Maintenance for the week of July 20:
• NA megaservers for patch maintenance – July 20, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• EU megaservers for patch maintenance – July 20, 8:00 UTC (4:00AM EDT) - 16:00 UTC (12:00PM EDT)
• NA megaservers for patch maintenance – July 20, 4:00AM EDT (8:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)
• EU megaservers for patch maintenance – July 20, 8:00 UTC (4:00AM EDT) - 16:00 UTC (12:00PM EDT)
There needs to be a PvP Dev Team
-
imPDA✭✭✭✭PvP is not going to make money, so no need to even bother talking to PvPers lol. They give up with us long ago, which caused massive layoffs among PvP players and that made talking to PvP even less important, because there are even less really people interested in it. It is positive feedback loop - less attention they give, less people play, then even less attention they give, etc.Your Friendly Neighborhood PvP Enjoyer (prior to U48)2 -
gariondavey✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭There should be one
In the least, some pvp ambassadors.
Skilled vets who understand the game well. There are a few of them left. A few even frequently post on here.PC NA @gariondavey, BG, IC & Cyrodiil Focused Since October 2017 Stamplar (main), Magplar, Magsorc, Stamsorc, StamDK, MagDK, Stamblade, Magblade, Magden, Stamden1 -
X94✭✭PvP is not going to make money, so no need to even bother talking to PvPers lol. They give up with us long ago, which caused massive layoffs among PvP players and that made talking to PvP even less important, because there are even less really people interested in it. It is positive feedback loop - less attention they give, less people play, then even less attention they give, etc.
I've spent hundreds of £ since the few months I've been back and my primary interest is PVP, if there was no PVP I wouldn't be playing this game.4 -
SundarahFr3akinrican✭✭✭✭PvP is not going to make money, so no need to even bother talking to PvPers lol. They give up with us long ago, which caused massive layoffs among PvP players and that made talking to PvP even less important, because there are even less really people interested in it. It is positive feedback loop - less attention they give, less people play, then even less attention they give, etc.
I've spent hundreds of £ since the few months I've been back and my primary interest is PVP, if there was no PVP I wouldn't be playing this game.
Preach brother3 -
merevie✭✭✭✭✭Recently I have begun to suspect that there is now at least one dev playing GH regularly and not just the ones that were lurking in some people's streams on weekends reacting to chat.1
-
ToddIngram✭✭✭✭✭PvP is not going to make money, so no need to even bother talking to PvPers lol. They give up with us long ago, which caused massive layoffs among PvP players and that made talking to PvP even less important, because there are even less really people interested in it. It is positive feedback loop - less attention they give, less people play, then even less attention they give, etc.
Pretty sure that's a negative feedback loop you're describing, but accurately unfortunately.3 -
Bushido2513✭✭✭✭✭SundarahFr3akinrican wrote: »What a lovely feeling can be getting a comment on how the work you do 9-5 should exist.. x3
But hey, maybe there's a reason why people are assuming that there are no people working on this since hey, many of the decisions and directions ESO takes nowadays are so bad.
There's obviously people working on it, but only when they decide to. They need a dedicated team that communicates with the PvP community on every single update and delivers results on a update by update basis.
There should be no instance where there isnt a PvP related section in a major update. And skill rebalancing alone does not constitute a "pvp update". Every update should include BG/Cyrodiil section with clean ups, bug fixues, score rebalancing, at a minimum. But should also include new content features or added features to existing game modes.
The manner at which they have approached PvP has stifled the growth it could have had. For instance they created 8v8 and then never really did much with it, even though it is plagued with issues and needed balancing. For instance just recently, one of my favorite streams started playing ESO and only lasted about 3 weeks, because he couldnt handle the plethora of bugs and crazy unbalanced combat in PvP. Even though he could see how great this game could be. It doesnt have to be like this.
This is the exact same issue I have when trying to get friends to play. Most cant look past the balance and bugs.
I won't say the zos doesn't care much about pvp but just say that based on the direction of things up to this point why would anyone expect that they would devote money to devs when this would just open up a can of worms on things that also need money?
Pvp unfortunately isn't much of a money maker. I do think if they actually cleaned it up that the player base would boom but they've shown time and time again that they aren't willing to or are unable to commit the resources.
At this point I think most can see that it's not that the game can't absolutely be better. It's just that the required money isn't being invested in favor of the revenue they currently collect.1 -
MorallyBipolar✭✭✭✭✭Bushido2513 wrote: »SundarahFr3akinrican wrote: »What a lovely feeling can be getting a comment on how the work you do 9-5 should exist.. x3
But hey, maybe there's a reason why people are assuming that there are no people working on this since hey, many of the decisions and directions ESO takes nowadays are so bad.
There's obviously people working on it, but only when they decide to. They need a dedicated team that communicates with the PvP community on every single update and delivers results on a update by update basis.
There should be no instance where there isnt a PvP related section in a major update. And skill rebalancing alone does not constitute a "pvp update". Every update should include BG/Cyrodiil section with clean ups, bug fixues, score rebalancing, at a minimum. But should also include new content features or added features to existing game modes.
The manner at which they have approached PvP has stifled the growth it could have had. For instance they created 8v8 and then never really did much with it, even though it is plagued with issues and needed balancing. For instance just recently, one of my favorite streams started playing ESO and only lasted about 3 weeks, because he couldnt handle the plethora of bugs and crazy unbalanced combat in PvP. Even though he could see how great this game could be. It doesnt have to be like this.
This is the exact same issue I have when trying to get friends to play. Most cant look past the balance and bugs.
I won't say the zos doesn't care much about pvp but just say that based on the direction of things up to this point why would anyone expect that they would devote money to devs when this would just open up a can of worms on things that also need money?
Pvp unfortunately isn't much of a money maker. I do think if they actually cleaned it up that the player base would boom but they've shown time and time again that they aren't willing to or are unable to commit the resources.
At this point I think most can see that it's not that the game can't absolutely be better. It's just that the required money isn't being invested in favor of the revenue they currently collect.
The myth that PvP isn't a money maker for ZOS strikes again.
Maybe a big part of why ZOS isn't achieving revenue goals as easily now days is because they've neglected PvP so much for so long.
Edited by MorallyBipolar on July 1, 2026 3:43PM8 -
ceruulean✭✭✭✭They clearly do have PvP devs. The Vengeance skills have changed since the 1st test.
- One example is necromancer's Grave Grasp. Initially, it had the circle visuals and a magicka cost, while in U50 the skill effect is now rectangular and free to cast (ima be honest, it looks a little worse but oh well).
- Templar's purify is still too expensive and a waste of GCD and magicka, but it purges 3 negative effects now, compared to 2 from the 1st iteration.
Feels like DK has a 60% play rate in Vengeance, with NB being 20%, sorc 10%, and other classes 10%. I hope the devs do something about that. If they can get the strongest classes within a 5-10% margin of the worst class (which is, surprise surprise, templar), it should be fine.
Edited to update rough estimates of class popularity in Vengeance. 70% DK is an exaggeration but there are a ton of them for some reason.Edited by ceruulean on July 1, 2026 4:15PM3 -
MorallyBipolar✭✭✭✭✭They clearly do have PvP devs. The Vengeance skills have changed since the 1st test.
- One example is necromancer's Grave Grasp. Initially, it had the circle visuals and a magicka cost, while in U50 the skill effect is now rectangular and free to cast (ima be honest, it looks a little worse but oh well).
- Templar's purify is still too expensive and a waste of GCD and magicka, but it purges 3 negative effects now, compared to 2 from the 1st iteration.
Clearly they don't. They thought vengeance was a good idea. And their lead combat dev didn't even recognize Rush of Agony in a live stream.5 -
Bushido2513✭✭✭✭✭MorallyBipolar wrote: »Bushido2513 wrote: »SundarahFr3akinrican wrote: »What a lovely feeling can be getting a comment on how the work you do 9-5 should exist.. x3
But hey, maybe there's a reason why people are assuming that there are no people working on this since hey, many of the decisions and directions ESO takes nowadays are so bad.
There's obviously people working on it, but only when they decide to. They need a dedicated team that communicates with the PvP community on every single update and delivers results on a update by update basis.
There should be no instance where there isnt a PvP related section in a major update. And skill rebalancing alone does not constitute a "pvp update". Every update should include BG/Cyrodiil section with clean ups, bug fixues, score rebalancing, at a minimum. But should also include new content features or added features to existing game modes.
The manner at which they have approached PvP has stifled the growth it could have had. For instance they created 8v8 and then never really did much with it, even though it is plagued with issues and needed balancing. For instance just recently, one of my favorite streams started playing ESO and only lasted about 3 weeks, because he couldnt handle the plethora of bugs and crazy unbalanced combat in PvP. Even though he could see how great this game could be. It doesnt have to be like this.
This is the exact same issue I have when trying to get friends to play. Most cant look past the balance and bugs.
I won't say the zos doesn't care much about pvp but just say that based on the direction of things up to this point why would anyone expect that they would devote money to devs when this would just open up a can of worms on things that also need money?
Pvp unfortunately isn't much of a money maker. I do think if they actually cleaned it up that the player base would boom but they've shown time and time again that they aren't willing to or are unable to commit the resources.
At this point I think most can see that it's not that the game can't absolutely be better. It's just that the required money isn't being invested in favor of the revenue they currently collect.
The myth that PvP isn't a money maker for ZOS strikes again.
Maybe a big part of why ZOS isn't achieving revenue goals as easily now days is because they've neglected PvP so much for so long.
If it's a money maker then why are they clearly spending the majority of money on pve?
A simple analysis, look at everything that has been created to be sold in recent years, houses, assistants, skins, non combat pets, etc. Then look at new content development and the target audience.
I'm not saying pvp generates zero dollars. I'm saying it's definitely lower tier in earnings for zos because pve gets a cake and pvp gets crumbs
Yes if they made pvp better there would be so many more players but that requires a large initial investment and even then getting revenue would be tricky given the fit m hits pvp has already taken in reputation.0 -
ceruulean✭✭✭✭MorallyBipolar wrote: »They clearly do have PvP devs. The Vengeance skills have changed since the 1st test.
- One example is necromancer's Grave Grasp. Initially, it had the circle visuals and a magicka cost, while in U50 the skill effect is now rectangular and free to cast (ima be honest, it looks a little worse but oh well).
- Templar's purify is still too expensive and a waste of GCD and magicka, but it purges 3 negative effects now, compared to 2 from the 1st iteration.
Clearly they don't. They thought vengeance was a good idea. And their lead combat dev didn't even recognize Rush of Agony in a live stream.
There's more than 1 dev on the team lol, it's not like Brian Wheeler makes decisions alone. If all you can do is insult people for being ignorant, and ignoring the devs who do make good decisions like removing signet from PvP, what are you even accomplishing? And Vengeance is a great idea. There are many people who enjoy it.Edited by ceruulean on July 1, 2026 4:05PM2 -
SundarahFr3akinrican✭✭✭✭MorallyBipolar wrote: »They clearly do have PvP devs. The Vengeance skills have changed since the 1st test.
- One example is necromancer's Grave Grasp. Initially, it had the circle visuals and a magicka cost, while in U50 the skill effect is now rectangular and free to cast (ima be honest, it looks a little worse but oh well).
- Templar's purify is still too expensive and a waste of GCD and magicka, but it purges 3 negative effects now, compared to 2 from the 1st iteration.
Clearly they don't. They thought vengeance was a good idea. And their lead combat dev didn't even recognize Rush of Agony in a live stream.
There's more than 1 dev on the team lol, it's not like Brian Wheeler makes decisions alone. If all you can do is insult people for being ignorant, and ignoring the devs who do make good decisions like removing signet from PvP, what are you even accomplishing? And Vengeance is a great idea. There are many people who enjoy it.
There will be people that like Vengeance. The issue is that the Vengeance arc was first started to address the Cyrodiil community and address their concerns. But Vengeance goes against everything Cyrodiil players want. The people that will play Vengeance are an entriely different type of player base. So the Cyro community is once again neglected.1 -
ceruulean✭✭✭✭SundarahFr3akinrican wrote: »MorallyBipolar wrote: »They clearly do have PvP devs. The Vengeance skills have changed since the 1st test.
- One example is necromancer's Grave Grasp. Initially, it had the circle visuals and a magicka cost, while in U50 the skill effect is now rectangular and free to cast (ima be honest, it looks a little worse but oh well).
- Templar's purify is still too expensive and a waste of GCD and magicka, but it purges 3 negative effects now, compared to 2 from the 1st iteration.
Clearly they don't. They thought vengeance was a good idea. And their lead combat dev didn't even recognize Rush of Agony in a live stream.
There's more than 1 dev on the team lol, it's not like Brian Wheeler makes decisions alone. If all you can do is insult people for being ignorant, and ignoring the devs who do make good decisions like removing signet from PvP, what are you even accomplishing? And Vengeance is a great idea. There are many people who enjoy it.
There will be people that like Vengeance. The issue is that the Vengeance arc was first started to address the Cyrodiil community and address their concerns. But Vengeance goes against everything Cyrodiil players want. The people that will play Vengeance are an entriely different type of player base. So the Cyro community is once again neglected.
Lol why would Venegance be for a different playerbase? Is Venegance not considered Cyro? It's still pvp and open to all. You can join 'em too. A ton of returning players are enjoying it since they don't like the current normal PvP balance. So saying that Vengence goes against everything that players want is absolutist and not a good argument. It has decent balance and build variety. Of course there's still issues like the 3-target damage AoE cap, and group buffs are kinda tedious and meaningless when they only hit 3 people at a time, but otherwise the lack of power encourages people to group up and it has a decent balance of rewarding individual skill while also rewarding coordination, leadership, and social cohesion skills to win.0 -
LPapirius✭✭✭✭✭
✭SundarahFr3akinrican wrote: »MorallyBipolar wrote: »They clearly do have PvP devs. The Vengeance skills have changed since the 1st test.- One example is necromancer's Grave Grasp. Initially, it had the circle visuals and a magicka cost, while in U50 the skill effect is now rectangular and free to cast (ima be honest, it looks a little worse but oh well).
- Templar's purify is still too expensive and a waste of GCD and magicka, but it purges 3 negative effects now, compared to 2 from the 1st iteration.
Clearly they don't. They thought vengeance was a good idea. And their lead combat dev didn't even recognize Rush of Agony in a live stream.
There's more than 1 dev on the team lol, it's not like Brian Wheeler makes decisions alone. If all you can do is insult people for being ignorant, and ignoring the devs who do make good decisions like removing signet from PvP, what are you even accomplishing? And Vengeance is a great idea. There are many people who enjoy it.
There will be people that like Vengeance. The issue is that the Vengeance arc was first started to address the Cyrodiil community and address their concerns. But Vengeance goes against everything Cyrodiil players want. The people that will play Vengeance are an entriely different type of player base. So the Cyro community is once again neglected.
Lol why would Venegance be for a different playerbase? Is Venegance not considered Cyro? It's still pvp and open to all. You can join 'em too. A ton of returning players are enjoying it since they don't like the current normal PvP balance. So saying that Vengence goes against everything that players want is absolutist and not a good argument. It has decent balance and build variety. Of course there's still issues like the 3-target damage AoE cap, and group buffs are kinda tedious and meaningless when they only hit 3 people at a time, but otherwise the lack of power encourages people to group up and it has a decent balance of rewarding individual skill while also rewarding coordination, leadership, and social cohesion skills to win.
Vengeance is for the PvE players who want their PvP to have training wheels and zero skill gap.4 -
Firstmep✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭MorallyBipolar wrote: »They clearly do have PvP devs. The Vengeance skills have changed since the 1st test.- One example is necromancer's Grave Grasp. Initially, it had the circle visuals and a magicka cost, while in U50 the skill effect is now rectangular and free to cast (ima be honest, it looks a little worse but oh well).
- Templar's purify is still too expensive and a waste of GCD and magicka, but it purges 3 negative effects now, compared to 2 from the 1st iteration.
Clearly they don't. They thought vengeance was a good idea. And their lead combat dev didn't even recognize Rush of Agony in a live stream.
There's more than 1 dev on the team lol, it's not like Brian Wheeler makes decisions alone. If all you can do is insult people for being ignorant, and ignoring the devs who do make good decisions like removing signet from PvP, what are you even accomplishing? And Vengeance is a great idea. There are many people who enjoy it.
I don't want to hate on the devs but we don't have any information that there are more than 2 people who have anything to do with pvp.
Most balance decisions not just for pvp, seem to stem from dummy parsing almost entirely.
The fact they are okay with leaving pvp balance in the state that it is tells me that they just don't have the resources(read:manpower) to assess and act on feedback.
This last pts hundreds of pages of feedback was provided on things like sps and werewolf, and most of it was not acted upon. Again I don't think it's intentional, I just don't they have the time or resources to actually do anything with feedback.
Even their class reworks so far is just: " Give them everything".
I mean just look at dk vs literally any of the other classes, dks have the best burst, highest dot damage, best self heal, best sustain and with wings the kinda mobility old dks couldn't even dream of.
Edited by Firstmep on July 2, 2026 7:28PM1 -
X94✭✭It wouldn't be difficult at all to fix pvp, mostly just tweaking numbers so nothing new needing to be coded.
It would require someone who knows pvp inside out and can remain neutral and don't play favoritism.
Honstly a few days of tweaking and PvP would become amazing.2 -
SundarahFr3akinrican✭✭✭✭It wouldn't be difficult at all to fix pvp, mostly just tweaking numbers so nothing new needing to be coded.
It would require someone who knows pvp inside out and can remain neutral and don't play favoritism.
Honstly a few days of tweaking and PvP would become amazing.
Yeah i feel a lot of things could be handled with battle spirit tweaks.0 -
ToddIngram✭✭✭✭✭MorallyBipolar wrote: »They clearly do have PvP devs. The Vengeance skills have changed since the 1st test.
- One example is necromancer's Grave Grasp. Initially, it had the circle visuals and a magicka cost, while in U50 the skill effect is now rectangular and free to cast (ima be honest, it looks a little worse but oh well).
- Templar's purify is still too expensive and a waste of GCD and magicka, but it purges 3 negative effects now, compared to 2 from the 1st iteration.
Clearly they don't. They thought vengeance was a good idea. And their lead combat dev didn't even recognize Rush of Agony in a live stream.
There's more than 1 dev on the team lol, it's not like Brian Wheeler makes decisions alone. If all you can do is insult people for being ignorant, and ignoring the devs who do make good decisions like removing signet from PvP, what are you even accomplishing? And Vengeance is a great idea. There are many people who enjoy it.
You might want to check the latest news today. Just say'n.5