Maintenance for the week of September 8:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – September 8
• PC/Mac: EU megaserver for maintenance – September 9, 22:00 UTC (6:00PM EDT) - September 10, 16:00 UTC (12:00PM EDT) https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/682784
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – September 8
• PC/Mac: EU megaserver for maintenance – September 9, 22:00 UTC (6:00PM EDT) - September 10, 16:00 UTC (12:00PM EDT) https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/682784
Battlegrounds: Cycle of Self-Destruction
-
Calastir✭✭✭✭✭Anyone else regretting ever replying here and getting spammed daily with notifications from this neverending topic?Chaszmyr Do'Benrae (Dunmer Magsorc Vampire Infinity) ~ Dusk Doublespeak (Breton Magplar Werewolf) ~ Stan of Rimari (Nord Dragonknight Tank) ~ Bunto Kim Alhambra (Redguard Magplar Paladin) ~ Alicyankali (Argonian Magicka Necromancer Draugr Kin) ~ Gruuman Odinfan (Orsimer Magplar) ~ Boymans van Beuningen (Khajiit Stam Warden Bowzerker) ~ Flannelflail (Imperial Stamina Nightblade Brawler PVP) ~ Calastir (Altmer Stamina Dragonknight) ~ Sallystir (Bosmer Stam Warden Frostbite PVP) ~ Zalastir (Altmer Magicka Warden Ice Storm) ~ Capt Peach (Nord Stamcanist Crux Cannon) ~ PC EU ~ Flynt Westwood (Bosmer Magicka Dragonknight) ~ Chandu the Conjurer (Redguard Magcanist Rune Walker) ~ PC NA ~ since May 26th, 2021.3 -
Jierdanit✭✭✭✭✭
✭You think it would be more popular too:
The preferred format of the newcomers (90% of players in queue) should obviously be made available whether it replaces dead queue options or not.Then i guess on that part we do somewhat agree. Newcomers(PvErs) would rather do 4v4v4 than do 8v8 or 4v4 to complete their daily, because they're more likely to get rewards there.
I think it would be slightly more popular with people who dont in the slightest care about PvP because 3 way BGs mean that on average they have to do less PvP to get their dailies.
That is it.
I also dont care at all about those players in terms of PvP. I dont think they should have any say in how it is designed and I dont think that making them happier should have any impact on PvP changes.With no rewards to draw people in and no separate DM queue? How could it?Multiplying the amount of transmutation crystals you get from BGs by fifty might have something to do with the increased participation.
As far as I know there still isnt a seperate DM queue so idk what that has to do with anything.
Sure more transmutes probably lead to a few more people doing BGs, however I dont think that the majority of PvE players even has a need for transmutes.
All the other rewards for BGs are still awful, so thats certainly not why there is more people
.With the rewards we have right now, and a separate DM queue so players with different objectives aren't forced into the same match? How could it not?
Again could still just add a seperate DM queue to 2 team BGs.
Also it could not because most people dont like 4v4v4 either. As you could obviously see because 4v4v4 BGs were dead.
If people actually wanted to do something they would do it even if the rewards arent great (Im doing BGs even tho most of the rewards are absolutely worthless to me).After the return of 3-sided, Zenimax should keep investing in 2-sided until it can compete... or until they understand that it never will.
It's unfortunate that you've shown some modicum of sincerity by recognizing that the newcomers would choose 3-sided, but then went right back to cartoonishly fighting until your dying breath to deny people the choice.
I also said that i dont think that BGs should at all cater to newcomers.
Btw I also think newcomers is a bad word to use. It suggests that those might actually be new people interested in doing BGs when in fact probably 99% of them are just PvE players who are going to leave immediately after they get their daily.
As I already said.
PvP should stop trying to cater to PvE players. They are never going to like it.
And for most people who actually want to PvP i think both 4v4 and 8v8 are more enjoyable than 4v4v4.PC/EU, StamSorc Main4 -
Moonspawn✭✭✭✭You think it would be more popular too:
The preferred format of the newcomers (90% of players in queue) should obviously be made available whether it replaces dead queue options or not.Then i guess on that part we do somewhat agree. Newcomers(PvErs) would rather do 4v4v4 than do 8v8 or 4v4 to complete their daily, because they're more likely to get rewards there.
I think it would be slightly more popular with people who dont in the slightest care about PvP because 3 way BGs mean that on average they have to do less PvP to get their dailies.
That is it.
I also dont care at all about those players in terms of PvP. I dont think they should have any say in how it is designed and I dont think that making them happier should have any impact on PvP changes.With no rewards to draw people in and no separate DM queue? How could it?Multiplying the amount of transmutation crystals you get from BGs by fifty might have something to do with the increased participation.
As far as I know there still isnt a seperate DM queue so idk what that has to do with anything.
Sure more transmutes probably lead to a few more people doing BGs, however I dont think that the majority of PvE players even has a need for transmutes.
All the other rewards for BGs are still awful, so thats certainly not why there is more people
.With the rewards we have right now, and a separate DM queue so players with different objectives aren't forced into the same match? How could it not?
Again could still just add a seperate DM queue to 2 team BGs.
Also it could not because most people dont like 4v4v4 either. As you could obviously see because 4v4v4 BGs were dead.
If people actually wanted to do something they would do it even if the rewards arent great (Im doing BGs even tho most of the rewards are absolutely worthless to me).After the return of 3-sided, Zenimax should keep investing in 2-sided until it can compete... or until they understand that it never will.
It's unfortunate that you've shown some modicum of sincerity by recognizing that the newcomers would choose 3-sided, but then went right back to cartoonishly fighting until your dying breath to deny people the choice.
I also said that i dont think that BGs should at all cater to newcomers.
Btw I also think newcomers is a bad word to use. It suggests that those might actually be new people interested in doing BGs when in fact probably 99% of them are just PvE players who are going to leave immediately after they get their daily.
As I already said.
PvP should stop trying to cater to PvE players. They are never going to like it.
And for most people who actually want to PvP i think both 4v4 and 8v8 are more enjoyable than 4v4v4.
So you want Battlegrounds to cater to the whims of the PvPers who dislike the challenges of the 3-sided format, without the rewards-hungry newcomers getting in the way. How is that different from Two-Teams Custom Lobbies?
0 -
Jierdanit✭✭✭✭✭
✭You think it would be more popular too:
The preferred format of the newcomers (90% of players in queue) should obviously be made available whether it replaces dead queue options or not.Then i guess on that part we do somewhat agree. Newcomers(PvErs) would rather do 4v4v4 than do 8v8 or 4v4 to complete their daily, because they're more likely to get rewards there.
I think it would be slightly more popular with people who dont in the slightest care about PvP because 3 way BGs mean that on average they have to do less PvP to get their dailies.
That is it.
I also dont care at all about those players in terms of PvP. I dont think they should have any say in how it is designed and I dont think that making them happier should have any impact on PvP changes.With no rewards to draw people in and no separate DM queue? How could it?Multiplying the amount of transmutation crystals you get from BGs by fifty might have something to do with the increased participation.
As far as I know there still isnt a seperate DM queue so idk what that has to do with anything.
Sure more transmutes probably lead to a few more people doing BGs, however I dont think that the majority of PvE players even has a need for transmutes.
All the other rewards for BGs are still awful, so thats certainly not why there is more people
.With the rewards we have right now, and a separate DM queue so players with different objectives aren't forced into the same match? How could it not?
Again could still just add a seperate DM queue to 2 team BGs.
Also it could not because most people dont like 4v4v4 either. As you could obviously see because 4v4v4 BGs were dead.
If people actually wanted to do something they would do it even if the rewards arent great (Im doing BGs even tho most of the rewards are absolutely worthless to me).After the return of 3-sided, Zenimax should keep investing in 2-sided until it can compete... or until they understand that it never will.
It's unfortunate that you've shown some modicum of sincerity by recognizing that the newcomers would choose 3-sided, but then went right back to cartoonishly fighting until your dying breath to deny people the choice.
I also said that i dont think that BGs should at all cater to newcomers.
Btw I also think newcomers is a bad word to use. It suggests that those might actually be new people interested in doing BGs when in fact probably 99% of them are just PvE players who are going to leave immediately after they get their daily.
As I already said.
PvP should stop trying to cater to PvE players. They are never going to like it.
And for most people who actually want to PvP i think both 4v4 and 8v8 are more enjoyable than 4v4v4.
So you want Battlegrounds to cater to the whims of the PvPers who dislike the challenges of the 3-sided format, without the rewards-hungry newcomers getting in the way. How is that different from Two-Teams Custom Lobbies?
Still at it with the "challenges of the 3-sided format"...
Spending the entire BG hiding waiting for the other 2 teams to fight eachother so you can steal kills or go to an empty objective isnt challenging or skillful (That is literally the best tactic in every single 4v4v4 BG).
I want PvP (BGs) to focus on the people who actually PvP instead of trying to get the casual PvE playerbase to get into it when its been shown often enough that they will simply always hate PvP.
And as i said (In case you still didnt get that) I think the majority of those PvP players would rather have 2 team BGs than 3 team BGs.
Also I wouldnt be opposed to 2-Team Custom Lobbies.
In addition to four 2-Team queues of course.PC/EU, StamSorc Main5 -
Decimus✭✭✭✭✭
✭@xylena_lazarow
hiya
I have not been keeping up with the thread
but if I remember correctly you prefer 2-teams BGs, and kept repeating that 3-teams was 4v8, yes? Maybe you can provide the video @Moonspawn is asking for, then. I'm guessing that the team being focused must be at least trying to move together away from the sandwich though, instead of pointlessly attempting to fight their way out.Show me a Solo Queue 3-sided BG where the weakest team kept getting focused by the other teams even as they kept trying to retreat together away from the sandwich.
Yes. It's important that ''the team being focused must be at least trying to move together away from the sandwich though, instead of pointlessly attempting to fight their way out.'' Can't be a scoreboard screenshot, or a video where the weakest team is insisting on the wrong and pointless move. @Decimus do you have it?
Do I have what, videos of where the weakest team isn't playing like the weakest team?
I'm not quite sure I follow.
A video where the team that's being focused by the other two keeps trying to move together away from the sandwich, instead of pointlessly attempting to fight their way out, but is unable to do so.
How would you expect a bunch of people with 20k health to go anywhere when they get one shot by even one person as they jump down from the base?
I'm not sure if you quite understand the skill/knowledge gaps and BG dynamics in this game.
Even if you got 4 people who just queued in in their PvE builds to get a daily reward box to coordinate like a professional esports team, they wouldn't get anywhere with squishy builds and slow reaction times/incorrect responses to burst/CCs etc.
Even people more experienced at PvP fall victim to this as there's still a huge skill/knowledge gap between them and the top tier PvPers - a certain poster here for example is frequently getting farmed in EU BGs, even in middle of his team as the build/gameplay just aren't at the level required to survive certain players.
It is what it is.
If you want examples, I have around 7 years worth of them on my Youtube channel and probably some saved Twitch VODs as well where people just instantly die the moment they jump down from spawn.
No video, then?
I actually don't have many boring ones recorded (I may have underestimated myself as a content creator in the earlier statement), but here's one where I literally have no gear equipped (only reason why this BG was even worth saving) and it's not even my team that winds up getting farmed:
https://youtu.be/3GP2zZoXxAQ?si=uwxjpcO3zKvYp1AD
I stopped recording BGs almost entirely for the last year or so of 3-way BGs, it just got monotone and boring and most of them would be 6 or 7 kills, healers in two teams, one team without healer getting farmed by the more experienced PvPers who'd ignore each other apart from the occasional 1v1 somewhere for fun, which would get interrupted by a random sniper from 3rd team that you'd both then focus... and the BG then ending in 4 minutes because people stood on flags.
I have scoreboards of these BGs for various reasons, but there's literally zero reason to upload VODs of them just like there's zero reason to upload VODs of many of the boring BGs right now that happen sometimes.
Doesn't look like a 8v4 to me, just a standard 3-sided Domination. Thanks anyway.
Ah yes, the standard 3-sided Domination where the more experienced PvPers farm squishies and the team with the most squishies has 3 Kills 15 Deaths at the end - sounds about right. This is of course not "lopsided" at all, that must be a team vs team exclusive.
You're lucky I didn't record the BGs where enemy teams would leave as they get farmed by two strong teams, get replacements, replacements leave & you wind up with one or two names on the scoreboard at the end.
Complaining about "lopsided" matches in a competitive team vs team is kind of ridiculous anyway... it'd be like complaining that it's somehow unfair when a top football team beats the bottom one 3-0. The only difference is that FIFA with a multi-billion dollar budget hasn't decided to throw in a third team and a third goal to "make it better". Damn, if only they had advise like yours they could fix their sport!
And just for the record, BGs are PvP. If you enjoy running from point A to point B and don't like fighting other players, might I recommend trying the other 99% of the game that's more designed for you? That, or asking for some "social mini-games" like other MMOs have (racing etc) if you prefer contactless competition.2 -
xylena_lazarow✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
Lol right. Not one single 3-sided enjoyer has clearly articulated these challenges. They even rejected my attempt to concede that chaos is its own challenge, trying to claim there's some secret deep strats going on. Well what are they?challenges of the 3-sided formatPC/NA || Cyro/BGs || RIP old PvP build system || bring Vengeance3 -
Moonspawn✭✭✭✭You think it would be more popular too:
The preferred format of the newcomers (90% of players in queue) should obviously be made available whether it replaces dead queue options or not.Then i guess on that part we do somewhat agree. Newcomers(PvErs) would rather do 4v4v4 than do 8v8 or 4v4 to complete their daily, because they're more likely to get rewards there.
I think it would be slightly more popular with people who dont in the slightest care about PvP because 3 way BGs mean that on average they have to do less PvP to get their dailies.
That is it.
I also dont care at all about those players in terms of PvP. I dont think they should have any say in how it is designed and I dont think that making them happier should have any impact on PvP changes.With no rewards to draw people in and no separate DM queue? How could it?Multiplying the amount of transmutation crystals you get from BGs by fifty might have something to do with the increased participation.
As far as I know there still isnt a seperate DM queue so idk what that has to do with anything.
Sure more transmutes probably lead to a few more people doing BGs, however I dont think that the majority of PvE players even has a need for transmutes.
All the other rewards for BGs are still awful, so thats certainly not why there is more people
.With the rewards we have right now, and a separate DM queue so players with different objectives aren't forced into the same match? How could it not?
Again could still just add a seperate DM queue to 2 team BGs.
Also it could not because most people dont like 4v4v4 either. As you could obviously see because 4v4v4 BGs were dead.
If people actually wanted to do something they would do it even if the rewards arent great (Im doing BGs even tho most of the rewards are absolutely worthless to me).After the return of 3-sided, Zenimax should keep investing in 2-sided until it can compete... or until they understand that it never will.
It's unfortunate that you've shown some modicum of sincerity by recognizing that the newcomers would choose 3-sided, but then went right back to cartoonishly fighting until your dying breath to deny people the choice.
I also said that i dont think that BGs should at all cater to newcomers.
Btw I also think newcomers is a bad word to use. It suggests that those might actually be new people interested in doing BGs when in fact probably 99% of them are just PvE players who are going to leave immediately after they get their daily.
As I already said.
PvP should stop trying to cater to PvE players. They are never going to like it.
And for most people who actually want to PvP i think both 4v4 and 8v8 are more enjoyable than 4v4v4.
So you want Battlegrounds to cater to the whims of the PvPers who dislike the challenges of the 3-sided format, without the rewards-hungry newcomers getting in the way. How is that different from Two-Teams Custom Lobbies?
Still at it with the "challenges of the 3-sided format"...
Spending the entire BG hiding waiting for the other 2 teams to fight eachother so you can steal kills or go to an empty objective isnt challenging or skillful (That is literally the best tactic in every single 4v4v4 BG).
I want PvP (BGs) to focus on the people who actually PvP instead of trying to get the casual PvE playerbase to get into it when its been shown often enough that they will simply always hate PvP.
And as i said (In case you still didnt get that) I think the majority of those PvP players would rather have 2 team BGs than 3 team BGs.
Also I wouldnt be opposed to 2-Team Custom Lobbies.
In addition to four 2-Team queues of course.
I can prove it if you want. I'll make a list of all the challenges that are inherent to the 3-teams format, but don't exist in 2-teams. You make a list of the challenges that only exist in 2-teams, but not in 3-teams. There is a catch, though. You can't put ''dealing with the boredom of a lopsided match'' in your list. That would be cheating.0 -
Haki_7✭✭✭Destruction of Battlegrounds Chapter 73: Waiting 22 minutes for a lopsided match (Solo 8v8 PC/NA)
https://youtu.be/8JZuH3BASIA 0 -
EvilGoatKing✭✭✭Capture the relic is so much stank hole juice. Ill take the penalty for dropping out from now on. In fact it really makes the most sense in general to drop group ASAP once you know the BG is lost, time is better spent on productive aspects of the game like anything else.0
-
Moonspawn✭✭✭✭xylena_lazarow wrote: »
Only if @Jierdanit agrees to make the other list. I doubt he will though. He probably realized by now that his list wouldn't have a single item, which would automatically prove my point about the people who prefer 2-sided disliking the challenges of the 3-sided format.Edited by Moonspawn on April 20, 2025 8:38AM0 -
Jierdanit✭✭✭✭✭
✭I can prove it if you want. I'll make a list of all the challenges that are inherent to the 3-teams format, but don't exist in 2-teams. You make a list of the challenges that only exist in 2-teams, but not in 3-teams. There is a catch, though. You can't put ''dealing with the boredom of a lopsided match'' in your list. That would be cheating.
Sure I can do that.
1. You have to actually fight people to win BGs.
2. You get rewarded for fighting outnumbered instead of being punished for it.
3. Your team has to earn their kills instead of being able to steal them from the 3rd team.
4. Your team actually needs to be better than the other team for you to win (most of the time).
5. You need to be aware that players you fight might have sigils buffing them (in 8v8).
6. Even in objective modes your team usually needs to be able to win fights to win the match.
7. Have to actually play strategically instead of just avoiding combat as much as possible.
8. 8 people playing coordinated is a lot more difficult to fight than two coordinated 4 man teams (8v8).
9. There is no 3rd team to take the focus off of you.
10. You can be forced to play outnumbered in 4v4 DM.
Most of this is in regards to 8v8, since that is what i mostly play atm. Some of it applies to 4v4 too tho.
Could probably come up with quite a bit more if i actually thought about it longer
.
Now your turn. Please tell us how 4v4v4 was so incredibly challenging.PC/EU, StamSorc Main1 -
Jierdanit✭✭✭✭✭
✭xylena_lazarow wrote: »
Only if Jierdanit agrees to make the other list. I doubt he will though. He probably realized by now that his list wouldn't have a single item, which would automatically prove my point about the people who prefer 2-sided disliking the challenges of the 3-sided format.
?PC/EU, StamSorc Main0 -
Moonspawn✭✭✭✭I can prove it if you want. I'll make a list of all the challenges that are inherent to the 3-teams format, but don't exist in 2-teams. You make a list of the challenges that only exist in 2-teams, but not in 3-teams. There is a catch, though. You can't put ''dealing with the boredom of a lopsided match'' in your list. That would be cheating.
Sure I can do that.
1. You have to actually fight people to win BGs.
2. You get rewarded for fighting outnumbered instead of being punished for it.
3. Your team has to earn their kills instead of being able to steal them from the 3rd team.
4. Your team actually needs to be better than the other team for you to win (most of the time).
5. You need to be aware that players you fight might have sigils buffing them (in 8v8).
6. Even in objective modes your team usually needs to be able to win fights to win the match.
7. Have to actually play strategically instead of just avoiding combat as much as possible.
8. 8 people playing coordinated is a lot more difficult to fight than two coordinated 4 man teams (8v8).
9. There is no 3rd team to take the focus off of you.
10. You can be forced to play outnumbered in 4v4 DM.
Most of this is in regards to 8v8, since that is what i mostly play atm. Some of it applies to 4v4 too tho.
Could probably come up with quite a bit more if i actually thought about it longer.
Now your turn. Please tell us how 4v4v4 was so incredibly challenging.
I'm afraid it's not that simple:You make a list of the challenges that only exist in 2-teams, but not in 3-teams
1. You have to actually fight people to win BGs.
Challenge that existed in 3-sided.
2. You get rewarded for fighting outnumbered instead of being punished for it.
You could be either rewarded or punished for fighting outnumbered in 3-sided, depending on the situation. Anyway, it used to happen in 3-sided.
3. Your team has to earn their kills instead of being able to steal them from the 3rd team.
Challenge that existed in 3-sided.
4. Your team actually needs to be better than the other team for you to win (most of the time).
Challenge that existed in 3-sided.
5. You need to be aware that players you fight might have sigils buffing them (in 8v8).
Identifying when to attack and when to retreat is not a challenge exclusive to the new format.
6. Even in objective modes your team usually needs to be able to win fights to win the match.
Challenge that existed in 3-sided.
7. Have to actually play strategically instead of just avoiding combat as much as possible.
Challenge that existed in 3-sided.
8. 8 people playing coordinated is a lot more difficult to fight than two coordinated 4 man teams (8v8).
Challenge that existed in 3-sided. 8v1-4 is all 2-sided enjoyers complain about.
9. There is no 3rd team to take the focus off of you.
Challenge that existed in 3-sided. Matches were not a concentrated 3-way fight all the time.
10. You can be forced to play outnumbered in 4v4 DM.
Challenge that existed in 3-sided.
Edited by Moonspawn on April 20, 2025 1:15PM0 -
Joy_Division✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭RealLoveBVB wrote: »
Fun fact: Someone who wants to win, would never ever have you in their team, as you don't play for the objective (except deathmatch) and risking a loss, as you are farming kills randomly on the map.
I am very competitive and would be thrilled beyond belief to have @Decimus on my team, every time.
I've seen his content going all the way back to ESO's early days. Every class, every playstyle, he is an excellent player with deep knowledge of PvP mechanics.
Over the long run, Decimus is going to win more matches than the 3-42 players, especially now when there are just two teams and the 3-42ers can't just go hop on an empty flag while the other two teams are fighting. At the end of the day, it is easier to return relics, capture flags, and hold on to Chaos balls if the opposing players are being constantly defeated, especially if those who lack confidence become demoralized such that they stay on their spawn spamming light attacks. I've been on more than enough winning and losing teams to notice the KDR ratio isn't coincidental.
Make Rush of Agony "Monsters only." People should not be consecutively crowd controlled in a PvP setting. Period.2 -
Jierdanit✭✭✭✭✭
✭
I'm afraid it is. You just really dont know what youre talking about.I'm afraid it's not that simple:
Wrong.1. You have to actually fight people to win BGs.
Challenge that existed in 3-sided.
Wrong.2. You get rewarded for fighting outnumbered instead of being punished for it.
You could be either rewarded or punished for fighting outnumbered in 3-sided, depending on the situation. Anyway, it used to happen in 3-sided.
Wrong.3. Your team has to earn their kills instead of being able to steal them from the 3rd team.
Challenge that existed in 3-sided.
Wrong.4. Your team actually needs to be better than the other team for you to win (most of the time).
Challenge that existed in 3-sided.
That is why I said something else, but it seems you have trouble reading.5. You need to be aware that players you fight might have sigils buffing them (in 8v8).
Identifying when to attack and when to retreat is not a challenge exclusive to the new format.
Wrong.6. Even in objective modes your team usually needs to be able to win fights to win the match.
Challenge that existed in 3-sided.
Wrong.7. Have to actually play strategically instead of just avoiding combat as much as possible.
Challenge that existed in 3-sided.
Wrong.8. 8 people playing coordinated is a lot more difficult to fight than two coordinated 4 man teams (8v8).
Challenge that existed in 3-sided. 8v1-4 is all 2-sided enjoyers complain about.
They were often though. So wrong.9. There is no 3rd team to take the focus off of you.
Challenge that existed in 3-sided. Matches were not a concentrated 3-way fight all the time.
Wrong.10. You can be forced to play outnumbered in 4v4 DM.
Challenge that existed in 3-sided.
Its crazy how you have absolutely no idea how 4v4v4 even worked and still insist that its better.
Also you still didnt give us your list PC/EU, StamSorc Main3 -
Moonspawn✭✭✭✭
I'm afraid it is. You just really dont know what youre talking about.I'm afraid it's not that simple:
Wrong.1. You have to actually fight people to win BGs.
Challenge that existed in 3-sided.
Wrong.2. You get rewarded for fighting outnumbered instead of being punished for it.
You could be either rewarded or punished for fighting outnumbered in 3-sided, depending on the situation. Anyway, it used to happen in 3-sided.
Wrong.3. Your team has to earn their kills instead of being able to steal them from the 3rd team.
Challenge that existed in 3-sided.
Wrong.4. Your team actually needs to be better than the other team for you to win (most of the time).
Challenge that existed in 3-sided.
That is why I said something else, but it seems you have trouble reading.5. You need to be aware that players you fight might have sigils buffing them (in 8v8).
Identifying when to attack and when to retreat is not a challenge exclusive to the new format.
Wrong.6. Even in objective modes your team usually needs to be able to win fights to win the match.
Challenge that existed in 3-sided.
Wrong.7. Have to actually play strategically instead of just avoiding combat as much as possible.
Challenge that existed in 3-sided.
Wrong.8. 8 people playing coordinated is a lot more difficult to fight than two coordinated 4 man teams (8v8).
Challenge that existed in 3-sided. 8v1-4 is all 2-sided enjoyers complain about.
They were often though. So wrong.9. There is no 3rd team to take the focus off of you.
Challenge that existed in 3-sided. Matches were not a concentrated 3-way fight all the time.
Wrong.10. You can be forced to play outnumbered in 4v4 DM.
Challenge that existed in 3-sided.
Its crazy how you have absolutely no idea how 4v4v4 even worked and still insist that its better.
Also you still didnt give us your list
You know what, you're right about number 5, since sigils didn't exist in the old format. Let's ignore that their visual effect glitches most of the time and call it a challenge. How are all of the other numbers exclusive to 2-sided?
Edited by Moonspawn on April 20, 2025 2:07PM0 -
DigiAngel✭✭✭✭✭
✭Still pretty rough as of today....skills sometimes don't fire...potions as well...kind of messy when you need it split second.0 -
xylena_lazarow✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
No. We do not have it. You have not given it. You've only said that they share the same challenges.The list of challenges that are inherent to the 3-teams format, but don't exist in 2-teams? You already have it. Don't you?PC/NA || Cyro/BGs || RIP old PvP build system || bring Vengeance3 -
Urzigurumash✭✭✭✭✭
✭Solo Queue 4v4 on Xbox is excellent by the end of the week. If the MMR reset was slowed down they'd be better earlier in the week too.
This mode has a loyal following and long standing culture on Xbox - like since Halo came out.
Edited by Urzigurumash on April 21, 2025 1:37AMXbox NA AD / Day 1 ScrubDK / Wood Orc Cuisine Enthusiast1 -
Moonspawn✭✭✭✭
It's the same as the list of things you hate about 3-sided BGs. Those are the challenges.Edited by Moonspawn on April 21, 2025 7:54AM0 -
Jierdanit✭✭✭✭✭
✭
It's the same as the list of things you hate about 3-sided BGs. Those are the challenges.
I'd still like you to list them.
But I guess you can't come up with anything except for "everyone who doesn't like 3 sided BGs loves lopsided BGs and can't handle the challenges of 4v4v4".
If you really don't have anything specific to say idk why you're wasting everyone's time on this.PC/EU, StamSorc Main4 -
Moonspawn✭✭✭✭
It's the same as the list of things you hate about 3-sided BGs. Those are the challenges.
I'd still like you to list them.
But I guess you can't come up with anything except for "everyone who doesn't like 3 sided BGs loves lopsided BGs and can't handle the challenges of 4v4v4".
If you really don't have anything specific to say idk why you're wasting everyone's time on this.
I can tell that you find the concept of disliking challenge offensive for some reason, so maybe we should start using another word instead? Particularities?PvE players in this game are never going to like PvP and ZOS needs to stop trying to pull more of them into PvP. Instead they should just design PvP to be as good for actual PvP players as possible.''
The particularities of 3-sided BGs were better suited to teach the newcomers you hate so much about positioning and target selection, about teamwork and decision-making. But God forbid they learn anything about those, right? They should just keep chasing you around the map as you generate ultimate and play the part of the good little fodder... forever.''Now, team mates do split in team vs team BGs as well and outnumbered fights happen... but the difference is that while you're being outnumbered in team vs team, your team is outnumbering the rest of the opponents. That is balance: you can buy your team kills and objectives by just being a good player and surviving outnumbered.
If you do this in 3-way BGs, not only are you outnumbered, but so is your team - splitting into two groups just turns your fight into two 2v4s instead of one 2v4 and team being able to 6v4 meanwhile for example. This forces a ball group style gameplay on people, which is the last thing battlegrounds need. Fundamental problem, glad it's gone.''
0 -
Moonspawn✭✭✭✭xylena_lazarow wrote: »
If you must know, the list of challenges @Jierdanit dislikes would be anything involving the presence of the third team: having to worry about killstealing (by the third team), the objective getting done uncontested (by the third team), and the possibility of being sandwiched (because of the third team). Since he'll be opposing the return of 3-sided until his dying breath, I assume the list goes on indefinitely?0 -
Jierdanit✭✭✭✭✭
✭I can tell that you find the concept of disliking challenge offensive for some reason, so maybe we should start using another word instead? Particularities?
You're surprised that I find something that is clearly meant so sound offensive offensive?PvE players in this game are never going to like PvP and ZOS needs to stop trying to pull more of them into PvP. Instead they should just design PvP to be as good for actual PvP players as possible.''
The particularities of 3-sided BGs were better suited to teach the newcomers you hate so much about positioning and target selection, about teamwork and decision-making. But God forbid they learn anything about those, right? They should just keep chasing you around the map as you generate ultimate and play the part of the good little fodder... forever.
First of all I stop acting like I said stuff I never did.
I don't hate "newcomers". I just don't think they should ever be in my BGs, since that is bad for both them and me.
Also saying that 3-sided BGs are better for new players to learn just isn't true.
It's better for PvE players to get their dailies, because they need to know absolutely nothing about PvP to win in those BGs.
Which obviously also means they don't need to learn anything.
In 2 team BGs they do.
But yes keep acting like the only reason I want 2 sided BGs is because I want to farm PvErs.
Not surprising since you obviously generally have no clue what you're talking about.PC/EU, StamSorc Main3 -
Maggusemm✭✭✭In general the concept 8 vs 8 is nice and properly working. The balancing of course cannot work every time, but in average it will be ok.
I played also the old style of battlegrounds and think that the new concept is at least good enough to stay. I always play with 8 players, this is a lot more interesting and might even out some very good players on one side.0 -
xylena_lazarow✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
No that's all of it.having to worry about killstealing (by the third team), the objective getting done uncontested (by the third team), and the possibility of being sandwiched (because of the third team). Since he'll be opposing the return of 3-sided until his dying breath, I assume the list goes on indefinitely?PC/NA || Cyro/BGs || RIP old PvP build system || bring Vengeance3
This discussion has been closed.