Honestly - Is Vengeance Viable?

spartaxoxo · December 15

MorallyBipolar wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

I think whatever amount of players are "boycotting" will be counter balanced by the amount of players who dont even know greyhost is back because they dont frequent forums or see zone chat gossip, which is a lot of players.

Some of the people who like Gray Host are in the very same PvP groups that are also boycotting, afaik. They know full well that Grey Host is active because their PvP guilds them. I'm not saying everyone is but I've seen enough of zone chat to know it's a thing.

Gray Host's population cap is pretty small.

The players who refuse to play vengeance now will continue to refuse to play vengeance in the future. So your argument is that ZOS should mandate vengeance?

Vengeance has been a fail by every measure. It will continue to fail for one very simple, very obvious reason: If ZOS can't make Grey Host run smoothly they can't make vengeance run smoothly either. No rational person is going to accept a decade of grinding gear sets and CP being taken away from them so they can prosper in PvP.

Like I said, some of them will probably never set foot again on principle. But, some of them may try it out again after Vengeance is no longer seen as a threat to Gray Host. I've seen a couple of people claim in zone chat that ZOS already is mandating Vengeance, that it will replace Gray Host, etc. If ZOS keeps their word and instead makes it a separate thing that doesn't harm Gray Host, then I can imagine that this "US vs Them" thing will also die down and people will be able to enjoy both modes.

Who knows though. Only time will tell.

I've said once and I'll say it again. I hope that both campaigns succeed.

xylena · December 15

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

Your patronizing tone aside let’s call this debate squashed.

Let's not, because "haha GH had slightly more players than a test" isn't the flex you think it is. Where is GH getting new players from? Nowhere. It will continue to wither until even prime time loses critical mass and collapses, all it would take is a few guild leads quitting. Where would Vengeance get new players from? Noobs who enjoy "not being instakilled."

BardokRedSnow · December 15

Well as far as I am concerned the debate is squashed, not gonna argue in circles because the test didn’t go your way.

edward_frigidhands · December 15

SneaK wrote: »

Discussion on pop doesn’t even matter, ZOS will find the only positives from the “test”, 100% they won’t bring up anything negative about the population. It’ll all be about the perks and interactions when fighting “big” battles.

GH people, all we can hope for is that our bars fill up everyday cause then it’s really hard to justify shutting it down.

Personally, I cancelled my sub when they released their letter regarding "scenario 2". I am going to keep playing as long as the game continues to have the reasons that prompted me to buy it.

Once they make their decision to remove it, I am removing it from my PC.

Its just one player and one subscription, so I am sure it doesn't matter to them. But I think I want to vote with my wallet and my time regardless.

imPDA · December 15

1). It is too much "GH is more popular" vs "VG is more popular", better comment and say you want to see the real numbers, same as from the first test, unblurred, with population over time for GH and VG side by side. It would be objectively good to know. We saw nothing from 2nd and 3rd btw.

2). We were warned there will be not that much content this transitional year, it is understandable, but it is definitely the first year with only questionable, negative or strongly negative discussions about added features. No need to argue with each other at this point, we are not the people who made this happen. All we can is to show what we think, what want to see (results of VG, at this thread at least) and wait, and then leave or continue playing after results shown (or not) and official ZOS position announced.

Stamicka · December 15

What are you guys even trying to preserve with Grey Host?

I ask that genuinely. It’s barely a PvP zone at this point cause it’s extremely dead. We haven’t seen good combat adjustments in so many years that I’ve lost count. Subclassing hasn’t been a positive thing for PvP either.

If you guys succeed in getting ZOS to scrap Vengeance, Grey Host will continue to die anyway.

If you’re holding out for ZOS to fix PvP through incremental tweaks as it is right now, you’re going to be disappointed.

So many of PvP’s issues exist because of PvE balancing. ZOS has been trying to make higher damage in PvE easier to achieve for years now. This is why status effects are such an overtuned and free damage source. It’s also why there’s so many broken group buff sets that can be combined to give even small coordinated groups 1000+ extra weapon damage, very easy access to Major Force, and much more. Heal stacking likely remains in the game because of PvE balancing as well. Tweaking that too much could make certain Veteran trials too difficult for the average group.

A lot of times ESO’s direction is unclear, but one thing that has been clear and consistent throughout the years is that ZOS wants to boost veteran PvE participation rates through making damage easier to achieve. PvP is in a deep hole largely due to balancing efforts around that goal and the hole will continue to get deeper for as long as PvE and PvP are balanced together. We are well past the point where Battle Spirit is enough to keep things in check.

ZOS will not walk back on their casual oriented PvE balancing efforts. As long as they continue down that path, PvP balance will get worse and worse. By advocating for Grey Host you guys are basically acting like ZOS will eventually and successfully address balance concerns in a way that keeps PvErs and PvPers happy. You guys really think they’re going to pull that off despite their track record and the fact that there’s so much more complexity (subclassing) to keep in mind now? It’s not going to happen.

Yes Vengeance has poor balance, a low skill ceiling, and it’s way too simple. However, it’s 100% separate from PvE and all of its issues are addressable without consequences elsewhere. It doesn’t have to have the balance that it does now.

So maybe some of you guys hate Vengeance as it is, that’s understandable. Instead of trying to get it scrapped completely, try to get it balanced correctly though. Grey Host will only sink deeper into it’s hole as it continues to be balanced with PvE.

Don’t ruin PvPs opportunity to be completely separated from PvE. It’s more productive to bring attention to the overtuned healing, lack of mobility skills, low skill ceiling, etc. in Vengeance. If they actually address those issues, we could get somewhere.

Artisian0001 · December 15

xylena wrote: »

Artisian0001 wrote: »

Why does GH need to be pop locked all day?

people work jobs other than American 9-5

people live in other time zones

no meaningful AvAvA or campaign score because the map is 1 color 12 hours a day

all your prime time faction progress erased by like 10 guys fighting npcs and doors

people want to PvP when there are no ball groups running

but all these players have long given up

You are wrong because people PvP during prime time when MORE ballgroups are on. You are again just proving yourself wrong. People don't want to PvP when ballgroups are on, yet more people than normal log on when ballgroups are on during prime time to PvP. It sounds like the problem is you are just using your own preferences and personal anecdotes as evidence. You do this all the time.

MorallyBipolar · December 15

xylena wrote: »

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

Your patronizing tone aside let’s call this debate squashed.

Let's not, because "haha GH had slightly more players than a test" isn't the flex you think it is. Where is GH getting new players from? Nowhere. It will continue to wither until even prime time loses critical mass and collapses, all it would take is a few guild leads quitting. Where would Vengeance get new players from? Noobs who enjoy "not being instakilled."

GH will get more players and returning players when ZOS limits heal stacking and makes some adjustments to about 5 proc sets. Nothing will bring more players to vengeance. The PvP community won't stick around for vengeance. PvE players won't suddenly decide they want to PvP. Everyone who wants to PvP is already playing PvP. Even broken GH is better than any version of vengeance.

Again, if ZOS can't make GH run smoothly, they can't make a version of vengeance work smoothly either. And people won't accept having all their time and money investment taken away from them. They'll just uninstall and never buy anything ZOS/Bethesda ever again. I think if ZOS mandates vengeance it will not just be the end of PvP in ESO, I think it will sink the entire company.

MorallyBipolar · December 15

spartaxoxo wrote: »

MorallyBipolar wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

I think whatever amount of players are "boycotting" will be counter balanced by the amount of players who dont even know greyhost is back because they dont frequent forums or see zone chat gossip, which is a lot of players.

Some of the people who like Gray Host are in the very same PvP groups that are also boycotting, afaik. They know full well that Grey Host is active because their PvP guilds them. I'm not saying everyone is but I've seen enough of zone chat to know it's a thing.

Gray Host's population cap is pretty small.

The players who refuse to play vengeance now will continue to refuse to play vengeance in the future. So your argument is that ZOS should mandate vengeance?

Vengeance has been a fail by every measure. It will continue to fail for one very simple, very obvious reason: If ZOS can't make Grey Host run smoothly they can't make vengeance run smoothly either. No rational person is going to accept a decade of grinding gear sets and CP being taken away from them so they can prosper in PvP.

Like I said, some of them will probably never set foot again on principle. But, some of them may try it out again after Vengeance is no longer seen as a threat to Gray Host. I've seen a couple of people claim in zone chat that ZOS already is mandating Vengeance, that it will replace Gray Host, etc. If ZOS keeps their word and instead makes it a separate thing that doesn't harm Gray Host, then I can imagine that this "US vs Them" thing will also die down and people will be able to enjoy both modes.

Who knows though. Only time will tell.

I've said once and I'll say it again. I hope that both campaigns succeed.

ZOS will pick one or the other. They will never support more than one PvP mode at the same time. Plus, a second campaign will parisitize the server resources needed to keep the other running.

SneaK · December 15

edward_frigidhands wrote: »

SneaK wrote: »

Discussion on pop doesn’t even matter, ZOS will find the only positives from the “test”, 100% they won’t bring up anything negative about the population. It’ll all be about the perks and interactions when fighting “big” battles.

GH people, all we can hope for is that our bars fill up everyday cause then it’s really hard to justify shutting it down.

Personally, I cancelled my sub when they released their letter regarding "scenario 2". I am going to keep playing as long as the game continues to have the reasons that prompted me to buy it.

Once they make their decision to remove it, I am removing it from my PC.

Its just one player and one subscription, so I am sure it doesn't matter to them. But I think I want to vote with my wallet and my time regardless.

Same boat, only reason I play ESO is for PvP. Vengeance isn’t even the same game.

Artisian0001 · December 15

MorallyBipolar wrote: »

xylena wrote: »

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

Your patronizing tone aside let’s call this debate squashed.

Let's not, because "haha GH had slightly more players than a test" isn't the flex you think it is. Where is GH getting new players from? Nowhere. It will continue to wither until even prime time loses critical mass and collapses, all it would take is a few guild leads quitting. Where would Vengeance get new players from? Noobs who enjoy "not being instakilled."

GH will get more players and returning players when ZOS limits heal stacking and makes some adjustments to about 5 proc sets. Nothing will bring more players to vengeance. The PvP community won't stick around for vengeance. PvE players won't suddenly decide they want to PvP. Everyone who wants to PvP is already playing PvP. Even broken GH is better than any version of vengeance.

Again, if ZOS can't make GH run smoothly, they can't make a version of vengeance work smoothly either. And people won't accept having all their time and money investment taken away from them. They'll just uninstall and never buy anything ZOS/Bethesda ever again. I think if ZOS mandates vengeance it will not just be the end of PvP in ESO, I think it will sink the entire company.

100% A lot of the end game higher skilled PvP players are also end game PvE players that do trifecta trial and dungeon runs. The entire game will see a huge plummet in players if anything is permanently done to GH, but why they sink any resources into vengeance rather than just improving GH is beyond me.

BardokRedSnow · December 15

Stamicka wrote: »

What are you guys even trying to preserve with Grey Host?

I ask that genuinely. It’s barely a PvP zone at this point cause it’s extremely dead. .

This is not true, as stated again and again. If GH is dead, Vengeance was worse.

xylena · December 15

MorallyBipolar wrote: »

GH will get more players and returning players when ZOS limits heal stacking and makes some adjustments to about 5 proc sets

So when is that gonna happen? Never lol. But have fun hoping and waiting.

MorallyBipolar · December 15

Stamicka wrote: »

What are you guys even trying to preserve with Grey Host?

I ask that genuinely. It’s barely a PvP zone at this point cause it’s extremely dead. We haven’t seen good combat adjustments in so many years that I’ve lost count. Subclassing hasn’t been a positive thing for PvP either.

If you guys succeed in getting ZOS to scrap Vengeance, Grey Host will continue to die anyway.

If you’re holding out for ZOS to fix PvP through incremental tweaks as it is right now, you’re going to be disappointed.

So many of PvP’s issues exist because of PvE balancing. ZOS has been trying to make higher damage in PvE easier to achieve for years now. This is why status effects are such an overtuned and free damage source. It’s also why there’s so many broken group buff sets that can be combined to give even small coordinated groups 1000+ extra weapon damage, very easy access to Major Force, and much more. Heal stacking likely remains in the game because of PvE balancing as well. Tweaking that too much could make certain Veteran trials too difficult for the average group.

A lot of times ESO’s direction is unclear, but one thing that has been clear and consistent throughout the years is that ZOS wants to boost veteran PvE participation rates through making damage easier to achieve. PvP is in a deep hole largely due to balancing efforts around that goal and the hole will continue to get deeper for as long as PvE and PvP are balanced together. We are well past the point where Battle Spirit is enough to keep things in check.

ZOS will not walk back on their casual oriented PvE balancing efforts. As long as they continue down that path, PvP balance will get worse and worse. By advocating for Grey Host you guys are basically acting like ZOS will eventually and successfully address balance concerns in a way that keeps PvErs and PvPers happy. You guys really think they’re going to pull that off despite their track record and the fact that there’s so much more complexity (subclassing) to keep in mind now? It’s not going to happen.

Yes Vengeance has poor balance, a low skill ceiling, and it’s way too simple. However, it’s 100% separate from PvE and all of its issues are addressable without consequences elsewhere. It doesn’t have to have the balance that it does now.

So maybe some of you guys hate Vengeance as it is, that’s understandable. Instead of trying to get it scrapped completely, try to get it balanced correctly though. Grey Host will only sink deeper into it’s hole as it continues to be balanced with PvE.

Don’t ruin PvPs opportunity to be completely separated from PvE. It’s more productive to bring attention to the overtuned healing, lack of mobility skills, low skill ceiling, etc. in Vengeance. If they actually address those issues, we could get somewhere.

Sorry. I bought a product from ZOS and I expect ZOS to support that product they're still selling to this day. This is not an unreasonable expectation in any capacity.

If ZOS can't make GH run smoothly, they can't make a version of vengeance that will either. Plus, I'll feel robbed if they take a decade of set grinding away from me to the point that I will never buy any ZOS/Bethesda product ever again.

ceruulean · December 15

Stamicka wrote: »

What are you guys even trying to preserve with Grey Host?

I ask that genuinely. It’s barely a PvP zone at this point cause it’s extremely dead. We haven’t seen good combat adjustments in so many years that I’ve lost count. Subclassing hasn’t been a positive thing for PvP either.

Right now there's a lot of lag issues with the server in PvE and PvP, so the game pop is at an all time low. But honestly, Cyrodiil is like going to your favorite bar. You just pick which campaign to patronize as long as your friends are there too.

There is almost nothing left in Greyhost. Because of subclassing, Greyhost is more like a pub to socialize than a PvP zone. It's no different than running a normal trial and stomping zergs left and right. Super serious PvPer can duel at Stormhaven/Bergama and IC, BGs, or Vengeance.

edward_frigidhands · December 15

Stamicka wrote: »

What are you guys even trying to preserve with Grey Host?

I am not sure how else to say this but...probably the actual bloody game that we bought.

imPDA · December 15

Stamicka wrote: »

Grey Host will only sink deeper into it’s hole as it continues to be balanced with PvE.

Well, if ZOS finally made PvP completely separate from PvE, I hope they can now understand, what they can do the same for GH. Separate skill lines, all the same as in PvE, but with different balance. And it will ELIMINATE battle spirit problem - just make damage smaller from the start, in skill tooltip itself, not in separate passive which needs to be calculated every time damage done or shield casted, etc, etc. And it will eliminate balance PvE vs PvP problem - you can adjust them separately. It would seriously take less time than creation of a whole entire campaign with all new skills.

Stamicka · December 15

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

What are you guys even trying to preserve with Grey Host?

I ask that genuinely. It’s barely a PvP zone at this point cause it’s extremely dead. .

This is not true, as stated again and again. If GH is dead, Vengeance was worse.

Maybe Vengeance was more dead, I don’t care cause Grey Host is still dead too. You’re comparing dead to even more dead, it’s a waste of time.

Do you realize how low population is? I logged in for Whitestrake’s Mayhem and even when I did that, Blackreach was never filled when I logged on… and that was near prime time.

I remember logging into ESO on a regular weekday and there were 4+ campaigns with multiple bars, 2 of them would be completely pop locked. I also met a ton of players over the years and VERY few of them still play the game. PvP is so very far from lively like it once was and there’s a lot of reasons for that, but a lot of it comes back to performance and balance.

The point I’m making is: Grey Host’s problems cannot be fixed without impacting PvE. Vengeance’s problems can. That’s a huge deal if you ever want positive PvP balance adjustments.

Artisian0001 · December 15

ceruulean wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

What are you guys even trying to preserve with Grey Host?

I ask that genuinely. It’s barely a PvP zone at this point cause it’s extremely dead. We haven’t seen good combat adjustments in so many years that I’ve lost count. Subclassing hasn’t been a positive thing for PvP either.

Right now there's a lot of lag issues with the server in PvE and PvP, so the game pop is at an all time low. But honestly, Cyrodiil is like going to your favorite bar. You just pick which campaign to patronize as long as your friends are there too.

There is almost nothing left in Greyhost. Because of subclassing, Greyhost is more like a pub to socialize than a PvP zone. It's no different than running a normal trial and stomping zergs left and right. Super serious PvPer can duel at Stormhaven/Bergama and IC, BGs, or Vengeance.

What are these random out of touch arguments from people on the forums? Do you guys actually even PvP? Your metric for super serious PvPs includes IC players, vengeance players, and BG players? What? IC has almost no population and is generally used for farming telvar for currency. Vengeance is for those that strictly do not want competition and higher skilled gameplay, but only a numbers fight. BGs are also lacking in population because there is no real leaderboard based on win percentage, solely on time played. The best PvP players are without a shadow of a doubt, those who play in current GH and try to fight equal or greater numbers than those they currently have in their group. The "super serious" ones are the ones that make comps and builds for every single person in their group to be optimized so they can fight as many people as they can. Not randoms running around in IC to fight mobs. Good players will pop in every now and then to try and find a fight, but they are few and far between.

Stamicka · December 15

edward_frigidhands wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

What are you guys even trying to preserve with Grey Host?

I am not sure how else to say this but...probably the actual bloody game that we bought.

I’m not sure how else to say this but… that game died a long time ago.

It sucks, but at this point if you ever want that game back, some serious changes will need to be made. Those changes will not happen while PvE and PvP are balanced together. ZOS just can’t get it right and they’ve shown it time and time again.

imPDA · December 15

Stamicka wrote: »

The point I’m making is: Grey Host’s problems cannot be fixed without impacting PvE.

They can, see my previous comment: create separate skill lines for Cyrodiil (GH, RW, BR), as it was done for VG, but left them mostly as is, just adjust according to battle spirit. Done. Now it is independent from PvE and you can balance it as you want independently.

edward_frigidhands · December 15

Stamicka wrote: »

edward_frigidhands wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

What are you guys even trying to preserve with Grey Host?

I am not sure how else to say this but...probably the actual bloody game that we bought.

I’m not sure how else to say this but… that game died a long time ago.

It sucks, but at this point if you ever want that game back, some serious changes will need to be made. Those changes will not happen while PvE and PvP are balanced together. ZOS just can’t get it right and they’ve shown it time and time again.

The game is still here. Albeit a little changed. I will take that over the other game that I didn't buy which is the Vengeance campaign. I don't want it and it seems I am not alone.

I don't need serious changes. I don't need separate pvp balancing. I don't need the old game back.

I want the game to move forward with adequate maintenance into it's systems, code and hardware. Unfortunately, this involves an investment of resources and efforts that ZOS leadership chose to put into a cancelled game.

This isn't my fault and I am not interested in the next cheapest alternative in the form of the Vengeance campaign.

Lord_Hev · December 15

Stamicka wrote: »

What are you guys even trying to preserve with Grey Host?

I ask that genuinely. It’s barely a PvP zone at this point cause it’s extremely dead. We haven’t seen good combat adjustments in so many years that I’ve lost count. Subclassing hasn’t been a positive thing for PvP either.

If you guys succeed in getting ZOS to scrap Vengeance, Grey Host will continue to die anyway.

If you’re holding out for ZOS to fix PvP through incremental tweaks as it is right now, you’re going to be disappointed.

So many of PvP’s issues exist because of PvE balancing. ZOS has been trying to make higher damage in PvE easier to achieve for years now. This is why status effects are such an overtuned and free damage source. It’s also why there’s so many broken group buff sets that can be combined to give even small coordinated groups 1000+ extra weapon damage, very easy access to Major Force, and much more. Heal stacking likely remains in the game because of PvE balancing as well. Tweaking that too much could make certain Veteran trials too difficult for the average group.

A lot of times ESO’s direction is unclear, but one thing that has been clear and consistent throughout the years is that ZOS wants to boost veteran PvE participation rates through making damage easier to achieve. PvP is in a deep hole largely due to balancing efforts around that goal and the hole will continue to get deeper for as long as PvE and PvP are balanced together. We are well past the point where Battle Spirit is enough to keep things in check.

ZOS will not walk back on their casual oriented PvE balancing efforts. As long as they continue down that path, PvP balance will get worse and worse. By advocating for Grey Host you guys are basically acting like ZOS will eventually and successfully address balance concerns in a way that keeps PvErs and PvPers happy. You guys really think they’re going to pull that off despite their track record and the fact that there’s so much more complexity (subclassing) to keep in mind now? It’s not going to happen.

Yes Vengeance has poor balance, a low skill ceiling, and it’s way too simple. However, it’s 100% separate from PvE and all of its issues are addressable without consequences elsewhere. It doesn’t have to have the balance that it does now.

So maybe some of you guys hate Vengeance as it is, that’s understandable. Instead of trying to get it scrapped completely, try to get it balanced correctly though. Grey Host will only sink deeper into it’s hole as it continues to be balanced with PvE.

Don’t ruin PvPs opportunity to be completely separated from PvE. It’s more productive to bring attention to the overtuned healing, lack of mobility skills, low skill ceiling, etc. in Vengeance. If they actually address those issues, we could get somewhere.

Zos officially commented that they are looking at utilizing more of [Battle Spirit] for balancing.

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

From the community’s mind PVP combat balance is a core reason why performance suffers during primetime. As more and more players log in and group up 'group sets' and 'sticky' HoTs and shields increase and also cause groups to be unbalanced in comparison to the overall population - This leads to much prolonged fights as well as discontent within the community. Has the team considered that adjusting balance might also show performance gains if done correctly?

We are aware of this, as well as related challenges with heal/shield stacking and ball groups, and are working on exploring how we can tackle it with Battle Spirit. This work is early in development, and we’ll share more details as we have them.

To expand a bit, the abilities players use in Gray Host are shared across the rest of the game. We want to avoid future situations where adjusting abilities to address issues with one type of gameplay has a negative impact on another. This is why we are trying to tackle this issue at the Battle Spirit level. It’s also why there is no Battle Spirit active in Vengeance, because the abilities are separate from the rest of the game. In Vengeance, if heal/shield stacking are an issue, we will first try to address it on an ability-by-ability basis. If we need to explore introducing Battle Spirit as an extra step, we will.

So, the optimist in me sees this as a dramatically good sign. BUT, time will tell and the track record, well... Credit where credit is due, at least we're getting transparent responses and there's some semblance of communication again.

This is why people are trying to preserve Greyhost. Vengeance is a band-aid solution, and many do not like the restrictions. If we take the transparent comments at face value A.) Battle-spirit is a fantastic option to fine-tune outliers without interfering with PvE balance as an excuse. The only gripe here is it has taken 11 years to admit this. And B.) It means that other pain points of Greyhost[balance] being tackled as well.

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

tomofhyrule wrote: »

Does the Combat Team intend to attempt balancing the rest of the game? Or is “Vengeance” going to be the answer to anyone who wants a balanced system, and other players can stick with their single overpowered hodgepodge or their mimetically useless pure-class builds?

Combat and class balance work will continue, and the team plans to address outliers as needed. Vengeance will not stop that work, and you can read a bit about the team’s vision and plans in this recent post. We do intend to lean on Battle Spirit a bit more in the future, and that is something we’re currently exploring.

This is the perfect segue into balancing other egregious outliers, aka pull sets. Some current massive Greyhost PAIN-points 1.)Ballgroups are obnoxiously overpowered[HOT stacking/Heals/PULLS] 2.)Severe meta gap affecting average player experience[Subclassing and also PULLS] This also extends to veteran pvpers, Subclassing imbalance is universally noted, and pulls are a very common point of discussion of grief. 3.)Proc sets(lol) but mainly current annoyances like Null Arca. Not directly stated but can be inferred, as being tuned by battle-spirit if we remain optimistic.

And we can add in the official Class Identity Refresh to cover overall balance. Setting aside the fact that performance on the scale of 500+ players is "impossible" for Greyhost, all the other non-performance issues plaguing it are a matter of balancing and TLC. Cyrodiil has always been a place of freedom, sandbox PvP. People want to be able to wear whatever sets they have farmed/grinded for and have their effects active and validated. I think that's really the main core premise and is human nature really. I don't use many of these sets personally, and I'll be the first of many to come here and gripe about their usage. But its understandable people want to be able to use what they spent time crafting.

As ridiculous as this will sound... but it almost feels like "performance" has become a red-herring of sorts. I'll speak mainly for myself here; but overall performance is tame compared to the lag I remember of older days. And I've already been dealing with all manner of primetime performance woes forever at this point. I, and many others STILL pvp and are passionate about Cyrodiil. The common grounds I see a lot have to do with balancing being ignored, not performance.

Stamicka · December 15

imPDA wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

The point I’m making is: Grey Host’s problems cannot be fixed without impacting PvE.

They can, see my previous comment: create separate skill lines for Cyrodiil (GH, RW, BR), as it was done for VG, but left them mostly as is, just adjust according to battle spirit. Done. Now it is independent from PvE and you can balance it as you want independently.

This does not address the ridiculous amount of free damage in live PvP through status effects and procs. It also doesn’t really address the overtuned sets or buff stacking. It might address heal stacking if those added skill lines have heals that are specifically made not to stack. I don’t think this is as future proof as a completely separate mode like Vengeance.

To be clear, I don’t support Vengeance as is. I do support a completely separate PvP environment with a high skill ceiling, high burst, no free damage, and balanced sets. Vengeance could become that environment with just a few tweaks and additions, whereas Grey Host would need much more to get to that point.

If they just scrap Vengeance here what do you think is next? You think they’re going to suddenly start making good balance decisions even though there’s more to balance than ever and it is still tied to PvE? Do you think suddenly they will be able to fit more people in Cyrodiil as things are? I’ve been waiting for that for like 8 years now.

I see Vengeance as an effort with potential. It’s more effort towards PvP than I’ve seen from ZOS in a really long time. Seeing higher population caps again was great. The performance was mixed. In some cases it held up nearby huge battles, sometimes it didn’t. As a whole the performance felt better than Grey Host though. It can go somewhere if they take balancing it seriously.

MincMincMinc · December 15

imPDA wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

The point I’m making is: Grey Host’s problems cannot be fixed without impacting PvE.

They can, see my previous comment: create separate skill lines for Cyrodiil (GH, RW, BR), as it was done for VG, but left them mostly as is, just adjust according to battle spirit. Done. Now it is independent from PvE and you can balance it as you want independently.

Problem is zos should have used those groundworks from the first vengeance test to lay out an actual plan. They could fast track redesign pvp with the split rules designed for performance from the get go, while also splitting away from the pve quarterly release bloat/creep. The split also gives future content opportunity with building up a whole new loot pool. All they had to do was keep vengeance going in the background adding in generic stat sets, enchants, potions, poisons, morphs.

So performance wise if GH is the current worst case and vengeance is the best case. What happens if we go somewhere halfway between... designing for performance from the start? Cutting out the majority of cascading calculations that get distributed like proc sets or proc weapon enchants or proc passives.

BardokRedSnow · December 16

Stamicka wrote: »

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

What are you guys even trying to preserve with Grey Host?

I ask that genuinely. It’s barely a PvP zone at this point cause it’s extremely dead. .

This is not true, as stated again and again. If GH is dead, Vengeance was worse.

Maybe Vengeance was more dead, I don’t care cause Grey Host is still dead too. You’re comparing dead to even more dead, it’s a waste of time.

Do you realize how low population is? I logged in for Whitestrake’s Mayhem and even when I did that, Blackreach was never filled when I logged on… and that was near prime time.

I remember logging into ESO on a regular weekday and there were 4+ campaigns with multiple bars, 2 of them would be completely pop locked. I also met a ton of players over the years and VERY few of them still play the game. PvP is so very far from lively like it once was and there’s a lot of reasons for that, but a lot of it comes back to performance and balance.

The point I’m making is: Grey Host’s problems cannot be fixed without impacting PvE. Vengeance’s problems can. That’s a huge deal if you ever want positive PvP balance adjustments.

These are COVID numbers you’re referring to mostly, it hasn’t been like this authentically across the board since then, and since it’s very earliest days. The only thing that’s really changed is Zos lowering the campaign population cap.

Everything now in eso is pretty dead in comparison to those high peak times which steam charts support and you can see for yourself. Greyhost is pop locked every evening when people get off from work. If you have gripes with anything it’s not Greyhost, the game itself is dipping in total logins.

Apply this logic to pve and see how much sense it makes. I can’t get a quick game in the middle of the day for dungeons so let’s get rid of dungeons as we know them and replace it with vengeance style layouts instead and make it play like dark souls, focus on skill and mechanics.

Stamicka · December 16

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

What are you guys even trying to preserve with Grey Host?

I ask that genuinely. It’s barely a PvP zone at this point cause it’s extremely dead. .

This is not true, as stated again and again. If GH is dead, Vengeance was worse.

Maybe Vengeance was more dead, I don’t care cause Grey Host is still dead too. You’re comparing dead to even more dead, it’s a waste of time.

Do you realize how low population is? I logged in for Whitestrake’s Mayhem and even when I did that, Blackreach was never filled when I logged on… and that was near prime time.

I remember logging into ESO on a regular weekday and there were 4+ campaigns with multiple bars, 2 of them would be completely pop locked. I also met a ton of players over the years and VERY few of them still play the game. PvP is so very far from lively like it once was and there’s a lot of reasons for that, but a lot of it comes back to performance and balance.

The point I’m making is: Grey Host’s problems cannot be fixed without impacting PvE. Vengeance’s problems can. That’s a huge deal if you ever want positive PvP balance adjustments.

These are COVID numbers you’re referring to mostly, it hasn’t been like this authentically across the board since then, and since it’s very earliest days. The only thing that’s really changed is Zos lowering the campaign population cap.

Everything now in eso is pretty dead in comparison to those high peak times which steam charts support and you can see for yourself. Greyhost is pop locked every evening when people get off from work. If you have gripes with anything it’s not Greyhost, the game itself is dipping in total logins.

Apply this logic to pve and see how much sense it makes. I can’t get a quick game in the middle of the day for dungeons so let’s get rid of dungeons as we know them and replace it with vengeance style layouts instead and make it play like dark souls, focus on skill and mechanics.

I’m not even talking about COVID numbers, I’m talking 2015-2016. Even PvP during COVID was dead compared to what it once was. It’s been declining for years now. I started on Xbox NA. Every night a campaign named Haderus and Scourge reliably filled to pop lock. Then Thornblade, Skeleton Key, and Skull of Corruption, all had multiple bars of population while the other 2 were pop locked. This is back when population caps were significantly higher than they are now. ESO has lost a massive amount of PvPers and it’s directly due to performance and balance.

edward_frigidhands wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

edward_frigidhands wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

What are you guys even trying to preserve with Grey Host?

I am not sure how else to say this but...probably the actual bloody game that we bought.

I’m not sure how else to say this but… that game died a long time ago.

It sucks, but at this point if you ever want that game back, some serious changes will need to be made. Those changes will not happen while PvE and PvP are balanced together. ZOS just can’t get it right and they’ve shown it time and time again.

The game is still here. Albeit a little changed. I will take that over the other game that I didn't buy which is the Vengeance campaign. I don't want it and it seems I am not alone.

I don't need serious changes. I don't need separate pvp balancing. I don't need the old game back.

I want the game to move forward with adequate maintenance into it's systems, code and hardware. Unfortunately, this involves an investment of resources and efforts that ZOS leadership chose to put into a cancelled game.

This isn't my fault and I am not interested in the next cheapest alternative in the form of the Vengeance campaign.

This is definitely not the game I or any other veteran PvPer purchased. It hasn’t been for a long time.

SneaK · December 16

Stamicka wrote: »

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

What are you guys even trying to preserve with Grey Host?

I ask that genuinely. It’s barely a PvP zone at this point cause it’s extremely dead. .

This is not true, as stated again and again. If GH is dead, Vengeance was worse.

Maybe Vengeance was more dead, I don’t care cause Grey Host is still dead too. You’re comparing dead to even more dead, it’s a waste of time.

Do you realize how low population is? I logged in for Whitestrake’s Mayhem and even when I did that, Blackreach was never filled when I logged on… and that was near prime time.

I remember logging into ESO on a regular weekday and there were 4+ campaigns with multiple bars, 2 of them would be completely pop locked. I also met a ton of players over the years and VERY few of them still play the game. PvP is so very far from lively like it once was and there’s a lot of reasons for that, but a lot of it comes back to performance and balance.

The point I’m making is: Grey Host’s problems cannot be fixed without impacting PvE. Vengeance’s problems can. That’s a huge deal if you ever want positive PvP balance adjustments.

Its PvP population has shrank with time because ZOS hasn’t done anything for PvP in years. The grass is greener where you water it. They also don’t market it anymore at all, which is crazy. There’s sooooo many people that have no idea ESO has PvP. It’s a huge miss on their part.

Currently, they are at least talking about it, although it’s not the kind of talk the people who have actually endured all these bad updates want to hear. We just want balance. Vengeance is not the same as balancing ESO.

spartaxoxo · December 16

MorallyBipolar wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

MorallyBipolar wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

I think whatever amount of players are "boycotting" will be counter balanced by the amount of players who dont even know greyhost is back because they dont frequent forums or see zone chat gossip, which is a lot of players.

Some of the people who like Gray Host are in the very same PvP groups that are also boycotting, afaik. They know full well that Grey Host is active because their PvP guilds them. I'm not saying everyone is but I've seen enough of zone chat to know it's a thing.

Gray Host's population cap is pretty small.

The players who refuse to play vengeance now will continue to refuse to play vengeance in the future. So your argument is that ZOS should mandate vengeance?

Vengeance has been a fail by every measure. It will continue to fail for one very simple, very obvious reason: If ZOS can't make Grey Host run smoothly they can't make vengeance run smoothly either. No rational person is going to accept a decade of grinding gear sets and CP being taken away from them so they can prosper in PvP.

Like I said, some of them will probably never set foot again on principle. But, some of them may try it out again after Vengeance is no longer seen as a threat to Gray Host. I've seen a couple of people claim in zone chat that ZOS already is mandating Vengeance, that it will replace Gray Host, etc. If ZOS keeps their word and instead makes it a separate thing that doesn't harm Gray Host, then I can imagine that this "US vs Them" thing will also die down and people will be able to enjoy both modes.

Who knows though. Only time will tell.

I've said once and I'll say it again. I hope that both campaigns succeed.

ZOS will pick one or the other. They will never support more than one PvP mode at the same time. Plus, a second campaign will parisitize the server resources needed to keep the other running.

I don't personally agree that will be the case. My personal guess is that we will have both Grey Host and Vengeance. But, I understand this sentiment and the lack of trust from PvP players around this whole thing. ZOS needs to earn back the trust of PvP players and that doesn't come overnight.

They said they want to use Battle spirit to help with balancing Gray Host more often. So we'll see.

ceruulean · December 16

"Artisian0001 wrote:

What are these random out of touch arguments from people on the forums? Do you guys actually even PvP? Your metric for super serious PvPs includes IC players, vengeance players, and BG players? What? IC has almost no population and is generally used for farming telvar for currency. Vengeance is for those that strictly do not want competition and higher skilled gameplay, but only a numbers fight. BGs are also lacking in population because there is no real leaderboard based on win percentage, solely on time played. The best PvP players are without a shadow of a doubt, those who play in current GH and try to fight equal or greater numbers than those they currently have in their group. The "super serious" ones are the ones that make comps and builds for every single person in their group to be optimized so they can fight as many people as they can. Not randoms running around in IC to fight mobs. Good players will pop in every now and then to try and find a fight, but they are few and far between.

So if you want to test your pvp build, where do you go? Into the time sink of horse-riding Cyrodiil? Of course not. Serious PvPers test their builds in smaller scale settings so they can iterate quickly. BGs are no CP and have a slightly different meta than CP enabled places, but otherwise yes, the better players are found dueling there. Otherwise, let me know why there are so many rank 50 Grand Overlords that crumple to a forum-going PvE carebear in Venegance.

Maybe back in 2018 when the population was higher and there was actual competition and strategy in Cyrodiil, I'd believe that CP Cyro required skill of the chess kind. Zone chat was full of spies and people calling out plays and doing psychological mind games and whatnot. But nowadays, the population caps are low and it's mostly ball groups fighting zergs and waiting for some other ball group to contest them, and they're dueling for 10 minutes with no one dying. I suppose these GvG need to be pre-arranged in Discord nowadays with exclusive signups like vet trials. So fun.