Maintenance for the week of September 22:
· [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – September 22, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 10:00AM EDT (14:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – September 22, 8:00 UTC (4:00AM EDT) - 14:00 UTC (10:00AM EDT)
· [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – September 22, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 10:00AM EDT (14:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – September 22, 8:00 UTC (4:00AM EDT) - 14:00 UTC (10:00AM EDT)
[REQUEST] Permanent Vengeance Test Campaign
-
aetherix8✭✭✭MorallyBipolar wrote: »
That's because you're not a PvP player.
The problem is that ZOS is acting like their intention is to make vengeance the only PvP option in Cyrodiil just like they made 2 team BG's the only option.
The current Cyrodiil isn't bringing any new players to PvP either. On the contrary, even with drastically reduced pop caps GH isn't pop locked most of the time, BR is barely kicking and the other two campaigns are basically dead. It's been quite some time I didn't see PvPers complaining about queue lenghts. The last WSM saw the lowest participation ever, and I'm pretty sure PvEers got out as soon as they got their tickets from a single scouting quest, while before they used to hang around for much longer, be it in towns or in pugs.
ZOS is acting like their intention is to develop a new mode while saying they are just testing some performance fixes.
Vengeance haters are acting like the current Cyrodiil is so broken that there's nothing else to do but to scrap it entirely.PC EU - V4hn12 -
Darethran✭✭✭
The current Cyrodiil isn't bringing any new players to PvP either. On the contrary, even with drastically reduced pop caps GH isn't pop locked most of the time, BR is barely kicking and the other two campaigns are basically dead. It's been quite some time I didn't see PvPers complaining about queue lenghts. The last WSM saw the lowest participation ever, and I'm pretty sure PvEers got out as soon as they got their tickets from a single scouting quest, while before they used to hang around for much longer, be it in towns or in pugs.
ZOS is acting like their intention is to develop a new mode while saying they are just testing some performance fixes.
Vengeance haters are acting like the current Cyrodiil is so broken that there's nothing else to do but to scrap it entirely.
At least on Pact EU, all the PvP guilds have fallen apart and there's only 1 active one taking in new players. Back in 2016 there were still more than three so you had to pick and choose. Around 2022-ish there were 2. Now there's 1 and it's not exactly brimming with players.
I tried out ESO because of the PvP, I played over a thousand hours because of it. But as server performance and combat balance got worse, my breaks got longer then I just stopped because the PvP is just a shell. No-proc was just tedious and a half-baked effort that didn't make performance any better.
I've said it a bajillion times, so I'll keep it short, but Vengeance 2 was poplocked into the evening until the last day. I know this because I only learned about it when it had two days left in the test lmao. And it was so good, I've been thirsting and regularly lurking on the forums for the next one.
Vengeance is a taste of the awesome open world warfare that was advertised, current Cyrodiil is just sad, small, and underpopulated even when maxed out.3 -
Vengeance was boring slow ***.
I say it again.. Don't make yourself illusions.
If you got steamrolled by a good player in regular GH then you'll also be steamrolled by good players during vengeance ✌🏻
Edit: it's easier for a company to keep customers attracted then to gain new customers or bring those customers back who left.. Just saying.Edited by xR3ACTORx on September 22, 2025 9:29AM1 -
aetherix8✭✭✭Vengeance was boring slow ***.
Vengeance is too slow, I agree with that. At least V1. We will see about V4.I say it again.. Don't make yourself illusions.
If you got steamrolled by a good player in regular GH then you'll also be steamrolled by good players during vengeance ✌🏻
I've gotten plenty steamrolled by better players in no-proc RW and no-CP IC. At some point, I abandoned leading pugs completely, and was specifically looking for fights against better players because it is the only way to improve one's skill.
PC EU - V4hn10 -
MincMincMinc✭✭✭✭✭
✭Vengeance is fine for a learning environment. Actually it is probably ideal for a learning environment in today's game. Early on ESO was far more vertical progression wise. Vertical progression had tiers to separate playerbases which is why we had u50 and then nocp and then you finally got to vetcp campaigns. However now that ESO is such a wide horizontal progression game there is no way to split up the playerbase. New players are cp160 within the first day if they want.
The only way to create those learning environments with horizontal progression is to cut back on systems. However at a certain point people wonder what systems are enabled? what about this or that? Which can be worse in some cases because it clouds the experience making the new player learn tons of more stuff just to play something that should be easier. This was the issue with the NOPROC nocp campaign. Even 10year vet players like me had to spend hours and hours testing random sets to see what worked. How can you expect new players to participate, who dont keep up with pts and patch notes or even read wiki pages and build editors.
IMO replacing the u50 and nocp campaign is a nobrainer, they are beyond dead. Then have two cp 30 day campaigns. Testing wise for proper data you NEED the ballgroup and vet CP guild group players though. THEY are the lag. How they play, the choices they make, the skills they prefer, the effects they choose. There will be very clear performance demand differences from ball group players vs lvl10 new players spamming light attack only.
The other major design hole we are seeing is right now vengeance now has its own system for stat changes. This was probably put in place to quickly allow players during testing to have build choice to some degree, while allowing zos to introduce and plug and play systems on demand. IMO they should have made the simple perk and loadout system MIMIC item sets and bonuses, mundus, enchants. As a training tool give new players a basic menu so they could learn about pairing item sets and quickly swap choices they would normally do ingame. Then start baking in each of the mundus, enchant, gear, item set bonus systems as they get vengeance reworks. Slowly greying them out in the vengeance test menu.Zos should hire pvp consultants3 -
Iriidius✭✭✭✭✭
Vengeance PC EU has 3 bars on all alliances at 9pm without any Vengeance goldenpursuit pullingin pve players but an undaunted golden pursuit and event pulling players out.SaffronCitrusflower wrote: »Could keeping Vengeance 4 on live be viable?
Let's say, once V4 is on live in December, it remains accessible until after the V5 PTS testing. Then, if necessary, it goes down for a week or two to allow for adding new features.
Would it lead to an avalanche of support tickets about corrupted characters and items missing from inventories?
Would it make players complain about new features because they got used to a certain ruleset?
Would it trigger even more complaints about unbalanced classes and skills?
No. ZOS isn't going to support two different versions of cyodiil long term. They're just not going to. Sooner or later it will be one or the other, and vengeance isn't going to fly with the current PvP players, and the PvE players won't play vengeance either. They don't like PvP or they'd already be playing it.
Why is this so hard to understand for the vengeance supporters? This is why vengeance has to be opposed in every possible way at every opportunity.
Then why did so many PvE players who hate GreyHost played and enjoyed Vengeance?
Them not playing PvP doesn’t mean they do not like any PvP, only that they dislike current PvP. Otherwise „GreyHost players don‘t like PvP or they would play Vengeance“ would be true. Players just like different version of PvP.
There are quite a few current and a lot more former PvPer preferring Vengeance (but that probably autoturns them into nonPvPer).
Nobody wanting to play Vengeance is „hard to understand“for Vengeance supporters because they’re living prove it is not true.
Well, at least you are realizing that vengeance is popular with the PvE community. The PvP community almost without exception hates vengeance. People who like PvP are already playing PvP. Vengeance will not, ever, under any circumstances, bring new players to ESO. It will do the opposite. It will drive away the few PvP players left.
And to answer your question, the PvE players populated vengeance because there was an associated Golden Pursuit. Once they had their pursuit completed they left and never came back.
3 bars Vengeance are like 9 bars GreyHost so still enaugh to fill 2,5 normal campaigns which is more than ever fill outside event.
2 -
Darethran✭✭✭Vengeance PC EU has 3 bars on all alliances at 9pm without any Vengeance goldenpursuit pullingin pve players but an undaunted golden pursuit and event pulling players out.
3 bars Vengeance are like 9 bars GreyHost so still enaugh to fill 2,5 normal campaigns which is more than ever fill outside event.
Yeah the fights were constant even though the factions were at 2 bars. AD even got to 3, and DC were pushing hard. I had a blast2 -
reazea✭✭✭✭✭
✭MincMincMinc wrote: »Vengeance is fine for a learning environment. Actually it is probably ideal for a learning environment in today's game. Early on ESO was far more vertical progression wise. Vertical progression had tiers to separate playerbases which is why we had u50 and then nocp and then you finally got to vetcp campaigns. However now that ESO is such a wide horizontal progression game there is no way to split up the playerbase. New players are cp160 within the first day if they want.
The only way to create those learning environments with horizontal progression is to cut back on systems. However at a certain point people wonder what systems are enabled? what about this or that? Which can be worse in some cases because it clouds the experience making the new player learn tons of more stuff just to play something that should be easier. This was the issue with the NOPROC nocp campaign. Even 10year vet players like me had to spend hours and hours testing random sets to see what worked. How can you expect new players to participate, who dont keep up with pts and patch notes or even read wiki pages and build editors.
IMO replacing the u50 and nocp campaign is a nobrainer, they are beyond dead. Then have two cp 30 day campaigns. Testing wise for proper data you NEED the ballgroup and vet CP guild group players though. THEY are the lag. How they play, the choices they make, the skills they prefer, the effects they choose. There will be very clear performance demand differences from ball group players vs lvl10 new players spamming light attack only.
The other major design hole we are seeing is right now vengeance now has its own system for stat changes. This was probably put in place to quickly allow players during testing to have build choice to some degree, while allowing zos to introduce and plug and play systems on demand. IMO they should have made the simple perk and loadout system MIMIC item sets and bonuses, mundus, enchants. As a training tool give new players a basic menu so they could learn about pairing item sets and quickly swap choices they would normally do ingame. Then start baking in each of the mundus, enchant, gear, item set bonus systems as they get vengeance reworks. Slowly greying them out in the vengeance test menu.
Except vengeance is in no way preparation for actual live PvP. It's templated no skill zergfest. That's NOT how to prepare someone to create and play builds.1 -
reazea✭✭✭✭✭
✭
Vengeance PC EU has 3 bars on all alliances at 9pm without any Vengeance goldenpursuit pullingin pve players but an undaunted golden pursuit and event pulling players out.SaffronCitrusflower wrote: »Could keeping Vengeance 4 on live be viable?
Let's say, once V4 is on live in December, it remains accessible until after the V5 PTS testing. Then, if necessary, it goes down for a week or two to allow for adding new features.
Would it lead to an avalanche of support tickets about corrupted characters and items missing from inventories?
Would it make players complain about new features because they got used to a certain ruleset?
Would it trigger even more complaints about unbalanced classes and skills?
No. ZOS isn't going to support two different versions of cyodiil long term. They're just not going to. Sooner or later it will be one or the other, and vengeance isn't going to fly with the current PvP players, and the PvE players won't play vengeance either. They don't like PvP or they'd already be playing it.
Why is this so hard to understand for the vengeance supporters? This is why vengeance has to be opposed in every possible way at every opportunity.
Then why did so many PvE players who hate GreyHost played and enjoyed Vengeance?
Them not playing PvP doesn’t mean they do not like any PvP, only that they dislike current PvP. Otherwise „GreyHost players don‘t like PvP or they would play Vengeance“ would be true. Players just like different version of PvP.
There are quite a few current and a lot more former PvPer preferring Vengeance (but that probably autoturns them into nonPvPer).
Nobody wanting to play Vengeance is „hard to understand“for Vengeance supporters because they’re living prove it is not true.
Well, at least you are realizing that vengeance is popular with the PvE community. The PvP community almost without exception hates vengeance. People who like PvP are already playing PvP. Vengeance will not, ever, under any circumstances, bring new players to ESO. It will do the opposite. It will drive away the few PvP players left.
And to answer your question, the PvE players populated vengeance because there was an associated Golden Pursuit. Once they had their pursuit completed they left and never came back.
3 bars Vengeance are like 9 bars GreyHost so still enaugh to fill 2,5 normal campaigns which is more than ever fill outside event.
Very hard to believe that the camp would be so popular on EU server and so hated on NA server. The PC NA servers are dead even during prime time right now.
At least ZOS is getting the feedback they should this time around in regards to vengeance. Look around. It's still the same 3 to 5 people trying to convince themselves how great vengeance is while all the PvP mains are flooding the forums with feedback that actually is reflective of what the vast majority of the PvP community thinks of vengeance. (they're logging off until next Tuesday, when the test is over)1 -
ADawg✭✭✭The 4th iteration of Vengeance in December will be available alongside Grey Host. Could it just stay on please? With more build possibilities, one week is simply too short to test them all. In order to avoid disappointments, it should be clearly indicated in the title, description, and all over the place that this is a test campaign, and as such, it is going to be updated on a regular basis with additional features until tests are concluded and a final version is achieved.
@ZOS_BrianWheeler @ZOS_Kevin
So why not play no-proc, no CP Ravenwatch like we used to have?
Seems like the CP and sets are the problem, well we had a solution, but ZOS took that away. No-Proc PVP was great.
BGs are No-CP, Cyrodiil should be the same. No super GOD MODE ultra fast, infinite sustain, infinite heals, corrosive ROFL LAWL PWN builds that we see constantly.0 -
ADawg✭✭✭SaffronCitrusflower wrote: »Could keeping Vengeance 4 on live be viable?
Let's say, once V4 is on live in December, it remains accessible until after the V5 PTS testing. Then, if necessary, it goes down for a week or two to allow for adding new features.
Would it lead to an avalanche of support tickets about corrupted characters and items missing from inventories?
Would it make players complain about new features because they got used to a certain ruleset?
Would it trigger even more complaints about unbalanced classes and skills?
No. ZOS isn't going to support two different versions of cyodiil long term. They're just not going to. Sooner or later it will be one or the other, and vengeance isn't going to fly with the current PvP players, and the PvE players won't play vengeance either. They don't like PvP or they'd already be playing it.
Why is this so hard to understand for the vengeance supporters? This is why vengeance has to be opposed in every possible way at every opportunity.
Then why did so many PvE players who hate GreyHost played and enjoyed Vengeance?
Them not playing PvP doesn’t mean they do not like any PvP, only that they dislike current PvP. Otherwise „GreyHost players don‘t like PvP or they would play Vengeance“ would be true. Players just like different version of PvP.
There are quite a few current and a lot more former PvPer preferring Vengeance (but that probably autoturns them into nonPvPer).
Nobody wanting to play Vengeance is „hard to understand“for Vengeance supporters because they’re living prove it is not true.
Well, at least you are realizing that vengeance is popular with the PvE community. The PvP community almost without exception hates vengeance. People who like PvP are already playing PvP. Vengeance will not, ever, under any circumstances, bring new players to ESO. It will do the opposite. It will drive away the few PvP players left.
And to answer your question, the PvE players populated vengeance because there was an associated Golden Pursuit. Once they had their pursuit completed they left and never came back.
Realizing PvEr like it doesn’t mean PvPer do not.
Many players from both PvP and PvE clearly said they enjoyed Vengeance and not enjoy Grey Host. Many PvPer have stopped PvP because of issues nonexistent in Vengeance. Liking PvP doesn’t mean you like ballgroups, procsets, subclassing, metachasing or fights decided before they begin.
When PvEr miss out end of campaign reward they can also miss out golden pursuit giving only ap and gold. Golden pursuit can’t mobilize as many players as there were.
Does not playing Vengeance mean that you don’t like PvP because otherwise you would play Vengeance or does it mean you just do not like Vengeance? If it means you dislike only Vengeance and not all PvP than why does players not liking/playing Grey Host mean they dislike and won’t play Vengeance either?
(even when they said they like and play it)?
Here I will make a deal. As a PVP main, I will accept vengeance if we also apply it to TRIALS.
FIGHT FIRE WITH FIRE. I want to limit your build potential in TRIALS if we have to suffer it in PVP.
Check, your move. Explain to us why that would be a bad decision.
"but I spent so much time on my build"..... UHH YEAH THATS MY POINT!0 -
aetherix8✭✭✭
Except vengeance is in no way preparation for actual live PvP. It's templated no skill zergfest. That's NOT how to prepare someone to create and play builds.
You boycott this test iteration entirely according to your own posts, therefore you have no idea whether it is a no-skill zergfest or not. It isn't anymore.
V1 was exactly that, I've never seen such massive zerg trains before, and although it was awesome to see so many players in Cyro, it was upsetting to see everyone running in one huge zerg.
V3 is quite different; players group up or run their guild's groups, and fights are spread on the map. I've also seen several players being able to fight outnumbered, keep killing their opponents, and survive all right during the entire keep fight (NBs are really strong in Vengeance when played by a skilled player).
You won't get this kind of a map in a zergfest. Five keeps burning, 3 factions at BRK (this fight was up for quite a while). I was at Nikel where some ungrouped players like me defended against a group of AD (no more than 20 players), so six objectives burning at the same time.
PC EU - V4hn10 -
aetherix8✭✭✭
Very hard to believe that the camp would be so popular on EU server and so hated on NA server. The PC NA servers are dead even during prime time right now.
Not sure it is very popular on PC EU. Maybe it is just that EU folks are reasonable people trying to help ZOS fix Cyro's performance by participating in this test.
PC EU - V4hn10 -
aetherix8✭✭✭The 4th iteration of Vengeance in December will be available alongside Grey Host. Could it just stay on please? With more build possibilities, one week is simply too short to test them all. In order to avoid disappointments, it should be clearly indicated in the title, description, and all over the place that this is a test campaign, and as such, it is going to be updated on a regular basis with additional features until tests are concluded and a final version is achieved.
@ZOS_BrianWheeler @ZOS_Kevin
So why not play no-proc, no CP Ravenwatch like we used to have?
Seems like the CP and sets are the problem, well we had a solution, but ZOS took that away. No-Proc PVP was great.
BGs are No-CP, Cyrodiil should be the same. No super GOD MODE ultra fast, infinite sustain, infinite heals, corrosive ROFL LAWL PWN builds that we see constantly.
No-proc RW is dead and buried. If you think it will ever come back, you will be sorely dissappointed. It was a great learning environment but it was plagued by it's own problems that drove players away.
That said, if ZOS is considering Vengeance as a potential mode, they must add sets at some point, and sooner rather than later. It could be Vengeance sets (reworked to reduce calcs) that you can only equip if you have them collected in your sticker book.
Vengeance as it is right now is far too simple and limited to be engaging in the long term.PC EU - V4hn10 -
aetherix8✭✭✭MincMincMinc wrote: »Vengeance is fine for a learning environment. Actually it is probably ideal for a learning environment in today's game. Early on ESO was far more vertical progression wise. Vertical progression had tiers to separate playerbases which is why we had u50 and then nocp and then you finally got to vetcp campaigns. However now that ESO is such a wide horizontal progression game there is no way to split up the playerbase. New players are cp160 within the first day if they want.
The only way to create those learning environments with horizontal progression is to cut back on systems. However at a certain point people wonder what systems are enabled? what about this or that? Which can be worse in some cases because it clouds the experience making the new player learn tons of more stuff just to play something that should be easier. This was the issue with the NOPROC nocp campaign. Even 10year vet players like me had to spend hours and hours testing random sets to see what worked. How can you expect new players to participate, who dont keep up with pts and patch notes or even read wiki pages and build editors.
IMO replacing the u50 and nocp campaign is a nobrainer, they are beyond dead. Then have two cp 30 day campaigns. Testing wise for proper data you NEED the ballgroup and vet CP guild group players though. THEY are the lag. How they play, the choices they make, the skills they prefer, the effects they choose. There will be very clear performance demand differences from ball group players vs lvl10 new players spamming light attack only.
The other major design hole we are seeing is right now vengeance now has its own system for stat changes. This was probably put in place to quickly allow players during testing to have build choice to some degree, while allowing zos to introduce and plug and play systems on demand. IMO they should have made the simple perk and loadout system MIMIC item sets and bonuses, mundus, enchants. As a training tool give new players a basic menu so they could learn about pairing item sets and quickly swap choices they would normally do ingame. Then start baking in each of the mundus, enchant, gear, item set bonus systems as they get vengeance reworks. Slowly greying them out in the vengeance test menu.
Except vengeance is in no way preparation for actual live PvP. It's templated no skill zergfest. That's NOT how to prepare someone to create and play builds.
If I completely ignore the "no skill zergfest" then, for a time, I agree with you.
Perfect learning environment needs to be much closer to what Cyro currently is, and that means adding sets, mundus, and basically all systems that exist in the game. We can argue whether we want to see 3 paragraphs long bonus item sets (NO), but an alternative mode would have to allow players to learn not only combat, but also building.
There's no room in Vengeance for theory crafting atm, and it's its biggest weakness. Figuring out your own builds is a lot of fun, and a mode without this aspect will be unappealing to many players imo.PC EU - V4hn10 -
MincMincMinc✭✭✭✭✭
✭MincMincMinc wrote: »Vengeance is fine for a learning environment. Actually it is probably ideal for a learning environment in today's game. Early on ESO was far more vertical progression wise. Vertical progression had tiers to separate playerbases which is why we had u50 and then nocp and then you finally got to vetcp campaigns. However now that ESO is such a wide horizontal progression game there is no way to split up the playerbase. New players are cp160 within the first day if they want.
The only way to create those learning environments with horizontal progression is to cut back on systems. However at a certain point people wonder what systems are enabled? what about this or that? Which can be worse in some cases because it clouds the experience making the new player learn tons of more stuff just to play something that should be easier. This was the issue with the NOPROC nocp campaign. Even 10year vet players like me had to spend hours and hours testing random sets to see what worked. How can you expect new players to participate, who dont keep up with pts and patch notes or even read wiki pages and build editors.
IMO replacing the u50 and nocp campaign is a nobrainer, they are beyond dead. Then have two cp 30 day campaigns. Testing wise for proper data you NEED the ballgroup and vet CP guild group players though. THEY are the lag. How they play, the choices they make, the skills they prefer, the effects they choose. There will be very clear performance demand differences from ball group players vs lvl10 new players spamming light attack only.
The other major design hole we are seeing is right now vengeance now has its own system for stat changes. This was probably put in place to quickly allow players during testing to have build choice to some degree, while allowing zos to introduce and plug and play systems on demand. IMO they should have made the simple perk and loadout system MIMIC item sets and bonuses, mundus, enchants. As a training tool give new players a basic menu so they could learn about pairing item sets and quickly swap choices they would normally do ingame. Then start baking in each of the mundus, enchant, gear, item set bonus systems as they get vengeance reworks. Slowly greying them out in the vengeance test menu.
Except vengeance is in no way preparation for actual live PvP. It's templated no skill zergfest. That's NOT how to prepare someone to create and play builds.
Game design 101, you should be tailoring the newer player experiences to mimic endgame. For instance the loadout and perk system should be replaced with vengeance item sets and other stat changes as you test to add them back in. A big simple step would be to make the cyrodil base spawn areas have gear vendors and crafting stations where you can make basic vengeance item sets. Or food, or mundus, or enchants. Literally put it in peoples faces or force them through a quest to make a basic gear layout. Literally make a starter training course off to the side where you are shown how CCs and CC breaking works, its no different than any other video game intro.
Do we think live u50 pvp and nocp are any comparison to live greyhost pvp? You have maybe 10 people on those servers at any given time with the maps entirely one color and at best a pvdoor with one seiger that leaves before people get in. Even live vet BGs are no comparison to 12-24 man organized ball and zerg guilds stacking proc group sets to have 10x your stats.Zos should hire pvp consultants0