Maintenance for the week of November 18:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – November 18
• ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – November 19, 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC) - 6:00PM EST (23:00 UTC)
• PlayStation®: EU megaserver for maintenance – November 19, 23:00 UTC (6:00PM EST) - November 20, 17:00 UTC (12:00PM EST)
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/668861
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – November 18
• ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – November 19, 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC) - 6:00PM EST (23:00 UTC)
• PlayStation®: EU megaserver for maintenance – November 19, 23:00 UTC (6:00PM EST) - November 20, 17:00 UTC (12:00PM EST)
https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/668861
How to turn this game from a "Walking Simulator" to a "War Simulator"
-
Harakh✭✭✭Feed your Horse!Die Welt in einem Sandkorn sehen
Und den Himmel in einer wilden Blume;
Die Unendlichkeit in der Handfläche halten
Und die Ewigkeit in einer Stunde.6 -
isengrimb16_ESO✭✭✭✭✭I'm sorry, I read this title and laughed, because WoW wants to be a walking sim. A walking sim where you have to fight packs of mobs every time you take a single step forward.
As far as PvP goes, has no one heard the WW1 era adage that says war is a lot of boring stuff punctuated by moments of terror?
I heard a story from an old Hungarian guy who'd been here in Canada since VE day or thereabouts. He was 14 when he went to war, and, in the Polish woods, ran into a German kid about his age. They both kept their firearms aimed on each other .. as they danced around. Neither pulled the trigger, and allowed the other to go their way. They were both equally terrified, the oldster thought. They could have killed each other on the spot, and no one would probably have ever found their bodies.
That's pvp.
Edited by isengrimb16_ESO on 26 May 2014 19:567 -
Elyna✭✭✭✭
Has no one heard that we dont need to perfectly simulate real world warfare? If thats the case, why not just have one life and thats itisengrimb16_ESO wrote: »I'm sorry, I read this title and laughed, because WoW wants to be a walking sim. A walking sim where you have to fight packs of mobs every time you take a single step forward.
As far as PvP goes, has no one heard the WW1 era adage that says war is a lot of boring stuff punctuated by moments of terror?7 -
isengrimb16_ESO✭✭✭✭✭But ESO is already more realistic than most other games I've played. Granted, I haven't played many, but WoW's pitched battlefields to me represent just one point in time - the taking of Iwo Jima, perhaps. Not the whole war.
If I have to actually go hunt for enemies in Cyrodiil, then, that's a lot more realistic right off the bat. They shouldn't be having a big tag over themselves that says "HEY, WE'RE OVER HERE, COME KICK OUR BUTTS" - or the equivalent.
Edited by isengrimb16_ESO on 26 May 2014 20:014 -
Lord_Draevan✭✭✭✭✭
✭I like the current system. This way, you have to be cautious about the battles you pick, and attacking enemy re-inforcement routes becomes a viable tactic.
Of course it's kind of annoying when no one's willing to press the attack because they don't want to die and have to travel back...
I'm a man of few words. Any questions?NA/PC server1 -
Elyna✭✭✭✭Lord_Draevan wrote: »I like the current system. This way, you have to be cautious about the battles you pick, and attacking enemy re-inforcement routes becomes a viable tactic.
Of course it's kind of annoying when no one's willing to press the attack because they don't want to die and have to travel back...
Thats my point. Death shouldnt have such a massive punishment. Its basically a 5 minute respawn timer. Battles become stalemates because no one wants to run all the way back thus making the battles less of who kills who and more who can whittle down who? Its a war of attrition. Is it realistic? Probably. Is it fun? No. And thats what the devs need to focus on more if anything realism is cool and all. But it shouldnt come at the cost of enjoyment of the game itself.3 -
Elyna✭✭✭✭Lord_Draevan wrote: »I like the current system. This way, you have to be cautious about the battles you pick, and attacking enemy re-inforcement routes becomes a viable tactic.
Of course it's kind of annoying when no one's willing to press the attack because they don't want to die and have to travel back...
Thats my point. Death shouldnt have such a massive punishment. Its basically a 5 minute respawn timer. Battles become stalemates because no one wants to run all the way back thus making the battles less of who kills who and more who can whittle down who? Its a war of attrition. Is it realistic? Probably. Is it fun? No. And thats what the devs need to focus on more if anything. Realism is cool and all, but it shouldnt come at the cost of enjoyment of the game itself.
I swear to god this format....Edited by Elyna on 26 May 2014 20:150 -
nukeyoo✭✭✭You're missing the whole point which is not surprising judging from your previous posts. Not only does the time it takes to travel add value to the objectives; it is part of the penalty for losing. You tend to avoid that penalty by playing better than your opponent. So you might want to try that since people that do so have no issue with affording the cost of forward camps.- done w/ it5 -
Samadhi✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Heavily decrease the cost of forward camps.
BAM
Hire me Zenimax.
Been suggested multiple times. Not really needed. Anyone who PvPs regularly can generate the necessary points quickly.
What really needs to be done is fix the constant bugging of forward camps -- no one wants to pay for a camp that gets bugged out after one (or even no) respawns and also locks people out of putting up other tents in the area until the bugged one is burned."If you want others to be happy, practice compassion. If you want to be happy, practice compassion." -- the 14th Dalai Lama
Wisdom is doing Now that which benefits you later.
0 -
isengrimb16_ESO✭✭✭✭✭Maybe they're just a bunch of hippies at Zeni/Beth who want to teach us the "futility of war".
I'd almost think so, if they think pimping is OK but war is baaad.
But I doubt Zeni is full of burnt-out hippies or their intellectual spawn.
Yes, I took the two skill points. Sheo wanted Valaste for some reason. Her life was as boring as mine is. Yes, I too would rather chase butterflies in the Shivering Isles than deal with the crap down here, sometimes. I hope both sides see follow-up quests in the future, because that was one awesomely amusing quest chain.
But I did save Raz, even though I knew he'd be madder'n hell at me for doing so.
Oh, just make sure to have those rocks that let you rez on the spot. I suppose that's where the traditional MMO grind comes in. I just destroyed an empty soul gem because I couldn't be bothered filling it.
Edited by isengrimb16_ESO on 26 May 2014 20:270 -
Elyna✭✭✭✭You're missing the whole point which is not surprising judging from your previous posts. Not only does the time it takes to travel add value to the objectives; it is part of the penalty for losing. You tend to avoid that penalty by playing better than your opponent. So you might want to try that since people that do so have no issue with affording the cost of forward camps.
Man you are butthurt. Get over it. Never seen someone on a forum hold such a grudge.1 -
Lord_Draevan✭✭✭✭✭
✭
Thats my point. Death shouldnt have such a massive punishment. Its basically a 5 minute respawn timer. Battles become stalemates because no one wants to run all the way back thus making the battles less of who kills who and more who can whittle down who? Its a war of attrition. Is it realistic? Probably. Is it fun? No. And thats what the devs need to focus on more if anything realism is cool and all. But it shouldnt come at the cost of enjoyment of the game itself.
For me, it only takes more than 1-2 minutes to get back to the fight if I have to avoid/engage a gank group. I don't mind it.I'm a man of few words. Any questions?NA/PC server0 -
Tannakaobi✭✭✭✭✭You're missing the whole point which is not surprising judging from your previous posts. Not only does the time it takes to travel add value to the objectives; it is part of the penalty for losing. You tend to avoid that penalty by playing better than your opponent. So you might want to try that since people that do so have no issue with affording the cost of forward camps.
Except that not true. I tend to die because while I have been enjoying PVP (you know, the reason I play) another person has instead been questing. While they zoomed to VR10 and have all the epic armor to match. I'm still stuck in my mid 20's with the crap they call PVP rewards.0 -
nukeyoo✭✭✭You're missing the whole point which is not surprising judging from your previous posts. Not only does the time it takes to travel add value to the objectives; it is part of the penalty for losing. You tend to avoid that penalty by playing better than your opponent. So you might want to try that since people that do so have no issue with affording the cost of forward camps.
Man you are butthurt. Get over it. Never seen someone on a forum hold such a grudge.
Can you please show me this grudge I'm holding?- done w/ it0 -
isengrimb16_ESO✭✭✭✭✭Wow teaches bad habits. You only have to move out of the fire once every three minutes.
Eso makes me move like cat food.
2 -
nukeyoo✭✭✭Tannakaobi wrote: »You're missing the whole point which is not surprising judging from your previous posts. Not only does the time it takes to travel add value to the objectives; it is part of the penalty for losing. You tend to avoid that penalty by playing better than your opponent. So you might want to try that since people that do so have no issue with affording the cost of forward camps.
Except that not true. I tend to die because while I have been enjoying PVP (you know, the reason I play) another person has instead been questing. While they zoomed to VR10 and have all the epic armor to match. I'm still stuck in my mid 20's with the crap they call PVP rewards.
So my post is "not true" because you knowingly enter battles with a handicap of level/gear gap? Taking the disparaging bolstering system into account; a player still has means of playing better than opponents although it be a smaller margin for error. You can't expect to solo as mid 20s with much success.- done w/ it1 -
Tannakaobi✭✭✭✭✭Tannakaobi wrote: »You're missing the whole point which is not surprising judging from your previous posts. Not only does the time it takes to travel add value to the objectives; it is part of the penalty for losing. You tend to avoid that penalty by playing better than your opponent. So you might want to try that since people that do so have no issue with affording the cost of forward camps.
Except that not true. I tend to die because while I have been enjoying PVP (you know, the reason I play) another person has instead been questing. While they zoomed to VR10 and have all the epic armor to match. I'm still stuck in my mid 20's with the crap they call PVP rewards.
So my post is "not true" because you knowingly enter battles with a handicap of level/gear gap? Taking the disparaging bolstering system into account; a player still has means of playing better than opponents although it be a smaller margin for error. You can't expect to solo as mid 20s with much success.
Er.. yeah.
"You tend to avoid that penalty by playing better than your opponent. So you might want to try that since people that do so have no issue with affording the cost of forward camps."
That part is not true, but you are right that you can't expect to PVP at mid 20s with much success unless you want it to be a "Walking Simulator" instead of a "War Simulator". A fundamental floor in the game as was pointed out, but you decided to disagree. You are entitled to your opinion, but don't expect other people to agree. Especially when there are so many variables.
As for knowingly entering battles with a handicap of level/gear, I didn't realize their was another option. Unless you mean questing all three factions quest lines before I can even enter PVP!
Now you can say, if you don't like it leave, and if it doesn't change I most probably will, a really good way to keep costumers and therefore money coming in and in turn more content.
1 -
nukeyoo✭✭✭
How is that even an argument that can be disputed? You do in fact avoid the penalty of your "walking simulator" by playing better than your opponent. This isn't a discussion on the disparity of gear/level gaps. We know its unfortunate for you and other poor saps that don't care to spend the time to level up to be on equal footing. That isn't the discussion; I'm sure you can find plenty of QQ threads for better bolstering if you want to discuss that.Tannakaobi wrote: »Tannakaobi wrote: »You're missing the whole point which is not surprising judging from your previous posts. Not only does the time it takes to travel add value to the objectives; it is part of the penalty for losing. You tend to avoid that penalty by playing better than your opponent. So you might want to try that since people that do so have no issue with affording the cost of forward camps.
Except that not true. I tend to die because while I have been enjoying PVP (you know, the reason I play) another person has instead been questing. While they zoomed to VR10 and have all the epic armor to match. I'm still stuck in my mid 20's with the crap they call PVP rewards.
So my post is "not true" because you knowingly enter battles with a handicap of level/gear gap? Taking the disparaging bolstering system into account; a player still has means of playing better than opponents although it be a smaller margin for error. You can't expect to solo as mid 20s with much success.
Er.. yeah.
"You tend to avoid that penalty by playing better than your opponent. So you might want to try that since people that do so have no issue with affording the cost of forward camps."
That part is not true, but you are right that you can't expect to PVP at mid 20s with much success unless you want it to be a "Walking Simulator" instead of a "War Simulator". A fundamental floor in the game as was pointed out, but you decided to disagree. You are entitled to your opinion, but don't expect other people to agree. Especially when there are so many variables.
The discussion is about travel times. They are there for a reason. Reason being to give worth to battlefield objectives and to incur a "respawn" penalty for the loser. Better positioning, better abilities usage, better siege usage, better support, having more friends.... Plenty of variables that if pieced together correctly will keep you from suffering the aforementioned penalty regardless of level. And if pieced together and done so on the regular you will find that the cost of forward camps is not overbearing at all.
If you don't like the fact that its not completely fair for lowbies and the game play requires you to work a bit and doesn't hand everything to you on a silver platter perhaps you might want to rethink your game choice.
But that's just my opinion which I'm entitled to. I don't expect you to agree.
- done w/ it4 -
Igolbug✭✭✭They can make them free and it wouldn't make a difference because of how bugged they are.Igolbug
V10 R20 Nightblade Ebonheart Pact
WABBAJACK since day1!1 -
PF1901✭✭✭
Behold! It was exactly here I stopped reading.Lord_Draevan wrote: »I like the current system. This way, you have to be cautious about the battles you pick, and attacking enemy re-inforcement routes becomes a viable tactic.
Of course it's kind of annoying when no one's willing to press the attack because they don't want to die and have to travel back...
Thats my point. Death shouldnt have such a massive punishment....
Damn this game is one massive punishment after another. They even ask me to play it!
2 -
Igolbug✭✭✭If I don't have to run back how do I find the small scale I want when 1-2 people jump me on the way back, I didn't put all this stamina into my mount so I can fight people for nothing.Igolbug
V10 R20 Nightblade Ebonheart Pact
WABBAJACK since day1!1 -
isengrimb16_ESO✭✭✭✭✭Tannakaobi wrote: »Tannakaobi wrote: »You're missing the whole point which is not surprising judging from your previous posts. Not only does the time it takes to travel add value to the objectives; it is part of the penalty for losing. You tend to avoid that penalty by playing better than your opponent. So you might want to try that since people that do so have no issue with affording the cost of forward camps.
Except that not true. I tend to die because while I have been enjoying PVP (you know, the reason I play) another person has instead been questing. While they zoomed to VR10 and have all the epic armor to match. I'm still stuck in my mid 20's with the crap they call PVP rewards.
So my post is "not true" because you knowingly enter battles with a handicap of level/gear gap? Taking the disparaging bolstering system into account; a player still has means of playing better than opponents although it be a smaller margin for error. You can't expect to solo as mid 20s with much success.
Er.. yeah.
"You tend to avoid that penalty by playing better than your opponent. So you might want to try that since people that do so have no issue with affording the cost of forward camps."
That part is not true, but you are right that you can't expect to PVP at mid 20s with much success unless you want it to be a "Walking Simulator" instead of a "War Simulator". A fundamental floor in the game as was pointed out, but you decided to disagree. You are entitled to your opinion, but don't expect other people to agree. Especially when there are so many variables.
As for knowingly entering battles with a handicap of level/gear, I didn't realize their was another option. Unless you mean questing all three factions quest lines before I can even enter PVP!
Now you can say, if you don't like it leave, and if it doesn't change I most probably will, a really good way to keep costumers and therefore money coming in and in turn more content.
I think you mistakenly bought into the idea that TESO was going to be a PvP gank-game. I can't blame you, the first time I saw anything about it last year, it did seem to be PvP oriented, which almost turned me off permanently. Hell, from the way it sounded, I thought they were turning back the clock about a decade or so and would allow players to steal from one another. I _HATED_ that about online Diablo (one and two), and played those solo instead.
It looks like you're expecting FPS style stuff. I don't think you'll ever find that here. If you don't like walking or riding back into battle ... um ... either stick with WoW battlegrounds and get graveyard-camped, or, um, maybe you'd like Doom better. A walk back to battle? Be happy you're allowed to rejoin it at all after death. If I was going to design a "hard game", you'd be out back doing PvE questing for 24 hours after dying in a PvP battlezone.
Edited by isengrimb16_ESO on 27 May 2014 06:392 -
teox76Soul Shrivensorry could not resist...
https://youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=rjTOF8IC528#t=121
https://youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=AOIi9SjJvgU#t=31
Edited by teox76 on 27 May 2014 08:190 -
dbishop✭✭✭Agree. I'd link my Horse riding sim thread but people didn't like that idea either. I logged into PVP land earlier and after looking at the map just went back to PVE. I don't have hours to waste pointlessly riding around to get ganked and have to start all over again.
Moar spawns or watch PVP die.1 -
Igolbug✭✭✭Agree. I'd link my Horse riding sim thread but people didn't like that idea either. I logged into PVP land earlier and after looking at the map just went back to PVE. I don't have hours to waste pointlessly riding around to get ganked and have to start all over again.
Moar spawns or watch PVP die.
Then don't be bad and when people jump you fight back and kill them? TADA no ganking!Igolbug
V10 R20 Nightblade Ebonheart Pact
WABBAJACK since day1!0 -
CapuchinSeven✭✭✭✭✭
✭Lord_Draevan wrote: »I like the current system. This way, you have to be cautious about the battles you pick, and attacking enemy re-inforcement routes becomes a viable tactic.
Of course it's kind of annoying when no one's willing to press the attack because they don't want to die and have to travel back...
Thats my point. Death shouldnt have such a massive punishment. Its basically a 5 minute respawn timer. Battles become stalemates because no one wants to run all the way back thus making the battles less of who kills who and more who can whittle down who? Its a war of attrition. Is it realistic? Probably. Is it fun? No. And thats what the devs need to focus on more if anything realism is cool and all. But it shouldnt come at the cost of enjoyment of the game itself.
Don't wanna have to walk? Don't die. It's honestly that simple, you've lost and now you're paying for it.
I'm not being an ass, that's the cost of PVP in this game, the cost of dying is either losing your keep because your ress point is to far away and you all don't get back in time/no one wants to run that far.1 -
Avidus✭✭✭So let me get this straight.
If we respawn right where we need to be, don't have to travel to get there.
Then how does one take a keep?
Quite often the loser in a long drawn out siege battle is the one that loses their forward camps.
What you propose is instead of the back and forth zergfest we all call Wabba is a stationary zerg pile. which would inevitably be called Wabba.2