DaniimalsSF wrote: »

The rewards need to be better plain and simple. Some suggestions: double AP but it’s converted to gold, 1 crown crate per every 25k AP earned, a Golden Pursuit for an Apex mount completely tied to Cyrodill, 1 day free ESO+ per 25k AP earned. As it stands they are asking us to give our time and money to test their product.

LPapirius wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

LPapirius wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Just_Attivi wrote: »

After getting a peek at the Vengeance skills...

While I, again, understand they claim this to be just a test, Im seeing that they put in way too much effort into these vengeance skills, and with the history of this company, it just makes me feel even more confident that this is the ultimate direction they are going.
---
Some thoughts:

I dont mind PVP having PVP specific skills, as this would make balancing easier, in theory, more on that later. While I actually do like "SOME" of the new skills, I think a lot of them are lacking utility in current state and despite all the people touting "oh you wont be able to rely on proc sets anymore, gonna have to actually get skill" - as someone who generally plays without free damage proc sets on anything but a ganker, I see some class kits desperately lacking important buffs, which means youll need groups to get them, which means a couple things. 1- your 1vX'ers will be forced to be 2V's or Xv's , and if you already hated dealing with them itll only be worse. 2-If you were a 1vX'er, now you likely will need a comped group to a degree for buffs, which for some, really removes the thrill. 3- lacking combo's and pressure with skills that are now a dedicated 'just a buff' or 'just damage' it seems like in order to really kill any competent player, you will need to group them down or battle of attrition.

They are removing Battlespirit for the test and giving everyone 70k HP (but everyone takes PVE damage). This seems counterproductive as Battlespirit was the tool to separate PVE and PVP. Getting rid of it seems to suggest they think they can balance PVP without it. Which to me just screams more years of Sledgehammering skills into uselessness and Buffing others in an attempt to "Balance" with minimal idea of what this new pvp monstrosity theyre creating needs, because PVP playtesting from Dev side seems minimal, and PVP player feedback is generally not considered in any timely fashion.

Adding cooldowns to skills.... What? Okay, I get that its an attempt to limit powerful skills.... losing control over how and when to use them is not great. I can jump into any well developed Tab target game if I wanted that, and hit my rotation mindlessly for hours. ESO has the freedom to use skills as needed, pairing down not just the utility but the timing of skills removes the ability to adapt to situations, and unpredictable situations are half the thrill of PVP. This will only lead to less engaging gameplay. This isnt meant to be a phone game.

Basically everything has at most a target limit of 3 players. I don't know how I feel about that yet, but I think I see it as more of a downside than an upside, as someone who generally fights outnumbered.

If they do go this ultra trimmed down cyrodiil route, How will sets tie into it? By trimming down cyro, you are removing build versatility. While many people see this as 'HAHA NO MORE PROC CHEESE FOR YOU" they dont think about the other side of the coin: you know how many players Ive helped make one bar builds because they physically or mentally cannot do 2 bars? or how many people play tanks because they enjoy taking part in the action but arent so fast reacting anymore? Without sets, these playstyles do become obsolete. In order to reintroduce these, basically entire sets now need to be rebalanced, furthering the endeavor of this cyro revamp to levels I really dont see ZOS going through with. Build versatility is what makes this game interesting, and I just dont see a scenario that this pans out well, unless ZOS actually goes through with appropriate changes and balancing, which I doubt would happen. But a lot of this just seems half baked already, even from a testing standpoint.
---

I probably have more thoughts about this, but work is calling, so I'll probably ramble later. I will close this with saying that I do genuinely hope ZOS pulls through and makes something amazing and properly tests and balances things and everything is sunshine and rainbows. Their history just shows this is an unlikely scenario.

I don't think they are putting a crazy amount of effort. Many of the skills are just old versions or current versions with parts deleted.

The battlespirit is another layer that is nolonger needed if pvp has its own skill versions. Keeping it would just be unnecessary bloat and rounding calculations.

Cooldowns are a sus way of limiting skills. Once the test happens live make sure to voice and die for this opinion. Ramping costs or higher costs are a better option for even better performance.

Target limit is fine. Even in today's 1vX it is more like dueling against 10 players. Most classes other than acuity warden basically only take down 1-3 targets at a time. Big fear is they add back in Uncapped aoe heals and cross heals.

IMO accessibility is a one way street. If you cater too hard to disabled players you open doors for average/good lazy players to abuse cheese. Yay now heavy attack builds work....... oh there are 5 templars heavy attacking and beaming me to death with no counterplay...... nice. I think there are smarter ways than procs for disabled players. Oakensoul for example doesnt undermine the gcd system, but helps disabled players. Maybe instead of a fast paced dizzy swing build, they run a more aoe dot focused build. Or instead of more active skills they slot more buff skills and a single spammable.

Just_Attivi wrote: »

Sluggy wrote: »

@Just_Attivi

Erm, wow. That stuff you mentioned is all real? Not just supposition? I assume there's been some streams covering it or something? I really haven't been paying that much attention because I was taking a wait-and-see approach before reinstalling.

I agree with your assessment about the effort they've put in. I've hinted at it myself in a few posts (maybe even this one? I can't remember) I was just avoiding saying it out loud due to the excessive censorship lately. But the details you've said are completely scorched earth beyond a level even my jaded attitude would imagine. Assuming that's the case, I'd say there's not much left to post here. I mean on the PvP/Combat forums in general. At that point everything we know and like about ESO's PvP combat is gone. This is actually an entirely different game at this point. The ESO we've been playing for a decade is officially shutdown after this 'test' goes live.

yea, obviously we dont know what they will do in the future, but the track records make me think what i think lol. I know this is a "Test" but I can see this becoming the quick fix to get less "wah wah wah" from PVP'ers in the future, and if that is the route they go... yea, I dont see anyone who actually enjoys PVP staying.

Again, I hope I'm wrong, and I hope this test helps them find out how to improve performance and keep what we all love (and maybe improve the things we dont love, like excessive heal/shield stacking lol). I agree that this step is a great FIRST step in diagnosing the problems, my doubts are with them carrying out appropriate steps beyond this, and again, I really want to be proven wrong on this. (also, still... midyear mayhem performance is always radically better than 'normal' despite being pop locked... just saying... maybe a point to look at, ZOS)

The game was far more popular in the early days which vengeance is very similar to combat wise. Combat is clear and actions are meaningful. Its like playing super smash bros with items turned off vs turned on. They already stated that a more final vision would include sets, mundus, enchants, etc. Just dont expect skills to do an aoe+dot+gap close+buff+debuff+ground affect+ do your dishes.......etc.

The dynamic of what affects your output as a player will finally be more dependent on which skills you cast instead of what dlc you buy and slot. Seriously think about your output as a player. How much of your damage is from procs or passive buffs? Most skills now a days interact with 5-10 passive buffs instead of scaling mainly off your chosen stats. Inevitably pvp players will prefer the winning by skill instead of by default.

Um, sorry, no, the vengence version of Cyrodiil on the PTS now is NOTHING like Cyrodiil in 2014. Not even remotely.

The only comment you've made in all these threads about the vengence mode that holds true in my opinion is "I don't think they are putting a crazy amount of effort" in regards to ZOS' investment into Cyrodiil PvP.

Nobody I know will stick around for this version of Cyrodiil. And besides that, it will seriously hurt ZOS' income because there will no longer be any reason for the PvP community to spend money on the PvE aspects of the game. This whole effort is misdirected in the first place in my opinion. They need to fix the Cyrodiil they already have. Not create a whole new game mode. They made Cyrodiil that worked and was glorious for years and they could do it again if they just tried. Instead they are going in a totally different direction.

You are arguing against the necessary steps to fix pvp...... and then saying they should fix pvp. What do you want me to say to this? I think the tests are 100% necessary, but I also have background in engineering and know the typical corporate process that would pretty much force them to have to test before taking action.

A 1 week test is not the end of the world, crazy that people think it is. They stated many times that this is not, nor would it be the final release version of pvp. It also does not make monetary sense to make all pvp players be able to ignore content and subscription services.

I most certainly am not "arguing against the necessary steps to fix pvp". <snip>. Please stop mischaracterizing my statements.

MincMincMinc wrote: »

LPapirius wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

LPapirius wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Just_Attivi wrote: »

After getting a peek at the Vengeance skills...

While I, again, understand they claim this to be just a test, Im seeing that they put in way too much effort into these vengeance skills, and with the history of this company, it just makes me feel even more confident that this is the ultimate direction they are going.
---
Some thoughts:

I dont mind PVP having PVP specific skills, as this would make balancing easier, in theory, more on that later. While I actually do like "SOME" of the new skills, I think a lot of them are lacking utility in current state and despite all the people touting "oh you wont be able to rely on proc sets anymore, gonna have to actually get skill" - as someone who generally plays without free damage proc sets on anything but a ganker, I see some class kits desperately lacking important buffs, which means youll need groups to get them, which means a couple things. 1- your 1vX'ers will be forced to be 2V's or Xv's , and if you already hated dealing with them itll only be worse. 2-If you were a 1vX'er, now you likely will need a comped group to a degree for buffs, which for some, really removes the thrill. 3- lacking combo's and pressure with skills that are now a dedicated 'just a buff' or 'just damage' it seems like in order to really kill any competent player, you will need to group them down or battle of attrition.

They are removing Battlespirit for the test and giving everyone 70k HP (but everyone takes PVE damage). This seems counterproductive as Battlespirit was the tool to separate PVE and PVP. Getting rid of it seems to suggest they think they can balance PVP without it. Which to me just screams more years of Sledgehammering skills into uselessness and Buffing others in an attempt to "Balance" with minimal idea of what this new pvp monstrosity theyre creating needs, because PVP playtesting from Dev side seems minimal, and PVP player feedback is generally not considered in any timely fashion.

Adding cooldowns to skills.... What? Okay, I get that its an attempt to limit powerful skills.... losing control over how and when to use them is not great. I can jump into any well developed Tab target game if I wanted that, and hit my rotation mindlessly for hours. ESO has the freedom to use skills as needed, pairing down not just the utility but the timing of skills removes the ability to adapt to situations, and unpredictable situations are half the thrill of PVP. This will only lead to less engaging gameplay. This isnt meant to be a phone game.

Basically everything has at most a target limit of 3 players. I don't know how I feel about that yet, but I think I see it as more of a downside than an upside, as someone who generally fights outnumbered.

If they do go this ultra trimmed down cyrodiil route, How will sets tie into it? By trimming down cyro, you are removing build versatility. While many people see this as 'HAHA NO MORE PROC CHEESE FOR YOU" they dont think about the other side of the coin: you know how many players Ive helped make one bar builds because they physically or mentally cannot do 2 bars? or how many people play tanks because they enjoy taking part in the action but arent so fast reacting anymore? Without sets, these playstyles do become obsolete. In order to reintroduce these, basically entire sets now need to be rebalanced, furthering the endeavor of this cyro revamp to levels I really dont see ZOS going through with. Build versatility is what makes this game interesting, and I just dont see a scenario that this pans out well, unless ZOS actually goes through with appropriate changes and balancing, which I doubt would happen. But a lot of this just seems half baked already, even from a testing standpoint.
---

I probably have more thoughts about this, but work is calling, so I'll probably ramble later. I will close this with saying that I do genuinely hope ZOS pulls through and makes something amazing and properly tests and balances things and everything is sunshine and rainbows. Their history just shows this is an unlikely scenario.

I don't think they are putting a crazy amount of effort. Many of the skills are just old versions or current versions with parts deleted.

The battlespirit is another layer that is nolonger needed if pvp has its own skill versions. Keeping it would just be unnecessary bloat and rounding calculations.

Cooldowns are a sus way of limiting skills. Once the test happens live make sure to voice and die for this opinion. Ramping costs or higher costs are a better option for even better performance.

Target limit is fine. Even in today's 1vX it is more like dueling against 10 players. Most classes other than acuity warden basically only take down 1-3 targets at a time. Big fear is they add back in Uncapped aoe heals and cross heals.

IMO accessibility is a one way street. If you cater too hard to disabled players you open doors for average/good lazy players to abuse cheese. Yay now heavy attack builds work....... oh there are 5 templars heavy attacking and beaming me to death with no counterplay...... nice. I think there are smarter ways than procs for disabled players. Oakensoul for example doesnt undermine the gcd system, but helps disabled players. Maybe instead of a fast paced dizzy swing build, they run a more aoe dot focused build. Or instead of more active skills they slot more buff skills and a single spammable.

Just_Attivi wrote: »

Sluggy wrote: »

@Just_Attivi

Erm, wow. That stuff you mentioned is all real? Not just supposition? I assume there's been some streams covering it or something? I really haven't been paying that much attention because I was taking a wait-and-see approach before reinstalling.

I agree with your assessment about the effort they've put in. I've hinted at it myself in a few posts (maybe even this one? I can't remember) I was just avoiding saying it out loud due to the excessive censorship lately. But the details you've said are completely scorched earth beyond a level even my jaded attitude would imagine. Assuming that's the case, I'd say there's not much left to post here. I mean on the PvP/Combat forums in general. At that point everything we know and like about ESO's PvP combat is gone. This is actually an entirely different game at this point. The ESO we've been playing for a decade is officially shutdown after this 'test' goes live.

yea, obviously we dont know what they will do in the future, but the track records make me think what i think lol. I know this is a "Test" but I can see this becoming the quick fix to get less "wah wah wah" from PVP'ers in the future, and if that is the route they go... yea, I dont see anyone who actually enjoys PVP staying.

Again, I hope I'm wrong, and I hope this test helps them find out how to improve performance and keep what we all love (and maybe improve the things we dont love, like excessive heal/shield stacking lol). I agree that this step is a great FIRST step in diagnosing the problems, my doubts are with them carrying out appropriate steps beyond this, and again, I really want to be proven wrong on this. (also, still... midyear mayhem performance is always radically better than 'normal' despite being pop locked... just saying... maybe a point to look at, ZOS)

The game was far more popular in the early days which vengeance is very similar to combat wise. Combat is clear and actions are meaningful. Its like playing super smash bros with items turned off vs turned on. They already stated that a more final vision would include sets, mundus, enchants, etc. Just dont expect skills to do an aoe+dot+gap close+buff+debuff+ground affect+ do your dishes.......etc.

The dynamic of what affects your output as a player will finally be more dependent on which skills you cast instead of what dlc you buy and slot. Seriously think about your output as a player. How much of your damage is from procs or passive buffs? Most skills now a days interact with 5-10 passive buffs instead of scaling mainly off your chosen stats. Inevitably pvp players will prefer the winning by skill instead of by default.

Um, sorry, no, the vengence version of Cyrodiil on the PTS now is NOTHING like Cyrodiil in 2014. Not even remotely.

The only comment you've made in all these threads about the vengence mode that holds true in my opinion is "I don't think they are putting a crazy amount of effort" in regards to ZOS' investment into Cyrodiil PvP.

Nobody I know will stick around for this version of Cyrodiil. And besides that, it will seriously hurt ZOS' income because there will no longer be any reason for the PvP community to spend money on the PvE aspects of the game. This whole effort is misdirected in the first place in my opinion. They need to fix the Cyrodiil they already have. Not create a whole new game mode. They made Cyrodiil that worked and was glorious for years and they could do it again if they just tried. Instead they are going in a totally different direction.

You are arguing against the necessary steps to fix pvp...... and then saying they should fix pvp. What do you want me to say to this? I think the tests are 100% necessary, but I also have background in engineering and know the typical corporate process that would pretty much force them to have to test before taking action.

A 1 week test is not the end of the world, crazy that people think it is. They stated many times that this is not, nor would it be the final release version of pvp. It also does not make monetary sense to make all pvp players be able to ignore content and subscription services.

I most certainly am not "arguing against the necessary steps to fix pvp". This is yet another straw man argument regarding my statements on this topic. Please stop mischaracterizing my statements.

Regardless of what you think a strawman is, your last statement I responded to was you saying they should try to fix the current cyrodil instead of doing the planned test path. ...... The test is 100% necessary for zos to greenlight any changes to cyro going forward and you are against it. I do not believe I mischaracterize your statement by any stretch.The argument comes down to whether you think the test is necessary or not. I do and you don't seem to agree. Our opinion doesn't matter, because a zos director also thinks this is test is necessary before they blow more money on a blackhole issue.

MincMincMinc wrote: »

JustLovely wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

LPapirius wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

LPapirius wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

Just_Attivi wrote: »

After getting a peek at the Vengeance skills...

While I, again, understand they claim this to be just a test, Im seeing that they put in way too much effort into these vengeance skills, and with the history of this company, it just makes me feel even more confident that this is the ultimate direction they are going.
---
Some thoughts:

I dont mind PVP having PVP specific skills, as this would make balancing easier, in theory, more on that later. While I actually do like "SOME" of the new skills, I think a lot of them are lacking utility in current state and despite all the people touting "oh you wont be able to rely on proc sets anymore, gonna have to actually get skill" - as someone who generally plays without free damage proc sets on anything but a ganker, I see some class kits desperately lacking important buffs, which means youll need groups to get them, which means a couple things. 1- your 1vX'ers will be forced to be 2V's or Xv's , and if you already hated dealing with them itll only be worse. 2-If you were a 1vX'er, now you likely will need a comped group to a degree for buffs, which for some, really removes the thrill. 3- lacking combo's and pressure with skills that are now a dedicated 'just a buff' or 'just damage' it seems like in order to really kill any competent player, you will need to group them down or battle of attrition.

They are removing Battlespirit for the test and giving everyone 70k HP (but everyone takes PVE damage). This seems counterproductive as Battlespirit was the tool to separate PVE and PVP. Getting rid of it seems to suggest they think they can balance PVP without it. Which to me just screams more years of Sledgehammering skills into uselessness and Buffing others in an attempt to "Balance" with minimal idea of what this new pvp monstrosity theyre creating needs, because PVP playtesting from Dev side seems minimal, and PVP player feedback is generally not considered in any timely fashion.

Adding cooldowns to skills.... What? Okay, I get that its an attempt to limit powerful skills.... losing control over how and when to use them is not great. I can jump into any well developed Tab target game if I wanted that, and hit my rotation mindlessly for hours. ESO has the freedom to use skills as needed, pairing down not just the utility but the timing of skills removes the ability to adapt to situations, and unpredictable situations are half the thrill of PVP. This will only lead to less engaging gameplay. This isnt meant to be a phone game.

Basically everything has at most a target limit of 3 players. I don't know how I feel about that yet, but I think I see it as more of a downside than an upside, as someone who generally fights outnumbered.

If they do go this ultra trimmed down cyrodiil route, How will sets tie into it? By trimming down cyro, you are removing build versatility. While many people see this as 'HAHA NO MORE PROC CHEESE FOR YOU" they dont think about the other side of the coin: you know how many players Ive helped make one bar builds because they physically or mentally cannot do 2 bars? or how many people play tanks because they enjoy taking part in the action but arent so fast reacting anymore? Without sets, these playstyles do become obsolete. In order to reintroduce these, basically entire sets now need to be rebalanced, furthering the endeavor of this cyro revamp to levels I really dont see ZOS going through with. Build versatility is what makes this game interesting, and I just dont see a scenario that this pans out well, unless ZOS actually goes through with appropriate changes and balancing, which I doubt would happen. But a lot of this just seems half baked already, even from a testing standpoint.
---

I probably have more thoughts about this, but work is calling, so I'll probably ramble later. I will close this with saying that I do genuinely hope ZOS pulls through and makes something amazing and properly tests and balances things and everything is sunshine and rainbows. Their history just shows this is an unlikely scenario.

I don't think they are putting a crazy amount of effort. Many of the skills are just old versions or current versions with parts deleted.

The battlespirit is another layer that is nolonger needed if pvp has its own skill versions. Keeping it would just be unnecessary bloat and rounding calculations.

Cooldowns are a sus way of limiting skills. Once the test happens live make sure to voice and die for this opinion. Ramping costs or higher costs are a better option for even better performance.

Target limit is fine. Even in today's 1vX it is more like dueling against 10 players. Most classes other than acuity warden basically only take down 1-3 targets at a time. Big fear is they add back in Uncapped aoe heals and cross heals.

IMO accessibility is a one way street. If you cater too hard to disabled players you open doors for average/good lazy players to abuse cheese. Yay now heavy attack builds work....... oh there are 5 templars heavy attacking and beaming me to death with no counterplay...... nice. I think there are smarter ways than procs for disabled players. Oakensoul for example doesnt undermine the gcd system, but helps disabled players. Maybe instead of a fast paced dizzy swing build, they run a more aoe dot focused build. Or instead of more active skills they slot more buff skills and a single spammable.

Just_Attivi wrote: »

Sluggy wrote: »

@Just_Attivi

Erm, wow. That stuff you mentioned is all real? Not just supposition? I assume there's been some streams covering it or something? I really haven't been paying that much attention because I was taking a wait-and-see approach before reinstalling.

I agree with your assessment about the effort they've put in. I've hinted at it myself in a few posts (maybe even this one? I can't remember) I was just avoiding saying it out loud due to the excessive censorship lately. But the details you've said are completely scorched earth beyond a level even my jaded attitude would imagine. Assuming that's the case, I'd say there's not much left to post here. I mean on the PvP/Combat forums in general. At that point everything we know and like about ESO's PvP combat is gone. This is actually an entirely different game at this point. The ESO we've been playing for a decade is officially shutdown after this 'test' goes live.

yea, obviously we dont know what they will do in the future, but the track records make me think what i think lol. I know this is a "Test" but I can see this becoming the quick fix to get less "wah wah wah" from PVP'ers in the future, and if that is the route they go... yea, I dont see anyone who actually enjoys PVP staying.

Again, I hope I'm wrong, and I hope this test helps them find out how to improve performance and keep what we all love (and maybe improve the things we dont love, like excessive heal/shield stacking lol). I agree that this step is a great FIRST step in diagnosing the problems, my doubts are with them carrying out appropriate steps beyond this, and again, I really want to be proven wrong on this. (also, still... midyear mayhem performance is always radically better than 'normal' despite being pop locked... just saying... maybe a point to look at, ZOS)

The game was far more popular in the early days which vengeance is very similar to combat wise. Combat is clear and actions are meaningful. Its like playing super smash bros with items turned off vs turned on. They already stated that a more final vision would include sets, mundus, enchants, etc. Just dont expect skills to do an aoe+dot+gap close+buff+debuff+ground affect+ do your dishes.......etc.

The dynamic of what affects your output as a player will finally be more dependent on which skills you cast instead of what dlc you buy and slot. Seriously think about your output as a player. How much of your damage is from procs or passive buffs? Most skills now a days interact with 5-10 passive buffs instead of scaling mainly off your chosen stats. Inevitably pvp players will prefer the winning by skill instead of by default.

Um, sorry, no, the vengence version of Cyrodiil on the PTS now is NOTHING like Cyrodiil in 2014. Not even remotely.

The only comment you've made in all these threads about the vengence mode that holds true in my opinion is "I don't think they are putting a crazy amount of effort" in regards to ZOS' investment into Cyrodiil PvP.

Nobody I know will stick around for this version of Cyrodiil. And besides that, it will seriously hurt ZOS' income because there will no longer be any reason for the PvP community to spend money on the PvE aspects of the game. This whole effort is misdirected in the first place in my opinion. They need to fix the Cyrodiil they already have. Not create a whole new game mode. They made Cyrodiil that worked and was glorious for years and they could do it again if they just tried. Instead they are going in a totally different direction.

You are arguing against the necessary steps to fix pvp...... and then saying they should fix pvp. What do you want me to say to this? I think the tests are 100% necessary, but I also have background in engineering and know the typical corporate process that would pretty much force them to have to test before taking action.

A 1 week test is not the end of the world, crazy that people think it is. They stated many times that this is not, nor would it be the final release version of pvp. It also does not make monetary sense to make all pvp players be able to ignore content and subscription services.

I most certainly am not "arguing against the necessary steps to fix pvp". This is yet another straw man argument regarding my statements on this topic. Please stop mischaracterizing my statements.

Regardless of what you think a strawman is, your last statement I responded to was you saying they should try to fix the current cyrodil instead of doing the planned test path. ...... The test is 100% necessary for zos to greenlight any changes to cyro going forward and you are against it. I do not believe I mischaracterize your statement by any stretch.The argument comes down to whether you think the test is necessary or not. I do and you don't seem to agree. Our opinion doesn't matter, because a zos director also thinks this is test is necessary before they blow more money on a blackhole issue.

How do you know "the test is 100% necessary for zos to greenlight any changes to cyrodiil going fowarward..."?

Can you please show us where zos has stated this publicly or is this just an assumption on your part? It's ok to admit your just making an assumption if you can't post a link to where ZOS has explained this publicly.

You have to make an assumption at some point, you and I dont work at zos, there is no way I would have internal email discussion between managers and directors discussing what they require for zos development allocation. Do you believe devs and managers and blindly ask to restructure the game or do server upgrades on an issue they dont have data on? No, believe it or not zos has a process of diagnosing and addressing issues. Every company works this way, you must bring valid data to the table so your manager and director can argue for company resources. On the last livestream they stated they cannot simulate the load without doing a live external oriented test, meaning either they or someone else at zos higher up does not think they have the proper evidence to push a major change without the test. If you havent seen the livestream here is a link, I wish they just had a write up instead of several sporadic streams and dev update blurbs. There clearly was a communication fumble on this which is why so many people still dont know why the test is happening.

All of their actions and statements in livestreams indicate that the test is necessary to make a decision....otherwise this pts cycle would have just implemented the changes instead of implementing a test. I guess we can be happy in that aspect, that we even get a say.
- Dart board uninvasive tests were not significant enough to allocate dev resources and risk
- Hardware upgrades and lower pop caps did not solve the issue
- They stated battlespirit is already a blanket fix/limiting factor and won't facilitate longterm performative rule changes.
- For a decade now they did not want to split pve and pvp into two different games (pvp became a slave to pve changes), however now they are having to investigate doing what they have opposed for years.
- Internal simulations are not being accepted as a final datapoint.

With the new hardware and 10 years of changes, they have no running baseline stress test that would normally happen in an alpha or beta. The only way to do that is a live test with players. Just like with the last cyrodil tests, their internal simulations won't give 1:1 representative data to be able to give proof a change should happen. From the numbers they are talking about on the livestreams, we can assume the team needs to be able to 2x-3x cyrodil pop caps before getting final approval from higher ups. (which makes sense with the previous cyro tests because they failed to achieve this)

CatoUnchained wrote: »

Just_Attivi wrote: »

Sluggy wrote: »

@Just_Attivi

Erm, wow. That stuff you mentioned is all real? Not just supposition? I assume there's been some streams covering it or something? I really haven't been paying that much attention because I was taking a wait-and-see approach before reinstalling.

I agree with your assessment about the effort they've put in. I've hinted at it myself in a few posts (maybe even this one? I can't remember) I was just avoiding saying it out loud due to the excessive censorship lately. But the details you've said are completely scorched earth beyond a level even my jaded attitude would imagine. Assuming that's the case, I'd say there's not much left to post here. I mean on the PvP/Combat forums in general. At that point everything we know and like about ESO's PvP combat is gone. This is actually an entirely different game at this point. The ESO we've been playing for a decade is officially shutdown after this 'test' goes live.

yea, obviously we dont know what they will do in the future, but the track records make me think what i think lol. I know this is a "Test" but I can see this becoming the quick fix to get less "wah wah wah" from PVP'ers in the future, and if that is the route they go... yea, I dont see anyone who actually enjoys PVP staying.

Again, I hope I'm wrong, and I hope this test helps them find out how to improve performance and keep what we all love (and maybe improve the things we dont love, like excessive heal/shield stacking lol). I agree that this step is a great FIRST step in diagnosing the problems, my doubts are with them carrying out appropriate steps beyond this, and again, I really want to be proven wrong on this. (also, still... midyear mayhem performance is always radically better than 'normal' despite being pop locked... just saying... maybe a point to look at, ZOS)

I'm on the same page as you. Why would ZOS be sinking so much time and effort into this new system if they haven't already decided this was the future of Cyrodiil PvP? This feels like the beta test of what will, sooner or later, be the only option in Cyrodiil.

MincMincMinc wrote: »

sans-culottes wrote: »

It’s kinda sad they’d have to make another post saying what they’ve said all along just to nip the conspiracy theories in the bud.

Having said that, thanks for explaining this (again), as it seems a portion of the player base is convinced this is the future of the PVP experience.

Funny that after 9 years of people complaining about zos doing nothing about pvp, the same people are now complaining that zos is doing something for pvp.

PR could have been better. I think they still try to use the hype train secrecy model where people just see past that by now. Like others pointed out there were still other fixes available, many don't understand why they couldnt have been implemented. Zos should have done a single write up on why this test is necessary and what their options were and why they chose this one.

• Why can't zos use battlespirit to separate pvp and pve skill rules?
• Why don't they prevent hots/dots/procs from stacking on the same enemy?
• Why don't they prevent cross healing in large groups(5+players)?

It seems most people just dont have experience in engineering or game development companies to know how things work. I see alot of assumptions that the grunt worker can just wave a wand and implement these "fixes" without testing or proof of benefit.

DrSlaughtr wrote: »

There is zero chance of me playing ESO with skill cooldowns. There are a lot better options for that. This seems like an extreme version of what is necessary, which makes sense for getting a baseline.

Make people use class skills. Remove unnecessary effects from those skills. Limit sets to no proc or, even better, crafted only. Eliminate passives. Eliminate cross-healing. Make everyone use one bar. Make group heals only work with resto staves.

Do all that and you'll drastically eliminate server calculations without making me play ESO: Tab Target Mod.

1. vigor heals yourself
2. vigor heals yourself and 4 group members
3. vigor heals yourself and 8 allies
4. vigor heals yourself and vigorbuff will be applied to 4 group members and not stack

Crossheals affecting only group members was one of the most stupid ideas ever, it does not decrease ballgroup healing at all because all their healing comes from inside the ballgroup but prevents two outnumbered solo players from healing each other.

blktauna wrote: »

I think limiting heal stacking is the way to go. You can only carry one heal at a time, the others just slide off.

Iriidius wrote: »

MincMincMinc wrote: »

DrSlaughtr wrote: »

There is zero chance of me playing ESO with skill cooldowns. There are a lot better options for that. This seems like an extreme version of what is necessary, which makes sense for getting a baseline.

Make people use class skills. Remove unnecessary effects from those skills. Limit sets to no proc or, even better, crafted only. Eliminate passives. Eliminate cross-healing. Make everyone use one bar. Make group heals only work with resto staves.

Do all that and you'll drastically eliminate server calculations without making me play ESO: Tab Target Mod.

I think there was a big design flop decision made back in the day. For some reason it became standard that every heal had to be X or Y. Like with cross healing, instead of making blanket rules across the whole game, maybe just make certain heals only affect group members. Certain morphs stack, etc.

Imagine a few versions of vigor:

1. vigor heals yourself
2. vigor heals yourself and 4 group members
3. vigor heals yourself and 8 allies
4. vigor heals yourself and vigorbuff will be applied to 4 group members and not stack

Then just tweak balance from there. Suddenly not everyone has a basic copy of breath of life or vigor. Maybe templar has more group heals and ally heals where warden has more self heals or group heals.

Since hybridization a lot of morphs have become useless because one is a BIS version. This could hit two birds with one stone so to speak for performance and build diversity. Morphs can functionally be different instead of just mag vs stam morphs.

Crossheals affecting only group members was one of the most stupid ideas ever, it does not decrease ballgroup healing at all because all their healing comes from inside the ballgroup but prevents two outnumbered solo players from healing each other.

Why is the second a problem and gets prevented but the first is ok and gets ignored despite the first beeing much more powerful and than the second?

Think the reason is just that ZoS wanted to reduce calculations and assumed that not in the same group not heal each other anyway or at least nor rely on it.