Gabriel_H wrote: »

I think Vengeance should absolutely become a thing for the PC master race then. 😄
You guys genuinely seem to suffer the most from ball groups and bad lag anyway.
Happy participating!

Gabriel_H wrote: »

amiiegee wrote: »

Gabriel_H wrote: »

I think Vengeance should absolutely become a thing for the PC master race then. 😄
You guys genuinely seem to suffer the most from ball groups and bad lag anyway.
Happy participating!

You know ZOS are working on crossplay, right?!

Are they?? This one must of went past me?!

Gabriel_H wrote: »

amiiegee wrote: »

Gabriel_H wrote: »

I think Vengeance should absolutely become a thing for the PC master race then. 😄
You guys genuinely seem to suffer the most from ball groups and bad lag anyway.
Happy participating!

You know ZOS are working on crossplay, right?!

Yes, I know, doesn't make this popular with console players

There has always been a discrepancy between controller UI and keyboard layout. No idea if this is a bug. Maybe Kevin knows.

This is what I see on my end:


When I plug in my controller on the same campaign gives me this 1 second later


Either way, seems pretty great for a weekday evening.

licenturion wrote: »

There has always been a discrepancy between controller UI and keyboard layout. No idea if this is a bug. Maybe Kevin knows.

This is what I see on my end:


When I plug in my controller on the same campaign gives me this 1 second later


Either way, seems pretty great for a weekday evening.

Looks like a disparity in the fill calculations. Interesting.

Yellow and blue one bar, red two bars on PCNA.

SneaK wrote: »

licenturion wrote: »

There has always been a discrepancy between controller UI and keyboard layout. No idea if this is a bug. Maybe Kevin knows.

This is what I see on my end:


When I plug in my controller on the same campaign gives me this 1 second later


Either way, seems pretty great for a weekday evening.

I think they’ll use the numbers from the first picture for their graphs.

Their the same numbers, they are simply being displayed differently.

Did some spying on the campaign to see how it was going... I see
people talking about how its so much fun in zone while the map stays stagnant, EP is three bars in, everyone else is two bar, and DC has so few players that have played thus far that the leaderboard has only counted 77 players.

On pc na at this hour, when there's only one campaign available, these numbers are very bad. Even for the first day of a campaign which typically is one of the most active regardless of the weekday. All factions are locked out normally, which I know they raised the cap for this test, 300 per faction, but 77 dc only on the leaderboard counters any arguments about the pop lock increase.

AD's is at 82, and EP is the only faction that has 100 recorded which matches the logic of what the bars show.






Assuming the bars are accurate representation of the pop, which I think it is due to the leaderboards' telling numbers, this is a pretty bad day one even for a wednesday in pc na.

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

Did some spying on the campaign to see how it was going... I see
people talking about how its so much fun in zone while the map stays stagnant, EP is three bars in, everyone else is two bar, and DC has so few players that have played thus far that the leaderboard has only counted 77 players.

On pc na at this hour, when there's only one campaign available, these numbers are very bad. Even for the first day of a campaign which typically is one of the most active regardless of the weekday. All factions are locked out normally, which I know they raised the cap for this test, 300 per faction, but 77 dc only on the leaderboard counters any arguments about the pop lock increase.

AD's is at 82, and EP is the only faction that has 100 recorded which matches the logic of what the bars show.






Assuming the bars are accurate representation of the pop, which I think it is due to the leaderboards' telling numbers, this is a pretty bad day one even for a wednesday in pc na.

I didn't bother to home it until like 5 hours in and noticed an actual leaderboard. I think it's a safe assumption 90% of the casual playerbase won't bother trying to home it, as homing previous vengeances were essentially irrelevant.

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

Assuming the bars are accurate representation of the pop, which I think it is due to the leaderboards' telling numbers, this is a pretty bad day one even for a wednesday in pc na.

I think the bars are accurate, and I see no reason for it to not be the case. I wonder though, what are the current pop caps? Yesterday evening, PC EU hit 3 bars on all factions fairly early, but these bars were nowhere to be seen. The campaign felt emptier than during previous tests. At first I assumed that people were figuring out their set ups at the base, but every time I ported there, there were around 20 people, as opposed to 200+, so it doesn’t explain this lower headcount. The map was far from being dynamic - only two or three keeps burning at the same time, and none of these fights were as massive as before: I don’t think there were more than 100 blues at any point attacking or defending.

It would be great if other platforms participated, if only to see if anyone gets the impression that 3 bars are still 900 players because it doesn’t seem to be the case anymore.

ZOS if you reduced those caps you should have told us. This would constitute a truly transparent communication. If caps need to be reduced to allow for more complexity that’s fine, and I don’t think sharing that with us would cause a massive backlash.

It’s so bad, like unimaginably bad.


It would fix PvE performance tho

^ And keep in mind, I like the idea of Vengeance, to a degree, but man does it need work…

PC/EU had all alliances on 3 bars for 1-2 hours on prime time and at least on 2 the rest of the time. With a max number of 300, 3 bars should be 200-300 and 2, 100-200. There were quite a lot of good fights. I also noted that a number of raid groups from GH were around, both casual and some good one. A good group still have a large impact, but the power gap is much smaller than on the normal campaign, which in my opinion is good for the game.

On a side note most if not all Cyro functions are up again, like quests, alliance buffs, leaderboards and leader boards. I also noted that we had double AP.

Logged in to try Vengeance for the first time. I wasn't playing during the previous tests so I figured I'd see what it was all about.

• Performance was worse for me than Greyhost in terms of skills not going off, random frame drops, etc.
• Reach of my skills felt way worse than live but I'm not sure if that's because reach was nerfed for Vengeance skills or I was just having a hard time hitting things.
• It was not clear that I wasn't supposed to have gear at all; I had some random weapons in my inventory for vengeance but no gear so was very confused if I was just running around naked. Had to actually ask in chat and I saw that I was not the only one.
• I absolutely loathe the Apocrypha coloring of the sky and the red tinge on everything makes it harder to see the ground effects of siege, plus the green lightning/strobe effect.
• I find it an odd choice that extremely flashy mounts with tons of special effects are still allowed in Cyro.
• The "only one siege of each option" is annoying. Oils in particular are the worst.

All in all, I'm not a fan.

Objectively, because I'm not a Vengeance supporter in concept and loathe Templates... here's my early report card:

Performance is good, had some very very big fights that showed absolutely zero lag. Population seems enough to support the play, if not what it was the first "performance test" (yeah, I use that word lightly), though I think Vengeance's gameplay is so dependent on huge numbers to be any fun that it's gonna be really hard to keep them up without tremendous reward incentive to lure in those who don't normally PvP if it's possible at all.

The "builds" (again, I use that word lightly) are... better... than the past tests, but still very limited. I don't like how little true personalization is possible and miss my Sets, passives, and CP for sculpting something that feels my own and suits me fully. There's some, but there could be a lot more and honestly it just makes me miss the norm as I try to cobble something together.

Gameplay is ok-ish. It's not quite full-on bumper rails PvP like the first go, but it's not far removed. There are some outliers (MagNB is obscenely good compared to most others) that seem silly, considering how much easier balance should be in this setting.

I don't hate it, though I want to.

I don't love it, though I'd like to.

What I want is normal (Grey Host) Cyrodiil with some serious changes to Ballgroups and whatever mechanics, AddOns, or structural dynamic makes them tank performance and some trimming to Heal/Shield stacking, problematic things like RoA and Warden Charm, and for that to be the focus. That makes the most sense to me, and I don't get why reinventing the wheel was the priority.

I don't think I'd stick around for Vengeance-only. There's not enough of the RPG element present and it removes years of effort I've put into collecting Sets and building my characters for PvP, but if I'm being fully objective and not personal about it, the current Vengeance campaign is very functional and playing well if a little bland. I'd prefer it was used as an "on ramp" for those who want to dip their toe into PvP and that the real lion's share of focus went to Grey Host/standard Cyrodiil, but I'm trying not to color my impression with my personal preferences.