Thank you for participating in the Cyrodiil Champions Test!

Erickson9610 · April 2

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

however please also consider that players starved of content and changes will always react more positively to 'anything' new.

Players did not react positively to Update 35's new changes. Don't dismiss people's enthusiasm as them just being starved of new content.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO · April 2

Erickson9610 wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

however please also consider that players starved of content and changes will always react more positively to 'anything' new.

Players did not react positively to Update 35's new changes. Don't dismiss people's enthusiasm as them just being starved of new content.

I wouldn't consider PVE in this game starved for content. Majority of the complaining about U35 was from the Trials scene from what I remember.

Erickson9610 · April 2

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

however please also consider that players starved of content and changes will always react more positively to 'anything' new.

Players did not react positively to Update 35's new changes. Don't dismiss people's enthusiasm as them just being starved of new content.

I wouldn't consider PVE in this game starved for content. Majority of the complaining about U35 was from the Trials scene from what I remember.

Neither would I, but the combat adjustments in Update 35 affected more than just PvE players.

The point is, a new update to anything does not mean that crowd will react more positively to the changes. A lot of people hate the new Battlegrounds, yet it got a lot of attention because it was new and had new rewards.

Considering the Battlegrounds update previous to the 2-team Battlegrounds update was many years ago, I'd consider Battlegrounds players to have been starved for content — wouldn't you? So why don't they automatically like the new Battlegrounds?

Yasha · April 2

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

@ZOS_BrianWheeler There were a lot of encouraging points which can be used to learn from I'm sure however please also consider that players starved of content and changes will always react more positively to 'anything' new.
I think you need to very carefully consider what sort of environment you want Cyrodiil to be because if these changes go in (albeit with more skills etc) a lot of players will quit from an already player starved core group.

@ZOS_BrianWheeler A lot of players have already quit because the current implementation of Cyrodiil is so bad. Imagine how many new and returning players are going to fill Cyrodiil if you implemented a fun, skill-based, and accessable sytem like Vengeance. I think you need to very carefully consider what sort of environment you want Cyrodiil to be because if these changes do not go in (albeit with more skills etc) you will be missing out on an amazing opportunity to revitalize a dying game mode.

And btw, thanks to all the developers and others involved in setting up this test. It only latest a week, but that was the best fun I have had in Cyrodiil in literally years!

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO · April 3

Yasha wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

@ZOS_BrianWheeler There were a lot of encouraging points which can be used to learn from I'm sure however please also consider that players starved of content and changes will always react more positively to 'anything' new.
I think you need to very carefully consider what sort of environment you want Cyrodiil to be because if these changes go in (albeit with more skills etc) a lot of players will quit from an already player starved core group.

@ZOS_BrianWheeler A lot of players have already quit because the current implementation of Cyrodiil is so bad. Imagine how many new and returning players are going to fill Cyrodiil if you implemented a fun, skill-based, and accessable sytem like Vengeance. I think you need to very carefully consider what sort of environment you want Cyrodiil to be because if these changes do not go in (albeit with more skills etc) you will be missing out on an amazing opportunity to revitalize a dying game mode.

And btw, thanks to all the developers and others involved in setting up this test. It only latest a week, but that was the best fun I have had in Cyrodiil in literally years!

As someone who has played PVP since launch I can remember the various stages of it and the points at which each massive pvp guild quit the game taking huge chunks of playerbase with them.
On top of this players fought for years to remove AOE caps because of the boring zerg based combat aoe caps lead to. Trust me when I say you didn't see anything yet if these changes go live when it comes to group survivability and numbers stacking. Don't get me wrong the performance and player numbers we saw were both positive things. The sacrifices made to get there not so much.
I don't generally give feedback on gameplay any more after around 6+ years of trying in the past, if the games fun i'll play it, if its not I wont these days. I'm just saying that as someone who has seen every iteration of pvp in ESO so far, people will not find this fun after more than 1 month of this ruleset.

Erickson9610 · April 3

I think a good compromise would be to have regular PvP and Vengeance PvP as separate campaigns. It's clear that they're both very different kinds of PvP, appealing to very different audiences — no amount of compromise to a single campaign will make both audiences happy.

anadandy · April 3

Vengeance was the most fun I've had in. Cyrodiil in easily five years. Thanks for that.

Elvenheart · April 3

Erickson9610 wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

however please also consider that players starved of content and changes will always react more positively to 'anything' new.

Players did not react positively to Update 35's new changes. Don't dismiss people's enthusiasm as them just being starved of new content.

I wouldn't consider PVE in this game starved for content. Majority of the complaining about U35 was from the Trials scene from what I remember.

Neither would I, but the combat adjustments in Update 35 affected more than just PvE players.

The point is, a new update to anything does not mean that crowd will react more positively to the changes. A lot of people hate the new Battlegrounds, yet it got a lot of attention because it was new and had new rewards.

Considering the Battlegrounds update previous to the 2-team Battlegrounds update was many years ago, I'd consider Battlegrounds players to have been starved for content — wouldn't you? So why don't they automatically like the new Battlegrounds?

For the record, I’m one of the people who did not like the BG change from 3 teams to 2 teams from the start, and they haven’t grown on me at all. I tried them in the beginning, but I’ll probably never do another one again unless I have to for some reason.

I felt totally different about the Vengeance test, not because I usually experience lag or any of the other problems people talk about (I’ve never even experienced the infamous “stuck-in-combat” bug!) but because the playing field was more level and I didn’t have to put thousands of hours and gold into creating and trying to figure out how to use some sort of meta PVP build against people who have been PVPing forever already. It reminded me of a better version of WoW’s Plunderstorm. If they build on it by adding PVP weapon skills and maybe some passives, maybe that could give it more variety. My favorite thing about it was the large number of people I was playing with, it reminded me of the way Cyrodiil first was when ESO came out. My least favorite thing was the recharge time on some of the skills, especially the heals.

Stridig · April 3

Yasha wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

@ZOS_BrianWheeler There were a lot of encouraging points which can be used to learn from I'm sure however please also consider that players starved of content and changes will always react more positively to 'anything' new.
I think you need to very carefully consider what sort of environment you want Cyrodiil to be because if these changes go in (albeit with more skills etc) a lot of players will quit from an already player starved core group.

@ZOS_BrianWheeler A lot of players have already quit because the current implementation of Cyrodiil is so bad. Imagine how many new and returning players are going to fill Cyrodiil if you implemented a fun, skill-based, and accessable sytem like Vengeance. I think you need to very carefully consider what sort of environment you want Cyrodiil to be because if these changes do not go in (albeit with more skills etc) you will be missing out on an amazing opportunity to revitalize a dying game mode.

And btw, thanks to all the developers and others involved in setting up this test. It only latest a week, but that was the best fun I have had in Cyrodiil in literally years!

I'm glad you enjoyed it. There is a silver lining here. If they implemented this rule set as the new PvP standard, then everyone calling for Cyrodiil to be a PvE zone would get their wish. It would be a ghost town after a couple of weeks.

Kungfu · April 3

@ZOS_BrianWheeler I’m concerned that you all are quickly becoming a victim of Vengeance success.

Please think about spinning another up or replacing the under 50 campaign with an exact copy of vengeance and quickly.

Half of my guild is losing interest in other areas of the game because all they really want to do is specifically Vengeance cyro.

There are some VERY old players and quite a few new. But vengeance was so fun AND we could all play together on a TRULY even field…

Some who were logging in every day have not since Sunday (no, these are retired folks… not kids at school or adults at work).
I found out last night and tonight that the majority are just playing other games “until vengeance comes again”

Anthy1066 · April 3

I agree a good compromise would be to have regular PvP and Vengeance PvP as separate campaigns. You are spot on that they appeal to very different audiences.

M1SHAAN · April 3

Thank you for all the effort that went into putting together the test! I hope that you gleaned plentiful data and that the analysis of it is fruitful.

I got a couple nice screenshots! They're compressed on the forum display, but if you open in a new tab you can see the detail.

First, a quick little skirmish from the first day of Vengeance:

A closeup on the numbers:

Next, a huge battle in a bona fide battlefield, stretching as far as the eye can see out to the maximum player render distance:

My apologies to Manafi7, I can't remember if I rezzed you before standing around taking screenshots or not

Flangdoodle · April 3

The Positive:

really enjoyed the massive scale battles
Loved the lack of a "combat bug"
Didn't miss the bombers, tower-humpers, or gankers
interestingly - the classes that IMO have been a bit flat of late (Templars, Necros,) felt really strong
The lag and crashing -while still there at times- was definitively less

The Negative:

The lack of any kind of customization made it feel like large-scale Overwatch (which, for those who've never played, uses character templates with specified skills. There are no "morphs", passives or universally available skills, and if you want to use different skills you simply have to choose a different character. )
The template aspect of it felt really dumbed down, and was in fact a completely different game. (*but see below)
As others have said, it got a little boring once it became about whoever could bring the largest zerg, and the lack of customization left few options to combat it. If your group was smaller than the opposing group, you lost. Period.
The one infinite siege per type was interesting, but I found myself missing being able to put up multiple siege - emphasizing the zerg-to-win aspect of the test environment.
Unpopular opinion, but I really didn't like the red sky and the black rain. It was depressing.

Genuine question: did you guys do something to the vertical plane of range abilities in this test? I ask because I found it really hard to use anything but a trebuchet to attack anyone on a wall. No range skills worked, and for staves you had to be positioned just right or they wouldn't go off. Even when the staves did hit someone on a wall the damage was none to negligible. This led to people stacking on the walls of keeps, and while they could fire downward, we couldn't fire upward. Weird.

Anyway thanks for the continuing efforts, and I could definitely see this as its own separate campaign, though certainly not a replacement for Gray Host.

*I also really appreciate @tomofhyrule 's point above about PVP having no progression scale like PVE and I really like the idea of perhaps making this its own campaign -perhaps with the understanding that it is like training for the other campaigns. Heaven knows I've prattled-on in the past about the lack of tutorials for PVP. Using this as a "training campaign" might be a step in eliminating that gap.

Cheers.

supabicboi · April 3

making Vengeance to a different campaign is essentially resetting Cyrodiil to its 1.0 state. im sure it will be populated, its the best way for many players to get into pvp, training camp? great idea, great place to experience the basics, and i dont rly enjoy ****ting on new players. but. It's essential to remember how the current meta evolved from those early days.

Ball groups, cross heals, bombers, gankers, cheese tanks, and even most recent 'immortal sorc' all originated from Cyrodiil 1.0. Ball groups emerged as a response to zerglords amassing large numbers, and the only way to win outnumbered was to group up and optimize. Bombers were once a novelty, but now they're a nuisance, thanks to rush of agony

get rid of it pls thx. i still rmb those days when i was a novel pvper, looking at those bombers and ball groups - they were the solution to winning the war. zerglords were a special breed too, think just about anyone in zone chat is capable of mobilizing the faction? nope. only a handful, a few.

immortal tanks used to be the frontline defense against zergs, chokepoint holders and attention grabbing, they had a real proper use, now its 'cheese' tank cuz of the numbers of players choosing to play the brain wheeler style, and also due to just how pathetic some of these 'tanks' play. nb gankers were a good way to cull the weak in a seige, albeit a nuisance, its peak rat-ness was pre-nerf tarnish.

And let's not forget, sorcs were once a B-tier class, it was trash. I should know, I've played sorc for the past 8 years and never complained about their balance. Classes rise and fall in power, it's a natural cycle. Remember when necros were relevant? They had their moment in the sun, and even got to shine again briefly in the Vengeance campaign.

The point is, all of these 'issues' started as minorities. reset cyro, similar mindsets will come back. how should I, as a player, how can I make a bigger impact in the field? look towards grouping, oh my group is not as good as the other group? what can we change in terms of class and build so we can win the other group next time? look towards ways to not die as easily? look towards ways to eliminate a mass of enemies becuase your alliance is 1 bar less than the other while they are faction stacking your keep.. sound familiar?

I've played most of them, except for cheese tanks. Don't let this brief 'victory' in Vengeance make you think that reverting to a simpler version will magically fix Cyrodiil. We need to learn from the past and move forward, not repeat the same mistakes

aetherix8 · April 3

Thank you for this test @ZOS_BrianWheeler & team, it’s really important to see some serious tackling of Cyro’s problems. Looking forward to seeing the results and learning about the next steps.

colossalvoids · April 3

Flangdoodle wrote: »

Genuine question: did you guys do something to the vertical plane of range abilities in this test? I ask because I found it really hard to use anything but a trebuchet to attack anyone on a wall. No range skills worked, and for staves you had to be positioned just right or they wouldn't go off. Even when the staves did hit someone on a wall the damage was none to negligible. This led to people stacking on the walls of keeps, and while they could fire downward, we couldn't fire upward. Weird.

Cheers.

That's a result of lowering the range, it did felt clunky same as default speeds.

colossalvoids · April 3

Thanks for the test and congratulations on it being a smooth ride. Hopeful that it would lead to positive changes or that the very foundation would be layed to something new.

As much as I liked the test in the end I do suggest to not blindly ride the wave of positive feedback but also recognise it's the very first step, the proverbial founding brick and not the definitive solution. I won't complain though if the current test one would replace below 50 campaign for now, for example. It would definitely help starting folks and not just being an Emp grounds for already experienced players.

Kungfu · April 3

I would like to address something here.

I hear this a LOT about the test:
“ it became about whoever could bring the largest zerg, and the lack of customization left few options to combat it. If your group was smaller than the opposing group, you lost. Period.”

And it’s simply not factual.

I personally was involved in multiple defenses where we were outnumbered and won out because we pushed intelligently, at the right times, and on the correct sides.

I also won a lot of open field fights in small man groups where we were up against double our number.

I WILL agree: there is a threshold at which this statement became true.
Best I can tell, if we were out in the open, exactly double our numbers out greater and we almost always lost. But that seems reasonable to me.

And, if we were attacking a keep, equal numbers or greater defending most commonly resulted in a loss.

But it just wasn’t a 100% off the time “if they had more, you lost” situation. I had TONS of fights where we should have won but lost because people never pushed or pushed solo and plenty of the opposite.

Kungfu · April 3

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Yasha wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

@ZOS_BrianWheeler There were a lot of encouraging points which can be used to learn from I'm sure however please also consider that players starved of content and changes will always react more positively to 'anything' new.
I think you need to very carefully consider what sort of environment you want Cyrodiil to be because if these changes go in (albeit with more skills etc) a lot of players will quit from an already player starved core group.

@ZOS_BrianWheeler A lot of players have already quit because the current implementation of Cyrodiil is so bad. Imagine how many new and returning players are going to fill Cyrodiil if you implemented a fun, skill-based, and accessable sytem like Vengeance. I think you need to very carefully consider what sort of environment you want Cyrodiil to be because if these changes do not go in (albeit with more skills etc) you will be missing out on an amazing opportunity to revitalize a dying game mode.

And btw, thanks to all the developers and others involved in setting up this test. It only latest a week, but that was the best fun I have had in Cyrodiil in literally years!

As someone who has played PVP since launch I can remember the various stages of it and the points at which each massive pvp guild quit the game taking huge chunks of playerbase with them.
On top of this players fought for years to remove AOE caps because of the boring zerg based combat aoe caps lead to. Trust me when I say you didn't see anything yet if these changes go live when it comes to group survivability and numbers stacking. Don't get me wrong the performance and player numbers we saw were both positive things. The sacrifices made to get there not so much.
I don't generally give feedback on gameplay any more after around 6+ years of trying in the past, if the games fun i'll play it, if its not I wont these days. I'm just saying that as someone who has seen every iteration of pvp in ESO so far, people will not find this fun after more than 1 month of this ruleset.

I think it’s very important to be clear though:
The vast majority that I read who are asking for it to continue I think are more like me… remembering the original statements that explained this is just step 1 of many to come.

The hope would be that (1) we get to continue enjoying the current stage while they work on the next and that (2) next stage is a SMALL, controllable, measured, and removable change that comes before the boredom sets in.

Personally, I don’t see myself getting bored of it like you suggest everyone will. TBH only here replying still because of blanket statements like this where people project their own views as though “everyone” feels the same as them.

The only thing that will get me to quit is complete performance failure or boredom due to an empty campaign. And yes, I have my beta monkey too. I know what I say is factual having experienced dead campaigns and being forced to play the current frustrating crap campaign because there’s just nothing like cyro in any game anywhere else.

Request is: provide a camp while they dev up next steps so people can play either version based on their preferences. There’s nothing wrong with that request.

aetherix8 · April 3

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

@ZOS_BrianWheeler There were a lot of encouraging points which can be used to learn from I'm sure however please also consider that players starved of content and changes will always react more positively to 'anything' new.
I think you need to very carefully consider what sort of environment you want Cyrodiil to be because if these changes go in (albeit with more skills etc) a lot of players will quit from an already player starved core group.

Cannot but fully agree, I find it mind blowing that players loved so much this setting designed to test things, and much less to have fun. That alone is very revealing.
If there were to be a mode similar to Vengeance, I hope it is implemented thoughtfully and without too much rush.

LalMirchi · April 3

@ZOS_BrianWheeler I've mostly avoided PVP in the 7 years I've played ESO. However Vengeance was was very enjoyable, the thrill of participating in very large scale battles was exhilarating.

Hopefully this test will lead to permanent improvements in Cyrodiil.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO · April 3

Kungfu wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Yasha wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

@ZOS_BrianWheeler There were a lot of encouraging points which can be used to learn from I'm sure however please also consider that players starved of content and changes will always react more positively to 'anything' new.
I think you need to very carefully consider what sort of environment you want Cyrodiil to be because if these changes go in (albeit with more skills etc) a lot of players will quit from an already player starved core group.

@ZOS_BrianWheeler A lot of players have already quit because the current implementation of Cyrodiil is so bad. Imagine how many new and returning players are going to fill Cyrodiil if you implemented a fun, skill-based, and accessable sytem like Vengeance. I think you need to very carefully consider what sort of environment you want Cyrodiil to be because if these changes do not go in (albeit with more skills etc) you will be missing out on an amazing opportunity to revitalize a dying game mode.

And btw, thanks to all the developers and others involved in setting up this test. It only latest a week, but that was the best fun I have had in Cyrodiil in literally years!

As someone who has played PVP since launch I can remember the various stages of it and the points at which each massive pvp guild quit the game taking huge chunks of playerbase with them.
On top of this players fought for years to remove AOE caps because of the boring zerg based combat aoe caps lead to. Trust me when I say you didn't see anything yet if these changes go live when it comes to group survivability and numbers stacking. Don't get me wrong the performance and player numbers we saw were both positive things. The sacrifices made to get there not so much.
I don't generally give feedback on gameplay any more after around 6+ years of trying in the past, if the games fun i'll play it, if its not I wont these days. I'm just saying that as someone who has seen every iteration of pvp in ESO so far, people will not find this fun after more than 1 month of this ruleset.

Personally, I don’t see myself getting bored of it like you suggest everyone will. TBH only here replying still because of blanket statements like this where people project their own views as though “everyone” feels the same as them.

My post wasn't just my own view but equally I never stated 'everyone'.
Almost every guild I spoke to and saw interactions in discords / in game perceived the change negatively. The only players who I saw enjoying the changes (outside of the performance and player count benefits which, as mentioned, were positive) were the players who generally play inside their main factions frontline solo or in pug groups, or who don't generally pvp outside of events.

As an example the post above this one,

LalMirchi wrote: »

@ZOS_BrianWheeler I've mostly avoided PVP in the 7 years I've played ESO. However Vengeance was was very enjoyable, the thrill of participating in very large scale battles was exhilarating.

Hopefully this test will lead to permanent improvements in Cyrodiil.

This is a player who it would be great to gain the participation of in PVP but it shouldn't be at the expense of the core existing pvp playerbase.

Elvenheart · April 3

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Kungfu wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Yasha wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

@ZOS_BrianWheeler There were a lot of encouraging points which can be used to learn from I'm sure however please also consider that players starved of content and changes will always react more positively to 'anything' new.
I think you need to very carefully consider what sort of environment you want Cyrodiil to be because if these changes go in (albeit with more skills etc) a lot of players will quit from an already player starved core group.

@ZOS_BrianWheeler A lot of players have already quit because the current implementation of Cyrodiil is so bad. Imagine how many new and returning players are going to fill Cyrodiil if you implemented a fun, skill-based, and accessable sytem like Vengeance. I think you need to very carefully consider what sort of environment you want Cyrodiil to be because if these changes do not go in (albeit with more skills etc) you will be missing out on an amazing opportunity to revitalize a dying game mode.

And btw, thanks to all the developers and others involved in setting up this test. It only latest a week, but that was the best fun I have had in Cyrodiil in literally years!

As someone who has played PVP since launch I can remember the various stages of it and the points at which each massive pvp guild quit the game taking huge chunks of playerbase with them.
On top of this players fought for years to remove AOE caps because of the boring zerg based combat aoe caps lead to. Trust me when I say you didn't see anything yet if these changes go live when it comes to group survivability and numbers stacking. Don't get me wrong the performance and player numbers we saw were both positive things. The sacrifices made to get there not so much.
I don't generally give feedback on gameplay any more after around 6+ years of trying in the past, if the games fun i'll play it, if its not I wont these days. I'm just saying that as someone who has seen every iteration of pvp in ESO so far, people will not find this fun after more than 1 month of this ruleset.

Personally, I don’t see myself getting bored of it like you suggest everyone will. TBH only here replying still because of blanket statements like this where people project their own views as though “everyone” feels the same as them.

My post wasn't just my own view but equally I never stated 'everyone'.
Almost every guild I spoke to and saw interactions in discords / in game perceived the change negatively. The only players who I saw enjoying the changes (outside of the performance and player count benefits which, as mentioned, were positive) were the players who generally play inside their main factions frontline solo or in pug groups, or who don't generally pvp outside of events.

As an example the post above this one,

LalMirchi wrote: »

@ZOS_BrianWheeler I've mostly avoided PVP in the 7 years I've played ESO. However Vengeance was was very enjoyable, the thrill of participating in very large scale battles was exhilarating.

Hopefully this test will lead to permanent improvements in Cyrodiil.

This is a player who it would be great to gain the participation of in PVP but it shouldn't be at the expense of the core existing pvp playerbase.

Hopefully all those guilds you spoke with will provide their feedback too so their voices can be heard as well.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO · April 3

Elvenheart wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Kungfu wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Yasha wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

@ZOS_BrianWheeler There were a lot of encouraging points which can be used to learn from I'm sure however please also consider that players starved of content and changes will always react more positively to 'anything' new.
I think you need to very carefully consider what sort of environment you want Cyrodiil to be because if these changes go in (albeit with more skills etc) a lot of players will quit from an already player starved core group.

@ZOS_BrianWheeler A lot of players have already quit because the current implementation of Cyrodiil is so bad. Imagine how many new and returning players are going to fill Cyrodiil if you implemented a fun, skill-based, and accessable sytem like Vengeance. I think you need to very carefully consider what sort of environment you want Cyrodiil to be because if these changes do not go in (albeit with more skills etc) you will be missing out on an amazing opportunity to revitalize a dying game mode.

And btw, thanks to all the developers and others involved in setting up this test. It only latest a week, but that was the best fun I have had in Cyrodiil in literally years!

As someone who has played PVP since launch I can remember the various stages of it and the points at which each massive pvp guild quit the game taking huge chunks of playerbase with them.
On top of this players fought for years to remove AOE caps because of the boring zerg based combat aoe caps lead to. Trust me when I say you didn't see anything yet if these changes go live when it comes to group survivability and numbers stacking. Don't get me wrong the performance and player numbers we saw were both positive things. The sacrifices made to get there not so much.
I don't generally give feedback on gameplay any more after around 6+ years of trying in the past, if the games fun i'll play it, if its not I wont these days. I'm just saying that as someone who has seen every iteration of pvp in ESO so far, people will not find this fun after more than 1 month of this ruleset.

Personally, I don’t see myself getting bored of it like you suggest everyone will. TBH only here replying still because of blanket statements like this where people project their own views as though “everyone” feels the same as them.

My post wasn't just my own view but equally I never stated 'everyone'.
Almost every guild I spoke to and saw interactions in discords / in game perceived the change negatively. The only players who I saw enjoying the changes (outside of the performance and player count benefits which, as mentioned, were positive) were the players who generally play inside their main factions frontline solo or in pug groups, or who don't generally pvp outside of events.

As an example the post above this one,

LalMirchi wrote: »

@ZOS_BrianWheeler I've mostly avoided PVP in the 7 years I've played ESO. However Vengeance was was very enjoyable, the thrill of participating in very large scale battles was exhilarating.

Hopefully this test will lead to permanent improvements in Cyrodiil.

This is a player who it would be great to gain the participation of in PVP but it shouldn't be at the expense of the core existing pvp playerbase.

Hopefully all those guilds you spoke with will provide their feedback too so their voices can be heard as well.

I think the majority of the pvp community has somewhat given up providing feedback after so long, the forum represents a very small section of it (partially due to forum bans - compare how active the pvp forum was in 2015-2018 vs now)

ZOS_Kevin · April 3

Erickson9610 wrote: »

ZOS_Kevin wrote: »

Erickson9610 wrote: »

When will we get the rest of the PvP Q&A answered?

We're working on answers now and need to get those translated. So it will be a little bit. But these are in progress.

Should we expect them sometime after the big April 10 livestream? I know that reveal stream will take up a lot of focus, like the Cyrodiil Champions test did.

It will be some point after the livestream. We are still going through questions, so it it is going to take some time. We had to split the Q&A as a result and have part two up now. Part one was focused on Cyrodiil Champions PTS testing. But working on additional questions now and will have a date once we get through most of the remaining questions.

Wallar333 · April 3

Again here, in this thread. Vengeance was better and much more fun than normal cyro. Why ? Well from the bigger part because it made new players to be equal to endgame players in everything, except game experience, which led to WHOLE community to enjoy pvp.
But even many veteran players likes this kind of cyro more, than normal one, and that is caused by:

1. NO unbalanced crazy sets.
2. NO crazy crosshealing/shielding
3. NO ballgroups
And also its sad to say it, by this pvp feels more balanced than normal one.

Equality of players is much closer there, than its in normal cyro, which is just poisoned with few ballgroups just playing their own game. Crosshealing is almost absent there OR its too weak to even be recognized, its definitely not gamebreaking as it is in normal cyro where are all those heals even shielded by DMG shields, which is destroying any fun of pvp.

I would vote to keep this campaign to let ppl actually have fun playing PVP. I would just change a few things. I would suggest to do it like this:

1. Weapon, armor and race passives to be active
2. Switch all UNLIMITED things for regular inventory stuff, so ppl would still have to craft/buy potions etc.
3. Food buffs to be active
4. Changing current max stats to 2/3
5. Changing builds to provide their armor, enchants and trait bonuses, but keeping all SET bonuses BLOCKED
6. Changing cyro test spells to regular class ones but WITHOUT class passives
7. Alliance war skill lines to be active
8. Keeping champion points BLOCKED for obvious reasons
9. EDIT: Some classes are dependent on some weapon skills, so if it wont cause lags, it would be better to add those as well, for such classes. Those skills wont change pure fair gameplay i would like to achieve by making such campaign.
10. Mundus stone bonuses to be active

*To make it more clear, just make this campaign without set bonuses, class passives and world and guild skill lines. Also BLOCK CP points. The rest could stay the same as in normal cyro, with one thing to consider, reducing healing/shielding by another 15%, making it 70% instead of 55%.

Also ome more thing to consider could be changing cyro joining not by actual alliance, but by which alliance would need more players, cos as some ppl stated, sometimes one alliance have 50+ more players making it too hard to play against such a mass in less numbers.

This would make cyro much more fun, and much more balanced and tactical. Its just my suggestion, it can surely be changed for the better, someone can sure have a good idea how it could be possible to make it even better, while also such campaign would need to be tested, which im sure MANY community members would like to help with testing this, and making such campaign to live.

Doing this, i also suggest to merge gray host and blackreach campaigns into ONE keeping it alliance locked. And also another thing to consider could be merging under lvl 50 campaign with vengeance, cos its in 95% time completely dead campaign, and even if not, then usually only veteran players are fighting there anyway. With just newly created characters with golded builds, which is nonsense to keep such campaign, ment for new players, no one would play it.
This is actually also a problem in under 50 BGs, where i would also suggest to BLOCK set bonuses to prevent this, and let it be for actually new players to train there.

Till now, whole PVP was 100% new player unfriendly, while it was also incredibly boring and just bad even for veteran players. This campaign could actually save this games PVP, making it accesible and FUN for the WHOLE community.

Also as i mentioned in my thread, average player age is another thing why to make such campaign, cos average age is around 30yo, at least by what i was told from other community members, most ppl were between 25-35, so were almost a MMORPG dinosaurs

. Mentioning this cos of possible time spent to actually play the game, which is average probably like 12 hours/week if even for this age category, making it VERRY hard to exp CP/skill lines and/or to drop usable sets. For such campaign, ppl would just have to get one golded build to play both PVE and PVP thanks to set bonus BLOCK, with only exception for weapons, cos of traits/enchants. So such a move could lure MANY more ppl into the game, cos every MMORPG endgame, is simply PVP, which is unacessible for new players, and unfun for veterans in current state.

With this move, even ppl who try this game during free trials could actually try pvp, which would still be verry hard for them but PLAYABLE what we cant say about old cyro/pvp weve had till now. It would convince much more ppl to actually buy a game for both PVE/PVP contents (for now most ppl play just for PVE) and make games community to grow.

Many ppl rather do some party in Auridon, than to ruin their fun and play PVP in endgame (exactly me haha). So MAYBE this could also change and party enjoyers could do some funny assembly directly in cyro, instead of Auridon

. Bringing some new breath into the game. Would actually be funny to make some kind of festival there, im gonna be a drummer, would beat the dust out of my fungal drum

:D .

LPapirius · April 3

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Now that the Cyrodiil Champions test has come to a close, we want to thank everyone who took part. We know you’re eager to learn the results and next steps – so are we! We do need some time to go through the data, analyze it, and extract the findings. When we’re done with that next step, we will share the test results with you. Test participants, please keep an eye out for a post-test survey in the next week. (To ensure you receive it, please make sure you’re opted-in to get emails from us here!)
In the meantime, we’d like to leave you with a summary of some of the incredible history-breaking records we were able to hit during this test, thanks to you, as well as a few screenshots of the fun. (We’d love to see yours, too!)
Most players ever in Cyrodiil at one time, in a single campaign
We were able to hit triple the amount of players that is currently possible in a single Cyrodiil campaign.

Largest sustained battles we’ve ever had in Cyrodiil
We hit a new record with the amount of players not only in a single campaign, but also in a single battle. We saw almost double the amount of players that were possible in an entire campaign before the Cyrodiil Champions test in a single sustained battle on the Vengeance campaign.

Best overall game performance we’ve ever seen in Cyrodiil
We had three times the number of players in a single Cyrodiil campaign with little to no performance problems.

Thank you again for helping us with the Cyrodiil Champions test. Your participation will help us shape the future of Cyrodiil!

Wait. There are some issues with this assessment.

First, the original pop cap in Cyro was 600/faction. The pop cap in Cyro during vengeance was not increased by comparison to the original pop caps. The cap was increased by 3x of the population just prior to the test, which was a cap of literally 10% the original cap plus or minus about 10 players/faction.

There were some very large and lengthy battles during vengeance, but not bigger than they've ever been. In the beginning these large and long keep battles were the norm, not the exception.

And the performance was not the best ever seen in Cyrodiil either. There were still issues with disconnecting, rubber banding and bar swapping. The only thing vengeance fixed for sure was the stuck in combat issue.

This comparison review is in relation to what Cyrodiil was like the week before vengeance, not in relation to what Cyrodiil was like in it's prime sometime around 2016-2018.

This is the exact kind of statement I've feared would be released after vengeance.

LPapirius · April 3

Stridig wrote: »

Yasha wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

@ZOS_BrianWheeler There were a lot of encouraging points which can be used to learn from I'm sure however please also consider that players starved of content and changes will always react more positively to 'anything' new.
I think you need to very carefully consider what sort of environment you want Cyrodiil to be because if these changes go in (albeit with more skills etc) a lot of players will quit from an already player starved core group.

@ZOS_BrianWheeler A lot of players have already quit because the current implementation of Cyrodiil is so bad. Imagine how many new and returning players are going to fill Cyrodiil if you implemented a fun, skill-based, and accessable sytem like Vengeance. I think you need to very carefully consider what sort of environment you want Cyrodiil to be because if these changes do not go in (albeit with more skills etc) you will be missing out on an amazing opportunity to revitalize a dying game mode.

And btw, thanks to all the developers and others involved in setting up this test. It only latest a week, but that was the best fun I have had in Cyrodiil in literally years!

I'm glad you enjoyed it. There is a silver lining here. If they implemented this rule set as the new PvP standard, then everyone calling for Cyrodiil to be a PvE zone would get their wish. It would be a ghost town after a couple of weeks.

Yep.

Please focus on fixing the Cyrodiil PvP we already have as opposed to mandating a new game mode.

Stamicka · April 3

LPapirius wrote: »

Wait. There are some issues with this assessment.

First, the original pop cap in Cyro was 600/faction. The pop cap in Cyro during vengeance was not increased by comparison to the original pop caps. The cap was increased by 3x of the population just prior to the test, which was a cap of literally 10% the original cap plus or minus about 10 players/faction.

Yea they are basically saying that the current population cap is greater than or equal to 204 (I’m guessing it goes by multiples of 12) per alliance and increasing it by 3 times would get us 612v612v612 to break the previous record. So 204 is basically the minimum that current population caps could be.

That just doesn’t feel possible to me and current population caps feel below even 108, maybe like 72. I’ve seen Volendrung faction stacks that have completely killed the rest of the map and there was less than 60 people per alliance there. It’s not adding up.

Getsugatenso · April 3

be very careful with my favorite pvp in my favorite game, don't take away my happiness in building my pvp builds