BardokRedSnow wrote: »

Iriidius wrote: »

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

Iriidius wrote: »

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

DeathandDebauchery wrote: »

BardokRedSnow wrote: »

The idea that greyhost doesnt get new players, Im not sure where that comes from but thats not the case, we get new players jumping in every campaign, and especially a big influx after midyear mayhem. And no I dont just mean the name changes or returning banned players on new accounts, etc.

The burn off of grey host has to be massive though. Walk in, don't have a meta build, get rofl-stomped. No content creators that are easily accessible for PvP builds. Try to workshop your own. Get rofl-stomped. Spend 2-3 months getting rofl-stomped until you learn on your own or join a PvP guild. Watch someone 1v10 you and your 9 other newbie friends. The time investment to even be VIABLE is insane. Most casuals are never going to do this, and Cyrodil is meant to be accessible to all, its not meant to be a Trifecta Trial.

Vs. Vengance

Walk in - Click 1 button - you are at approximately the same level and abilities as everyone else playing. No one can 1v10 you. No one can even 1v5 you. The most they can do is stay alive if they rock a tank build. Now your PvP experience is about skill, not gear knowledge. Your abilitiy to understand the landscape and utilize a restrictive set of abilities to optimal results, not your theorycrafting for 200 hours. Now your PvP experience is about LARGE GROUP COORDINATION not small group warfare (which is what 4's and 8's were designed for). Small group warfare is there, but 5 people can no longer kill 20.

Explain to me why Grey Host is better for new players? I'm not pulling this out of my ass, I run one of the largest Social guilds on PC-NA and my members wont do Grey Host regularly but were eating up Vengeance this week.

If you stepped in with 12 new players to a vet trial or dungeon, especially dlc, you will also get roflstomped, unless being hard carried.

Greyhost PvP is meant, again, for end game players. Its something to occupy your time when you've done everything else, and even then, all you gotta do is ask one of the more casual guilds to pick you up, they'll help you be ready to pvp in less than a day or so. They have guild halls to craft sets for you, even put up free sets in the bank, and thats half the battle right there.

It doesn't take long at all, you have to put up effort just like any other piece of content in the game.

And it definitely doesn't take that long to theorycraft builds, especially if all you wanna do is zerg. If all you want to do is get kills and zerg, just take an alcast build up and go from there. Plenty of the so called sweaty gh players people complain about are doing that anyway and die in a few hits same as the newcomers, but they have fun anyway.

Dying is a part of cyrodiil, everyone does in GH contrary to the complaints here.

Cant complain new players want to be able to do endgame content if you don't give them an alternative.

You absolutely can because their alternate content is pve, below 50, ravenwatch, and BR.

the only reason you have less veterans there is that its less active.

that and because its not locked out which is also a part of the whole casual campaign thing, if you're wanting an easier time, log into the faction that is zerging the most. Thats exactly what they did in vengeance the last time, literally no difference.

Respectfully Zos, I refuse to play any pvp camp that isn't locked. We already have enough trolls/griefers in locked camps as it is (friends of other factions, proven alt accounts - against ToS by the way but whatever -) the last thing we need is a main camp that isn't locked.

Oh DC is trying to take this scroll... let me log into my alt really quick (theres no queue in vengence)... picks up scroll.. RP walks it until it times out and resets.

This is just a small fraction of the stupid griefing stuff that is already happening in GH that will just get 10x in Veng.

This reason alone, not even including how vengence feels and plays, is enough for me to not waste a second of time playing it.

LadyGP wrote: »

xylena wrote: »

LadyGP wrote: »

When the vast majoriity of your core GH audince

This audience is neither as numerous nor significant as it thinks it is.

And you know this off of what, your gut? I played every day for this last test and the overwhelming majority of people in zone chat who spoke did not have anything positive to say about it.

so again, do you have data to back this up or is this just another oe of those "gut" feelings you have?

Cool little test for someone at ZoS that they could easily do.

• Take all the different zone chat logs during vengence tests.
• Go into Azure AI Language (its under the Text Analystics section or Cognitive Services cant remember) -> Sentiment analysis and opinion mining
• run all the zone chat history through this, shape it a little bit, and you'll figure our very quickly the true "in the moment" feelings of people who were playing Vengence

Theres also a low code solution in Power Platform under the Ai builder... Sentiment analysis using the prebuilt model.

Assuming they had the zonechat logs this literally would take them minutes to do.

I also played every day for this last test and the overwhelming majority of people in zone chat were regularly sharing their sighs of relief at the absence of ballgroups and bombers. People were enjoying themselves and there were definitely fewer "this is BS i'm out" comments too.

So if ZOS were to do what you suggest, I think the result would be far more nuanced than what you imply, unless they check your platform only.

aetherix8 wrote: »

LadyGP wrote: »

xylena wrote: »

LadyGP wrote: »

When the vast majoriity of your core GH audince

This audience is neither as numerous nor significant as it thinks it is.

And you know this off of what, your gut? I played every day for this last test and the overwhelming majority of people in zone chat who spoke did not have anything positive to say about it.

so again, do you have data to back this up or is this just another oe of those "gut" feelings you have?

Cool little test for someone at ZoS that they could easily do.

• Take all the different zone chat logs during vengence tests.
• Go into Azure AI Language (its under the Text Analystics section or Cognitive Services cant remember) -> Sentiment analysis and opinion mining
• run all the zone chat history through this, shape it a little bit, and you'll figure our very quickly the true "in the moment" feelings of people who were playing Vengence

Theres also a low code solution in Power Platform under the Ai builder... Sentiment analysis using the prebuilt model.

Assuming they had the zonechat logs this literally would take them minutes to do.

I also played every day for this last test and the overwhelming majority of people in zone chat were regularly sharing their sighs of relief at the absence of ballgroups and bombers. People were enjoying themselves and there were definitely fewer "this is BS i'm out" comments too.

So if ZOS were to do what you suggest, I think the result would be far more nuanced than what you imply, unless they check your platform only.

Not because more people like it, but because those who don't, so any decent PvPler rather played 3 sided BGs instead of joining that sad excuse for a campaign.

@LadyGP

Yes, you used bullet points in the post I answered, exactly once and not in a place that would suggest that you aren't 150% sure that everyone hates Vengeance. Hence my reaction.

The title of this entire thread is just misleading. What people? I would agree if it said "veteran PvPers hate Vengeance", but ofc when it comes to Veng, it must always be a ragebait generalization for some reason.

As for you not understanding why people think ballgroups are going away, I'm there with you. I expect we will get all the same configurations as any other Cyro campaign: organized groups (smallscale and full ballgroups), bombers, 1vXers, tower hoppers, etc. Where I disagree is the "unkillable" part—that remains to be seen. No-proc RW had very few ballgroups left, and they were pretty killable. Bombers were nearly nonexistant, it was just too difficult to pull and death was almost guaranteed. That makes me pretty skeptical about this "unkillable" part.


@L_Nici

Same as above, what people? Veteran PvPers whose home campaign has been GH for a very long time? Totally agree. But we still got 2bars DC / 3bars EP / 2 bars AD every evening (PC EU). Who were they, AI chatbots? And I don't want to inflate the numbers, so let's say PC displays 2 bars when 1 bar is full => there is more than 100 players in a given faction. That would mean more than 400 players every evening; that's far from being insignificant.

"Decent" PvPers, you're shooting yourself in the foot with your stubborn antipathy to Vengeance. Better allow new players and learners a space to breathe and grow, and you may yet see more fresh blood entering your campaign too, eventually.

Edit to remove the 1st line; not enough coffee

L_Nici wrote: »

aetherix8 wrote: »

@LadyGP

Yes, you used bullet points in the post I answered, exactly once and not in a place that would suggest that you aren't 150% sure that everyone hates Vengeance. Hence my reaction.

The title of this entire thread is just misleading. What people? I would agree if it said "veteran PvPers hate Vengeance", but ofc when it comes to Veng, it must always be a ragebait generalization for some reason.

As for you not understanding why people think ballgroups are going away, I'm there with you. I expect we will get all the same configurations as any other Cyro campaign: organized groups (smallscale and full ballgroups), bombers, 1vXers, tower hoppers, etc. Where I disagree is the "unkillable" part—that remains to be seen. No-proc RW had very few ballgroups left, and they were pretty killable. Bombers were nearly nonexistant, it was just too difficult to pull and death was almost guaranteed. That makes me pretty skeptical about this "unkillable" part.


@L_Nici

Same as above, what people? Veteran PvPers whose home campaign has been GH for a very long time? Totally agree. But we still got 2bars DC / 3bars EP / 2 bars AD every evening (PC EU). Who were they, AI chatbots? And I don't want to inflate the numbers, so let's say PC displays 2 bars when 1 bar is full => there is more than 100 players in a given faction. That would mean more than 400 players every evening; that's far from being insignificant.

"Decent" PvPers, you're shooting yourself in the foot with your stubborn antipathy to Vengeance. Better allow new players and learners a space to breathe and grow, and you may yet see more fresh blood entering your campaign too, eventually.

Edit to remove the 1st line; not enough coffee

Who: PvE people who complain, that they would have to change their builds for actual PvP, wonder when we get Trifecta Achievements with Vengeancerules, because I don't want to change my build for PvE and want everything with absolutely no effort.

And Vengeance does not teach anyone anything. It is so far off from actual PvP, from ESO itself actually, most what makes ESO unique and awesome is just not there. Diversity? Nope. CP? You wish. Sets? Did you think crafting, farming or reconstruction would mean anything? Of course not. Theorycrafting? Well there is nothing to theorycraft with, so no. Unique playstyles within pure classes? Nope, not even morphs, screw you Staminaplayers (magicka is highly overrepresented without morphs), Subclassing? Was awesome wasn't it, you won't get it here though.

Also there is absolutely no strategy involved in Vengeance, the bigger zerg wins. No need to learn anything but zerging, why LoS if you have 100 people around you, why learning how to move, dodge, block and most importantly when doing what, if you can just roll over someone.

So what I am saying is, Vengeance will not cause an increase of players in actual PvP at all, because it is so fundamentally different, that nothing you do there would even work in GH. I would go as far and say that Vengeance is even further away from actual PvP than regular PvE.

Lol, sure, continue dismissing anyone who does not regard GH as the pinnacle of PvP as lazy PvEers who cannot be bothered to equip anything other than white gear. If you don't participate in Veng, how are you even supposed to form informed opinions? You're just repeating other people's unsophisticated mantras and false claims, and you seem unable to argue with others respectfully and without ridiculous threats.

Subclassing is well there. You would know that if you were arguing in good faith—by having tested it yourself extensively and as objectively as possible, and not just repeating some hollow arguments of other people.

aetherix8 wrote: »

L_Nici wrote: »

aetherix8 wrote: »

@LadyGP

Yes, you used bullet points in the post I answered, exactly once and not in a place that would suggest that you aren't 150% sure that everyone hates Vengeance. Hence my reaction.

The title of this entire thread is just misleading. What people? I would agree if it said "veteran PvPers hate Vengeance", but ofc when it comes to Veng, it must always be a ragebait generalization for some reason.

As for you not understanding why people think ballgroups are going away, I'm there with you. I expect we will get all the same configurations as any other Cyro campaign: organized groups (smallscale and full ballgroups), bombers, 1vXers, tower hoppers, etc. Where I disagree is the "unkillable" part—that remains to be seen. No-proc RW had very few ballgroups left, and they were pretty killable. Bombers were nearly nonexistant, it was just too difficult to pull and death was almost guaranteed. That makes me pretty skeptical about this "unkillable" part.


@L_Nici

Same as above, what people? Veteran PvPers whose home campaign has been GH for a very long time? Totally agree. But we still got 2bars DC / 3bars EP / 2 bars AD every evening (PC EU). Who were they, AI chatbots? And I don't want to inflate the numbers, so let's say PC displays 2 bars when 1 bar is full => there is more than 100 players in a given faction. That would mean more than 400 players every evening; that's far from being insignificant.

"Decent" PvPers, you're shooting yourself in the foot with your stubborn antipathy to Vengeance. Better allow new players and learners a space to breathe and grow, and you may yet see more fresh blood entering your campaign too, eventually.

Edit to remove the 1st line; not enough coffee

Who: PvE people who complain, that they would have to change their builds for actual PvP, wonder when we get Trifecta Achievements with Vengeancerules, because I don't want to change my build for PvE and want everything with absolutely no effort.

And Vengeance does not teach anyone anything. It is so far off from actual PvP, from ESO itself actually, most what makes ESO unique and awesome is just not there. Diversity? Nope. CP? You wish. Sets? Did you think crafting, farming or reconstruction would mean anything? Of course not. Theorycrafting? Well there is nothing to theorycraft with, so no. Unique playstyles within pure classes? Nope, not even morphs, screw you Staminaplayers (magicka is highly overrepresented without morphs), Subclassing? Was awesome wasn't it, you won't get it here though.

Also there is absolutely no strategy involved in Vengeance, the bigger zerg wins. No need to learn anything but zerging, why LoS if you have 100 people around you, why learning how to move, dodge, block and most importantly when doing what, if you can just roll over someone.

So what I am saying is, Vengeance will not cause an increase of players in actual PvP at all, because it is so fundamentally different, that nothing you do there would even work in GH. I would go as far and say that Vengeance is even further away from actual PvP than regular PvE.

Lol, sure, continue dismissing anyone who does not regard GH as the pinnacle of PvP as lazy PvEers who cannot be bothered to equip anything other than white gear. If you don't participate in Veng, how are you even supposed to form informed opinions? You're just repeating other people's unsophisticated mantras and false claims, and you seem unable to argue with others respectfully and without ridiculous threats.

Subclassing is well there. You would know that if you were arguing in good faith—by having tested it yourself extensively and as objectively as possible, and not just repeating some hollow arguments of other people.

I've read enough of your posts regarding vengeance to know that dismissing your claims, which historically have been shown to be highly unrepresentative, so dismissing your claims is exactly what we should do.

There are a handful of vengeance cheerleaders on this forum that should not be given any credibility. If they were ever going to take up PvP they would have by now. Vengeance isn't going to change that. The people who will play PvP are already playing it.

Just because you don't like it doesn't mean the game is dead.

My whole guild likes it!

ToddIngram wrote: »

reazea wrote: »

CatalinaWineMixer2 wrote: »

Vengeance is the future. If they could have fixed GH by now, they would have. Things only keep getting more and more broken there. Id rather deal with Zergs than what's going on there. At least my Guildies would be there. They wont set foot in BG, IC or GH at all anymore. As far as BG, they should just eliminate grouping for it all together. The majority would prefer it. Hardliner PvP won't but what else is new. The current state of PvP is dragging the game down. It really used to be fun, Cyrodiil. Im not in agreement with adding proc sets to Vengeance either. Trying to turn it into GH will just start repeating another terrible chapter in Eso PvP history.

ZOS built it. ZOS can fix it. They've chosen to not even try, and that should be a big red flag to everyone.

And if ZOS can't fix Grey Host, then they can't make vengeance work properly either.

If vengeance, night market and IA are the future of ESO, then ESO is already dead, people just haven't figured it out yet.

This is the exact thing so many are failing to recognize. ZOS isn't being honest about not being able to do anything to improve Grey Host. They haven't even tried capping heal and shield stacking, so they haven't really tried at all IMO. Then they came up with the vengeance distraction and presented it as the only option going forward as if vengeance could work when they didn't even try to improve the PvP they already had. It's all a very bad look.

I don’t disagree, ZOS claiming they can’t fix GH really holds no weight. They haven’t tried, and tbh they seem to just make it worse and worse with introducing more and more complicated abilities/sets.

[snip]
[edited for conspiracy theories]

SneaK wrote: »

ToddIngram wrote: »

CatalinaWineMixer2 wrote: »

At this point they really need to just start giving GH, Battlegrounds and IC what they want. 100k more dps per patch. Thats all they want. More. Until there isnt a population in any of them at all. Which actually, Im beginning to think Zos are the smart ones. If they keep up the broken trend of what's going on there, it will collapse on its own anyway. Eventually the tanks will quit. Then the healers. Then... More dps! Give them all they want😂 Im investing in popcorn.

Nobody has ever asked for what you have snarkily described.

Comments like the one quoted are usually considered unhelpful trolling. But since it's an anti PvP post I'm certain the mods will let it stand.

Meanwhile I’m snipped for conspiracy theories..

So I’ll rewrite it as fact instead of speculation, Vengeance will be a zero investment game mode that will attract new players, who (some) will in turn buy the Tomes.

You do appear to be on the naughty list at this time. Only way to get off that list is to stop posting I think. ....at least that's the only thing that's worked for me in the past. Around here anything can be a conspiracy theory, any criticism can be bashing, and a misspelled word can be profanity. :'( In my many decades of using and managing forums I've never seen one like this one. Never.

CatalinaWineMixer2 wrote: »

At this point they really need to just start giving GH, Battlegrounds and IC what they want. 100k more dps per patch. Thats all they want. More. Until there isnt a population in any of them at all. Which actually, Im beginning to think Zos are the smart ones. If they keep up the broken trend of what's going on there, it will collapse on its own anyway. Eventually the tanks will quit. Then the healers. Then... More dps! Give them all they want😂 Im investing in popcorn.

Yep. They aren't happy unless people are dropping like flies.

They seem genuinely offended if anyone has a build they can't kill near instantly. I guess it never occurs to them that is the whole point in playing a "Tank" build. But I guess in their minds Tanks are just suppose to be characters that do no damage and live maybe a second longer than others builds before they go splat. And then they wonder why they all quit and it's just the same 10 people over and over again in battlegrounds.

What they should do is give these people their own special PvP mode where everyone can one shot the other so they can run around while attempting to target the other person first for instant kills. It seems to me that is what they really want. Then give the rest of us a PvP mode where it's ok to have builds that can't be slaughtered in a single global cool down.

ROFL Isn't this a thread, cant believe I missed it.

First lets remember the game is quite old in terms of launch. Most if not all of the original coders are likely gone from the fold making the idea that They have no idea how to fix issues a reality. At least not without breaking other things. We have seen this in the past when they changed things and broke Block and break free.

Yes Vengeance is a very unpopular solution for many myself included, however consider they may be rewriting the system to be able to fix it easier on the fly with full knowledge and control. Still don't agree with it but it makes sense.

In the end the numbers will tell the tale, My guess is without substantial change it will be dead very quickly. With that said the Idea has great potential for an active PVP base if they can keep broken sets ball groups and mythics out. Shield stacking, Heal stacking and procs should not be a factor while the focus remains on Skill and resource management. Bring back L.A.W. (Light attack Weaving) and give morphs to the classes.

I don’t think “people don’t like Vengeance” is universally true, but I do think the reaction shows a real problem: Vengeance and Grey Host are serving very different audiences.

Vengeance can be useful as an entry-level or lower-friction PvP mode. I understand why some players like being able to jump in without farming sets, copying builds, or getting deleted by optimized groups. That part has value, especially for newer or more casual PvPers.

But it should not be treated as a replacement for Grey Host or as proof that regular Cyrodiil cannot be improved. A lot of veteran PvP players are not rejecting change just because it is change. They are rejecting a mode that removes too much of what makes ESO PvP feel like ESO: buildcraft, gear choices, class identity, CP, counters, and long-term character investment.

The right path, in my opinion, is:

Keep Vengeance as an optional campaign for players who want that style.
Keep Grey Host as the main traditional Cyrodiil experience.
Stop removing or sidelining Grey Host during tests.
Use real population, retention, queue, and platform-specific data before calling Vengeance a success or failure.
Continue working on Grey Host issues like performance, heal/shield stacking, proc balance, faction imbalance, and ball group counterplay.
If Vengeance lives alongside Grey Host, great. More options are good. But if Vengeance becomes the answer to every Cyrodiil complaint, then it is going to keep frustrating the exact players who have stuck with ESO PvP for years.

ZOS should not frame this as “Vengeance or nothing.” The better answer is Vengeance for the players who enjoy that format, and meaningful Grey Host improvements for the players who still want traditional ESO PvP.

I know some players don't like vengeance, and I respect their reasons, but I had the most fun I've ever had in PVP during the last test.