Dear Zenimax, I don't like your game at all, but if I did, I would want you to play to your strength and stop biting off more than you can chew. Keep your pvp unique as is, but make it better, don't do what everyone else is, if you do your going to lose, you're game doesn't stack up to the competition side by side, but your unique pvp doesn't have much competition /freeconsultingoff
I play ESO and while i enjoy it i find the PVP boring. My experiences in Cyrodil so far have been running around for hours not ffinding any smaller group pvp which is what i enjoy, or being able to participate in the zerg keep pvp which i find very dull.
Battlegrounds? why does everyone allways think in the allready known stufff...
Yes, ESO could need some small scale PvP... but i would not do battlegrounds like we know them in to many other games.. I would do them as quest instances, with PvP enabled... and both sides having quests that interact with eachother...
For example, Daggerfall convenant plans an invasion, the eabonheart pact plays the defenses. Many NPC, assisted by some PCs...
Or a dungeonrun, where both (or all 3) sides have the same objectives... and are meant to meet somewhere halfway...
You can litterally have dozens of scenarios... which are changed from week to week... to prevent to many scenarios being active at the same time...
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
I have to say add battleground to ESO would be a big misstake the PvP we have in ESO feel more like your are contribute to War effort and it is fun. I think Zenimax is do right thing not to gave in to all them that what battleground and also it is true what say about automatic group finder shouldn’t be an option for ESO either. ESO is all about promoting social engagement i mean just look at WoW automatic group finder make you not even interact with other people you are total anonymous in WoW and you dont need to talk to the people in group.
Playing: Darkfall New Dawn (and planning to play Fallout 76) Favourite games have included: UO, Lineage2, Darkfall, Lotro, Baldur's Gate, SSX, FF7 and yes the original Wizardry on an Apple IIe
Battlegrounds? why does everyone allways think in the allready known stufff...
Yes, ESO could need some small scale PvP... but i would not do battlegrounds like we know them in to many other games.. I would do them as quest instances, with PvP enabled... and both sides having quests that interact with eachother...
For example, Daggerfall convenant plans an invasion, the eabonheart pact plays the defenses. Many NPC, assisted by some PCs...
Or a dungeonrun, where both (or all 3) sides have the same objectives... and are meant to meet somewhere halfway...
You can litterally have dozens of scenarios... which are changed from week to week... to prevent to many scenarios being active at the same time...
I went online to PvP yesterday (my last day before my 30 days box time runs out). In 20 minutes I saw perhaps 5 other players in Daggerfall, went ot a siege where maybe a dozen players were. Not good.
Strangely I think it's the forced social interactions that have put so many people off. Never thought I'd say that - amazed at how few people want to be really social in a game.
Those that do want social gaming seem a decent number on the forums. But when you actually get into a game? You realise that in fact their forum presence is a loud manifestation of a vocal minority - and from what I see it's a small minority. 10% maybe?
The other 90% of people are to be seen running away from grouping with strangers, quitting the game, going back to playing games where they can be their old anonymous self... anything rather than really engage socially.
Not only are TESO's game mechanics pretty dull, but the forced social interaction is - despite the desire to be social seen on forums like this - not what the vast majority want.
Not sure a game that is this big, with the amount of money put into it up front, can survive for long when it disenfranchises the majority. Social games that work tend to start out as lower budget sleeper hits and scale up as players join.
And that's a shame . It's all a shame. Not saying people should group if they don't want to. And people do group in "Anonymous Warcraft style" where you never need to know the people you group with. Players seem fine with that. But actual proper real interaction?
Seems that most don't want it.
They say they do - but in game? Very few seem to, and most run from it.
BG's would kill Cyrodiil populations. They are adding a dungeon to the middle of Cyrodiil available to whoever controls the inner keeps - just like it was in DAoC.
Here is what 10v10 or 15v15's would look like in ESO. 12 DK's 3 sorc healer pre-made groups running in and killing the other 15 people in 2 sec. Everyone would rage on the forums and the class nerf circle jerk would ensue for eternity.
In certain games battlegrounds have their place, such as WoW since there weren't really any world objectives to fight over even back in vanilla on the PVP severs. The Tauren Mill Tug-O-War can only be fun for so long. However, in a game that already has a dedicated PVP zone such as ESO then adding BGs to it would hurt the game's PVP even more by spreading the PVP'er population even thinner which will be bad for such a big zone as Cyrodil, not to mention that half of the campaigns are grossly lopsided with certain factions. Splitting the PVP population between RvR and BG's is what hurt WAR a lot.
Not to mention the only reason "battlegrounds" were introduced to Vanilla in the first place was due to their horrible engine not being capable of handling server-wide warfare. I can't even remember how many times entire servers crashed because of capital city raids. So its understandable they had to introduce instanced PvP, but I am fairly certain the original intention of developers was to focus on world PvP. (Hence ranked system arrived when there was absolutely no talk of battlegrounds)
They only have finite resources; spreading them too thinly will result in all aspects failing.
Friendly Fire and collision, will do wonders in Cyrodiil and do much to combat the mindless zerging that basically makes up the majority of PvP in any large-scale online game these days.
Let's just see if they're brave enough to really do something different.
Low levels in ESO rarely enter cyrodil mainly to complete some dailies and when the game is filled with veteran ranks the lower levels can't do anything against them. Battlegrounds/Arenas should be in every MMO that doesn't have open world pvp (no Cyrodil isn't open world, open world is when in more than 1 zone there are more than 1 faction doing quests and random stuff or like Korean based games everyone can engage in pvp with a button) .Will it hurt Cyrodil yes , but even without battlegrounds in Europe there are far too many campaigns and there aren't any people in most of them or 1 faction is dominating because others don't have people, also 90 days to change campaign is insane. There will always be people that like to wage sieges and play for 4-5 hours to achieve something in PVP that won't change they just need to merge some campaigns and there will be enough people in it from every faction. As for me I don't have the time to play 4-5 hours or the nerves to take keeps and resources and zerg some keep, I love an open world pvp (which there is no way to be put at the moment) and battlegrounds where you can make 3-4 games for 1 hour and see where you stand skill/gear wise and also achieve something. For me the main reason they aren't added is because in a battleground system where you have 10vs10 or 5vs5 people very fast will figure out some imbalanced team setup that destroys everything and with ESO skill system there is no way to balance so called "classes" and they will get more hate from players rather than appreciation.
Battleground debate can be handled a year from now as this game isn't even remotely as polished as it needs to be to really move forward with something that radically changed WoW
Cryodiil is the current PvP area and it needs to be thoroughly tested and balanced before Zenimax can tackle a huge game changing feature like Battlegrounds.
Zenimax needs to add DUELING and ARENAS first and foremost! Why do you ask? Well..
Templates need to be thoroughly tested and balanced so there are more then a few to several optimal templates so as to add the air of anticipation and excitement as there will be more mystery and suspense to every encounter as it should be in large scale battles or even small skirmishes. This also improves player interest in TESO as there are more viable options for players concerning class/template choices and the evolution of their character and the game in general.
DUELING allows players to engage each other safely within the confines of their own realm/alliance so players can learn, adapt, and help improve class/template balance
ARENAS are also very important as they allow players to fight 2 vs 2, 3 vs 3, 5 vs 5, Keep defense vs Keep siege, etc...so small group encounters are optimized as any PUG ZERG can be taken out by an organized ZERG comprised of small but very effective, cohesive groups working together and assisting the overall ZERG
DUELING AND ARENAS allow players to concentrate on class/template balance for overall PvP balance in Cryodiil campaigns. This part of the game needs to be addressed and optimized a long while before Battlegrounds is even remotely considered. This discussion is wayyyyyy to early in the game.
This game is headed to console by the end of this year so there is another good reason to hold off on this debate and allow the players/developers to work together in the coming days so everyone can enjoy a much more polished, balanced, and optimal release of the console version of The Elder Scrolls Online!
Yes, I want battlegrounds! I'll need them to stay enthused with the game long-term. Cyrodiil takes massive commitment in time and effort to see a small amount of PvP. Battlegrounds give the option of something fun with or against friends for twenty minutes or so, when that's all the time you have that day, where almost all that time is engaged in the action.
idk i wont play a game without bgs... i do not like zerging/seiging it puts me to sleep... if there were more smaller scale battles like 5 and under id be game but doesnt seem to happen as frequently as needed... bgs you get to use some skill versus zerging... just my opinion... plus i like objective based games...
I doubt id play this game though even if they added them...
I think adding guild Vs Guild battlegrounds would be fine, it is one of the most exciting PvP tournaments you can have but general battlegrounds would just split up the PvP players more without adding much to the game.
The last thing ESO needs to do at this point is appease the boom headshot crowd imo. The game stands on it's own quite fine and provides RvR style PvP for someone who doesn't want to play medieval BF4. Arenas/BGs have destroyed the PvP community on both WoW and Rift, I see no reason to not learn from those mistakes.
They need to stand firm on their design decisions that makes the game great for those of us who don't want another WoW clone. Being different should be a good thing in video games, not be something that is paraded around like a problem. There are dozens of games out there that offer lowest common denominator PvP, let's not ruin another game to appeal to players who will play one or two months then leave for the next MMO with BG's.
Currently Playing: ESO and FFXIV Have played: You name it If you mention rose tinted glasses, you better be referring to Mitch Hedberg.
Comments
Battlegrounds? why does everyone allways think in the allready known stufff...
Yes, ESO could need some small scale PvP... but i would not do battlegrounds like we know them in to many other games.. I would do them as quest instances, with PvP enabled... and both sides having quests that interact with eachother...
For example, Daggerfall convenant plans an invasion, the eabonheart pact plays the defenses. Many NPC, assisted by some PCs...
Or a dungeonrun, where both (or all 3) sides have the same objectives... and are meant to meet somewhere halfway...
You can litterally have dozens of scenarios... which are changed from week to week... to prevent to many scenarios being active at the same time...
Best MMO experiences : EQ(PvE), DAoC(PvP), WoW(total package) LOTRO (worldfeel) GW2 (Artstyle and animations and worlddesign) SWTOR (Story immersion) TSW (story) ESO (character advancement)
Playing: Darkfall New Dawn (and planning to play Fallout 76)
Favourite games have included: UO, Lineage2, Darkfall, Lotro, Baldur's Gate, SSX, FF7 and yes the original Wizardry on an Apple IIe
Hodor!
+1 could be fun, like that idea with dungeonrun
----
----
I went online to PvP yesterday (my last day before my 30 days box time runs out). In 20 minutes I saw perhaps 5 other players in Daggerfall, went ot a siege where maybe a dozen players were. Not good.
Strangely I think it's the forced social interactions that have put so many people off. Never thought I'd say that - amazed at how few people want to be really social in a game.
Those that do want social gaming seem a decent number on the forums. But when you actually get into a game? You realise that in fact their forum presence is a loud manifestation of a vocal minority - and from what I see it's a small minority. 10% maybe?
The other 90% of people are to be seen running away from grouping with strangers, quitting the game, going back to playing games where they can be their old anonymous self... anything rather than really engage socially.
Not only are TESO's game mechanics pretty dull, but the forced social interaction is - despite the desire to be social seen on forums like this - not what the vast majority want.
Not sure a game that is this big, with the amount of money put into it up front, can survive for long when it disenfranchises the majority. Social games that work tend to start out as lower budget sleeper hits and scale up as players join.
And that's a shame . It's all a shame. Not saying people should group if they don't want to. And people do group in "Anonymous Warcraft style" where you never need to know the people you group with. Players seem fine with that. But actual proper real interaction?
Seems that most don't want it.
They say they do - but in game? Very few seem to, and most run from it.
BG's would kill Cyrodiil populations. They are adding a dungeon to the middle of Cyrodiil available to whoever controls the inner keeps - just like it was in DAoC.
Here is what 10v10 or 15v15's would look like in ESO. 12 DK's 3 sorc healer pre-made groups running in and killing the other 15 people in 2 sec. Everyone would rage on the forums and the class nerf circle jerk would ensue for eternity.
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.
battlegrounds just proves the inability of the developers to design a fair and balanced open world pvp system.
WoW released battlegrounds cause its open world pvp failed hard.
ESO already has a pretty good pvp system i would say with this huge map and a triangle balance, i dont see why it should had battlegrounds ...
Not to mention the only reason "battlegrounds" were introduced to Vanilla in the first place was due to their horrible engine not being capable of handling server-wide warfare. I can't even remember how many times entire servers crashed because of capital city raids. So its understandable they had to introduce instanced PvP, but I am fairly certain the original intention of developers was to focus on world PvP. (Hence ranked system arrived when there was absolutely no talk of battlegrounds)
No... But I don't like PvP in general so am biased....
I would however suggest they improve Cyrodiil as it seems there is a basis for decent PvP there...
No, they should keep working on Cyrodiil.
They only have finite resources; spreading them too thinly will result in all aspects failing.
Friendly Fire and collision, will do wonders in Cyrodiil and do much to combat the mindless zerging that basically makes up the majority of PvP in any large-scale online game these days.
Let's just see if they're brave enough to really do something different.
Fuck With The Best, Die Like The Rest!!!
Battleground debate can be handled a year from now as this game isn't even remotely as polished as it needs to be to really move forward with something that radically changed WoW
Cryodiil is the current PvP area and it needs to be thoroughly tested and balanced before Zenimax can tackle a huge game changing feature like Battlegrounds.
Zenimax needs to add DUELING and ARENAS first and foremost! Why do you ask? Well..
Templates need to be thoroughly tested and balanced so there are more then a few to several optimal templates so as to add the air of anticipation and excitement as there will be more mystery and suspense to every encounter as it should be in large scale battles or even small skirmishes. This also improves player interest in TESO as there are more viable options for players concerning class/template choices and the evolution of their character and the game in general.
DUELING allows players to engage each other safely within the confines of their own realm/alliance so players can learn, adapt, and help improve class/template balance
ARENAS are also very important as they allow players to fight 2 vs 2, 3 vs 3, 5 vs 5, Keep defense vs Keep siege, etc...so small group encounters are optimized as any PUG ZERG can be taken out by an organized ZERG comprised of small but very effective, cohesive groups working together and assisting the overall ZERG
DUELING AND ARENAS allow players to concentrate on class/template balance for overall PvP balance in Cryodiil campaigns. This part of the game needs to be addressed and optimized a long while before Battlegrounds is even remotely considered. This discussion is wayyyyyy to early in the game.
This game is headed to console by the end of this year so there is another good reason to hold off on this debate and allow the players/developers to work together in the coming days so everyone can enjoy a much more polished, balanced, and optimal release of the console version of The Elder Scrolls Online!
If you want small scale pvp...
Get away from the zerg..
Its not hard.
idk i wont play a game without bgs... i do not like zerging/seiging it puts me to sleep... if there were more smaller scale battles like 5 and under id be game but doesnt seem to happen as frequently as needed... bgs you get to use some skill versus zerging... just my opinion... plus i like objective based games...
I doubt id play this game though even if they added them...
I think adding guild Vs Guild battlegrounds would be fine, it is one of the most exciting PvP tournaments you can have but general battlegrounds would just split up the PvP players more without adding much to the game.
Arenas is fine as well though.
The last thing ESO needs to do at this point is appease the boom headshot crowd imo. The game stands on it's own quite fine and provides RvR style PvP for someone who doesn't want to play medieval BF4. Arenas/BGs have destroyed the PvP community on both WoW and Rift, I see no reason to not learn from those mistakes.
They need to stand firm on their design decisions that makes the game great for those of us who don't want another WoW clone. Being different should be a good thing in video games, not be something that is paraded around like a problem. There are dozens of games out there that offer lowest common denominator PvP, let's not ruin another game to appeal to players who will play one or two months then leave for the next MMO with BG's.
Currently Playing: ESO and FFXIV
Have played: You name it
If you mention rose tinted glasses, you better be referring to Mitch Hedberg.