Please do not force me to play in Vengance, I do not want to

marius_buys · July 1

After 20K+ hours in ESO I am now forced into a test campaign with an alternate playstyle, alternate skills, alternate rule set and alternate gear.
Thanks but no thanks, I simply do not want to.

With respect there are factors ZOS is simply not quantifying in forcing all pvp players into a cookie cutter campaign where all stats are standard. Regardless of the literally thousands of hours spent farming gear and fine tuning playstyle there are many Meta factors getting ignored for instance the affect of ping. I play with a standards ping of 250ms out of South Africa. There is no way around it. This is why I for instance play with Oakensoul as I am at a distinct disadvantage with bar swapping and animation cancelling in combat when I fight against a player with lets say 50 ping.

I understand your need for testing BUT not at the cost of players who dislike the changes.
Please ZOS, give the players who do not want to test a normal CP & Non CP campaign during your testing in Vengance.

HatchetHaro · July 1

If you don't want to play it then don't. No one is "forcing" you to do anything.

MISTFORMBZZZ · July 1

HatchetHaro wrote: »

If you don't want to play it then don't. No one is "forcing" you to do anything.

Yes they do, since they removed the other campaigns.
Not on all servers the population is high enough to surstain IC and Battlegrounds

scrappy1342 · July 1

if pvp is their main thing that they do when they play, then yes, they are being forced into it

Abelon · July 1

They are still not "forced" into it. The game literally never forces you into pvp at all. If somebody makes a choice to only play pvp, that's a choice. And during this one test week, yes, the other campaigns are removed. Battlegrounds and Imperial City are technically still there, how many people play them especially during this week I have no idea, but they can make the choice to queue for them instead. They can also make the choice to play pve this one week. They can also make the choice to not play the game this one week.

But they are certainly, 100%, not forced into anything.

preevious · July 1

There is seriously bad faith arguments against OP, here, although he is perfectly right.

"Technically", players are not forced, but since it's the only campain, PvP players can either play it, or don't play at all.
So, vengeance is not a choice, it's an obligation.
I can get behing the fact that you guys like vengeance, and it's all right.
No need to defend it with hollow arguments, though. The fact that it's the only choice right now IS forcing players to play it, and is a bit of unbecoming move.

Jaavaa · July 1

HatchetHaro wrote: »

If you don't want to play it then don't. No one is "forcing" you to do anything.

Bad Argument. On Xbox EU i have to play this if i wanna play pvp, cause the Population is low and there is nobody at ic or bg atm.

Rungar · July 1

imo you cant want the game to improve and not have to help out at least a little bit. This is exactly why this game advances so slow. Everyone is fine as long as it doesnt affect them in any way.

Jaavaa · July 1

I'm not paid for this. In fact, I pay Zenimax every six months. I'm not a developer. That's their job.

preevious · July 1

Rungar wrote: »

imo you cant want the game to improve and not have to help out at least a little bit. This is exactly why this game advances so slow. Everyone is fine as long as it doesnt affect them in any way.

To be fair, there seems to be enough support for vangeance in these forum to infer that they would have enough data without making it the only choice.

Abelon · July 1

preevious wrote: »

There is seriously bad faith arguments against OP, here, although he is perfectly right.

"Technically", players are not forced, but since it's the only campain, PvP players can either play it, or don't play at all.
So, vengeance is not a choice, it's an obligation.
I can get behing the fact that you guys like vengeance, and it's all right.
No need to defend it with hollow arguments, though. The fact that it's the only choice right now IS forcing players to play it, and is a bit of unbecoming move.

It's not really a hollow argument. But it is semantics. There is no actual force (nor obligation), that's not what those words mean. When you make a title that says "Please don't force me to play Vengeance, I don't want to" - you invite discussion. It's a clickbaity title. It acts like ZoS is in OP's room with a gun, forcing them to play Vengeance, while they try and fail to say no. My reaction to that is to say - sorry, but it's not possible for ZoS to force you to play Vengeance. You don't want to play Vengeance, don't play it.

If the post were written differently maybe... If it didn't have this clickbaity emotional title. If it led with the final sentence of the post instead, the completely legitimate request to have other campaigns back (even if it likely won't happen, but I completely understand the wish and wouldn't argue against it), then people wouldn't have that kneejerk reaction.

And also obligation is once again an incredibly strong word for something completely optional in a video game. I couldn't imagine ever thinking I have an obligation to pixels. What sort of obligation do you have to a pvp campaign and why? Is it moral or legal? You have a debt to a pvp campaign? This is a completely wrong word to use...

CalamityCat · July 1

It's a short term test to help performance. That needs as many players as possible in Cyrodiil.

None of us are able to use the skills/gear and builds we're used to. But it's not really about our preferences and playstyle. It's more turning up and just trying to be active in fights. Whether that's sieging, healing or fighting.

Last Vengance there were so many players including newbies, nobody was really expecting anyone to be at top performance. The lack of lag made it so much easier too. I'd certainly recommend actually trying it, especially with a group or guild to run with.

Major_Mangle · July 1

Rungar wrote: »

imo you cant want the game to improve and not have to help out at least a little bit. This is exactly why this game advances so slow. Everyone is fine as long as it doesnt affect them in any way.

Dagoth_Rac · July 1

preevious wrote: »

Rungar wrote: »

imo you cant want the game to improve and not have to help out at least a little bit. This is exactly why this game advances so slow. Everyone is fine as long as it doesnt affect them in any way.

To be fair, there seems to be enough support for vangeance in these forum to infer that they would have enough data without making it the only choice.

But ZOS is only partly concerned with whether people like it and what the forums think. They are also concerned with the stress test of having as many people as possible in the campaign and seeing when it breaks and what breaks it. They will get higher populations and more stress and more data if there is no alternative Cyrodiil during the testing period.

preevious · July 1

Abelon wrote: »

preevious wrote: »

There is seriously bad faith arguments against OP, here, although he is perfectly right.

"Technically", players are not forced, but since it's the only campain, PvP players can either play it, or don't play at all.
So, vengeance is not a choice, it's an obligation.
I can get behing the fact that you guys like vengeance, and it's all right.
No need to defend it with hollow arguments, though. The fact that it's the only choice right now IS forcing players to play it, and is a bit of unbecoming move.

It's not really a hollow argument. But it is semantics. There is no actual force (nor obligation), that's not what those words mean. When you make a title that says "Please don't force me to play Vengeance, I don't want to" - you invite discussion. It's a clickbaity title. It acts like ZoS is in OP's room with a gun, forcing them to play Vengeance, while they try and fail to say no. My reaction to that is to say - sorry, but it's not possible for ZoS to force you to play Vengeance. You don't want to play Vengeance, don't play it.

If the post were written differently maybe... If it didn't have this clickbaity emotional title. If it led with the final sentence of the post instead, the completely legitimate request to have other campaigns back (even if it likely won't happen, but I completely understand the wish and wouldn't argue against it), then people wouldn't have that kneejerk reaction.

And also obligation is once again an incredibly strong word for something completely optional in a video game. I couldn't imagine ever thinking I have an obligation to pixels. What sort of obligation do you have to a pvp campaign and why? Is it moral or legal? You have a debt to a pvp campaign? This is a completely wrong word to use...

So, by your own admission, you're using sementics to go against an argument you still perfectly understand.

i'll never understand why people do that ... can't you argue about the subject at and, instead of dilluting it with semantics?
That would be rad.

Jaavaa · July 1

preevious wrote: »

Abelon wrote: »

preevious wrote: »

There is seriously bad faith arguments against OP, here, although he is perfectly right.

"Technically", players are not forced, but since it's the only campain, PvP players can either play it, or don't play at all.
So, vengeance is not a choice, it's an obligation.
I can get behing the fact that you guys like vengeance, and it's all right.
No need to defend it with hollow arguments, though. The fact that it's the only choice right now IS forcing players to play it, and is a bit of unbecoming move.

It's not really a hollow argument. But it is semantics. There is no actual force (nor obligation), that's not what those words mean. When you make a title that says "Please don't force me to play Vengeance, I don't want to" - you invite discussion. It's a clickbaity title. It acts like ZoS is in OP's room with a gun, forcing them to play Vengeance, while they try and fail to say no. My reaction to that is to say - sorry, but it's not possible for ZoS to force you to play Vengeance. You don't want to play Vengeance, don't play it.

If the post were written differently maybe... If it didn't have this clickbaity emotional title. If it led with the final sentence of the post instead, the completely legitimate request to have other campaigns back (even if it likely won't happen, but I completely understand the wish and wouldn't argue against it), then people wouldn't have that kneejerk reaction.

And also obligation is once again an incredibly strong word for something completely optional in a video game. I couldn't imagine ever thinking I have an obligation to pixels. What sort of obligation do you have to a pvp campaign and why? Is it moral or legal? You have a debt to a pvp campaign? This is a completely wrong word to use...

So, by your own admission, you're using sementics to go against an argument you still perfectly understand.

i'll never understand why people do that ... can't you argue about the subject at and, instead of dilluting it with semantics?
That would be rad.

You shouldn't argue with such people. There's only their opinion.

Islyn · July 1

Abelon wrote: »

They are still not "forced" into it. The game literally never forces you into pvp at all. If somebody makes a choice to only play pvp, that's a choice. And during this one test week, yes, the other campaigns are removed. Battlegrounds and Imperial City are technically still there, how many people play them especially during this week I have no idea, but they can make the choice to queue for them instead. They can also make the choice to play pve this one week. They can also make the choice to not play the game this one week.

But they are certainly, 100%, not forced into anything.

That's a rather disingenuous statement.

No one is forced into anything by that standard. They can just uninstall.

Also why does the PTS even exist then? I am personally not a fan of testing stuff on live servers.

I am also concerned that they could make this the *only* way to PVP and I think more options = better.

TO BE CLEAR I am not trying to complain - it will be whatever it is, and I'll just play it or not. *shrug* That's how I am.

(I don't know you, and I don't want to get in any drama some people really be adding 2 + 2 and coming up with 7 in here and I am not interested in that)

Abelon · July 1

preevious wrote: »

Abelon wrote: »

preevious wrote: »

There is seriously bad faith arguments against OP, here, although he is perfectly right.

"Technically", players are not forced, but since it's the only campain, PvP players can either play it, or don't play at all.
So, vengeance is not a choice, it's an obligation.
I can get behing the fact that you guys like vengeance, and it's all right.
No need to defend it with hollow arguments, though. The fact that it's the only choice right now IS forcing players to play it, and is a bit of unbecoming move.

It's not really a hollow argument. But it is semantics. There is no actual force (nor obligation), that's not what those words mean. When you make a title that says "Please don't force me to play Vengeance, I don't want to" - you invite discussion. It's a clickbaity title. It acts like ZoS is in OP's room with a gun, forcing them to play Vengeance, while they try and fail to say no. My reaction to that is to say - sorry, but it's not possible for ZoS to force you to play Vengeance. You don't want to play Vengeance, don't play it.

If the post were written differently maybe... If it didn't have this clickbaity emotional title. If it led with the final sentence of the post instead, the completely legitimate request to have other campaigns back (even if it likely won't happen, but I completely understand the wish and wouldn't argue against it), then people wouldn't have that kneejerk reaction.

And also obligation is once again an incredibly strong word for something completely optional in a video game. I couldn't imagine ever thinking I have an obligation to pixels. What sort of obligation do you have to a pvp campaign and why? Is it moral or legal? You have a debt to a pvp campaign? This is a completely wrong word to use...

So, by your own admission, you're using sementics to go against an argument you still perfectly understand.

i'll never understand why people do that ... can't you argue about the subject at and, instead of dilluting it with semantics?
That would be rad.

I am not the one diluting the subject at hand. OPs who use clickbait titles like the ones currently on the 1st page, are the ones diluting the subjects at hand. "Vengeance - THE WORST PVP EVER " or "Please do not force me to play in Vengance, I do not want to"

Don't like this clickbait nonsense in real life in new articles, don't like it on forums either. But aside from that, I did admit that it is semantics, yes. With clickbait titles being what causes my kneejerk reaction.

And I did already make a statement on the subject - I personally understand the wish for the normal campaigns even during this test week. But we already know that's not going to happen, we had plenty of information from ZoS' side about the importance of this test and about them needing as many players in it as possible. It is specifically not done on the test server this time, because not enough people go to the test servers. For the same reason they don't let us play the normal campaign this week. They want the maximum amount of players possible. And the week already started. It will be over faster than anyone at ZoS would make any sort of decision, including turning other campaigns back on.

Islyn · July 1

Abelon wrote: »

preevious wrote: »

Abelon wrote: »

preevious wrote: »

There is seriously bad faith arguments against OP, here, although he is perfectly right.

"Technically", players are not forced, but since it's the only campain, PvP players can either play it, or don't play at all.
So, vengeance is not a choice, it's an obligation.
I can get behing the fact that you guys like vengeance, and it's all right.
No need to defend it with hollow arguments, though. The fact that it's the only choice right now IS forcing players to play it, and is a bit of unbecoming move.

It's not really a hollow argument. But it is semantics. There is no actual force (nor obligation), that's not what those words mean. When you make a title that says "Please don't force me to play Vengeance, I don't want to" - you invite discussion. It's a clickbaity title. It acts like ZoS is in OP's room with a gun, forcing them to play Vengeance, while they try and fail to say no. My reaction to that is to say - sorry, but it's not possible for ZoS to force you to play Vengeance. You don't want to play Vengeance, don't play it.

If the post were written differently maybe... If it didn't have this clickbaity emotional title. If it led with the final sentence of the post instead, the completely legitimate request to have other campaigns back (even if it likely won't happen, but I completely understand the wish and wouldn't argue against it), then people wouldn't have that kneejerk reaction.

And also obligation is once again an incredibly strong word for something completely optional in a video game. I couldn't imagine ever thinking I have an obligation to pixels. What sort of obligation do you have to a pvp campaign and why? Is it moral or legal? You have a debt to a pvp campaign? This is a completely wrong word to use...

So, by your own admission, you're using sementics to go against an argument you still perfectly understand.

i'll never understand why people do that ... can't you argue about the subject at and, instead of dilluting it with semantics?
That would be rad.

I am not the one diluting the subject at hand. OPs who use clickbait titles like the ones currently on the 1st page, are the ones diluting the subjects at hand. "Vengeance - THE WORST PVP EVER " or "Please do not force me to play in Vengance, I do not want to"

Don't like this clickbait nonsense in real life in new articles, don't like it on forums either. But aside from that, I did admit that it is semantics, yes. With clickbait titles being what causes my kneejerk reaction.

And I did already make a statement on the subject - I personally understand the wish for the normal campaigns even during this test week. But we already know that's not going to happen, we had plenty of information from ZoS' side about the importance of this test and about them needing as many players in it as possible. It is specifically not done on the test server this time, because not enough people go to the test servers. For the same reason they don't let us play the normal campaign this week. They want the maximum amount of players possible. And the week already started. It will be over faster than anyone at ZoS would make any sort of decision, including turning other campaigns back on.

Ok but he feels forced - as what is the other option? A LOT LOT of people have stated this PVP isn't good. His opinion to me isn't clickbaity at all - and I cannot stand bait titles/hyperbole (like people using SCREAMING when someone is just expressing confusion or a mild dislike, or PUNISHED for some petty inconvenience, or SUFFERING over a motif not dropping lol) myself.

Oops! I meant so say: I DO understand where you're coming from - I just think his opinion is valid - just because I myself cannot stand zerg pvp. I just rather not play.

Abelon · July 1

Islyn wrote: »

Abelon wrote: »

preevious wrote: »

Abelon wrote: »

preevious wrote: »

There is seriously bad faith arguments against OP, here, although he is perfectly right.

"Technically", players are not forced, but since it's the only campain, PvP players can either play it, or don't play at all.
So, vengeance is not a choice, it's an obligation.
I can get behing the fact that you guys like vengeance, and it's all right.
No need to defend it with hollow arguments, though. The fact that it's the only choice right now IS forcing players to play it, and is a bit of unbecoming move.

It's not really a hollow argument. But it is semantics. There is no actual force (nor obligation), that's not what those words mean. When you make a title that says "Please don't force me to play Vengeance, I don't want to" - you invite discussion. It's a clickbaity title. It acts like ZoS is in OP's room with a gun, forcing them to play Vengeance, while they try and fail to say no. My reaction to that is to say - sorry, but it's not possible for ZoS to force you to play Vengeance. You don't want to play Vengeance, don't play it.

If the post were written differently maybe... If it didn't have this clickbaity emotional title. If it led with the final sentence of the post instead, the completely legitimate request to have other campaigns back (even if it likely won't happen, but I completely understand the wish and wouldn't argue against it), then people wouldn't have that kneejerk reaction.

And also obligation is once again an incredibly strong word for something completely optional in a video game. I couldn't imagine ever thinking I have an obligation to pixels. What sort of obligation do you have to a pvp campaign and why? Is it moral or legal? You have a debt to a pvp campaign? This is a completely wrong word to use...

So, by your own admission, you're using sementics to go against an argument you still perfectly understand.

i'll never understand why people do that ... can't you argue about the subject at and, instead of dilluting it with semantics?
That would be rad.

I am not the one diluting the subject at hand. OPs who use clickbait titles like the ones currently on the 1st page, are the ones diluting the subjects at hand. "Vengeance - THE WORST PVP EVER " or "Please do not force me to play in Vengance, I do not want to"

Don't like this clickbait nonsense in real life in new articles, don't like it on forums either. But aside from that, I did admit that it is semantics, yes. With clickbait titles being what causes my kneejerk reaction.

And I did already make a statement on the subject - I personally understand the wish for the normal campaigns even during this test week. But we already know that's not going to happen, we had plenty of information from ZoS' side about the importance of this test and about them needing as many players in it as possible. It is specifically not done on the test server this time, because not enough people go to the test servers. For the same reason they don't let us play the normal campaign this week. They want the maximum amount of players possible. And the week already started. It will be over faster than anyone at ZoS would make any sort of decision, including turning other campaigns back on.

Ok but he feels forced - as what is the other option? A LOT LOT of people have stated this PVP isn't good. His opinion to me isn't clickbaity at all - and I cannot stand bait titles/hyperbole (like people using SCREAMING when someone is just expressing confusion or a mild dislike, or PUNISHED for some petty inconvenience, or SUFFERING over a motif not dropping lol) myself.

Oops! I meant so say: I DO understand where you're coming from - I just think his opinion is valid - just because I myself cannot stand zerg pvp. I just rather not play.

Yeah, like I said, I also understand OP's general opinion. Someone who only plays PvP campaigns, not battleground or IC, nor any pve content... Doesn't have anything to play right now. That is unfortunate. It is somewhat self imposed, because OP makes the choice to not play anything else whatsoever, but that is their choice and I'm not judging it. The options would be to either, after all, decide to play something else in ESO, or just not play ESO at all. Like I said, ZoS is slow, I find it highly doubtful that they would react in any way until the end of the week and turn other campaigns back on. That's if they even decided to do it.

Unstoppable force meets immovable object. ZoS won't change direction and neither will OP.

Veinblood1965 · July 1

N/C

Avran_Sylt · July 1

scrappy1342 wrote: »

if pvp is their main thing that they do when they play, then yes, they are being forced into it

No, they are not. They have various flavors of BG's to play, and the more freeform Imperial City, and to a lesser extent dueling.

If you want large-scale battles, and player logistics being of importance, that's still in there in vengeance.

While in-depth character/gear customization was lost with this campaign, that can still be leveraged in the aforementioned game modes.

This also isn't permanent.

Sluggy · July 1

Jaavaa wrote: »

HatchetHaro wrote: »

If you don't want to play it then don't. No one is "forcing" you to do anything.

Bad Argument. On Xbox EU i have to play this if i wanna play pvp, cause the Population is low and there is nobody at ic or bg atm.

Here's an idea... everyone that wants to pvp the old way... go to IC?

I've been hearing that console Cyrodii is dead for months now and all of a sudden people are claiming it's the test and not the years of neglect that have done it. They are finally doing something to help that. It's a test. Engage with it. Help make it better. Or don't. PvP is already dead. What have you really go t to loose? Otherwise just go play something else like the rest of us have been doing for months or years now. Yeash.

Four_Fingers · July 1

Maybe it is time for "Vengeance" PVE mode as well at trials and HM dungeons, everybody balanced the same, no more meta complaints.
What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Arrow312 · July 1

Four_Fingers wrote: »

Maybe it is time for "Vengeance" PVE mode as well at trials and HM dungeons, everybody balanced the same, no more meta complaints.
What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

How could you i spent hours of farming and practice to got these achievnement and now you want to jump in and get them nearly for free? hell no (Sarcsm)

preevious · July 1

Also, as far as I understand, in vengeance, you only get to keep the AP, right? What about cyrod-sourced items, like the ruby stuff ot whatnot? They are fully innacessibles, now?

Or is there something I don't know about? (i admit, I don't play PvP, but I'm curious)

Maitsukas · July 1

preevious wrote: »

Also, as far as I understand, in vengeance, you only get to keep the AP, right? What about cyrod-sourced items, like the ruby stuff ot whatnot? They are fully innacessibles, now?

Or is there something I don't know about? (i admit, I don't play PvP, but I'm curious)

The AP, Rewards for the Worthy and XP get delivered once you leave the Vengeance Campaign. Any items you have for use in the Vengeance Campaign (basic gear, unlimited potions & siege) do not get carried over to PvE and vice versa.

Avran_Sylt · July 1

Four_Fingers wrote: »

Maybe it is time for "Vengeance" PVE mode as well at trials and HM dungeons, everybody balanced the same, no more meta complaints.
What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Heck yeah, I'd like skills all to be normalized to the point that builds can mix and match without clear winning combinations leaving others in the dust.

That's like a primary complaint in PvE lol. DPS is actively incentivized to eat their Green Beams for healthy DPS.

moderatelyfatman · July 1

marius_buys wrote: »

After 20K+ hours in ESO I am now forced into a test campaign with an alternate playstyle, alternate skills, alternate rule set and alternate gear.
Thanks but no thanks, I simply do not want to.

With respect there are factors ZOS is simply not quantifying in forcing all pvp players into a cookie cutter campaign where all stats are standard. Regardless of the literally thousands of hours spent farming gear and fine tuning playstyle there are many Meta factors getting ignored for instance the affect of ping. I play with a standards ping of 250ms out of South Africa. There is no way around it. This is why I for instance play with Oakensoul as I am at a distinct disadvantage with bar swapping and animation cancelling in combat when I fight against a player with lets say 50 ping.

I understand your need for testing BUT not at the cost of players who dislike the changes.
Please ZOS, give the players who do not want to test a normal CP & Non CP campaign during your testing in Vengance.

TX12001rwb17_ESO · July 1

I refuse to enter it on my main simply because it "disables" my Vampirism

Does not matter if it is temporary, my main has continuously been a Vampire for the last 10 years which is longer then this game has existed on console, not once has he ever been mortal since the day he was turned, not once have I ever set him to be mortal with the armory station, it means he is one of the oldest active Vampires in the entire game and I take pride in that fact.

Dock01 · July 1

You don't have to, the persuit reward sucks anyway, literally you can get that much just by spamming bg all day , and you dont have to win lol