Forward Camps are fixed, but now broken

Talcyndl

So as folks know, they fixed the forward camp bugs. I haven't seen any issues with them not working since the patch last week.

However, that has created a new problem...spamming of forward camps makes it close to impossible to take a keep that is even moderately defended. Most people have a ton of AP to spend, and so it is not an issue to just put a new camp down whenever the old one is used up.

With no timers on placement or rezzing, the result is that keeps have all but unlimited numbers of defenders. Personally, I've been on both sides of this. About 15 of us defended Faregyl from 100+ AD. And both DC AND EP on NA Wabba know the frustration of trying to take the last inner keep from AD.

Obviously, the counter is to completely control the inner courtyard to prevent new camps. But, camps go down almost instantly and people can spawn even if there is fighting nearby. We generally try and get ballistas hitting the camps as soon as we see them, but even so enough people spawn that the defense can continue.

I'd like to see some combination of (ie, not necessarily all of these):

(1) Making camp placement a longer channeled ability so that it can be interrupted more easily.

(2) Timer on replacing a used or burned camp. Even a minute or two would balance things between defenders and attackers.

(3) Timer on individual players rezzing at a camp. The merry-go-round of die, rez, die, rez makes defending a keep too easy. With the bugged camps, people had to carefully consider when to counter-attack the sieging force. Now, you can simply attack at will, knowing you'll be able to immediately rez.

(4) Limiting rezzing to those who died within the radius of the camp. As things stand now (and we all do it), groups will routinely suicide to transport to a keep under attack.

Thoughts, suggestions, insults?

Halrloprillalar

It's only a serious issue in highly pop-imbalanced campaigns, which are screwed anyhow

Otherwise you have to be careful at where you throw your forces.

It is also a bit baffling that you can drop camps so close to the keep imo... the keep should block with the 'friendly graveyard' thing itself up to the radius of say, the resource nodes. That would certainly fix a lot of the issues.

Talcyndl

No forward camps near/in keeps would certainly address the issue. Not sure how the balance of that would work out. It might make defending keeps too difficult.

Brandoid

This is an issue of you being bad or not having enough support to take the keep. Keeps are supposed to be hard to take even if there are only a moderate number of defenders. They have walls, npc support, and if the keep isn't flagged they can spawn there.

Xsorus

This also goes along with the problem of Keeps being far to easy to take, a Small group can throw down 20 ballista's and have the walls down in minutes...

It should be far harder to take down walls if Siege is going to be so easy to carry, in DAOC siege generally required you to have a lot of weight free to carry it, otherwise you'd move slow from being overburden, Carrying around a bunch of trebs for example was not possible.

SirAndy

Forward camps should not be allowed *inside* keeps.

That way, people have to get back through enemy lines and a good attacking force should always have people checking the resupply lines of the enemy.

arena25

Well, before anyone goes and tells keeps are too easy to defend, just remember that on Wabbajack, which both my sister and I participated in, my sister had joined the Daggerfall Covenant zerg, the "White Horse Herd". They were an absolute monster to take down, and in fact they were so difficult to take down that everyone quit. And to make matters worse, the White Horse Herd had an "Aussie herd" and an "American herd", so literally they could keep the pressure up 24/7. They finally stopped with 60 days left before campaign ends, and unfortunately their inability to finish the job not only cost them the campaign victory, but also most of their big rewards.
Oh, and I also suggest you take the resources before you proceed to attack a keep. Having resources up = Defenders always win = one happy alliance killing the fleeing defenders.

Keep this in mind the next time Alessia is under attack.

Take care.

Signed,
Arena25

P.S. When I return from my vacation on July 17th, I will be ready to kick some behinds.

Talcyndl

steven.brandon.garciaub17_ESO wrote: »

This is an issue of you being bad or not having enough support to take the keep. Keeps are supposed to be hard to take even if there are only a moderate number of defenders. They have walls, npc support, and if the keep isn't flagged they can spawn there.

What server are you on?

It's not a matter of being "hard" to take. It's that they are close to impossible to take when there is even a moderate sized defending force that can spam summon forward keeps.

It's simply a question of balance between defenders and attackers...and IMO that balance has been pushed too far with forward camps now always working.

Talcyndl

arena25 wrote: »

Having resources up = Defenders always win = one happy alliance killing the fleeing defenders.

This is not about NPCs. In general attackers don't even get to the flags in these situations. What happens is that the keep is flagged. If it is important enough (e.g., the last keep to dethrone or crown an emp), the defenders put down forward camps. They continue to put them down until the entire faction (that isn't PVE'ing) spawns there.

At that point NPCs are irrelevant.

Infraction

I fail to see how forward camps are the problem inside the keep when 9 times out of 10 nobody looks at the opposite postern where the camp is placed. There are enough people standing around that can take down a forward camp.

Nyxx

Infraction wrote: »

I fail to see how forward camps are the problem inside the keep when 9 times out of 10 nobody looks at the opposite postern where the camp is placed. There are enough people standing around that can take down a forward camp.

^ This

You're not sending people around the outer walls of the keep to check for forward camps....but you complain about people placing them inside keeps? Use your brain. You can take the things down. Can't reach it because of NPCs? Put up a fire ballista and start shooting it. Problem solved.

People are saying "Oh, don't allow them to be placed in Keeps...that will solve it." But you people aren't smart enough to run around the outer edges of the keep to check inside for foward camps...but apparently you'll be smart enough to have people in your team posted on each side of the keep waiting for incoming enemies? I doubt it.

Sick of people crying out for nerfs because they're stuck in a zerg mentality. Keeps are supposed to be hard to take. You shouldn't be able to face roll it. The camps are fine the way they are.

bsheffield2008ub17_ESO

Forward Camps are without a doubt a stupid thing in this game. They need to be redesigned. Atropos from ER has been complaining about forward camps from day one because of this reason.

For now, all we can do is adapt. I specifically setup a team of two to look for forward camps at the various positions of the keep. That is their sole duty.

Zintair

Nyxx wrote: »

Infraction wrote: »

I fail to see how forward camps are the problem inside the keep when 9 times out of 10 nobody looks at the opposite postern where the camp is placed. There are enough people standing around that can take down a forward camp.

^ This

You're not sending people around the outer walls of the keep to check for forward camps....but you complain about people placing them inside keeps? Use your brain. You can take the things down. Can't reach it because of NPCs? Put up a fire ballista and start shooting it. Problem solved.

People are saying "Oh, don't allow them to be placed in Keeps...that will solve it." But you people aren't smart enough to run around the outer edges of the keep to check inside for foward camps...but apparently you'll be smart enough to have people in your team posted on each side of the keep waiting for incoming enemies? I doubt it.

Sick of people crying out for nerfs because they're stuck in a zerg mentality. Keeps are supposed to be hard to take. You shouldn't be able to face roll it. The camps are fine the way they are.

You are assuming a lot here. There needs to be a respawn timer on either rezzing or forward camps. Plain and Simple.

There is no penalty of death in Cyrodiil. Dying means nothing and in an Open World PvP game if death means nothing then it is broken.

The same problem was in Warhammer when the spawn camps were a 30 second run from the keep. Attackers would wipe the defenders only to have them back on you in 30 seconds because there was no penalty to them being dumb and dying or actually losing.

In DAOC if you weren't rezzed then you respawned back in your zone and usually had to take a teleporter to o back to the realm you were in and then run back to where you were.

There is no penalty for death which makes it meaningless which caters to a zerg mentality.

Sounds like YOU are stuck in the zerg mentality.

Can't wait to hear the tears over not being able to get right back into the fight.

ORRRR considering 90% of the PvPers in this game are actually carebears.... they need to make AP useful other than siege. If people had to cringe to spend 7200 AP because of gear or other things then it would help to resolve the spam issue as well.

Sounds like people want a giant open world battleground which is fail IMO and why this *** is turning into Emp farming garbage. *** PvP mechanics are ***.

themizario

dbetterton_ESO wrote: »

So as folks know, they fixed the forward camp bugs. I haven't seen any issues with them not working since the patch last week.

However, that has created a new problem...spamming of forward camps makes it close to impossible to take a keep that is even moderately defended. Most people have a ton of AP to spend, and so it is not an issue to just put a new camp down whenever the old one is used up.

With no timers on placement or rezzing, the result is that keeps have all but unlimited numbers of defenders. Personally, I've been on both sides of this. About 15 of us defended Faregyl from 100+ AD. And both DC AND EP on NA Wabba know the frustration of trying to take the last inner keep from AD.

Obviously, the counter is to completely control the inner courtyard to prevent new camps. But, camps go down almost instantly and people can spawn even if there is fighting nearby. We generally try and get ballistas hitting the camps as soon as we see them, but even so enough people spawn that the defense can continue.

I'd like to see some combination of (ie, not necessarily all of these):

(1) Making camp placement a longer channeled ability so that it can be interrupted more easily.

(2) Timer on replacing a used or burned camp. Even a minute or two would balance things between defenders and attackers.

(3) Timer on individual players rezzing at a camp. The merry-go-round of die, rez, die, rez makes defending a keep too easy. With the bugged camps, people had to carefully consider when to counter-attack the sieging force. Now, you can simply attack at will, knowing you'll be able to immediately rez.

(4) Limiting rezzing to those who died within the radius of the camp. As things stand now (and we all do it), groups will routinely suicide to transport to a keep under attack.

Thoughts, suggestions, insults?

Insult. Whaa you big baby! Never good enough is it. They will fix the fps and you will come on here and say it's too fast and gives other people an advantage and they should cap fps at 32. Just try to enjoy the game dude.

Talcyndl

Infraction wrote: »

I fail to see how forward camps are the problem inside the keep when 9 times out of 10 nobody looks at the opposite postern where the camp is placed. There are enough people standing around that can take down a forward camp.

But even when you do send a a group to kill the camps, it doesn't help with a defended keep. All they have to do is push that group back for a few seconds while the next camp is placed. By the time that new camp is burned 10-20 people have spawned. You are fighting a losing battle. It's like digging a hole in the sand while the tide is rising.

This may not be an issue on low population servers, but it is on Wabba.

Talcyndl

themizario wrote: »

Insult. Whaa you big baby! Never good enough is it. They will fix the fps and you will come on here and say it's too fast and gives other people an advantage and they should cap fps at 32. Just try to enjoy the game dude.

Thanks. Now I feel better.

Terminus

dbetterton_ESO wrote: »

(4) Limiting rezzing to those who died within the radius of the camp. As things stand now (and we all do it), groups will routinely suicide to transport to a keep under attack.

Thoughts, suggestions, insults?

This may hold some weight, as it would solve a problem where players often "suicide" to quickly travel to different parts of the map.

Is this a bad tactic? Well, it's up to Zenimax to decide that.

I just want to finish by saying I am extremely grateful that forward camps function properly again... now how about those Mercenary Mages, eh?

Junipus

dbetterton_ESO wrote: »

Infraction wrote: »

I fail to see how forward camps are the problem inside the keep when 9 times out of 10 nobody looks at the opposite postern where the camp is placed. There are enough people standing around that can take down a forward camp.

But even when you do send a a group to kill the camps, it doesn't help with a defended keep. All they have to do is push that group back for a few seconds while the next camp is placed. By the time that new camp is burned 10-20 people have spawned. You are fighting a losing battle. It's like digging a hole in the sand while the tide is rising.

This may not be an issue on low population servers, but it is on Wabba.

That also works both ways.

If you're attacking the keep, simply set up forward camps and people dying elsewhere will spawn there to help the attacker numbers.

Quite often we've set down camps and suddenly a group of 10-15 will appear to help siege.

If you're attacking the last keep of a faction, you're going to have to expect every player on the map to appear there. If you're attacking an occupied home keep and they're funneling more people in via camps, expect that it's a large guild or there's zone chat going out or some other such call to arms.

Given that it's a "problem" which is ONLY a "problem" when the enemy use it (otherwise people are simply spoiling it for everyone), the way they are now is completely fine in my humble opinion.

IcyDeadPeople

dbetterton_ESO wrote: »

So as folks know, they fixed the forward camp bugs. I haven't seen any issues with them not working since the patch last week.

However, that has created a new problem...spamming of forward camps makes it close to impossible to take a keep that is even moderately defended. Most people have a ton of AP to spend, and so it is not an issue to just put a new camp down whenever the old one is used up.

With no timers on placement or rezzing, the result is that keeps have all but unlimited numbers of defenders. Personally, I've been on both sides of this. About 15 of us defended Faregyl from 100+ AD. And both DC AND EP on NA Wabba know the frustration of trying to take the last inner keep from AD.

Obviously, the counter is to completely control the inner courtyard to prevent new camps. But, camps go down almost instantly and people can spawn even if there is fighting nearby. We generally try and get ballistas hitting the camps as soon as we see them, but even so enough people spawn that the defense can continue.

I'd like to see some combination of (ie, not necessarily all of these):

(1) Making camp placement a longer channeled ability so that it can be interrupted more easily.

(2) Timer on replacing a used or burned camp. Even a minute or two would balance things between defenders and attackers.

(3) Timer on individual players rezzing at a camp. The merry-go-round of die, rez, die, rez makes defending a keep too easy. With the bugged camps, people had to carefully consider when to counter-attack the sieging force. Now, you can simply attack at will, knowing you'll be able to immediately rez.

(4) Limiting rezzing to those who died within the radius of the camp. As things stand now (and we all do it), groups will routinely suicide to transport to a keep under attack.

Thoughts, suggestions, insults?

I disagree. The usefulness of forward camps hasn't changed with the fix. The only difference is now you no longer need to log out and log back in to see the camp on your map.

Taking a defended keep is intended to be a challenging, epic battle. In my view, the issue is not forward camps, but low population campaigns where you don't have enough strong players on your side to take a keep that is heavily defended.

Camps are as useful for those assaulting the keep as those defending. In my view, the changes you are requesting would make it harder to assault a keep, not easier. You would lose a lot of momentum in your assault if you had to rez at some distant keep, and you would lose the interest of some of the attacking players if you had to keep riding back from some distance away.

The developers have indicated they are working on a fix for the frame rate issue, which will get more people into Cyrodiil. When we have only 5 campaigns instead of 11, and guesting becomes more expensive, ideally the remaining campaigns will be more populated.

As soon as we have playable frame rates and 4 or 5 campaigns with decent population instead of just one, I believe the user experience for both assaulting and defending keeps will be significantly improved.

Rylana

Camping enemy forward camps has never been better. Dont burn it, just camp it and kill the respawns, over, and over, and over, and over, and over.

CheesyDaedra

Rylana wrote: »

Camping enemy forward camps has never been better. Dont burn it, just camp it and kill the respawns, over, and over, and over, and over, and over.

Go back to your unpopulated campaign to farm emperor.

Rylana

DaedricCheese wrote: »

Rylana wrote: »

Camping enemy forward camps has never been better. Dont burn it, just camp it and kill the respawns, over, and over, and over, and over, and over.

Go back to your unpopulated campaign to farm emperor.

lolwut?

For one thing I home on Dawnbreaker, which is the most hotly contested of all campaigns as of right now, DC is the winning faction with emp, I am in 62nd place in AD for emp, and I guest on Bloodthorn, the DC stronghold where its all blue 24/7

I bet you feel stupid now.

runagate

If there's 100 people attacking a keep there's nothing whatsoever preventing them from pounding every single wall and door to dust with siege weapons.

I simply cannot fathom what you could be doing with all those people - just standing around angrily while the defenders blow kisses over the crenelations?

I have burned camps solo that were placed literally on the Flag at resources that were defended by 7 other players. Earlier today, in fact. Guard duty takes much more focus than the average PvPer has.

I defended Faregyl today against 13 or so almost solely because they were uncoordinated and, I presume, inexperienced (which is unfairly stigmatized in PvP - how on Nirn could anyone just be born experienced?). I would tell you the number of times I simply snuck out and set fire to their siege weapons but I still feel a tad embarrassed for them; they couldn't seem to figure out how I was doing it. They did eventually learn you could put out those fires. I remember back on the PTS I'd actively allow players to fight me over and over and over until using strategy occurred to them. Many PvP fights are over so fast there's no way to learn anything from the,. I still feel terrible every time I accidentally kill anyone under level 50 that's all alone.

I lay siege to Warden completely alone in the middle of the night very, very slowly while nearly asleep but apparently at some point a poor low-VR archer showed up and had we were at a hilarious impasse. He clearly didn't speak English, and no one else seemed to be around. How's that for nighttime ninja keep-taking? I couldn't take a Keep by myself, but I went around softening them up like the tooth-fairy - but with ballista.

But those are edge conditions. If they can spam FCs why can't you spam meatbags and ballista? I'm not trying troll, I am genuinely baffled.

Perphection

IcyDeadPeople wrote: »

dbetterton_ESO wrote: »

So as folks know, they fixed the forward camp bugs. I haven't seen any issues with them not working since the patch last week.

However, that has created a new problem...spamming of forward camps makes it close to impossible to take a keep that is even moderately defended. Most people have a ton of AP to spend, and so it is not an issue to just put a new camp down whenever the old one is used up.

With no timers on placement or rezzing, the result is that keeps have all but unlimited numbers of defenders. Personally, I've been on both sides of this. About 15 of us defended Faregyl from 100+ AD. And both DC AND EP on NA Wabba know the frustration of trying to take the last inner keep from AD.

Obviously, the counter is to completely control the inner courtyard to prevent new camps. But, camps go down almost instantly and people can spawn even if there is fighting nearby. We generally try and get ballistas hitting the camps as soon as we see them, but even so enough people spawn that the defense can continue.

I'd like to see some combination of (ie, not necessarily all of these):

(1) Making camp placement a longer channeled ability so that it can be interrupted more easily.

(2) Timer on replacing a used or burned camp. Even a minute or two would balance things between defenders and attackers.

(3) Timer on individual players rezzing at a camp. The merry-go-round of die, rez, die, rez makes defending a keep too easy. With the bugged camps, people had to carefully consider when to counter-attack the sieging force. Now, you can simply attack at will, knowing you'll be able to immediately rez.

(4) Limiting rezzing to those who died within the radius of the camp. As things stand now (and we all do it), groups will routinely suicide to transport to a keep under attack.

Thoughts, suggestions, insults?

I disagree. The usefulness of forward camps hasn't changed with the fix. The only difference is now you no longer need to log out and log back in to see the camp on your map.

Taking a defended keep is intended to be a challenging, epic battle. In my view, the issue is not forward camps, but low population campaigns where you don't have enough strong players on your side to take a keep that is heavily defended.

Camps are as useful for those assaulting the keep as those defending. In my view, the changes you are requesting would make it harder to assault a keep, not easier. You would lose a lot of momentum in your assault if you had to rez at some distant keep, and you would lose the interest of some of the attacking players if you had to keep riding back from some distance away.

The developers have indicated they are working on a fix for the frame rate issue, which will get more people into Cyrodiil. When we have only 5 campaigns instead of 11, and guesting becomes more expensive, ideally the remaining campaigns will be more populated.

As soon as we have playable frame rates and 4 or 5 campaigns with decent population instead of just one, I believe the user experience for both assaulting and defending keeps will be significantly improved.

This game was designed to have MULTIPLE armies attacking different locations and using strategy to defend/capture the keeps surrounding the Imperial city.

The current Forward Camp mechanics allow it so that ONE MASSIVE army can simply teleport anywhere on the map at will. It completely takes away from an RvR game type like this.

KBKB

Say what you want I'm just glad they work now, was beyond stupid before hand.

Talcyndl

To all those telling us how easy it is to take a keep...please come over to NA Wabba and show us at Alessia (assuming you're EP or DC).

Talcyndl

runagate wrote: »

If there's 100 people attacking a keep there's nothing whatsoever preventing them from pounding every single wall and door to dust with siege weapons.

The large mass of defenders who instantly teleported into the keep, and can now counter-attack the sieging forces, with no fear of death.

Think about it (or come watch Alessia on NA Wabba)...100 attackers, spread out around the entire keep (let's say three sides). Even if all 100 are the same faction, the defenders can attack with superior numbers before the sieging force can group.

Again, this doesn't happen with some random useless keep. But, where it is THE keep, the defending alliance brings its entire population all but instantly.

KBKB

dbetterton_ESO wrote: »

To all those telling us how easy it is to take a keep...please come over to NA Wabba and show us at Alessia (assuming you're EP or DC).

Im DC on wabba but that deserves an awesome. You guys have held it for what 6 days now? with both DC and EP attacking. I just steer clear and farm the alessia > sejanis gap now.

Talcyndl

Yeah, my hat's off to whatever drugs are keeping the AD Emperor up 24/7.

I have yet to be on (nor have any of my guildies around the world) when the Emp (and at least some of his group) weren't around to respond to that "Last" keep. Mostly it's been Alessia, but Roebeck has served in the role as well.

KBKB

Lol, as angry as it makes me its impressive *tips hat*

Talcyndl

Yeah, if it was just a matter of one group using FCs to hold a keep on Wabba, it would be annoying but not a big deal.

My concern is that with the new (fewer) campaigns starting in the near future, this will become the norm. Higher pops will mean there will mean most of the campaigns are like Wabba.