Maintenance for the week of March 25:
• [COMPLETE] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – March 28, 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)

There CANNOT be access gates to the Imperial City paid DLC

  • MissBizz
    MissBizz
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    I'm waiting until we get to test a different set of rules for access for a real stance, but already I am thinking having different campaigns with different access rules would be awesome. Some people LOVE the constant crowded PvP inside IC that comes from access all the time, where others would prefer to have to fight for it so once they clear out most of the enemy players it's a bit less PvP. If different campaigns had different rules, people would be able to join the campaign that suites them.
    Lone Wolf HelpFor the solo players who know, sometimes you just need a hand.PC | NA | AD-DC-EP | Discord
  • Maulkin
    Maulkin
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭
    Dagoth_Rac wrote: »
    I still think this is a problem for US DC because while they will have access to IC, they will be significantly outnumbered. DC will get into IC, just to be stomped by enemy players. Being underpopulated in Cyrodiil is not the end of the world, due to how spread out it is. You are not constantly being run over by huge numbers of enemy players. You can use some hit and run tactics, attack in places where it takes the enemy some time to react and reach you. But an underpopulated faction in the confined quarters of IC is going to be clearly and visibly overwhelmed at all times. There will be no escaping the superior numbers of the opposing factions.

    Well first off this is diverting from what the OP is talking about. He is talking about not being able to access the game content you paid for, which is an understandable concern. But once inside the content (similarly to buying the game and simply PvPing in Cyro) you can be outnumbered, yes. I don't see anything terribly wrong with that.

    Secondly, it might not turn out the way you think. If indeed DC Stateside are as disorganised as you say, they are very likely to pile into the campaign that offers free access. So I would say, they are most likely to outnumber the other factions inside IC for that campaign. Cause most of the players of other factions will be on other, more meaningful campaigns (where keep holding actually means sth). You never know, it might even galvanise and unify DC and they might show a strong presence on that campaign outside of IC too, stranger things have happened.
    Edited by Maulkin on July 31, 2015 2:30PM
    EU | PC | AD
  • Kulvar
    Kulvar
    ✭✭✭✭
    Dagoth_Rac wrote: »
    It is not like DC is underpopulated but everyone is a superstar PVP player. Or that EP is overpopulated but they are all idiots. The overpopulated factions have more of everything. More bad players, but also more good players. So superior numbers make a huge difference. And they will make an even bigger difference in IC, where the faction imbalances will be more keenly felt.

    Or prerequisite matching the population.
    Your faction population rate => Forts needed to access the Imperial City

    01% - 09% ( 2 forts)
    10% - 19% ( 3 forts)
    20% - 29% ( 4 forts)
    30% - 39% ( 5 forts)
    40% - 49% ( 6 forts)
    50% - 59% ( 7 forts)
    60% - 69% ( 8 forts)
    70% - 79% ( 9 forts)
    80% - 89% (10 forts)
    90% - 99% (11 forts)
    Coward Argonian scholar of the Ebonheart Pact
  • Stikato
    Stikato
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    I understand OP's concerns, but there have always been zones in MMOs that aren't accessible 24/7, while they are being paid for.

    For example, high level raiding zones may have long respawn timers, a massive amount of prerequisites, or if not instanced, claimed by other groups. Meanwhile, you are paying your subscription, or have paid for the game, yet don't have 24/7 access.

    I guess IC is a little bit different, but I can't remember anyone really complaining about not having permanent access to Darkness Falls in DAOC even though they had a paid sub.

    I know it may be struggle, but the struggle is what makes the success even better. I see IC as sort a bonus room for success in PvP, which would lose some luster if you could just go in anytime.

    I would support the idea of different rule sets in different campaigns in order to appeal to both sides of this debate.
    Mordimus - Stam Sorc
  • Reverb
    Reverb
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    This is sobering. I've really been enjoying IC and had every intention of buying. Now I'm reminded that I'm DC-NA and I don't zergblob. I'm glad I'm having fun on the PTS, because it's probably the last time I'll ever get to see IC.
    Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster, and if you gaze into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you. ~Friedrich Nietzsche
  • driosketch
    driosketch
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭
    As a DC player I understand this. At the same time, I'm worried that if my faction has access to IC all the time, almost no one in my faction will be left at all to help retake our keeps.
    Main: Drio Azul ~ DC, Redguard, Healer/Magicka Templar ~ NA-PC
    ●The Psijic Order●The Sidekick Order●Great House Hlaalu●Bal-Busters●
  • Darlgon
    Darlgon
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Great wall of meaningful text.

    Just to add one more thing to your information.

    With "travel to player" and the new stupid per-campaign rule sets, players wont be easily able to migrate to a campaign that their alliance controls. At least every campaign but one is seven days, so after a few weeks, each alliance will most likely have solidified into the one campaign that their alliance controls. Plus, the zergs have only two campaigns to home/guest in, not being easily able to flood all of the campaigns, one after the other, taking keeps with 60 plus players per zerg (looking at AD)..

    Thanks for the /lurk Rich.
    Power level to CP160 in a week:
    Where is the end game? You just played it.
    Why don't I have 300+ skill points? Because you skipped content along the way.
    Where is new content? Sigh.
  • Darlgon
    Darlgon
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Robotmafia wrote: »
    wasnt there talk of a campaign where alle factions can enter IC regardless of keeps held in Cyro

    Thats only on the PTS, which has one campaign, and only for a limited time, like this week.
    Power level to CP160 in a week:
    Where is the end game? You just played it.
    Why don't I have 300+ skill points? Because you skipped content along the way.
    Where is new content? Sigh.
  • Darlgon
    Darlgon
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    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.

    Yes they are out number and will lose IC access again and over time they will have the least amount of access time. But the design will allow them to gain access. every day, multiple times.

    Controlling or having access to IC is a reward. So why shouldn't the sides that are winning the most have the most access?

    When a side can cut off access to another alliance they make the content inside much more controlled. A lot of people would rather have a little bit of controlled PVE acces inside rather than being able to go their 24/7 and having it always pure gankfest where nothing can be accomlished

    @Pirhana7_ESO Funny.. because i am going to refer you back to the same quote I left for you in another thread..
    @Jules forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/2024746/#Comment_2024746

    Initial entrance is what is what we're discussing there and will be tested on PTS. Once you're inside IC or the Sewers, you can log out and log back in there to your hearts content, even if you lose Access in rule-sets where it's gated by Keep ownership.


    http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/2026573/#Comment_2026573

    No... if DC is able to get player into IC and they can stay in IC indefinitely, their whole force will not be outside. HOWEVER, those outside will be split among all the campaigns, so they cant help each other out, unless DC (and the other factions) picks ONE campaign to focus on controlling access to IC. Needless to say, this appears counter-productive to ZoS goals for IC.

    Actually, I need to add something to that.. that faction will also probably control most of IC, as they are able to get re-inforcements into the city.
    Edited by Darlgon on July 31, 2015 3:29PM
    Power level to CP160 in a week:
    Where is the end game? You just played it.
    Why don't I have 300+ skill points? Because you skipped content along the way.
    Where is new content? Sigh.
  • ZOS_BrianWheeler
    ZOS_BrianWheeler
    PvP & Combat Lead
    We will be testing the "native six" keeps rule on the PTS when we get the next PTS patch up to you all. This means to get into the Imperial City from Cyrodiil, you have to own your native six keeps. The Imperial City access rules can be assigned on a campaign-by-campaign basis, so one campaign may have an "Anyone gets in" ruleset, while another may have access rules applied to it. PTS testing will help guide that decision along with your feedback. =)

    Access rules will not gate access to the Imperial Prison or White-Gold Tower dungeons. You can still click on the icons on the map or use the group finder to get into these dungeons without special rule access.

    We have discussed other rulesets, such as owning your native six keeps plus one enemy keep, or owning the majority of keeps, but again, we'll be trying out the “native six” keeps ruleset on PTS to see how that plays when the next PTS version goes up.

    For clarification, "native six" is defined per alliance as:
    • Aldmeri: Alessia, Bloodmayne, Brindle, Roebeck, Faregyl, Blackboot
    • Ebonheart: Chalman, Blue Road, Drakelowe, Arrius, Kingscrest, Farragut
    • Daggerfall: Dragonclaw, Aleswell, Ash, Glademist, Rayles, Warden

    There will be in-game information noting whether or not you have access via the Imperial icon entrances around the Imperial City.

    Also, remember that once you're inside the Imperial City, you can log out and back into the Sewers or the Districts regardless of whether your alliance has access if there is room in the campaign for you to do so (just like standard Cyrodiil entry\queueing rules.) If your alliance doesn’t have access, however, and you leave the Imperial City, you won't be able to go back into the Sewer entrances until your alliance regains access.

    Looking forward, we will be monitoring the campaign populations when the Imperial City is released to see if more campaigns are required to meet demand. We are aware this could induce "Aldmeri's IC" or similar situations, so we will monitor the population carefully to protect against that as much as possible.

    In the meantime, keep playing on the PTS and giving us feedback! It's been invaluable thus far and it's really great to see everyone finally roaming the streets and sewers of the Imperial City!
    Wheeler
    ESO PVP Lead & Combat Lead
    Staff Post
  • Darlgon
    Darlgon
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    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.

    More like Wow saying...this expansion which both sides pay for is only accessible to the Horde. @#$%% you, Alliance dogs. Thanks for your money.
    Power level to CP160 in a week:
    Where is the end game? You just played it.
    Why don't I have 300+ skill points? Because you skipped content along the way.
    Where is new content? Sigh.
  • Preyfar
    Preyfar
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭
    Verrask wrote: »
    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.
    That was something I was pondering. Right now, emps on AD and EP* can hold Daggerfall back completely on Thornblade. Campaigns are changing, sure, but right now DC has trouble mustering up more than a dozen people. While we have some people who work really great together, mustering up enough people of the same skill and caliber is REALLY hard. Emps ride in, wipe lesser players instantly.

    With the damage changes going into place, Emps with 50K health and 40K shields are going to be a nightmare. While they'll o less damage, we do far less damage right back. The current AD emp on Thornblade is a great example. Without shields she's not too tough, but I've seen two of the harder hitting DPS have issue getting her shields down. She can hit hard at times, but... now I've got a 50% damage reduction. She still has everything she does. In fact, I've got MORE than a 50% damage reduction because all my sets were epicly nerfed with this patch. I'm looking at almost a 60% nerf.

    Yes, Imperial City is going to bring more people to Cyrodiil, but most PVE folk just don't do too well in PVP at first and get wiped. Former emps won't have their passives, but also lack a lot of skill players because most have been driven off. And it's even worse on EP's side. Thornblade is like a zombie.

    The buff server removal may help fix it, may not. There's a lot of concerns, and with the cost of server jumping going up as high as it is, and populations being as out of whack as they are, it's really hard to know how it's going to play out on live.

    Holding onto a single keep on Thornblade for more than 24 hours (hell, 12 hours) has been hard as hell for months. There should be an achievement for that on Thorn. While I know things will change with the oncoming population, I just don't know how much. I don't want to be locked out of content forever.

    * AD controlling Thorn is a recent thing, so I included EP's emps as well.
    Edited by Preyfar on July 31, 2015 3:48PM
  • drogon1
    drogon1
    ✭✭✭✭
    It's a good mechanic I think. However, ESO should do like DAOC did, and provide large AP and other benefits to low pop factions. This will cause an influx of - esp - min/maxers to the low pop faction, and the relative strengths will begin evening out. If I can make triple the AP fighting for DC, why not roll a toon there and cash in? (Note that DC dominates the non-vet campaign, so DC non-vets will have no prob entering IC.)

    I don't know what the numbers are now benefiting low pop factions, but ESO can adjust this stuff to provide proper incentive to balance factions. The game's health depends fundamentally on faction balance - everyone benefits from this.
    Edited by drogon1 on July 31, 2015 3:54PM
  • Slylok
    Slylok
    ✭✭✭
    I still dont think access should be around keeps.. Just keep track of alliance scores and base access and a certain number of points. Once all 3 factions have access then a reset timer begins and after it hits zero each faction has to get the set amount of alliance points before gaining access.

    Kills give points
    Taking over POIs give points
    Taking Keeps give points
    Etc Etc Etc.

    No more worries about a faction being locked out near all of the time.
    Youtube ESO First Person Gameplay - http://tinyurl.com/o6evusk

    Twitter - SlylokYoutube

    Google+ - Slylok
  • xaraan
    xaraan
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    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.

    This is a good idea. Probably the highly contested campaign where everything is up for grabs would be a good one, that way it would spread that population out into IC instance a little as well and since stuff flips hands so often it would allow people access still.
    -- @xaraan --
    nightblade: Xaraan templar: Xaraan-dar dragon-knight: Xaraanosaurus necromancer: Xaraan-qa warden: Xaraanodon sorcerer: Xaraan-ra
    AD • NA • PC
  • Reverb
    Reverb
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    You've made a lot of good points @Preyfar. I just want to address the "cost of campaign jumping" item. I understand the intent of this change, but I don't actually believe it will be a barrier, especially to the individuals and groups that are perceived as being the problem. AP is already easy to accrue a lot of, and 2.1 doesn't bring anything better to spend it on than campaign jumping. Most of us already have a couple mil AP, what's 150k, or even several hundred thousand to move around looking for a different fight?
    Battle not with monsters, lest ye become a monster, and if you gaze into the abyss, the abyss gazes also into you. ~Friedrich Nietzsche
  • Preyfar
    Preyfar
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭
    Reverb wrote: »
    You've made a lot of good points @Preyfar. I just want to address the "cost of campaign jumping" item. I understand the intent of this change, but I don't actually believe it will be a barrier, especially to the individuals and groups that are perceived as being the problem. AP is already easy to accrue a lot of, and 2.1 doesn't bring anything better to spend it on than campaign jumping. Most of us already have a couple mil AP, what's 150k, or even several hundred thousand to move around looking for a different fight?
    AP isn't actually easy to get on Thornblade. There's been periods during prime time (6pm - 10pm?) where I've ridden around for almost an hour trying to find somebody to kill and can't. Usually I'll take the Rayles LM and hope AD come, but sometimes I have to ride out to the EP gates and hope to find AD campers or kill the seemingly 1 or 2 EP online. It's not usually that bad, but it can be. Further, Thornblade seems to be where most new players go. For whatever reason, they see Thornblade and Azura's Star as the default, and all the level 10s join Thorn for some PVP, discover no fights or that they're trounced by gate campers and quit.

    We try to suggest going to Backwater Blade, but they don't have the AP to jump there... and never end up getting it. You can get AP on Thorn. Some day it's easy, other days it's really, REALLY hard and you have to work at it. Thornblade has no players. Again, I know that will change with IC, but even if we tripled our players on DC's side we'd still be outnumbered 3:1.
  • Attorneyatlawl
    Attorneyatlawl
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭
    Looking forward, we will be monitoring the campaign populations when the Imperial City is released to see if more campaigns are required to meet demand. We are aware this could induce "Aldmeri's IC" or similar situations, so we will monitor the population carefully to protect against that as much as possible.

    In the meantime, keep playing on the PTS and giving us feedback! It's been invaluable thus far and it's really great to see everyone finally roaming the streets and sewers of the Imperial City!

    Having a blast with it... and it's great to see the insight in your post as well as taking the extra factors into consideration. I'm not much of a sports fan, but in basketball parlance, "slam dunk." ;)
    -First-Wave Closed Beta Tester of the Psijic Order, aka the 0.016 percent.
    Exploits suck. Don't blame just the game, blame the players abusing them!

    -Playing since July 2013, back when we had a killspam channel in Cyrodiil and the lands of Tamriel were roamed by dinosaurs.
    ________________
    -In-game mains abound with "Nerf" in their name. As I am asked occasionally, I do not play on anything but the PC NA Megaserver at this time.
  • olemanwinter
    olemanwinter
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    MissBizz wrote: »
    I'm waiting until we get to test a different set of rules for access for a real stance, but already I am thinking having different campaigns with different access rules would be awesome. Some people LOVE the constant crowded PvP inside IC that comes from access all the time, where others would prefer to have to fight for it so once they clear out most of the enemy players it's a bit less PvP. If different campaigns had different rules, people would be able to join the campaign that suites them.

    I don't think that's how it will really work.

    If there is unrestricted access to IC then people will be free to play in whichever campaign they want...whenever they want.

    If the number of players encountered is the primary concern, then selecting a lower population server would be in order. Allowing unfettered access has a natural distributing effect of the population IMO.

    However, if you allow only 1 campaign to have guaranteed access then that campaign will become high-population. Again, you're only choice will be zerg play VS no access.

    Likewise, under your plan, if you are in a campaign with restrictions you will likely either face nobody at all (if it's a buff server) or a GIANT WAVE of enemies when they coordinate an attack to get access to IC.

    IMO, in your plan, it will still be unlikely to have any middle ground between dead pvp and zerg play.
  • Timeetyo
    Timeetyo
    ✭✭
    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.

    Yes they are out number and will lose IC access again and over time they will have the least amount of access time. But the design will allow them to gain access. every day, multiple times.

    Controlling or having access to IC is a reward. So why shouldn't the sides that are winning the most have the most access?

    When a side can cut off access to another alliance they make the content inside much more controlled. A lot of people would rather have a little bit of controlled PVE acces inside rather than being able to go their 24/7 and having it always pure gankfest where nothing can be accomlished


    Apparently you didn't play Warhammer then. Although only 2 factions they dis a similar thing with pvp locking content. It sounds great as if all locked out players would rally together...but then reality hits. You know what happened? Day 1 it worked like that as everyone was excited, then it wore off. After that if people logged in to see they were locked out they gave up and logged off. The losing faction became a ghost town and it destroyed entire servers.

    Bottom line is this: people have limited game time and want to log in and play towards their own goal and not have that dictated by the server status.
  • wraith808
    wraith808
    ✭✭✭✭
    MAOofDC wrote: »
    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.

    That's a perfectly valid stance to take- and one that ZOS has embraced with several posts, stating, paraphrased, PvEers wait for Wrothgar. This is PvP love. So if they don't like to PvP or PvE with PvP mixed in- the obvious option is not to buy, and ZOS seems to understand that.
    Quasim ibn-Muhammad - VR 12 Redguard Dragon Knight
    Taladriel Vanima - VR 5 Altmer Nightblade
    Ambalyo iyo Bogaadin - VR 1 Redguard Sorceror
  • leeux
    leeux
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Why don't make the IC entrances be part of the transit network?

    That way if you lose the surrounding keeps you only lose the "convenient" way to access them, and can still ride to them as normally.

    The the corresponding IC entrance is connected, you can directly travel to it from your alliance gate, to a transit node inside the base... And also add a transit node to be able to transit out of it too, of course!


    EDIT: It was pointed out that a similar idea was already proposed before here:
    Leandor wrote: »
    Make access tied to a transitus route to a faction emperor keep. If you can port to Aleswell/Ash, Blueroad/Chalman or Roebeck/Alessia respectively, you can enter. Again, clicky first link in my signature.

    Gives importance to dragon/drake/brindle since these are the shortest routes and two keeps can be taken against a dominating faction with a bit of coordination.

    Sorry that I missed the original post.

    The only difference I propose is that the sewer base have a transit node inside.
    Edited by leeux on July 31, 2015 4:56PM
    PC/NA - Proud old member of the Antique Ordinatus Populus

    My chars
    Liana Amnell (AD mSorc L50+, ex EP) =x= Lehnnan Klennett (AD mTemplar L50+ Healer/Support ) =x= Ethim Amnell (AD mDK L50+, ex DC)
    Leinwyn Valaene (AD mSorc L50+) =x= Levus Artorias (AD mDK-for-now L50+) =x= Madril Ulessen (AD mNB L50+) =x= Lyra Amnis (AD not-Stamplar-yet L50+)
    I only PvP on AD chars

    ~~ «And blossoms anew beneath tomorrow's sun >>»
    ~~ «I am forever swimming around, amidst this ocean world we call home... >>»
    ~~ "Let strength be granted so the world might be mended... so the world might be mended."
    ~~ "Slash the silver chain that binds thee to life"
    ~~ Our cries will shrill, the air will moan and crash into the dawn. >>
    ~~ The sands of time were eroded by the river of constant change >>
  • Halke
    Halke
    ✭✭✭
    Leandor wrote: »
    Make access tied to a transitus route to a faction emperor keep. If you can port to Aleswell/Ash, Blueroad/Chalman or Roebeck/Alessia respectively, you can enter. Again, clicky first link in my signature.

    Gives importance to dragon/drake/brindle since these are the shortest routes and two keeps can be taken against a dominating faction with a bit of coordination.

    This is the best idea I have seen in this whole thread. Can you get a route to the city (via one of the close keeps)? Then have fun in there.
  • Darlgon
    Darlgon
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    leeux wrote: »
    Why don't make the IC entrances be part of the transit network?

    That way if you lose the surrounding keeps you only lose the "convenient" way to access them, and can still ride to them as normally.

    The the corresponding IC entrance is connected, you can directly travel to it from your alliance gate, to a transit node inside the base... And also add a transit node to be able to transit out of it too, of course!

    At the risk of being foolish... its lore man. The sewers were always the way in and out if the law was looking for you in Oblivion, without being detected (or swim the giant lake with slaughterfish. Ask the guy on the cot about how that worked out for him.). Now, since Molag Bal controls all the entrances, its the only way for everyone else to get in too.
    Edited by Darlgon on July 31, 2015 4:33PM
    Power level to CP160 in a week:
    Where is the end game? You just played it.
    Why don't I have 300+ skill points? Because you skipped content along the way.
    Where is new content? Sigh.
  • Stikato
    Stikato
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Just a thought, but if there is free access to IC, what is the point of Cyrodiil. IC has all of the rewards of Cyrodiil plus TV stones, vet 15 resources, trophy room drops, etc.

    Unless you have a preference for siege warfare, playing in Cyrodiil will be functionally inefficient and less rewarding then being in IC.
    Mordimus - Stam Sorc
  • Halke
    Halke
    ✭✭✭
    Preyfar wrote: »
    Reverb wrote: »
    You've made a lot of good points @Preyfar. I just want to address the "cost of campaign jumping" item. I understand the intent of this change, but I don't actually believe it will be a barrier, especially to the individuals and groups that are perceived as being the problem. AP is already easy to accrue a lot of, and 2.1 doesn't bring anything better to spend it on than campaign jumping. Most of us already have a couple mil AP, what's 150k, or even several hundred thousand to move around looking for a different fight?
    AP isn't actually easy to get on Thornblade. There's been periods during prime time (6pm - 10pm?) where I've ridden around for almost an hour trying to find somebody to kill and can't. Usually I'll take the Rayles LM and hope AD come, but sometimes I have to ride out to the EP gates and hope to find AD campers or kill the seemingly 1 or 2 EP online. It's not usually that bad, but it can be. Further, Thornblade seems to be where most new players go. For whatever reason, they see Thornblade and Azura's Star as the default, and all the level 10s join Thorn for some PVP, discover no fights or that they're trounced by gate campers and quit.

    We try to suggest going to Backwater Blade, but they don't have the AP to jump there... and never end up getting it. You can get AP on Thorn. Some day it's easy, other days it's really, REALLY hard and you have to work at it. Thornblade has no players. Again, I know that will change with IC, but even if we tripled our players on DC's side we'd still be outnumbered 3:1.

    This worries me too about the cost to change. Back in the day I had the misfortune of homing one of my AD toons in what was effectively a dead campaign for us (it was a buff server). I didn't have the AP to change and just could not earn it. I only got out of there because they reset Cyrodiil with one of the updates. Now with it costing even more people in dead campaigns are going to be in a bind.
  • leeux
    leeux
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    @Darlgon
    Darlgon wrote: »
    At the risk of being foolish... its lore man. <snip>


    Yeah, I see your point :)

    But, one could argue that the forces trying to take back the city would somehow try to "connect" the network to be able to get reinforcements easier... right?

    Halke wrote: »
    This is the best idea I have seen in this whole thread. Can you get a route to the city (via one of the close keeps)? Then have fun in there.

    @Halke: thank you for the quote... I see I missed that @Leandor did already propose the same mechanics before.

    I'm at work so I couldn't read all the thread properly, so I skimmed over several posts quickly and I missed the original suggestion. Sorry.

    PC/NA - Proud old member of the Antique Ordinatus Populus

    My chars
    Liana Amnell (AD mSorc L50+, ex EP) =x= Lehnnan Klennett (AD mTemplar L50+ Healer/Support ) =x= Ethim Amnell (AD mDK L50+, ex DC)
    Leinwyn Valaene (AD mSorc L50+) =x= Levus Artorias (AD mDK-for-now L50+) =x= Madril Ulessen (AD mNB L50+) =x= Lyra Amnis (AD not-Stamplar-yet L50+)
    I only PvP on AD chars

    ~~ «And blossoms anew beneath tomorrow's sun >>»
    ~~ «I am forever swimming around, amidst this ocean world we call home... >>»
    ~~ "Let strength be granted so the world might be mended... so the world might be mended."
    ~~ "Slash the silver chain that binds thee to life"
    ~~ Our cries will shrill, the air will moan and crash into the dawn. >>
    ~~ The sands of time were eroded by the river of constant change >>
  • cschwingeb14_ESO
    cschwingeb14_ESO
    ✭✭✭✭
    IC access through owning keeps is just going to promote the current buff campaign mentality. DC will have a buff campaign to, even if it's just 1. And with people unable to change campaigns easily, campaigns are going to stagnate even more.

    How about:

    If your faction owns 10 or more keeps, you can enter IC with no restrictions

    If your faction owns less than 10 keeps, you can enter IC if you have the continuous attack buff

    If your faction has a scroll gate open, you cannot enter IC

    Possibly replace continuous attack buff with a different buff that only triggers on taking a keep/outpost, and lasts a bit longer.

    The idea is that too get into IC, you have to PvP on the behalf of you realm... At least for long enough to take a keep
  • olemanwinter
    olemanwinter
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    My blanket response to common arguments

    1) "IC is a reward"
    I take two issues with this. First, I don't pay for rewards. I'm fine with Imperial City being a "bonus" when Zos begins PAYING ME to play the game. lol
    Players cannot possibly be expected to pay money for content THEY EXPECT to only rarely access. You don't have to grant access to all players, but just don't expect full participation.

    Maybe if the "reward" was linked to individual contribution, such as alliance rank or achievement, then I could understand. Of course that will never work because most many players hide their individual ability behind the existence of large groups. However, I have no control over the rest of the DC alliance. To make my gaming experience completely contingent upon their actions is unacceptable....if they want my money.

    Secondly, Zos is not currently offering any way to change alliances. Until they do, you would be requiring me to spend hours playing with DC guilds and large groups I may not like to gain access to paid content.

    I say again, this is not a job. I'm all for being "A TEAM PLAYER" and "SHARING RESPONSIBILITY" and "PICKING UP THE SLACK" and "GOING ALONG TO GET ALONG".....when I'm working to earn a paycheck.

    I'm not going to spend money to have to type XYZ in zone chat, log into teamspeak, stack on the crown, and ride half way to X before someone changes their mind and says "Everyone blood port to Y" for hours just to get access to the thing I paid money for.


    2) "Other games have restricted content"
    I don't doubt this. I haven't bought other games. I won't be buying other games. I don't think ESO is trying to be WOW or DAOC or whatever other game people are thinking of. To do so would be a mistake.

    WOW has been about the only majorly successful MMO franchise (maybe also GW) that I know of. Most of the other games were not as popular and most are extinct, so copying them is probably not a good idea. And as for direct competition with WOW, copying your competitor is also never a good idea.

    Again, the developers will do what they deem best, and it may greatly please some of you to have access gates to the content, but don't expect full participation. A lot of gamers treat games like a drug. Their participation is a foregone conclusion. They may complain and gripe....but they will pay. BUT A LOT DON'T. I don't. If I can't get access at least most of the time I'm not buying it. Period.

    3) "This will inspire DC to play better and achieve access"
    I find this to be the most compelling argument against my viewpoint. And if campaign selection were random or if there was only 1 campaign, I would agree.

    However, there is an undeniable and factual imbalance in alliance population which will preclude the performance you describe, at least to begin with.

    Lets assume the vast majority of DC players select Azura's Star as a home campaign to combine their forces. This would work UNLESS OTHER ALLIANCES DO THE SAME. The full force of DC loses to the full force of AD or EP. It just does.

    Now paying customers are locked in a campaign for 30 days without access to the DLC they paid for.

    Or, they could choose a 7 day campaign to be safe, but which one? How much coordination are you expecting across an alliance of people that have no real connection with each other.

    I think a lot of people arguing this are PvP guildies that are used to coordinating (or trying and failing to do so) with other PvP guilds. I see them in PvP zone chat all the time.... "Leader of XYZ....whisper me the leader of ABC". And that's great. It has a lot of impact on a map....but it's still not how most people play PvP.

    There is another big problem with the idea of a "reward" or "DC will have to get it's act together". If we begin with reduced access we will very quickly be at an even greater disadvantage in PvP. Imagine an already weaker DC fighting against and AD or EP force that has had a week or two headstart in acquiring and crafting VR16 legendary gear while DC has almost no VR16 mats acquired.

    Mark my words, if this goes forth you will see both an increase is defections from DC to other alliances and outright abandoning of the game by players on DC who can't bare the thought of starting over.


    _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
    Some additional thoughts:

    PLAY HOW YOU WANT THEY SAID

    For a game that was marketed on the idea that we could all play how we want, it doesn't seem consistent to me to demand that people join large groups they otherwise wouldn't support and follow their instructions - consuming the bulk of their LEISURE TIME - in order to finally be granted a chance to "play how they want".

    WE COULD TAKE A PAGE FROM GUILD WARS

    In guild wars 1 (years ago) there was "elite" areas of PvE that had access gates. They were called things like the "Fissure of Woe" and "Underworld" and "The Deep". These were very cool, challenging, and amazing end-game environments.

    They developed a very unique access gate for these areas. The entire alliance would gain access to these areas when any single player within the alliance accomplished a feat. There were many different types of feats, some 1-time achievements and some were repeatable. For example, in ESO this would be like if every time a DC player completed Veteran DSA the entire DC alliance would get access to Imperial City for 1 hour. Or every time someone reached Alliance War ability rank 10. Or every time someone completed Sanctum. Etc.

    Individual accomplishments allowed temporary access for the community. And I think that is far better AND JUST than expecting a community wide effort to allow temporary access for individuals.
  • Xendyn
    Xendyn
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭
    @olemanwinter

    I see your point, for sure. Speaking to PC, I was wondering how you see the campaign ruleset changes as figuring into the access?


    Azura: Ownership of keeps, resources, Elder Scrolls, and outposts will generate 1 point each per scoring cycle and last 30 days.
    Blackwater Blade: Ownership of keeps, resources, Elder Scrolls, and outposts will generate 1 point each per scoring cycle and last 5 days. (Non-Veterans only.)
    Chillrend: Keeps, outposts, and resources will generate zero points. Ownership of Elder Scrolls will generate 1 point per scoring cycle and last 7 days.
    Haderus: Keeps, outposts, and Elder Scrolls will generate zero points. Ownership of resources will generate 1 point per scoring cycle and last 7 days.
    Thornblade: Resources, outposts, and Elder Scrolls will generate zero points. Ownership of keeps will generate 1 point per scoring cycle and last 7 days.
    Versidue-Shae (Console Only): Ownership of keeps, resources, Elder Scrolls, and outposts will generate 1 point each per scoring cycle and last 5 days. (Non-Veterans only.)

    Also, I know there is at least one large EP guild in the process of rerolling to DC. Does that improve your outlook at all?
    Lag is ruinin' my 'mershun!
    A society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know they shall never sit in.
    There is only one good, knowledge, and one evil, ignorance - Socrates
    Member of the Old Guard, keepers of the game's history

    PC/NA
Sign In or Register to comment.