Hmmm.

If they want to gate the Imperial City, then it is a derivative feature because it will always require being successful in other parts of the game before being able to access the DLC.

I suppose players could level up three characters, one in each Alliance and in different Campaigns and hope for the best.

However, ZOS can fix this by either never ever restricting access to the Imperial City for anyone able to get into Cyrodiil or by simply making the Imperial City part of the base game.

Just thinking out loud. Don't really care about which Alliance is the worst or teams up against the third.

I think a restriction should be in place, though it should just be home keeps (or at the absolute least, your keeps by your gates) with people being in IC if you cannot control your home keeps then that is pitiful.
As mentioned, at least the gate keeps - makes no sense that your army would be battling in IC when you cannot even keep your gates closed.

Greatsword wrote: »

krees28b14_ESO wrote: »

Team Green at their best.

Who is Team Green?
As a DC player I only know Team Orange.

Who are those teams? As an EP, I only know Team Jacob and Team Edward.

In absolute agreement. It is very hard for Daggerfall Covenant to hold any advantage, even starting at total map control, in the East Coast's Evening hours.

Especially against Team Orange.

Rescorla_ESO wrote: »

Pirhana7_ESO wrote: »

The thing you fail to mention is that while DC is locked out of IC their FULL force will be in Cyrodiil while the other alliances will have half their forces in IC. While this happens there is no reason DC shouldn't be bale to take back their home keeps + to gain access to IC.

This person gets it

Even if that was possible, which it is, all of DC was held at bay in its first keep (Fort Rayles) for hours by a 40AD person zerg team that was using lag exploits that ZOS refuses to apply a simple fix to.

So yes, eventually DC could get their keeps back while AD and EP were in the imperial city but only after several hours and thus eliminate those who may only have 3-4 hours to play tops.

A simple solution to the problem US DC are having would be to have 1 campaign in which access to IC is unrestricted. Thus more casual players can home or guest there and always play inside when they feel like it.

But for all other campaigns, there needs to be a lock out mechanism. One of the functions of IC is to work as an incentive to fight for the Cyrodiil map. Another function is to balance out population in campaigns where one faction dominates. You can't remove that.

Also, I personally believe if all factions have access to IC all the time, it will be total chaos in there. Too many players in a relatively small (smaller than the Cyrodiil map) area, too much lag, too much zerging.

So yeah, I feel one unrestricted campaign and one where you have to hold your home keeps is a more balanced solution.

DDuke wrote: »

Menelaos wrote: »

I find the notion that you have to pay for something and then cannot access it without first setting up the prerequisites yourself amusing.

Kind of like when you pay for WoW expansions, but can't access content until X level?

Or when a raid you have purchased with the DLC/expansion is "locked" until you have certain ilvl?


I really don't get this argument.

In your two examples, I personally have control over that gating and it's a one time thing. Once I hit level X, I can enter those expansions or raids whenever I want. All on my own (or even with my guild as a whole) I don't necessarily have any control over keep gating. If I log in at any given time, I may have multiple hours of "work" ahead of myself just to access content I've already paid for and this could happen every time I log in to attempt to enjoy my new paid content. It would get old very quickly. That's the big difference. A one time lock vs a lock every time I want to play.

Sincerely,
A DC player

krees28b14_ESO wrote: »

Igawotch wrote: »

Don't worry your AD/DC comrades will split Cyrodiil between each other.

"The enemy of my enemy is my ALLY "

I had to fix your proverb, because the enemy of your enemy while helpful and useful may or may not necessarily be your friend.

Anyway back to the OP I predict that the "Buff Campaigns" or since the buffs don't carry over outside Cyrodiil lets call them "Access Campaigns" will make a major comeback.

My reasoning is two fold:

One, With the scoring changes(see list of changes below) which seem strange and counterintuitive people will tend to gravitate to Azura Star since it is the only Vet campaign that will score the way that every campaign scores now. This will be the Home campaign to the most dedicated PvP players, people who play this game FOR the PvP and little else. Being a 30 day campaign it provides the biggest rewards. I also predict this will be the guest campaign for the less dedicated players who want to experience the full on warfare that can occur but PvP isn't their "thing".

Cyrodiil Campaign Changes
Campaigns are undergoing rule changes for encouraging different styles of gameplay within the campaigns, including non-veteran campaigns now lasting 7 days instead of 5 days.
Azura: Ownership of keeps, resources, Elder Scrolls, and outposts will generate one point each per scoring cycle, and lasts 30 days.
Blackwater Blade (non-Veteran only): Ownership of keeps, resources, Elder Scrolls, and outposts will generate one point each per scoring cycle, and lasts 7 days.
Chillrend: Keeps, outposts, and resources will generate zero points. Ownership of Elder Scrolls will generate one point per scoring cycle, and lasts 7 days.
Haderus: Keeps, outposts, and Elder Scrolls will generate zero points. Ownership of resources will generate one point per scoring cycle, and lasts 7 days.
Thornblade: Resources, outposts, and Elder Scrolls will generate zero points. Ownership of keeps will generate one point per scoring cycle, and lasts 7 days.


Two, many players will simply want access to Imperial City for the PvE opportunities provided within without the fear of constantly getting ganked and losing the TV stones they are trying to collect. These "Access Campaigns" will be highly desired for the dedicated PvE players and they will be these players home campaigns. 7 day campaigns provide less reward at the end of the scoring period and will be less popular with the dedicated PvP players anyway. They will also provide a place for dedicated PvP players to farm TV stone quickly so that they can get the best TV stone gear quickly. They can simply guest in their Alliance's "Access Campaign" for a few hours or days get what they need and move on. This will allow players who have no great desire to PvP, of which there are many, unfettered access to Imperial City.

The concept of end game PvE being gated behind PvP turns alot of players off. More than half my friends including my Mom (yes my 60+ year old Mom plays ESO) are contemplating not even buying the DLC simply because they don't want to have to PvP in way, shape, or fashion. I will agree that PvP players have needed a bone thrown there way for a while now but contrary to what you see on the forums MOST ESO player are not dedicated PvP players and the don't consider PvP to be end-game. The forums just happen to be chocked full of PvP players complaining about this ability or that one being unbalanced. Which they very will might be FOR PvP but not so much for PvE. Why the Devs can't separate ability effect for PvP and PvE with the Battle Spirit buff I don't know, but that is an argument for a different topic.

As always I welcome your thoughts, comments and/or recriminations to my posts.

DDuke wrote: »

Menelaos wrote: »

I find the notion that you have to pay for something and then cannot access it without first setting up the prerequisites yourself amusing.

Kind of like when you pay for WoW expansions, but can't access content until X level?

Or when a raid you have purchased with the DLC/expansion is "locked" until you have certain ilvl?


I really don't get this argument.

Apples n oranges. You won't buy a raid dlc till appropriate level , then you get perma access to it. Buy I.c get in once a month or whatever the case will turn into . It's not the best idea I've heard . In principle it could be OK but in practice with population imbalance it won't work fairly

Could not agree more. I mean even when DC are fighting for a buff server we cannot seem to keep hold of a campaign for very long.

Best solution is to have at least one campaign with constant access to the Imperial City for all three alliances, why it should even have requirements to enter aside from the DLC is beyond me. The Imperial City is meant to be a 3-way fight, that's what it was built for.

As an AD, I also support the idea how not owning keeps and having to travel further is a fair punishment. I bought 3 months of ESO plus so I can enjoy this DLC, which seems to be awesome thusfar (besides constant crashing which hopefully will be fixed soon). Anyways the idea that I'm going to spend 2,500 crowns for the DLC, and possibly not have access to it any time somewhat irks me.
If I want to hop on for an hour or two before work and go into IC, I should be able to, not having to worry about getting a large group together to take back keeps just to enter the Imperial City. Maybe as other alliances take your home keeps, restrict spawning in a way, where if you die in the cities, you might have to respawn in the sewers, making the distance to travel back to a district, further. And then if an entire faction owns all the keeps required to access IC, then the PVP aspect of the DLC is gone, ruining half the fun. So, I don't believe if I'm paying for access DLC, I shouldn't be restricted on entering the area based on my skill level of my faction, or the population of it as it will encourage people to hop campaigns just to join one where their faction reigns supreme.
Cyrodil offers large scale siege battles, for huge groups, while the Imperial City encourages more close quarters, small group fighting, and sometimes I prefer one over the other, and I should be able to freely choose which one I participate in, especially in an Elder Scrolls game.

A way to mix the two sides could be :

Any player can access to the Imperial City at any moment from a fort controlled by its faction and linked to a base camp through Transitus Shrines.
Any player can get access to the Imperial City after doing something (the access fading after a time if not used).

Example:
- Destroying a Dark Anchor in Cyrodiil (15min timer before fading)
- Paying an AP or gold fee to smugglers (instant)
- Special time (5min every hour)

@Enodoc ah ok, that makes sense. Thanks for clarifying.

I personally like the addition of mechanics like this to pvp - it reminds me of Darkness Falls in DAoC. I do understand the various concerns about pop imbalance though.

There are almost always gates to these kinds of content updates, whether they are level based, gear based, etc. this is just more dynamic to me and interesting.

Like I said though I do understand the issues mentioned - I just think it adds depth to the PVP campaigns.