individual116: The future of PvP in eso is shit if wheeler is involved in anyway. He can’t PvP and doesn’t even understand the game. He doesn’t even know that heavy attacking restored resources.

kayl38254: They should've kept the individual classes unique.

IROPP4I: If they go with vengeance only- I’m gone. They have absolutly nuked their own game completely this year.

lexicon2792: Thanks for the update. I can say with certainty, that I can live with scenario 1, but scenario 2 will cause me to switch to Guild Wars 2 full time. I'm not saying this like I'm full of rage or anything, I understand that they have to do what they have to do, but I have limited gaming time and I am not down with the vengeance campaign at all. Group PvP is the only real reason I play an MMO.

slavedemise: I usually enjoy your videos content and insight for the player base. However, you seem overly optimistic with this update. ZOS rarely does anything in the community interest when PvP is the topic. This will be another "rug pull" quickly followed by a "shoulder shrug". I don't see any path forward where this doesn't further neglect PvP in ESO.

MrModishMo: Sorry subclassing needs to be removed first … too little too late

dbizerra: We can offer one or the other. I call bs, new hardware probably would solve those issues but that is not something they would not be willing or able to do.

354sd: Anything that gets rid of ball groups and super tanks.

SquadalaWereOff: Hopefully the test next year regarding healing versus damage sheds some light on the situation. I feel like zos doesn't want to acknowledge the fact that heal stacking in general is probably the biggest issue, and ball groups make it so much worse with that and purge spamming. It's obvious whenever one gets on you notice the performance drop it's like they're actively grefing the severe, they become unkillable and you can't ignore them otherwise they're just gonna take keeps, or grab scrolls for attention.

swingkid1771: If they ultimately make Cyro into a permanent Vengeance campaign ONLY, they won't have to worry about performance b/c everyone will quit playing it. GH vs Vengeance is a no brainer, with Vengeance clearly losing. It would be a glorified holding room.

A mid-size system sounds interesting as does a progression system. Look forward to hearing more in 2026.

nkress7: Vengeance is for people who prefer checkers over chess.

mynameselias: Im always down for some pvp updates to this game, it's what made me interesting in buying this game in the first place. The battle for cyrodiil trailers sold me on eso.

eirikdenko1562: Are they finally going to make an island around Imperial City a playable part of the zone 0-0?

fufu_from_eso: They keep asking what we want then banning us or removing or ignoring our feedback then give us the opposite and act shocked. When the server update happened the game worked good. It progressively went back to crap. Nerf cross healing to 2 per morph, upgrade the servers... Revert the subclassing and whatever they just did to animations.... Honestly just leave it alone don't touch it for God's sake. Let it die with dignity.

thomasjefferson3449: I will come back only when they remove subclassing and restore class identity

malachiwarner5699: Hopefully they don't get rid of grey host. I think having a choice will be better. The one thing that irritated me with vengeance was if u were in a 1 on 1 match with someone neither one of u could kill each other. The characters were to even or the heals were stronger than the damage u could do. We would fight for 5-6 mins straight then we would both give up and stand there then walk away depressed.

davidobenson: As a 10-year PS player of ESO, I can say with certainty that there was no where near 900 players in the later Vengeance campaigns. Maybe in the first one, 900 players joined just out of curiosity, but not the later ones. They were nearly ghost towns. One needed only look at the bar count, especially during prime time, to see that not many players were in Cyrodiil.

I'm a member of a 500 count PVP focused guild. We've been fighting in Cyrodiil since 2015. Back in the day, We fielded two 24-player zergs before the 12-player caps went into effect. Even today, we typically have three or four 12-player teams in Cyrodiil during our regular play days. But not during Vengeance campaigns. We had trouble getting anyone to play. A few people like it in our guild. Most didn't. For the last two Vengeance campaigns, our guild cancelled our regular run days, and instead, waited for Grey Host to restart. We're likely to cancel our December runs as well.

If ZOS settles on Grey Host and Vengeance campaigns, I can say with certainty, our guild will run in Grey Host. If they eliminate Grey Host-style campaigns in favor of Vengeance, it's unlikely that our guild as it exists today, will continue to run in Cyrodiil.

Speaking for myself, I won't play in Cyrodiil in a Vengeance campaign. Not in a test. Not in a main campaign. That's not the game I bought. Not what I paid for. After 10 years, I still play this game -- still pay for ESO plus -- because I enjoy PVP, especially Cyrodiil. If ZOS can't/won't fix Grey Host without tearing it apart, I simply won't play anymore.

~Deedle

AbyssWolve: I love how these descriptions of results act as if MANY players took part..

cj1986x: They weren't paying attention last V campaign on PC NA where there was a huge pop imbalance where there was no point to try to play on the factions with a lower pop because you'd immediately get zerged so people literally just logged off. Plus V largely appeals to people who haven't really been playing PVP and likely won't ever be big PVP players no matter what. PVP is one of the last things keeping me playing and I see V killing PVP in ESO completely if they go that route.

CBTP: I kinda hate how they talked about how they had "the biggest sustained battles ever" in Vengeance. The reason that was the case was because the Vengeance ruleset makes killing large groups with coordinated pushes impossible so every fight breaks down into a stagnant Zerg VS Zerg. Putting AoE caps on damaging abilities in large scale PvP is a bad idea, full stop. It turns a coordinated ult dump into a slot machine pull hoping that the game allows your group to damage the same 3 individuals with your ultimates, otherwise no one dies and you just wasted a perfectly coordinated combo.

msattrtand: The main question for me: Is Vengeance 900 players' cap actually sustainable? Positive feedback mostly comes from casual players, who are not currently involved in PvP. Will they continue playing the Vengeance after the "Brand New Thing" effect wears off? Otherwise, we may end up with something like a capped, laggy GH and 200 players on lag-free (and build-depth-free) Vengeance. Also, I haven't understood what will happen to non-Vengeance and non-GH campaigns in scenario 1.

Also, their "we can't increase the cap in GH, so we won't try to fix the lags there" attitude is so weird. Why can't we have lag-free GH with the current cap at least?

ztyhurst: Players are going to gravitate towards the campaign with the best battles and most people. It’s not fun fighting the same group of try hards at every keep. I like theory crafting, but it really comes down to population. 300 per alliance means less queue time and more epic fights, I think that will make it worth it for most players including myself even if you lose some build choices.

naplzt4k: To help pvers understand- vengeance would be like if trials had a generic skills that were exactly the sane for everyone, no sets, no cp, 1 potion type shared by everyone and high hp bar to 'balance' it all

mikehagge3904: You’d have to be a complete moron to think the devs at zos will get this right.

SuperJrocktv: If they replace gray host with vengeance I’ll be done with eso vengeance is Zerg fest

Nov 26 2025

Buy ESO Gold