant to me to warrant the boogie-man status the CP system is obtaining. In BwB I kill plenty and I'm killed often enough and not once did I think to myself "oh that guy has a ton of CP." Rather they were higher level with more skills unlocked and leveled etc.. Or in the moment the were just better or got the drop on me...shrug. People gonna complain and not look in the mirror and CP is, IMO those level 40 n up in BwB seem to have a more significant advantage. It's why there are some that do all they can to stay in BwB while in that leveled "sweet spot," but people gonna complain.

If, in the end, we were looking at a BwB only experience with no CP, I might roll my eyes, but I'd play it with my friends and shrug on, but you and I both know it won't stop there, so I just don't support any of it until we see champion points without veteran levels and gear.