Tankqull wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

uberkull wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Jura23 wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

uberkull wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

uberkull wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

uberkull wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

uberkull wrote: »

As I enjoy the podcasts, these are all very talented, small scale PvPers, Sypher and Fengrush builds are nice....for pvp. But they hardly represent the entire community across PC and console. If you really want to get a PVE presence, bring Deltia into the mix. He can bring a lot to the table and actually discuss vet dungeon PVE and class skills for PVE.

As it stands, these guys have biased opinions based on their ability or inability to perform in PvP. AOE cap, Zerg, ball, broken skills for pvp, etc etc. The problem with this bias is that the classes can't be fixed or balanced for just pvp or pve, they are balanced for both. If abilities are nerfed, they get nerfed regardless of the enemy, player or mob. This has to be considered before ZOS acts and changes something.

Remove AOE cap? How about just create battlegrounds that only have 12 players total? Objective based pvp. AOE cap doesn't impact pve, so it won't be removed. It will just be modified. The core problem is that these pvpers are trying to take out large groups in Cyrodiil solo or in groups of 4, they get zerged and get rolled. Their AOE only affects 6 people in the Zerg. Well, in the end....you really shouldn't expect 4 players to take out a group of 24.

Stop Zergs? Well....Cyrodiil is designed for large group pvp, it is siege warfare, not a battleground. Numbers will always crush small groups. Zergs cause performance problems? Maybe you should try console, 50v50...no problem on console. The game can handle it, PC ESO just isn't optimized like console was. Console removed a lot of the flare and draw distance, console renders players only when they get closer...otherwise they are black silhouettes. Graphics aren't as sharp and detailed on console, but...hey...Gameplay over eye candy. It's a good balance on console.

With all that said, if we DON'T have Twitch streamers like this going above and beyond making these Podcasts, this game won't be saved. MMOs require active communities with active players, not casuals. ZOS needs to listen and act quickly or they will lose their core commnutiy that was here from day one. MMOs need their core communities to survive and evolve, bringing new players to the game. How the hell would I know? I was a day one player in WoW, 2004. I played for 10 years straight through all the xpacs and witnessed the cycles of players that stayed, that left, that raged for changes. This is nothing new, the difference is that Blizzard listened and acted quickly, evolving to match their player's needs.

ZOS devs and designers finally posting on the forum is encouraging. Hopefully we will see results.

It was stressed a lot on there that we dont want to remove large groups from Cyro - that is how its designed, how its always been, and I actually enjoy fighting on a large battlefield. The difference between a lot of numbers and ball groups is what the meta has become though. You have to acknowledge and understand that difference to understand any of the points being made there.

Theres nothing wrong with removing AOE caps. As far as PVE perspective goes (it does effect it, you mistated that) - I think we can shed plenty of light on it. The greatest impact youre talking about here is trials where AOE is used against trash mobs. Solution is to amp trash mobs defenses or increase mobs resistance against AOE abilities. Its not rocket science to tackle these issues.

AOE caps, broken skills, ball groups - these issues effect everyone. To say were biased in a negative way would be misguided. As I said on the podcast, Id hope the game would be moved back towards equality in terms of balance. As it stands today, its actually imbalanced and favoring large groups. Large groups get more AP, passive defenses and ultimately the ball group style doesnt help with performance - it hurts it. Making the game equal and discouraging ball groups would 1) help performance and 2) make things fair. Personally, itd make PvP a lot more interesting too - but thats just a bonus on trying to make the game playable again.

Hey man, I get it, and I'm with you on most points. But there is no denying the podcast is all pure pvpers. I enjoyed watching your stream the other week when you had the day off and grinded all day on Maelstrom Arena(another bow please), but you were heading right back to pvp once you got the weapons you wanted. You said it yourself, You focus on pvp, and the opinions of the podcast originate from a pvp perspective.

PvP != PVE.

Trash mobs aren't really considered an AOE burden, so if you're hitting 6 out of 20..you move 1 inch and you hit another 6. Again, the AOE cap is really a issue in pvp.

I'm sure you have seen Deltia stream before, when he runs the training sessions on how to maximize dps on bosses, right rotations, boss phases, skill optimization for pve.....all PVE....it's a whole different perspective on what other parts of the game are working and what isn't.

Again...as far as performance on PC, I can assure you ZOS has the answer, they did it for console, Cyrodiil is completely playable at all times no matter the number of people on console. ZOS knows what they need to do, but the end result would kill the visuals you have on PC. Texture maps, draw distance, models....all of it would need to go down several notches. Then they would reduce the particle effects and finally the chatter between the client and server for positional reference. In the end, not sure the PC player would like the downgrade.

You are never going to stop how people want to group up in Cyrodiil. Zerg, ball group, our small groups. Players will continue to play the way they play, regardless of the changes ZOS makes. Players will adapt and still Zerg and ball.

I'm tired of pushing the topic, but queued battlegrounds like any other true pvp game has, is the answer. It satisfies small scale, organized pvp, and it forces fixing skills to be more balanced and effective. WoW nailed it with MMO BGs, the model is out there, ZOS just has to make the rewards for Cyrodiil attractive enough so that if they do introduce BGs that Cyrodiil won't be a ghost town like IC already is.

Again, I think you guys are doing a great job in presenting a hardcore players perspective on the state of the game. I'm just pointing out the perspective is slanted and coming from a PVP mentality. I know SypherPK has tried to include PVE players in the discussion, you had the one guy on mic only the one week....but he never came back.

Anyways, you take the time to stream and podcast, it brings players to the game, ZOS knows this and in the end they should listen to what you have to say regardless.

Ummm...How about no...WoW most certainly did not nail it with MMO Bgs

In fact out of all the games released to date...WoW managed to do it the worst..

There has only been two games to date that have managed to make BGs somewhat decent in comparison to mass scale pvp

Warhammer Online and SWTOR (Huttball)

So building a game around that because you think AOE caps shouldn't be removed for some odd reason blows my mind..Since you can look at the game this was trying to copy (DAOC) and see it works just fine and can support all modes of PVP just fine.

I can give a *** if they remove AOE caps or not. That's not the root of the problem.

And if you're gonna argue against the most successful MMO of all time, I'm not gonna fight that battle. Warhammer came and went during WOW and SWTOR is now a free to play sandbox. Yet WoW can still justify a monthly sub to play and pull in over 5 million subscribers in this era of free to play MMOs with micro transactions.

And somehow Arenas in WoW (which orignated from the pvp balancing and fine tuning of WoW BGs) is a eSport for the past 5 years.

Yea....WoW got it wrong.

Nobody denies wow was successful. Still that is mainly due to pve and not the pvp part of the game. They certainly did not nail it with arenas/battlegrounds.
It´s solely an "esport" because wow has the playerbase to draw from in the first place (right time of release being the factor before all other here) and the money to keep people attracted / coming back over several years.

You can´t measure the quality of pvp by a games overall success (because mainly due to wow pvp became niche gameplay in mmos). If EA would not have been to greedy to continue paying the warhammer license i´d play warhammer bgs over wow any day of the week.

In terms of BGs Huttball in swtor was easily the best designed map to date in any game i´ve played (pretty much all western mmos since the release of daoc in 2002).

Also calling swtor a sandbox - do you know what that word means?

So because WoW has held a player base for 11 years, it's only because of its PVE....yea, ok.

SWTOR is becoming so unstructured and open, that I believe is where the sandbox term applies. Yea, sure there is still progression, but I can bypass a lot of it now. They are just trying to hold players. And you think EA is going to keep this MMO alive for much longer? I bet that license isn't cheap either.

I've made my point and don't want to derail the thread.

I will continue to say that what Sypher and the team is doing is very beneficial to the community and appreciated. It just needs a solid PVE perspective each week.

Yes, WOW has only held its playerbase for 11 years because of PVE....Here is how bad WoW pvp is....A Vast majority of the BGs were nothing but Bots or completely avoiding the enemy to try and win the map due to Mechanics...

Also SWTOR; which I keep an active subscription to at all times to play occasionally is no where near a Sandbox game; how you even come to that conclusion boggles my mind. Also you realize that SWTOR makes over $100 Million a year right? It is one of the most profitable MMOS out right now...

I haven't played SWTOR for nearly two years now. Is it better game now than it was then? I left because PvE was no more challenge for me (unlike in ESO) and PvP was only about stacking one stat on gear with no variety in that.

I play it for the expansions they release then just let it sit till the next one; they usually offer promotions where if you subscribe for certain amount of time before expansions you get stuff, since they do it so often I just don't bother in unsubscribing. Though now that they've switched to the new story setup it shouldn't be that bad. Pvp wise I stopped playing it long ago. Though if I could play nothing but huttball is seriously consider playing it full time; I just cannot stand any of the other maps like civil war for example; which I consider one of the worst type of bg maps you can have in a game. Basically any type of map that requires a player to sit in on spot and defend a point is going to be a *** map in a game.

So wait, you don't even play SWTOR PvP anymore? Yet you praise it like its the next coming of CounterStrike. What 'boggles my mind' is how you have no clue on what 'good' pvp is. This is evident when you dismiss WoW's PvP and it's MASSIVE success and playerbase.

I think this is more about you've played WoW for a year, didn't like the style and left. Then you jumped on anything that wasn't WoW. All MMOs that came after 2004 have folded or had to become FTP to survive. It's only a matter of time for SWTOR.

Kinda done with this disagreement because you don't even play PvP in the game you praise PvP for.

1. I explained why I don't play it anymore; huttball doesn't pop consistently. If it did I would most likely play swtor full time.. And that says a lot cause I don't care much for BGs anymore. What does pop 90% of the time is civil war which is a AB type map which is god awful.
2. Umm I played WoW through cataclysm; I did not bother playing any of the expansions after that. But i have I think 6 or 7 level 85s I think it was and a few 80s I never completed.

In regards to BGs swtor huttball is vastly superior to WoWs bgs and there have been multiple other MMOs I've played with better BGs as well.. Rift and warhammer online for example. Note that I only pvp in ESO because I prefer it's setup over BGs but it I had to pvp in any of them swtor would be it.. Wow would be dead last everytime... Cept maybe wildstar

well huttball is the by far most frequently left BG(before it even starts) of SWTOR. some people like it the majority though does not.

It always seemed about equal to me, with maybe voidstar being a bit higher but not to much

Tankqull wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

uberkull wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Jura23 wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

uberkull wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

uberkull wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

uberkull wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

uberkull wrote: »

As I enjoy the podcasts, these are all very talented, small scale PvPers, Sypher and Fengrush builds are nice....for pvp. But they hardly represent the entire community across PC and console. If you really want to get a PVE presence, bring Deltia into the mix. He can bring a lot to the table and actually discuss vet dungeon PVE and class skills for PVE.

As it stands, these guys have biased opinions based on their ability or inability to perform in PvP. AOE cap, Zerg, ball, broken skills for pvp, etc etc. The problem with this bias is that the classes can't be fixed or balanced for just pvp or pve, they are balanced for both. If abilities are nerfed, they get nerfed regardless of the enemy, player or mob. This has to be considered before ZOS acts and changes something.

Remove AOE cap? How about just create battlegrounds that only have 12 players total? Objective based pvp. AOE cap doesn't impact pve, so it won't be removed. It will just be modified. The core problem is that these pvpers are trying to take out large groups in Cyrodiil solo or in groups of 4, they get zerged and get rolled. Their AOE only affects 6 people in the Zerg. Well, in the end....you really shouldn't expect 4 players to take out a group of 24.

Stop Zergs? Well....Cyrodiil is designed for large group pvp, it is siege warfare, not a battleground. Numbers will always crush small groups. Zergs cause performance problems? Maybe you should try console, 50v50...no problem on console. The game can handle it, PC ESO just isn't optimized like console was. Console removed a lot of the flare and draw distance, console renders players only when they get closer...otherwise they are black silhouettes. Graphics aren't as sharp and detailed on console, but...hey...Gameplay over eye candy. It's a good balance on console.

With all that said, if we DON'T have Twitch streamers like this going above and beyond making these Podcasts, this game won't be saved. MMOs require active communities with active players, not casuals. ZOS needs to listen and act quickly or they will lose their core commnutiy that was here from day one. MMOs need their core communities to survive and evolve, bringing new players to the game. How the hell would I know? I was a day one player in WoW, 2004. I played for 10 years straight through all the xpacs and witnessed the cycles of players that stayed, that left, that raged for changes. This is nothing new, the difference is that Blizzard listened and acted quickly, evolving to match their player's needs.

ZOS devs and designers finally posting on the forum is encouraging. Hopefully we will see results.

It was stressed a lot on there that we dont want to remove large groups from Cyro - that is how its designed, how its always been, and I actually enjoy fighting on a large battlefield. The difference between a lot of numbers and ball groups is what the meta has become though. You have to acknowledge and understand that difference to understand any of the points being made there.

Theres nothing wrong with removing AOE caps. As far as PVE perspective goes (it does effect it, you mistated that) - I think we can shed plenty of light on it. The greatest impact youre talking about here is trials where AOE is used against trash mobs. Solution is to amp trash mobs defenses or increase mobs resistance against AOE abilities. Its not rocket science to tackle these issues.

AOE caps, broken skills, ball groups - these issues effect everyone. To say were biased in a negative way would be misguided. As I said on the podcast, Id hope the game would be moved back towards equality in terms of balance. As it stands today, its actually imbalanced and favoring large groups. Large groups get more AP, passive defenses and ultimately the ball group style doesnt help with performance - it hurts it. Making the game equal and discouraging ball groups would 1) help performance and 2) make things fair. Personally, itd make PvP a lot more interesting too - but thats just a bonus on trying to make the game playable again.

Hey man, I get it, and I'm with you on most points. But there is no denying the podcast is all pure pvpers. I enjoyed watching your stream the other week when you had the day off and grinded all day on Maelstrom Arena(another bow please), but you were heading right back to pvp once you got the weapons you wanted. You said it yourself, You focus on pvp, and the opinions of the podcast originate from a pvp perspective.

PvP != PVE.

Trash mobs aren't really considered an AOE burden, so if you're hitting 6 out of 20..you move 1 inch and you hit another 6. Again, the AOE cap is really a issue in pvp.

I'm sure you have seen Deltia stream before, when he runs the training sessions on how to maximize dps on bosses, right rotations, boss phases, skill optimization for pve.....all PVE....it's a whole different perspective on what other parts of the game are working and what isn't.

Again...as far as performance on PC, I can assure you ZOS has the answer, they did it for console, Cyrodiil is completely playable at all times no matter the number of people on console. ZOS knows what they need to do, but the end result would kill the visuals you have on PC. Texture maps, draw distance, models....all of it would need to go down several notches. Then they would reduce the particle effects and finally the chatter between the client and server for positional reference. In the end, not sure the PC player would like the downgrade.

You are never going to stop how people want to group up in Cyrodiil. Zerg, ball group, our small groups. Players will continue to play the way they play, regardless of the changes ZOS makes. Players will adapt and still Zerg and ball.

I'm tired of pushing the topic, but queued battlegrounds like any other true pvp game has, is the answer. It satisfies small scale, organized pvp, and it forces fixing skills to be more balanced and effective. WoW nailed it with MMO BGs, the model is out there, ZOS just has to make the rewards for Cyrodiil attractive enough so that if they do introduce BGs that Cyrodiil won't be a ghost town like IC already is.

Again, I think you guys are doing a great job in presenting a hardcore players perspective on the state of the game. I'm just pointing out the perspective is slanted and coming from a PVP mentality. I know SypherPK has tried to include PVE players in the discussion, you had the one guy on mic only the one week....but he never came back.

Anyways, you take the time to stream and podcast, it brings players to the game, ZOS knows this and in the end they should listen to what you have to say regardless.

Ummm...How about no...WoW most certainly did not nail it with MMO Bgs

In fact out of all the games released to date...WoW managed to do it the worst..

There has only been two games to date that have managed to make BGs somewhat decent in comparison to mass scale pvp

Warhammer Online and SWTOR (Huttball)

So building a game around that because you think AOE caps shouldn't be removed for some odd reason blows my mind..Since you can look at the game this was trying to copy (DAOC) and see it works just fine and can support all modes of PVP just fine.

I can give a *** if they remove AOE caps or not. That's not the root of the problem.

And if you're gonna argue against the most successful MMO of all time, I'm not gonna fight that battle. Warhammer came and went during WOW and SWTOR is now a free to play sandbox. Yet WoW can still justify a monthly sub to play and pull in over 5 million subscribers in this era of free to play MMOs with micro transactions.

And somehow Arenas in WoW (which orignated from the pvp balancing and fine tuning of WoW BGs) is a eSport for the past 5 years.

Yea....WoW got it wrong.

Nobody denies wow was successful. Still that is mainly due to pve and not the pvp part of the game. They certainly did not nail it with arenas/battlegrounds.
It´s solely an "esport" because wow has the playerbase to draw from in the first place (right time of release being the factor before all other here) and the money to keep people attracted / coming back over several years.

You can´t measure the quality of pvp by a games overall success (because mainly due to wow pvp became niche gameplay in mmos). If EA would not have been to greedy to continue paying the warhammer license i´d play warhammer bgs over wow any day of the week.

In terms of BGs Huttball in swtor was easily the best designed map to date in any game i´ve played (pretty much all western mmos since the release of daoc in 2002).

Also calling swtor a sandbox - do you know what that word means?

So because WoW has held a player base for 11 years, it's only because of its PVE....yea, ok.

SWTOR is becoming so unstructured and open, that I believe is where the sandbox term applies. Yea, sure there is still progression, but I can bypass a lot of it now. They are just trying to hold players. And you think EA is going to keep this MMO alive for much longer? I bet that license isn't cheap either.

I've made my point and don't want to derail the thread.

I will continue to say that what Sypher and the team is doing is very beneficial to the community and appreciated. It just needs a solid PVE perspective each week.

Yes, WOW has only held its playerbase for 11 years because of PVE....Here is how bad WoW pvp is....A Vast majority of the BGs were nothing but Bots or completely avoiding the enemy to try and win the map due to Mechanics...

Also SWTOR; which I keep an active subscription to at all times to play occasionally is no where near a Sandbox game; how you even come to that conclusion boggles my mind. Also you realize that SWTOR makes over $100 Million a year right? It is one of the most profitable MMOS out right now...

I haven't played SWTOR for nearly two years now. Is it better game now than it was then? I left because PvE was no more challenge for me (unlike in ESO) and PvP was only about stacking one stat on gear with no variety in that.

I play it for the expansions they release then just let it sit till the next one; they usually offer promotions where if you subscribe for certain amount of time before expansions you get stuff, since they do it so often I just don't bother in unsubscribing. Though now that they've switched to the new story setup it shouldn't be that bad. Pvp wise I stopped playing it long ago. Though if I could play nothing but huttball is seriously consider playing it full time; I just cannot stand any of the other maps like civil war for example; which I consider one of the worst type of bg maps you can have in a game. Basically any type of map that requires a player to sit in on spot and defend a point is going to be a *** map in a game.

So wait, you don't even play SWTOR PvP anymore? Yet you praise it like its the next coming of CounterStrike. What 'boggles my mind' is how you have no clue on what 'good' pvp is. This is evident when you dismiss WoW's PvP and it's MASSIVE success and playerbase.

I think this is more about you've played WoW for a year, didn't like the style and left. Then you jumped on anything that wasn't WoW. All MMOs that came after 2004 have folded or had to become FTP to survive. It's only a matter of time for SWTOR.

Kinda done with this disagreement because you don't even play PvP in the game you praise PvP for.

1. I explained why I don't play it anymore; huttball doesn't pop consistently. If it did I would most likely play swtor full time.. And that says a lot cause I don't care much for BGs anymore. What does pop 90% of the time is civil war which is a AB type map which is god awful.
2. Umm I played WoW through cataclysm; I did not bother playing any of the expansions after that. But i have I think 6 or 7 level 85s I think it was and a few 80s I never completed.

In regards to BGs swtor huttball is vastly superior to WoWs bgs and there have been multiple other MMOs I've played with better BGs as well.. Rift and warhammer online for example. Note that I only pvp in ESO because I prefer it's setup over BGs but it I had to pvp in any of them swtor would be it.. Wow would be dead last everytime... Cept maybe wildstar

well huttball is the by far most frequently left BG(before it even starts) of SWTOR. some people like it the majority though does not.

Thats because it requires teamwork and coordination. A team on TS is most likely going to destroy opponents without organisation.

Also people don´t want to think but be on the #1 on the dmg board when the bg ends.

Minno wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

Tankqull wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

uberkull wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Jura23 wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

uberkull wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

uberkull wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

uberkull wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

uberkull wrote: »

As I enjoy the podcasts, these are all very talented, small scale PvPers, Sypher and Fengrush builds are nice....for pvp. But they hardly represent the entire community across PC and console. If you really want to get a PVE presence, bring Deltia into the mix. He can bring a lot to the table and actually discuss vet dungeon PVE and class skills for PVE.

As it stands, these guys have biased opinions based on their ability or inability to perform in PvP. AOE cap, Zerg, ball, broken skills for pvp, etc etc. The problem with this bias is that the classes can't be fixed or balanced for just pvp or pve, they are balanced for both. If abilities are nerfed, they get nerfed regardless of the enemy, player or mob. This has to be considered before ZOS acts and changes something.

Remove AOE cap? How about just create battlegrounds that only have 12 players total? Objective based pvp. AOE cap doesn't impact pve, so it won't be removed. It will just be modified. The core problem is that these pvpers are trying to take out large groups in Cyrodiil solo or in groups of 4, they get zerged and get rolled. Their AOE only affects 6 people in the Zerg. Well, in the end....you really shouldn't expect 4 players to take out a group of 24.

Stop Zergs? Well....Cyrodiil is designed for large group pvp, it is siege warfare, not a battleground. Numbers will always crush small groups. Zergs cause performance problems? Maybe you should try console, 50v50...no problem on console. The game can handle it, PC ESO just isn't optimized like console was. Console removed a lot of the flare and draw distance, console renders players only when they get closer...otherwise they are black silhouettes. Graphics aren't as sharp and detailed on console, but...hey...Gameplay over eye candy. It's a good balance on console.

With all that said, if we DON'T have Twitch streamers like this going above and beyond making these Podcasts, this game won't be saved. MMOs require active communities with active players, not casuals. ZOS needs to listen and act quickly or they will lose their core commnutiy that was here from day one. MMOs need their core communities to survive and evolve, bringing new players to the game. How the hell would I know? I was a day one player in WoW, 2004. I played for 10 years straight through all the xpacs and witnessed the cycles of players that stayed, that left, that raged for changes. This is nothing new, the difference is that Blizzard listened and acted quickly, evolving to match their player's needs.

ZOS devs and designers finally posting on the forum is encouraging. Hopefully we will see results.

It was stressed a lot on there that we dont want to remove large groups from Cyro - that is how its designed, how its always been, and I actually enjoy fighting on a large battlefield. The difference between a lot of numbers and ball groups is what the meta has become though. You have to acknowledge and understand that difference to understand any of the points being made there.

Theres nothing wrong with removing AOE caps. As far as PVE perspective goes (it does effect it, you mistated that) - I think we can shed plenty of light on it. The greatest impact youre talking about here is trials where AOE is used against trash mobs. Solution is to amp trash mobs defenses or increase mobs resistance against AOE abilities. Its not rocket science to tackle these issues.

AOE caps, broken skills, ball groups - these issues effect everyone. To say were biased in a negative way would be misguided. As I said on the podcast, Id hope the game would be moved back towards equality in terms of balance. As it stands today, its actually imbalanced and favoring large groups. Large groups get more AP, passive defenses and ultimately the ball group style doesnt help with performance - it hurts it. Making the game equal and discouraging ball groups would 1) help performance and 2) make things fair. Personally, itd make PvP a lot more interesting too - but thats just a bonus on trying to make the game playable again.

Hey man, I get it, and I'm with you on most points. But there is no denying the podcast is all pure pvpers. I enjoyed watching your stream the other week when you had the day off and grinded all day on Maelstrom Arena(another bow please), but you were heading right back to pvp once you got the weapons you wanted. You said it yourself, You focus on pvp, and the opinions of the podcast originate from a pvp perspective.

PvP != PVE.

Trash mobs aren't really considered an AOE burden, so if you're hitting 6 out of 20..you move 1 inch and you hit another 6. Again, the AOE cap is really a issue in pvp.

I'm sure you have seen Deltia stream before, when he runs the training sessions on how to maximize dps on bosses, right rotations, boss phases, skill optimization for pve.....all PVE....it's a whole different perspective on what other parts of the game are working and what isn't.

Again...as far as performance on PC, I can assure you ZOS has the answer, they did it for console, Cyrodiil is completely playable at all times no matter the number of people on console. ZOS knows what they need to do, but the end result would kill the visuals you have on PC. Texture maps, draw distance, models....all of it would need to go down several notches. Then they would reduce the particle effects and finally the chatter between the client and server for positional reference. In the end, not sure the PC player would like the downgrade.

You are never going to stop how people want to group up in Cyrodiil. Zerg, ball group, our small groups. Players will continue to play the way they play, regardless of the changes ZOS makes. Players will adapt and still Zerg and ball.

I'm tired of pushing the topic, but queued battlegrounds like any other true pvp game has, is the answer. It satisfies small scale, organized pvp, and it forces fixing skills to be more balanced and effective. WoW nailed it with MMO BGs, the model is out there, ZOS just has to make the rewards for Cyrodiil attractive enough so that if they do introduce BGs that Cyrodiil won't be a ghost town like IC already is.

Again, I think you guys are doing a great job in presenting a hardcore players perspective on the state of the game. I'm just pointing out the perspective is slanted and coming from a PVP mentality. I know SypherPK has tried to include PVE players in the discussion, you had the one guy on mic only the one week....but he never came back.

Anyways, you take the time to stream and podcast, it brings players to the game, ZOS knows this and in the end they should listen to what you have to say regardless.

Ummm...How about no...WoW most certainly did not nail it with MMO Bgs

In fact out of all the games released to date...WoW managed to do it the worst..

There has only been two games to date that have managed to make BGs somewhat decent in comparison to mass scale pvp

Warhammer Online and SWTOR (Huttball)

So building a game around that because you think AOE caps shouldn't be removed for some odd reason blows my mind..Since you can look at the game this was trying to copy (DAOC) and see it works just fine and can support all modes of PVP just fine.

I can give a *** if they remove AOE caps or not. That's not the root of the problem.

And if you're gonna argue against the most successful MMO of all time, I'm not gonna fight that battle. Warhammer came and went during WOW and SWTOR is now a free to play sandbox. Yet WoW can still justify a monthly sub to play and pull in over 5 million subscribers in this era of free to play MMOs with micro transactions.

And somehow Arenas in WoW (which orignated from the pvp balancing and fine tuning of WoW BGs) is a eSport for the past 5 years.

Yea....WoW got it wrong.

Nobody denies wow was successful. Still that is mainly due to pve and not the pvp part of the game. They certainly did not nail it with arenas/battlegrounds.
It´s solely an "esport" because wow has the playerbase to draw from in the first place (right time of release being the factor before all other here) and the money to keep people attracted / coming back over several years.

You can´t measure the quality of pvp by a games overall success (because mainly due to wow pvp became niche gameplay in mmos). If EA would not have been to greedy to continue paying the warhammer license i´d play warhammer bgs over wow any day of the week.

In terms of BGs Huttball in swtor was easily the best designed map to date in any game i´ve played (pretty much all western mmos since the release of daoc in 2002).

Also calling swtor a sandbox - do you know what that word means?

So because WoW has held a player base for 11 years, it's only because of its PVE....yea, ok.

SWTOR is becoming so unstructured and open, that I believe is where the sandbox term applies. Yea, sure there is still progression, but I can bypass a lot of it now. They are just trying to hold players. And you think EA is going to keep this MMO alive for much longer? I bet that license isn't cheap either.

I've made my point and don't want to derail the thread.

I will continue to say that what Sypher and the team is doing is very beneficial to the community and appreciated. It just needs a solid PVE perspective each week.

Yes, WOW has only held its playerbase for 11 years because of PVE....Here is how bad WoW pvp is....A Vast majority of the BGs were nothing but Bots or completely avoiding the enemy to try and win the map due to Mechanics...

Also SWTOR; which I keep an active subscription to at all times to play occasionally is no where near a Sandbox game; how you even come to that conclusion boggles my mind. Also you realize that SWTOR makes over $100 Million a year right? It is one of the most profitable MMOS out right now...

I haven't played SWTOR for nearly two years now. Is it better game now than it was then? I left because PvE was no more challenge for me (unlike in ESO) and PvP was only about stacking one stat on gear with no variety in that.

I play it for the expansions they release then just let it sit till the next one; they usually offer promotions where if you subscribe for certain amount of time before expansions you get stuff, since they do it so often I just don't bother in unsubscribing. Though now that they've switched to the new story setup it shouldn't be that bad. Pvp wise I stopped playing it long ago. Though if I could play nothing but huttball is seriously consider playing it full time; I just cannot stand any of the other maps like civil war for example; which I consider one of the worst type of bg maps you can have in a game. Basically any type of map that requires a player to sit in on spot and defend a point is going to be a *** map in a game.

So wait, you don't even play SWTOR PvP anymore? Yet you praise it like its the next coming of CounterStrike. What 'boggles my mind' is how you have no clue on what 'good' pvp is. This is evident when you dismiss WoW's PvP and it's MASSIVE success and playerbase.

I think this is more about you've played WoW for a year, didn't like the style and left. Then you jumped on anything that wasn't WoW. All MMOs that came after 2004 have folded or had to become FTP to survive. It's only a matter of time for SWTOR.

Kinda done with this disagreement because you don't even play PvP in the game you praise PvP for.

1. I explained why I don't play it anymore; huttball doesn't pop consistently. If it did I would most likely play swtor full time.. And that says a lot cause I don't care much for BGs anymore. What does pop 90% of the time is civil war which is a AB type map which is god awful.
2. Umm I played WoW through cataclysm; I did not bother playing any of the expansions after that. But i have I think 6 or 7 level 85s I think it was and a few 80s I never completed.

In regards to BGs swtor huttball is vastly superior to WoWs bgs and there have been multiple other MMOs I've played with better BGs as well.. Rift and warhammer online for example. Note that I only pvp in ESO because I prefer it's setup over BGs but it I had to pvp in any of them swtor would be it.. Wow would be dead last everytime... Cept maybe wildstar

well huttball is the by far most frequently left BG(before it even starts) of SWTOR. some people like it the majority though does not.

Thats because it requires teamwork and coordination. A team on TS is most likely going to destroy opponents without organisation.

Also people don´t want to think but be on the #1 on the dmg board when the bg ends.

Negative effects of increased exposure to Call of Duty on the overall player base. Quick and easy, over patience and calculated research type play.

CoD gets a bad rep as an FPS but really Search and Destroy is where its at.

vamp_emily wrote: »

Comments on episode 4:

Most all of the issues you guys talk about, and most issues that anyone talks about, are 1v1 or small scale PvP issues. Seriously you want a "Chance" to take a keep when you only have 4 members in your group? Well you do have a chance right now; just go out and try and take a keep. If you can't succeed then add a member to your group, you don't need 24 players in your group if you have "skills" like you think you do.

If ball groups are such a big issue, use your so called "skills" and brains to find a way to break them up to kill the group. I don't think groups should be forced to play a style you don't like.

I suggest ZOS build a 1v1 or small scale PvP area so everyone can take their problems there, and keep it out of Large scale. It is kind of funny how everyone thinks "small scale" is going to save the world ( PvP ). I really don't think it is going to save anything, more than likely it will be another thing that people cry about.

The number one thing that ZOS needs to look at/fix is the lag. That is what is going to keep people playing. I personally don't have much of an issue with lag EXCEPT Azura Star campaign or after a major update . I've been in other vet campaigns and never experienced lag. One thing that can solve some of the lag issues, which I know most of you are familiar with, is get a better video card, and maybe a better internet connection.

I play in BwB mostly, and if you have ever played there recently you should know how big EPs zerges get ( just using EP as an example, of course I know other factions zerg ). I have been at bleakers several times fighting 40 or 50 EPs in one location. Very seldom do I feel lag. So the question is why does BwB not have as much lag as Azura Star? I don't know but I do know most the time we don't have 3 bars but we can still fight big battles.

Another thing that ZOS can fix is, maybe look at some of the problems with Non-Vet PvP. Some times its very discourging when you have someone who has 501 CP and you don't have any. Just the other day I was grouped with someone that had 501 CP and he said, "Watch this, I think I can 1 hit this guy with WB from stealth". He did exactly what he said he would do, one hit someone and they died. How is that fair for anyone in Non-Vet PvP? This is not a problem for me anymore because i am out getting my CP but, for a new person its not a very good way to promote PvP.

One thing I would like for ZOS to fix is AP. There are very few of us out there that really care about the health of our alliance in "Non-Vet" PvP. Most players will not stick around and repair walls. This is draining the people that are actually doing the repairs. I think ZOS should reward more to players that are repairing. I also think AP should not be used to buy armor. Armor is something we should get as a reward. To many people are saving AP so they can buy/sell Armor.

Note:
I don't play in ball groups or 24 player groups. I normally just support my alliance and go where I am needed.

FENGRUSH wrote: »

vamp_emily wrote: »

Comments on episode 4:

The number one thing that ZOS needs to look at/fix is the lag. That is what is going to keep people playing. I personally don't have much of an issue with lag EXCEPT Azura Star campaign or after a major update . I've been in other vet campaigns and never experienced lag. One thing that can solve some of the lag issues, which I know most of you are familiar with, is get a better video card, and maybe a better internet connection.

I thought resetting routers was good enough? All in all, it looks like you didnt watch episode 4 too closely or you tuned out the part where it was mentioned lag is the primary issue with cyro that needs to be fixed.

vamp_emily wrote: »

If you can't succeed then add a member to your group, you don't need 24 players in your group if you have "skills" like you think you do.

If ball groups are such a big issue, use your so called "skills" and brains to find a way to break them up to kill the group. I don't think groups should be forced to play a style you don't like.

Nice comments, can I go to your thread about asking for help learning how to PvP and telling you to use your brains or so called skills?

vamp_emily wrote: »

I am so freaking tired of getting hit 3 times and dying.

I have leveled at least 3 characters in PvP 10-50, I wear all purple gear, sometimes yellow weapons. i use Imp and nirn traits and I also have purple magicka glyphs, and eat purple food for mag/stam/health buffs.

I get hit 1 time and i am crippled. i can't even get away and my magic and stam just stop working even if they were 100 percent.

Grab a notepad and visit twitch.tv/FENGRUSH son.

Fengrush, I think we all have the right to post our opinion.

Soft caps, bring them back. Not this stupid crap we have today

uberkull wrote: »

.

FENGRUSH wrote: »

vamp_emily wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

vamp_emily wrote: »

Comments on episode 4:

The number one thing that ZOS needs to look at/fix is the lag. That is what is going to keep people playing. I personally don't have much of an issue with lag EXCEPT Azura Star campaign or after a major update . I've been in other vet campaigns and never experienced lag. One thing that can solve some of the lag issues, which I know most of you are familiar with, is get a better video card, and maybe a better internet connection.

I thought resetting routers was good enough? All in all, it looks like you didnt watch episode 4 too closely or you tuned out the part where it was mentioned lag is the primary issue with cyro that needs to be fixed.

vamp_emily wrote: »

If you can't succeed then add a member to your group, you don't need 24 players in your group if you have "skills" like you think you do.

If ball groups are such a big issue, use your so called "skills" and brains to find a way to break them up to kill the group. I don't think groups should be forced to play a style you don't like.

Nice comments, can I go to your thread about asking for help learning how to PvP and telling you to use your brains or so called skills?

vamp_emily wrote: »

I am so freaking tired of getting hit 3 times and dying.

I have leveled at least 3 characters in PvP 10-50, I wear all purple gear, sometimes yellow weapons. i use Imp and nirn traits and I also have purple magicka glyphs, and eat purple food for mag/stam/health buffs.

I get hit 1 time and i am crippled. i can't even get away and my magic and stam just stop working even if they were 100 percent.

Grab a notepad and visit twitch.tv/FENGRUSH son.

Fengrush, I think we all have the right to post our opinion.

Confirmed - you have received the opinion from The Lord.

Good joke? You are supporting a podcast that requires viewers to make it worth even doing, right? Not everyone is a sheep and follows you blindly.

Its feedback, absorb it, ignore it, but 'Opinion from The Lord'? Lol....cmon, you play one class, spamming wrecking blow and using bow for ranged. And it's a Sorc. LoL. If that doesn't tell people how messed up pvp classes are in ESO, I don't know what will. I think there are a lot of larger issues in ESO pvp then just ball groups and zergs.

These are insults - not really feedback. He literally said we want to change cyro for 1vX, when we actually 100% completely stated we dont want to do that in the podcast, more than once.

This is someone that either isnt watching it, or is watching it and lying/cant comprehend what was said. Its misinformation. So it gets struck down.


Sorry you dont appreciate stam sorc and wrecking blows. Most of my victims complain about WB spam as well, even though their kill screen includes a rush, light attack, dots, and an execute typically. But hey - WB spam right? Thatll diminish my value. Let me know when they add a single stam morph for sorcs like we asked for in IC patch, which they said was coming, and didnt come. Id love to have more skills to use.


Insults:

vamp_emily wrote: »

Comments on episode 4:

you don't need 24 players in your group if you have "skills" like you think you do.

If ball groups are such a big issue, use your so called "skills" and brains to find a way to break them up to kill the group. I don't think groups should be forced to play a style you don't like.

Rekt !

Episode 5 in 30 Minutes!

twitch.tv/sypherpk

@Fengrush - AOE cap

Watched the stream. All of it. Good discussion, but man....you continue to beat a dead horse with the AOE cap.

Let me break it down...
1) In some form there has to be an AOE cap. Maybe 6 is to little, but it has to be there.
2) The DK video Sypher showed to try to give and example of how the AOE cap is a negative. I'm sorry, that DK should die everytime in that situation. First he leaped from the tower onto a capture flag, that should be some fall damage. Second, the group capturing the flag has to be in close proximity to capture the flag, so the AOE cap works exactly as intended here. Perfect reason why the AOE cap should exist.
3) If you run with a group of 4 and encounter a group of 24 with half a brain, your group of 4 should die EVERYTIME. It's straight out numbers and dps. If I'm in the group of 24 and we're all mic'ed and your group of 4 gets the jump, first thing I do is shout 'spread out' as much as possible given the area. Then I identify the healer in your group of 4, if none then I take out the biggest threat first, 'focus 24 dps on Fengrush and burn him down'. If your attack somehow took out 10 of us to start, never happen on a org grp, but fine 'focus 14 dps on Fengrush'. Your out of the picture, on to the next one. Eventually your group will lose to any half way decent organized, large group.

What you get pissed about is that you run into large pugs and still get beat, or get unexpected results, and throw out AOE cap as the reason for your demise. Bottomline, the game would be designed wrong if you are able to take out 5x the amount of players with a substantially smaller group.

4) Moving on to the AOE cap. Let's throw out a real world example. Gernade fragmentation. You throw a grenade into a group of soldiers, the fragmentation is going to effect the immediate area of where the grenade landed. The outwards fragmentation of the grenade, the shrapnel, is going to spray out and effect other soldiers but to a lesser degree because the bodies around the gernades impact area took a majority of the damage. The soldiers on the outer perimeter of the grenade blast may not get hit at all depending on distance.

Now, maybe you say 'it's a video game, we're fukin magical, we can shoot lighting out of our hands....real world shouldn't apply'. Then let's look at a popular gaming engine and see how it works. This developer goes through a lot of tech speak and coding practices, so not to bore you(I don't know your line of work)...you can fast forward to 6:45 and listen how he explains the AOE impact that the grenade has based on the code methods and variables provided by the Unity engine. The Unity engine itself has methods(functions) that support AOE impact and how much it damages players not directly at the area of impact.

http://youtu.be/PVfXDvfn8hs

Again, if it's boring bs, it is what it is, I've been coding for over 20 years and I get the reasoning behind what ZOS wants to do with AOE caps.

So you say, 'well ball groups are all at the point of impact, they should all take the damage from my aoe'. They should take MORE damage, but not all. If we go back to the real world example, bodies will shield other bodies therefore limiting the damage to other people in the area of effect. So a simplistic AOE cap simulates this, 6 get all the damage, the others get 50% less damage, etc. THIS is where the problem lies with how ZOS is approaching the AOE issue.

How to fix it?
Ball groups would NEVER exist if there was player collision detection, more specifically players should not be able to walk through each other. You implement that, you eliminate ball groups. Period, the end. If they still want to tightly pack...good luck moving. The players in the center of the mass would be trapped like their in a mosh pit. No ones going anywhere.

Of course the reason ZOS and other developers don't have collision implemented for players is griefing. Want to get into the bank? ...not happening cause some fools are afk parked in front of the bank door. Wanna visit the guild traders?...nope, a circle of afk players surround the traders. In PVP...Want storm a keep? Forget it cause now ball groups just turned into old fashion civil war tactics. Frontline, next line, next line, next line...100 players stacked in lines of 10. Better get the sieges out and prepare for a 3 hour war on a single keep.

ZOS can't add collision detection on players where they would be solid objects, so they need to have a AOE cap to spread damage out. Is 6 the right number? Not sure....is 6 the magic number for the long term planned arena? 6v6? Maybe that's why it's set at this number at this time.

Long read, but I'd be surprised if Eric said anything different...if he actually ever speaks on the topic.

-Uber

blabafat wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

Just finished watching the podcast. Great discussions and I'm looking forward into seeing Brian Wheeler at the next official ESO Live. So again, thanks for your time investments as streamers into this guys.

Only one point I disagree and no offense @sypher but I don't like Animation cancelling at all. Not because I cannot do it but because I don't think it is right. For me it's just a broken mechanic and if the game gets someday to the point where Animation cancelling is a must in any build to be competitive in PvP, I'll just stop playing it.

Animation cancelling adds another layer of skill to the game. ZoS has already removed so many of these layers *cough cough* heavy attack bashing

Further lowering the skill requirement by removing an aspect of the game that requires practice would just reinforce the fact that Zeni keeps catering to casuals.

Blabafat for Combat Mechanics Manager 2016

FENGRUSH wrote: »

uberkull wrote: »

@Fengrush - AOE cap

Watched the stream. All of it. Good discussion, but man....you continue to beat a dead horse with the AOE cap.

Let me break it down...
1) In some form there has to be an AOE cap. Maybe 6 is to little, but it has to be there.
2) The DK video Sypher showed to try to give and example of how the AOE cap is a negative. I'm sorry, that DK should die everytime in that situation. First he leaped from the tower onto a capture flag, that should be some fall damage. Second, the group capturing the flag has to be in close proximity to capture the flag, so the AOE cap works exactly as intended here. Perfect reason why the AOE cap should exist.
3) If you run with a group of 4 and encounter a group of 24 with half a brain, your group of 4 should die EVERYTIME. It's straight out numbers and dps. If I'm in the group of 24 and we're all mic'ed and your group of 4 gets the jump, first thing I do is shout 'spread out' as much as possible given the area. Then I identify the healer in your group of 4, if none then I take out the biggest threat first, 'focus 24 dps on Fengrush and burn him down'. If your attack somehow took out 10 of us to start, never happen on a org grp, but fine 'focus 14 dps on Fengrush'. Your out of the picture, on to the next one. Eventually your group will lose to any half way decent organized, large group.

What you get pissed about is that you run into large pugs and still get beat, or get unexpected results, and throw out AOE cap as the reason for your demise. Bottomline, the game would be designed wrong if you are able to take out 5x the amount of players with a substantially smaller group.

4) Moving on to the AOE cap. Let's throw out a real world example. Gernade fragmentation. You throw a grenade into a group of soldiers, the fragmentation is going to effect the immediate area of where the grenade landed. The outwards fragmentation of the grenade, the shrapnel, is going to spray out and effect other soldiers but to a lesser degree because the bodies around the gernades impact area took a majority of the damage. The soldiers on the outer perimeter of the grenade blast may not get hit at all depending on distance.

Now, maybe you say 'it's a video game, we're fukin magical, we can shoot lighting out of our hands....real world shouldn't apply'. Then let's look at a popular gaming engine and see how it works. This developer goes through a lot of tech speak and coding practices, so not to bore you(I don't know your line of work)...you can fast forward to 6:45 and listen how he explains the AOE impact that the grenade has based on the code methods and variables provided by the Unity engine. The Unity engine itself has methods(functions) that support AOE impact and how much it damages players not directly at the area of impact.

http://youtu.be/PVfXDvfn8hs

Again, if it's boring bs, it is what it is, I've been coding for over 20 years and I get the reasoning behind what ZOS wants to do with AOE caps.

So you say, 'well ball groups are all at the point of impact, they should all take the damage from my aoe'. They should take MORE damage, but not all. If we go back to the real world example, bodies will shield other bodies therefore limiting the damage to other people in the area of effect. So a simplistic AOE cap simulates this, 6 get all the damage, the others get 50% less damage, etc. THIS is where the problem lies with how ZOS is approaching the AOE issue.

How to fix it?
Ball groups would NEVER exist if there was player collision detection, more specifically players should not be able to walk through each other. You implement that, you eliminate ball groups. Period, the end. If they still want to tightly pack...good luck moving. The players in the center of the mass would be trapped like their in a mosh pit. No ones going anywhere.

Of course the reason ZOS and other developers don't have collision implemented for players is griefing. Want to get into the bank? ...not happening cause some fools are afk parked in front of the bank door. Wanna visit the guild traders?...nope, a circle of afk players surround the traders. In PVP...Want storm a keep? Forget it cause now ball groups just turned into old fashion civil war tactics. Frontline, next line, next line, next line...100 players stacked in lines of 10. Better get the sieges out and prepare for a 3 hour war on a single keep.

ZOS can't add collision detection on players where they would be solid objects, so they need to have a AOE cap to spread damage out. Is 6 the right number? Not sure....is 6 the magic number for the long term planned arena? 6v6? Maybe that's why it's set at this number at this time.

Long read, but I'd be surprised if Eric said anything different...if he actually ever speaks on the topic.

-Uber

I kinda started skipping the second half of the post becuase youre saying people shouldnt win 1:5 just because.


Your solution is they should put in player collison - theres a reason it was never put in the game: 1) performance 2) they dont want players to block others and *troll*. I like collision, but its not happening.

Cool, thanks for glossing over it. *** it then. I pointed out a actual gaming engine that incorporates AOE cap for a reason. I pointed out why collision detection won't work. But you go ahead and keep whining about ball groups, makes for great podcasts.

Absolutely right, there shouldn't be a game design in where evenly skilled people could win a battle 1v5. Those 5 skilled pvp players should be able to, within the design of the game, be able to roll the 1vx. No god damn AOE should be a nuke, leveling an entire group. That's just a one-button win mechanic. Pointless.

You wanna continue to run sewers and gank noobs, go for it, but the AOE cap is there and you'll have to figure out how to work around it. I'll be interested to see what the new complaint is once arena rolls around in 2017.

Jhunn wrote: »

@uberkull Who's talking about 1vX'ing evenly skilled players? You're missing the point

AOE cap is there with the intention to mitigate the damage a AOE spell does over an area, regardless of the pvp players skill. Because the noob player is bunching up because of it, doesn't mean 'just remove it' because that leads to one-button nukes and supports gankers, which most of the 1vX *** is anyways.

If 'pvpers' want to stream running after a huge Zerg, trying to pull out a random to gank him and the entire group turns around and rolls you, don't whine like a little ***. You rolled up in there and got face stomped. Don't blame the game.

uberkull wrote: »

Jhunn wrote: »

@uberkull Who's talking about 1vX'ing evenly skilled players? You're missing the point

AOE cap is there with the intention to mitigate the damage a AOE spell does over an area, regardless of the pvp players skill. Because the noob player is bunching up because of it, doesn't mean 'just remove it' because that leads to one-button nukes and supports gankers, which most of the 1vX *** is anyways.

If 'pvpers' want to stream running after a huge Zerg, trying to pull out a random to gank him and the entire group turns around and rolls you, don't whine like a little ***. You rolled up in there and got face stomped. Don't blame the game.

This post illustrates your complete lack of understanding of the issue.