Maintenance for the week of December 8:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – December 8
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – December 8
Do you really need proc effects and PvE skills in PvP?
ImmortalCX
✭✭✭✭✭
Vengence campaign has shown player base that by removing sets and skills with procs that lag isn't much of a problem. This was a smart move. Does PvP really need these things anyway?
The solution is in sight. And I expect this is where they are going with it:
1) Remove any proc effects from sets in PvP. PvE sets will work, except that many will be underwhelming when they lose their proc. Chose your sets accordingly. Also, provide mythic PVP sets that have a very useful 5-piece effect for PvP, so that players have something to work towards.
2) Provide specific PvP skills that are tested and balanced for PvP. Call them "vengeance skills". They will be a collection of PvP specific skills like Assault, that also include offensive skills. These skills do not work outside of PvP zones. Some of the vengeance skills are only available to a particular class (and are inspired by the class skill lines), while other skills are available to any class.
What this would do is create distinct class archetypes, but with some flexibility in skill selection. And everything would be tested for:
1) Balance
2) Performance
This is probably the best possible outcome. And I don't see it being an unrealistic amount of work.
The solution is in sight. And I expect this is where they are going with it:
1) Remove any proc effects from sets in PvP. PvE sets will work, except that many will be underwhelming when they lose their proc. Chose your sets accordingly. Also, provide mythic PVP sets that have a very useful 5-piece effect for PvP, so that players have something to work towards.
2) Provide specific PvP skills that are tested and balanced for PvP. Call them "vengeance skills". They will be a collection of PvP specific skills like Assault, that also include offensive skills. These skills do not work outside of PvP zones. Some of the vengeance skills are only available to a particular class (and are inspired by the class skill lines), while other skills are available to any class.
What this would do is create distinct class archetypes, but with some flexibility in skill selection. And everything would be tested for:
1) Balance
2) Performance
This is probably the best possible outcome. And I don't see it being an unrealistic amount of work.
7
-
Thumbless_Bot✭✭✭✭✭
✭Need? You do realize this is a video game...
The game needs to be fun, repeatable and with some sense that you can compete.Edited by Thumbless_Bot on March 24, 2025 11:19PM21 -
ImmortalCX✭✭✭✭✭Thumbless_Bot wrote: »Need? You do realize this is a video game...
The game needs to be fun, repeatable and with some sense that you can compete.
What I described would be more fun than what the game has now.5 -
tomofhyrule✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭I really wouldn't be surprised if they replace one of the permanent Campaigns with a Vengeance one after this test. Sure, it may need some balance, but people seem to be enjoying the larger fights.
However, I do want to just point out one thing:
They did that. There was a "no proc" test, and then a lot of people campaigned to keep that as a permanent ruleset, which ended up replacing the noCP campaign. And it was popular for a bit... until it died.ImmortalCX wrote: »1) Remove any proc effects from sets in PvP. PvE sets will work, except that many will be underwhelming when they lose their proc. Chose your sets accordingly. Also, provide mythic PVP sets that have a very useful 5-piece effect for PvP, so that players have something to work towards.
While reinventing the wheel is not usually the best course of action, maybe we'd need to see first why the first one failed instead of just coming in and claiming that it's a ticket to success, when it demonstrably was not.12 -
ImmortalCX✭✭✭✭✭tomofhyrule wrote: »I really wouldn't be surprised if they replace one of the permanent Campaigns with a Vengeance one after this test. Sure, it may need some balance, but people seem to be enjoying the larger fights.
However, I do want to just point out one thing:
They did that. There was a "no proc" test, and then a lot of people campaigned to keep that as a permanent ruleset, which ended up replacing the noCP campaign. And it was popular for a bit... until it died.ImmortalCX wrote: »1) Remove any proc effects from sets in PvP. PvE sets will work, except that many will be underwhelming when they lose their proc. Chose your sets accordingly. Also, provide mythic PVP sets that have a very useful 5-piece effect for PvP, so that players have something to work towards.
While reinventing the wheel is not usually the best course of action, maybe we'd need to see first why the first one failed instead of just coming in and claiming that it's a ticket to success, when it demonstrably was not.
Because people want to have their cake and eat it too.0 -
Thumbless_Bot✭✭✭✭✭
✭ImmortalCX wrote: »Thumbless_Bot wrote: »Need? You do realize this is a video game...
The game needs to be fun, repeatable and with some sense that you can compete.
What I described would be more fun than what the game has now.
Then why do you already play it? It's not like it's a car that you have to use to get to work. Your sentiment is like having every type of food literally at your finger tips then eating a burger and fries, over and over, and saying I wanted pizza.
Go get pizza. This game is a burger and fries. Always has been. If they remove burgers and fries, those that like burgers and fries will be lost as customers.Edited by Thumbless_Bot on March 24, 2025 11:38PM3 -
SwimsWithMemes✭✭✭✭ImmortalCX wrote: »Vengence campaign has shown player base that by removing sets and skills with procs that lag isn't much of a problem. This was a smart move. Does PvP really need these things anyway?
The solution is in sight. And I expect this is where they are going with it:
1) Remove any proc effects from sets in PvP. PvE sets will work, except that many will be underwhelming when they lose their proc. Chose your sets accordingly. Also, provide mythic PVP sets that have a very useful 5-piece effect for PvP, so that players have something to work towards.
2) Provide specific PvP skills that are tested and balanced for PvP. Call them "vengeance skills". They will be a collection of PvP specific skills like Assault, that also include offensive skills. These skills do not work outside of PvP zones. Some of the vengeance skills are only available to a particular class (and are inspired by the class skill lines), while other skills are available to any class.
What this would do is create distinct class archetypes, but with some flexibility in skill selection. And everything would be tested for:
1) Balance
2) Performance
This is probably the best possible outcome. And I don't see it being an unrealistic amount of work.
Just remove proc sets from the game entirely, they probably contribute to lag in trials.
PvE and PvP should have the same gear that works in the same way. Some might be better in or the other of course, but as a player if I venture into any map I should really be able to expect my gear to be functionally the same.
I don't mind if they "convert" gear you are wearing to a simplified build, though.2 -
ImmortalCX✭✭✭✭✭SwimsWithMemes wrote: »ImmortalCX wrote: »Vengence campaign has shown player base that by removing sets and skills with procs that lag isn't much of a problem. This was a smart move. Does PvP really need these things anyway?
The solution is in sight. And I expect this is where they are going with it:
1) Remove any proc effects from sets in PvP. PvE sets will work, except that many will be underwhelming when they lose their proc. Chose your sets accordingly. Also, provide mythic PVP sets that have a very useful 5-piece effect for PvP, so that players have something to work towards.
2) Provide specific PvP skills that are tested and balanced for PvP. Call them "vengeance skills". They will be a collection of PvP specific skills like Assault, that also include offensive skills. These skills do not work outside of PvP zones. Some of the vengeance skills are only available to a particular class (and are inspired by the class skill lines), while other skills are available to any class.
What this would do is create distinct class archetypes, but with some flexibility in skill selection. And everything would be tested for:
1) Balance
2) Performance
This is probably the best possible outcome. And I don't see it being an unrealistic amount of work.
Just remove proc sets from the game entirely, they probably contribute to lag in trials.
PvE and PvP should have the same gear that works in the same way. Some might be better in or the other of course, but as a player if I venture into any map I should really be able to expect my gear to be functionally the same.
I don't mind if they "convert" gear you are wearing to a simplified build, though.
But what if they can't get that working? And they have had ten years, so it's unlikely.
Would having specific PvP sets be that bad?2 -
ImmortalCX✭✭✭✭✭Thumbless_Bot wrote: »ImmortalCX wrote: »Thumbless_Bot wrote: »Need? You do realize this is a video game...
The game needs to be fun, repeatable and with some sense that you can compete.
What I described would be more fun than what the game has now.
Then why do you already play it? It's not like it's a car that you have to use to get to work. Your sentiment is like having every type of food literally at your finger tips then eating a burger and fries, over and over, and saying I wanted pizza.
Go get pizza. This game is a burger and fries. Always has been. If they remove burgers and fries, those that like burgers and fries will be lost as customers.
I dont play PvP in its current form, but if they had standardized gear and skills that were balanced and performed well, I would give it a look.1 -
Amottica✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭ImmortalCX wrote: »Thumbless_Bot wrote: »Need? You do realize this is a video game...
The game needs to be fun, repeatable and with some sense that you can compete.
What I described would be more fun than what the game has now.
And what is fun is a matter of personal opinion. The no-proc campaign was not a favored by many players so it does not seem many were of the opinion that it was fun.
6 -
Kappachi✭✭✭✭✭Yes. I only play PvP because it's the same as the rest of the game. ESO's build customization is unmatched by any other game and that extends into PvP, if they remove it from cyrodiil then I'd probably never visit again and just stick to bgs.
If you want what you're describing with specific PvP sets then what you want is Guild Wars 2's Structred PvP, not ESO's super customizable PvP with unrivaled depth.Edited by Kappachi on March 25, 2025 12:31AM9 -
ImmortalCX✭✭✭✭✭Yes. I only play PvP because it's the same as the rest of the game. ESO's build customization is unmatched by any other game and that extends into PvP, if they remove it from cyrodiil then I'd probably never visit again and just stick to bgs.
If you want what you're describing with specific PvP sets then what you want is Guild Wars 2's Structred PvP, not ESO's super customizable PvP with unrivaled depth.
OK. I don't want to hear you complain about lag then.
4 -
Amottica✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭ImmortalCX wrote: »Yes. I only play PvP because it's the same as the rest of the game. ESO's build customization is unmatched by any other game and that extends into PvP, if they remove it from cyrodiil then I'd probably never visit again and just stick to bgs.
If you want what you're describing with specific PvP sets then what you want is Guild Wars 2's Structred PvP, not ESO's super customizable PvP with unrivaled depth.
OK. I don't want to hear you complain about lag then.
I think we can discuss what we want to as long as it is within the ToS and CoC. They are entitled to their thoughts and opinions just like the rest of us.
6 -
ImmortalCX✭✭✭✭✭ImmortalCX wrote: »Yes. I only play PvP because it's the same as the rest of the game. ESO's build customization is unmatched by any other game and that extends into PvP, if they remove it from cyrodiil then I'd probably never visit again and just stick to bgs.
If you want what you're describing with specific PvP sets then what you want is Guild Wars 2's Structred PvP, not ESO's super customizable PvP with unrivaled depth.
OK. I don't want to hear you complain about lag then.
I think we can discuss what we want to as long as it is within the ToS and CoC. They are entitled to their thoughts and opinions just like the rest of us.
Yes. I said i dont want to hear them complain about lag.
No one else can tell me what i want.2 -
AzuraFan✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭SwimsWithMemes wrote: »Just remove proc sets from the game entirely, they probably contribute to lag in trials.
A couple of my favourite sets are proc sets because they fit the theme of my character (and some proc sets can be really fun). I'd hate to see them go in PvE.2 -
SwimsWithMemes✭✭✭✭ImmortalCX wrote: »SwimsWithMemes wrote: »ImmortalCX wrote: »Vengence campaign has shown player base that by removing sets and skills with procs that lag isn't much of a problem. This was a smart move. Does PvP really need these things anyway?
The solution is in sight. And I expect this is where they are going with it:
1) Remove any proc effects from sets in PvP. PvE sets will work, except that many will be underwhelming when they lose their proc. Chose your sets accordingly. Also, provide mythic PVP sets that have a very useful 5-piece effect for PvP, so that players have something to work towards.
2) Provide specific PvP skills that are tested and balanced for PvP. Call them "vengeance skills". They will be a collection of PvP specific skills like Assault, that also include offensive skills. These skills do not work outside of PvP zones. Some of the vengeance skills are only available to a particular class (and are inspired by the class skill lines), while other skills are available to any class.
What this would do is create distinct class archetypes, but with some flexibility in skill selection. And everything would be tested for:
1) Balance
2) Performance
This is probably the best possible outcome. And I don't see it being an unrealistic amount of work.
Just remove proc sets from the game entirely, they probably contribute to lag in trials.
PvE and PvP should have the same gear that works in the same way. Some might be better in or the other of course, but as a player if I venture into any map I should really be able to expect my gear to be functionally the same.
I don't mind if they "convert" gear you are wearing to a simplified build, though.
But what if they can't get that working? And they have had ten years, so it's unlikely.
Would having specific PvP sets be that bad?
It wouldn't be the end of the world or anything, but it will have flow on effects. If we have specific PvP gear, I think it would be fair to expect it doesn't force PvP oriented players into PvE
- there could be alternative ways of getting it, but the primary way should be through PvP.
This would mean that PvP players ought to have their own (consistent, not relegated to weekly rotating shops) way of getting monster sets, overland sets, dungeon, trial and Arena gear. Maybe taking specific castles or districts have different versions of gear sellers or give undaunted keys etc
This will of course take several PvP players out of having to do PvE, which is a sentiment I have heard expressed (I prefer when the systems reinforce each other but that's personal preference). This will make queue times and grouping a little longer and harder for PvE players.
PvP players ought to also be provided their own ways of acquiring material for crafting gear, if the gear needs upgrading or enchanting etc.
A corollary would also be that PvP gear is not used in PvE content - so Deadly Strikes, Powerful Assault would need to be changed.
It will also have market and economic impacts, if PvP players are expected to engage in PvP for PvP gear, what need do they have to buy gear?
None of these I am saying are good or bad, but it is a complex set of decisions to bifurcate the content in the game. Currently it all is inter-connected.Edited by SwimsWithMemes on March 25, 2025 2:54AM1 -
Amottica✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭ImmortalCX wrote: »ImmortalCX wrote: »Yes. I only play PvP because it's the same as the rest of the game. ESO's build customization is unmatched by any other game and that extends into PvP, if they remove it from cyrodiil then I'd probably never visit again and just stick to bgs.
If you want what you're describing with specific PvP sets then what you want is Guild Wars 2's Structred PvP, not ESO's super customizable PvP with unrivaled depth.
OK. I don't want to hear you complain about lag then.
I think we can discuss what we want to as long as it is within the ToS and CoC. They are entitled to their thoughts and opinions just like the rest of us.
Yes. I said i dont want to hear them complain about lag.
No one else can tell me what i want.
Exactly my point just as they can speak their mind as well. Glad we agree that they can complain about lag if they choose to .
2 -
DestroyerPewnack✭✭✭✭ImmortalCX wrote: »Thumbless_Bot wrote: »Need? You do realize this is a video game...
The game needs to be fun, repeatable and with some sense that you can compete.
What I described would be more fun than what the game has now.
What you described is vague at best. No actual solutions offered, and zero consideration given to how PvPers would react, if Vengeance mode became permanent. [snip]
[edited for baiting]Edited by ZOS_Icy on March 25, 2025 2:40PM1 -
ImmortalCX✭✭✭✭✭SwimsWithMemes wrote: »ImmortalCX wrote: »SwimsWithMemes wrote: »ImmortalCX wrote: »Vengence campaign has shown player base that by removing sets and skills with procs that lag isn't much of a problem. This was a smart move. Does PvP really need these things anyway?
The solution is in sight. And I expect this is where they are going with it:
1) Remove any proc effects from sets in PvP. PvE sets will work, except that many will be underwhelming when they lose their proc. Chose your sets accordingly. Also, provide mythic PVP sets that have a very useful 5-piece effect for PvP, so that players have something to work towards.
2) Provide specific PvP skills that are tested and balanced for PvP. Call them "vengeance skills". They will be a collection of PvP specific skills like Assault, that also include offensive skills. These skills do not work outside of PvP zones. Some of the vengeance skills are only available to a particular class (and are inspired by the class skill lines), while other skills are available to any class.
What this would do is create distinct class archetypes, but with some flexibility in skill selection. And everything would be tested for:
1) Balance
2) Performance
This is probably the best possible outcome. And I don't see it being an unrealistic amount of work.
Just remove proc sets from the game entirely, they probably contribute to lag in trials.
PvE and PvP should have the same gear that works in the same way. Some might be better in or the other of course, but as a player if I venture into any map I should really be able to expect my gear to be functionally the same.
I don't mind if they "convert" gear you are wearing to a simplified build, though.
But what if they can't get that working? And they have had ten years, so it's unlikely.
Would having specific PvP sets be that bad?
It wouldn't be the end of the world or anything, but it will have flow on effects. If we have specific PvP gear, I think it would be fair to expect it doesn't force PvP oriented players into PvE
- there could be alternative ways of getting it, but the primary way should be through PvP.
This would mean that PvP players ought to have their own (consistent, not relegated to weekly rotating shops) way of getting monster sets, overland sets, dungeon, trial and Arena gear. Maybe taking specific castles or districts have different versions of gear sellers or give undaunted keys etc
This will of course take several PvP players out of having to do PvE, which is a sentiment I have heard expressed (I prefer when the systems reinforce each other but that's personal preference). This will make queue times and grouping a little longer and harder for PvE players.
PvP players ought to also be provided their own ways of acquiring material for crafting gear, if the gear needs upgrading or enchanting etc.
A corollary would also be that PvP gear is not used in PvE content - so Deadly Strikes, Powerful Assault would need to be changed.
It will also have market and economic impacts, if PvP players are expected to engage in PvP for PvP gear, what need do they have to buy gear?
None of these I am saying are good or bad, but it is a complex set of decisions to bifurcate the content in the game. Currently it all is inter-connected.
My idea, that the 5pc effect of a set is inactive in PvP, and the availability of PvP sets with tested and balanced 5pc effects would work well. People could use PvE sets, but there wouild be incentive to farm PvP set.
The obvious problem with all the PvE skills and gear is that there are hundreds/thousands? of different effects (aoe, timers, graphics) with interactions that must be maintained by the server.
They have had 10 years and they aren't able to get it working with the complexity of the task at hand. Lets be realistic, they aren't going to get it working with all the gear and skill effects.
They showed the player base that when those things are removed, the lag is acceptable.
Whatever they allow in PvP needs to be tested in that environment. They came up with all these cool set procs over the years and never considered the impact it would have on PvP.
That is why there needs to be separate skill lines and gear for PvP.
I recognoze that the majority of people still playing ESO PvP aren't skill based players and are relying primarily on gear supremacy to one shot or be unkillable damage sponge. They want something that is imposssible. I recognize they will be unhappy if there is a level playing field.
Edited by ImmortalCX on March 25, 2025 2:09PM1 -
Major_Mangle✭✭✭✭✭You could say the same thing for PvE. Does PvE really need all these flashy sets that degrade performance?. We should´ve a "vengeance" PvE test to see if performance would improve there as well.Edited by Major_Mangle on March 25, 2025 2:12PMPs4 EU 2016-2020
PC/EU: 2020 -2 -
ImmortalCX✭✭✭✭✭Major_Mangle wrote: »You could say the same thing for PvE. Does PvE really need all these flashy sets that degrade performance?. We should´ve a "vengeance" PvE test to see if performance would improve there as well.
I dont think PvE people are complaining.
The sets were created for novelty, to sell DLC, and to use in trials and dungoens.
This is not a PVE problem. Your arguement is, "If we can't have nice things, then you shouldn't be able to have nice things."Edited by ImmortalCX on March 25, 2025 2:15PM5 -
BXR_Lonestar✭✭✭✭✭
✭ImmortalCX wrote: »Thumbless_Bot wrote: »Need? You do realize this is a video game...
The game needs to be fun, repeatable and with some sense that you can compete.
What I described would be more fun than what the game has now.
More fun for whom, might I ask? For you? Or for me? Do you not see that your idea of fun may not be someone elses idea of fun?
I think taking the heavy hand of rebalancing PVP via the "Vengeance" strategy would be fun for a vocal minority, but would not be fun for those who are enjoying the PVP experience as it currently exists. I see this debate as a similar debate that went out when Destiny (Destiny 1 - I never played Destiny 2) was all the rage and there was this tension between PVE and PVP balance, and things kept getting nerfed for the sake of PVP.
The people who hated the way the game's PVP played because of the lack of balance were those people who were familiar with the Bungie name because of the Halo game. And Halo cut its teeth with its competitive PVP gameplay. Everything was balanced, nobody had weapons or abilities other people didn't have or couldn't get. And that crowd very much wanted to change Destiny's gameplay to make the game more "balanced" for a competitive PVP experience. That crowd won out, and Destiny went into a nerf cycle until they nerfed each and every thing that made the game so magical and addictive in the first place for so many other players. That crowd was also a very vocal minority of players.
What that crowd failed to see was that while Destiny's PVP balance wasn't great, there was great synergy in the game between PVE and PVP that kept people playing and that kept the game fun. Going out and grinding to get that amazing weapon that was OP in PVP was fun - and then it was fun to use in PVP until the next OP counter-weapon came out. And weapon classes rose and fell, but I remember almost every meta up until the Wrath of the Machine's expansion and they were all mostly fun to play in.
What I'm trying to say here is: don't cook your golden goose. It may not be perfectly balanced, and it might not be for everyone, but there are also a LOT of people who enjoy how things currently are and who will leave or quit playing that aspect of the game if you make significant changes to the way it currently plays by reordering skills, abilities, sets, etc. And if they go down this road and find that they mistakenly listened to the vocal minority, there's not much that they can do to get all those players back, and they (Zos) just took one more step towards killing their game.
Now, I can see making these changes as a mode for Battlegrounds, where there SHOULD be some semblance of balance because that is a more highly competitive environment. And that is probably how any changes should be implemented in the first place. Put it in battlegrounds as a separate mode and see how many people show up. If people don't play it, you know that it is not going to be popular mass-scale.1 -
Reginald_leBlem✭✭✭✭✭
✭ImmortalCX wrote: »Vengence campaign has shown player base that by removing sets and skills with procs that lag isn't much of a problem. This was a smart move. Does PvP really need these things anyway?
The solution is in sight. And I expect this is where they are going with it:
1) Remove any proc effects from sets in PvP. PvE sets will work, except that many will be underwhelming when they lose their proc. Chose your sets accordingly. Also, provide mythic PVP sets that have a very useful 5-piece effect for PvP, so that players have something to work towards.
2) Provide specific PvP skills that are tested and balanced for PvP. Call them "vengeance skills". They will be a collection of PvP specific skills like Assault, that also include offensive skills. These skills do not work outside of PvP zones. Some of the vengeance skills are only available to a particular class (and are inspired by the class skill lines), while other skills are available to any class.
What this would do is create distinct class archetypes, but with some flexibility in skill selection. And everything would be tested for:
1) Balance
2) Performance
This is probably the best possible outcome. And I don't see it being an unrealistic amount of work.
Did you play in Ravenwatch when it was no proc?1 -
wolfie1.0.✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Have to keep in mind that vengeance campaign is a novelty at the moment. It's new so a lot of people in there.
Also keep in mind that the games progression is though cp and gear, factors that are disabled in vengeance campaign.
If it's determined that proc sets and cp are really the issues behind the lag, and the only way to address lag is to nuke these from the game. The entire progression system would have to be reworked, and all of the gear rebalanced. You can only have so many non proc stat boosting sets2 -
ImmortalCX✭✭✭✭✭BXR_Lonestar wrote: »ImmortalCX wrote: »Thumbless_Bot wrote: »Need? You do realize this is a video game...
The game needs to be fun, repeatable and with some sense that you can compete.
What I described would be more fun than what the game has now.
More fun for whom, might I ask? For you? Or for me? Do you not see that your idea of fun may not be someone elses idea of fun?
I think taking the heavy hand of rebalancing PVP via the "Vengeance" strategy would be fun for a vocal minority, but would not be fun for those who are enjoying the PVP experience as it currently exists. I see this debate as a similar debate that went out when Destiny (Destiny 1 - I never played Destiny 2) was all the rage and there was this tension between PVE and PVP balance, and things kept getting nerfed for the sake of PVP.
The people who hated the way the game's PVP played because of the lack of balance were those people who were familiar with the Bungie name because of the Halo game. And Halo cut its teeth with its competitive PVP gameplay. Everything was balanced, nobody had weapons or abilities other people didn't have or couldn't get. And that crowd very much wanted to change Destiny's gameplay to make the game more "balanced" for a competitive PVP experience. That crowd won out, and Destiny went into a nerf cycle until they nerfed each and every thing that made the game so magical and addictive in the first place for so many other players. That crowd was also a very vocal minority of players.
What that crowd failed to see was that while Destiny's PVP balance wasn't great, there was great synergy in the game between PVE and PVP that kept people playing and that kept the game fun. Going out and grinding to get that amazing weapon that was OP in PVP was fun - and then it was fun to use in PVP until the next OP counter-weapon came out. And weapon classes rose and fell, but I remember almost every meta up until the Wrath of the Machine's expansion and they were all mostly fun to play in.
What I'm trying to say here is: don't cook your golden goose. It may not be perfectly balanced, and it might not be for everyone, but there are also a LOT of people who enjoy how things currently are and who will leave or quit playing that aspect of the game if you make significant changes to the way it currently plays by reordering skills, abilities, sets, etc. And if they go down this road and find that they mistakenly listened to the vocal minority, there's not much that they can do to get all those players back, and they (Zos) just took one more step towards killing their game.
Now, I can see making these changes as a mode for Battlegrounds, where there SHOULD be some semblance of balance because that is a more highly competitive environment. And that is probably how any changes should be implemented in the first place. Put it in battlegrounds as a separate mode and see how many people show up. If people don't play it, you know that it is not going to be popular mass-scale.
I recognize in my earlier post that the people remaining who play PvP are into gear min/max. If they were into straight up skill then they would already be playing a number of other pvp games.
My bias is that I don't have respect for people who play a pvp game that is based on weird combinations of gear that become overpowered. But I recognize that these people are all who is remaining in eso pvp, because there skill based games are numberous.
So do nothing then! Devs should just put in the earplugs and say F-lag.
But I suspect the number of people who migrated to New World or other rpg for its more competitive pvp are larger than the group remaining in low pop eso campaigns. And as I don't have respect that kind of player, I would rather they fix the lag by removing procs. Maybe get back the people who left for better pvp systems. I would rather play with those people anyway.
Edited by ImmortalCX on March 25, 2025 2:52PM1 -
Reginald_leBlem✭✭✭✭✭
✭ImmortalCX wrote: »BXR_Lonestar wrote: »ImmortalCX wrote: »Thumbless_Bot wrote: »Need? You do realize this is a video game...
The game needs to be fun, repeatable and with some sense that you can compete.
What I described would be more fun than what the game has now.
More fun for whom, might I ask? For you? Or for me? Do you not see that your idea of fun may not be someone elses idea of fun?
I think taking the heavy hand of rebalancing PVP via the "Vengeance" strategy would be fun for a vocal minority, but would not be fun for those who are enjoying the PVP experience as it currently exists. I see this debate as a similar debate that went out when Destiny (Destiny 1 - I never played Destiny 2) was all the rage and there was this tension between PVE and PVP balance, and things kept getting nerfed for the sake of PVP.
The people who hated the way the game's PVP played because of the lack of balance were those people who were familiar with the Bungie name because of the Halo game. And Halo cut its teeth with its competitive PVP gameplay. Everything was balanced, nobody had weapons or abilities other people didn't have or couldn't get. And that crowd very much wanted to change Destiny's gameplay to make the game more "balanced" for a competitive PVP experience. That crowd won out, and Destiny went into a nerf cycle until they nerfed each and every thing that made the game so magical and addictive in the first place for so many other players. That crowd was also a very vocal minority of players.
What that crowd failed to see was that while Destiny's PVP balance wasn't great, there was great synergy in the game between PVE and PVP that kept people playing and that kept the game fun. Going out and grinding to get that amazing weapon that was OP in PVP was fun - and then it was fun to use in PVP until the next OP counter-weapon came out. And weapon classes rose and fell, but I remember almost every meta up until the Wrath of the Machine's expansion and they were all mostly fun to play in.
What I'm trying to say here is: don't cook your golden goose. It may not be perfectly balanced, and it might not be for everyone, but there are also a LOT of people who enjoy how things currently are and who will leave or quit playing that aspect of the game if you make significant changes to the way it currently plays by reordering skills, abilities, sets, etc. And if they go down this road and find that they mistakenly listened to the vocal minority, there's not much that they can do to get all those players back, and they (Zos) just took one more step towards killing their game.
Now, I can see making these changes as a mode for Battlegrounds, where there SHOULD be some semblance of balance because that is a more highly competitive environment. And that is probably how any changes should be implemented in the first place. Put it in battlegrounds as a separate mode and see how many people show up. If people don't play it, you know that it is not going to be popular mass-scale.
I recognize in my earlier post that the people remaining who play PvP are into gear min/max. If they were into straight up skill then they would already be playing a number of other pvp games.
My bias is that I don't have respect for people who play a pvp game that is based on weird combinations of gear that become overpowered. But I recognize that these people are all who is remaining in eso pvp, because there skill based games are numberous.
So do nothing then! Devs should just put in the earplugs and say F-lag.
But I suspect the number of people who migrated to New World or other rpg for its more competitive pvp are larger than the group remaining in low pop eso campaigns. And as I don't have respect that kind of player, I would rather they fix the lag by removing procs. Maybe get back the people who left for better pvp systems. I would rather play with those people anyway.
Are you new here? Did you participate in the previous round of testing, that specifically targeted AOE skills and proc sets? Were you aware that Ravenwatch was left no proc, by popular demand, and that it was only reverted recently because it was a ghost town?
3 -
ImmortalCX✭✭✭✭✭Reginald_leBlem wrote: »ImmortalCX wrote: »BXR_Lonestar wrote: »ImmortalCX wrote: »Thumbless_Bot wrote: »Need? You do realize this is a video game...
The game needs to be fun, repeatable and with some sense that you can compete.
What I described would be more fun than what the game has now.
More fun for whom, might I ask? For you? Or for me? Do you not see that your idea of fun may not be someone elses idea of fun?
I think taking the heavy hand of rebalancing PVP via the "Vengeance" strategy would be fun for a vocal minority, but would not be fun for those who are enjoying the PVP experience as it currently exists. I see this debate as a similar debate that went out when Destiny (Destiny 1 - I never played Destiny 2) was all the rage and there was this tension between PVE and PVP balance, and things kept getting nerfed for the sake of PVP.
The people who hated the way the game's PVP played because of the lack of balance were those people who were familiar with the Bungie name because of the Halo game. And Halo cut its teeth with its competitive PVP gameplay. Everything was balanced, nobody had weapons or abilities other people didn't have or couldn't get. And that crowd very much wanted to change Destiny's gameplay to make the game more "balanced" for a competitive PVP experience. That crowd won out, and Destiny went into a nerf cycle until they nerfed each and every thing that made the game so magical and addictive in the first place for so many other players. That crowd was also a very vocal minority of players.
What that crowd failed to see was that while Destiny's PVP balance wasn't great, there was great synergy in the game between PVE and PVP that kept people playing and that kept the game fun. Going out and grinding to get that amazing weapon that was OP in PVP was fun - and then it was fun to use in PVP until the next OP counter-weapon came out. And weapon classes rose and fell, but I remember almost every meta up until the Wrath of the Machine's expansion and they were all mostly fun to play in.
What I'm trying to say here is: don't cook your golden goose. It may not be perfectly balanced, and it might not be for everyone, but there are also a LOT of people who enjoy how things currently are and who will leave or quit playing that aspect of the game if you make significant changes to the way it currently plays by reordering skills, abilities, sets, etc. And if they go down this road and find that they mistakenly listened to the vocal minority, there's not much that they can do to get all those players back, and they (Zos) just took one more step towards killing their game.
Now, I can see making these changes as a mode for Battlegrounds, where there SHOULD be some semblance of balance because that is a more highly competitive environment. And that is probably how any changes should be implemented in the first place. Put it in battlegrounds as a separate mode and see how many people show up. If people don't play it, you know that it is not going to be popular mass-scale.
I recognize in my earlier post that the people remaining who play PvP are into gear min/max. If they were into straight up skill then they would already be playing a number of other pvp games.
My bias is that I don't have respect for people who play a pvp game that is based on weird combinations of gear that become overpowered. But I recognize that these people are all who is remaining in eso pvp, because there skill based games are numberous.
So do nothing then! Devs should just put in the earplugs and say F-lag.
But I suspect the number of people who migrated to New World or other rpg for its more competitive pvp are larger than the group remaining in low pop eso campaigns. And as I don't have respect that kind of player, I would rather they fix the lag by removing procs. Maybe get back the people who left for better pvp systems. I would rather play with those people anyway.
Are you new here? Did you participate in the previous round of testing, that specifically targeted AOE skills and proc sets? Were you aware that Ravenwatch was left no proc, by popular demand, and that it was only reverted recently because it was a ghost town?
ESO pvp is a ghost town. They should be doing everything in their power to make the game as much like successful pvp games like NW.
ESO is a great rpg because of the volume of story content. Then comes the horizontal progression which makes most sets worthwhile. (Unlike WOW, they did not do a complete gear reset at each new expansion.)
Finally, the pvp system has the bones of a good system but very few people play them because of imbalance, performance issues, and lack of class identity.
If you read my first post I mentioned there should be specific pvp sets that are tested to work and not cause performance issues. That also serve as a carrot. If ravenwatch was no proc and they did nothing else to support progression within that system, then it is no wonder it was unpopular.
0 -
Reginald_leBlem✭✭✭✭✭
✭ImmortalCX wrote: »Reginald_leBlem wrote: »ImmortalCX wrote: »BXR_Lonestar wrote: »ImmortalCX wrote: »Thumbless_Bot wrote: »Need? You do realize this is a video game...
The game needs to be fun, repeatable and with some sense that you can compete.
What I described would be more fun than what the game has now.
More fun for whom, might I ask? For you? Or for me? Do you not see that your idea of fun may not be someone elses idea of fun?
I think taking the heavy hand of rebalancing PVP via the "Vengeance" strategy would be fun for a vocal minority, but would not be fun for those who are enjoying the PVP experience as it currently exists. I see this debate as a similar debate that went out when Destiny (Destiny 1 - I never played Destiny 2) was all the rage and there was this tension between PVE and PVP balance, and things kept getting nerfed for the sake of PVP.
The people who hated the way the game's PVP played because of the lack of balance were those people who were familiar with the Bungie name because of the Halo game. And Halo cut its teeth with its competitive PVP gameplay. Everything was balanced, nobody had weapons or abilities other people didn't have or couldn't get. And that crowd very much wanted to change Destiny's gameplay to make the game more "balanced" for a competitive PVP experience. That crowd won out, and Destiny went into a nerf cycle until they nerfed each and every thing that made the game so magical and addictive in the first place for so many other players. That crowd was also a very vocal minority of players.
What that crowd failed to see was that while Destiny's PVP balance wasn't great, there was great synergy in the game between PVE and PVP that kept people playing and that kept the game fun. Going out and grinding to get that amazing weapon that was OP in PVP was fun - and then it was fun to use in PVP until the next OP counter-weapon came out. And weapon classes rose and fell, but I remember almost every meta up until the Wrath of the Machine's expansion and they were all mostly fun to play in.
What I'm trying to say here is: don't cook your golden goose. It may not be perfectly balanced, and it might not be for everyone, but there are also a LOT of people who enjoy how things currently are and who will leave or quit playing that aspect of the game if you make significant changes to the way it currently plays by reordering skills, abilities, sets, etc. And if they go down this road and find that they mistakenly listened to the vocal minority, there's not much that they can do to get all those players back, and they (Zos) just took one more step towards killing their game.
Now, I can see making these changes as a mode for Battlegrounds, where there SHOULD be some semblance of balance because that is a more highly competitive environment. And that is probably how any changes should be implemented in the first place. Put it in battlegrounds as a separate mode and see how many people show up. If people don't play it, you know that it is not going to be popular mass-scale.
I recognize in my earlier post that the people remaining who play PvP are into gear min/max. If they were into straight up skill then they would already be playing a number of other pvp games.
My bias is that I don't have respect for people who play a pvp game that is based on weird combinations of gear that become overpowered. But I recognize that these people are all who is remaining in eso pvp, because there skill based games are numberous.
So do nothing then! Devs should just put in the earplugs and say F-lag.
But I suspect the number of people who migrated to New World or other rpg for its more competitive pvp are larger than the group remaining in low pop eso campaigns. And as I don't have respect that kind of player, I would rather they fix the lag by removing procs. Maybe get back the people who left for better pvp systems. I would rather play with those people anyway.
Are you new here? Did you participate in the previous round of testing, that specifically targeted AOE skills and proc sets? Were you aware that Ravenwatch was left no proc, by popular demand, and that it was only reverted recently because it was a ghost town?
ESO pvp is a ghost town. They should be doing everything in their power to make the game as much like successful pvp games like NW.
ESO is a great rpg because of the volume of story content. Then comes the horizontal progression which makes most sets worthwhile. (Unlike WOW, they did not do a complete gear reset at each new expansion.)
Finally, the pvp system has the bones of a good system but very few people play them because of imbalance, performance issues, and lack of class identity.
If you read my first post I mentioned there should be specific pvp sets that are tested to work and not cause performance issues. That also serve as a carrot. If ravenwatch was no proc and they did nothing else to support progression within that system, then it is no wonder it was unpopular.
Ah ok, so what I get from this is:
You don't play much pvp at all. Just about any time I've been in pvp Blackreach it's been busy, and GH is often pop locked.
You didn't know that we already did a prior pvp test, the details, or the results.
And that no, you didn't play in the no proc server.
2 -
ImmortalCX✭✭✭✭✭Reginald_leBlem wrote: »ImmortalCX wrote: »Reginald_leBlem wrote: »ImmortalCX wrote: »BXR_Lonestar wrote: »ImmortalCX wrote: »Thumbless_Bot wrote: »Need? You do realize this is a video game...
The game needs to be fun, repeatable and with some sense that you can compete.
What I described would be more fun than what the game has now.
More fun for whom, might I ask? For you? Or for me? Do you not see that your idea of fun may not be someone elses idea of fun?
I think taking the heavy hand of rebalancing PVP via the "Vengeance" strategy would be fun for a vocal minority, but would not be fun for those who are enjoying the PVP experience as it currently exists. I see this debate as a similar debate that went out when Destiny (Destiny 1 - I never played Destiny 2) was all the rage and there was this tension between PVE and PVP balance, and things kept getting nerfed for the sake of PVP.
The people who hated the way the game's PVP played because of the lack of balance were those people who were familiar with the Bungie name because of the Halo game. And Halo cut its teeth with its competitive PVP gameplay. Everything was balanced, nobody had weapons or abilities other people didn't have or couldn't get. And that crowd very much wanted to change Destiny's gameplay to make the game more "balanced" for a competitive PVP experience. That crowd won out, and Destiny went into a nerf cycle until they nerfed each and every thing that made the game so magical and addictive in the first place for so many other players. That crowd was also a very vocal minority of players.
What that crowd failed to see was that while Destiny's PVP balance wasn't great, there was great synergy in the game between PVE and PVP that kept people playing and that kept the game fun. Going out and grinding to get that amazing weapon that was OP in PVP was fun - and then it was fun to use in PVP until the next OP counter-weapon came out. And weapon classes rose and fell, but I remember almost every meta up until the Wrath of the Machine's expansion and they were all mostly fun to play in.
What I'm trying to say here is: don't cook your golden goose. It may not be perfectly balanced, and it might not be for everyone, but there are also a LOT of people who enjoy how things currently are and who will leave or quit playing that aspect of the game if you make significant changes to the way it currently plays by reordering skills, abilities, sets, etc. And if they go down this road and find that they mistakenly listened to the vocal minority, there's not much that they can do to get all those players back, and they (Zos) just took one more step towards killing their game.
Now, I can see making these changes as a mode for Battlegrounds, where there SHOULD be some semblance of balance because that is a more highly competitive environment. And that is probably how any changes should be implemented in the first place. Put it in battlegrounds as a separate mode and see how many people show up. If people don't play it, you know that it is not going to be popular mass-scale.
I recognize in my earlier post that the people remaining who play PvP are into gear min/max. If they were into straight up skill then they would already be playing a number of other pvp games.
My bias is that I don't have respect for people who play a pvp game that is based on weird combinations of gear that become overpowered. But I recognize that these people are all who is remaining in eso pvp, because there skill based games are numberous.
So do nothing then! Devs should just put in the earplugs and say F-lag.
But I suspect the number of people who migrated to New World or other rpg for its more competitive pvp are larger than the group remaining in low pop eso campaigns. And as I don't have respect that kind of player, I would rather they fix the lag by removing procs. Maybe get back the people who left for better pvp systems. I would rather play with those people anyway.
Are you new here? Did you participate in the previous round of testing, that specifically targeted AOE skills and proc sets? Were you aware that Ravenwatch was left no proc, by popular demand, and that it was only reverted recently because it was a ghost town?
ESO pvp is a ghost town. They should be doing everything in their power to make the game as much like successful pvp games like NW.
ESO is a great rpg because of the volume of story content. Then comes the horizontal progression which makes most sets worthwhile. (Unlike WOW, they did not do a complete gear reset at each new expansion.)
Finally, the pvp system has the bones of a good system but very few people play them because of imbalance, performance issues, and lack of class identity.
If you read my first post I mentioned there should be specific pvp sets that are tested to work and not cause performance issues. That also serve as a carrot. If ravenwatch was no proc and they did nothing else to support progression within that system, then it is no wonder it was unpopular.
Ah ok, so what I get from this is:
You don't play much pvp at all. Just about any time I've been in pvp Blackreach it's been busy, and GH is often pop locked.
You didn't know that we already did a prior pvp test, the details, or the results.
And that no, you didn't play in the no proc server.
I have 2500 hours in the game. Most of that between 2017 and 2021.
I have played BGs when they were released adn thought that was a good game mode. And I have enough time In cyr to unlock all the skills.
I played alot of pvp in WOW.
There are too many problems in ESO pvp to make it a worthwhile mode of play, except for people who want to exploit gear imbalance. All those kills you get in Cyr are just PVE people trying to grind up their assault skill line or meet targets for an event. Its not real pvp. It is at best beating up little kids for their lunch money.
I like to see them doing the no proc test and hope they will take pvp seriously and do a clean slate redesign. They have been trying to fix pvp for a decade without success. A clean slate redesign is the only hope it has of growing player numbers.
1