District Control Concept and why Imperial City needs it

Enodoc

PvP in Imperial City is currently an objective-less zerg-based grind-fest for Tel Var Stones. This is fine for some people, but Imperial City was advertised as "the DLC for PvP players", and some people want more structure to their PvP. As far as I am aware, this was last brought up in its own thread on the PTS forums, and hasn't really been directly addressed in General Discussion (although if I'm mistaken, please point me to those threads as well).

Tagging some people who have expressed an interest in District Control: @Fornacis @HeroOfNone @Kingof green @Lava_Croft @UrQuan @MissBizz

District Control was in the original plan for IC, but for some unknown reason was scrapped before release. That alone means that many of the mechanisms have already been mostly developed, meaning that comparatively little dev time would be needed to reimplement it (just enough to re-enable the code and add in some tweaks and polish). If there's time available for further tweaks, then I have laid out a full concept for district capture and defence below.

District Control would:

• Add structured PvP objectives to Imperial City, providing a different gameplay style
• Help reduce the zerg mentality of the current Imperial City by giving more sources of TV Stones
• Bring more people into Imperial City, thus more sales of the DLC
• Benefit those people who enjoy the grind, as there will be more players carrying more TV Stones
• Alleviate spawn camping in the districts
• Spread PvP out through all the districts

Features of Controlled Districts

• Only the alliance in control can access the district Rally Point directly from their Base in the Sewers.
  • Other alliances can enter the district, but only from the neighbouring districts, or the all-access Sewer Entrances.
• The alliance in control can get directly back to their Base, without having to go through the Sewers.
• Only the alliance in control can respawn at the district Rally Point.
• An alliance which controls a district can travel directly to Imperial City using the Transitus Network regardless of the current state of Gated Access, as long as they also control enough connecting Cyrodiil keeps (at least one scroll keep, the hub keep, and one emperor keep).
• Certain areas (such as the Watch Tower and Rally Point) would be guarded by alliance soldier NPCs. (This would not include quest-related areas.)

Features of Neutral Districts

• All alliances can access the district Rally Point from their Base in the Sewers.
• No alliances can get back to their Base from the district.
• No alliances can respawn at the district Rally Point (they would respawn at the Base in the Sewers).
• Higher mob density, since the Daedra are currently in control of the district.

Attacking
There are 6 Watch Towers, and 6 Districts. Each tower is located along the wall between two districts. So there are two options here:

• One tower per district. Control the tower, you control the district.
• Two towers per district. Control both towers, you control the district between them.

I think two towers is a more interesting option, as that would promote PvP in the district between them. Under this system, it would work similarly to Emperor keeps; you need to control both towers at once to gain control, but you will then retain control for as long as one tower is under your control.

Gaining Control from Neutral
The original idea for gaining control involved a delve-sized Coldharbour location; details beyond that I don't know, so I'll make the rest up.

• After 1 hour of Neutral control, a portal opens up on the lower floor of one of the Watch Towers (the upper floors are inaccessible).
• The three alliances fight through a PvP-enabled Coldharbour delve (has Daedra) to reach the Portal Pinion.
• An alliance must hold the pinion for a period of time (like capturing a keep) before the pinion is destroyed.
• The Watch Tower comes under that alliance's control in a brilliant flash of light.
  • Alliance banners are draped down the outside of the tower.
  • An appropriately-coloured beam shines from the top of the tower.

Gaining Control from Another Alliance
I'm undecided whether this should follow the same process or not. At the moment I will go for "not", as From Neutral involves a bit too much PvE for my liking (which is necessary but unfortunate).

• The controlling alliance's flag is at the top of the Watch Tower.
• The attacking alliance must fight their way up three levels of the tower to reach the flag, "breaching" each successive level with something conceptually similar to a Cyrodiil battering ram (although it could just be a context action, or something; I want to have as little PvDoor time as possible).
• They must hold the top floor for a period of time (like capturing a keep) to convert the flag.
• The Watch Tower comes under that alliance's control in a brilliant flash of light.
  • Alliance banners are draped down the outside of the tower.
  • An appropriately-coloured beam shines from the top of the tower.

Defending
Depending on the situation, you may be defending against another alliance, or against the Daedra. Alliances can attempt to gain control of a tower at any time (while that tower is under the control of another alliance). If an alliance hasn't assaulted the tower for 90 minutes, the Daedra will mount an assault. The Daedra will also mount an assault anyway after 3 hours of continually-changing alliance control (but not within the first 15 minutes of each successive control period).

The Watch Towers
The Watch Towers are made up of three levels. An attacking force must breach each level until they eventually arrive at the top floor, where they will attempt to destroy the flag. The controlling alliance can use ladders to quickly access each level; the attacking alliance cannot use these. Burning Oil is available.

• If a Tower and a District are under the control of the same alliance, there will exist a portal leading from the Rally Point to the top level of the Tower, to allow players to access it quickly if a defence is needed.
• The Tower is marked "Under Attack" once the door from the lower level to the middle level is breached. At this time, the portal is disabled.
• The interior structure would be something like this:
  • Lower Level: Open area with a few NPC guards, overlooked by a defensive balcony on the Middle Level. Breachable door to the Middle Level. (The portal to Coldharbour is in the middle of this level when under Daedric control, and the door is not breachable.)
  • Middle Level: Two tiers of balconies and the steps leading between them. Lowest balcony overlooks the Lower Level. Also includes the steps leading up from the Lower Level. Breachable door to the Top Level is on the upper balcony.
  • Top Level: Observation/oil grate down to the upper balcony on the Middle Level. Flag located at the opposite end to the entrance. Defensive mid-height balcony behind the flag.
• Breached doors can be fixed with Woodwork Repair Kits.

Losing Control
If you are unable to defend against all attackers, and they make it to the top floor, they will try to destroy your alliance flag.

• Daedric assaults come in waves. Each wave will successfully breach one level if not countered. The third wave will destroy the flag.
• An attacking alliance will destroy the controlling alliance's flag after a period of time successfully holding the top floor (like at a keep).
• Control of the Watch Tower is lost, and there's a big explosion.
  • Any remaining defenders are "killed" in the AoE explosion (sorry guys, need to get you out of there somehow...) and respawn at the Rally Point. This actually counts as a teleport rather than a death, so you don't face any penalties.
  • If the Daedra gained control, the tower will remain Neutral for 1 hour before the portal opens again.
  • Under the two control towers system, an alliance must lose both towers in order to lose control of the district.

Rewards
I'm open to further suggestions for this; here's my initial thinking:
For the Two Watch Towers Model

• For successful capture of a tower: Standard XP and AP equivalent to a keep capture, plus 100 TV Stones
• For successful capture of a district (this is on top of the above reward for the second tower): Double-and-a-quarter XP and AP, plus 500 TV Stones
• For successful defence of a tower: Standard XP and AP equivalent to a keep defence, plus 100 TV Stones

For the One Watch Tower Model

• For successful capture: Standard XP and AP equivalent to a keep capture, plus 300 TV Stones
• For successful defence: Standard XP and AP equivalent to a keep defence, plus 300 TV Stones

Addendum (thanks for the reminder Saltypretzels)
Quests
Once a district has been "scouted" (for all of no reward), the Scouting Board in the Base will become the source of District Capture Quests. These would take into account which towers had already been captured. For the two tower model, turning in these quests would be the source of the "successful capture of a district" reward. The reward for individual towers would be immediate upon tower capture.

Mr-jo-handsome

Good idea just a little late it would be like a whole new thing

Enodoc

Mr-jo-handsome wrote: »

Good idea just a little late it would be like a whole new thing

It wouldn't though; as I said at the top of my post, the basic mechanics for District Control already exist, and that's what I'd like to see more than anything; re-enabling the stuff that was already developed. The rest is just my view on how it could work beyond that if they had more time.

Junglejim82

I have to say I.c in its current iteration has killed eso for me personally. I loved how I could gear up in pvp merely by pvping (objectives and player kills , playing the campaign to win ). Now the rugs been pulled from under my feet . So far I've had 1 go at the planar armour vault and one go of the bloody claw vault. I got 2 agility staves BTW after all that grind . If I wanted a hamster wheel , rng grind to only get screwed over I'd have never quit destiny . My gear is a joke by comparison to v16 sets . There's no alternative. No v16 alliance sets , not even dlc exclusive ones and cyrodil is a ghost town compared with 1.6 I just find it all truly awful

The small group pvp I expected in I.c never materialized it's just npc farming and blobing it would be somewhat bearable if there were pvp objectives rewarding stones the way cyrodil has objectives rewarding AP but alas I had 2 choices at night either mindlessly grind ( no thanks have a job already gaming is meant to be fun ) or I could run cyrodil with the guild essentially 2 tiers of gear behind most of em and most of the enemy , that's if I can find a fight so I now go with choice 3 , play mgs5 and Tony hawks

Xendyn

I would love to see Imperial City played the way it was supposed to be. ZOS needs to start sticking to its guns instead of watering everything down.
More structured, actual PVP goals would be most welcome.
Let's stop goofing off and get back to the War!

Dymence

Objectives are exactly what encourages zerg mentality.

Enodoc

@ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_BrianWheeler @ZOS_RichLambert Putting the full concept that I suggested aside for a minute, how far along did District Control get during development before it was scrapped, and is there any chance at all that we may see it (whether in it's original form or something else) in the future? Many people were disappointed when the only thing we'd heard about Imperial City from last year (either Quakecon or Guild Summit, I think?) did not end up in the released product.

Wolfenbelle

@Enodoc thanks for your fully thought out ideas for IC objectives. Much appreciated. Although only briefly in other threads recently, I also said the lack of PvP objectives is a mistake on ZOS' part.

@Junglejim82 I agree with you. IC as it currently exists, is a mess for all players, not just PvP players. It's a mindless grind fest. TV stones are sort of pointless once you realize the gear you can buy with it is only so-so. Crafting got screwed big time. PvP has no objectives at all. PvE players have to deal with gankers and enemy zergs in their attempts to acquire vr16 mats and gear.

All games should have some kind of objectives to achieve. Otherwise, what's the point?

Wolfenbelle

Dymence wrote: »

Objectives are exactly what encourages zerg mentality.

Oh, and the current state of IC doesn't encourage zergs? Please, get real.

Lava_Croft

Thanks for the tag, @Enodoc.

This is exactly the type of objectives we need in the IC's districts. In it's current form, the IC is nothing more than a really large and expensive Cracked Wood Cave. I don't really play the game that much anymore because of this. However, if ZOS is smart, they try to make up for their mistakes regarding the IC and will add this type of objective based gameplay to the districts. I'm fairly certain it would spark a lot more interest than the current iteration of the districts and I'm even more certain it will make people like myself log in again.

@ZOS_BrianWheeler @ZOS_RichLambert please seriously consider OP's ideas, it's the only way to save the IC from being nothing more than Cracked Wood City.

Junglejim82

Dymence wrote: »

Objectives are exactly what encourages zerg mentality.

Not as much as losing stones promote it . Not even close . Everyone scared of losing currency means they don't stray far from the pack

Saltypretzels

OP has a good plan here. Sounds like fun!

Daily quests should be given out to claim districts. Moderate TV stone bags should be the rewards. Also alliance points should be rewarded for attacks and defenses.

Lava_Croft

Saltypretzels wrote: »

OP has a good plan here. Sounds like fun!

Daily quests should be given out to claim districts. Moderate TV stone bags should be the rewards. Also alliance points should be rewarded for attacks and defenses.

Daily quests should only be given out to the faction that controls a district!

Enodoc

Saltypretzels wrote: »

OP has a good plan here. Sounds like fun!

Daily quests should be given out to claim districts. Moderate TV stone bags should be the rewards. Also alliance points should be rewarded for attacks and defenses.

Yeah, that's what I'm thinking. That Mission Board in the Sewers is going unused once the Scouting quests are complete, so putting district control quests on there would be a good use for it. Aside from the fact that I forgot to mention it (I'll go back and add it in), there would definitely be quests for district control, and that's where those rewards would come from.

Brrrofski

So the pvp expansion needs to be sprayed into one faction zones to pve?

It's fines it is.

Open access to IC for all, districts open to all, sewers open to all

phbell

Not sure what your expectation is here, but I wish you luck. I think trying to impose rules in that kind of close quarter combat will not be easy.

I was in the Memorial District last night and it was chaos. All 3 alliances (Maybe 50-60 total) attacking each other, in close quarters, at same time, with the Flesh Atronach Boss running around in the middle of it dropping big AoE. I don't know about anyone else, but I thought it was GREAT and had a really good time. Understand... I am terrible at PvP and have no expectation of gaining any TVS when in the city. I did notice a funny thing though. As the evening progressed opponents that were thumping me earlier had a harder and harder time beating me. Toward the end I even won once or twice (woo hoo).

So for me (in my stage of PvP development) the IC last night was a sandbox that helped me improve my PvP game quite a bit. I doubt that I will ever have the skill of those I went up against but I never had more fun getting thumped. [A tip of the hat to all the folks that hammered me and helped me learn.]

To repeat - I am challenged to see how imposing objectives/rules/goals in that setting is realistic - but i wish you all the luck.

Enodoc

Brrrofski wrote: »

So the pvp expansion needs to be sprayed into one faction zones to pve?

It's fines it is.

Open access to IC for all, districts open to all, sewers open to all

What? that makes no sense. Nowhere do I suggest affecting any faction's PvE zones, nor do I suggest knocking out all access. This is adding more PvP to the PvP expansion. Limited access to a district would be a bonus for the controlling faction (as there needs to be some benefits of the system), but that doesn't stop others from going there.

phbell wrote: »

To repeat - I am challenged to see how imposing objectives/rules/goals in that setting is realistic - but i wish you all the luck.

It's exactly the same as it is at keeps in Cyrodiil (once you're through the outer wall). ZOS thought it would work, otherwise they wouldn't have developed it.

Enodoc

Lava_Croft wrote: »

Saltypretzels wrote: »

OP has a good plan here. Sounds like fun!
Daily quests should be given out to claim districts. Moderate TV stone bags should be the rewards. Also alliance points should be rewarded for attacks and defenses.

Daily quests should only be given out to the faction that controls a district!

Interesting idea - assuming you mean in this case the PvE dailies (since you would only get capture dailies if you didn't control the district), but I don't want to negatively affect the PvE gameplay by taking away their already reduced quests (there were originally supposed to be 5 dailies per district). Being in control of a district might make it safer for you to do the dailies there, though.

Brrrofski

But limited access means there's one faction there.

Unless other faction's try to get access, it'll stay pve. Which people will do to farm tel far stones.

If people wouldn't do that, your idea would work. But we all know that's what would happen.

They just need to give bigger incentives for people to leave the arena and go to other districts.

Recremen

Brrrofski wrote: »

But limited access means there's one faction there.

Unless other faction's try to get access, it'll stay pve. Which people will do to farm tel far stones.

If people wouldn't do that, your idea would work. But we all know that's what would happen.

They just need to give bigger incentives for people to leave the arena and go to other districts.

I think the point is that daedra wouldn't spawn in a controlled district. That prevents PvE farming and leaves it strictly a PvP objective. Dunno how the Daedra would "recapture" it, though, to turn it back into a contested zone, but I'm sure they can figure something out. :-)

Callous2208

This is a fantastic idea and sounds like a whole lot of fun.

Dymence

Wolfenbelle wrote: »

Dymence wrote: »

Objectives are exactly what encourages zerg mentality.

Oh, and the current state of IC doesn't encourage zergs? Please, get real.

Please quote the part where I said the current state of IC does not encourage zergs. Right. I didn't say anything of the sort.

I'm just saying objectives are not the solution if the OP claims he/she wants to get rid of the zerg mentality.

HeroOfNone

Thanks for the tag. I would hope that something would be added but the community doesn't seem to get behind any idea at this point. ITS assumed that everything is done until next patch, or that it's coming "soon". Folks kinda sat there and complained this would be zergy, others claimed it would not, few got behind any idea that would help it. I would really like to see SOMETHING that would be more objective based to help break up the zerging and encourage small scale PVP.

For people that don't visit other forums, my previous posts

"Claiming" a District (AKA making the street brawls mean something) (back during testing on the PTS forums)
[Suggestion] Claiming Districts in Imperial City (more recent, on the alliance forum, several suggestions with a poll)

I'll just tag 2 more here who I know are annoyed with the zergs as well, @Sypher @rishardnelsonb14_ESO

Enodoc

Brrrofski wrote: »

But limited access means there's one faction there.
Unless other faction's try to get access, it'll stay pve. Which people will do to farm tel far stones.
If people wouldn't do that, your idea would work. But we all know that's what would happen.
They just need to give bigger incentives for people to leave the arena and go to other districts.

The proposal doesn't stop the other factions from getting into the district at all; they just don't have direct access. For example, say I'm DC and have a quest in Temple District, but Temple is currently controlled by AD. Arboretum is Neutral right now, so I go straight up to Arboretum, and through the connecting door to Temple.

To ensure it doesn't stay that way for too long, that's why I have a Daedric assault after 90 minutes, which will set Temple back to Neutral if unopposed.

Recremen wrote: »

I think the point is that daedra wouldn't spawn in a controlled district. That prevents PvE farming and leaves it strictly a PvP objective. Dunno how the Daedra would "recapture" it, though, to turn it back into a contested zone, but I'm sure they can figure something out. :-)

There would be some Daedra, so that PvE players can do the quests with higher relative safety, but the mob density would be around 50% of when the district is Neutral.

UrQuan

Yeah, I would definitely like to see this. Having said that, I'm not much of a PVP player at all, so I'll happily bow to the opinions of more experienced PVPers, but I would expect that having some sort of objectives to fight for, and advantages to achieving those objectives (without the advantage being "no enemy players to fight in this district" - that's why I like that this would just make it less convenient for the players of other factions to get into the zone, and that it wouldn't lock them out) would appeal to most PVP players.

I like this concept a lot. I'm not sure about the exact mechanics for control, as I really don't have enough PVP experience to say if the mechanics presented here would be reasonable or not. Nothing jumps out at me as being unreasonable, though. I'm thinking for the alliance that controls the district the transitus shrine as well as the access to go directly back to the alliance sewers base would be inside the watch towers.

Morvul

the idea in the OP sounds extremely good!

BalticBlues

I would welcome such a concept.
In fact, I would welcome any concent that brings gameplay instead of grinding.

It is the gameplay that makes Cyrodiil great, not the grinding.
At least, the IC assets are great. They just need to be filled with gameplay.

Here some more gameplay ideas:
- Capture the Flag: Steal the IC banner and bring it to your base to win TV stones.
- Domination: Hold a given IC district for a certain time to win TV stones.
- Last Man Standing: Be the last man standing in a 2 team arena (2x4 players) to win TV stones.
- Scroll Hunting: Find lost scrolls in the IC and bring them to Cyrodiil for more bonuses.
- Emperor Domination: Conquer all IC districts to crown the real emperor.

Enodoc

So, I didn't want to negatively impact those players who like to do the PvE quests in the city. And yet by not allowing for them, I have inadvertently affected them. If the ladders are locked off when another alliance controls the district, those players can't get to the quest givers.

Solution 1: Ignore it. To get to the quests, the alliance will have to reclaim the district. (Not what I want to suggest, as that's the sort of impact I want to avoid.)

Solution 2: Allow them up to the Rally Point to get the quests, but don't allow them to get down into the district. (This would probably involve invisible walls and be confusing.)

Solution 3: Move (or duplicate) the quest giver to one of the Sanctuary safe houses in the district, as a secondary start location. (This is my preferred option, and would have the added benefit of allowing you to pick up the quest if you'd just entered from another district.)

Enodoc

UrQuan wrote: »

I'm thinking for the alliance that controls the district the transitus shrine as well as the access to go directly back to the alliance sewers base would be inside the watch towers.

Yeah, that's a good idea. What I was thinking was that the Transitus would just get you to the Sewer Base, and from then on it would be as normal. To get back to the Sewers if you're in control, I was thinking you would go to the Watch Tower, take the portal to the Rally Point, and then use the trap door.

Lava_Croft

Enodoc wrote: »

Lava_Croft wrote: »

Saltypretzels wrote: »

OP has a good plan here. Sounds like fun!
Daily quests should be given out to claim districts. Moderate TV stone bags should be the rewards. Also alliance points should be rewarded for attacks and defenses.

Daily quests should only be given out to the faction that controls a district!

Interesting idea - assuming you mean in this case the PvE dailies (since you would only get capture dailies if you didn't control the district), but I don't want to negatively affect the PvE gameplay by taking away their already reduced quests (there were originally supposed to be 5 dailies per district). Being in control of a district might make it safer for you to do the dailies there, though.

My angle is that taking control of a district would provide PvE players with a more safe environment to do their dailies.

Enodoc

Lava_Croft wrote: »

Enodoc wrote: »

Lava_Croft wrote: »

Saltypretzels wrote: »

OP has a good plan here. Sounds like fun!
Daily quests should be given out to claim districts. Moderate TV stone bags should be the rewards. Also alliance points should be rewarded for attacks and defenses.

Daily quests should only be given out to the faction that controls a district!

Interesting idea - assuming you mean in this case the PvE dailies (since you would only get capture dailies if you didn't control the district), but I don't want to negatively affect the PvE gameplay by taking away their already reduced quests (there were originally supposed to be 5 dailies per district). Being in control of a district might make it safer for you to do the dailies there, though.

My angle is that taking control of a district would provide PvE players with a more safe environment to do their dailies.

Yeah, that would definitely be one of the benefits. Doesn't necessarily have to be exclusive to them though; they could still be available to the other alliances if they wanted to try it (they'd just have to get the quest from somewhere else, per my comment above).