Cyrodiil Updates for Update 18

Beardimus

Patch notes land Monday @Morgul667 from memory it was all as per this thread just more details on the tick system, new conquest quests, details on performance changes etc

Oh, battle games ranking I felt was new, an algorithm to try to pair pre made with pre made he mentioned.

Morgul667

Beardimus wrote: »

Patch notes land Monday @Morgul667 from memory it was all as per this thread just more details on the tick system, new conquest quests, details on performance changes etc

Oh, battle games ranking I felt was new, an algorithm to try to pair pre made with pre made he mentioned.

OK thanks

Appreciate your reply

I feel pre made vs premade will not solve the issue but ranking might. Anyway time will tell

Looking forward to those patch notes

Morgul667

Did they say something about alliance switching “counter measure”?

ZOS_BrianWheeler

We are still discussing Alliance association and Campaigns.

tinythinker

Darkmage1337 wrote: »

tinythinker wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

Then they should open up 8v8 and/or 12v12 and/or 16v16 battlegrounds. These would bring alot of excitement and fierce competition between guilds. Once the popularity of the PvP starts growing up again, re-introduce a large scale instance.

...

Later on when the game can support it, reintroduce a large zone similar to Cyrodiil where all 3 factions will fight once more in a new battle facing hundreds of players on the screen (what was promised at release).

So Cloudruler Temple could be a nice halfway to what you want...

I mean, as a PvP trial (i.e. extended battleground) or just a plain large battleground it would give guild vs. guild vs. guild competition. Plus it's already in Cyro (even though it would be it's own instance and not share Cyro's pop cap).

In my head the idea was to take this larger instanced show on the road, so that new and old zones contested PvE-wise could also have other models of the concept with cool new mechanics added-in.

That Cloudruler Temple Battleground-Trial PvPvE crossover idea would be awesome! (Though details need some refinement)
I wish ZOS did something to that floating hunk of rock! Lol.
I was originally hoping for something similar to a Battleground-Trial PvPvE idea for within Imperial City (White Gold Tower or Imperial City Prison) were the only other two opportunities to do something like that, but Cloudruler Temple is an unused and presently available option, as well.
If the idea of making Cloudruler Temple into a Battleground-Trial PvPvE type event ever came to light, there would be so much HYPE lol.
Until then, all we can do is battle over Fort Dragonclaw and Bruma in the background until, if ZOS ever decides to do something with Cloudruler Temple.

EDIT: On a side-note, ZOS still has opportunity to do something unique with Bravil (to the right/east of the Gate of Mnem), or Skingrad (to the left/west of Castle Brindle), and/or Leyawiin/Blackwood (south of Bravil).

Details in my concept/suggested content posts are there to give a sense of what I'm picturing but aren't set in stone. I find giving some flavor of an idea helps get the larger point across as opposed to where the description is purely conceptual/mechanical. They are open to reinterpretation or replacement

Morgul667

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

We are still discussing Alliance association and Campaigns.

Thanks for the reply nice

frozywozy

Maura_Neysa wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

Maura_Neysa wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

Instead of adding additional rewards such as mounts and cosmetics for completing alliance ranks (which would have been nice at release 4years ago), I think it would be great to give rewards for players who finish a 30days cycle campaign on the top10 of their faction on the leaderboard. The same mount or costume could be the same every campaign. It would still make it unique and special. Another idea would be to give a title such as "Commander of <Insert_name_of_campaign>".

While I think this is a good idea too. In reality what PvP needs, not counting the performance issues, is more active players. So incentivizing Top 10 does not help that. I'm not sure if rank based ones will help or not either. After all, everyone's rank is already displayed all the time. The only time I hear anything though, is when in PvE when running PvE Tank build, people are surprised that my Warden is a Major. Usually PvE only notices your PvP rank because you are running around in PvE with a PvP build. So maybe something akin to Skins will help. I do know that they are decent motivation in PvE. All without ruining things for those that do not want to play the way that is needed to earn them.

The goal of giving rewards based on the actual challenges was not to bring more people to the game but to simply focus on what we could consider "endgame pvp top tier" nowadays. If you actually want to bring more players to the game, what should have been done and should be done is the following.

When the game got released, thousands of players rushed into Cyrodiil to test what was supposed to be the new best MMO since WoW got released. The potential was there, but Zenimax screwed up with the code, the engine and the client (no 64bits). When the popularity started dropping to the point where each faction cap is sitting around 100-150~ players, the PvP development team should have realized that they don't have the population to support large scale PvP any longer. To attract more people, they should focus and devote ALL of their ressources into smaller instances of PvP. They already started with battlegrounds (which in my opinion should be named arenas or something similar). Then they should open up 8v8 and/or 12v12 and/or 16v16 battlegrounds. These would bring alot of excitement and fierce competition between guilds. Once the popularity of the PvP starts growing up again, re-introduce a large scale instance.

Even the lore could support it. The daedra has been vanquished. The war in Cyrodiil is over but the conflicts between all 3 factions is just starting. They are now fighting all over the summerset isles in these new typical zones (battlegrounds).

Later on when the game can support it, reintroduce a large zone similar to Cyrodiil where all 3 factions will fight once more in a new battle facing hundreds of players on the screen (what was promised at release).

Absolutely non of that appeals to me. I do not know where to rank myself exactly, however I am sure its isn't as a top tier PvPer.

Could you describe exactly what you mean by "this does not appeals to you"? Does this mean that you disagree with the proposal or you simply does not feel concerned or does not feel like this would benefit you as a whole?

Are you reffering strictly to the first part of my post where I discuss different ways to reward end-game pvp (something that has never been done since release) or the second part where I answer someone else and explain how I imagine we could bring people back to the game and also make it a better experience for the actual players?

Maura_Neysa

frozywozy wrote: »

Could you describe exactly what you mean by "this does not appeals to you"? Does this mean that you disagree with the proposal or you simply does not feel concerned or does not feel like this would benefit you as a whole?

Are you reffering strictly to the first part of my post where I discuss different ways to reward end-game pvp (something that has never been done since release) or the second part where I answer someone else and explain how I imagine we could bring people back to the game and also make it a better experience for the actual players?

frozywozy wrote: »

When the game got released, thousands of players rushed into Cyrodiil to test what was supposed to be the new best MMO since WoW got released. The potential was there, but Zenimax screwed up with the code, the engine and the client (no 64bits).

Zero effect on console. Of which I am one. Considering console PvP suffers too, I do not think this would have helped. However it is connection issues and lag plaguing console as well.

frozywozy wrote: »

When the popularity started dropping to the point where each faction cap is sitting around 100-150~ players, the PvP development team should have realized that they don't have the population to support large scale PvP any longer. To attract more people, they should focus and devote ALL of their resources into smaller instances of PvP. They already started with battlegrounds (which in my opinion should be named arenas or something similar).

Unless you run in a coordinated group, BGs is not sucks. Either you stay with your PuGs and not accomplish any objectives. Unless it actually happens to be Deathmatch. Or you attempt to accomplish objectives with half a team, because at least 2 PuGs dont know how to do anything but Deathmatch.
BGs holds no lore or "reason" for it. If I want to play that kind of game I'll just go to one of the FPS. I'm not willing to black hole for a game though.

frozywozy wrote: »

Then they should open up 8v8 and/or 12v12 and/or 16v16 battlegrounds. These would bring alot of excitement and fierce competition between guilds.

Maybe if you're lucky each team with be only half PuGs. Either way, BGs hinges on communications way more then Cryodiil, meaning the 2/3 mic'less community will be of no help. An 8, 12, 16 man PreMade will just be even worse versions of the current mess.

frozywozy wrote: »

Even the lore could support it. The daedra has been vanquished. The war in Cyrodiil is over but the conflicts between all 3 factions is just starting. They are now fighting all over the summerset isles in these new typical zones (battlegrounds).

How is the War over? Who is the new Emporor? How do you bring back "Large Scale" PvP once it meets the threshold? Lastly this doesnt fit at all with the One Tamrial idea of play with friends and play it in any order.

frozywozy wrote: »

Instead of adding additional rewards such as mounts and cosmetics for completing alliance ranks (which would have been nice at release 4years ago), I think it would be great to give rewards for players who finish a 30days cycle campaign on the top10 of their faction on the leaderboard.

I will never be this much of a try hard. So this is zero incentive to me. However if it is incentive to some, then yeah go for it. After all this kind of skill reward already exist in PvE with no counter to it for the PvP side. However leveling rewards keep the non PvP deicated coming back into Cryodiil more. It keeps them incentized even if they will never be a top 10 person. Not sure if you PvP at all but a go 70% plus of characters out there are Legionary. There are more Generals than Captains, that's not right.

frozywozy wrote: »

The same mount or costume could be the same every campaign. It would still make it unique and special. Another idea would be to give a title such as "Commander of <Insert_name_of_campaign>".

The mount or costume seems incentive enough. I do not think the title would be. Would people really run that over Stormproof, Flawless, Scythe, and others? Maybe, I do run Major myeself over them. Though, I am a Ghost in the Shell fan. That and I wear the Dreadhorn Shaman skin.

geonsocal

seeing how we're all just spitballing some ideas out here in cyberspace - how about kicking a little more coin into those rewards for the worthy bags...

1k for sub 50, 2k for level 50...

PvP is expensive, and time consuming...enjoyable - but, expensive and time consuming...

for myself anyway - it's been my primary source of income in eso for years...

I want nice things too

might also help incentivize some of our pve friends to come join us...

Beardimus

Morgul667 wrote: »

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

We are still discussing Alliance association and Campaigns.

Thanks for the reply nice

SO good to see this is being discussed

Maura_Neysa

geonsocal wrote: »

seeing how we're all just spitballing some ideas out here in cyberspace - how about kicking a little more coin into those rewards for the worthy bags...

1k for sub 50, 2k for level 50...

PvP is expensive, and time consuming...enjoyable - but, expensive and time consuming...

for myself anyway - it's been my primary source of income in eso for years...

I want nice things too

might also help incentivize some of our pve friends to come join us...

You heard in the latest Live. Alchemy Satchels are common to Rewards of the Worthy. So there is at least some money coming. If you do the work for it. Similar to the Tel Var ones, but not as good it sounded like.

Ragnarock41

@ZOS_BrianWheeler Please consider taking a look at the ''Rewards for the Worthy'' and the monthly campaign rewards.

The RFTW boxes are just spamming the inbox with lots of items that we mostly don't even want(and when you want something specific, the odds of you getting that exact item is quite low) and it just kills the inventory space.It would be cool if we had some sort of credit/token system where we could buy what we want after earning for it.

I know it sounds like much work but I'm pretty sure most of us would prefer a change to the current system.

and about the campaign end rewards, I'm afraid having a few pieces of golden jewelry , will not be very meaningful when we can now craft it. Maybe consider rewarding players at top 10-20 with ability altering weapons? They have to spend lots of time to be in the leaderboards, the rewards should be better to make PvP more appealing.

I'm just putting out ideas for you to consider, as I want a better cyrodiil for all of us. Thanks for reading.

Rohamad_Ali

What would people think about a "Main Alliance" insensitive in Cyrodiil ? At the beginning of a campaign you pick your main alliance to support and all characters in the alliance recieve Campaign Loyalty rewards based on the out come of the campaign , up to max rewards level 3 but all the characters of opposing faction can only recieve minimum level Campaign Loyalty rewards . No faction lock outs and just incentivize the faction loyalty a bit . Any thoughts ?

casparian

Rohamad_Ali wrote: »

What would people think about a "Main Alliance" insensitive in Cyrodiil ? At the beginning of a campaign you pick your main alliance to support and all characters in the alliance recieve Campaign Loyalty rewards based on the out come of the campaign , up to max rewards level 3 but all the characters of opposing faction can only recieve minimum level Campaign Loyalty rewards . No faction lock outs and just incentivize the faction loyalty a bit . Any thoughts ?

I don't think enough people care about Campaign Loyalty rewards enough for this to be anything close to effective.

Rohamad_Ali

casparian wrote: »

Rohamad_Ali wrote: »

What would people think about a "Main Alliance" insensitive in Cyrodiil ? At the beginning of a campaign you pick your main alliance to support and all characters in the alliance recieve Campaign Loyalty rewards based on the out come of the campaign , up to max rewards level 3 but all the characters of opposing faction can only recieve minimum level Campaign Loyalty rewards . No faction lock outs and just incentivize the faction loyalty a bit . Any thoughts ?

I don't think enough people care about Campaign Loyalty rewards enough for this to be anything close to effective.

You hear that @ZOS_BrianWheeler ? Soldiers want a pay raise .

Darkmage1337

ZOS simply needs to do 3 things with Battlegrounds:

1. Have a CP and non-CP and under-50 version (just like with Cyrodiil). We currently only get under-50 and non-CP or under-50 and CP; but, never both CP and non-CP at the same time.

2. ZOS needs to create a MMR (Match-Making Rating) system or season/bracket system (e.g. Play 5 or 10 Battleground matches to get 'ranked' for the season and get placed as Bronze, Silver, Gold, Platinum, Diamond [or whatever they want to name the brackets)] and have each tier have a percentage of the player-base. E.g. Only the Top 20% of BG players can be in the Platinum division for any given season, and the bottom 20% in Bronze, or whatever... (plenty of ways to iron-out the specific details here); but, regardless, BGs need an MMR system so newbie fight-time BG players stop getting placed against the #1 player on the leaderboards match after match after match.
I have seen first-hand the same player-names in several consecutive Battleground matches. Playing the same group of people again over and over again is rather annoying and defeats the purpose of a queue if you're just going to match up against the #1 person on the leaderboards every single time, lol.

3. Relating to my previous point, is the need to separate solo-queuers with pre-made groups. Obviously a group of 4 people who are skilled, coordinated, playing the objective, and communicating via voice chat in TeamSpeak/Discord will always beat the 4 individuals who solo-queued and text to communicate and are playing death-match instead of the mode's objective, lol, unless it is, in fact, a death-match BG game.

Also, 4. I don't mind the randomness of the BG game-type mode as much (e.g. being able to queue for solely death-match or solely capture-the-relic, or whatever, would be nice), but the other 3 issues pointed out above are more important and take priority over specific game-mode queues, in my opinion.

Not sure why ZOS removed CP-enabled BGs (BGs have gone from non-CP only to CP-only then back to non-CP only).
I re-read the Dragon Bones DLC Patch Notes, where ZOS reverted the BG changes, but ZOS did not give a specific reason why they changed it. Again.
But, again, why not have both? Just like Cyrodiil.
Let players play how they want to play.
Players didn't grind to 720+ CP just to not ever be able to use all the CP combo spec variations for in PvP, especially Battlegrounds; which is literally 1/3rd of the PvP content in ESO, other than Cyrodiil and Imperial City, which should technically even be clumped together as one, but I digress, lol.

BaylorCorvette

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

We are still discussing Alliance association and Campaigns.

Would be awesome to lock people to a faction per specific campaign. Or at least implement something to discourage all the faction swaps.

abelsgmx

This will reduce the 90% hits failure?

dotme

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

We are still discussing Alliance association and Campaigns.

BaylorCorvette wrote: »

Would be awesome to lock people to a faction per specific campaign. Or at least implement something to discourage all the faction swaps.

Agreed. I'm not a faction-hopper myself, but I understand those who are - Some kind of price to pay seems better than forcing a ban. Maybe a 2 hour cooldown on a swap, along with no AP earned during those 2 hours (So when you start earning AP, you know you can swap again). It's a tough issue to deal with - someone's going to cry no matter what. But incentives and some penalties might help reduce the swapping (and toxicity in chat because of it)

anadandy

I agree that a reward system for staying with a single faction would work better than a punitive system for faction hopping - but also that for the typical PVPer, most "rewards" are not going to be enough to deter it . Maybe some type of cumulative AP bonus that increases for every time you play a single alliance during a campaign without swapping. You swap and boom you're back down to 0% bonus. Apologies if this has already been suggested.

Katahdin

My only issue with buffing the guards is that it will be harder to take a camp solo. It isone of the few things a roamer can do to comtribute. It is already tricky to do on some builds. This might make it impossible without joining a group.


I understand the issue but I am against hard faction locks. I play with an EP guild on one or two nights a week in IC, the rest of the time on another faction. Some of these proposals would prevent me from doing that.

ZOS_BrianWheeler

You can still solo a resource. It takes a bit of effort and you have to pick it apart, but it's do-able. It's much easier with a buddy and this gets Resources back to their intended level of difficulty where it takes 1 or 2 people to take.

Universe

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

You can still solo a resource. It takes a bit of effort and you have to pick it apart, but it's do-able.

That's good news
Soloing a resource was too easy before this patch anyway

Rickter

from how he sounded in the ESO Live, it seemed like he was saying that the Guards in Sotha Sil were more along the intended difficulty which doesnt translate to CP campaigns and thus the increase in their difficulty.

personally - I think they should add a few more guards in the towers to discourage tower farmers @ZOS_BrianWheeler

Sandman929

Rickter wrote: »

from how he sounded in the ESO Live, it seemed like he was saying that the Guards in Sotha Sil were more along the intended difficulty which doesnt translate to CP campaigns and thus the increase in their difficulty.

personally - I think they should add a few more guards in the towers to discourage tower farmers @ZOS_BrianWheeler

It would take quite a few guards to even give a tower farming group pause....what might help is if tower were prone to siege no matter who owns them

Rickter

Sandman929 wrote: »

Rickter wrote: »

from how he sounded in the ESO Live, it seemed like he was saying that the Guards in Sotha Sil were more along the intended difficulty which doesnt translate to CP campaigns and thus the increase in their difficulty.

personally - I think they should add a few more guards in the towers to discourage tower farmers @ZOS_BrianWheeler

It would take quite a few guards to even give a tower farming group pause....what might help is if tower were prone to siege no matter who owns them

it wouldn't take that many. i reckon 3 more guards, but im also mainly speaking on like that one eternal hunt player that runs in there. I agree a 6-10 man farming in a tower is going to take more than a few guards.

Sandman929

Rickter wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

Rickter wrote: »

from how he sounded in the ESO Live, it seemed like he was saying that the Guards in Sotha Sil were more along the intended difficulty which doesnt translate to CP campaigns and thus the increase in their difficulty.

personally - I think they should add a few more guards in the towers to discourage tower farmers @ZOS_BrianWheeler

It would take quite a few guards to even give a tower farming group pause....what might help is if tower were prone to siege no matter who owns them

it wouldn't take that many. i reckon 3 more guards, but im also mainly speaking on like that one eternal hunt player that runs in there. I agree a 6-10 man farming in a tower is going to take more than a few guards.

Ah, gotcha. Yeah, nobody likes that guy. He's the guy that insists that you chase him around the tower, even when you try to leave him alone because you're not into 12v1ing him and you're also not interested in watching him run for his life.

Rickter

Sandman929 wrote: »

Rickter wrote: »

Sandman929 wrote: »

Rickter wrote: »

from how he sounded in the ESO Live, it seemed like he was saying that the Guards in Sotha Sil were more along the intended difficulty which doesnt translate to CP campaigns and thus the increase in their difficulty.

personally - I think they should add a few more guards in the towers to discourage tower farmers @ZOS_BrianWheeler

It would take quite a few guards to even give a tower farming group pause....what might help is if tower were prone to siege no matter who owns them

it wouldn't take that many. i reckon 3 more guards, but im also mainly speaking on like that one eternal hunt player that runs in there. I agree a 6-10 man farming in a tower is going to take more than a few guards.

Ah, gotcha. Yeah, nobody likes that guy. He's the guy that insists that you chase him around the tower, even when you try to leave him alone because you're not into 12v1ing him and you're also not interested in watching him run for his life.

yup! lol

Avran_Sylt

Been doing some resources on the PTS, and I gotta say, I love the current direction. The guards hit hard, have DoTs, heal themselves, and are generally not something you can face-tank with a glass cannon.

This is from the perspective of a Glass Cannon Snipe build, but really it's incredibly easy to do, once you figure it out.

Snipe spam the menders from just outside the attack range of the other NPC's, so you don't take any/much damage, then do the same with the Honor Guards. The mage in the tower is easy to kill once the 4 flag npc have been dealt with, and the two door npc are hardly a problem. (The regular guard does jack all, and the mender is easy to kill)

I could see it being made even easier (though a slight bit longer) by using the eagle eye set (3m range increase).

I'm going to try this with a Melee char, and see if the new crossbow pull can be used to segment the flag guards away from each other (as it seems that they don't like to move), and kill them one on one (puling them into the tower doorway)

My initial criticism on this is that the tower door guard should be made an honor guard.

geonsocal

Avran_Sylt wrote: »

Been doing some resources on the PTS, and I gotta say, I love the current direction. The guards hit hard, have DoTs, heal themselves, and are generally not something you can face-tank with a glass cannon.

This is from the perspective of a Glass Cannon Snipe build, but really it's incredibly easy to do, once you figure it out.

Snipe spam the menders from just outside the attack range of the other NPC's, so you don't take any/much damage, then do the same with the Honor Guards. The mage in the tower is easy to kill once the 4 flag npc have been dealt with, and the two door npc are hardly a problem. (The regular guard does jack all, and the mender is easy to kill)

I could see it being made even easier (though a slight bit longer) by using the eagle eye set (3m range increase).

I'm going to try this with a Melee char, and see if the new crossbow pull can be used to segment the flag guards away from each other (as it seems that they don't like to move), and kill them one on one (puling them into the tower doorway)

My initial criticism on this is that the tower door guard should be made an honor guard.

are these guards dropping any loot?

I thought I had read somewhere that the resource guards would start dropping loot...