Maintenance for the week of September 22:
• NA megaservers for maintenance – September 22, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 10:00AM EDT (14:00 UTC)
• EU megaservers for maintenance – September 22, 8:00 UTC (4:00AM EDT) - 14:00 UTC (10:00AM EDT)
• NA megaservers for maintenance – September 22, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 10:00AM EDT (14:00 UTC)
• EU megaservers for maintenance – September 22, 8:00 UTC (4:00AM EDT) - 14:00 UTC (10:00AM EDT)
PvP Plans?
Overamera
✭✭✭✭
I was wondering if Cyrodiil Vengence is the only thing planned for PvP or does ZOS have other plans aswell like new content?
1
-
MincMincMinc✭✭✭✭✭
✭Currently yes- Bgs were already touched and are fairly popular and doing well.
- IC already got reward updates that are good
We should use the insightful and awesome buttons more2 -
LPapirius✭✭✭✭✭MincMincMinc wrote: »Currently yes
- Bgs were already touched and are fairly popular and doing well.
- IC already got reward updates that are good
Every "test" they've done so far has resulted in only one long term change. And that change is a massive reduction in the population cap. Nothing good for the player base has ever resulted from these past PvP "tests". In addition, I used to play the PTS regularly and played through all those different "tests" in Cyrodiil a few years back. So it seems to me you just don't have very much play time in Cyrodiil or have lived through all it's ups and downs in the last 11 years and witnessed the results.
9 -
blktauna✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭The suits don't play and they're the ones that want numbers. Don't give them numbers, don't get money for fixes.
I do not miss dealing with that nonsense.PCNA
PCEU2 -
xylena_lazarow✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Are there plans to nerf Rushing Agony in PvP? This proc set is unanimously hated.PC/NA || Cyro/BGs || RIP old PvP build system || bring Vengeance4 -
moo_2021✭✭✭✭✭xylena_lazarow wrote: »Are there plans to nerf Rushing Agony in PvP? This proc set is unanimously hated.
Count me out. I started to like the set esp in 8x8. Seems fun to pull people left and right.0 -
xylena_lazarow✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
Yeah it is. I have an RoA NB, wasn't even that good at it, but I could clown entire tryhard smallscale groups. But you know what would be even more fun than violating game mechanics with an automated proc? God mode.Seems fun to pull people left and right.PC/NA || Cyro/BGs || RIP old PvP build system || bring Vengeance5 -
MincMincMinc✭✭✭✭✭
✭MincMincMinc wrote: »Currently yes- Bgs were already touched and are fairly popular and doing well.
- IC already got reward updates that are good
Every "test" they've done so far has resulted in only one long term change. And that change is a massive reduction in the population cap. Nothing good for the player base has ever resulted from these past PvP "tests". In addition, I used to play the PTS regularly and played through all those different "tests" in Cyrodiil a few years back. So it seems to me you just don't have very much play time in Cyrodiil or have lived through all it's ups and downs in the last 11 years and witnessed the results.
I have almost exclusively only played cyrodil since beta.... much like the other thread, I do not understand you complaining about zos doing nothing and at the same time demanding they do nothing to pvp. I appreciate you trying to diminish my explanations with an ad hominem.
I played all the tests just like everyone else. Even with watered down playerbases the performance was hardly an improvement. No improvement means zos wasn't going to spend any more money until they had better answers. We still dont have better answers with internal investigations. Thus zos has to do this external investigative test for final proof to get approval.We should use the insightful and awesome buttons more0 -
Thumbless_Bot✭✭✭✭✭I read the title as PVP planes... darn it... but maybe we can get dragons as mounts that we can fly around cyro and IC?3
-
LPapirius✭✭✭✭✭MincMincMinc wrote: »Currently yes
- Bgs were already touched and are fairly popular and doing well.
- IC already got reward updates that are good
Could you please provide a link to the source showing this is what is going on? How do you know this is what is going on in office communication at ZOS?MincMincMinc wrote: »MincMincMinc wrote: »Currently yes- Bgs were already touched and are fairly popular and doing well.
- IC already got reward updates that are good
Every "test" they've done so far has resulted in only one long term change. And that change is a massive reduction in the population cap. Nothing good for the player base has ever resulted from these past PvP "tests". In addition, I used to play the PTS regularly and played through all those different "tests" in Cyrodiil a few years back. So it seems to me you just don't have very much play time in Cyrodiil or have lived through all it's ups and downs in the last 11 years and witnessed the results.
I have almost exclusively only played cyrodil since beta.... much like the other thread, I do not understand you complaining about zos doing nothing and at the same time demanding they do nothing to pvp. I appreciate you trying to diminish my explanations with an ad hominem.
I played all the tests just like everyone else. Even with watered down playerbases the performance was hardly an improvement. No improvement means zos wasn't going to spend any more money until they had better answers. We still dont have better answers with internal investigations. Thus zos has to do this external investigative test for final proof to get approval.
No ad hominem statement has been made so far in our discussion. But it is a straw man logical fallacy when you claimed I am complaining about ZOS doing nothing and demanding they continue to do nothing.
I'm asking why ZOS can't test limiting heal and shield stacking in groups when battle spirit is active. This is something we've been asking for for years and have yet to see ZOS test. If they can't make it possible for it to be conditional on Battle Spirit, then they could just rework the newer end game PvE beasties to be a little easier and fix it that way without destroying the best PvP ever created in an online game.6 -
blktauna✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
I'm asking why ZOS can't test limiting heal and shield stacking in groups when battle spirit is active. This is something we've been asking for for years and have yet to see ZOS test. If they can't make it possible for it to be conditional on Battle Spirit, then they could just rework the newer end game PvE beasties to be a little easier and fix it that way without destroying the best PvP ever created in an online game.
Who says they won't? And as we have no visibility into their codebase, how do we even know if that's possible?
I remember some time ago when they did limit the heals to only those in your group and it made a slight difference, but the didn't take it to the next step because everyone complained relentlessly about it.
I would love to see cyro return to 2017 pvp but you have to start somewhere.PCNA
PCEU0 -
React✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭MincMincMinc wrote: »Currently yes- Bgs were already touched and are fairly popular and doing well.
- IC already got reward updates that are good
Where exactly are you getting this information? Did they explicitly state this was the case somewhere?
You know, the only time we've ever seen a long term tangible improvement in performance was when they replaced the hardware. So I'd venture to say that the issue is hardware related, and they simply aren't willing to spend the money required on the hardware side to maintain good performance.
There is evidence to support this not only in the fact that the hardware replacement gave us about 6 months of nearly flawless performance, but because every single midyear/whitestrakes event we see vastly improved performance with significantly higher numbers of players participating in PVP. Do we really think it's just a magical coincidence that this occurs every single PVP event? It's extremely obvious that they're capable of allocating more server resources to cyrodiil and solving the performance issues, but that they're simply unwilling to due to the cost of doing so.
We've been through years of tests. They've been running them for the better part of a decade. If there is a positive improvement as a result of this test, then great. However, I'm not going to thank or defend them gutting the combat system when we KNOW they're capable of improving on the issues by spending money on the hardware/server resource side.@ReactSlower - PC/NA - 2000+ CP
React Faster - XB/NA - 1500+ CP
ContentTwitch.tv/reactfaster
Youtube.com/@ReactFaster12 -
Turtle_Bot✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Thumbless_Bot wrote: »I read the title as PVP planes... darn it... but maybe we can get dragons as mounts that we can fly around cyro and IC?
maybe if cyrodiil gets fixed enough we could, or if not dragons then the daedric titans at least.no I will not put down the copium1 -
Turtle_Bot✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭MincMincMinc wrote: »Currently yes- Bgs were already touched and are fairly popular and doing well.
- IC already got reward updates that are good
Could you please provide a link to the source showing this is what is going on? How do you know this is what is going on in office communication at ZOS?
Doubt there will ever be confirmation of anything like this from ZOS, but this is typical/standard business practice within large corporations, where higher ups (upper management/board level) want to see that spending the money required to do something (anything) will at the least do what they want it to do, so it's not just a waste of money.
It's like buying a company vehicle for example. The boss isn't just going to blindly approve spending more than $100k on a truck, when a small stock sedan/hatch for like $20k is all that is required. If the employee could prove that the money spent on the truck is going to actually give the desired results where the small stock sedan/hatch cannot (say moving large loads regularly), then the boss is more likely to think about approving the funds to buy the truck than if the employee just turned around and said "trust me bro, we need it".1 -
Chrisilis✭✭✭MincMincMinc wrote: »Currently yes
- Bgs were already touched and are fairly popular and doing well.
- IC already got reward updates that are good
Tell me you don't play battlegrounds without telling me you don't play battlegrounds.3 -
CatoUnchained✭✭✭✭✭MincMincMinc wrote: »Currently yes
- Bgs were already touched and are fairly popular and doing well.
- IC already got reward updates that are good
Where are you getting this information? Can you please link to a public statement ZOS has made to support this assertion?
6 -
CatoUnchained✭✭✭✭✭MincMincMinc wrote: »Currently yes
- Bgs were already touched and are fairly popular and doing well.
- IC already got reward updates that are good
Where exactly are you getting this information? Did they explicitly state this was the case somewhere?
You know, the only time we've ever seen a long term tangible improvement in performance was when they replaced the hardware. So I'd venture to say that the issue is hardware related, and they simply aren't willing to spend the money required on the hardware side to maintain good performance.
There is evidence to support this not only in the fact that the hardware replacement gave us about 6 months of nearly flawless performance, but because every single midyear/whitestrakes event we see vastly improved performance with significantly higher numbers of players participating in PVP. Do we really think it's just a magical coincidence that this occurs every single PVP event? It's extremely obvious that they're capable of allocating more server resources to cyrodiil and solving the performance issues, but that they're simply unwilling to due to the cost of doing so.
We've been through years of tests. They've been running them for the better part of a decade. If there is a positive improvement as a result of this test, then great. However, I'm not going to thank or defend them gutting the combat system when we KNOW they're capable of improving on the issues by spending money on the hardware/server resource side.
This is an excellent summary of the current state of things. ZOS knows they have other options to at least try to fix performance without entirely trashing their current game mode in Cyrodiil. They're choosing not to try those other options for some reason.8 -
MincMincMinc✭✭✭✭✭
✭MincMincMinc wrote: »Currently yes- Bgs were already touched and are fairly popular and doing well.
- IC already got reward updates that are good
Where exactly are you getting this information? Did they explicitly state this was the case somewhere?
You know, the only time we've ever seen a long term tangible improvement in performance was when they replaced the hardware. So I'd venture to say that the issue is hardware related, and they simply aren't willing to spend the money required on the hardware side to maintain good performance.
There is evidence to support this not only in the fact that the hardware replacement gave us about 6 months of nearly flawless performance, but because every single midyear/whitestrakes event we see vastly improved performance with significantly higher numbers of players participating in PVP. Do we really think it's just a magical coincidence that this occurs every single PVP event? It's extremely obvious that they're capable of allocating more server resources to cyrodiil and solving the performance issues, but that they're simply unwilling to due to the cost of doing so.
We've been through years of tests. They've been running them for the better part of a decade. If there is a positive improvement as a result of this test, then great. However, I'm not going to thank or defend them gutting the combat system when we KNOW they're capable of improving on the issues by spending money on the hardware/server resource side.
That's just basic corporate structure. For something of this scale which requires heavy investment do you think a manager or lower level employee can simply wave a wand and buy new servers or restructure the entire combat system. No, you need to prove what is the issue and what methods will fix the issue.
MyM events are not indicative of every day performance though. The playerbase is heavily diluted with new players who only light attack at 40m range. Compared to pop lock of 10y zergs and ball group players stacking 100x more effects.
I do not think they publicly confirmed whether they bump up the pvp server performance during events, but many speculate from private event conversations.
So the hardware upgrades only lasting 6mo, what do you think happened there? did they revert the hardware change? Add more effects in combat that just inflated lag back up? Or do you think they only allocated resources like the MyM theory for a short while?
People point that zos could try other changes before doing tests like rule changes for cross healing, aoes, effect stacking dots/hots/procs. However in many of these instances zos already stated that there is no appropriate way to achieve this without creating a system to split pve and pvp. Battlespirit will not properly make these function.Edited by MincMincMinc on January 29, 2025 4:17PMWe should use the insightful and awesome buttons more0 -
MincMincMinc✭✭✭✭✭
✭MincMincMinc wrote: »Currently yes- Bgs were already touched and are fairly popular and doing well.
- IC already got reward updates that are good
Could you please provide a link to the source showing this is what is going on? How do you know this is what is going on in office communication at ZOS?MincMincMinc wrote: »MincMincMinc wrote: »Currently yes- Bgs were already touched and are fairly popular and doing well.
- IC already got reward updates that are good
Every "test" they've done so far has resulted in only one long term change. And that change is a massive reduction in the population cap. Nothing good for the player base has ever resulted from these past PvP "tests". In addition, I used to play the PTS regularly and played through all those different "tests" in Cyrodiil a few years back. So it seems to me you just don't have very much play time in Cyrodiil or have lived through all it's ups and downs in the last 11 years and witnessed the results.
I have almost exclusively only played cyrodil since beta.... much like the other thread, I do not understand you complaining about zos doing nothing and at the same time demanding they do nothing to pvp. I appreciate you trying to diminish my explanations with an ad hominem.
I played all the tests just like everyone else. Even with watered down playerbases the performance was hardly an improvement. No improvement means zos wasn't going to spend any more money until they had better answers. We still dont have better answers with internal investigations. Thus zos has to do this external investigative test for final proof to get approval.
No ad hominem statement has been made so far in our discussion. But it is a straw man logical fallacy when you claimed I am complaining about ZOS doing nothing and demanding they continue to do nothing.
I'm asking why ZOS can't test limiting heal and shield stacking in groups when battle spirit is active. This is something we've been asking for for years and have yet to see ZOS test. If they can't make it possible for it to be conditional on Battle Spirit, then they could just rework the newer end game PvE beasties to be a little easier and fix it that way without destroying the best PvP ever created in an online game.
The previous comment made a personal attack trying to claim i was a new player so my argument must be invalid..... that's an ad hominem not a strawman.
They already stated battlespirit wont allow for these types of rule changes, these rules are baked into the skills. So you would need to change the skills. A major part of the vengeance test accomplishes just that, a way to have pvp versions of the skills. In the end the skills may end up providing the same buffs and effects as before except now zos could make rule changes to dot skills or heal skills.
I think we would have massive improvements from no cross healing and no hot/dot/proc effect stacking like the game was way back when. Not only would those provide performance improvements, but many combat and build diversity improvements. These rule changes will hardly affect most combat anyways. Zergs would be nonlonger be able to stack the same BIS skill 10x, they'll hardly know it changed anyways because they are already casting into a void of 30+man groups.We should use the insightful and awesome buttons more0 -
LPapirius✭✭✭✭✭MincMincMinc wrote: »MincMincMinc wrote: »Currently yes
- Bgs were already touched and are fairly popular and doing well.
- IC already got reward updates that are good
Where exactly are you getting this information? Did they explicitly state this was the case somewhere?
You know, the only time we've ever seen a long term tangible improvement in performance was when they replaced the hardware. So I'd venture to say that the issue is hardware related, and they simply aren't willing to spend the money required on the hardware side to maintain good performance.
There is evidence to support this not only in the fact that the hardware replacement gave us about 6 months of nearly flawless performance, but because every single midyear/whitestrakes event we see vastly improved performance with significantly higher numbers of players participating in PVP. Do we really think it's just a magical coincidence that this occurs every single PVP event? It's extremely obvious that they're capable of allocating more server resources to cyrodiil and solving the performance issues, but that they're simply unwilling to due to the cost of doing so.
We've been through years of tests. They've been running them for the better part of a decade. If there is a positive improvement as a result of this test, then great. However, I'm not going to thank or defend them gutting the combat system when we KNOW they're capable of improving on the issues by spending money on the hardware/server resource side.
That's just basic corporate structure. For something of this scale which requires heavy investment do you think a manager or lower level employee can simply wave a wand and buy new servers or restructure the entire combat system. No, you need to prove what is the issue and what methods will fix the issue.
MyM events are not indicative of every day performance though. The playerbase is heavily diluted with new players who only light attack at 40m range. Compared to pop lock of 10y zergs and ball group players stacking 100x more effects.
I do not think they publicly confirmed whether they bump up the pvp server performance during events, but many speculate from private event conversations.
So the hardware upgrades only lasting 6mo, what do you think happened there? did they revert the hardware change? Add more effects in combat that just inflated lag back up? Or do you think they only allocated resources like the MyM theory for a short while?
People point that zos could try other changes before doing tests like rule changes for cross healing, aoes, effect stacking dots/hots/procs. However in many of these instances zos already stated that there is no appropriate way to achieve this without creating a system to split pve and pvp. Battlespirit will not properly make these function.
We know what happened. We just aren't allowed to discuss it.4 -
LPapirius✭✭✭✭✭MincMincMinc wrote: »MincMincMinc wrote: »Currently yes
- Bgs were already touched and are fairly popular and doing well.
- IC already got reward updates that are good
Could you please provide a link to the source showing this is what is going on? How do you know this is what is going on in office communication at ZOS?MincMincMinc wrote: »MincMincMinc wrote: »Currently yes- Bgs were already touched and are fairly popular and doing well.
- IC already got reward updates that are good
Every "test" they've done so far has resulted in only one long term change. And that change is a massive reduction in the population cap. Nothing good for the player base has ever resulted from these past PvP "tests". In addition, I used to play the PTS regularly and played through all those different "tests" in Cyrodiil a few years back. So it seems to me you just don't have very much play time in Cyrodiil or have lived through all it's ups and downs in the last 11 years and witnessed the results.
I have almost exclusively only played cyrodil since beta.... much like the other thread, I do not understand you complaining about zos doing nothing and at the same time demanding they do nothing to pvp. I appreciate you trying to diminish my explanations with an ad hominem.
I played all the tests just like everyone else. Even with watered down playerbases the performance was hardly an improvement. No improvement means zos wasn't going to spend any more money until they had better answers. We still dont have better answers with internal investigations. Thus zos has to do this external investigative test for final proof to get approval.
No ad hominem statement has been made so far in our discussion. But it is a straw man logical fallacy when you claimed I am complaining about ZOS doing nothing and demanding they continue to do nothing.
I'm asking why ZOS can't test limiting heal and shield stacking in groups when battle spirit is active. This is something we've been asking for for years and have yet to see ZOS test. If they can't make it possible for it to be conditional on Battle Spirit, then they could just rework the newer end game PvE beasties to be a little easier and fix it that way without destroying the best PvP ever created in an online game.
The previous comment made a personal attack trying to claim i was a new player so my argument must be invalid..... that's an ad hominem not a strawman.
They already stated battlespirit wont allow for these types of rule changes, these rules are baked into the skills. So you would need to change the skills. A major part of the vengeance test accomplishes just that, a way to have pvp versions of the skills. In the end the skills may end up providing the same buffs and effects as before except now zos could make rule changes to dot skills or heal skills.
I think we would have massive improvements from no cross healing and no hot/dot/proc effect stacking like the game was way back when. Not only would those provide performance improvements, but many combat and build diversity improvements. These rule changes will hardly affect most combat anyways. Zergs would be nonlonger be able to stack the same BIS skill 10x, they'll hardly know it changed anyways because they are already casting into a void of 30+man groups.
Can you please provide a link to where and when they made the "battlespirit won't allow for these types of rule changes" statement?
Also note that historically ZOS has made many, many promises and statements about their plans for Cyrodiil that turned out to not be reflective of their actual plans or they changed their plans after making those promises or statements. (we have no way of knowing which) Thus we have to base our assumptions on what they've done in the past, not what they say they will do in the future. This is why your statements make it appear you are new to the game and have not experienced the more than a decade of ZOS dealings with Cyrodiil and the PvP community.
Edited by LPapirius on January 30, 2025 5:44AM4 -
LPapirius✭✭✭✭✭MincMincMinc wrote: »Currently yes
- Bgs were already touched and are fairly popular and doing well.
- IC already got reward updates that are good
BG's and IC are the two least populated, least played portions of ESO.4 -
Chrisilis✭✭✭.MincMincMinc wrote: »Currently yes
- Bgs were already touched and are fairly popular and doing well.
- IC already got reward updates that are good
BG's and IC are the two least populated, least played portions of ESO.
IC I get, the rare times I go in there I almost never see anyone else but can you point to a source for BG participation? Or a breakdown by percentage of player activities? I've heard many times that PvP in general and Bg's specifically are super niche and used by a tiny percentage of players but where are people getting these numbers? Or is it just perception and word of mouth? I'd be super interested in an actual source for this info, thanks0 -
DeadlySerious✭✭✭✭.MincMincMinc wrote: »Currently yes
- Bgs were already touched and are fairly popular and doing well.
- IC already got reward updates that are good
BG's and IC are the two least populated, least played portions of ESO.
IC I get, the rare times I go in there I almost never see anyone else but can you point to a source for BG participation? Or a breakdown by percentage of player activities? I've heard many times that PvP in general and Bg's specifically are super niche and used by a tiny percentage of players but where are people getting these numbers? Or is it just perception and word of mouth? I'd be super interested in an actual source for this info, thanks
Did you watch the BG live stream about a month ago? Roughly half the time even the devs and class reps couldn't get into a BG without getting disconnected. Nothing has improved since then. If you can't get in, you can't play.5 -
CrazyKitty✭✭✭✭✭MincMincMinc wrote: »Currently yes
- Bgs were already touched and are fairly popular and doing well.
- IC already got reward updates that are good
Where exactly are you getting this information? Did they explicitly state this was the case somewhere?
You know, the only time we've ever seen a long term tangible improvement in performance was when they replaced the hardware. So I'd venture to say that the issue is hardware related, and they simply aren't willing to spend the money required on the hardware side to maintain good performance.
There is evidence to support this not only in the fact that the hardware replacement gave us about 6 months of nearly flawless performance, but because every single midyear/whitestrakes event we see vastly improved performance with significantly higher numbers of players participating in PVP. Do we really think it's just a magical coincidence that this occurs every single PVP event? It's extremely obvious that they're capable of allocating more server resources to cyrodiil and solving the performance issues, but that they're simply unwilling to due to the cost of doing so.
We've been through years of tests. They've been running them for the better part of a decade. If there is a positive improvement as a result of this test, then great. However, I'm not going to thank or defend them gutting the combat system when we KNOW they're capable of improving on the issues by spending money on the hardware/server resource side.
Nobody could have outlined the situation more accurately than you did in this post. Well done!
Edited by CrazyKitty on January 31, 2025 4:17PM3 -
MincMincMinc✭✭✭✭✭
✭MincMincMinc wrote: »MincMincMinc wrote: »Currently yes- Bgs were already touched and are fairly popular and doing well.
- IC already got reward updates that are good
Could you please provide a link to the source showing this is what is going on? How do you know this is what is going on in office communication at ZOS?MincMincMinc wrote: »MincMincMinc wrote: »Currently yes- Bgs were already touched and are fairly popular and doing well.
- IC already got reward updates that are good
Every "test" they've done so far has resulted in only one long term change. And that change is a massive reduction in the population cap. Nothing good for the player base has ever resulted from these past PvP "tests". In addition, I used to play the PTS regularly and played through all those different "tests" in Cyrodiil a few years back. So it seems to me you just don't have very much play time in Cyrodiil or have lived through all it's ups and downs in the last 11 years and witnessed the results.
I have almost exclusively only played cyrodil since beta.... much like the other thread, I do not understand you complaining about zos doing nothing and at the same time demanding they do nothing to pvp. I appreciate you trying to diminish my explanations with an ad hominem.
I played all the tests just like everyone else. Even with watered down playerbases the performance was hardly an improvement. No improvement means zos wasn't going to spend any more money until they had better answers. We still dont have better answers with internal investigations. Thus zos has to do this external investigative test for final proof to get approval.
No ad hominem statement has been made so far in our discussion. But it is a straw man logical fallacy when you claimed I am complaining about ZOS doing nothing and demanding they continue to do nothing.
I'm asking why ZOS can't test limiting heal and shield stacking in groups when battle spirit is active. This is something we've been asking for for years and have yet to see ZOS test. If they can't make it possible for it to be conditional on Battle Spirit, then they could just rework the newer end game PvE beasties to be a little easier and fix it that way without destroying the best PvP ever created in an online game.
The previous comment made a personal attack trying to claim i was a new player so my argument must be invalid..... that's an ad hominem not a strawman.
They already stated battlespirit wont allow for these types of rule changes, these rules are baked into the skills. So you would need to change the skills. A major part of the vengeance test accomplishes just that, a way to have pvp versions of the skills. In the end the skills may end up providing the same buffs and effects as before except now zos could make rule changes to dot skills or heal skills.
I think we would have massive improvements from no cross healing and no hot/dot/proc effect stacking like the game was way back when. Not only would those provide performance improvements, but many combat and build diversity improvements. These rule changes will hardly affect most combat anyways. Zergs would be nonlonger be able to stack the same BIS skill 10x, they'll hardly know it changed anyways because they are already casting into a void of 30+man groups.
Can you please provide a link to where and when they made the "battlespirit won't allow for these types of rule changes" statement?
Also note that historically ZOS has made many, many promises and statements about their plans for Cyrodiil that turned out to not be reflective of their actual plans or they changed their plans after making those promises or statements. (we have no way of knowing which) Thus we have to base our assumptions on what they've done in the past, not what they say they will do in the future. This is why your statements make it appear you are new to the game and have not experienced the more than a decade of ZOS dealings with Cyrodiil and the PvP community.
You can dig through years of vods for a clip if you want, fairly certain it was said on dev posts during patch notes too. Or if you have a basic game design understanding you should know battlespirit is not the correct way to facilitate rule changes in skills.
My statements purely pull information from what they have disclosed. I just don't agree with your dreamed up evil zos that maliciously is trying to ruin your fun. They are a company, plans get released, plans get worked on, plans get scrapped. Its the nature of how companies work. I accept that's how the world works and I don't get disappointed and upset like some people do. I hear the next set of plans and go from there. Not everyone has to be in a depressive state to be considered old in the game. Been playing since beta as much as the next guy playing since beta.
Like their statement of how vengeance is just a test and sets will be reintroduced......Not only is this coming from several teams at the company, but on our end we can see that it makes no sense regardless of what zos says because monetarily it makes no sense to stop pvp players from buying eso+ or dlc. So no point fantasizing that zos will make a template moba pvp game mode.We should use the insightful and awesome buttons more2 -
reazea✭✭✭✭✭
✭MincMincMinc wrote: »Currently yes- Bgs were already touched and are fairly popular and doing well.
- IC already got reward updates that are good
Where exactly are you getting this information? Did they explicitly state this was the case somewhere?
You know, the only time we've ever seen a long term tangible improvement in performance was when they replaced the hardware. So I'd venture to say that the issue is hardware related, and they simply aren't willing to spend the money required on the hardware side to maintain good performance.
There is evidence to support this not only in the fact that the hardware replacement gave us about 6 months of nearly flawless performance, but because every single midyear/whitestrakes event we see vastly improved performance with significantly higher numbers of players participating in PVP. Do we really think it's just a magical coincidence that this occurs every single PVP event? It's extremely obvious that they're capable of allocating more server resources to cyrodiil and solving the performance issues, but that they're simply unwilling to due to the cost of doing so.
We've been through years of tests. They've been running them for the better part of a decade. If there is a positive improvement as a result of this test, then great. However, I'm not going to thank or defend them gutting the combat system when we KNOW they're capable of improving on the issues by spending money on the hardware/server resource side.
As usual, React gives an excellent summary of where we're at with this issue. I know Kevin said no plans have been made for future content, but it feels like the table has already been set. We know how tests like this have gone in the past, and why aren't they focusing on what's already been created instead of creating a whole new system? I think React's post quoted answers those questions.4 -
xylena_lazarow✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
It's certainly frustrating to watch them go all-in on Ravenwatch 2.0 while ignoring Rushing Agony.We know how tests like this have gone in the past, and why aren't they focusing on what's already been created instead of creating a whole new system?PC/NA || Cyro/BGs || RIP old PvP build system || bring Vengeance4