Is it time for ZOS to give us an official statement of intentions regarding future vengeance plans?

Muizer · October 4

Four_Fingers wrote: »

On the other side of the coin, why are PvE players so keen to get rid of the existing PvP when they don't play PvP at all?

There's have been plenty of complaints about nerfs made for the sake of balancing PvP negatively impacting the experience of PvEers. That's for sure.

YandereGirlfriend · October 4

Yes

Muizer wrote: »

Four_Fingers wrote: »

On the other side of the coin, why are PvE players so keen to get rid of the existing PvP when they don't play PvP at all?

There's have been plenty of complaints about nerfs made for the sake of balancing PvP negatively impacting the experience of PvEers. That's for sure.

It goes both ways. There are plenty of adjustments for PvE reasons that have important effects in PvP as well.

aetherix8 wrote: »

Muizer wrote: »

CatoUnchained wrote: »

Muizer wrote: »

StihlReign wrote: »

What is the Cyrodiil Champions Test?
The Cyrodiil Champions Test (Vengeance Campaign) is focused directly on reducing Ability complexity in an effort to cut down on server stress when mass battles occur. Anything you see that's enabled or disabled during this test is purely for the sake of performance and getting calculations as low as possible on the server. SOURCE

Note: ZOS calls it the Vengeance Campaign in January, March and September. Source

Test 4 soon. This thread will be interesting...

The post below it is also pretty clear about what 'test' means.

ZOS_Kevin wrote:

what is on PTS today is not even close to a full feature.

ZOS_Kevin wrote:

As a reminder, this is a test and isn't a fully fleshed out feature.

ZOS_Kevin wrote:

Any changes to Cyrodiil that follow this test will require A LOT of work to get to a full feature

ZOS_Kevin wrote:

While we understand that everyone is eager to know what comes next, please remember that this is just a test. It is not a full feature.

ZOS_Kevin wrote:

This is a test, not a full feature. We are aware of balance concerns

So just to be clear: it's a test as opposed to a full feature.

Nothing about vengeance is a test. It's rolling out an alternative to or replacement for live Cyrodiil PvP.

Those quotes demonstrate that 7 months ago what they mean by 'test' is a 'work in progress'. The people they were trying to reassure were people who might think Vengeance 1 was the "full feature". That that was literally what PvP was going to be. No further development. Go back and read it. You'll see.

ZOS keeps using a vocabulary like “experimenting”, etc. It is clear that they are testing different ideas and systems, and none of those has any guarantee of becoming permanent. Vengeance might disappear entirely once all data is collected. I’m not sure why PvPers are panicking so badly, I guess deep inside they know that current PvP is just too broken on many levels.

Distrust from the long history of strange, unpopular, and ill-communicated changes made to PvP (and, really, to the game in general) looms large. Which does not inspire many PvPers to buy-in to essentially, "Trust me, bro..." arguments.

Muizer · October 4

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

It goes both ways. There are plenty of adjustments for PvE reasons that have important effects in PvP as well.

That actually reinforces the point rather than negate it.

StihlReign · October 4

Yes

aetherix8 wrote: »

ZOS keeps using a vocabulary like “experimenting”, etc. It is clear that they are testing different ideas and systems, and none of those has any guarantee of becoming permanent. Vengeance might disappear entirely once all data is collected. I’m not sure why PvPers are panicking so badly, I guess deep inside they know that current PvP is just too broken on many levels.

PvPer's see a ton of money going into the development of features they don't want to see in a FUTURE PvP environment so they've asked for clarity. Panic seems like a stretch but here you are.

PvE'rs please, relax...

The strongest advocates for adjusting and removing many of the skills and sets that are killing you, are PvPers. ZOS says they're working on a more performant Cyrodiil. Ultimately, if you don't like PvP and you enter the PvP arena, experienced PvPers are probably going to kill you anyway.

There's a lack of trust because the folks in charge appear to have little in-game experience PvPing. The lead combat dev couldn't answer questions about common PvP sets and skills on a live stream while PvPing. This has compounded distrust. Meanwhile there's statements on this forum from the devs that state the devs PvP hardcore and casually.

We gave PvErs a simple solution via CP and an easy to purchase 2 pc set to stop them from getting bombed and ganked during events. It was nerfed in record time, about 2 weeks. The info is in the patch notes.

So yes, we can read, but trust is a little short.

LPapirius · October 5

Yes

aetherix8 wrote: »

Muizer wrote: »

CatoUnchained wrote: »

Muizer wrote: »

StihlReign wrote: »

What is the Cyrodiil Champions Test?
The Cyrodiil Champions Test (Vengeance Campaign) is focused directly on reducing Ability complexity in an effort to cut down on server stress when mass battles occur. Anything you see that's enabled or disabled during this test is purely for the sake of performance and getting calculations as low as possible on the server. SOURCE

Note: ZOS calls it the Vengeance Campaign in January, March and September. Source

Test 4 soon. This thread will be interesting...

The post below it is also pretty clear about what 'test' means.

ZOS_Kevin wrote:

what is on PTS today is not even close to a full feature.

ZOS_Kevin wrote:

As a reminder, this is a test and isn't a fully fleshed out feature.

ZOS_Kevin wrote:

Any changes to Cyrodiil that follow this test will require A LOT of work to get to a full feature

ZOS_Kevin wrote:

While we understand that everyone is eager to know what comes next, please remember that this is just a test. It is not a full feature.

ZOS_Kevin wrote:

This is a test, not a full feature. We are aware of balance concerns

So just to be clear: it's a test as opposed to a full feature.

Nothing about vengeance is a test. It's rolling out an alternative to or replacement for live Cyrodiil PvP.

Those quotes demonstrate that 7 months ago what they mean by 'test' is a 'work in progress'. The people they were trying to reassure were people who might think Vengeance 1 was the "full feature". That that was literally what PvP was going to be. No further development. Go back and read it. You'll see.

ZOS keeps using a vocabulary like “experimenting”, etc. It is clear that they are testing different ideas and systems, and none of those has any guarantee of becoming permanent. Vengeance might disappear entirely once all data is collected. I’m not sure why PvPers are panicking so badly, I guess deep inside they know that current PvP is just too broken on many levels.

At least you realize you're not a PvP player, even if it's unconsciously. So why do you care so much about what happens to PvP? You're not going to be playing it either way.

aetherix8 wrote: »

Four_Fingers wrote: »

On the other side of the coin, why are PvE players so keen to get rid of the existing PvP when they don't play PvP at all?

What if PvEers did try to PvP, got lagged to death, got ballgroup-steamrolled over and over, got bombed on every ram, flag, or door-repairing, got farmed countless times by players abusing broken sets, and simply figured they had better things to do if there is nothing really fun about the current Cyrodiil? Too bad though, because ESO PvP would be quite engaging if it weren't so broken on so many levels.

Are PvEers wrong to ask for a PvP mode where they stand a chance and one they enjoy? No, any person can post any wish here on the forum (within ToS ofc). There's nothing wrong about zergfest either, as long as zergs are equal in size (at some point skill matters again).

Frankly, I couldn't care less whether PvPers keep the current version or not, as it doesn't exist for me anyways. In general, I suspect that PvEers don't really care either, they have other problems, like hats and economy. PvPers can try and dictate whatever they want to PvEers, it doesn't change that Cyro populations are shrinking.

aetherix8 · October 5

Yes

LPapirius wrote: »

At least you realize you're not a PvP player, even if it's unconsciously. So why do you care so much about what happens to PvP? You're not going to be playing it either way.

Reading comprehension and objectivity are severely lacking in any Vengeance discussion. Also, the discrimination against PvE mains' voices and opinions, even when they pvp regularly (or used to), is disappointing. It gives an image of a PvP community that is a self-proclaimed elite but one devoid of vision, open-mindedness, and the ability to embrace change.
Also devoid of reading skills.

I'm not a PvP main since beta; claiming on this forum that you're a PvPer is pointless, and it just derails any discussion. Anyway, as I said, I don't care about what happens to the current version of PvP, and yes, I'm not going to play it as it is right now; it's an awful experience.

But I'm all in for testing a potential alternative PvP version. If Vengeance's results help fix the current PvP, then I'm happy for those who enjoy it. If Vengeance becomes a mode in its own right, much enhanced than what we saw so far, then I'm going to play it on a regular basis. If Vengeance gets deleted once testing is over, then I get at least 1 week of PvP every 3 months, while it lasts, that is fun when populations are balanced.

ToddIngram · October 5

Yes

aetherix8 wrote: »

LPapirius wrote: »

At least you realize you're not a PvP player, even if it's unconsciously. So why do you care so much about what happens to PvP? You're not going to be playing it either way.

Reading comprehension and objectivity are severely lacking in any Vengeance discussion. Also, the discrimination against PvE mains' voices and opinions, even when they pvp regularly (or used to), is disappointing. It gives an image of a PvP community that is a self-proclaimed elite but one devoid of vision, open-mindedness, and the ability to embrace change.
Also devoid of reading skills.

I'm not a PvP main since beta; claiming on this forum that you're a PvPer is pointless, and it just derails any discussion. Anyway, as I said, I don't care about what happens to the current version of PvP, and yes, I'm not going to play it as it is right now; it's an awful experience.

But I'm all in for testing a potential alternative PvP version. If Vengeance's results help fix the current PvP, then I'm happy for those who enjoy it. If Vengeance becomes a mode in its own right, much enhanced than what we saw so far, then I'm going to play it on a regular basis. If Vengeance gets deleted once testing is over, then I get at least 1 week of PvP every 3 months, while it lasts, that is fun when populations are balanced.

Sounds like you don't have any mirrors in your house.

Iriidius · October 5

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Muizer wrote: »

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

Vengeance is history repeating itself almost verbatim. At the onset, it was introduced as an anodyne "test" to help determine which sets of systems had the largest impact on PvP performance. Okay, fair enough. But re-writing every single class skill in the game definitely did not comport with its billing as a simple test. And thus the skepticism begins.

Are you sure your sense of betrayal does not stem from your assumptions about the meaning of the word "test" than with anything ZOS have actually, explicitly said or done? Perhaps based on experiences with earlier tests they ran?

Personally I've always taken the emphasis they put on it being a test (like putting in the orange sky and all) as their way of reassuring people Vengeance was in early stages of development: Test, as opposed to 'finished product'. And everything they have said and done seems perfectly consistent with it.

The problem is that the “test” was sold as “we’re going to strip Cyrodiil to bare bones and then add things back over time to get back to what it is now, and then we can see what exactly causes the performance issues to arise.” Then, once they found that, they would optimize it to make the current Cyrodiil campaigns run 95% the same but with the issue optimized.

I believed the special “Vengeance skills” were just quick remakes of the standards that they’d add to over time to get back up. It all made sense, and they spent a lot of time trying to stress this.

And now U48’s version is shattering that illusion. They’re adding “loadouts” and “perks”—tell me, where in current Cyrodiil do those exist now? It’s a way to customize builds by adding bonuses/penalties (e.g. focusing on damage at the expense of armor) and little CP- or passive-esque features that are mostly unique to Vengeance. It also has a complete UI and new icons for everything.

So… I’m to believe that they spent the time to make all of these assets, during which time they also did *zero* balancing on the rest of the game after Subclassing, only to toss it later since Cyrodiil doesn’t have that stuff? No, they’re 100% intending for Cyrodiil to get those things, and that suggests that current Cyrodiil is going to end up very different after these tests.

A lot of PvPers want a performant version of Grey Host. They don’t want something that barely resembles Grey Host to replace it. And to add insult to injury, Vengeance as a mode is less for the current PvP playerbase, and more for the casual I-only-do-Cyrodiil-during-MYM PvErs to get them in, since they don’t need to research and play the meta in order to have a small chance of success.

I know they said Vengeance 4 in December will run concurrent with Grey Host, so I believe the idea is that this eventual “permanent Vengeance” will have both Grey Host and Vengeance together. I can’t say the same for Blackreach, Ravenwatch, or Icereach. Furthermore, Vengeance 5 will work on balancing the Vengeance skills, so it is clear they intend to proceed with it.

All they need to say to stop the worrying is “we have gotten promising results from Vengeance and are considering making it a full mode in the future. But don’t worry, we intend to keep Grey Host as is for players who prefer to use all the build freedoms they want.”
…and they haven’t said that.

Stripping Cyrodiil to the bones than adding back systems over time is what ZOS did with every test.
The nonexistent of perks and loadouts is not a proof that Vengeance will replace lifePvP but rather shows that it will stay a temporary test as ZOS didn’t even bother to keep them similar to existing systems for a test.
The perk system is done too poorly thought out and careless to be anything more than an improvised placeholder. Probably rewriting cp, sets, Mundus, passives etc was to much effort so they simulate their effect/calculations with perks.
Loadouts are like Armory slots with a few stat changes not available otherwise.
UI was recycled from Collections and Armory and a few icons.

Ravenwatch and Icecap are dead campaings and Blackreach halfdead PvDoor campaign. Most PvPer only use BR when GreyHost has queue, it will be dead too when GreyHost will loose queue as some players go Vengeance. So why is it a problem what happens to them during Vengeance?
ZOS could remove them without Vengeance just for beeing empty. They could also keep them during Vengeance despite being empty as they keep them now despite being empty.

ZOS already said Vengeance is just a test. ZOS isnt the most communicative company so how clear do you expect them to say they not want to remove GreyHost?

Four_Fingers · October 5

Muizer wrote: »

YandereGirlfriend wrote: »

It goes both ways. There are plenty of adjustments for PvE reasons that have important effects in PvP as well.

That actually reinforces the point rather than negate it.

You all honestly believe there wouldn't still be nerfs and "balance adjustments" to PvE if PvP is removed?
The nature of these devs is to always be changing things.

Iriidius · October 5

ZOS should give official statement about their future plans for Vengeance to increase acceptance and prevent critics from spreading conspiration theories like Vengeance being empty and permanently replacing current PvP because otherwise players treat those theories like facts.

RobZha · October 5

Yes

It's not helping those of us that want Cyro to remain mostly as it is and I think the silence makes it even worse.

I've got kind of used to it though, along with several other long running things that aren't really communicated on. For instance, why in 2025 is there still a stuck in combat bug that still winds so many players up? Things like this are factors that can lead players to leaving the game, if they were resolved it could be a lot better.

StihlReign · October 5

Yes

aetherix8 wrote: »

Reading comprehension and objectivity are severely lacking in any Vengeance discussion. Also, the discrimination against PvE mains' voices and opinions, even when they pvp regularly (or used to), is disappointing. It gives an image of a PvP community that is a self-proclaimed elite but one devoid of vision, open-mindedness, and the ability to embrace change.
Also devoid of reading skills.

I'm not a PvP main since beta; claiming on this forum that you're a PvPer is pointless, and it just derails any discussion. Anyway, as I said, I don't care about what happens to the current version of PvP, and yes, I'm not going to play it as it is right now; it's an awful experience.

But I'm all in for testing a potential alternative PvP version. If Vengeance's results help fix the current PvP, then I'm happy for those who enjoy it. If Vengeance becomes a mode in its own right, much enhanced than what we saw so far, then I'm going to play it on a regular basis. If Vengeance gets deleted once testing is over, then I get at least 1 week of PvP every 3 months, while it lasts, that is fun when populations are balanced.

PvE has received an incredible amount of resources from the devs. PvP has one main zone and the devs couldn't be bothered to make even simple changes suggested by the players. Things are left half done, unexplained, ignored, mocked or given some of the worst excuses - while doing nothing, or something no one asked for. Why is clarity an unreasonable request?

There are trees floating in the air in Cyrodiil 12 years later. This is the level of neglect and apathy the current leadership has had for the community. Please excuse the cynicism.

TBV = trust, but verify.

Orbital78 · October 5

Four_Fingers wrote: »

On the other side of the coin, why are PvE players so keen to get rid of the existing PvP when they don't play PvP at all?

Maybe they would enjoy a less laggy and more balanced experience rather than the current state. PVD is a more enjoyable experience right now.

Maybe my PVE builds would stop getting decimated because they cannot use battle spirit as well.

xR3ACTORx · October 6

PDarkBHood wrote: »

Vengeance is a test, only a test and nothing but a test. What don't you people understand about this?? Did you watch Zos's recent video, they explain what they are doing and it's future. Again Vengeance is a test, only a test and nothing but a test.

They are collecting data to make a better future Cyrodiil. Enough with your conspiracy theories.

Hmm. Not an expert but maybe ZOS should pay people to test vengeance instead of letting those test vengeance who pay ZOS.

reazea · October 6

Yes

Iriidius wrote: »

ZOS should give official statement about their future plans for Vengeance to increase acceptance and prevent critics from spreading conspiration theories like Vengeance being empty and permanently replacing current PvP because otherwise players treat those theories like facts.

How do you know the conspiracy theory isn't that ZOS isn't making vengeance to be a replacement for Grey Host?

And point of fact, vengeance 3 on PC NA was a ghost town compared to normal live. So that part we know for certain is not a conspiracy theory.

aetherix8 · October 6

Yes

StihlReign wrote: »

aetherix8 wrote: »

ZOS keeps using a vocabulary like “experimenting”, etc. It is clear that they are testing different ideas and systems, and none of those has any guarantee of becoming permanent. Vengeance might disappear entirely once all data is collected. I’m not sure why PvPers are panicking so badly, I guess deep inside they know that current PvP is just too broken on many levels.

PvPer's see a ton of money going into the development of features they don't want to see in a FUTURE PvP environment so they've asked for clarity. Panic seems like a stretch but here you are.

PvEers see a ton of money going into the development of features they don't want to see and don't care about. They would rather see a new chapter with more quests.

On what grounds do PvPers reserve the exclusive right to decide what the FUTURE PvP will look like? What's wrong with having regular Cyrodiil and a second, Vengeance-like campaign, both enabled at the same time?

StihlReign wrote: »

We gave PvErs a simple solution via CP and an easy to purchase 2 pc set to stop them from getting bombed and ganked during events. It was nerfed in record time, about 2 weeks. The info is in the patch notes.

LOL. Since when do PvPers work for ZOS? PvPers have given exactly nothing to PvEers, and now are also trying hard to take away any possibility of an additional PvP mode from those who would welcome such an alternative.

StihlReign wrote: »

aetherix8 wrote: »

Reading comprehension and objectivity are severely lacking in any Vengeance discussion. Also, the discrimination against PvE mains' voices and opinions, even when they pvp regularly (or used to), is disappointing. It gives an image of a PvP community that is a self-proclaimed elite but one devoid of vision, open-mindedness, and the ability to embrace change.
Also devoid of reading skills.

I'm not a PvP main since beta; claiming on this forum that you're a PvPer is pointless, and it just derails any discussion. Anyway, as I said, I don't care about what happens to the current version of PvP, and yes, I'm not going to play it as it is right now; it's an awful experience.

But I'm all in for testing a potential alternative PvP version. If Vengeance's results help fix the current PvP, then I'm happy for those who enjoy it. If Vengeance becomes a mode in its own right, much enhanced than what we saw so far, then I'm going to play it on a regular basis. If Vengeance gets deleted once testing is over, then I get at least 1 week of PvP every 3 months, while it lasts, that is fun when populations are balanced.

PvE has received an incredible amount of resources from the devs. PvP has one main zone and the devs couldn't be bothered to make even simple changes suggested by the players. Things are left half done, unexplained, ignored, mocked or given some of the worst excuses - while doing nothing, or something no one asked for. Why is clarity an unreasonable request?

This is patently false. Back in 2021, ZOS tested some players' ideas, like disabling crosshealing outside of groups or disabling proc sets, so yeah, devs bother from time to time. They also introduce things no one asked for, but since it's their game, they can do whatever they deem best, whether we agree or not.

Nobody is asking for a blind trust in ZOS, but rather that PvPers chill so they can access clarity of thinking and their reading skills again, and stop jumping to misguided conclusions like "Vengeance will replace all of PvP" or "PvEers hate us and want PvP deleted from the game."

StihlReign · October 6

Yes

aetherix8 wrote: »

This is patently false. Back in 2021, ZOS tested some players' ideas, like disabling crosshealing outside of groups or disabling proc sets, so yeah, devs bother from time to time. They also introduce things no one asked for, but since it's their game, they can do whatever they deem best, whether we agree or not.

The tree is still floating in the air. They've done nothing to fix it.

aetherix8 · October 6

Yes

StihlReign wrote: »

aetherix8 wrote: »

This is patently false. Back in 2021, ZOS tested some players' ideas, like disabling crosshealing outside of groups or disabling proc sets, so yeah, devs bother from time to time. They also introduce things no one asked for, but since it's their game, they can do whatever they deem best, whether we agree or not.

The tree is still floating in the air. They've done nothing to fix it.

Yeah, all right, the tree is still floating.

My point stands though. When you say

StihlReign wrote: »

PvP has one main zone and the devs couldn't be bothered to make even simple changes suggested by the players.

what you say is inaccurate.

Four_Fingers · October 6

This PvP players vs PvE players thing is getting old as well as the console wars, we are all gamers!
We all will have to play the game as the developers provide, or we can choose our given right to move on.

aetherix8 · October 6

Yes

Besides, which floating tree do you mean, because it appears that there are several in Cyrodiil.

I found 2 reports on this forum:

2014 https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/97379/graphics-glitch-floating-tree-in-cyrodiil

2020 https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/622672/more-floating-trees-in-cyrodiil

Upon visiting these locations though, it appears that these trees are properly grounded. So if you post on these forums screenshots of a floating tree and its location, chances are high that it will get patched up eventually.

StihlReign · October 6

Yes

Four_Fingers wrote: »

This PvP players vs PvE players thing is getting old as well as the console wars, we are all gamers!
We all will have to play the game as the developers provide, or we can choose our given right to move on.

Agreed. PvErs attacking PvPers on the forums is asinine - we have Grey Host. I like PvE players and have since day one. I've helped tons of players and will continue to do so.

StihlReign · October 6

Yes

aetherix8 wrote: »

StihlReign wrote: »

aetherix8 wrote: »

ZOS keeps using a vocabulary like “experimenting”, etc. It is clear that they are testing different ideas and systems, and none of those has any guarantee of becoming permanent. Vengeance might disappear entirely once all data is collected. I’m not sure why PvPers are panicking so badly, I guess deep inside they know that current PvP is just too broken on many levels.

PvPer's see a ton of money going into the development of features they don't want to see in a FUTURE PvP environment so they've asked for clarity. Panic seems like a stretch but here you are.

PvEers see a ton of money going into the development of features they don't want to see and don't care about. They would rather see a new chapter with more quests.

On what grounds do PvPers reserve the exclusive right to decide what the FUTURE PvP will look like? What's wrong with having regular Cyrodiil and a second, Vengeance-like campaign, both enabled at the same time?

StihlReign wrote: »

We gave PvErs a simple solution via CP and an easy to purchase 2 pc set to stop them from getting bombed and ganked during events. It was nerfed in record time, about 2 weeks. The info is in the patch notes.

LOL. Since when do PvPers work for ZOS? PvPers have given exactly nothing to PvEers, and now are also trying hard to take away any possibility of an additional PvP mode from those who would welcome such an alternative.

StihlReign wrote: »

aetherix8 wrote: »

Reading comprehension and objectivity are severely lacking in any Vengeance discussion. Also, the discrimination against PvE mains' voices and opinions, even when they pvp regularly (or used to), is disappointing. It gives an image of a PvP community that is a self-proclaimed elite but one devoid of vision, open-mindedness, and the ability to embrace change.
Also devoid of reading skills.

I'm not a PvP main since beta; claiming on this forum that you're a PvPer is pointless, and it just derails any discussion. Anyway, as I said, I don't care about what happens to the current version of PvP, and yes, I'm not going to play it as it is right now; it's an awful experience.

But I'm all in for testing a potential alternative PvP version. If Vengeance's results help fix the current PvP, then I'm happy for those who enjoy it. If Vengeance becomes a mode in its own right, much enhanced than what we saw so far, then I'm going to play it on a regular basis. If Vengeance gets deleted once testing is over, then I get at least 1 week of PvP every 3 months, while it lasts, that is fun when populations are balanced.

PvE has received an incredible amount of resources from the devs. PvP has one main zone and the devs couldn't be bothered to make even simple changes suggested by the players. Things are left half done, unexplained, ignored, mocked or given some of the worst excuses - while doing nothing, or something no one asked for. Why is clarity an unreasonable request?

This is patently false. Back in 2021, ZOS tested some players' ideas, like disabling crosshealing outside of groups or disabling proc sets, so yeah, devs bother from time to time. They also introduce things no one asked for, but since it's their game, they can do whatever they deem best, whether we agree or not.

Nobody is asking for a blind trust in ZOS, but rather that PvPers chill so they can access clarity of thinking and their reading skills again, and stop jumping to misguided conclusions like "Vengeance will replace all of PvP" or "PvEers hate us and want PvP deleted from the game."

I understand why PvE players want ZOS to create a zone for you. PvP is difficult, unpredictable, requires skill, cooperation, communication, a time investment, and an understanding of the environment. Armor sets and skill selection matter, ability and timing affect the outcome. Strategy, situational awareness, positioning, and knowledge of the enemy matter. Siege selection and placement matters and determines outcomes.

I watch PvErs jump off walls in Cyro 1000s of times. I watch experienced players finish them off within seconds. They res, heal at the wayshrine, and do it again...

The wayshrine heal killed them first, then..
The jump killed them.

Here to help.

RobZha · October 6

Yes

I don't like this divide with pve and pvp players either. I also think that when some of them do join Cyro during the Whitestrake's Mayhem events it's more fun and interesting at times too.

xR3ACTORx · October 6

aetherix8 wrote: »

Four_Fingers wrote: »

On the other side of the coin, why are PvE players so keen to get rid of the existing PvP when they don't play PvP at all?

What if PvEers did try to PvP, got lagged to death, got ballgroup-steamrolled over and over, got bombed on every ram, flag, or door-repairing, got farmed countless times by players abusing broken sets, and simply figured they had better things to do if there is nothing really fun about the current Cyrodiil? Too bad though, because ESO PvP would be quite engaging if it weren't so broken on so many levels.

Are PvEers wrong to ask for a PvP mode where they stand a chance and one they enjoy? No, any person can post any wish here on the forum (within ToS ofc). There's nothing wrong about zergfest either, as long as zergs are equal in size (at some point skill matters again).

Frankly, I couldn't care less whether PvPers keep the current version or not, as it doesn't exist for me anyways. In general, I suspect that PvEers don't really care either, they have other problems, like hats and economy. PvPers can try and dictate whatever they want to PvEers, it doesn't change that Cyro populations are shrinking.

Every pvp player started at zero. The conditions are the same for everyone.

aetherix8 · October 6

Yes

xR3ACTORx wrote: »

aetherix8 wrote: »

Four_Fingers wrote: »

On the other side of the coin, why are PvE players so keen to get rid of the existing PvP when they don't play PvP at all?

What if PvEers did try to PvP, got lagged to death, got ballgroup-steamrolled over and over, got bombed on every ram, flag, or door-repairing, got farmed countless times by players abusing broken sets, and simply figured they had better things to do if there is nothing really fun about the current Cyrodiil? Too bad though, because ESO PvP would be quite engaging if it weren't so broken on so many levels.

Are PvEers wrong to ask for a PvP mode where they stand a chance and one they enjoy? No, any person can post any wish here on the forum (within ToS ofc). There's nothing wrong about zergfest either, as long as zergs are equal in size (at some point skill matters again).

Frankly, I couldn't care less whether PvPers keep the current version or not, as it doesn't exist for me anyways. In general, I suspect that PvEers don't really care either, they have other problems, like hats and economy. PvPers can try and dictate whatever they want to PvEers, it doesn't change that Cyro populations are shrinking.

Every pvp player started at zero. The conditions are the same for everyone.

The conditions are subject to change over time (ex. number of systems and sets available, changes to how traits work, etc) so they are different for different players depending on when they started to pvp in ESO.

SneaK · October 6

Yes

aetherix8 wrote: »

Four_Fingers wrote: »

On the other side of the coin, why are PvE players so keen to get rid of the existing PvP when they don't play PvP at all?

What if PvEers did try to PvP, got lagged to death, got ballgroup-steamrolled over and over, got bombed on every ram, flag, or door-repairing, got farmed countless times by players abusing broken sets, and simply figured they had better things to do if there is nothing really fun about the current Cyrodiil?

Are PvEers wrong to ask for a PvP mode where they stand a chance and one they enjoy?

I’m going to answer your questions, respectfully.

1. What if they did try to PvP and weren’t successful?

They’d be PvPing….. maybe storing years of resentment and finally voicing it on the forums since they see a sliver of opportunity to get revenge on those ornery PvPers by gutting the only part of the game they have. Muhahahah
(Reality is, player vs player is survival of the fittest. If Vengeance were to replace normal Cyro, and actual PvPers had to play it, you would get killed in the exact same ways you do now, maybe worse cause numbers matter more in that terrible mode)

2. Are PvErs wrong to ask for a PvP campaign that’s easy?

Yea, pretty much. If that’s what we’re doing, let PvPers get a group finder for easy trials/arenas that give the same rewards as hard mode. Somewhere we can just stand in the back (similar to a wall of a keep) and LA with our bows, I’d really like to get that perfected maul.

Lucasl402 · October 6

Yes

aetherix8 wrote: »

StihlReign wrote: »

aetherix8 wrote: »

ZOS keeps using a vocabulary like “experimenting”, etc. It is clear that they are testing different ideas and systems, and none of those has any guarantee of becoming permanent. Vengeance might disappear entirely once all data is collected. I’m not sure why PvPers are panicking so badly, I guess deep inside they know that current PvP is just too broken on many levels.

PvPer's see a ton of money going into the development of features they don't want to see in a FUTURE PvP environment so they've asked for clarity. Panic seems like a stretch but here you are.

PvEers see a ton of money going into the development of features they don't want to see and don't care about. They would rather see a new chapter with more quests.

On what grounds do PvPers reserve the exclusive right to decide what the FUTURE PvP will look like? What's wrong with having regular Cyrodiil and a second, Vengeance-like campaign, both enabled at the same time?

StihlReign wrote: »

We gave PvErs a simple solution via CP and an easy to purchase 2 pc set to stop them from getting bombed and ganked during events. It was nerfed in record time, about 2 weeks. The info is in the patch notes.

LOL. Since when do PvPers work for ZOS? PvPers have given exactly nothing to PvEers, and now are also trying hard to take away any possibility of an additional PvP mode from those who would welcome such an alternative.

StihlReign wrote: »

aetherix8 wrote: »

Reading comprehension and objectivity are severely lacking in any Vengeance discussion. Also, the discrimination against PvE mains' voices and opinions, even when they pvp regularly (or used to), is disappointing. It gives an image of a PvP community that is a self-proclaimed elite but one devoid of vision, open-mindedness, and the ability to embrace change.
Also devoid of reading skills.

I'm not a PvP main since beta; claiming on this forum that you're a PvPer is pointless, and it just derails any discussion. Anyway, as I said, I don't care about what happens to the current version of PvP, and yes, I'm not going to play it as it is right now; it's an awful experience.

But I'm all in for testing a potential alternative PvP version. If Vengeance's results help fix the current PvP, then I'm happy for those who enjoy it. If Vengeance becomes a mode in its own right, much enhanced than what we saw so far, then I'm going to play it on a regular basis. If Vengeance gets deleted once testing is over, then I get at least 1 week of PvP every 3 months, while it lasts, that is fun when populations are balanced.

PvE has received an incredible amount of resources from the devs. PvP has one main zone and the devs couldn't be bothered to make even simple changes suggested by the players. Things are left half done, unexplained, ignored, mocked or given some of the worst excuses - while doing nothing, or something no one asked for. Why is clarity an unreasonable request?

This is patently false. Back in 2021, ZOS tested some players' ideas, like disabling crosshealing outside of groups or disabling proc sets, so yeah, devs bother from time to time. They also introduce things no one asked for, but since it's their game, they can do whatever they deem best, whether we agree or not.

Nobody is asking for a blind trust in ZOS, but rather that PvPers chill so they can access clarity of thinking and their reading skills again, and stop jumping to misguided conclusions like "Vengeance will replace all of PvP" or "PvEers hate us and want PvP deleted from the game."

Yet for most of the history of ESO there have been people on this forum posting regularly that the game would be better if PvP was removed. Right below this thread there is even a poll asking if the 3 banners war should end with the next patch.

I guess you just missed those hundreds of threads over the years.

aetherix8 · October 6

Yes

SneaK wrote: »

aetherix8 wrote: »

Four_Fingers wrote: »

On the other side of the coin, why are PvE players so keen to get rid of the existing PvP when they don't play PvP at all?

What if PvEers did try to PvP, got lagged to death, got ballgroup-steamrolled over and over, got bombed on every ram, flag, or door-repairing, got farmed countless times by players abusing broken sets, and simply figured they had better things to do if there is nothing really fun about the current Cyrodiil?

Are PvEers wrong to ask for a PvP mode where they stand a chance and one they enjoy?

I’m going to answer your questions, respectfully.

1. What if they did try to PvP and weren’t successful?

They’d be PvPing….. maybe storing years of resentment and finally voicing it on the forums since they see a sliver of opportunity to get revenge on those ornery PvPers by gutting the only part of the game they have. Muhahahah
(Reality is, player vs player is survival of the fittest. If Vengeance were to replace normal Cyro, and actual PvPers had to play it, you would get killed in the exact same ways you do now, maybe worse cause numbers matter more in that terrible mode)

2. Are PvErs wrong to ask for a PvP campaign that’s easy?

Yea, pretty much. If that’s what we’re doing, let PvPers get a group finder for easy trials/arenas that give the same rewards as hard mode. Somewhere we can just stand in the back (similar to a wall of a keep) and LA with our bows, I’d really like to get that perfected maul.

You aren't even answering my questions; you answer to some twisted interpretation, respectfully.

Questions are clearly indicated with the question mark:

1. What if PvEers figured they had better things to do than deal with op ballgroups, broken builds, lag, etc?

For some reason, you make it about being unsuccessful and resentful, while it is simply about being tired of the unbalanced mess that is the current PvP.

2. Are PvEers wrong to ask for a PvP mode where they stand a chance and one they enjoy?

“A mode where they stand a chance and one they enjoy” means a balanced environment and improved performance. At least Vengeance has improved performance, and imbalance is atm less game-breaking than on live.

Lucasl402 wrote: »

aetherix8 wrote: »

StihlReign wrote: »

aetherix8 wrote: »

ZOS keeps using a vocabulary like “experimenting”, etc. It is clear that they are testing different ideas and systems, and none of those has any guarantee of becoming permanent. Vengeance might disappear entirely once all data is collected. I’m not sure why PvPers are panicking so badly, I guess deep inside they know that current PvP is just too broken on many levels.

PvPer's see a ton of money going into the development of features they don't want to see in a FUTURE PvP environment so they've asked for clarity. Panic seems like a stretch but here you are.

PvEers see a ton of money going into the development of features they don't want to see and don't care about. They would rather see a new chapter with more quests.

On what grounds do PvPers reserve the exclusive right to decide what the FUTURE PvP will look like? What's wrong with having regular Cyrodiil and a second, Vengeance-like campaign, both enabled at the same time?

StihlReign wrote: »

We gave PvErs a simple solution via CP and an easy to purchase 2 pc set to stop them from getting bombed and ganked during events. It was nerfed in record time, about 2 weeks. The info is in the patch notes.

LOL. Since when do PvPers work for ZOS? PvPers have given exactly nothing to PvEers, and now are also trying hard to take away any possibility of an additional PvP mode from those who would welcome such an alternative.

StihlReign wrote: »

aetherix8 wrote: »

Reading comprehension and objectivity are severely lacking in any Vengeance discussion. Also, the discrimination against PvE mains' voices and opinions, even when they pvp regularly (or used to), is disappointing. It gives an image of a PvP community that is a self-proclaimed elite but one devoid of vision, open-mindedness, and the ability to embrace change.
Also devoid of reading skills.

I'm not a PvP main since beta; claiming on this forum that you're a PvPer is pointless, and it just derails any discussion. Anyway, as I said, I don't care about what happens to the current version of PvP, and yes, I'm not going to play it as it is right now; it's an awful experience.

But I'm all in for testing a potential alternative PvP version. If Vengeance's results help fix the current PvP, then I'm happy for those who enjoy it. If Vengeance becomes a mode in its own right, much enhanced than what we saw so far, then I'm going to play it on a regular basis. If Vengeance gets deleted once testing is over, then I get at least 1 week of PvP every 3 months, while it lasts, that is fun when populations are balanced.

PvE has received an incredible amount of resources from the devs. PvP has one main zone and the devs couldn't be bothered to make even simple changes suggested by the players. Things are left half done, unexplained, ignored, mocked or given some of the worst excuses - while doing nothing, or something no one asked for. Why is clarity an unreasonable request?

This is patently false. Back in 2021, ZOS tested some players' ideas, like disabling crosshealing outside of groups or disabling proc sets, so yeah, devs bother from time to time. They also introduce things no one asked for, but since it's their game, they can do whatever they deem best, whether we agree or not.

Nobody is asking for a blind trust in ZOS, but rather that PvPers chill so they can access clarity of thinking and their reading skills again, and stop jumping to misguided conclusions like "Vengeance will replace all of PvP" or "PvEers hate us and want PvP deleted from the game."

Yet for most of the history of ESO there have been people on this forum posting regularly that the game would be better if PvP was removed. Right below this thread there is even a poll asking if the 3 banners war should end with the next patch.

I guess you just missed those hundreds of threads over the years.

I guess you just missed those hundreds of votes that I cast over the years in polls asking for a PvE version of Cyrodill.

Muizer · October 6

SneaK wrote: »

Are PvErs wrong to ask for a PvP campaign that’s easy?

Would it be easy? Recently someone argued that

SneaK wrote: »

If Vengeance were to replace normal Cyro, and actual PvPers had to play it, you would get killed in the exact same ways you do now, maybe worse cause numbers matter more in that terrible mode)

I think they were right.

edward_frigidhands · October 6

Yes

Orbital78 wrote: »

Four_Fingers wrote: »

On the other side of the coin, why are PvE players so keen to get rid of the existing PvP when they don't play PvP at all?

Maybe they would enjoy a less laggy and more balanced experience rather than the current state. PVD is a more enjoyable experience right now.

Maybe my PVE builds would stop getting decimated because they cannot use battle spirit as well.

Your builds were nerfed because they were overpowered in PvE. PvP had nothing to do with it.