Second day and still had fun, this time with my DC Orc stam DK. Running fine until late afternoon when the system became a bit wonky and I also crashed out of the game at one stage. There seemed to me that there were more players where I was, compared to yesterday. Also seemed to be more visual effects running as well, but that maybe my perception. Yesterday the game was running fine all afternoon on my AD Khajiit Magsorc. EU server.

I really enjoyed playing the Vengeance campaign. Performance is significantly better than normal Cyrodiil. There was a brief period of time with lag/low frame rates, but there were also easily 60 players in front of me at the keep. I like how simple the classes are and how they have their own identity. Gear doesn't matter and that's awesome. Just players playing on relatively balanced classes. Good players do well, newer players can also do well. No one is overpowered because of gear. The healing isn't over tuned and everyone is killable. This is how it should be. I would love to see this campaign stay around, but with a little bit of fine tuning.

I like it. No combat bug (how about that) is maybe the best feature... ok, maybe not the best, but right up there.

Before this test, in "normal"Cyro I encountered players that was close to invincible. And I thought I just was very poor. Now, however, when encountering some of those players, suddenly you realise (if you didn't already) that they've been carried by their sets. No rock goblins, or tower trolls. So, so nice.

Having said that, I acknowledge that these players have spent lots of hours, learning the sets and how to combine etc.

I bet they hate this test, as much as I love it.

Mounts should be a bit faster. Heavy attacks don't always fire as they should.

Vengeance reminds me of how it used to be in the beginning. Not a lot of lag. Skills, rather than sets, do count. Though, of course, there are a lot more zergs now, but anyway, that's much better than ball grps.

All in all I am happy with this, and hope they will give us one server with this kind of pvp

I don't think people are realizing how bored they're going to get in a hurry if this version of PvP goes into effect full time. Most people I know are already done with it.

smallhammer wrote: »

SaffronCitrusflower wrote: »

I don't think people are realizing how bored they're going to get in a hurry if this version of PvP goes into effect full time. Most people I know are already done with it.

---

They are getting done with it, maybe because they used to rely on the sets carrying them. But now they realise that they are getting killed just as easily as any other. And that is boring, of course.

Or maybe they enjoy competition and diversity, because anything else is boring. (not saying everything was better before, but ZOS has never even tried adjusting the handful of very calculation intensive sets or limiting shield/HoT stacking)

SpiritKitten wrote: »

IsharaMeradin wrote: »

After having gone in with my main account this morning, I had a totally different experience. Honestly, I think it comes down to the alliance and the players currently playing for the given alliance.

Last night, I was on my second account with a DC character and chat while present was mostly quick discussions about where to go next. Once a place was decided, that is where it seems the entire population went.

This morning, I was on my main account with an EP character and chat was overflowing with negativity, troll calling and calls for going to multiple locations. It was confusing, chaotic and definitely not as enjoyable. Once I stopped relying on chat and just followed several others was I able to actually participate in the capturing of some keeps and resources.

AD really shone for this. Very clear callouts and everyone working together. Almost no debating, people just went where told by some quickly decisive leaders who seemed to have a plan. No wonder they controlled the map. DC, pretty good but too much debating, so team got split up too much. Pact...absolute chaos. I actually had to join a group to get any sense where to go. And even then, groupmates in 3 different locations.

After years of getting team purpled, we adjusted to the harsh environment, became attuned, and learned how to work together. It was DC and EP that made us tougher.

smallhammer wrote: »

They are getting done with it, maybe because they used to rely on the sets carrying them. But now they realise that they are getting killed just as easily as any other. And that is boring, of course.

This is such a weird take. It's easy to just pick one of the stronger classes and get kills in a huge zerg battle much more than you get killed yourself.

On my NB DD:


On my Warden healer:


The issue is that there is no variation. It's just largescale battles where no matter what you play, you are just a cog in the zerg machine. No other gameplay exists, there is no build variety, no individual skill expression and due to the lack of sustain on several classes you are busy casting heavy attacks most of the time. It is still easy to get kills and perform well on both an individual and a group level, but I genuinely do not find this gameplay interesting beyond the novelty factor of seeing so many people online.

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

Wonder how many of the hyped casuals are gonna still be this into it near the end, when they realize they've been doing exactly the same thing every fight for a week, and that's everything this entire game mode will ever be.

It's why it's important to monitor player reception and feedback once that honeymoon phase is over and that new, shiny thing is just another thing. This widespread enthusiasm was also there for no-proc and we all know how that ended.

It's a bit of a shame that they're increasing the player cap every day, otherwise it would've been interesting to see whether the population was still locked as often and queues were as long as on day 1.

How come so many people have replaced the word "test" with the word "mode"? This is not a game mode nor will it ever be a game mode.

RaikaNA wrote: »

ZOS finally fixed the combat bug in Cyrodiil! I LOVE it!

Best feature of the Vengeance campaign!

Bit of a home goal having the test at the same time as an event? Especially when most casuals have done the Golden Pursuits by now. There was a bit of a drop in the population this afternoon I noticed. A bit of an indication long term? Though I enjoyed the test, for me I can't see PVP, in whatever form supplanting questing. PC EU

Yasha wrote: »

Zallion wrote: »

I just want to know precisely how ZOS is going to measure player feedback. I think there’s some merits to the test as with performance and combat bug, but overall it is not an enjoyable gamemode long term for me at least. I can maybe tolerate a 2 hour session before it gets boring, mostly due to the skills and limitations on my build. A lot of vets dislike it, a lot of casuals love it. Does ZOS value the opinions of the players who have 1000s of hours in their pvp more vs the players who have 10-20 hours? I would really hope it’s the former but there probably isn’t a great way to measure that. Casuals outnumber the vets, a poll wouldn’t exactly be great either. I just hope the goal here is for them to build it back to as close to live as possible and eliminate a small handful of factors along the way to help with performance. If it requires sacrificing most of what makes pvp so special in this game, it just isn’t worth it.

I have been playing eso since beta and have 1000s of hours in pvp. The same is true for many of the friends I play with. We all love this new game mode and think its the best pvp Cyrodiil has had in years. The only "vets" that don't like it are the ones who play in ball groups and/or crutch on gear thinking it is skill - and those are the very people who have been slowly killing the game.

I’m for anything nerfing ballgroups, heck I’d even argue they’re the main source of performance issues. They’re toxic for the game as a whole and make the barrier to entry for pvp even steeper than it needs to be. Doesn’t seem like a fun playstyle but idk I’ve never played in one.

But, I wouldn’t be super happy essentially playing a new game where my skills and gear are either disabled or operate differently than they have for years. I mainly solo or small scale, or do BGs. Theory crafting is the heart and soul of this game for me, and many others. Gear plays a pretty big role in that, like it or not. If that’s taken away or stripped down or too simplified long term, it will get boring fast for a lot of people. You need a large selection of gear not because of needing to crutch on one particular set or meta, but because of lack of variety being the alternative, the game would get stale. Little build variety and little identity from player to player. I’ve been able to perform pretty well in this game mode. I’ve had some fun with it too and had won some good outnumbered fights. To me though the limitations make it boring quickly. If the way forward comes at the cost of build customization and theory crafting, it won’t be able to keep my attention long term as the current live version of pvp does with all sets and abilities enabled. Remember the motto of this game used to be “play the way you want.” It should continue live up to that and aspire to be as close to the live version as possible while weeding out the issues that cause major peformance problems. If the solution to that happens to be that we need to all be artificially put in the same gear and stats to make this game accessible for everyone than every character ever leveled for pvp, every set ever farmed for pvp, every guild or world skill leveled and/or bought (undaunted lol, can’t be bothered leveling that one), mythic, arena, mats spent, etc etc etc will be a monumental waste of progression and time. Think of the time spent doing those side activities to make builds what they are even on a base level, let alone a minmaxed one, then multiply that by every character on every pvp main. If we opt more for template pvp, all that time and (potentially money for some people) will be worth nothing in such a gamemode. They need to fix the outlier issues, and add layers of complexity until we’re essentially to where we are on live, and that’s it. Cause at the end of the day, the sweaties will still be sweaties and the pugs will still be pugs, and new or casual pvp players will get stomped by vets, and comped groups will still outperform non comped groups no matter what the templates look like.

Major_Mangle wrote: »

Honestly, the best part of the campaign was the red sky, made for an interesting vibe/aesthetic. Other than that it was some of the most dull and boring PvP experiences I ever had. Rather have some acceptable performance issues than completely stripping down the combat ESO has to offer, couldn´t care less if it allowed 1000 people on the screen. If all I can do is zerg along and light attack + some beta version of a skill I`m out.
As long as it remains a "test only" with no other ulterior motives, which I still doubt due to ZOS history and outcomes of previous tests aimed to collect data on performance, I don´t mind ZOS testing things.

Yes I´m aware it´s a test, I just don´t trust ZOS will stop at this being a test only and further down the line it will lead to major combat overhauls that eventually kills the wonderful combat system the game has.

I agree it was really boring and lame after just one hour. Just the bigger zerg wins. I rather figh ballgroups and get wayshrine farmed then this

Having read through the thread, I stand by my initial assessment. I think the mode is a significant improvement on performance and that the actual gameplay, although simplified and lacking diversity, has merits and needs further exploration.

The big take away is that with less 'OP' sets, lower mobility and sustain, that fighting depends more on numbers vs skill. You can 1vX 2-4 players at most but beyond that, you are really struggling. What often ends up happening is due to the combat being very punishing for mistakes due to lower sustain / mobility that you find this encourages people to stick together thus zerg.

I also noticed that classes felt very different in playstyle and power in specific situations. Nightblade was good for moving and outnumbered whereas DK was better in group play. I like that they have more of a defining role vs can do everything really, really well regardless of class / build.

Another take away was that by limiting AOE skills to 3 target caps and healing makes that it made it hard for ball be destroyed ironically. I'd say that from my testing and experience that ball groups are stronger like this as AoE damage has a range/radius usually around the caster whereas heals have much larger ranges that can be fired from the back. As such, you find that pushing into another group with a group is harder as players do not die as easy as before because you can't land as much AOE damage vs how many incoming heals they can still get. This alone I think could be fixed by keeping heals at 3 target cap but increasing AoE damage to 4-6 which would also make taking resources easier for players.

The other thing I saw a lot is that build diversity is limited. That said, I would ask any dedicated pvp player how much 'diversity' do they really have? How many of their 'unique' and 'diverse' builds actually use meta sets/skill combos - wretched vitality, rallying cry, balorgh, essence thief, tarnished nightmare, etc. and for the skill combos it is usually spamable, burst skill (deep fissure, potl, blast bones, stacked whip, grim focus), dawnbreaker/burst ult, execute/spamable. When you bring things down into the core base, a lot of what we have at present are are generic setups using the same sets/skill types on each class whereas this really makes classes feel more unique and strong/weak in their own right.

I loved that there was tri-potions for free and would love an alliance war option for AP as many, MANY pvp players often use these but don't have an AP currency sink whereas this would fill that gap. The golden vendor often lacks good sets so isn't a reliable sink.

I also loved that with limited sets (none at this stage) that farming and making a PvP build didn't need you to engage in say PvE or content you don't like. Often when setting up a PvP build optimatelly, you need to use many PvE sets and this makes it harder to setup for PvP and try new things. In this mode, I was able to try all classes, tweak skills/builds and do things more dynamically as my power wasn't dependent on my gear. I think you either build around this that power comes from skill choice vs sets or a bit of both - I quite like the idea that it comes from skill choices and morphs other who has the better gear.

Based on all of this, I think that the system needs more refinement and expansion. I would suggest the following:

Changes to PvP going forward based on this test if trying to get a blended mode from live to this
- Removal battle spirit:
battle spirit makes the combat system more complex and confusing where as just giving players a flat HP buff achieves the same goal and is simpler to understand. A 10k spamable should do around 10k damage not 50% reduction then reduced by armour, CP and % reductions often resulting in 3k damage. This is also true for healing - removing the 50% heal reduction and increasing the HP by a flat amount can achieve the same effect and is simpler. A 15k heal tool tip being reduced to 7.5k is confusing for newer players and actually doesn't change the number of heals needed to recover.
- Remove all passives in PvP:
Passives from a competitive point are needed and you get a situation where it penalises those who don't have whilst also adding unnecessary server checks
- Remove racial passives if trying get a true competitive scene or keep them but add flat stats to the stat page without proc conditions.
- Add skill morphs that let skills double down without the proc nature:
a good example is strife - the nightblade spamable that does around 50% damage and a 50% heal in terms of power. Morph 1 = 100% ranged damage and 0% heal. Morph 2 = 100% heal and 0% ranged damage or 25% damage and 75% heal. For melee skills such as surprise attack. Morph 1 = stamina morph making it cost stamina and increasing damage by 25%. Morph 2 = magicka morph increases damage by 25%. As for more niche skills like armour buffs they could simply be: morph 1 - applies to you and 3 allies. Morph 2 - applies minor buff. This would give some tweaking to your build options and provide more diversity without adding extra undue lag due to constant proc and checks i.e. concealed weapon: are they sneaking? Have they attacked from sneak or invisibility? Is the skill equipped - do they get more speed?
- Adding weapon skills, alliance skills and guild active skills:
gives more choice but needs to stick to the rules above. Heals 3 target max. HOTS 5s 1-3 targets max. DOTS 5-10s 1 target.
- Adding PvP specific gear sets that are flat stats / buffs vs active procs which can be bought for AP/Gold from a vendor as well as PvP crafted sets:
This removes the issue of sets like Tarnished Nightmare which causes a lot of server checks and also adds a lot of free damage which can be abused with specific builds/setups even post nerf. This is true for winterborn as well. You then have healing sets that do the same and sustain ones i.e. wretched vitality.
- Add scribing but I am struggling to see how you could add this without adding lots of serverside checks:
Perhaps limiting this to specific skills or scripts that are useful in pvp i.e. why have empower for pvp?
- CP but unsure how this could be achieved beyond just always active or slotable.

Changes to PvP going if trying to make it more competitive and balanced
- Make the build power come from less variables i.e. your power comes from the skills you use, mundus and attribute points. Have sets provide little to no combat power thus removing need to farm and give advantages to those with better/worse gear.
- Remove racial passives
- Remove all passives
- Add skill morph options but keep flat buffs/stats
- Provide morph options to double down on skills i.e. you lose healing power but gain more damage
- Double down on class differences

Finally, I would add with these suggestions that some or all could and would likely add more lag. As soon as you add more options, then you need the server to check for them so I am aware that these are not all entirely possible whilst keeping lag at 0 and are simply a wish list.

Overall, there is potential here and I would like to see the campaign continue after this test to gauge popularity longer term when an event is not active.

Thanks for reading
Dan

Unified_Gaming wrote: »

ZOS changed Cyrodiil PvP to fixed lag but what works?? Here I show you the best PvP builds for the Vengeance Cyrodiil test on ESO PC EU and ESO PC NA:
https://youtu.be/PvsdDrbraog

If you want to see each class in action then check out my livestream with over 6 hours of gameplay here:
https://youtube.com/live/v-Cb4IOqYvc

Feedback:
Firstly, a HUGE congratulations to ZOS @ZOS_Kevin. I can't stress enough how much better the performance was. I was able to take part in 200+ player fights which we even head counted to check we weren't going mad. Not only this, the skills and abilities worked flawlessly for an entire 6 hour stream showcasing all classes. As such, the goal of the test to improve performance seems to have made a GREAT start.

As for balance which I understand is not the focus of this test but as a PvP content creator I feel it would be unfair to comment on this. Long story short, I have broken down each class into their most viable build in the video linked and a tier list.

The good:
1. Classes felt 'true' to their nature. Nightblades felt to be a sneaky rouge whereas Sorcerers felt like they were your high damage spell casters.
2. Although limited options, there were enough choices to make builds with some variation - as such it seems like a good foundation to build upon.
3. The removal of battle spirit makes PvP more accessible as it is simpler to understand. Those PvP players among us need to note they have increased the base stats to reflect this which seemed fine overall.
4. Tri infinite potions were a godsend - PLEASE keep these or make alliance war versions - if only usable in PvP that'd be great still.
5. Combat was fun overall and felt semi-fast paced (slower than live) with the need for combos and good movement to do well thus having some skill differences
6. Cross Healing was limited and thus felt better when fighting group v group
7. Siege didn't feel as oppressive but still worth using

What would be better:
1. Class balance is very, very off sadly
2. More skill choices
3. Access to specific sets such as Hundings Rage, Julianous etc. that provide flat stats to give some customisation without having procs do the work of the player
4. Champion points
5. Access to snare immunity / speed boosts to help classes who lack mobility such as DK / Templar

Class feedback:

Nightblade - felt like a rouge but the sneak speed penalty felt off and should be removed. Their execute should scale from 50% hp down to make it worthwhile as sub 25% hp means people die from a spamable + light attack typically

Sorcerer - AMAZING. Don't break it.

Warden - Great all rounder but lacks killing power and an execute. Healing and survival is great just finishing people needs looking into. I'd suggest making the Fetcher Infection (swarm skill) reduce the targets armour (minor breach) given it is not on scorch. Scorch 3s change is great and keep this.

Templar - Felt really bad overall. Melee felt hard to stay alive as lacks heal over time options it usually uses. Ranged felt somewhat possible but clunky. Only real benefit is their beam which is worth using for group play. Seemed to lack any cross healing hot options making it more of a burst healer only at which point other classes outdo it.

Dragonknight - Similar to warden but lacks an execute but can pull people to you. Felt underwhelming overall. Needs mobility or to be able to snare other players to help with its melee focus.

Arcanist - AMAZING. LOVE THE CHANGES. Beam works. Teleport is useful. Apply the portal changes to the base skill please for all gameplay areas and beam changes too for pvp.

Necromancer - Felt very clunky. The changes were cool in theory but the don't factor in the mobile nature of PvP so the class lacked burst due to people moving out of the detonation skill. Healing wise it felt food. Lacked mobility.

Overall, I think the test is going well and I would welcome this becoming a permeant feature or at least a weekend event with this rule set in Cyrodiil as it seemed a lot more balanced vs the current version.

So given that they explicitly said this was a minimal test and class balance was not even a goal during the campaign, a resounding success then?

It feels like everyone thinks that now there's been a test, this vengeance campaign will just become the norm with minimal change, but that was never the aim.

Having said all that, I had a really good time and I think some of that was down to limitations in the extremes that are possible with the usual CP + sets builds we see in GH. No irritating bombers (boy would they have had a field day with the amount of people standing on flags!) and best of all no unkillable tanks. That aspect of the test is something I really hope ZoS do carry forward because not having to have a whole group spend 15 minutes dislodging some lame troll tank from the battlements made the pace of the war feel much more fluid than GH. Somewhere between the full customisability of GH and the cookie cutter class skills only builds in Vengeance there must be a happy medium that allows for a bit of tailoring while avoiding the extremes we currently face.

Sets is going to be interesting: stats-based sets should be fine, but proc sets could be tougher - if ZoS disable them in PVP then even more sets become useless (or perhaps super niche if they still have a place in battlegrounds), but if they keep them... well there's a lot of the calculation load back again. Same with CP really - keep them and keep all the calculations they have been experimenting with getting rid of, or get rid of them and half the nodes in the CP trees become useless.

If they do find a way to manage the calculation load I think it might be more interesting to ton down the effect of sets and CP anyway, say cut all stats, damage and healing offered by sets in half in PVP zones (but retain a big chunk of the baseline stats that everyone got in Vengeance) and similarly cut the effect of CP in half in PVP zones. That way customization could still be used to give builds a "flavour" while avoiding problematic extremes. Combined with the reductions in players affected by abilities in Vengeance it might even tone down the ball groups a bit as well.