A few ways ZoS can give a nod to solo/small scale players.

Lucky28 · September 2017

what i really wish they'd do is give the option upon logging in which patch you want to play on. so ZOS can keep doing whatever it is they're doing with ESO since morrowind. and i'll just go play on 1.6

zyk · September 2017

NBrookus wrote: »

It's not reasonable. If you have 10 people beating on you, why do 4 of them take less damage from you while you take full damage from all 10 of them? Most of the time unless you are a tank, that's a RIP situation, but there's a principle here. The group with more heals and damage by virtue of having more numbers is additionally given a damage reduction crutch.

And if there are 3 or 4 of you getting beat on by 10 -- a far more manageable situation -- every member of the smaller group is taking full damage from the larger group while the damage you do to them is artificially reduced.

Unless I missed or have forgotten about a change, healing is capped too. From a different POV, imagine the game with uncapped healing . Do you recall when Barrier and Cleanse were uncapped? Wouldn't that make AE heals OP?

I'm not advocating for AE caps in ESO PVP. I just don't think the way they are implemented is catastrophic and I can see where the devs are coming from. I don't agree with their implementation though.

Ultimately, it comes down to how the game designers envision gameplay and the results they are trying to promote. If AEs are too strong, they can -- and in ESO, do -- dominate gameplay.

I know many feel that removing caps entirely would eliminate zergs from ESO, but zerging wasn't decreased when the cap was changed from a hard cap of six in 1.6 or when it was changed to allow for more damage in 2.7.

Personally, I prefer gameplay that is mainly singe target with situational AE.

NBrookus · September 2017

zyk wrote: »

NBrookus wrote: »

It's not reasonable. If you have 10 people beating on you, why do 4 of them take less damage from you while you take full damage from all 10 of them? Most of the time unless you are a tank, that's a RIP situation, but there's a principle here. The group with more heals and damage by virtue of having more numbers is additionally given a damage reduction crutch.

And if there are 3 or 4 of you getting beat on by 10 -- a far more manageable situation -- every member of the smaller group is taking full damage from the larger group while the damage you do to them is artificially reduced.

Unless I missed or have forgotten about a change, healing is capped too. From a different POV, imagine the game with uncapped healing . Do you recall when Barrier and Cleanse were uncapped? Wouldn't that make AE heals OP?

The cap evenly affects both sides on healing. For example, if I'm on a DK and deep breath, it doesn't matter if there are 50 players in range, I only hit 6 people so I only get the heal from 6. (Bad example perhaps since deep breath is both damage and heals in one.)

Xsorus · October 2017

To give you an idea of the sillyness of AOE caps

anything past 6 people automatically gets a 25% damage reduction to AOE damage.

Who here would like a 25% damage reduction that's automatically applied to you cause you stood next to a bunch of people.

You know, the exact thing AOE's are suppose to counter..

Cold91 · October 2017

antihero727 wrote: »

Cold91 wrote: »

So I know i'm no PvP expert or "elite" player, but I do really enjoy solo/small scale PvP and I remember a time when that was viable. The way mechanics work in PvP in order to be truly succesful you must run in a large group and bonus points for 3rd party voice comm. I'm not gonna bash those players, I play like that too from time to time and its rewarding. I do propose that ZoS improve the ability to solo/smallscale again.

ZoS should remove aoe Caps: I never really was sure what the point of aoe caps were to begin with. While the removal has several positives to it. Better enable outnumbered players to fight back, and reduce the amount of calculations both server and client side overall. Seems like a win win for everybody.

ZoS should re-implement dynamic ult: Perhaps the best way for outnumbered players to level the odds. The more I get hit, the more I heal, and the more players I hit, the faster my ult should raise, it makes perfect sense, and would allow me to win outnumbered. Not every time, but enough that solo/smallscale play would be viable again, and rewarding.

Neither of these options, either alone or together would overthrow the dominant meta of zerging, so any who prefer to play that way shouldn't feel he need to come here and P*ss on this post. These changes would only serve to make solo/smallscale funner, more viable, and more rewarding, while leaving large groups still the most powerful thing on the map, barring that now a few more of them will die when xv1ing, and there will be a few more wipes over all facing a small organized group.

Oh great someone watched a fengrush stream and has all of these "new ideas" on how to bring small scale back again. Clap clap clap and repeat slowly

Never said they were new ideas, never watched a fengrush stream. Not sure why your s**t posting, I had put forth some ideas (new or not) and backed them up arguments. You came here and contributed nothing.

enzoisadog · October 2017

I miss dynamic ult ;_;

Ghostbane · October 2017

Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »

Bring back ground oils.

Eirella · October 2017

Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »

A few ways they can do it is REVERT all the buffs to zergs they have been putting in the game.

Here are some examples:
Completely remove the gap closer snare. This is the single WORST combat mechanics change since launch.

Revert petty changes to class skills that reduce the ability to fight multiple players (e.g. fear affects less people now).

Minor or major heroism if you are taking damage from over X amount of players. (aka poor man's dynamic ulti)

Bring back ground oils.

Agree with all of these, particularly with ground oils. I'm sure zergs wouldn't bother me as much if they did this

Joy_Division · October 2017

Ghostbane wrote: »

Bring back ground oils.

Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »

Bring back ground oils.

If they did, I might never log out of this game.

zyk · October 2017

ground oils + s.draconis = end of days

gabriebe · October 2017

FFS they made Battlegrounds, use em. Yes, they could be improved but stop imagingin a Cyrodiil where everywhere you step there's an equal amount of opponents, or where your amazing group will wipe everybody by their sheer talent. That's never gonna happen.

FENGRUSH · October 2017

gabriebe wrote: »

FFS they made Battlegrounds, use em. Yes, they could be improved but stop imagingin a Cyrodiil where everywhere you step there's an equal amount of opponents, or where your amazing group will wipe everybody by their sheer talent. That's never gonna happen.

I get sick of reading stupid replies like this when I come through the forum.

gabriebe · October 2017

Allow me to elaborate.

Battlegrounds were introduced to satisfy a need for competitive play and a desire for smaller scale PvP. If anyone was looking for a nod to small scale players, this is it. Currently, they are underused for a variety of reason. I think it would be a lot more productive to suggest ways to improve those battlegrounds than pray for the disappearance in Cyrodiil. Personally, I think the BGs would be a lot more popular if they had separate queues for premade and nonpremade, and if premade teams could compete as teams vs teams. That's just one idea, but there's plenty found in these very forums to both satisfy the need for competitve PvP and smaller scale.

The dynamics of Cyro are such that you can expect 20 people to show up at a ressource taken by 3 people, or none to show up at a keep taken by 20 people. If someone calls something in zone or a group sees a ressource lit, it's not always clear how much ressources you should dedicate to it. Nothing ZOS can do about it.

To my understanding, the AOE caps are implemented to avoid situations where an ult dump would wipe even more than it already does, with, say, 4-5 people coordinating an ult bomb from stealth on 20+ players. While I agree that this kind of stuff is super fun when you're the perpretator, I don't think it's balanced gameplay in any way. And I don't particularly see either why skills should be designed to give an advantage on those who are outnumbered.

Ultimately, I'm just getting tired of sometimes spending half my time in Cyrodiil with people [snip] about getting zerged down, or just trying to get the perfect-sized group to find another perfect-sized group to have an hypothetical great small scale fight they'll maybe get one time in the evening. Small scale, in a lot of situatons, essentialy becomes a way of saying 'I don't want to fight scrubs, because I'm not one' without actually saying it and it gets a bit grating after a while.

NBrookus · October 2017

BG's suggestions have not only been ignored, but ZOS has doubled and now tripled down on the very aspects that small scale players specifically don't want. Those players are never going to be happy with a plate of iceberg lettuce when they ordered a burger, and the people who keep dismissively saying "go eat your lettuce" are missing the point.

I have faith ZOS will revise battlegrounds to appeal to small scale right after they fix the lag in Cyrodiil.

gabriebe wrote: »

To my understanding, the AOE caps are implemented to avoid situations where an ult dump would wipe even more than it already does, with, say, 4-5 people coordinating an ult bomb from stealth on 20+ players. While I agree that this kind of stuff is super fun when you're the perpretator, I don't think it's balanced gameplay in any way. And I don't particularly see either why skills should be designed to give an advantage on those who are outnumbered.

Why should 20 people be artifically protected from 4 or 5, but when that group of 20 stealth ult bombs 4 or 5 they get free extra damage reduction in case anyone dares survive and retaliate? Is that "balanced game play?"

gabriebe · October 2017

Is that "balanced game play?"

...yea? Destro ults trains are already annoying to deal with, can't even imagine what they'd be without some sort of mitigation when an organised guild group barrels toward a group of randoms.

NBrookus · October 2017

So numbers should always win, even if a smaller group is better organized and more skilled?

idk · October 2017

Not sure how AoE damage reduced to 75% for 7-24 targets is a huge deal. Certainly the drop at 25+ targets is so rare it's probably not worth speaking of.

I can understand the caps since healing has caps. Removing the small reduction of damage from AoE against large groups would probably give a larger advantage to large groups since they could more easily outdanage heals.

Cold91 · October 2017

idk wrote: »

Not sure how AoE damage reduced to 75% for 7-24 targets is a huge deal. Certainly the drop at 25+ targets is so rare it's probably not worth speaking of.

I can understand the caps since healing has caps. Removing the small reduction of damage from AoE against large groups would probably give a larger advantage to large groups since they could more easily outdanage heals.

Removing AOE caps is more about reducing the calculations, both server and client side, to improve overall performance. although the extra 25% less dmg on top of the overall 50% nerf in cyrodil is a big deal to outnumbered players. In say a 4v12 (happens all the time, usually 4v much more than 12) all 4 players will take 100% dmg and no passive mechanical mitigation, while the grp of 12 has 5 players taking 25% less dmg. It matters.

Alphaa · October 2017

Remove AoE caps

Max group size down to 16.

Cut CP values in half for PvP with 'Battle spirit'

Crown · October 2017

NBrookus wrote: »

So numbers should always win, even if a smaller group is better organized and more skilled

That's what was said on ESO Live a couple months back.

Shortly thereafter a lot of small scale PvP players too another break from the game (and most haven't yet returned).

Dorrino · October 2017

zyk wrote: »

I don't think there should be a system to artificially even odds for players who are outnumbered. It's so counter-intuitive. Winning outnumbered has value because the odds are against you; in theory. The kind of imbalances we had the first year in ESO PVP are why most people left in the first place. More easily mowing down players who are stacked because they're legitimately afraid of getting mowed down isn't going to make this game more popular.

The proper way to get players to stop stacking is to right-size competition. If players feel they're going to get wrecked in 5 seconds if they stray from the herd, then they won't stray from the herd. No one will play a game in which they don't believe they have an opportunity to be successful. The validation of a successful group shouldn't be the number of players they can fight, but rather the caliber of the opponents they defeat.

What this game needs are objectives that are attractive for confident and competent players to fight each other for -- reducing the competitive burden elsewhere. I think everyone would benefit from this.

Sometimes people falsely correlate the strong opinions I express here with over-confidence in my abilities. I get some pretty interesting tells. But I call myself a casual random. I think I do pretty well, but I'm past my prime and past the days of trying to be among the *very* best. At least individually. However, I was there at another point in my life and best vs best competition is, by far, the most gratifying for truly competitive players.

With all that said, small scale is very viable right now IMO. I think there are fewer large ball groups running than ever. There are a lot of times when it feels like there are only pugs and small to medium groups running.

Quoted, because can’t add much, besides ‘Exactly!’.

generalmyrick · October 2017

Cold91 wrote: »

So I know i'm no PvP expert or "elite" player, but I do really enjoy solo/small scale PvP and I remember a time when that was viable. The way mechanics work in PvP in order to be truly succesful you must run in a large group and bonus points for 3rd party voice comm. I'm not gonna bash those players, I play like that too from time to time and its rewarding. I do propose that ZoS improve the ability to solo/smallscale again.

ZoS should remove aoe Caps: I never really was sure what the point of aoe caps were to begin with. While the removal has several positives to it. Better enable outnumbered players to fight back, and reduce the amount of calculations both server and client side overall. Seems like a win win for everybody.

ZoS should re-implement dynamic ult: Perhaps the best way for outnumbered players to level the odds. The more I get hit, the more I heal, and the more players I hit, the faster my ult should raise, it makes perfect sense, and would allow me to win outnumbered. Not every time, but enough that solo/smallscale play would be viable again, and rewarding.

Neither of these options, either alone or together would overthrow the dominant meta of zerging, so any who prefer to play that way shouldn't feel he need to come here and P*ss on this post. These changes would only serve to make solo/smallscale funner, more viable, and more rewarding, while leaving large groups still the most powerful thing on the map, barring that now a few more of them will die when xv1ing, and there will be a few more wipes over all facing a small organized group.

i already hate the dude/gal that permablocks with an argonian...this seems to boost those types.

Yolokin_Swagonborn · October 2017

Dorrino wrote: »

zyk wrote: »

I don't think there should be a system to artificially even odds for players who are outnumbered. It's so counter-intuitive. Winning outnumbered has value because the odds are against you; in theory. The kind of imbalances we had the first year in ESO PVP are why most people left in the first place. More easily mowing down players who are stacked because they're legitimately afraid of getting mowed down isn't going to make this game more popular.

The proper way to get players to stop stacking is to right-size competition. If players feel they're going to get wrecked in 5 seconds if they stray from the herd, then they won't stray from the herd. No one will play a game in which they don't believe they have an opportunity to be successful. The validation of a successful group shouldn't be the number of players they can fight, but rather the caliber of the opponents they defeat.

What this game needs are objectives that are attractive for confident and competent players to fight each other for -- reducing the competitive burden elsewhere. I think everyone would benefit from this.

Sometimes people falsely correlate the strong opinions I express here with over-confidence in my abilities. I get some pretty interesting tells. But I call myself a casual random. I think I do pretty well, but I'm past my prime and past the days of trying to be among the *very* best. At least individually. However, I was there at another point in my life and best vs best competition is, by far, the most gratifying for truly competitive players.

With all that said, small scale is very viable right now IMO. I think there are fewer large ball groups running than ever. There are a lot of times when it feels like there are only pugs and small to medium groups running.

Quoted, because can’t add much, besides ‘Exactly!’.

I find it hilarious that you of all people would want a system that incentivizes competition and encourages skilled players to fight other skilled players since you seem to spend most of your time farming new and inexperienced players in towers and then running away when there is anyone that poses an actual threat to you.

Cold91 · October 2017

[/quote] I find it hilarious that you of all people would want a system that incentivizes competition and encourages skilled players to fight other skilled players since you seem to spend most of your time farming new and inexperienced players in towers and then running away when there is anyone that poses an actual threat to you. [/quote]

I'm not sure who you are talking to here, me as the OP? Or whoever you quoted. If your talking to me I'd just like to say not uh. I spend a very minimal time farming new and inexperienced players, and I have never run away from a fight. Of course I want a system to incentives skilled play, and make solo/small scale more rewarding, fun and viable. If you aren't referring to me, then disregard this message, i'm just a baddie anyway