Thanks for link

800k matches played in 25 days is pretty impressive.

And that was counted like with the best (for zos) scenario in mind, real numbers should be much less impressive

BabyDeathClaw wrote: »

Elsonso wrote: »

Thanks for link

800k matches played in 25 days is pretty impressive.

What? The patch was out on june 5, now its a july 21.
But lets count with your 25 days.
It is 33555 matches a day.
That is a maximum of 67110 players played this in a single day.
In a game with player count around 500-600k.
That is some 11% of the players, and numbers will only go down.
[snip]

[edited for trolling]

Data was from June 6 to July 1. By my quick count, 25 days is close enough.

Yes, the number will go down. That info-graphic was the last one they will probably make about the game. Ever.

Ratzkifal wrote: »

Elsonso wrote: »

Thanks for link

800k matches played in 25 days is pretty impressive.

It's just 400k matches though. Two players play a match, so they count it as both players having a match each, but that doubles the number of matches played, which is a bit disingenuous. You can tell that this is how they counted if you add up the number of wins.

Hmm. Interesting. I don't know enough about the game to notice things like that.

For example, I have no idea what a "bewilderment" is, or why 42 is a notable number given how many people in here are bewildered by Update 35.

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

The_Lex wrote: »

My personal hot take:

A card game is not PvP in an MMO. Using the moniker "PvP" for ToT further diminishes the vision implemented by the original design team for what PvP in this game should be, which is being systematically ignored or minimized by the current team.

Just to provide some context here. The reason we are using the term PvP is because this is calculating only the Player Vs Player interactions, not when players go against NPCs in Tales of Tribute. So the usage of PvP is accurate here. This is not an attempt to diminish our long standing PvP experiences of Cyrodiil, the Imperial City, and Battlegrounds.

Still, since ultimately ToT is a game of chance more than a game of skill or knowledge, it's not the same as player vs player content. It's player vs RNG. As an example, poker is entirely chance based, but it takes skill to know when to fold and when to raise, because poker is ultimately not about the cards but about the money. It also requires being able to read other people. ToT doesn't allow you to read your opponent and it does not allow you to build a deck yourself. If two players play optimally, the game is entirely up to chance, which is unlike other PvP games, even other card games.

I suggest that Tales of Tribute "PvP" is instead referred to as "against other players", which might sound the same in the ears of the developers but the connotation is entirely different. Calling it PvP might have been fine in an alternate reality where ESO's PvP isn't plagued by performance issues, lack of content updates and poorly received balance changes, but right now it certainly comes across as further dismissal of PvP players even if that is not the intention by the developers here. Most people know on a rational level that this isn't the intention, but on an emotional level hearing it referred to as PvP stings and leaves a bitter taste in your mouth. Just watch people react to the High Isle reveal and similar official videos where Tales of Tribute is referred to as "PvP". Usually people laugh and then sarcastically say "there is your PvP update".

Communication is not just about presenting facts but also about how facts are presented and this requires taking into account the context in which they are presented and who they are being presented to.

When do we get one of these for dueling? How many duels were in that same time? What was the highest score on the leader board? Or longest win streak? How many tournaments were held and how much prize money was given away? How many werewolves were laughed out of town?

spartaxoxo wrote: »

I am glad that they call it PvP because that's what it is. ToT is a game of both skill and chance, and I've caught my opponents slipping plenty of times and won matches. One recent victory being using a tithe card that they left alone for several hands despite the fact that they were massively in the lead of me, had multiple agents on the field, and it was realistically my only chance of winning. I knew that and bid my time until I knew for sure I'd be able to turn it into a win and did win. Sometimes I can play well and still lose due to chance, but that's not unlike other games of chance like Blackjack. I personally would find it disrespectful to ToT players to not call it what it is, as a way to diminish the skill of the Tales players to appease some small portion of the guys in Cyrodiil, who will never be happy until their performance issues are fixed.

I found this article highly interesting as well. I feel bad for some of the people that encountered those "most x in a single game" moments haha.

In blackjack you can count cards. That's a game of skill, even if casinos hate you for that and kick you out because you aren't playing in a way that favors the casino. And in blackjack you are still betting on the outcome of the game while in ToT you aren't. You are trying to top-deck a winning combo because you have had no input in what cards are in your deck and you cannot count cards to determine any likelihood either because you've shuffled your deck with your opponent's. Maybe it's a fun game but it's ultimately the same as flipping a coin to determine who wins. If it was Hearthstone or even Elder Scrolls Legends I would feel the PvP tag would be a bit more justified. Just call it "playing Tales of Tribute against other players". Or do you consider the economy PvP as well? Are trial leaderboards PvP? Is gathering resources PvP? Would you personally find it disrespectful if these weren't called PvP?

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Ratzkifal wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

I am glad that they call it PvP because that's what it is. ToT is a game of both skill and chance, and I've caught my opponents slipping plenty of times and won matches. One recent victory being using a tithe card that they left alone for several hands despite the fact that they were massively in the lead of me, had multiple agents on the field, and it was realistically my only chance of winning. I knew that and bid my time until I knew for sure I'd be able to turn it into a win and did win. Sometimes I can play well and still lose due to chance, but that's not unlike other games of chance like Blackjack. I personally would find it disrespectful to ToT players to not call it what it is, as a way to diminish the skill of the Tales players to appease some small portion of the guys in Cyrodiil, who will never be happy until their performance issues are fixed.

I found this article highly interesting as well. I feel bad for some of the people that encountered those "most x in a single game" moments haha.

In blackjack you can count cards. That's a game of skill, even if casinos hate you for that and kick you out because you aren't playing in a way that favors the casino. And in blackjack you are still betting on the outcome of the game while in ToT you aren't. You are trying to top-deck a winning combo because you have had no input in what cards are in your deck and you cannot count cards to determine any likelihood either because you've shuffled your deck with your opponent's. Maybe it's a fun game but it's ultimately the same as flipping a coin to determine who wins. If it was Hearthstone or even Elder Scrolls Legends I would feel the PvP tag would be a bit more justified. Just call it "playing Tales of Tribute against other players". Or do you consider the economy PvP as well? Are trial leaderboards PvP? Is gathering resources PvP? Would you personally find it disrespectful if these weren't called PvP?

You don't have to be betting for a game of chance to take skill. There is strategy in which cards you select from the pool and when, strategy in when to sacrifice a card you'd benefit from to deny your opponent a card, there is strategy in building your deck from the cards available to you, there is strategy in which decks you play together, there is strategy in planning to go for a patron win, there is strategy in reading your opponent's cards to determine which strategies they are going to be using, there is strategy in how you use the treasury. This game is direct competition between two players. None of those other activities are. There is strategy in the timing of patron use. You are constantly being dismissive of the strategy it takes to be good at Tales of Tribute, but it doesn't erase that it is strategic. And it would be incredibly disrespectful of ZOS to denigrate the strategy it takes, especially towards those skilled players in the Ruebdite ranks, to call it anything else.

You are fighting off against another player in a game of strategy or chance. There is a version where you go against an NPC, and that is PVE, because the opponent you're directly against during gameplay is not a human being.

I believe you are getting strategy confused with tactics. There is a tactical aspect to the game where you judge the worth of each individual card on the board each turn. While there is a strategy attached to each deck you choose, the strategic aspect of the game is completely eliminated without actual deckbuilding, because your opponent might end up with all the cards you needed to win in their deck. It is ultimately as strategic as UNO.
Meanwhile leaderboard trials are a direct competition between players, require an actual strategy that results in a time advantage over players with a different strategy and the ability to execute that strategy is where skill comes into play. I do not think calling it something else would diminish the achievement of reaching the rubedite rank. The actual rewards you get for reaching rubedite rank already do that. But I don't see PvE players complaining about their leaderboard achievement being diminished by it not being called PvP, because they are very much aware they are playing competitive PvE in the same way people are playing competitive ToT, not actually PvP. These terms are reserved for the core gameplay of ESO - the combat - not some minigame like Antiquities and ToT.

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Ratzkifal wrote: »

I believe you are getting strategy confused with tactics. There is a tactical aspect to the game where you judge the worth of each individual card on the board each turn. While there is a strategy attached to each deck you choose, the strategic aspect of the game is completely eliminated without actual deckbuilding, because your opponent might end up with all the cards you needed to win in their deck.

LOL. No it's not. You have a plan in mind but your opponent getting the cards you wanted is them either countering your strategy OR your strategy is the same as yours and they're getting the upper hand. How early you recognize this might happen and how you adapt to that and come up with a new strategy is a skill. I've beaten plenty of people who go "I'm a crow deck" player by recognizing they are concentrating on crows, buying up key cards when I get the opportunity that they'd need or removing them from the tavern, while simultaneously planning to build my deck around a card type they've been ignoring. For example, sometimes I snap up blue cards purely to sacrifice later in the game to a patron while fighting the other player for control of crows. I usually win against crow decks at this point. Still coming up with a strat against Pelin players.

That is strategy.

Just because YOU don't have strategy and tactics does NOT make this game without skill.


Leaderboarding is NOT pvp because the direct gameplay is PVE. They are not playing against another person during the actual gameplay of the trial. They are playing against AI.

Tales players ARE playing against other players. And it's disrespectful to not acknowledge that and belittle their skill at the game as being non-existent and their ability to climb as pure RNG. It is NOT. They have strategy, tactics, and skill. And the direct gameplay involves playing against other human opponents. That IS pvp.

Edit:

Here's an example of a player planning ahead based off understanding the cards available and fully understanding the way the work, so that they can pickup up a key card.

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/612327/advanced-guide-to-deck-cycling-by-pinkappleyt#latest

This is a tactic I didn't know as someone still figuring out strats and tactics. I don't have a ton of time played so I'm not high ranked. This player would likely consistently beat me, because they are significantly higher skilled.

I'm done arguing semantics.

You are not acknowledging the skill of ToT players by calling it PvP nor belittling them by not calling it PvP. What ZOS is doing, and what you want them to be doing, is actually disrespecting PvPers by calling it PvP content when there hasn't been PvP content since the addition of the last Battlegrounds map. There hasn't even been an addition of ranked Battlegrounds. It's understandable that PvPers are upset about that, no? What do you suggest PvPers do now? Rename themselves to "Cyrodiil players", "Battlegrounders" or "Duelists" so that they cannot get confused with the hardcore ToT PvPers? How about no.
Would you like it if ZOS did a huge marketing thing about their "furnishing limit increase" but it's actually just increasing the number of furnishings you can stack from 200 to 400?
ToT players are players of ToT. They are just that, no more and no less. Getting Rubedite rank requires what it requires whether that takes skill or just RNG doesn't matter. Nothing is being taken away from them by not calling it PvP, because what else is it going to be? Does anyone actually care about beating NPCs in ToT? At least I have never heard anyone proudly proclaim "world first ToT win over XYZNPC". The rubedite rank speaks for itself and if anything it's belittling to ToT players if you think it must be called PvP for that to mean anything.

Ratzkifal wrote: »

You are not acknowledging the skill of ToT players by calling it PvP nor belittling them by not calling it PvP. What ZOS is doing, and what you want them to be doing, is actually disrespecting PvPers by calling it PvP content when there hasn't been PvP content since the addition of the last Battlegrounds map.

You are not belittling PvPers to call something that is PvP in this game by it's name. You said yourself that the reason to call TOT something else is because it sends the message that TOT is "it's not the same as player vs player content. It's player vs RNG." Calling it something that sends the message that it is "player vs RNG" is disrespectful to player skill.

People who play Cyrodiil would be furious if ZOS decided to stop calling Cyrodiil "PVP" because "it's not skill, it's just whoever is wearing the better armor. Now, League is a real PVP game. We don't make a PVP game."

This is no different than helping two customers by the same name. Customer 1 is named Jeff and has a complicated issue so he was to asked to wait in a seat to be served. Another customer named Jeff comes in and needs something that can be done quickly, so they start serving him first. It would be wildly disrespectful to the 2nd person named Jeff to claim that "I'M" the only Jeff that is allowed to be called Jeff. And that other person can be called Plaid Shirt Guy or whatever, but not Jeff. No matter how long you've been waiting, that is disrespectful of the person trying to rename Jeff, not of the customer service agent.

TOT is a game of both skill and chance played against another human being in direct competitive gameplay. That is PVP.

And they should not be called anything else because people who claim that it's "RNG" get offended by something being accurately described.

There hasn't even been an addition of ranked Battlegrounds. It's understandable that PvPers are upset about that, no? What do you suggest PvPers do now? Rename themselves to "Cyrodiil players", "Battlegrounders" or "Duelists" so that they cannot get confused with the hardcore ToT PvPers?

It's perfectly understandable that those players are upset. And their issues should be resolved ASAP. They are getting a server re-architecture and hopefully when that's done, they will get a substantial update to PVP. Until that time "Tales of Tribute PVP" vs "PVP" are pretty clear. If they are so determined not to share the "PVP" label with a game mode they find inferior, they can also call it "PK (player killing)" which is an alternative name for that type of PVP, which players have been using since at least the mid-2000s.

Thanks for the overview. That's some interesting numbers. The Bewilderment match must have been horrible.

blktauna wrote: »

Card Games are not PvP. Please stop with that.

Ratzkifal wrote: »

Just call it "playing Tales of Tribute against other players".

I'm not really sure why some people are being upset over the use of the word 'PvP'. The title clearly states it's about Tribute PvP matches. So... Tribute Player versus Player matches. That's literally what PvP means and this is the most efficient way of mentioning it. This is stated specifically because the alternative is playing against NPC's.

I think everyone understands that a cardgame is different than combat.

I am someone that 100% believes that PvP in this game needs more love from the devs. Cyro during primetime is just not fun and I'm not trying to downplay how much the attempts of "improving" combat have impacted PvP. I also believe that there's many examples out there of ZOS using unacceptable wording. I personally don't believe this is an example of this. If we keep jumping at every word from ZOS, we will not be taken serious anymore and ZOS already has some challenges at that point.

Playing against another player is, by definition, PvP, whether it's playing cards or playing warfare.

In the future, could Tales articles be put in the Tales of Tribute section? It's kind of an off-shoot part of the game, and I think that it would mostly only be of interest to people who actually enjoy Tales (or at least want to discuss it). I feel like part of the lack of activity in this thread discussing the actual Tales information is due to it not being in the TOT section.