Do you really want arena PvP?

Imperator_Clydus · June 2014

No.

FiQ wrote: »

Yes to arena. I personally hate zerg-fights. Proper 2vs2, 3vs3 or 4vs4 needs much more skill than running around with 50 other players. I think there is no need for leaderboards or rewards (maybe small amount of G per victory or new title's) on arena, but i think adding arena would make this game much more interesting.

I notice people tend to throw the term "zerg" around a lot and smaller groups having more "skill." AvA is large scale PvP. Both sides have large groups of players fighting each other at the same time. How can it be any less skill if two coordinated large groups are fighting each other versus two coordinated small groups?

I'd say you are more likely to actually find skilled players in AvA due to how dynamic and unpredictable PvP can be. Arenas and battlegrounds are very safe and it's incredibly obvious how to win, whether you have to control an objective, or just kill the other team. There generally isn't a risk because you will know 9/10 who will win if you know the players on both teams.

Either way, people seem to continue to ignore that smaller scale PvP can actually happen in Cyrodiil. My guild runs a small group of players that generally doesn't exceed eight in Cyrodiil and they are able to find plenty of smaller skirmishes. I can already envision arena outcomes will be based solely on who is faster at spamming impulse, AOEs, and ultimates.

Imperator_Clydus · June 2014

No.

nelsonus_ESO wrote: »

Adding Arena's would not change cyrodil. If theres a large population that doesn't like arena's, then why would there be no one left in cyrodil?

Bottom line is adding more option for playing = a better game. Stop trying to force the game only to cater to you because you are afraid of change.

Incorrect. Adding more options does not lead to a better game. This is a fallacy that many developers and publishers have fooled themselves into believing over the years. They believe if they make the most well-rounded game possible, they will have the most profitable game on the planet.

What in truth actually happens is the vision and direction of the game becomes so convoluted and distorted that one is generally left with an underwhelming and mediocre product that doesn't excel at anything. It's more practical to create a unique and different vision and follow through with it. You can't please everyone, and if you try, you will inevitably please no one.

Again, with how early this game is in its life cycle, and how many issues the current systems have, adding an entirely new PvP system would be ill-advised. AvA is the foundation of this game and that is what ZOS should focus their resources on. There's more variety in PvP there than many give Cyrodiil credit and like my personal idea of an arena for this game, there are better ways of implementing the system with ESO.

Copying other MMOs just because they have a system does not mean it will be successful in your game. I'm all for small scale PvP, but you don't necessarily need an arena to organize that.

Imperator_Clydus · June 2014

No.

Tombs_UDL wrote: »

SWTOR had a battleground, not arenas. One battleground... to play over and over and over. It had no real world PVP to speak of. It killed the game (for PVPers) when it didnt have a balance of PVP options, not because it had Huttball. Let's not distort reality here.

It is clear to me Clydus that you dont relish the small scale even encounters. Otherwise, you wouldnt be in Cyrodil daily with your "SHehai attacking Bleakers, X for invite"s in zone and running with a small zerg. Get out a little bit on your own my man, test your skills, learn from your losses, get strong, 1v1 Varus or FireShot. Maybe you relish the role of hive queen, I dont know.

If you dont want to play arenas DONT PLAY THEM. But dont try to screw up what other people want to do because you are uncomfortable. Let me give you the biggest example of all... WORLD OF FRIGGEN WARCRAFT. It exists, still. People are still playing arenas and having fun. They are still playing battlegrounds. They are still killing people in the world on PVP servers.

You combine DAOC with WOW for PVP content, add in a little Darfallish type death penalty and you have yourself a game. Saying anything else is silly.

I was a long-term Game Tester for SWTOR and I played the game its first two years. Arenas were implemented. They weren't there initially, but they have been in the game for a while, and they did not improve PvP in the slightest. There were three warzones (battlegrounds) at launch with Alderaan Civil War, Voidstar, and Huttball. Three more have been added since then.

The point still stands that arenas and battlegrounds are very similar, both being structured PvP. Battlegrounds generally focus more on objectives while arenas are pure death matches, but this isn't always the case. The example of an "arena" ZOS showcased at E3 was 3v3v3 one point domination.

Ilum was the world PvP in SWTOR, for those of us who were actually there at launch to experience it. The problem is the HeroEngine could not handle large scale PvP, so it was unfortunately removed due to stupidity on BioWare's part. Removing Ilum, not fixing class balance, having a terrible stun system (resolve), and making PvP more casual destroyed the game.

I came to ESO to participate in AvA (siege battles, capturing elder scrolls, crowning an emperor). I did not come here to duel or to mindlessly death match. There are plenty of other games and MMOs that facilitate that experience much better than ESO. If I happen to be in a situation where I am in a 1v1 or smaller scale scenario, which happens more than you think in ESO, I always engage.

You just don't get it. This has nothing to do with me not wanting to participate in Arenas. I love PvP and have been participating in arenas, battlegrounds, world PvP, and everything in-between in MMORPGs for a decade. My concerns are the consequences of adding a system that does not fit with the fabric of the game. I am concerned by adding such a drastically different system so soon after launch will further exacerbate issues and create and even less enjoyable experience for everybody, whether in arenas, AvA, or PvE.

This is how MMORPGs. What affects one feature, will inevitably affect the rest. There are underlining consequences many do not consider and so I am here to bring those concerns to light. This isn't just as simple of "hey lets throw in an arena and give players more options." That's not how game development works, and for a game that wasn't built for such a system, requires a lot of preparation and thought well in advance.

World of Warcraft is a terrible example of PvP in MMORPGs. It is and always will be a PvE MMO driven by its raid content. ESO, instead, should look to PvP MMOs such as DAoC, Darkfall Online, Mortal Online, Star Wars Galaxies, Ultima Online, EVE, and others that it has a lot more in common with.

You want FFA full loot PvP in ESO like Darkfall? I can already tell you that will never happen as ESO is not a hardcore sandbox and it is trying to appeal to a wider audience, not to a small niche. I am interested in the long term health of ESO, and prioritizing properly and adding features that make sense will largely determine how well this MMO will do.

Imperator_Clydus · June 2014

No.

nelsonus_ESO wrote: »

SBR_QuorTek wrote: »

Then why did you leave for playing TESO.. it make no sense, especially since the main playerbase support TES ways and not WoW/SWtor ways

Why does it have to be one or the other? Think about WAR, it had battlegrounds and open world pvp. People did both, and people loved it. Some days I wanted open world action, sometimes I wanted battleground option.

Here is the key:

Either way, I was still playing WAR. In ESO if I want small man instanced action? I have to go play another game. How is that good for ESO? It's not.

Now I don't know anything about other ESO players, neither do you. So all I can talk about is myself. But MMO populations are made up of players so if an MMO is making ME not want to play because of lack of options, that is a BAD thing. ESPECIALLY if the 3v3 arena is already created, just not implemented.

The question you should be asking yourself is why are you getting bored of AvA? Why are you not finding smaller scale fights in Cyrodiil? It should be placed into context that AvA is not entirely working as intended and many players have been abusing and exploiting the various systems of the PvP feature.

Once there are less campaigns, transfer costs are increased, and guesting is less frequent, I think you will find there will be a lot more opportunities for variety and various scenarios for PvP. Various guilds in my campaign, at least, set up small scale PvP events with others and have a blast. I can only see AvA being more fulfilling once the new changes are in effect and most of the dead campaigns are removed for good.

Lithion · June 2014

Yes.

I'd actually love an arena system. I'd actually be able to experiment with various abilities and learn to PvP with my class in a non-laggy, non-zergy environment.

If ZOS is worried about players leaving AvA then they can simply implement an arena system with no experience or substantial rewards. Maybe some cosmetics or a title, but nothing substantial. Hell, I wouldn't mind if they just implemented arena for fun/practice with no reward system. AvA will always be more rewarding if ZOS implements Arena correctly, and people who love AvA will have no reason to do arena.

Also, balance is always an issue for PvP, but ZOS wouldn't have to worry about striking a perfect balance if Arena exists solely for fun/practice. I just want to play my class in a setting where I won't get punished severely for trying unique builds. Right now I'd be stupid to try sub-par builds or abilities in AvA because I'd spend most of my time running back after being wtfpwnd repeatedly.

nan.jieb17_ESO · June 2014

Yes.

Imperator_Clydus wrote: »

I just want to ensure that ZOS does not neglect its most enticing feature in favor of adding something that generally ruins PvP in a lot of MMORPGs.

For you it was SWTOR and which other game?
Don't mention WoW because there are many people playing arenas and having fun there.

Imperator_Clydus wrote: »

I'm fine with arenas when the rest of the game is functioning and running smoothly. I'm fine with arenas if they are implemented in a way that makes sense and does not further convolute balance and stability. As it stands, the game is still very new and needs time to develop and mature. Battlegrounds weren't added in SWG until 2009, and that was six years after the game was launched.

Then why did you vote "no"? Do you think that people that voted "yes" dont want the rest of the game fixed?

You are fighting pretty hard for less endcontent I wonder where all this hate comes from. Disappointment in Huttball?
You never played WAR right? This is how RvR should be like and how battlegrounds should work. And WAR was introduced as a PvP/RvR game with only 2 factions and without mirrored classes, was awesome though.
So it can actually work out without considering all the stuff perfectionists would want.....
Why not take stuff from other games which were good?
Ah right, because a handful dont want it. Cheers mate. :P

About 200 people were voting here thats like 10% of one campaign on 1 server (NA/NA-EU) which is very representative, if we get 2000 vote will Obama deal with the problem? Or is he afraid of receiving a long answer from Imperator_Clydus without arguments. :P

SBR_QuorTek · June 2014

No.

Imperator_Clydus wrote: »

SBR_QuorTek wrote: »

Uh Starwars Galaxies PvP had it all, and no actual arenas you would queu into at all and you could pvp everywhere you wanted to.. the specific zones... you would just walk into and be flagged for pvp.

For balance... original SWG was skill based as well meaning no actual classes either other than those paths you wanted to go and class/hybrid class you wanted to be, SWG had one of the best communities where as players made up PvP events where the big battle should be. SWG also had the space part of the game xwing vs tiefighter alike combat which also was heavy involved in pvp.

What killed swg was the constant combat upgrades and complete reworks of how classes/gameplay should work out, if knew how to play there would be no real differences between classes either... gear wise... all armor was crafted with the most and best crafting system I have ever seen in ANY mmo out there, but meaning you could hit this or that cap and that would be it and not able to exceed that, but then meaning you would had gathered the best amount of mats as well... not having a legendary tag... epic tag or whichever onto it... but each mat would drop for like 3 weeks or something like titanium steel (insert 2/6 stats ranging from 1 to 1000) after that period a new titanium steel with a new set of stats onto it.

Player cities with player houses was a thing as well.. you could 100% decorate your house meaning you could use cordinates to move around the painting you had looted/bought and place it where you want it to be.

Anyhow it involved grinds, quests and more... this more cool items you wanted like mandalorian armor this harder the struggle, but was really engageing and fun... going hunting with a couple of friends for something big... and in the old days getting a 20man group totally owned in the deathwatch bunker lol.

The pvp sort of get close to the old SWG system but more advanced in ESO though, PvE system even share some of the same traits... guess it is what attracted me to TESO, well being a TES fan too.

You obviously did not play SWG after the NGE. Initially with Pre-CU, there was only open world and there were various zones on planets designated for more structured death matching. After the NGE went live, SOE turned Restuss into a PvP zone and later added battlegrounds that you had to queue up for with a group.

I don't really want to get off topic and start reminiscing about how amazing a game SWG was. It's fair to say in general anyone who played it loved it and many were discouraged by the changes SOE implemented with the Combat Upgrade and then the infamous New Game Enhancement. My point in regards to SWG was that what made the PvP shine was the fact that it was open world and completely player-driven, and Cyrodiil has some similarities to that.

The reason I even play ESO, besides the fact I have been an avid TES fan since Morrowind, was because of the sandbox nature of the franchise and the overall promise of incredible, sandbox, open world PvP. That's what Cyrodiil offers, albeit not perfect, but it has a great amount of potential and it sets ESO apart from many other MMORPGs on the market.

I just want to ensure that ZOS does not neglect its most enticing feature in favor of adding something that generally ruins PvP in a lot of MMORPGs. I'm fine with arenas when the rest of the game is functioning and running smoothly. I'm fine with arenas if they are implemented in a way that makes sense and does not further convolute balance and stability. As it stands, the game is still very new and needs time to develop and mature. Battlegrounds weren't added in SWG until 2009, and that was six years after the game was launched.

Actually I did... spendt a week or two with the NGE active... held 4-5 month break and returned again.... space was my the most active part.... but when they actually made ground classes useable again I returned to dirtside now and then.

SBR_QuorTek · June 2014

No.

nelsonus_ESO wrote: »

SBR_QuorTek wrote: »

Then why did you leave for playing TESO.. it make no sense, especially since the main playerbase support TES ways and not WoW/SWtor ways

Why does it have to be one or the other? Think about WAR, it had battlegrounds and open world pvp. People did both, and people loved it. Some days I wanted open world action, sometimes I wanted battleground option.

Here is the key:

Either way, I was still playing WAR. In ESO if I want small man instanced action? I have to go play another game. How is that good for ESO? It's not.

Now I don't know anything about other ESO players, neither do you. So all I can talk about is myself. But MMO populations are made up of players so if an MMO is making ME not want to play because of lack of options, that is a BAD thing. ESPECIALLY if the 3v3 arena is already created, just not implemented.

This is not 'WAR?' This is TESO another ruleset another setting..

cjmarsh725b14_ESO · June 2014

No.

I don't think the class lines are anywhere near balanced enough for arena pvp. I also think they should focus on fixing the major issues of lag and buggy forward camps before adding major features like this.

Yasha · June 2014

Yes.

SBR_QuorTek wrote: »

nelsonus_ESO wrote: »

SBR_QuorTek wrote: »

Then why did you leave for playing TESO.. it make no sense, especially since the main playerbase support TES ways and not WoW/SWtor ways

Why does it have to be one or the other? Think about WAR, it had battlegrounds and open world pvp. People did both, and people loved it. Some days I wanted open world action, sometimes I wanted battleground option.

Here is the key:

Either way, I was still playing WAR. In ESO if I want small man instanced action? I have to go play another game. How is that good for ESO? It's not.

Now I don't know anything about other ESO players, neither do you. So all I can talk about is myself. But MMO populations are made up of players so if an MMO is making ME not want to play because of lack of options, that is a BAD thing. ESPECIALLY if the 3v3 arena is already created, just not implemented.

This is not 'WAR?' This is TESO another ruleset another setting..

The point is that WAR is very similar to this game in many ways, while the people giving reasons for why they do not want Arena/battlegrounds are drawing reference to games like SWTOR and WoW which have very little in common with ESO's pvp set up.

If you look at WAR and GW2, the two recentish games that had AvA (similar to ESO) and also had battlegrounds, you will see that both forms of pvp worked well together and AvA was/is actually the most popular form of pvp in those games.

All these issues that people talk about with how battlegrounds destroy AVA etc, did/do not exist in the two games most similar to ESO in terms of pvp (and which also have battlegrounds).

Gravord · June 2014

Yes.

Imperator_Clydus wrote: »

I can already envision arena outcomes will be based solely on who is faster at spamming impulse, AOEs, and ultimates.

That statement says all. You have not a single clue what arena/scenario combat is about if you think impulse will be key ability in 4vs4...

Tannakaobi · June 2014

Yes.

The argument that Small scale PVP will ruin Cyrodiil does not fly at all. If Cyrodiil is so lame that people are desperate for any other form of PVP then.... enough said.

So to sum up, if Cyrodiil is so poor that it will be killed by other forms of PVP then it needs to die a horrible painful death.

And lets face the facts, 90% of the time Cyrodiil is utter rollocks. It's not even PVP, it's just PVE in a PVP zone.

If anything, adding more forms of PVP and reducing the number of Cyrodiil's to one or two would make it much better as there would actually be people in it.

PVP in eso is tomtit. It needs a complete re-think.

Edit: For me arena is not really the solution, I would rather 10v10v10 up to 50v50v50 battle grounds. But arena's would be better than nothing...

nan.jieb17_ESO · June 2014

Yes.

SBR_QuorTek wrote: »

This is not 'WAR?' This is TESO another ruleset another setting..

You dont say

. But if you want your MMORPG to be successful why not take the good stuff from other games? Yeah right because you dont want a franchise you want sth completely new without even using the same letters in the title than other games which might have ruined your childhood had. k thx bye

SBR_QuorTek · June 2014

No.

nan.jieb17_ESO wrote: »

SBR_QuorTek wrote: »

This is not 'WAR?' This is TESO another ruleset another setting..

You dont say . But if you want your MMORPG to be successful why not take the good stuff from other games? Yeah right because you dont want a franchise you want sth completely new without even using the same letters in the title than other games which might have ruined your childhood had. k thx bye

You get another stupid clone, going same old same old is really not the way.. it is like why play another game when you just get the same packet solution.

Also tell me how to balance the 4 classes and there 1000s of more subclass actions down to be like balanced... it would be zerg in arenas just in mini-scale and to be efficient at it you need no more than 3-5 people really.

It works in other games for one reason you have x amount of classes and they can only spec this or that way vs full skill based system.

apterous · June 2014

Yes.

hell yes i want arena, it's lorefriendly and fun.

Dudis · June 2014

No.

I don't think people will play arenas because they are more fun but rather because it'll be an easier and more convenient point-grind.

I get that people want more competative smallscale pvp, but there has to be a better way to do it without separating it from the larger scale Cyrodiil.

DAoC managed to have a very competative 8v8 scene even though it all took place in an open frontier.

Konou · June 2014

Yes.

What if you want to play PvP and all campaigns have a queue? Soon we will have less campaigns and I promise you there will be very huge queues! Ok, you can do PvE, but some people dont want that. But if you can do 3v3v3 arena in the queue time it would be great for everyone!

nan.jieb17_ESO · June 2014

Yes.

Dudis wrote: »

I don't think people will play arenas because they are more fun but rather because it'll be an easier and more convenient point-grind.

the math : assuming everyone that voted in the poll is an rvr player (which is not the case) then we have currently 36% who want to play arenas.
with 3 full campaigns on NA-EU server this makes (if populationcap wasnt changed) 36% * 6000player = 2160 players from europe alone and assuming NA has the same amount that makes 4320 players wanting arenas.
Not counting pve players at all which are also likely to play arenas for fun.
Thats be like 50k€ each month they can bind by making arenas over half a million per year. We cant be entirely sure about the numbers but 4k player seem to me like an arenacommunity you can work with.

Dudis wrote: »

I get that people want more competative smallscale pvp, but there has to be a better way to do it without separating it from the larger scale Cyrodiil.

Seems to me like you said the opposite in the sentence before, but of course it wasnt the case

you have to say that though. :P

Dudis wrote: »

DAoC managed to have a very competative 8v8 scene even though it all took place in an open frontier.

Why not both, the material seems to be there, the knowledge/experience aswell. The people who would be up for it are there too.

SBR_QuorTek · June 2014

No.

nan.jieb17_ESO wrote: »

Dudis wrote: »

I don't think people will play arenas because they are more fun but rather because it'll be an easier and more convenient point-grind.

the math : assuming everyone that voted in the poll is an rvr player (which is not the case) then we have currently 36% who want to play arenas.
with 3 full campaigns on NA-EU server this makes (if populationcap wasnt changed) 36% * 6000player = 2160 players from europe alone and assuming NA has the same amount that makes 4320 players wanting arenas.
Not counting pve players at all which are also likely to play arenas for fun.
Thats be like 50k€ each month they can bind by making arenas over half a million per year. We cant be entirely sure about the numbers but 4k player seem to me like an arenacommunity you can work with.

Dudis wrote: »

I get that people want more competative smallscale pvp, but there has to be a better way to do it without separating it from the larger scale Cyrodiil.

Seems to me like you said the opposite in the sentence before, but of course it wasnt the case you have to say that though. :P

Dudis wrote: »

DAoC managed to have a very competative 8v8 scene even though it all took place in an open frontier.

Why not both, the material seems to be there, the knowledge/experience aswell. The people who would be up for it are there too.

Or they could keep on improving current system and then attract alot of players for that, honestly I think we should stick with what we got and work on that side of the matter, as for the above 'market analysis' it is invalid, only a very few really check the forums, so you can't really make up some numbers without having something to back it up with.

As in the only thing the devs really only should be paying attention to here should be class bugs, stuff not working as intended, fixing current bugs. eg. the error 301 and 103 issues... openly used exploits such as power leveling with to much gain and more.

The choice is when you look at the poll should go more like: do you want freedom or do you want to be put into a box with arenas getting stomped the exact same way as in openworld cyrodiil.

Just some thoughts..

Dudis · June 2014

No.

nan.jieb17_ESO wrote: »

stuff... read above :P

Couple of things:

1) The bolded parts were taken way out of context. I'm not saying people won't play arenas. On the contrary, I believe arenas might be the doom of Cyrodiil simply because of the convenience of the queue system, not having to find a group, go look for action etc, etc... NOT because everyone enjoys it more.

2) That 4k number is a lot larger. Just because there's only 6000 people online pvping doesn't mean there's only 6000 pvpers. I remember some old estimate saying that peak population times 10-15 roughly equal number of subscribers to an MMO. Of course, very few MMOs actually show online numbers anymore.

3) I want smallscale pvp in an open world, I don't think I contradicted myself by saying that. I only run solo or duo in ESO.

SBR_QuorTek · June 2014

No.

Dudis wrote: »

nan.jieb17_ESO wrote: »

stuff... read above :P

Couple of things:

3) I want smallscale pvp in an open world, I don't think I contradicted myself by saying that. I only run solo or duo in ESO.

You are 100% correct about that, if you want small scale pvp you can do such in Cyrodiil, it is very easy to get into as well, all what it take is seeking out the content of course you can run into an army at times but that is just the tough luck stuff that happen now and then... and easy to pass by just clicking respawn and go somewhere else.

People are lazy that is why they want a queu system for something small scale... but in small scale you wont participiate in anything emperor alike content nor would the points be gotten for your alliance.

Also if anything small scale should appear... it should not include the rank system, obtaining rank should only be available in Open World Cyrodiil content, because I foresee an exploit people powergrinding ranks if allowed in Arenas removing content from cyrodil and do not get me wrong on that, it will happen if the case.

nan.jieb17_ESO · June 2014

Yes.

SBR_QuorTek wrote: »

Or they could keep on improving current system and then attract alot of players for that, honestly I think we should stick with what we got and work on that side of the matter, as for the above 'market analysis' it is invalid, only a very few really check the forums, so you can't really make up some numbers without having something to back it up with.

I can and I will, just because the numbers might vary about 2000+- doesnt mean I cant use it. Somebody said barely anyone will play arenas so I make up some numbers that sound reasonable.

SBR_QuorTek wrote: »

As in the only thing the devs really only should be paying attention to here should be class bugs, stuff not working as intended, fixing current bugs. eg. the error 301 and 103 issues... openly used exploits such as power leveling with to much gain and more.

"No" to arenas, not because Iam against but because I think others things are more important. *** really? This is the spirit? Guess the poll about "what is wrong with ESO game or community" was right.

SBR_QuorTek wrote: »

The choice is when you look at the poll should go more like: do you want freedom or do you want to be put into a box with arenas getting stomped the exact same way as in openworld cyrodiil.

Haha "do you want freedom" xD thats very american, good "argument"
Of course you will get stomped by zerg and oil in arenas thats what they are about. :P

nan.jieb17_ESO · June 2014

Yes.

Dudis wrote: »

Couple of things:

1) The bolded parts were taken way out of context. I'm not saying people won't play arenas. On the contrary, I believe arenas might be the doom of Cyrodiil simply because of the convenience of the queue system, not having to find a group, go look for action etc, etc... NOT because everyone enjoys it more.

Dudis wrote: »

I don't think people will play arenas

?

So you say the people shouldnt have a queue system because its too convenient? I think fat people shouldnt drive in a wheelchair. :P (little joky)
But srsly when people rate queue and arenas over rvr why should it be bad to give them what they want? It might be bad for the rvr players but if they are not enough people or the rvr is *** why continue?

Dudis wrote: »

2) That 4k number is a lot larger. Just because there's only 6000 people online pvping doesn't mean there's only 6000 pvpers. I remember some old estimate saying that peak population times 10-15 roughly equal number of subscribers to an MMO. Of course, very few MMOs actually show online numbers anymore.

you can see it as a worst-case-scenario

Dudis wrote: »

3) I want smallscale pvp in an open world, I don't think I contradicted myself by saying that. I only run solo or duo in ESO.

I am pretty sure you can have both. Smallscale in Cyro and arenas.
To buff smallscale you actually have to make small grps able to impact on the campaign like capping small battelobjects (farm, mine etc)
Reducing the number of npcs seems valid.
Right now 1-2 people alone can only gank and hope the enemy comes 1 by 1.

Lorkhan · June 2014

Yes.

oh yeah! i rly want arena pvp man! aleluia they'r implementing
let the pvp players pvp. give us options. i love cyrodill, but arena will be more fun, im sure about this. fast pace game, no 10 minutes horse travelling, no 10X100, no siege. just a fight club. you feel fear? go pve

Dudis · June 2014

No.

nan.jieb17_ESO wrote: »

To buff smallscale you actually have to make small grps able to impact on the campaign like capping small battelobjects (farm, mine etc)
Reducing the number of npcs seems valid.
Right now 1-2 people alone can only gank and hope the enemy comes 1 by 1.

Exactly. Except I generally enjoy fighting larger numbers :P
In the end all I want is good challenging and varied fights, hence I prefer an open world system.

Also, my quote was:
"I don't think people will play arenas because they are more fun but rather because it'll be an easier and more convenient point-grind."

Meaning i don't think the reason the majority of people will play arena is because it's more fun.

Think of it like questing vs grinding. Most people enjoy questing much more than grinding XP, but many will force themselves to grind simply because it's more efficient, or in this case, convenient.

SirknightMMB · June 2014

Yes.

I voted yes. Not only does this game have the capacity for AMAZING small scale battles but it can bring an element of E-Sports to the game bringing a larger interest in the game.

For those whom voted no the Arena system should and would not be forced on you. So no is almost an invalid answer at this point.

For those whom answered no just because Cyro needs fixes well those will come regardless.

nelsonus_ESO · June 2014

Yes.

Some great responses in this thread for both sides.

Let's all agree that we would love for ESO to fix all of its problems first, but that wont happen. They are releasing PVE zones and more VR ranks instead of fixing balance and bugs. So instead of waiting around forever for them to fix things and lag in cyrodil, I would like to be able to enjoy some small fair fights to test my mettle, between my attempts to beat everyone up in cyrodil.

SBR_QuorTek · June 2014

No.

nan.jieb17_ESO wrote: »

Dudis wrote: »

Couple of things:

1) The bolded parts were taken way out of context. I'm not saying people won't play arenas. On the contrary, I believe arenas might be the doom of Cyrodiil simply because of the convenience of the queue system, not having to find a group, go look for action etc, etc... NOT because everyone enjoys it more.

Dudis wrote: »

I don't think people will play arenas

?

So you say the people shouldnt have a queue system because its too convenient? I think fat people shouldnt drive in a wheelchair. :P (little joky)
But srsly when people rate queue and arenas over rvr why should it be bad to give them what they want? It might be bad for the rvr players but if they are not enough people or the rvr is *** why continue?

Dudis wrote: »

2) That 4k number is a lot larger. Just because there's only 6000 people online pvping doesn't mean there's only 6000 pvpers. I remember some old estimate saying that peak population times 10-15 roughly equal number of subscribers to an MMO. Of course, very few MMOs actually show online numbers anymore.

you can see it as a worst-case-scenario

Dudis wrote: »

3) I want smallscale pvp in an open world, I don't think I contradicted myself by saying that. I only run solo or duo in ESO.

I am pretty sure you can have both. Smallscale in Cyro and arenas.
To buff smallscale you actually have to make small grps able to impact on the campaign like capping small battelobjects (farm, mine etc)
Reducing the number of npcs seems valid.
Right now 1-2 people alone can only gank and hope the enemy comes 1 by 1.

As long as they keep the rank gain system to cyrodiil only it is fine, else you will find the entire playerbase grinding rank in Arenas, where as it should be earned on the big battlefield... makes sense as well.

nan.jieb17_ESO · June 2014

Yes.

SBR_QuorTek wrote: »

nan.jieb17_ESO wrote: »

Dudis wrote: »

Couple of things:

1) The bolded parts were taken way out of context. I'm not saying people won't play arenas. On the contrary, I believe arenas might be the doom of Cyrodiil simply because of the convenience of the queue system, not having to find a group, go look for action etc, etc... NOT because everyone enjoys it more.

Dudis wrote: »

I don't think people will play arenas

?

So you say the people shouldnt have a queue system because its too convenient? I think fat people shouldnt drive in a wheelchair. :P (little joky)
But srsly when people rate queue and arenas over rvr why should it be bad to give them what they want? It might be bad for the rvr players but if they are not enough people or the rvr is *** why continue?

Dudis wrote: »

2) That 4k number is a lot larger. Just because there's only 6000 people online pvping doesn't mean there's only 6000 pvpers. I remember some old estimate saying that peak population times 10-15 roughly equal number of subscribers to an MMO. Of course, very few MMOs actually show online numbers anymore.

you can see it as a worst-case-scenario

Dudis wrote: »

3) I want smallscale pvp in an open world, I don't think I contradicted myself by saying that. I only run solo or duo in ESO.

I am pretty sure you can have both. Smallscale in Cyro and arenas.
To buff smallscale you actually have to make small grps able to impact on the campaign like capping small battelobjects (farm, mine etc)
Reducing the number of npcs seems valid.
Right now 1-2 people alone can only gank and hope the enemy comes 1 by 1.

As long as they keep the rank gain system to cyrodiil only it is fine, else you will find the entire playerbase grinding rank in Arenas, where as it should be earned on the big battlefield... makes sense as well.

Completely new ranksystem for arenas would be fine.

I think no serious arenaplayer wants to be mistaken for someone who made his points easily in rvr. :P

SBR_QuorTek · June 2014

No.

nan.jieb17_ESO wrote: »

SBR_QuorTek wrote: »

nan.jieb17_ESO wrote: »

Dudis wrote: »

Couple of things:

1) The bolded parts were taken way out of context. I'm not saying people won't play arenas. On the contrary, I believe arenas might be the doom of Cyrodiil simply because of the convenience of the queue system, not having to find a group, go look for action etc, etc... NOT because everyone enjoys it more.

Dudis wrote: »

I don't think people will play arenas

?

So you say the people shouldnt have a queue system because its too convenient? I think fat people shouldnt drive in a wheelchair. :P (little joky)
But srsly when people rate queue and arenas over rvr why should it be bad to give them what they want? It might be bad for the rvr players but if they are not enough people or the rvr is *** why continue?

Dudis wrote: »

2) That 4k number is a lot larger. Just because there's only 6000 people online pvping doesn't mean there's only 6000 pvpers. I remember some old estimate saying that peak population times 10-15 roughly equal number of subscribers to an MMO. Of course, very few MMOs actually show online numbers anymore.

you can see it as a worst-case-scenario

Dudis wrote: »

3) I want smallscale pvp in an open world, I don't think I contradicted myself by saying that. I only run solo or duo in ESO.

I am pretty sure you can have both. Smallscale in Cyro and arenas.
To buff smallscale you actually have to make small grps able to impact on the campaign like capping small battelobjects (farm, mine etc)
Reducing the number of npcs seems valid.
Right now 1-2 people alone can only gank and hope the enemy comes 1 by 1.

As long as they keep the rank gain system to cyrodiil only it is fine, else you will find the entire playerbase grinding rank in Arenas, where as it should be earned on the big battlefield... makes sense as well.

Completely new ranksystem for arenas would be fine.
I think no serious arenaplayer wants to be mistaken for someone who made his points easily in rvr. :P

People say it is for E-Sport so no new ranks other than maybe top 10 players get a title and an armor look for being a champ in top 10 or something... that will reset each month or something including title and use of special armor look... or something..

Can go all anime style with You are numbeeer one!!!