SpiritKitten wrote: »Okay so a lot of comments are saying 'pvpers' hate Vengeance. Well, they are not making Vengeance for pvpers. Don't y'all get that?
It is for PVErs, of which there are a lot, who love it. There are many more players like that than 'dedicated' pvpers. This game's design decisions always revolve around the largest player demographic- the casual gamer. And it's smart to. That's who pays the bills. It's a numbers game.
Vengeance is super fun for casual pvp.
They are going to let y'all hardcore pvpers enjoy your ball groups and other unbalanced ridiculousness in Grayhost. Be happy for that. Vengeance won't affect y'all at all. Unless of course...you secretly realize that a lot of Grayhosters actually want to leave for Vengeance?
I have played all sorts of pvp since DAoC. I have spent a lot of time in all the Cyro campaigns. Grayhost is a 50-car pileup wreck. And they just admitted they are not going to fix it. Let's be honest with ourselves. It's time to move on.
Bring on Vengeance!
@SpiritKitten Where is my vengeance version of trials? I want the same rewards, but I don't want to put in the effort of getting good at the game. They should make a trial that you can complete with a group of 12 random PvPers that grants you the exact same rewards as doing veteran hardmode trifecta trial runs. Bring on Vengeance trials!
This is the attitude of players that want Vengeance because real PvP is too tough for them. They just want to zerg and zerging is the only playstyle Vengeance enables. These players will obviously quit Gray Host, and I'm not blaming them for choosing the game mode most suited to their desires. I'm blaming ZOS for enabling this attitude and for downgrading the experience for the players that don't like Vengeance by splitting the population.
StihlReign wrote: »New mid-size PvP sounds like a complete waste of Dev time and money. It will be abandoned. It will be buggy, never tuned or updated, and over-run by a few comp groups that farm it into Oblivion.
Why not improve IC? Or, get rid of the Cyrodiil PvE (it's everywhere), move the blocking Titans and open the center island?
StihlReign wrote: »New mid-size PvP sounds like a complete waste of Dev time and money. It will be abandoned. It will be buggy, never tuned or updated, and over-run by a few comp groups that farm it into Oblivion.
Why not improve IC? Or, get rid of the Cyrodiil PvE (it's everywhere), move the blocking Titans and open the center island?
@ZOS_JessicaFolsom @ZOS_Kevin
Does 'keeping' current PvP in scenario 1 include a commitment to make efforts to maintain/improve PvP balance? Or would PvE become the main focus of balancing efforts for the shared combat model going forward, in the knowledge that there is an alternative mode for PvP?
MincMincMinc wrote: »Having a veng and CP campaign makes the most sense as people have been saying since the first test. Right now eso doesn't have a learning environment for new players like it used to. So we are losing alot of new pvpers early on, where previously they used to have BwB loaded with players and a thriving nocp population.
colossalvoids wrote: »StihlReign wrote: »New mid-size PvP sounds like a complete waste of Dev time and money. It will be abandoned. It will be buggy, never tuned or updated, and over-run by a few comp groups that farm it into Oblivion.
Why not improve IC? Or, get rid of the Cyrodiil PvE (it's everywhere), move the blocking Titans and open the center island?
Honest question, how would you personally improve IC with current audience the game has? Not trying any gotcha here, just really do not see a way to make it any more appealing without something as damaging to the current PvP meta enjoyers as Vengeance is. Not talking ruleset, just scale of changes needed and how those would be hugely opposed by remained PvP players, as you can't drawn new players there without making it more appealing or at the very least not that punishing/unfair.
@ZOS_JessicaFolsom @ZOS_Kevin
Does 'keeping' current PvP in scenario 1 include a commitment to make efforts to maintain/improve PvP balance? Or would PvE become the main focus of balancing efforts for the shared combat model going forward, in the knowledge that there is an alternative mode for PvP?
ArctosCethlenn wrote: »MincMincMinc wrote: »Having a veng and CP campaign makes the most sense as people have been saying since the first test. Right now eso doesn't have a learning environment for new players like it used to. So we are losing alot of new pvpers early on, where previously they used to have BwB loaded with players and a thriving nocp population.
Honestly it'd make more sense to just remove CP from all forms of pvp. It contributes a lot to the balance issues in GH, particularly because of the amount of defensive power you get from champion points, and is a pretty big barrier to entry keeping new players out. Not having champion points wouldn't drive folks away from the game like vengeance will.
ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »With the next Vengeance test coming up in December, we wanted to give everyone an update on the Vengeance testing and where we’re headed with Cyrodiil. We recognize that you all have questions about next steps and what these tests mean for the future of Cyrodiil, and we’re here to answer some of those questions. We also want to give you as much context and info as possible, in the name of transparency.
The Goals
To recap where we started and where we’ve been with the Vengeance tests, earlier this year we set out to try some new things with Cyrodiil to address the following specific goals:
- Significantly increase the player cap in a Cyrodiil campaign so that campaigns feel lively, full, and there’s lots of action to enjoy.
- Cyrodiil was originally designed to support 900 total concurrent players (300 per alliance.) We have not been able to support those target numbers in the current non-Vengeance Cyrodiil campaigns. We are able to hit 900 total concurrent players with the Vengeance ruleset.
- Reduce frustrating latency and related game performance issues in Cyrodiil, especially during large, sustained battles. And in turn, increase the fun and enjoyment.
- Through testing, determine if overall Ability complexity is the main cause of server stress and game performance issues in Cyrodiil, especially during mass battles and in high-population campaigns.
- We did test other potential causes of server stress and game performance issues in Cyrodiil during the Vengeance tests, such as item sets and procs, consumable items, siege weapons, quests, vendors, etc. Ability complexity was our primary suspected main cause factor, though.
Test Summaries
Since March, we have held three Vengeance tests. The next one will begin on December 3, 2025.
For the first test, which was on the PC EU and NA servers, we introduced the Vengeance ruleset including normalized character stats, attributes, consumables, and Vengeance-specific weapons for all classes. We also disabled things like the Champion System, all quests, item sets, and access to banks, vendors, and crafting nodes.
The specific goal of this test was to give us a starting point – to reduce things to the most basic level so we could evaluate the findings and begin adding things back in. At the end of this test, we saw the most players ever in Cyrodiil at one time in a single campaign, the largest sustained battles we’ve ever had in Cyrodiil, and the best overall game performance we’ve ever seen in Cyrodiil. By all accounts, we were on the right track based on our goals.
Survey results were also the most positive following this test compared to subsequent ones, with many participants saying they enjoyed the higher population, improved game performance/lower latency, and overall experience. The aligned Golden Pursuit was also noted as a positive. The loss of unique class/character builds and customization was (and continues to be) the biggest negative point.
For the second test, we welcomed the live console EU and NA server communities. The Vengeance ruleset was largely the same as the first test, with the addition of Vengeance versions of skills from all Weapon skill lines and the Assault and Support Skill lines to the available class templates.
The specific goal of this test was to build upon the baseline we set during the first test, slowly begin introducing more skill lines and abilities, and evaluate the results. At the end of this test, we saw similar results with better game performance, lower latency, higher population, and larger sustained battles than possible in other Cyrodiil campaigns.
This test overlapped with the Zeal of Zenithar event, which we recognize not everyone enjoyed.
Survey results for this test were similar in sentiment, leaning positive. Over 80% of participants rated the added skill lines favorably (“OK”, “Good”, or “Great”), sharing appreciation for the variety and balance, while also noting that there’s room to improve.
For the third test, we layered upon what we introduced in the two previous tests, and added in meatbag catapults, as well as performance-tailored skill lines for the Fighters Guild and Mages Guild, plus an armor skill line with active abilities for light, medium, and heavy armor. We also introduced certain progression and cosmetic systems into Vengeance, including Skyshards, mount selection, titles, and achievements.
Similar to the second test, our goal was to introduce more things that players enjoy and expect in a Cyrodiil campaign, and monitor the impact on latency, game performance, and overall experience.
We did not run a Golden Pursuit during this Vengeance test, and saw disappointment about that. We also ran this test during the Undaunted Celebration, which some players understandably noted they had higher interest in participating in versus this test. Even though population in Vengeance was lower during this test, it still performed well and participant numbers were still higher than our typical population caps in a normal Cyrodiil campaign.
Survey results for this test were more mixed than the results following the first two and we saw less positivity overall. More survey participants noted fatigue with the tests and a desire to be able to play their own unique characters and builds in Cyrodiil, and frustration that the test ran during another in-game event.
Test Learnings
Throughout the first three tests, we learned with certainty that in order to deliver a performant Cyrodiil, to support a large-scale PvP zone with mass-scale battles, the abilities, procs, passives, etc. must be lighter versions of the ones that exist in the rest of the game.
The set of four graphs below illustrate the differences in population as well as the server frames per second between the Vengeance Cyrodiil campaign and non-Vengeance Cyrodiil campaigns. (On the left of each graph is the non-Vengeance campaigns and on the right are the Vengeance campaigns, on the PC EU and PC NA servers.)
Next Steps
For the test in December, we will introduce Vengeance-specific Perks and Loadout systems for character/class templates. These systems are designed to give you a bit more variety over your builds compared to what was available in previous Vengeance tests. Specifically, you will have more control over your stats with four pre-build stats packages called “Loadouts” and “Perks” are passives that give extra combat effectiveness and bonuses to your characters. The intent with these is to give characters a boost that is comparable to a single 5-piece item set that is purely passive, like Julianos.
We will also be adding a Vengeance-specific inventory, which will store all your Vengeance items. During this test, you will also be able to collect regular items while in the Vengeance campaign – those items will be placed into your regular inventory. Many systems that were previously turned off in Vengeance will also be turned back on including quests, vendors, and leaderboards. Scattershot and Oil Catapults will also join the available options for siege weapons, and Keep Recall Stones and Channeled Repair Kits will also be added.
We’ll share more detailed notes ahead of the December test. We’ll monitor the impact of these additional systems on latency and game performance, as we have during prior tests.
Lastly, the Gray Host campaign (as it is now) will be up during the second half of this Vengeance test and will monitor server performance for both campaigns. This comparison will allow us valuable side-by-side data. This will be our final “adding new things” test where we compare the game performance of Vengeance with what a campaign looks like with all the systems turned on.
We have another test or two planned for next year, for the sake of evaluating healing versus damage concerns. We’ll share more about those next year.
So where does this put us, and where do we as a dev team realistically think we’re headed for the future of Cyrodiil? With the caveat that the December test still needs to happen, we see two realistic paths forward:As a dev team, Scenario 1 is the one we strongly prefer and is the most likely. We want you to have a choice between playing in Vengeance or Gray Host, and would closely monitor both campaign populations to help inform any additional actions we should take moving forward.
- Scenario 1: We would open a Vengeance Cyrodiil campaign sometime next year with a special ruleset based on the previous and upcoming tests, and leave Grey Host open as it is now.
- Scenario 2: We would close all existing Cyrodiil campaigns and open one or two Vengeance ruleset campaigns sometime next year.
We recognize that some of our players would prefer there be no changes to their characters, effectively how they are in the Gray Host Cyrodiil campaign, while enjoying the higher population and reduced latency/game performance issues of the Vengeance campaign. This is not something that will be possible. Based on what we have learned from the tests so far, we can offer one or the other, not both, and we want to be transparent about that.
Lastly, we do want to share a few early bits about some things that we are working on for PvP. You’ll hear a little more about these in January. For players who wish to enjoy a PvP experience that is more like Grey Host, we are in the early stages of working on a mid-size PvP space. It will be smaller than Cyrodiil but larger than our largest Battlegrounds, and offer enough room for 3-sided keep warfare and an overall similar experience to Cyrodiil. The goal with that will be to allow players to have their full suite of abilities, unique builds, equipment, etc. just like in Gray Host. We are also working on a PvP progression system that we’re excited to tell you a little more about early next year.
Thank you all for your continued feedback and support. Your participation in the Vengeance tests and related surveys has been greatly appreciated. We’d like to remind everyone that when we send out surveys where it’s important we are able to verify that participants played the content, we have to send out the surveys via email. Please consider opting in to these emails if you haven’t already, so you may be included in future survey sends. Thank you!
I am glad to see an attempt to be transparent, but I am sad to hear you can't fix what you've broken. I remember great times playing in healthy Cyrodiil years ago, in big battles with almost no lag. Then dark times came: first, lag became unplayable (I played on Ravenwatch), and I left the game. Then you introduced no-proc, and it healed the campaign a bit; I returned and spent a year playing almost every day. Then you returned procs, and now it is completely dead again. Now you are going to kill Grayhost.
My prediction: Vengeance is a second Ravenwatch - abandoned, hardly populated, dominated by one faction of casual players who will be able to recruit 24-48 players to play 3 days a week against the doors of empty keeps in the evening, and dominated by a second faction who will nightcap the map. Grayhost will still be laggy.
I truly hate Vengeance in its current state and taking into consideration the fact that nothing else will be added to Vengeance and it is going to keep the loadout and perks system, I will not be there. I'm interested to hear about mid-size PvP, but if it has nothing similar to Cyrodiil in its current state, I will not be there as well.
Anything but addressing the actual problem, classic. You need to deal with cross healing and shield stacking.
You know why Vengeance performs better? Because there's no groups running around with a dozen instances of the same 3 hots.
ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »As a dev team, Scenario 1 is the one we strongly prefer and is the most likely. We want you to have a choice between playing in Vengeance or Gray Host, and would closely monitor both campaign populations to help inform any additional actions we should take moving forward.
- Scenario 1: We would open a Vengeance Cyrodiil campaign sometime next year with a special ruleset based on the previous and upcoming tests, and leave Grey Host open as it is now.
- Scenario 2: We would close all existing Cyrodiil campaigns and open one or two Vengeance ruleset campaigns sometime next year.
We recognize that some of our players would prefer there be no changes to their characters, effectively how they are in the Gray Host Cyrodiil campaign, while enjoying the higher population and reduced latency/game performance issues of the Vengeance campaign. This is not something that will be possible. Based on what we have learned from the tests so far, we can offer one or the other, not both, and we want to be transparent about that
JustLovely wrote: »We need an explanation as to why on these performance graphs the player number axis is blurred out.
