reazea wrote: »

CatalinaWineMixer2 wrote: »

I dont belive those bars or leaderboards mean anything. I have been playing and my Guilds have been playing Vengeance since it has been added in U50. Some people have not committed to the campaigns/home campaign for leaderboard but are still playing. I didn't even do it myself for half of the first week. If Blackreach is a popular as people are suggesting, then why is the wait time not hours? And its usually dead in there.

Image what cross platform would do to the GH que. Or how it will affect the performance which already cant be fixed and is an issue right now with GH. How would anyone really intend on merging three platforms and that kind of population into the size of GH?

Vengeance is good. My Guilds are playing PvP again because of it. They will not play GH and BG anymore. Or Blackreach. Its fair PvP. People cant hide behind builds and exploit with mythics. The combat in GH and BG is out of control. And still, people are calling for more dps. And nerfs to healers and tanks which is exactly the same thing.

As we play more Vengeance (and we will be) I will write to Zos and give them additional good honest feedback concerning it. It is far more enjoyable, far more fair, far more acceptable to the majority of the entire player base and not just GH people.

Why has such a small pond of GH players been allowed to constantly get out characters nerfed every other patch for over a decade? People are tired of it. Just like theyre trying again right now with the DK and Werewolf. It needs to stop.

Zos has already said GH cannot be fixed. They did try. Like it or not, Vengeance is the future. And the game will be better for it in the long run. I am saying that as an 11 year Eso Vet.

ZOS also repeatedly insisted vengeance was just a test to learn how to improve Grey Host.

Sorry, but you either haven't been around in this game and forum very long or you're being deliberately obtuse.

ZOS' job is to fix the game we purchased. Not try to force some new system essentially nobody likes and has no connection to other parts of ESO what so ever. Template toons are for PvE games.

Every streamer that advertises builds for Eso are advertising Template toons

Eldovar wrote: »

amiiegee wrote: »

Whole 14 people in the leaderboard enjoying the vengeance campaign, such a blast!

Maybe on the platform where people scream and shout for crossplay it's empty.

On PC EU there are 346 people in the leaderboard, and the campaign basically just started.

People can complain as much as they like, but just like all the rest of the game...vengeance won't go anywhere. (and neither will GH and BR)

Ok you have 300 people played in two days in a 900 cap server on the most populated mega server .. that’s still not good 😂

CatalinaWineMixer2 wrote: »

reazea wrote: »

CatalinaWineMixer2 wrote: »

I dont belive those bars or leaderboards mean anything. I have been playing and my Guilds have been playing Vengeance since it has been added in U50. Some people have not committed to the campaigns/home campaign for leaderboard but are still playing. I didn't even do it myself for half of the first week. If Blackreach is a popular as people are suggesting, then why is the wait time not hours? And its usually dead in there.

Image what cross platform would do to the GH que. Or how it will affect the performance which already cant be fixed and is an issue right now with GH. How would anyone really intend on merging three platforms and that kind of population into the size of GH?

Vengeance is good. My Guilds are playing PvP again because of it. They will not play GH and BG anymore. Or Blackreach. Its fair PvP. People cant hide behind builds and exploit with mythics. The combat in GH and BG is out of control. And still, people are calling for more dps. And nerfs to healers and tanks which is exactly the same thing.

As we play more Vengeance (and we will be) I will write to Zos and give them additional good honest feedback concerning it. It is far more enjoyable, far more fair, far more acceptable to the majority of the entire player base and not just GH people.

Why has such a small pond of GH players been allowed to constantly get out characters nerfed every other patch for over a decade? People are tired of it. Just like theyre trying again right now with the DK and Werewolf. It needs to stop.

Zos has already said GH cannot be fixed. They did try. Like it or not, Vengeance is the future. And the game will be better for it in the long run. I am saying that as an 11 year Eso Vet.

ZOS also repeatedly insisted vengeance was just a test to learn how to improve Grey Host.

Sorry, but you either haven't been around in this game and forum very long or you're being deliberately obtuse.

ZOS' job is to fix the game we purchased. Not try to force some new system essentially nobody likes and has no connection to other parts of ESO what so ever. Template toons are for PvE games.

Every streamer that advertises builds for Eso are advertising Template toons

Except they're not discussing template builds unless they're streaming vengeance. They're still doing builds using sets obtained in PvE lands for use in PvP.

Your logical fallacy doesn't work.

This thread is starting to remind me of the battlegrounds thread where it's just posting and comparing screenshots.

You get the 3 servers. People like Vengeance, and some people like GH and BR. All three campaigns have populations just the same as all three are dead most of the day on weekdays.

Really no point in this discussion lasting this long other than tribalism.

LittleLionLeone wrote: »

This thread is starting to remind me of the battlegrounds thread where it's just posting and comparing screenshots.

You get the 3 servers. People like Vengeance, and some people like GH and BR. All three campaigns have populations just the same as all three are dead most of the day on weekdays.

Really no point in this discussion lasting this long other than tribalism.

Agreed, it’s not clear to me what all the screenshots are supposed to accomplish.

It wouldn’t make sense to do it to show ZOS that Vengeance is dead considering ZOS would have exact numbers and more detailed metrics than anyone could obtain.

I don’t even think that 1 Vengeance Bar = 1 Grey Host bar so it doesn’t work as a good or accurate visual.

What’s the point?

Stamicka wrote: »

LittleLionLeone wrote: »

This thread is starting to remind me of the battlegrounds thread where it's just posting and comparing screenshots.

You get the 3 servers. People like Vengeance, and some people like GH and BR. All three campaigns have populations just the same as all three are dead most of the day on weekdays.

Really no point in this discussion lasting this long other than tribalism.

Agreed, it’s not clear to me what all the screenshots are supposed to accomplish.

It wouldn’t make sense to do it to show ZOS that Vengeance is dead considering ZOS would have exact numbers and more detailed metrics than anyone could obtain.

I don’t even think that 1 Vengeance Bar = 1 Grey Host bar so it doesn’t work as a good or accurate visual.

What’s the point?

They want people to not play Vengeance.

LittleLionLeone wrote: »

This thread is starting to remind me of the battlegrounds thread where it's just posting and comparing screenshots.

You get the 3 servers. People like Vengeance, and some people like GH and BR. All three campaigns have populations just the same as all three are dead most of the day on weekdays.

Really no point in this discussion lasting this long other than tribalism.

At least there is more than 2 people participating, in comparison to that other thread that reminds more of the recent spam accounts that´s been flooding the forums

Stamicka wrote: »

You’re probably right. I think people have become addicted to the power imbalance that this game allows. They are terrified of losing what makes them feel like a winner.

I saw a ballgroup streaming the other day and they were complaining that no one was showing up to fight them. It’s like they just can’t piece together that the power gap isn’t fun for people on the receiving end.

You also get a few of those people in Vengeance now. They are grouped on Discord over voice chat constantly circling around battles around keeps or zergs never engaging with the actual battles but trying to lure people away from the group and gank them. Or they do this run around the tower stairs thing/invisible/heal loop hoping one or two players keep chasing them while the rest of the group moves on.

But most people just ignore the bait and even the zergs ignore those players. Zone chat is usually warning players where they are and some are even calling them by their real names. So they are desperate for a fight but don't get any.

LittleLionLeone wrote: »

This thread is starting to remind me of the battlegrounds thread where it's just posting and comparing screenshots.

You get the 3 servers. People like Vengeance, and some people like GH and BR. All three campaigns have populations just the same as all three are dead most of the day on weekdays.

Really no point in this discussion lasting this long other than tribalism.

PC NA GH pop locks about noon during the weekdays.

React wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

LittleLionLeone wrote: »

This thread is starting to remind me of the battlegrounds thread where it's just posting and comparing screenshots.

You get the 3 servers. People like Vengeance, and some people like GH and BR. All three campaigns have populations just the same as all three are dead most of the day on weekdays.

Really no point in this discussion lasting this long other than tribalism.

Agreed, it’s not clear to me what all the screenshots are supposed to accomplish.

It wouldn’t make sense to do it to show ZOS that Vengeance is dead considering ZOS would have exact numbers and more detailed metrics than anyone could obtain.

I don’t even think that 1 Vengeance Bar = 1 Grey Host bar so it doesn’t work as a good or accurate visual.

What’s the point?

Many people insisted blackreach never saw any population (including yourself!). I've seen nightly bars in it since it was re-added, and between 50%-100% population during weekend prime time on both NA and EU.

If Blackreach was close to pop locking this weekend, I'm not surprised because it was a holiday weekend + beginning of campaign + prime time. It was kind of a perfect storm scenario. Your screenshot shows like 600 people in Cyrodiil in almost best possible conditions. That's still pretty bleak to me.

If you're actually seeing Blackreach populated on regular weekdays, then that actually does surprise me. I can admit I was wrong that it would be totally dead in that case. At least as far as PC NA goes.

I've since switched to Xbox NA since it can now be played on PC. The overall population is lower than PC NA (but that just means faster queues and better server performance for Cyrodiil). I may see Blackreach get one bar on some weekends, but it's not very alive over there.

React wrote: »

The point is that further pvp development resources going into something that is proveably not being used by the majority of pvp players does not make sense. Half of our reward track, several developer streams, and an unknown amount of man hours have gone into creating this thing that very few veterans want to participate in - imagine if that time had been spent developing the new "mid size zone", or fleshing out a better reward track, or doing literally anything that eso players actually want to interact with.

Vengeance is here, and that is fine. It can stay in the game forever, for all I care. At bare minimum, I think it is a good stepping stone for people to try pvp with no barrier to entry. But since they've recently said they're using participation metrics to gauge how much further development is going into something (per the recent livestream), I think its important for these population discrepancies to be on full display.

Someone who doesn't PvP might say "The point is that further game development resources going into something that is proveably not being used by the majority of ESO players does not make sense" in regards to PvP. Would you argue that since Cyrodiil is already in the game they should work on improving it to attract players or would you agree with them to scrap PvP completely. I would guess you would go with the first option.

For Vengeance, if players aren't showing up I'm not seeing why they shouldn't just try to improve it/built on it instead of stop putting resources in it completely.

Outside of that we must have deep disagreements regarding what's going wrong with PvP or how to fix it or something. You're bringing up this new mid size zone and to me it just doesn't matter. One thing to look at is that each consecutive Whitestrake's Mayhem gets worse turnout. It's not just Cyrodiil that isn't getting people during that event either, it's Imperial City too.

That Imperial City bit matters a lot here because IC tends to not lag as much as Cyrodiil and it's of course a different zone. That shows us that there's problems bigger than performance and Cyrodiil as a zone if increased incentives can't even get people in the door.

Another big clue is that players will do everything they can do avoid fighting against certain people in a PvP zone. That's not a sign of a healthy game. I don't even blame the people who have just started to ignore groups of people with 40k health, cross heals, and fully shielded health bars. It's not a good showing for PvP. I don't know why a new player or someone from an actual serious competitive game would return after seeing something like that.

I'm not seeing what you see when you think that the development of this new zone matters under a regular Cyrodiil ruleset. It only addresses one issue of so many.

Stamicka wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

LittleLionLeone wrote: »

This thread is starting to remind me of the battlegrounds thread where it's just posting and comparing screenshots.

You get the 3 servers. People like Vengeance, and some people like GH and BR. All three campaigns have populations just the same as all three are dead most of the day on weekdays.

Really no point in this discussion lasting this long other than tribalism.

Agreed, it’s not clear to me what all the screenshots are supposed to accomplish.

It wouldn’t make sense to do it to show ZOS that Vengeance is dead considering ZOS would have exact numbers and more detailed metrics than anyone could obtain.

I don’t even think that 1 Vengeance Bar = 1 Grey Host bar so it doesn’t work as a good or accurate visual.

What’s the point?

They want people to not play Vengeance.

You’re probably right. I think people have become addicted to the power imbalance that this game allows. They are terrified of losing what makes them feel like a winner.

I saw a ballgroup streaming the other day and they were complaining that no one was showing up to fight them. It’s like they just can’t piece together that the power gap isn’t fun for people on the receiving end.

It’s really not surprising that the PvP population shrinks and shrinks. I literally don’t think it’s had a period of growth in a decade.

Anyway they can keep throwing a tantrum about Vengeance. If they get it scrapped Grey Host will continue to lag and dwindle. If ZOS decides to make something of Vengeance they’ll continue to be mad. Either way they’re going to be mad really.

I think it's more likely that most of the people who wanted fairer PvP have left the game for good. And the hostility towards fairness turns the remaining people who might be interested away from PvP entirely. It might honestly be too little too late to reverse course on that. Vengeance needed to have real builds by now and not ones that require farming but something that made PvP more pickup and play with skill as the difference maker but they didn't do that. And unfortunately first impressions last.

The end result is a dwindling group of hardcore vets that will enjoy Cyrodiil regardless of how poorly it performs and how few people want to bother. And most everyone else will just use this game for PvE.

React wrote: »

So no, to me it doesn't make sense to continue developing this pvp environment that pvp players aren't asking for.

I would contest this point. Here is a post from 2018:

Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »

Here's what I want:

• I want 300 players on screen at the same time with no lag. Like we had at launch. It's possible.
• I want the disgusting champion system removed from PvP and some form of softcaps reinstated in PvP.
• I want the battle spirit heal/shield/damage debuff removed since it would no longer be necessary with caps.
• And I want the iconic class skills, gear, and basic game mechanics that have been around since launch all un-nerfed and un-butchered back the way they were.

Give us a campaign that can do that and you wouldn't need another vivec.

Albeit 8 years too late, pretty sure Vengeance fulfills 3/4 of those points. And for that fourth point about original mechanics, ZOS reintroduced disorients, a CC type that had been removed and doesn't exist anywhere else.

React wrote: »

Stamicka wrote: »

If Blackreach was close to pop locking this weekend, I'm not surprised because it was a holiday weekend + beginning of campaign + prime time. It was kind of a perfect storm scenario. Your screenshot shows like 600 people in Cyrodiil in almost best possible conditions. That's still pretty bleak to me.

While vengeance is reaching 300 in best possible conditions? That is also being as generous as we can be given what the bars should represent. Given that the entire reason for vengeance's existence is to "support a 900 player population cap and massive lag free battles", I'd argue the reality of that environment is no less bleak.

To be clear I was saying that the overall picture of PvP in ESO is bleak. Populations are a small fraction of where they once were and they continue to decline. In all my responses here I haven't ever really tried to claim that Vengeance was alive. I don't participate in Vengeance so I don't know. It is indeed bleak along with everything else regarding ESO PvP though.

React wrote: »

Sort of a pointless hypothetical, and that exact line of thinking has led to the downfall of PVP in more games than one. OSRS is a great example of this - allowing non-pvp players to dictate the future of PVP always results in resources being diverted from the content that PVP players want, and reinforces the vicious cycle of "No new content -> players leave -> Less people in the environment -> less incentive for the developer to invest resources into it". If zenimax is choosing to spend resources developing PVP content, it should be content the wider PVP community is interested in - not something largely dictated by what a casual, non-PVP audience thinks.
...

So no, to me it doesn't make sense to continue developing this pvp environment that pvp players aren't asking for.

So first, what the current PvP population of a game wants isn't always best for the game. I can bring up many different PvP MMORPGs, especially a lot of Korean ones to demonstrate this. They often devolve into mega guilds, whales, and tight knit circles that gatekeep progression and new players from joining the game. The people in those mega guilds will defend the current state of the game up until it gets taken offline because it's too dead. Even outside of games, the people who benefit from a broken system will often continue to defend that system even if it has catastrophic consequences down the line.

Second, in regards to the current PvP population, ZOS is in retention mode which is a very dangerous place to be. They are trying to maintain a small population that isn't growing. The problem with retention mode is that everyone has a final straw. I imagine that if the status effect 50k health werewolves remained in the game, that would've been the final straw for many people. Pretty much every year there's something new and incredibly broken in PvP. Who knows what will make people want to quit next. So ultimately the retention game is a losing game.

Because of this, I think that ZOS needs to attract new demographics to keep PvP going. I think they should aim to attract lapsed ESO PvPers, newer players that are at least open to PvP, and the MOBA/Team Shooter crowd. Nothing about Grey Host attracts these people. Lapsed PvPers quit for a reason that’s probably worsened, newer players won't have a good time after being permafarmed, and the MOBA/Team Shooter crowd would see ESO for the unbalanced clown show that it is.

One thing I find interesting is that there used to be more overlap between people from actual competitive gaming backgrounds and ESO players. You can even look at SypherPK who went on to play competitive Fortnite, but I know quite a few old players like this personally. One Tamriel was the last straw for most of these people. Many moved on to Overwatch, MOBAs, and Valorant. This overlap is much more uncommon now from my experience. The community is much different now and not in a good way.

Anyway long story short, my thoughts are that ESO needs to bring in new crowds and I think it can be done without losing too many existing players. Small balance tweaks won’t cut it. It’s a slow death otherwise… as we see.

React wrote: »

I don't think we are actually too far off in terms of what we think is wrong with PVP. There are deep, fundamental balance issues on all sides of the game that obviously need to be addressed. Unkillable ball groups, pull sets, solo builds with zero tradeoffs, massive class imbalances, etc. But where we are differing is that you think they shouldn't even try anymore, and instead should just start from scratch with vengeance. I think that most PVP players are not interested in vengeance, and PVP content should be designed around what PVP players want.

That’s not quite what I want or think exactly.

So for one what I want is hard separation between PvP and PvE. I think they are being developed with philosophies that fundamentally oppose each other. Not hard separating them the way Vengeance is separated will continue to cause problems down the road as it has caused problems for years.

More importantly what I want is pre One Tamriel PvP and more fair PvP. This would require stripping Grey Host down by a lot. This is the main reason Vengeance interests me.

Pre One Tamriel would be no craftable jewelry, only a few monster sets, only 3 jewelry traits. Most builds would be something like 3 willpower/agility, 5pc stat set, monster set, weapon set. Theres still opportunities to make a build, but these builds are more balanced and there’s tradeoffs. It’s also way easier for new players to understand and build.

In order to get Grey Host to a state like that they would have to remove way more things than they would allow. Thats why I just want them to bring this about through Vengeance. I want them to add some sets like Willpower/Agility purchaseable with AP. Also make abilities more interesting. Frag proc/stun, light attacks required for merciless resolve, dizzy swing stun, etc. I would also like the healing and TTK issues resolved.

Is this likely to happen? No, but I at least want the idea out there. Pre One Tamriel PvP was so much more popular than PvP is now. I really think if ZOS aimed to turn Vengeance into that kind of environment, it wouldn’t be so unpopular with vets and it might even interest lapsed PvPers.

I have a big problem with all the moving parts that builds have now. Beyond making PvP inaccessible, it kills more playstyles than it creates. Skills like vigor have become non negotiable pretty much. Major Evasion skills are getting to that point too. I used to have mag and stam variants of each class to choose from. On top of that, for certain classes there were various playstyles. A stam DK could be a reverb/low slash build or a dizzy swing build. A magblade could go destro/resto, or dual wield. Mag Sorcs could be destro or dual wield. The list goes on.

People act like all the build customization in Grey Host is what makes ESO good/unique but as of this very moment, any character that’s not my DK is benched. It’s bad for the game on every front you can think of. Accessibility, performance, balance, skill expression, build choices (paradoxically). So much good would come from reeling in the build stuff massively.

React wrote: »

The new zone is new content. New content is required to keep players playing, and to get old players to return. MYM is losing population every year because terrible balance and zero new content for years makes them not interested in playing the game. Perpetuating the cycle by continuing to offer no new content and ignoring the balance issues isn't going to help anyone. I'm not saying it is going to be perfect - who knows what incentives it will offer, if they're going to take steps to address the balance issues through group size limits or mechanics similar to the HOT stacking adjustment implemented earlier this year. But new content is one of the number one things that has been missing from ESO on the PVP front for basically 6+ years now. I'd wager more PVP players will return to the game to try out this new zone than those who returned to try out vengeance.

I don’t think Vengeance in its current state is worth lapsed PvP players returning to as well, we agree there.

Like I said even I don’t like it right now and don’t participate. The difference is, where you say “scrap it” I say improve it. Make it like 2015/2016 ESO.

"Second, in regards to the current PvP population, ZOS is in retention mode which is a very dangerous place to be. They are trying to maintain a small population that isn't growing. The problem with retention mode is that everyone has a final straw. I imagine that if the status effect 50k health werewolves remained in the game, that would've been the final straw for many people. Pretty much every year there's something new and incredibly broken in PvP. Who knows what will make people want to quit next. So ultimately the retention game is a losing game."

Well written post @Stamicka (as usual). I do think however that you paint an overly grim picture with respect to Grey Host population. I'm not convinced by the "retention mode" argument. We don't have access to ZOS's internal player data, so that's largely speculation. My own experience has been the opposite. I logged into Grey Host yesterday and the queue was approaching 60 which equated to a 45 minute wait. It remained pop locked for hours. Anecdotal I know, but that doesn't strike me as a PvP mode that's on life support.

Balance problems absolutely need to be addressed but that is a perpetual issue and always has been. However, having periodic overpowered builds isn't the same thing as evidence that PvP is in terminal decline. From what I'm seeing in-game, Grey Host is still attracting plenty of players. (played alongside a level 20 recently!).

fizzybeef wrote: »

On the playstation servers Vengeance never had a single bar yet this event.
This game mode is so empty and dead, i played it for 2 hours - the chat was empty, maybe like 10 people ran arround, the fights were slow and unenjoyable.

The pose my characcter is doing is portraying my mood when i think about why this game mode is still being pushed and invested in, when it is literally dead on arrival:




Instead of pushing 900 people cap with a dead play mode, it would be better to try to fix GH and maybe get a cap of 600 people instead of 900.

Get a mix of both, instead of giving up GH.

And just to state : im not against having Vengeance as a second option aside of GH (wich will be happening in the future anyway).

But i can tell already vengeance wont be populated because people dont like it. They dont even play it when its only one option.

If people dislike "Vengeance" type of game design, then basically ESO PVP is still minority contents.

First of all, I'm not ESO PVP fan. And I've been thinking that ESO PVP fan is basically fake PVPvers.
Most of ESO PVPver just want to display their building superiority against opponent players.

That's not real PVP game design. If we can't enjoy the contents without custom building or set equipment,
then it's not PVP game anymore.