Maintenance for the week of August 3:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – August 3
• ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – August 4, 5:00AM EDT (9:00 UTC) - 4:00PM EDT (20:00 UTC)
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – August 3
• ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – August 4, 5:00AM EDT (9:00 UTC) - 4:00PM EDT (20:00 UTC)
ESO Priorities
-
TonyH196✭✭✭@ZOS_Kevin I noticed that Vengeance testing was not on the Roadmap for the month. Was that intentional by leaving it off or was that an oversight0 -
ZOS_KevinCommunity Manager@ZOS_Kevin I noticed that Vengeance testing was not on the Roadmap for the month. Was that intentional by leaving it off or was that an oversight
It was an oversight.tomofhyrule wrote: »Hi all. Just wanted to give some insight here. The vengeance testing we have going on this week was already factored in and scheduled a few months ago. However, we are still committed to the class refresh and working on adjusting our schedule. We should have more to share soon. So class refresh is still a core focus moving forward.
Thank you Kevin. It is heartening to hear the refreshes are still a focus.
The players are nervous though. Would it be possible to have the Combat Team share some things? We really should have heard anything about Warden’s by now (DK essentially got the full patch notes the Thursday before U49’s PTS and was made a large focus of the Season Zero marketing, and we had the Werewolf concept art shown off in a DevChat stream weeks before U50 went to PTS along with a dev comment on the forums about how a new bit attack would be added), but the team has almost awkwardly been doing gymnastics to avoid even saying the word “Warden,” and the PTS was delayed by three weeks for a vague reason. Based on the original timeline, the Combat Team should be done with Warden and only polishing based on PTS feedback, and even starting to do Sorcerer by now. Is there any concept art or anything they could share to placate us?
I do also wonder why, if this Vengeance test was planned and scheduled months ago,
1) Why did it not get a first pass on PTS to both prep the players to accept it and also test to see which sets did and didn’t work?
2) Why was this not in the July Survival Guide article like the other planned Vengeance tests?
Those two factors are what’s making the players feel so off guard, and the timing of this being the first new communication after the news of the shakeups just made it land horribly.
So the vengeance tests require having a larger set of folks to play. So that is why we end up doing the tests on the live server. Giving wider access helps with the testing. As for the survival guide, it should have been on there. But I think that was a general oversight as to why it was not listed. But agreed, it should have been.
Community Manager for ZeniMax Online Studio and Elder Scrolls OnlineDev Tracker | Service Alerts | ESO Twitter2 -
Maitsukas✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭@ZOS_Kevin I noticed that Vengeance testing was not on the Roadmap for the month. Was that intentional by leaving it off or was that an oversight
He responded earlier:As for the survival guide, it should have been on there. But I think that was a general oversight as to why it was not listed. But agreed, it should have been.Edited by Maitsukas on July 20, 2026 5:57PMPC-EU @maitsukas
Posting the Infinite Archive and Imperial City Weekly Vendor updates.
Also trying out new Main Quests, Companions, ToT decks, Events and Styles on PTS.0 -
Twohothardware✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Class reworkHi all. Just wanted to give some insight here. The vengeance testing we have going on this week was already factored in and scheduled a few months ago. However, we are still committed to the class refresh and working on adjusting our schedule. We should have more to share soon. So class refresh is still a core focus moving forward.
Please let them know how important the Class reworks are and that the rest are the same quality as the DK/Werewolf. Like there's nothing else that even comes close in terms of new content to full class reworks and updates to combat. The clunky combat is the #1 reason people give for not playing ESO on other non-ESO MMO boards.Edited by Twohothardware on July 20, 2026 6:03PM0 -
IviRo✭✭✭Class reworkTheAwesomeChimpanzee wrote: »Hi all. Just wanted to give some insight here. The vengeance testing we have going on this week was already factored in and scheduled a few months ago. However, we are still committed to the class refresh and working on adjusting our schedule. We should have more to share soon. So class refresh is still a core focus moving forward.
Cancel the test @ZOS_Kevin. There's still time to save the PvP community.
What is dead cannot die.2 -
Ingenon✭✭✭✭✭
✭Neither one.
I would like to continue to have new stuff to do in game. Right now, I am doing the Season One related stuff, and eventually the timer on those activities will get to zero days. If I got to pick, I would choose for the priority to be that there will be a new Season, with new stuff to do.1 -
FENGRUSH✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Neither one.
I would like to continue to have new stuff to do in game. Right now, I am doing the Season One related stuff, and eventually the timer on those activities will get to zero days. If I got to pick, I would choose for the priority to be that there will be a new Season, with new stuff to do.
You'll have to take that one up with Microsoft. They laid off most of this staff and pretty clearly showed this not a priority. While im sure they will deliver new seasonal content, dont expect much. Can't ask the combat team to do that work though.3 -
Ingenon✭✭✭✭✭
✭Neither one.
I would like to continue to have new stuff to do in game. Right now, I am doing the Season One related stuff, and eventually the timer on those activities will get to zero days. If I got to pick, I would choose for the priority to be that there will be a new Season, with new stuff to do.
You'll have to take that one up with Microsoft. They laid off most of this staff and pretty clearly showed this not a priority. While im sure they will deliver new seasonal content, dont expect much. Can't ask the combat team to do that work though.
I think we agree on some things here.
Separately, I think they are only working on what they have said. Which since the beginning of July looks to me like Update 50 Patch 2. And Item Set Testing in Vengeance July 20 through July 27. So, Bug Fixes, and ongoing Vengeance Testing. Which is why I put in a vote for a new Season above. Hopefully they have enough folks to do three things.0 -
Destai✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Class reworkHi all. Just wanted to give some insight here. The vengeance testing we have going on this week was already factored in and scheduled a few months ago. However, we are still committed to the class refresh and working on adjusting our schedule. We should have more to share soon. So class refresh is still a core focus moving forward.
So is the same staff working on both the class refresh and vengeance testing?0 -
TheAwesomeChimpanzee✭✭✭✭✭Class reworkHi all. Just wanted to give some insight here. The vengeance testing we have going on this week was already factored in and scheduled a few months ago. However, we are still committed to the class refresh and working on adjusting our schedule. We should have more to share soon. So class refresh is still a core focus moving forward.
@ZOS_Kevin, you are very carefully choosing to answer the easiest questions while continuing to avoid the concerns at the center of this entire discussion, and it is becoming increasingly obvious.
Why do you keep shutting down Gray Host when the open-world PvP community gives you overwhelmingly negative feedback every time you do it?
How, specifically, are these tests supposed to benefit Gray Host? Will any of the data gathered actually be used to improve Gray Host’s performance, population capacity, or gameplay? Or are you simply developing Vengeance piece by piece while Gray Host is gradually neglected and pushed aside?
Why should Gray Host players participate in these tests when the team remains unwilling or unable to answer those basic concerns?
And why does ZOS continue investing resources into Vengeance—a mode that the overwhelming majority of the active PvP community clearly does not want—while gathering feedback from players who are not part of the core Cyrodiil audience and then iterating around that feedback? Meanwhile, the players who consistently populate open-world PvP are repeatedly stripped of the campaign they actually want to play and want the team to invest in.
Saying that broader participation is required for testing does not answer why Gray Host must be removed to obtain it, what these tests will do for Gray Host, or why the Gray Host community should support the continued development of a mode that repeatedly comes at the expense of their preferred campaign.TO THE PVP COMMUNITY: OUR ABSENCE IS FEEDBACK. DO NOT PARTICIPATE IN THE JULY 20TH VENGEANCE TESTS.6 -
Dax_Draconis✭✭✭✭Whatever the priorities are, they shouldn't be based on only the 165 votes in a forum thread as of this posting.Edited by Dax_Draconis on July 20, 2026 11:41PM7 -
AScarlato✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Class reworkDax_Draconis wrote: »Whatever the priorities are, they shouldn't be based on only the 165 votes in a forum thread as of this posting.
This is probably one of the more one-sided polls I've seen here. Just saying. That issue effects everyone and not just part of their playerbase.0 -
katanagirl1✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Class reworkClass rework will benefit GH PvP for sure. GH performance isn’t bad even on PS5 as long as you aren’t near a ball group. They could take a second look at all of the class and weapons skills while doing the rework to see just what it is that is causing the lag.
PS5 NA0 -
wolfie1.0.✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭colossalvoids wrote: »
I don't really get why we have this argument presented all the time, the team is also lower the size of one which created Solstice (what a great year it was, right?), or any other recent thing. It's also different people, most people who made those x-packs are long gone. Writers, gameplay mechanics people, dungeon team, person who made the best to date single player arena in eso, artists, composers, ones who initially wrote those raw concept sketches, they're not here anymore.
There are aslos such things what i like to call employee bottlenecks. Sometimes having too many people participating in a thing causes tasks to slow down to a crawl. Whether its too many workers, too many bosses, or too many committees... Sometimes having too many people in a thing bogs down objectives and introduces things like scope creep, coding spaghetti, and other such conflicts.
Nkt sure how ZOS was structured, but in my corporate experience, the more people that were included in meetings the likelihood that nothing gets done goes up exponentially.1 -
Tannus15✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Class reworkIf the class rework has to compete with vengeance for staff resourcing, then 100% the class rework is more important to me.
If it doesn't, then it's a moot question not worth asking.
The game was much smaller at that time as well. Less classes, less content, less systems.
Could that team have build content to the same size and quality if they had to incorporate antiquities, companions, tales of tribute, housing, 2 new classes, subclassing etc? I don't know the answer to that, but I do know that head count is a poor metric.
We know they lost a lot of veteran staff, which means institutional knowledge for all these additional systems as well. Don't know how that new system works? go ask the person who build it. Oh wait, they don't work here anymore.
I think ZoS can still put out top tier quality content, I just think they will by necessity need to neglect some area's of the game to do it.
And I hope they choose to do so.
I hope the class reworks are still the highest priority. Just the class masteries have been a breath of fresh air.
I'm so happy that hybridization was already being worked on before everything went to ... badness.
I hope the solo dungeon system is far enough along that we can see that pursued.
I hope that overland difficulty is expanded on and given some smarts and better rewards.
I really don't care about Vengance, but I'm not big into PvP so that's not unexpected.
I'm sure for others their list of priorities is very different to mine, but I also have confidence that ZoS is actually looking at the data from surveys etc to choose their battles appropriately.1 -
Fruity_Ninja✭✭✭✭Class reworkClass Rework AND Cross Play- those 2 things are important for the long term health of the game and population
Once that’s done then focus on new content (not Vengence though, just leave it there as is for the tiny community that likes it)
0 -
IZZEFlameLash✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Class reworkAt this point, push back all the things not already on the verge of completion and focus on class reworks while the team finds the bearing. Class reworks cannot be delayed as there's already too many balancing complaints due to the releases for each class refresh being too far apart. This could lead to further drop in numbers as if the chopping of significant portion of team rattling the playerbase wasn't enough.Edited by IZZEFlameLash on July 21, 2026 9:14AMImperials, the one and true masters of all mortal races of Tamriel3 -
Seraphayel✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Class reworkThey need to stop trying with Vengeance. The work isn’t worth the outcome. It‘s a waste of resources.PS5EUAldmeri Dominion- Khajiit Arcanist -4 -
Veinblood1965✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭
>>> What are they supposed to do? If large amounts of people are needed to stress test and they didn't shut down GH who exactly would participate?TheAwesomeChimpanzee wrote: »Hi all. Just wanted to give some insight here. The vengeance testing we have going on this week was already factored in and scheduled a few months ago. However, we are still committed to the class refresh and working on adjusting our schedule. We should have more to share soon. So class refresh is still a core focus moving forward.
@ZOS_Kevin, you are very carefully choosing to answer the easiest questions while continuing to avoid the concerns at the center of this entire discussion, and it is becoming increasingly obvious.
Why do you keep shutting down Gray Host when the open-world PvP community gives you overwhelmingly negative feedback every time you do it? >>>>They need large amounts of players to test stress, smaller amounts do not cause stress on the servers.
How, specifically, are these tests supposed to benefit Gray Host? Will any of the data gathered actually be used to improve Gray Host’s performance, population capacity, or gameplay? Or are you simply developing Vengeance piece by piece while Gray Host is gradually neglected and pushed aside? >>>>Testing....Have to have data to improve GH, Vengeance provides that data.... IE Testing....
Why should Gray Host players participate in these tests when the team remains unwilling or unable to answer those basic concerns? >>>>They have been answered in multiple posts.....
And why does ZOS continue investing resources into Vengeance—a mode that the overwhelming majority of the active PvP community clearly does not want—while gathering feedback from players who are not part of the core Cyrodiil audience and then iterating around that feedback? Meanwhile, the players who consistently populate open-world PvP are repeatedly stripped of the campaign they actually want to play and want the team to invest in. >>> see previous answers....
Saying that broader participation is required for testing does not answer why Gray Host must be removed to obtain it, what these tests will do for Gray Host, or why the Gray Host community should support the continued development of a mode that repeatedly comes at the expense of their preferred campaign.
See answers above...0 -
tomofhyrule✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Class reworkVeinblood1965 wrote: »
>>> What are they supposed to do? If large amounts of people are needed to stress test and they didn't shut down GH who exactly would participate?TheAwesomeChimpanzee wrote: »Hi all. Just wanted to give some insight here. The vengeance testing we have going on this week was already factored in and scheduled a few months ago. However, we are still committed to the class refresh and working on adjusting our schedule. We should have more to share soon. So class refresh is still a core focus moving forward.
ZOS_Kevin, you are very carefully choosing to answer the easiest questions while continuing to avoid the concerns at the center of this entire discussion, and it is becoming increasingly obvious.
Why do you keep shutting down Gray Host when the open-world PvP community gives you overwhelmingly negative feedback every time you do it? >>>>They need large amounts of players to test stress, smaller amounts do not cause stress on the servers.
How, specifically, are these tests supposed to benefit Gray Host? Will any of the data gathered actually be used to improve Gray Host’s performance, population capacity, or gameplay? Or are you simply developing Vengeance piece by piece while Gray Host is gradually neglected and pushed aside? >>>>Testing....Have to have data to improve GH, Vengeance provides that data.... IE Testing....
Why should Gray Host players participate in these tests when the team remains unwilling or unable to answer those basic concerns? >>>>They have been answered in multiple posts.....
And why does ZOS continue investing resources into Vengeance—a mode that the overwhelming majority of the active PvP community clearly does not want—while gathering feedback from players who are not part of the core Cyrodiil audience and then iterating around that feedback? Meanwhile, the players who consistently populate open-world PvP are repeatedly stripped of the campaign they actually want to play and want the team to invest in. >>> see previous answers....
Saying that broader participation is required for testing does not answer why Gray Host must be removed to obtain it, what these tests will do for Gray Host, or why the Gray Host community should support the continued development of a mode that repeatedly comes at the expense of their preferred campaign.
See answers above...
There’s a bit of information in your post that is not directly asked, but is nonetheless enlightening.
1) You are correctly talking about how large numbers are needed for a stress test. That is why it’s on Live and all other Campaigns are closed. This is correct.
However, by pointing out that it is specifically a stress test, that implies that it is not a functionality test, i.e. checking to make sure if the sets function as described or check which are not working. That is the question that is answered by releasing the Vengeance tests on PTS before bringing it live. If that were done this time (it was for every other Vengeance test!), then players would have a better idea of which sets worked and which didn’t, and then they could focus on stress testing instead or wondering why their set isn’t active while someone else is deleting everyone since their “while battle spirit is active” set is still at full PvE power.
2) The idea of Vengeance not being able to get to max players if other options exist is in effect a vote of no confidence in Vengeance. As such, it gives clues to what the playerbase enjoys, and where the Combat Team should direct resources.
Notably, in these uncertain times, if something is not favored by a large swath of the players, it would be best to table it an focus all effort onto things that do affect all players, i.e. the Refreshes. We still have no word on them beyond “we are still doing them,” despite the fact that Warden was supposed to have been finished the weekend before the layoffs hit (and therefore the layoffs did not affect Warden; if there is a problem and that is cited as a cause of the delay, that still means it was delayed before the layoffs and then the layoffs created an additional delay on top)3 -
colossalvoids✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Class reworkwolfie1.0. wrote: »colossalvoids wrote: »
I don't really get why we have this argument presented all the time, the team is also lower the size of one which created Solstice (what a great year it was, right?), or any other recent thing. It's also different people, most people who made those x-packs are long gone. Writers, gameplay mechanics people, dungeon team, person who made the best to date single player arena in eso, artists, composers, ones who initially wrote those raw concept sketches, they're not here anymore.
There are aslos such things what i like to call employee bottlenecks. Sometimes having too many people participating in a thing causes tasks to slow down to a crawl. Whether its too many workers, too many bosses, or too many committees... Sometimes having too many people in a thing bogs down objectives and introduces things like scope creep, coding spaghetti, and other such conflicts.
Nkt sure how ZOS was structured, but in my corporate experience, the more people that were included in meetings the likelihood that nothing gets done goes up exponentially.
The only thing I'm hopeful about nowadays is that some of those redundant management layers got axed aswell. As from the current employee lists there were a ton of crucial staff, for different areas of the game which brings zero confidence in remaining team.0 -
TheAwesomeChimpanzee✭✭✭✭✭Class reworkVeinblood1965 wrote: »
>>> What are they supposed to do? If large amounts of people are needed to stress test and they didn't shut down GH who exactly would participate?TheAwesomeChimpanzee wrote: »Hi all. Just wanted to give some insight here. The vengeance testing we have going on this week was already factored in and scheduled a few months ago. However, we are still committed to the class refresh and working on adjusting our schedule. We should have more to share soon. So class refresh is still a core focus moving forward.
@ZOS_Kevin, you are very carefully choosing to answer the easiest questions while continuing to avoid the concerns at the center of this entire discussion, and it is becoming increasingly obvious.
Why do you keep shutting down Gray Host when the open-world PvP community gives you overwhelmingly negative feedback every time you do it? >>>>They need large amounts of players to test stress, smaller amounts do not cause stress on the servers.
How, specifically, are these tests supposed to benefit Gray Host? Will any of the data gathered actually be used to improve Gray Host’s performance, population capacity, or gameplay? Or are you simply developing Vengeance piece by piece while Gray Host is gradually neglected and pushed aside? >>>>Testing....Have to have data to improve GH, Vengeance provides that data.... IE Testing....
Why should Gray Host players participate in these tests when the team remains unwilling or unable to answer those basic concerns? >>>>They have been answered in multiple posts.....
And why does ZOS continue investing resources into Vengeance—a mode that the overwhelming majority of the active PvP community clearly does not want—while gathering feedback from players who are not part of the core Cyrodiil audience and then iterating around that feedback? Meanwhile, the players who consistently populate open-world PvP are repeatedly stripped of the campaign they actually want to play and want the team to invest in. >>> see previous answers....
Saying that broader participation is required for testing does not answer why Gray Host must be removed to obtain it, what these tests will do for Gray Host, or why the Gray Host community should support the continued development of a mode that repeatedly comes at the expense of their preferred campaign.
See answers above...
Very simple, don’t develop vengeance, that’s what they’re supposed to do.TO THE PVP COMMUNITY: OUR ABSENCE IS FEEDBACK. DO NOT PARTICIPATE IN THE JULY 20TH VENGEANCE TESTS.1 -
TheAwesomeChimpanzee✭✭✭✭✭Class reworkTheAwesomeChimpanzee wrote: »Hi all. Just wanted to give some insight here. The vengeance testing we have going on this week was already factored in and scheduled a few months ago. However, we are still committed to the class refresh and working on adjusting our schedule. We should have more to share soon. So class refresh is still a core focus moving forward.
@ZOS_Kevin, you are very carefully choosing to answer the easiest questions while continuing to avoid the concerns at the center of this entire discussion, and it is becoming increasingly obvious.
Why do you keep shutting down Gray Host when the open-world PvP community gives you overwhelmingly negative feedback every time you do it?
How, specifically, are these tests supposed to benefit Gray Host? Will any of the data gathered actually be used to improve Gray Host’s performance, population capacity, or gameplay? Or are you simply developing Vengeance piece by piece while Gray Host is gradually neglected and pushed aside?
Why should Gray Host players participate in these tests when the team remains unwilling or unable to answer those basic concerns?
And why does ZOS continue investing resources into Vengeance—a mode that the overwhelming majority of the active PvP community clearly does not want—while gathering feedback from players who are not part of the core Cyrodiil audience and then iterating around that feedback? Meanwhile, the players who consistently populate open-world PvP are repeatedly stripped of the campaign they actually want to play and want the team to invest in.
Saying that broader participation is required for testing does not answer why Gray Host must be removed to obtain it, what these tests will do for Gray Host, or why the Gray Host community should support the continued development of a mode that repeatedly comes at the expense of their preferred campaign.
Come on, @ZOS_Kevin, I know you’re reading these threads.
Day 1 was horrendous. PC NA didn’t even reach 3 bars, yet we’re once again being asked to give up our main campaign for these tests.
Might be a good time to explain why we should participate this time.TO THE PVP COMMUNITY: OUR ABSENCE IS FEEDBACK. DO NOT PARTICIPATE IN THE JULY 20TH VENGEANCE TESTS.1 -
DoofusMax✭✭✭✭✭Dax_Draconis wrote: »Whatever the priorities are, they shouldn't be based on only the 165 votes in a forum thread as of this posting.
An extremely fair point, but it's worth adding that the devs have repeatedly said that they pay attention to what players are saying, but they mostly look at what players are doing.
I'm making no judgements on whether testing is necessary; that's a decision from well above my paygrade. But the purpose of testing is gathering data. What players are doing and how it's impacting server performance is collected on the backend. What players think about it is collected afterward.
Were I testing this, I'd be doing pretty much exactly what ZOS is doing: funnel everyone into a single campaign. Since performance numbers are gathered on the backend, all that's necessary is players being in that campaign (the more the merrier, but that's where the useful data is). Those who hate Vengeance with a vengeance (bah dah ching!) and are going to sit at home doing whatever they're doing when Grey Host and other campaigns aren't available (sulking, one supposes from some of the comments on this thread) and that's absolutely fine. A sample of the players who participated are going to get that "how did you like ... ?" survey at the end, and the sit-it-out folks won't be biasing that data. So I get data on what players actually do, I get data on server performance with the addition of the set procs, I get what players thought about it from the survey, and can proceed from there.
I think ZOS could have been more transparent on what was changing for this test rather than shoving it into patch notes which became available about the time the campaign went live and there was that whole oversight issue on the July Survival Guide. I didn't go into Vengeance yesterday because I had other in-game stuff to do, but now that I know what's being tested, I'll probably drop in for a bit and see how it goes. PvP'ing isn't my thing, but I'll certainly donate some time to the cause of data when I know what's being gathered and why.I'm fresh out of outrage, but I could muster up some amused annoyance if required.3
