spartaxoxo wrote: »

valenwood_vegan wrote: »

I'd like to see a more polished and balanced vengeance-type campaign added as an option, so in that sense I'd like to see proc sets removed. But I would not want to see all of these sets removed from the regular cyro campaign; as one becomes more skilled / familiar with pvp and gets into theory-crafting, it would imo start to become boring very quickly with options limited in such a way. Certainly outlier sets that are causing balance problems could be adjusted without removing all proc sets.

Yeah. I agree. I think a much better polished Vengeance campaign alongside the regular Cyrodiil campaigns would be a good idea

The new campaign would have to bring in a ton of new players to do that on PS NA. Gray Host is only pop locked during late prime time now.

Splitting the playerbase would make two mostly empty campaigns.

katanagirl1 wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

valenwood_vegan wrote: »

I'd like to see a more polished and balanced vengeance-type campaign added as an option, so in that sense I'd like to see proc sets removed. But I would not want to see all of these sets removed from the regular cyro campaign; as one becomes more skilled / familiar with pvp and gets into theory-crafting, it would imo start to become boring very quickly with options limited in such a way. Certainly outlier sets that are causing balance problems could be adjusted without removing all proc sets.

Yeah. I agree. I think a much better polished Vengeance campaign alongside the regular Cyrodiil campaigns would be a good idea

The new campaign would have to bring in a ton of new players to do that on PS NA. Gray Host is only pop locked during late prime time now.

Splitting the playerbase would make two mostly empty campaigns.

That is fair. I am mostly basing that opinion on the PC test being something that seems to have brought a lot of returning/new players into the game so much so they needed to increase an already expanded cap. If there is not enough people to sustain both rule sets should something like this go live though, then I think they should not do it as not enough people coming back is what killed the no proc campaign.

darvaria wrote: »

If they would have had no proc with CP, more players would have played there. I would play it just to get away from bombers and ball groups. No proc would have to really mean "no proc". Nothing like VD slipping in.

I'm surprised the poll is as close as it is.

Maybe just keep a vengeance campaign with no gear .. idk.

Ballgroups and bombers were still a thing on no proc.

xylena_lazarow wrote: »

Unrelated to Vengeance, this has been tried multiple times, and has always been unpopular.

It's hard to say if it's really an unpopular idea. Ravenwatch was No-CP and never populated on many servers even before No-Proc. It was also handled poorly. We never got a good list of sets that could work in No Proc for whatever reason. There weren't good indicators that would tell inexperienced players that their sets weren't working, and the rules made no sense.

There was a patch or 2 where Orders Wrath didn't work in no proc, but sets like Pariah and Impreg did. There weren't good enough offensive set options to counter some of the defense sets that were allowed.

I think no proc would have been way more successful if it allowed CP and only disabled proc sets like Rush of Agony and other traditional damage proc sets like the Defiler set. It also needed a very clear and accessible list of sets that players could see as soon as they entered the campaign.

wose wrote: »

I'd suggest a different, radical approach. One CP/proc campaign going forward, and one single tuned Vengeance style campaign. Nothing else - even under 50s can play perfectly in the Vengeance style campaign. Then we'll truly be able to measure popularity. (though I'm guessing dedicated PvP guilds will still mandate Grayhost, skewing the picture)

Vengeance needs a few more skills and balance adjustments before this could happen, but I think it's an excellent idea. I think part of ESO's PvP unpopularity is that newer players never enter PvP again after feeling ineffective due to dying instantly or getting pulled, ganked, bombed, etc.

When I started this game in 2015, I had fun in Cyrodiil and returned since there were fights everywhere, big battles, and no pulls, bombs, etc. I feel like if I started ESO right now and tried out PvP for the first time, I would never return after seeing things like Rush of Agony or cross healing.

Vengeance brings back that 2015 ESO vibe where Cyrodiil can actually appeal to new players again.

said no one ever wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

said no one ever wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

Proc sets fill in holes in certain builds/playstyles. For instance, Werewolf can't crossheal others (as no Werewolf ability can heal others), so using the Hiti's Hearth proc set to give the group some healing while transformed is very much welcome.

For me, dropping Werewolf just isn't an option. I'm not here to play the meta, so I'm not interested in playing Classes which already have crosshealing abilities.

were wolf doesant have cross heal and so you shouldnt get one fgrom a proc set either. ty for understanding.

I don't understand.

Before Werewolf could taunt, we used the Tormentor proc set to taunt for us, and ZOS recognized the legitimate desire to taunt in Werewolf form and added a taunt to the toolkit. The same can (and should) be done for crosshealing.

Vamp has no cross healing so what makes wolf special?

I don't mind if Vampire gets crosshealing added to their abilities.

The issue is that while Vampire can continue to freely use any skill they've unlocked, even non-Vampire skills, Werewolf is locked into using only Werewolf skills.

Werewolf literally cannot crossheal without sets, while Vampire can use Echoing Vigor, Radiating Regeneration, and so on. Werewolf just needs one of their abilities to crossheal to be able to function as healers.

KiltMaster wrote: »

But no procs at all? Boring and uncreative.

Procs really only got super popular during One Tamriel which was late 2016. The game was far from boring and uncreative prior to that patch. There was still lots of build variety, even more than today honestly.

Right now everyone is dual wield/ice staff with vigor and ele sus regardless of class. That’s what is boring and uncreative.

Rohamad_Ali wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

KiltMaster wrote: »

But no procs at all? Boring and uncreative.

Procs really only got super popular during One Tamriel which was late 2016. The game was far from boring and uncreative prior to that patch. There was still lots of build variety, even more than today honestly.

Right now everyone is dual wield/ice staff with vigor and ele sus regardless of class. That’s what is boring and uncreative.

Vicious death has been used forever. Way before 1 Tamriel.

Yea VD was Thieves Guild, but I don’t really consider VD to be in the same category as something like Tarnished Nightmare or the old Viper.

1 per 25sec mostly. It's totally fair.

LadyGP wrote: »

katanagirl1 wrote: »

The poll had no context, so I am making my own.

I would like to see Rush of Agony removed. It’s in every death recap I have. If I survive by blocking, the little bit of health I have left is removed by an ulti dump or VD proc.

Other problematic proc sets should be reviewed on a case by case basis when brought to their attention like RoA.

This is the context I was coming in to mention as well.

I'd be curious to see the break out by people who prefer to play in a "ballgroup-ish" style and those that prefer to play solo/surg/small man.

I'd assume the second half will mostly vote no based on current RoA workings.

IMO - proc sets need to stay - Rush needs to stay - but they need to be significantly tuned.

From a ball group lead perspective I'd like ZoS to force our hand a bit.

Example - Say ZoS changes Rush to being a smaller range and pulls less people and adds cc im.

As a lead I'm not going to have to ask myself do I want small pulls now with same amount of burst dmg/heals or so I sacrafice some burst dmg/heals to have more people put on rush so we get larger pulls. If I go with the second option it makes me have to be very careful what position I put the group into because we will be more squishy.

I say all of that with the assumption that healing/shielding stacks didn't get touched (which I think they should as well).

I'd love to see the meta shifted a bit to where you have to be very deliberate about what you're slotting, how many healers vs dps vs shielders vs pullers you have.

Right now with how things stack/hit the whole group its very brain numb to build a comp. I'd love for them to come in and change most of the skills in cyro so at most they hit 3 people in/out of group. This would not only help with making ball groups not as dominate but also help with the calcs on the server.

Just my two cents - feel free to roast me because I mentioned ball groups.

IMO, Rush of Agony is problematic not because it is "overperforming" so to speak but because it isn't even performing as intended. Every BG out there knows RoA is broken and is not working as intended. You are getting mile-long pulls sometimes, pulls through walls and doors, and because of that the pull behavior is a little unpredictable.

IMO, it needs to be reworked to do the pull centered around the person doing the pulling. If it did this at all times and was consistent, that would certainly go a long way with fixing things.

I don't think the set needs to be nerfed into the ground, it just needs to work properly.

LadyGP wrote: »

katanagirl1 wrote: »

The poll had no context, so I am making my own.

I would like to see Rush of Agony removed. It’s in every death recap I have. If I survive by blocking, the little bit of health I have left is removed by an ulti dump or VD proc.

Other problematic proc sets should be reviewed on a case by case basis when brought to their attention like RoA.

This is the context I was coming in to mention as well.

I'd be curious to see the break out by people who prefer to play in a "ballgroup-ish" style and those that prefer to play solo/surg/small man.

I'd assume the second half will mostly vote no based on current RoA workings.

IMO - proc sets need to stay - Rush needs to stay - but they need to be significantly tuned.

From a ball group lead perspective I'd like ZoS to force our hand a bit.

Example - Say ZoS changes Rush to being a smaller range and pulls less people and adds cc im.

As a lead I'm not going to have to ask myself do I want small pulls now with same amount of burst dmg/heals or so I sacrafice some burst dmg/heals to have more people put on rush so we get larger pulls. If I go with the second option it makes me have to be very careful what position I put the group into because we will be more squishy.

I say all of that with the assumption that healing/shielding stacks didn't get touched (which I think they should as well).

I'd love to see the meta shifted a bit to where you have to be very deliberate about what you're slotting, how many healers vs dps vs shielders vs pullers you have.

Right now with how things stack/hit the whole group its very brain numb to build a comp. I'd love for them to come in and change most of the skills in cyro so at most they hit 3 people in/out of group. This would not only help with making ball groups not as dominate but also help with the calcs on the server.

Just my two cents - feel free to roast me because I mentioned ball groups.

As someone who detests how insanely powerful Ball Groups are atm and what that does to Cyrodiil, I won't just NOT roast you - I'll praise you for your objectivity.

Ball Groups *should* be the pinnacle of what's possible in Cyrodiil. It's the maximum group size (unless two run together, which I've seen a few times) and capable of the best cooperation and synergy when solid theory crafting and good leadership are both present. As you stated, however, it's just too much and too easy atm.

If the fat gets trimmed like you're suggesting, with RoA limited (or removed a la Battle Spirit), cross-healing/shielding stacks reduced (or eliminated), and so forth it would indeed reduce server strain by nature AND greatly reduce the strength of the average Ball Group, which is dramatically out of hand. I personally have ZERO doubt that the really good Ball Groups would still be damn near unkillable and remarkably powerful, and that's as it should be - particularly if they have to really "work for it" in terms of creative builds and theory.

I've seen you help people with tech issues, so kudos to you for that too, but especially for this post. Probably won't be seen by a whole lot of people since it's a little off topic but consider -me- impressed and enjoy at least one sincere compliment. I'm about as anti-BG (in current form) as it gets, but I absolutely think it's on ZOS to limit them and not the players who will naturally push any envelope to its maximum. I also love that it's more fun and desirable for you to work around harder challenges in gearing and get creative without the low-hanging fruit of current mechanics.

Good post.

BXR_Lonestar wrote: »

AvalonRanger wrote: »

1 per 25sec mostly. It's totally fair.

25 seconds is an eternity. ESPECIALLY for something that is completely blockable/avoidable if you are running an immovable pot. So you go for a pull once and your entire group is exposed for 30 seconds because of a failed pull? Doesn't seem reasonable.

10 Seconds? 12 Seconds? That is a change that wouldn't be too terrible. The timer is already 8 seconds. 25 would kill the set. At that point, I'm getting on my block tank, gathering around the biggest zerg I can, and then calling out my scribed pulls right before the ballgroup reaches me.

Oh gosh, I can't even begin to imagine a 25 second cool down. The amount of times I've had a failled pull due to lag and I just end up standing in stupid waiting for a pull to go off that never does.... then add in 25 seconds where I have to just sit there and think about my (lack of) actions on a failed pull... no thank you.

Personally, I think the timer is fine as is. If they bumped it up more all we (ball groups) would do is run a second puller... or a third if it got that bad. The problem would still remain from the non-ball group persons perspective... pulls on pulls on pulls.

One thing people fail to consider when throwing out suggestions is that whatever box ZoS tries to put ball group members in we will ALWAYS push the edges to the max. I've probally spent hundreds of hours in discord calls with guldies going over logs (down to the seconds before and after pushes) to see where we can improve. This is the level of detail that I don't think people understand (most) ball groups put into their comp. There are so mains raids where we test sets/skills and then drill into the logs for hours and hours post raid. I've seen calls go on till 4am est when raid ended at 9pm est for context.

I say all that to drive home the point.... ball groups will always find a way to be "the best" if they want to. You're not going to be able to eliminate a 12 person core that runs around in Cyro in coms where each person knows every single aspect of their role and exactly when to heal someone. People think ball groups just spam heals and run around... what they don't see/hear is the calls where someone says "I got pulled", "need heals", "behind" etc.. and the entire group instinctively runs backwards while throwing hots their way and bursting them... while simultaneously getting shalks/proxy timed up turning around at the last second as raid leads pulling a group and dmg is focused on a small window. Theres a ton of coordination that goes into it.. a lot of work and effort. Just like trifecta cores.

It's an awesome experience for those who are into it... don't take it away.. just fix the problem so it's more fair for everyone is all I'm saying.

This post wasn't directed at you BXR I know you know this... this was more meant for everyone else who sees this.

The_Meathead wrote: »

LadyGP wrote: »

katanagirl1 wrote: »

The poll had no context, so I am making my own.

I would like to see Rush of Agony removed. It’s in every death recap I have. If I survive by blocking, the little bit of health I have left is removed by an ulti dump or VD proc.

Other problematic proc sets should be reviewed on a case by case basis when brought to their attention like RoA.

This is the context I was coming in to mention as well.

I'd be curious to see the break out by people who prefer to play in a "ballgroup-ish" style and those that prefer to play solo/surg/small man.

I'd assume the second half will mostly vote no based on current RoA workings.

IMO - proc sets need to stay - Rush needs to stay - but they need to be significantly tuned.

From a ball group lead perspective I'd like ZoS to force our hand a bit.

Example - Say ZoS changes Rush to being a smaller range and pulls less people and adds cc im.

As a lead I'm not going to have to ask myself do I want small pulls now with same amount of burst dmg/heals or so I sacrafice some burst dmg/heals to have more people put on rush so we get larger pulls. If I go with the second option it makes me have to be very careful what position I put the group into because we will be more squishy.

I say all of that with the assumption that healing/shielding stacks didn't get touched (which I think they should as well).

I'd love to see the meta shifted a bit to where you have to be very deliberate about what you're slotting, how many healers vs dps vs shielders vs pullers you have.

Right now with how things stack/hit the whole group its very brain numb to build a comp. I'd love for them to come in and change most of the skills in cyro so at most they hit 3 people in/out of group. This would not only help with making ball groups not as dominate but also help with the calcs on the server.

Just my two cents - feel free to roast me because I mentioned ball groups.

As someone who detests how insanely powerful Ball Groups are atm and what that does to Cyrodiil, I won't just NOT roast you - I'll praise you for your objectivity.

Ball Groups *should* be the pinnacle of what's possible in Cyrodiil. It's the maximum group size (unless two run together, which I've seen a few times) and capable of the best cooperation and synergy when solid theory crafting and good leadership are both present. As you stated, however, it's just too much and too easy atm.

If the fat gets trimmed like you're suggesting, with RoA limited (or removed a la Battle Spirit), cross-healing/shielding stacks reduced (or eliminated), and so forth it would indeed reduce server strain by nature AND greatly reduce the strength of the average Ball Group, which is dramatically out of hand. I personally have ZERO doubt that the really good Ball Groups would still be damn near unkillable and remarkably powerful, and that's as it should be - particularly if they have to really "work for it" in terms of creative builds and theory.

I've seen you help people with tech issues, so kudos to you for that too, but especially for this post. Probably won't be seen by a whole lot of people since it's a little off topic but consider -me- impressed and enjoy at least one sincere compliment. I'm about as anti-BG (in current form) as it gets, but I absolutely think it's on ZOS to limit them and not the players who will naturally push any envelope to its maximum. I also love that it's more fun and desirable for you to work around harder challenges in gearing and get creative without the low-hanging fruit of current mechanics.

Good post.

HEY! Thank you so much for the kind words... I really appreciate it!

I always say... it's very easy to come to the forums... fire off a rant... and then go onto something else - what is difficult is listening to peoples concerns and providing constructive feedback on the problem. At the end of the day WE ALL play ESO because we love the game for what it provides to us and we want the game to be successful. People come to the forums and complain because they want it to be better (although a lot of people could work on how they deliver that message to be fair).

Ball groups have been a sour subject for many years now. ZoS has openly said they don't want to remove them but it's clear that the calculations from skills that get introduced over the years are now hammering the server and causing problems. This isn't a direct result of ball groups - ball groups just expose the problem thats been there for many years now. I get why people blame ball groups for the lag but it's not really "our fault" so to speak.

Aside from the "ball groups cause lag" argument, there is a very valid argument to be made that heal/shield stacking has gotten so extreme/easy that it's making ball groups almost impossible to eliminate. Azure blight was a good attempt at making ball groups killable but 1) it didn't address the underlying problem and 2) the set was scaling incorrectly which made it impossible the heal through. Yes, the ball group haters out there loved it but alienating a larger section of your player base by having this set perform as it was isn't a good idea IMO given how ESO continues to lose players. I know of many guilds/players that quit eso because of how broken the set was. Again, people who hate ball groups will love that statement but then came the complains of "cyro is dead" - I wonder why.

ZoS has made it clear they want players to be able to "play as they want". It's totally doable to make that a reality in Cyro - we just need to work together and come up with some suggestions on how to make that happen - hence my feedback.

Now, my suggestions could be totally off base - I don't have the internal data that ZoS does so they could see an entirely different picture based on what the numbers show. This is just my outside looking in.. PoV.

Anyways.. appreciate the kind words! Always here to help in any way I can whether that tech issues (I've been dealing with them for a year so I have a lot of knowledge on what to try or what may be causing the issues) or how to work on ball groups etc.