Lets talk about one of the dumbest features added back to this game - Forward Camps

frozywozy

thankyourat wrote: »

I played when forward camps were removed and there were a lot more fights in the fields between keeps. It was great for solo players like myself. I could stand in the open field while people who died run back to the keep and actually get some good 1vXs where as now you either get a whole Zerg running to a keep or no one at all.

So what you are saying is that because people use forward camps to spread out the fight elsewhere, it makes it harder for you to get openfield fights on the transit line of your enemy. I understand that the amount of people zerging from one objective to the other following the transit line around the emp ring is reduced when game mechanics are implemented to spread people out on the map. The original motivation is to reduce the latency and help game performances.

I still believe that even thought you get less chances to see people riding back, you get more opportunities to fight at different places outside of the transit line (let say when someone attack deep in enemy territory and you cut off reinforcements) and imo this is a good thing.

zyk wrote: »

We know that's not true because we played without Forward Camps for more than a year and groups of all sizes pushed as deep as they do today. Except then, they did so for a fight rather than an otick. 2.2 had a far more active map than 4.1 does.

We will have to agree to disagree here because this is simply not true, at least not from my faction. I have been complaining for months straight about the lack of people pushing deep in enemy territory without camps. It would happen on very rare occasions, for example when we were missing a scroll.

With camps, even very casual groups or guilds take the risk nowadays and it create different environments for fights that we all want since fighting around the emp keeps is becoming so redundant.

SugaComa

Burn the camp ... Problemo solvio

Katahdin

Forward camps are fine.
There is a cooldown on respawning on one a second time and a distance

Time stop is way stupider than forward camps imo

Xsorus

Katahdin wrote: »

Forward camps are fine.
There is a cooldown on respawning on one a second time and a distance

Time stop is way stupider than forward camps imo

It’s a bloody group Rez if a five minute timer that anyone can use... the fact you don’t realize how powerful that is boggles my mind.

VaranisArano

Xsorus wrote: »

Katahdin wrote: »

Forward camps are fine.
There is a cooldown on respawning on one a second time and a distance

Time stop is way stupider than forward camps imo

It’s a bloody group Rez if a five minute timer that anyone can use... the fact you don’t realize how powerful that is boggles my mind.

Anyone can use a camp, yeah.

Until it runs out of health
Until the enemy discovers it
As long as they aren't on a 5 minute timer
As long as its within range
As long as its down at the right time to be useful (often times, its too late)

Oh, it can be really powerful. It can also be quite limited. I've seen plenty of times where a camp changed the tide of a battle. I've seen plenty of times where a camp let people rez and run straight back into getting farmed. I've seen plenty of times where camps were an expensive waste of AP.

pieratsos

frozywozy wrote: »

thankyourat wrote: »

Players would die and have to run back to the keep meaning there were a lot more small scrimmages in open fields and that's what's missing from eso right now. It's basically just 60v60 keep fights right now. And even though forward camps are popular I feel this won't change until they are removed

Have you played when forward camps were removed? The most typical scenario happening on a daily basis would be a huge crossword on top of Alessia Bridge, Chal milegate and sometimes Nikel milegate. Stale fights happening for hours with a side winning from time to time and pushing to the next objective until they get wiped for being too far away from the spawn.

I am not sure exactly where the removal of forward camps is supposed to favor small scrimmages in open fields. Unless what you mean by that is to gank people riding back to the bridge or milegates? Could you elaborate more?

zyk wrote: »

There are probably a lot of current players who didn't play during the period when Forward Camps were removed.

In today's game, groups aren't punished for bad decisions like they were then. Running deep in enemy territory took much more skill and focus. There was less of an 'omglol' mentality when making mistakes. Groups couldn't just kite indefinitely by dropping camps gratuitously. Good groups couldn't afford to carry bad players as easily.

Without forward camps, we would barely see anybody taking the decision to push deep in enemy territory to spread out the fight. Only on super rare occasions and from very specific groups we would see such events happening.

With offensive camps, it allows and encourages people to fight at different places, out of the emp ring.

I disagree entirely about groups not being punished enough when they do an effort to fight by themselves far away from their faction and any spawn point other than a camp. The problem is when people are able sneak camps while defending a keep, avoiding all kind of fights and running straight inside the inner postern to reinforce. A "Forward camp" used defensively. This tactic allows the fight to last forever and does not punish anybody resing at the camp. Those people can just safely wait inside with a massive amount of sieges until they are off cooldown to try another mindless push outside.

Removal of camps favors solo/small scale in terms of enabling fights in between keeps. A keep is UA and people die. They will naturally run back from the closest keep. Solo/small scale players know that and go in between those keeps to find small scale fights. Those fights could last a while, more people gather up from both alliances which potentially leads to a cool skirmish.

With camps there is no reason to go in between keeps, everyone stack in one keep which leads to an endless lag blob.

frozywozy

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

thankyourat wrote: »

Players would die and have to run back to the keep meaning there were a lot more small scrimmages in open fields and that's what's missing from eso right now. It's basically just 60v60 keep fights right now. And even though forward camps are popular I feel this won't change until they are removed

Have you played when forward camps were removed? The most typical scenario happening on a daily basis would be a huge crossword on top of Alessia Bridge, Chal milegate and sometimes Nikel milegate. Stale fights happening for hours with a side winning from time to time and pushing to the next objective until they get wiped for being too far away from the spawn.

I am not sure exactly where the removal of forward camps is supposed to favor small scrimmages in open fields. Unless what you mean by that is to gank people riding back to the bridge or milegates? Could you elaborate more?

zyk wrote: »

There are probably a lot of current players who didn't play during the period when Forward Camps were removed.

In today's game, groups aren't punished for bad decisions like they were then. Running deep in enemy territory took much more skill and focus. There was less of an 'omglol' mentality when making mistakes. Groups couldn't just kite indefinitely by dropping camps gratuitously. Good groups couldn't afford to carry bad players as easily.

Without forward camps, we would barely see anybody taking the decision to push deep in enemy territory to spread out the fight. Only on super rare occasions and from very specific groups we would see such events happening.

With offensive camps, it allows and encourages people to fight at different places, out of the emp ring.

I disagree entirely about groups not being punished enough when they do an effort to fight by themselves far away from their faction and any spawn point other than a camp. The problem is when people are able sneak camps while defending a keep, avoiding all kind of fights and running straight inside the inner postern to reinforce. A "Forward camp" used defensively. This tactic allows the fight to last forever and does not punish anybody resing at the camp. Those people can just safely wait inside with a massive amount of sieges until they are off cooldown to try another mindless push outside.

Removal of camps favors solo/small scale in terms of enabling fights in between keeps. A keep is UA and people die. They will naturally run back from the closest keep. Solo/small scale players know that and go in between those keeps to find small scale fights. Those fights could last a while, more people gather up from both alliances which potentially leads to a cool skirmish.

With camps there is no reason to go in between keeps, everyone stack in one keep which leads to an endless lag blob.

I understand your point. With people being able to drop camps in the courtyard of a keep they want to defend, and attackers being able to drop a camp close to the keep outside of the tick range, they only have to ride there once and then they can use the camp, wait for the cooldown, push again, rez at the camp, rince and repeat. As a result there are less people riding from one objective to the other.

This being said, you also have to understand the point I explained in the post you quoted. When camps were removed, people would very rarely push deep in enemy territory to make their own fights. What I mean by that is attacking and taking keeps. Not simply capturing resources. With camps I have seen a drastic change in the way even casual groups / guilds will take the risk to get out of the emp ring and push outside of the transit line.

My solution to your problem would be to make it so you can only use forward camps offensively (as where their name comes from) and defenders should only be able to place a camp outside of a tick range of any objective. As a result, people defending would have to be very careful. No more stealth camp deploy to rez 12 players that ignore all kind of enemies and run straight inside the inner postern like if the doors could only be opened for defenders.

VaranisArano

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

thankyourat wrote: »

Players would die and have to run back to the keep meaning there were a lot more small scrimmages in open fields and that's what's missing from eso right now. It's basically just 60v60 keep fights right now. And even though forward camps are popular I feel this won't change until they are removed

Have you played when forward camps were removed? The most typical scenario happening on a daily basis would be a huge crossword on top of Alessia Bridge, Chal milegate and sometimes Nikel milegate. Stale fights happening for hours with a side winning from time to time and pushing to the next objective until they get wiped for being too far away from the spawn.

I am not sure exactly where the removal of forward camps is supposed to favor small scrimmages in open fields. Unless what you mean by that is to gank people riding back to the bridge or milegates? Could you elaborate more?

zyk wrote: »

There are probably a lot of current players who didn't play during the period when Forward Camps were removed.

In today's game, groups aren't punished for bad decisions like they were then. Running deep in enemy territory took much more skill and focus. There was less of an 'omglol' mentality when making mistakes. Groups couldn't just kite indefinitely by dropping camps gratuitously. Good groups couldn't afford to carry bad players as easily.

Without forward camps, we would barely see anybody taking the decision to push deep in enemy territory to spread out the fight. Only on super rare occasions and from very specific groups we would see such events happening.

With offensive camps, it allows and encourages people to fight at different places, out of the emp ring.

I disagree entirely about groups not being punished enough when they do an effort to fight by themselves far away from their faction and any spawn point other than a camp. The problem is when people are able sneak camps while defending a keep, avoiding all kind of fights and running straight inside the inner postern to reinforce. A "Forward camp" used defensively. This tactic allows the fight to last forever and does not punish anybody resing at the camp. Those people can just safely wait inside with a massive amount of sieges until they are off cooldown to try another mindless push outside.

Removal of camps favors solo/small scale in terms of enabling fights in between keeps. A keep is UA and people die. They will naturally run back from the closest keep. Solo/small scale players know that and go in between those keeps to find small scale fights. Those fights could last a while, more people gather up from both alliances which potentially leads to a cool skirmish.

With camps there is no reason to go in between keeps, everyone stack in one keep which leads to an endless lag blob.

There's also no reason to aggressively defend a keep anymore, either. If you know you'll have to ride back and risk the enemy flipping the keep before you get back in, the only safe response is to fort up in the inner keep and pour oils and throw scattershot.

Attackers might be able to rez and come back for another try, but defenders would be even more disadvantaged. There's no longer any reason to fight before the keep is flagged, because if it flags and you die, you are really SOL, having to ride and risk gankers guarding the doors and hoping the enemy doesnt take the keep before you get back. And unless you are an organized raid who can do your own battle rezzes, there's no reason to risk fighting after the flag either, and plenty of people are begging for battle-rez nerfs too. So I expect people to settle in and fortify their inner keeps as much as they can...which is fun only if you like that sort of thing.

So, it might make for more fights in between objectives, but it would serious disadvantage defenders more than attackers.

pieratsos

VaranisArano wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

thankyourat wrote: »

Players would die and have to run back to the keep meaning there were a lot more small scrimmages in open fields and that's what's missing from eso right now. It's basically just 60v60 keep fights right now. And even though forward camps are popular I feel this won't change until they are removed

Have you played when forward camps were removed? The most typical scenario happening on a daily basis would be a huge crossword on top of Alessia Bridge, Chal milegate and sometimes Nikel milegate. Stale fights happening for hours with a side winning from time to time and pushing to the next objective until they get wiped for being too far away from the spawn.

I am not sure exactly where the removal of forward camps is supposed to favor small scrimmages in open fields. Unless what you mean by that is to gank people riding back to the bridge or milegates? Could you elaborate more?

zyk wrote: »

There are probably a lot of current players who didn't play during the period when Forward Camps were removed.

In today's game, groups aren't punished for bad decisions like they were then. Running deep in enemy territory took much more skill and focus. There was less of an 'omglol' mentality when making mistakes. Groups couldn't just kite indefinitely by dropping camps gratuitously. Good groups couldn't afford to carry bad players as easily.

Without forward camps, we would barely see anybody taking the decision to push deep in enemy territory to spread out the fight. Only on super rare occasions and from very specific groups we would see such events happening.

With offensive camps, it allows and encourages people to fight at different places, out of the emp ring.

I disagree entirely about groups not being punished enough when they do an effort to fight by themselves far away from their faction and any spawn point other than a camp. The problem is when people are able sneak camps while defending a keep, avoiding all kind of fights and running straight inside the inner postern to reinforce. A "Forward camp" used defensively. This tactic allows the fight to last forever and does not punish anybody resing at the camp. Those people can just safely wait inside with a massive amount of sieges until they are off cooldown to try another mindless push outside.

Removal of camps favors solo/small scale in terms of enabling fights in between keeps. A keep is UA and people die. They will naturally run back from the closest keep. Solo/small scale players know that and go in between those keeps to find small scale fights. Those fights could last a while, more people gather up from both alliances which potentially leads to a cool skirmish.

With camps there is no reason to go in between keeps, everyone stack in one keep which leads to an endless lag blob.

There's also no reason to aggressively defend a keep anymore, either. If you know you'll have to ride back and risk the enemy flipping the keep before you get back in, the only safe response is to fort up in the inner keep and pour oils and throw scattershot.

Attackers might be able to rez and come back for another try, but defenders would be even more disadvantaged. There's no longer any reason to fight before the keep is flagged, because if it flags and you die, you are really SOL, having to ride and risk gankers guarding the doors and hoping the enemy doesnt take the keep before you get back. And unless you are an organized raid who can do your own battle rezzes, there's no reason to risk fighting after the flag either, and plenty of people are begging for battle-rez nerfs too. So I expect people to settle in and fortify their inner keeps as much as they can...which is fun only if you like that sort of thing.

So, it might make for more fights in between objectives, but it would serious disadvantage defenders more than attackers.

Yes a keep siege is supposed to be fought with siege. Who would thought of that. Feel free to agressively defend. There is absolutely every reason to do it. Its just more risky. Aka, if you die it should mean something. Ironically the vast majority of people that aggressively defend and go out to fight people are the solo/small scale players.

Anw, im not sure what is ur whole point with offence being in advantage if you remove camps. I mean, you do realise that the very existence of camps puts offence in an even bigger advantage right? Attackers control the outside of the keep where you place the camps. Not defenders.

pieratsos

frozywozy wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

thankyourat wrote: »

Players would die and have to run back to the keep meaning there were a lot more small scrimmages in open fields and that's what's missing from eso right now. It's basically just 60v60 keep fights right now. And even though forward camps are popular I feel this won't change until they are removed

Have you played when forward camps were removed? The most typical scenario happening on a daily basis would be a huge crossword on top of Alessia Bridge, Chal milegate and sometimes Nikel milegate. Stale fights happening for hours with a side winning from time to time and pushing to the next objective until they get wiped for being too far away from the spawn.

I am not sure exactly where the removal of forward camps is supposed to favor small scrimmages in open fields. Unless what you mean by that is to gank people riding back to the bridge or milegates? Could you elaborate more?

zyk wrote: »

There are probably a lot of current players who didn't play during the period when Forward Camps were removed.

In today's game, groups aren't punished for bad decisions like they were then. Running deep in enemy territory took much more skill and focus. There was less of an 'omglol' mentality when making mistakes. Groups couldn't just kite indefinitely by dropping camps gratuitously. Good groups couldn't afford to carry bad players as easily.

Without forward camps, we would barely see anybody taking the decision to push deep in enemy territory to spread out the fight. Only on super rare occasions and from very specific groups we would see such events happening.

With offensive camps, it allows and encourages people to fight at different places, out of the emp ring.

I disagree entirely about groups not being punished enough when they do an effort to fight by themselves far away from their faction and any spawn point other than a camp. The problem is when people are able sneak camps while defending a keep, avoiding all kind of fights and running straight inside the inner postern to reinforce. A "Forward camp" used defensively. This tactic allows the fight to last forever and does not punish anybody resing at the camp. Those people can just safely wait inside with a massive amount of sieges until they are off cooldown to try another mindless push outside.

Removal of camps favors solo/small scale in terms of enabling fights in between keeps. A keep is UA and people die. They will naturally run back from the closest keep. Solo/small scale players know that and go in between those keeps to find small scale fights. Those fights could last a while, more people gather up from both alliances which potentially leads to a cool skirmish.

With camps there is no reason to go in between keeps, everyone stack in one keep which leads to an endless lag blob.

I understand your point. With people being able to drop camps in the courtyard of a keep they want to defend, and attackers being able to drop a camp close to the keep outside of the tick range, they only have to ride there once and then they can use the camp, wait for the cooldown, push again, rez at the camp, rince and repeat. As a result there are less people riding from one objective to the other.

This being said, you also have to understand the point I explained in the post you quoted. When camps were removed, people would very rarely push deep in enemy territory to make their own fights. What I mean by that is attacking and taking keeps. Not simply capturing resources. With camps I have seen a drastic change in the way even casual groups / guilds will take the risk to get out of the emp ring and push outside of the transit line.

My solution to your problem would be to make it so you can only use forward camps offensively (as where their name comes from) and defenders should only be able to place a camp outside of a tick range of any objective. As a result, people defending would have to be very careful. No more stealth camp deploy to rez 12 players that ignore all kind of enemies and run straight inside the inner postern like if the doors could only be opened for defenders.

How is removing camps also removing ur ability to attack deep in enemy lines. Feel free to do it. Its still the same concept. You take it by surprise. The only difference is that if you die, well you simply wipe. Being able to rez over and over again after the entire group dies even tho u are deep in enemy territory doesnt make much sense to begin with.

Objectives are the issue that prety much forces everyone to fight in the emp ring.

Sacredx

Forward camps are fine as is. Both sides get the advantage to rez. The main reasons camps exist is to:

• Save irl time having to run back on horse. Some people have limited playing time and don't want to waste it on a horse simulator. This doesn't remove gank play as the players have to get to the fight in the first place giving gankers plenty of opportunity.
• Create a more persistent combat atmosphere. You die, you rez and get straight back into it. With no camps you die and one side wipes and then there is nothing. People pvp to pvp, not to ride a horse.
• Spread the population more across the map rather than a few points. Groups are more likely to push out knowing they can backup rez which spreads the population. Without camps you will just have big ball fights with unplayable lag.

You wouldn't have any of these benefits if camps didn't exist.

zyk

I have a stupid amount of clips saved from 2.2 (I saved 10m at a time back then). I've watched some recently, and to me the map was far more alive than it is today. Inner and outlying keeps were regularly attacked, despite the lack of FCs.

I reference 2.2 a lot because it was the patch immediately before FCs were re-introduced in 2.3, but this was also the case during 1.5, 1.6, 2.0 and 2.1.

But whatever. Forget history. Look at today. Players are extremely consolidated. Faction stacks are normal. What used to be emp depose lag can happen at any keep or outpost.

If the Forward Camp is supposed to be a tool to spread players out, it has completely failed. In practice, it is a tool that assists in consolidating players, making lag worse. Much worse.

VaranisArano

pieratsos wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

thankyourat wrote: »

Players would die and have to run back to the keep meaning there were a lot more small scrimmages in open fields and that's what's missing from eso right now. It's basically just 60v60 keep fights right now. And even though forward camps are popular I feel this won't change until they are removed

Have you played when forward camps were removed? The most typical scenario happening on a daily basis would be a huge crossword on top of Alessia Bridge, Chal milegate and sometimes Nikel milegate. Stale fights happening for hours with a side winning from time to time and pushing to the next objective until they get wiped for being too far away from the spawn.

I am not sure exactly where the removal of forward camps is supposed to favor small scrimmages in open fields. Unless what you mean by that is to gank people riding back to the bridge or milegates? Could you elaborate more?

zyk wrote: »

There are probably a lot of current players who didn't play during the period when Forward Camps were removed.

In today's game, groups aren't punished for bad decisions like they were then. Running deep in enemy territory took much more skill and focus. There was less of an 'omglol' mentality when making mistakes. Groups couldn't just kite indefinitely by dropping camps gratuitously. Good groups couldn't afford to carry bad players as easily.

Without forward camps, we would barely see anybody taking the decision to push deep in enemy territory to spread out the fight. Only on super rare occasions and from very specific groups we would see such events happening.

With offensive camps, it allows and encourages people to fight at different places, out of the emp ring.

I disagree entirely about groups not being punished enough when they do an effort to fight by themselves far away from their faction and any spawn point other than a camp. The problem is when people are able sneak camps while defending a keep, avoiding all kind of fights and running straight inside the inner postern to reinforce. A "Forward camp" used defensively. This tactic allows the fight to last forever and does not punish anybody resing at the camp. Those people can just safely wait inside with a massive amount of sieges until they are off cooldown to try another mindless push outside.

Removal of camps favors solo/small scale in terms of enabling fights in between keeps. A keep is UA and people die. They will naturally run back from the closest keep. Solo/small scale players know that and go in between those keeps to find small scale fights. Those fights could last a while, more people gather up from both alliances which potentially leads to a cool skirmish.

With camps there is no reason to go in between keeps, everyone stack in one keep which leads to an endless lag blob.

There's also no reason to aggressively defend a keep anymore, either. If you know you'll have to ride back and risk the enemy flipping the keep before you get back in, the only safe response is to fort up in the inner keep and pour oils and throw scattershot.

Attackers might be able to rez and come back for another try, but defenders would be even more disadvantaged. There's no longer any reason to fight before the keep is flagged, because if it flags and you die, you are really SOL, having to ride and risk gankers guarding the doors and hoping the enemy doesnt take the keep before you get back. And unless you are an organized raid who can do your own battle rezzes, there's no reason to risk fighting after the flag either, and plenty of people are begging for battle-rez nerfs too. So I expect people to settle in and fortify their inner keeps as much as they can...which is fun only if you like that sort of thing.

So, it might make for more fights in between objectives, but it would serious disadvantage defenders more than attackers.

Yes a keep siege is supposed to be fought with siege. Who would thought of that. Feel free to agressively defend. There is absolutely every reason to do it. Its just more risky. Aka, if you die it should mean something. Ironically the vast majority of people that aggressively defend and go out to fight people are the solo/small scale players.

Anw, im not sure what is ur whole point with offence being in advantage if you remove camps. I mean, you do realise that the very existence of camps puts offence in an even bigger advantage right? Attackers control the outside of the keep where you place the camps. Not defenders.

Currently you can place camps inside keep walls before its flagged, which become vulnerable if the enemy breaches the outer wall. Defenders can also set down camps outside the keep, though those are more vulnerable and must be defended as well. So its not like attackers get free reign.

Death certain does mean a penalty that gets worse on repeated deaths in a short time frame, just not as much of one as you want it to mean.

Xsorus

VaranisArano wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

Katahdin wrote: »

Forward camps are fine.
There is a cooldown on respawning on one a second time and a distance

Time stop is way stupider than forward camps imo

It’s a bloody group Rez if a five minute timer that anyone can use... the fact you don’t realize how powerful that is boggles my mind.

Anyone can use a camp, yeah.

Until it runs out of health
Until the enemy discovers it
As long as they aren't on a 5 minute timer
As long as its within range
As long as its down at the right time to be useful (often times, its too late)

Oh, it can be really powerful. It can also be quite limited. I've seen plenty of times where a camp changed the tide of a battle. I've seen plenty of times where a camp let people rez and run straight back into getting farmed. I've seen plenty of times where camps were an expensive waste of AP.

Everything you listed only applies to potatoes; it gives actual zerg groups another way to instantly get back to farming... zero punishment for dying... it’s catering to dumb sobs who screwed up and died.

pieratsos

VaranisArano wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

thankyourat wrote: »

Players would die and have to run back to the keep meaning there were a lot more small scrimmages in open fields and that's what's missing from eso right now. It's basically just 60v60 keep fights right now. And even though forward camps are popular I feel this won't change until they are removed

Have you played when forward camps were removed? The most typical scenario happening on a daily basis would be a huge crossword on top of Alessia Bridge, Chal milegate and sometimes Nikel milegate. Stale fights happening for hours with a side winning from time to time and pushing to the next objective until they get wiped for being too far away from the spawn.

I am not sure exactly where the removal of forward camps is supposed to favor small scrimmages in open fields. Unless what you mean by that is to gank people riding back to the bridge or milegates? Could you elaborate more?

zyk wrote: »

There are probably a lot of current players who didn't play during the period when Forward Camps were removed.

In today's game, groups aren't punished for bad decisions like they were then. Running deep in enemy territory took much more skill and focus. There was less of an 'omglol' mentality when making mistakes. Groups couldn't just kite indefinitely by dropping camps gratuitously. Good groups couldn't afford to carry bad players as easily.

Without forward camps, we would barely see anybody taking the decision to push deep in enemy territory to spread out the fight. Only on super rare occasions and from very specific groups we would see such events happening.

With offensive camps, it allows and encourages people to fight at different places, out of the emp ring.

I disagree entirely about groups not being punished enough when they do an effort to fight by themselves far away from their faction and any spawn point other than a camp. The problem is when people are able sneak camps while defending a keep, avoiding all kind of fights and running straight inside the inner postern to reinforce. A "Forward camp" used defensively. This tactic allows the fight to last forever and does not punish anybody resing at the camp. Those people can just safely wait inside with a massive amount of sieges until they are off cooldown to try another mindless push outside.

Removal of camps favors solo/small scale in terms of enabling fights in between keeps. A keep is UA and people die. They will naturally run back from the closest keep. Solo/small scale players know that and go in between those keeps to find small scale fights. Those fights could last a while, more people gather up from both alliances which potentially leads to a cool skirmish.

With camps there is no reason to go in between keeps, everyone stack in one keep which leads to an endless lag blob.

There's also no reason to aggressively defend a keep anymore, either. If you know you'll have to ride back and risk the enemy flipping the keep before you get back in, the only safe response is to fort up in the inner keep and pour oils and throw scattershot.

Attackers might be able to rez and come back for another try, but defenders would be even more disadvantaged. There's no longer any reason to fight before the keep is flagged, because if it flags and you die, you are really SOL, having to ride and risk gankers guarding the doors and hoping the enemy doesnt take the keep before you get back. And unless you are an organized raid who can do your own battle rezzes, there's no reason to risk fighting after the flag either, and plenty of people are begging for battle-rez nerfs too. So I expect people to settle in and fortify their inner keeps as much as they can...which is fun only if you like that sort of thing.

So, it might make for more fights in between objectives, but it would serious disadvantage defenders more than attackers.

Yes a keep siege is supposed to be fought with siege. Who would thought of that. Feel free to agressively defend. There is absolutely every reason to do it. Its just more risky. Aka, if you die it should mean something. Ironically the vast majority of people that aggressively defend and go out to fight people are the solo/small scale players.

Anw, im not sure what is ur whole point with offence being in advantage if you remove camps. I mean, you do realise that the very existence of camps puts offence in an even bigger advantage right? Attackers control the outside of the keep where you place the camps. Not defenders.

Currently you can place camps inside keep walls before its flagged, which become vulnerable if the enemy breaches the outer wall. Defenders can also set down camps outside the keep, though those are more vulnerable and must be defended as well. So its not like attackers get free reign.

Death certain does mean a penalty that gets worse on repeated deaths in a short time frame, just not as much of one as you want it to mean.

Without camps they don't have free reign either. Not sure why everyone keep insisting on this nonsense that keep fights will end before they start or whatever. We did play without camps and keep fights were fine.

Death has little to no penalty except for the people who die every 2 minutes. Every single day there is going to be a keep/outpost UA and the attackers will pour in and die instantly and instead of being punished they are instantly back to die again. Over and over and over again.


Feel free to kill attackers on their way to the keep btw if you like aggressive defending.

NBrookus

I think you are blaming forward camps for something they aren't guilty of. The tendency to blob up instead of spreading out has everything to do with outsized o-ticks plus sets (like Earthgore) and mechanics (like siege damage) which vastly favor numbers over skill. There's no reason NOT to stack 60+ people to take a barely defended keep.

A forward camp inside might mean the outnumbered defenders get a chance to hold the keep until reinforcements arrive, or just have a chance to get a few kills before being zerged.

pieratsos wrote: »

Removal of camps favors solo/small scale in terms of enabling fights in between keeps. A keep is UA and people die. They will naturally run back from the closest keep. Solo/small scale players know that and go in between those keeps to find small scale fights. Those fights could last a while, more people gather up from both alliances which potentially leads to a cool skirmish.

It's not like people have stopped fighting at milegates and alessia bridge.

frozywozy

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

thankyourat wrote: »

Players would die and have to run back to the keep meaning there were a lot more small scrimmages in open fields and that's what's missing from eso right now. It's basically just 60v60 keep fights right now. And even though forward camps are popular I feel this won't change until they are removed

Have you played when forward camps were removed? The most typical scenario happening on a daily basis would be a huge crossword on top of Alessia Bridge, Chal milegate and sometimes Nikel milegate. Stale fights happening for hours with a side winning from time to time and pushing to the next objective until they get wiped for being too far away from the spawn.

I am not sure exactly where the removal of forward camps is supposed to favor small scrimmages in open fields. Unless what you mean by that is to gank people riding back to the bridge or milegates? Could you elaborate more?

zyk wrote: »

There are probably a lot of current players who didn't play during the period when Forward Camps were removed.

In today's game, groups aren't punished for bad decisions like they were then. Running deep in enemy territory took much more skill and focus. There was less of an 'omglol' mentality when making mistakes. Groups couldn't just kite indefinitely by dropping camps gratuitously. Good groups couldn't afford to carry bad players as easily.

Without forward camps, we would barely see anybody taking the decision to push deep in enemy territory to spread out the fight. Only on super rare occasions and from very specific groups we would see such events happening.

With offensive camps, it allows and encourages people to fight at different places, out of the emp ring.

I disagree entirely about groups not being punished enough when they do an effort to fight by themselves far away from their faction and any spawn point other than a camp. The problem is when people are able sneak camps while defending a keep, avoiding all kind of fights and running straight inside the inner postern to reinforce. A "Forward camp" used defensively. This tactic allows the fight to last forever and does not punish anybody resing at the camp. Those people can just safely wait inside with a massive amount of sieges until they are off cooldown to try another mindless push outside.

Removal of camps favors solo/small scale in terms of enabling fights in between keeps. A keep is UA and people die. They will naturally run back from the closest keep. Solo/small scale players know that and go in between those keeps to find small scale fights. Those fights could last a while, more people gather up from both alliances which potentially leads to a cool skirmish.

With camps there is no reason to go in between keeps, everyone stack in one keep which leads to an endless lag blob.

I understand your point. With people being able to drop camps in the courtyard of a keep they want to defend, and attackers being able to drop a camp close to the keep outside of the tick range, they only have to ride there once and then they can use the camp, wait for the cooldown, push again, rez at the camp, rince and repeat. As a result there are less people riding from one objective to the other.

This being said, you also have to understand the point I explained in the post you quoted. When camps were removed, people would very rarely push deep in enemy territory to make their own fights. What I mean by that is attacking and taking keeps. Not simply capturing resources. With camps I have seen a drastic change in the way even casual groups / guilds will take the risk to get out of the emp ring and push outside of the transit line.

My solution to your problem would be to make it so you can only use forward camps offensively (as where their name comes from) and defenders should only be able to place a camp outside of a tick range of any objective. As a result, people defending would have to be very careful. No more stealth camp deploy to rez 12 players that ignore all kind of enemies and run straight inside the inner postern like if the doors could only be opened for defenders.

How is removing camps also removing ur ability to attack deep in enemy lines. Feel free to do it. Its still the same concept. You take it by surprise. The only difference is that if you die, well you simply wipe. Being able to rez over and over again after the entire group dies even tho u are deep in enemy territory doesnt make much sense to begin with.

Objectives are the issue that prety much forces everyone to fight in the emp ring.

It is not about what it changes for people already engaging deep in enemy territory. It is about encouraging groups and guilds who are not used to do it to commit to it and give it a try. Without camps, most casual players will stay on the transit line and avoid any kind of high risk / challenge as we have seen when camps were removed.

The map stays on a very stale state for hours straight, as I mentioned in my first post, with a huge cross sword on top of the bridge and the milegates. Until one faction makes a push and start dying when they get too far from their spawn.

pieratsos

frozywozy wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

thankyourat wrote: »

Players would die and have to run back to the keep meaning there were a lot more small scrimmages in open fields and that's what's missing from eso right now. It's basically just 60v60 keep fights right now. And even though forward camps are popular I feel this won't change until they are removed

Have you played when forward camps were removed? The most typical scenario happening on a daily basis would be a huge crossword on top of Alessia Bridge, Chal milegate and sometimes Nikel milegate. Stale fights happening for hours with a side winning from time to time and pushing to the next objective until they get wiped for being too far away from the spawn.

I am not sure exactly where the removal of forward camps is supposed to favor small scrimmages in open fields. Unless what you mean by that is to gank people riding back to the bridge or milegates? Could you elaborate more?

zyk wrote: »

There are probably a lot of current players who didn't play during the period when Forward Camps were removed.

In today's game, groups aren't punished for bad decisions like they were then. Running deep in enemy territory took much more skill and focus. There was less of an 'omglol' mentality when making mistakes. Groups couldn't just kite indefinitely by dropping camps gratuitously. Good groups couldn't afford to carry bad players as easily.

Without forward camps, we would barely see anybody taking the decision to push deep in enemy territory to spread out the fight. Only on super rare occasions and from very specific groups we would see such events happening.

With offensive camps, it allows and encourages people to fight at different places, out of the emp ring.

I disagree entirely about groups not being punished enough when they do an effort to fight by themselves far away from their faction and any spawn point other than a camp. The problem is when people are able sneak camps while defending a keep, avoiding all kind of fights and running straight inside the inner postern to reinforce. A "Forward camp" used defensively. This tactic allows the fight to last forever and does not punish anybody resing at the camp. Those people can just safely wait inside with a massive amount of sieges until they are off cooldown to try another mindless push outside.

Removal of camps favors solo/small scale in terms of enabling fights in between keeps. A keep is UA and people die. They will naturally run back from the closest keep. Solo/small scale players know that and go in between those keeps to find small scale fights. Those fights could last a while, more people gather up from both alliances which potentially leads to a cool skirmish.

With camps there is no reason to go in between keeps, everyone stack in one keep which leads to an endless lag blob.

I understand your point. With people being able to drop camps in the courtyard of a keep they want to defend, and attackers being able to drop a camp close to the keep outside of the tick range, they only have to ride there once and then they can use the camp, wait for the cooldown, push again, rez at the camp, rince and repeat. As a result there are less people riding from one objective to the other.

This being said, you also have to understand the point I explained in the post you quoted. When camps were removed, people would very rarely push deep in enemy territory to make their own fights. What I mean by that is attacking and taking keeps. Not simply capturing resources. With camps I have seen a drastic change in the way even casual groups / guilds will take the risk to get out of the emp ring and push outside of the transit line.

My solution to your problem would be to make it so you can only use forward camps offensively (as where their name comes from) and defenders should only be able to place a camp outside of a tick range of any objective. As a result, people defending would have to be very careful. No more stealth camp deploy to rez 12 players that ignore all kind of enemies and run straight inside the inner postern like if the doors could only be opened for defenders.

How is removing camps also removing ur ability to attack deep in enemy lines. Feel free to do it. Its still the same concept. You take it by surprise. The only difference is that if you die, well you simply wipe. Being able to rez over and over again after the entire group dies even tho u are deep in enemy territory doesnt make much sense to begin with.

Objectives are the issue that prety much forces everyone to fight in the emp ring.

It is not about what it changes for people already engaging deep in enemy territory. It is about encouraging groups and guilds who are not used to do it to commit to it and give it a try. Without camps, most casual players will stay on the transit line and avoid any kind of high risk / challenge as we have seen when camps were removed.

The map stays on a very stale state for hours straight, as I mentioned in my first post, with a huge cross sword on top of the bridge and the milegates. Until one faction makes a push and start dying when they get too far from their spawn.

But that's an issue with the objectives which doesn't encourage people to go off the transit line.

Why would a casual group of players looking to fight other people go deep in enemy territory to take an empty keep.

Camps or no camps doesn't change that and if ur solution to that is give people the ability to just rez over and over again no matter how many times they die well we won't agree on that. I don't like band aid solutions fixing one problem and creating other problems.

And please now with camps solving the issue of stale maps. Is this a joke? Camps literally enable stale maps. That's the whole point of asking for the removal camps. To enable fights outside of a couple of keeps that are being sieged for hours cause every can constantly rez at camps.

pieratsos

NBrookus wrote: »

I think you are blaming forward camps for something they aren't guilty of. The tendency to blob up instead of spreading out has everything to do with outsized o-ticks plus sets (like Earthgore) and mechanics (like siege damage) which vastly favor numbers over skill. There's no reason NOT to stack 60+ people to take a barely defended keep.

A forward camp inside might mean the outnumbered defenders get a chance to hold the keep until reinforcements arrive, or just have a chance to get a few kills before being zerged.

pieratsos wrote: »

Removal of camps favors solo/small scale in terms of enabling fights in between keeps. A keep is UA and people die. They will naturally run back from the closest keep. Solo/small scale players know that and go in between those keeps to find small scale fights. Those fights could last a while, more people gather up from both alliances which potentially leads to a cool skirmish.

It's not like people have stopped fighting at milegates and alessia bridge.

Milegates and bridge are completely irrelevant. Their position and structure is what makes them places to find a fight. People go there to find a fight because it's fun to fight there. And if we are being honest even those places were a lot more busy before camps.

What I'm talking about is the objectives and how the system works in general creating fights in multiple places.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

thankyourat wrote: »

Players would die and have to run back to the keep meaning there were a lot more small scrimmages in open fields and that's what's missing from eso right now. It's basically just 60v60 keep fights right now. And even though forward camps are popular I feel this won't change until they are removed

Have you played when forward camps were removed? The most typical scenario happening on a daily basis would be a huge crossword on top of Alessia Bridge, Chal milegate and sometimes Nikel milegate. Stale fights happening for hours with a side winning from time to time and pushing to the next objective until they get wiped for being too far away from the spawn.

I am not sure exactly where the removal of forward camps is supposed to favor small scrimmages in open fields. Unless what you mean by that is to gank people riding back to the bridge or milegates? Could you elaborate more?

zyk wrote: »

There are probably a lot of current players who didn't play during the period when Forward Camps were removed.

In today's game, groups aren't punished for bad decisions like they were then. Running deep in enemy territory took much more skill and focus. There was less of an 'omglol' mentality when making mistakes. Groups couldn't just kite indefinitely by dropping camps gratuitously. Good groups couldn't afford to carry bad players as easily.

Without forward camps, we would barely see anybody taking the decision to push deep in enemy territory to spread out the fight. Only on super rare occasions and from very specific groups we would see such events happening.

With offensive camps, it allows and encourages people to fight at different places, out of the emp ring.

I disagree entirely about groups not being punished enough when they do an effort to fight by themselves far away from their faction and any spawn point other than a camp. The problem is when people are able sneak camps while defending a keep, avoiding all kind of fights and running straight inside the inner postern to reinforce. A "Forward camp" used defensively. This tactic allows the fight to last forever and does not punish anybody resing at the camp. Those people can just safely wait inside with a massive amount of sieges until they are off cooldown to try another mindless push outside.

Removal of camps favors solo/small scale in terms of enabling fights in between keeps. A keep is UA and people die. They will naturally run back from the closest keep. Solo/small scale players know that and go in between those keeps to find small scale fights. Those fights could last a while, more people gather up from both alliances which potentially leads to a cool skirmish.

With camps there is no reason to go in between keeps, everyone stack in one keep which leads to an endless lag blob.

I understand your point. With people being able to drop camps in the courtyard of a keep they want to defend, and attackers being able to drop a camp close to the keep outside of the tick range, they only have to ride there once and then they can use the camp, wait for the cooldown, push again, rez at the camp, rince and repeat. As a result there are less people riding from one objective to the other.

This being said, you also have to understand the point I explained in the post you quoted. When camps were removed, people would very rarely push deep in enemy territory to make their own fights. What I mean by that is attacking and taking keeps. Not simply capturing resources. With camps I have seen a drastic change in the way even casual groups / guilds will take the risk to get out of the emp ring and push outside of the transit line.

My solution to your problem would be to make it so you can only use forward camps offensively (as where their name comes from) and defenders should only be able to place a camp outside of a tick range of any objective. As a result, people defending would have to be very careful. No more stealth camp deploy to rez 12 players that ignore all kind of enemies and run straight inside the inner postern like if the doors could only be opened for defenders.

How is removing camps also removing ur ability to attack deep in enemy lines. Feel free to do it. Its still the same concept. You take it by surprise. The only difference is that if you die, well you simply wipe. Being able to rez over and over again after the entire group dies even tho u are deep in enemy territory doesnt make much sense to begin with.

Objectives are the issue that prety much forces everyone to fight in the emp ring.

It is not about what it changes for people already engaging deep in enemy territory. It is about encouraging groups and guilds who are not used to do it to commit to it and give it a try. Without camps, most casual players will stay on the transit line and avoid any kind of high risk / challenge as we have seen when camps were removed.

The map stays on a very stale state for hours straight, as I mentioned in my first post, with a huge cross sword on top of the bridge and the milegates. Until one faction makes a push and start dying when they get too far from their spawn.

But that's an issue with the objectives which doesn't encourage people to go off the transit line.

Why would a casual group of players looking to fight other people go deep in enemy territory to take an empty keep.

Camps or no camps doesn't change that and if ur solution to that is give people the ability to just rez over and over again no matter how many times they die well we won't agree on that. I don't like band aid solutions fixing one problem and creating other problems.

And please now with camps solving the issue of stale maps. Is this a joke? Camps literally enable stale maps. That's the whole point of asking for the removal camps. To enable fights outside of a couple of keeps that are being sieged for hours cause every can constantly rez at camps.

The reason people use to spread out was for map control because winning the campaign meant something. If a push somewhere failed or you got ganked going to the keep or one of 100 things you could look at your map and see 4-5 different camps to choose from.

This meant you could try go help at any location you wanted and if your back line keeps got flagged you could death port to go defend meaning that back line keep takes weren't just a matter of siege race.

Now admittedly they have changed the game quite a lot since those times. It may be too difficult with the current siege systems to allow resing at flagged keeps from anywhere like this but I stand by the fact that camps used to bring fun and interesting situations.

I also remember camping behind the enemy gate at the dummy spot and stealing scrolls. Was a lot of fun and provided some panic to the faction to go defend etc

pieratsos

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

thankyourat wrote: »

Players would die and have to run back to the keep meaning there were a lot more small scrimmages in open fields and that's what's missing from eso right now. It's basically just 60v60 keep fights right now. And even though forward camps are popular I feel this won't change until they are removed

Have you played when forward camps were removed? The most typical scenario happening on a daily basis would be a huge crossword on top of Alessia Bridge, Chal milegate and sometimes Nikel milegate. Stale fights happening for hours with a side winning from time to time and pushing to the next objective until they get wiped for being too far away from the spawn.

I am not sure exactly where the removal of forward camps is supposed to favor small scrimmages in open fields. Unless what you mean by that is to gank people riding back to the bridge or milegates? Could you elaborate more?

zyk wrote: »

There are probably a lot of current players who didn't play during the period when Forward Camps were removed.

In today's game, groups aren't punished for bad decisions like they were then. Running deep in enemy territory took much more skill and focus. There was less of an 'omglol' mentality when making mistakes. Groups couldn't just kite indefinitely by dropping camps gratuitously. Good groups couldn't afford to carry bad players as easily.

Without forward camps, we would barely see anybody taking the decision to push deep in enemy territory to spread out the fight. Only on super rare occasions and from very specific groups we would see such events happening.

With offensive camps, it allows and encourages people to fight at different places, out of the emp ring.

I disagree entirely about groups not being punished enough when they do an effort to fight by themselves far away from their faction and any spawn point other than a camp. The problem is when people are able sneak camps while defending a keep, avoiding all kind of fights and running straight inside the inner postern to reinforce. A "Forward camp" used defensively. This tactic allows the fight to last forever and does not punish anybody resing at the camp. Those people can just safely wait inside with a massive amount of sieges until they are off cooldown to try another mindless push outside.

Removal of camps favors solo/small scale in terms of enabling fights in between keeps. A keep is UA and people die. They will naturally run back from the closest keep. Solo/small scale players know that and go in between those keeps to find small scale fights. Those fights could last a while, more people gather up from both alliances which potentially leads to a cool skirmish.

With camps there is no reason to go in between keeps, everyone stack in one keep which leads to an endless lag blob.

I understand your point. With people being able to drop camps in the courtyard of a keep they want to defend, and attackers being able to drop a camp close to the keep outside of the tick range, they only have to ride there once and then they can use the camp, wait for the cooldown, push again, rez at the camp, rince and repeat. As a result there are less people riding from one objective to the other.

This being said, you also have to understand the point I explained in the post you quoted. When camps were removed, people would very rarely push deep in enemy territory to make their own fights. What I mean by that is attacking and taking keeps. Not simply capturing resources. With camps I have seen a drastic change in the way even casual groups / guilds will take the risk to get out of the emp ring and push outside of the transit line.

My solution to your problem would be to make it so you can only use forward camps offensively (as where their name comes from) and defenders should only be able to place a camp outside of a tick range of any objective. As a result, people defending would have to be very careful. No more stealth camp deploy to rez 12 players that ignore all kind of enemies and run straight inside the inner postern like if the doors could only be opened for defenders.

How is removing camps also removing ur ability to attack deep in enemy lines. Feel free to do it. Its still the same concept. You take it by surprise. The only difference is that if you die, well you simply wipe. Being able to rez over and over again after the entire group dies even tho u are deep in enemy territory doesnt make much sense to begin with.

Objectives are the issue that prety much forces everyone to fight in the emp ring.

It is not about what it changes for people already engaging deep in enemy territory. It is about encouraging groups and guilds who are not used to do it to commit to it and give it a try. Without camps, most casual players will stay on the transit line and avoid any kind of high risk / challenge as we have seen when camps were removed.

The map stays on a very stale state for hours straight, as I mentioned in my first post, with a huge cross sword on top of the bridge and the milegates. Until one faction makes a push and start dying when they get too far from their spawn.

But that's an issue with the objectives which doesn't encourage people to go off the transit line.

Why would a casual group of players looking to fight other people go deep in enemy territory to take an empty keep.

Camps or no camps doesn't change that and if ur solution to that is give people the ability to just rez over and over again no matter how many times they die well we won't agree on that. I don't like band aid solutions fixing one problem and creating other problems.

And please now with camps solving the issue of stale maps. Is this a joke? Camps literally enable stale maps. That's the whole point of asking for the removal camps. To enable fights outside of a couple of keeps that are being sieged for hours cause every can constantly rez at camps.

The reason people use to spread out was for map control because winning the campaign meant something. If a push somewhere failed or you got ganked going to the keep or one of 100 things you could look at your map and see 4-5 different camps to choose from.

This meant you could try go help at any location you wanted and if your back line keeps got flagged you could death port to go defend meaning that back line keep takes weren't just a matter of siege race.

Now admittedly they have changed the game quite a lot since those times. It may be too difficult with the current siege systems to allow resing at flagged keeps from anywhere like this but I stand by the fact that camps used to bring fun and interesting situations.

I also remember camping behind the enemy gate at the dummy spot and stealing scrolls. Was a lot of fun and provided some panic to the faction to go defend etc

Im not saying that just removing camps will suddenly fix PVP. It wont. I dont think that anything they do will magically fix this whole spread out thing cause the map is simply too large for the current population. However camps at their current state only make things worse. The entire map is literally dead. Even the concept of reinforcements doesnt exist anymore cause you only need to go once at the keep and thats it. You just rez over and over again.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

pieratsos wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

thankyourat wrote: »

Players would die and have to run back to the keep meaning there were a lot more small scrimmages in open fields and that's what's missing from eso right now. It's basically just 60v60 keep fights right now. And even though forward camps are popular I feel this won't change until they are removed

Have you played when forward camps were removed? The most typical scenario happening on a daily basis would be a huge crossword on top of Alessia Bridge, Chal milegate and sometimes Nikel milegate. Stale fights happening for hours with a side winning from time to time and pushing to the next objective until they get wiped for being too far away from the spawn.

I am not sure exactly where the removal of forward camps is supposed to favor small scrimmages in open fields. Unless what you mean by that is to gank people riding back to the bridge or milegates? Could you elaborate more?

zyk wrote: »

There are probably a lot of current players who didn't play during the period when Forward Camps were removed.

In today's game, groups aren't punished for bad decisions like they were then. Running deep in enemy territory took much more skill and focus. There was less of an 'omglol' mentality when making mistakes. Groups couldn't just kite indefinitely by dropping camps gratuitously. Good groups couldn't afford to carry bad players as easily.

Without forward camps, we would barely see anybody taking the decision to push deep in enemy territory to spread out the fight. Only on super rare occasions and from very specific groups we would see such events happening.

With offensive camps, it allows and encourages people to fight at different places, out of the emp ring.

I disagree entirely about groups not being punished enough when they do an effort to fight by themselves far away from their faction and any spawn point other than a camp. The problem is when people are able sneak camps while defending a keep, avoiding all kind of fights and running straight inside the inner postern to reinforce. A "Forward camp" used defensively. This tactic allows the fight to last forever and does not punish anybody resing at the camp. Those people can just safely wait inside with a massive amount of sieges until they are off cooldown to try another mindless push outside.

Removal of camps favors solo/small scale in terms of enabling fights in between keeps. A keep is UA and people die. They will naturally run back from the closest keep. Solo/small scale players know that and go in between those keeps to find small scale fights. Those fights could last a while, more people gather up from both alliances which potentially leads to a cool skirmish.

With camps there is no reason to go in between keeps, everyone stack in one keep which leads to an endless lag blob.

I understand your point. With people being able to drop camps in the courtyard of a keep they want to defend, and attackers being able to drop a camp close to the keep outside of the tick range, they only have to ride there once and then they can use the camp, wait for the cooldown, push again, rez at the camp, rince and repeat. As a result there are less people riding from one objective to the other.

This being said, you also have to understand the point I explained in the post you quoted. When camps were removed, people would very rarely push deep in enemy territory to make their own fights. What I mean by that is attacking and taking keeps. Not simply capturing resources. With camps I have seen a drastic change in the way even casual groups / guilds will take the risk to get out of the emp ring and push outside of the transit line.

My solution to your problem would be to make it so you can only use forward camps offensively (as where their name comes from) and defenders should only be able to place a camp outside of a tick range of any objective. As a result, people defending would have to be very careful. No more stealth camp deploy to rez 12 players that ignore all kind of enemies and run straight inside the inner postern like if the doors could only be opened for defenders.

How is removing camps also removing ur ability to attack deep in enemy lines. Feel free to do it. Its still the same concept. You take it by surprise. The only difference is that if you die, well you simply wipe. Being able to rez over and over again after the entire group dies even tho u are deep in enemy territory doesnt make much sense to begin with.

Objectives are the issue that prety much forces everyone to fight in the emp ring.

It is not about what it changes for people already engaging deep in enemy territory. It is about encouraging groups and guilds who are not used to do it to commit to it and give it a try. Without camps, most casual players will stay on the transit line and avoid any kind of high risk / challenge as we have seen when camps were removed.

The map stays on a very stale state for hours straight, as I mentioned in my first post, with a huge cross sword on top of the bridge and the milegates. Until one faction makes a push and start dying when they get too far from their spawn.

But that's an issue with the objectives which doesn't encourage people to go off the transit line.

Why would a casual group of players looking to fight other people go deep in enemy territory to take an empty keep.

Camps or no camps doesn't change that and if ur solution to that is give people the ability to just rez over and over again no matter how many times they die well we won't agree on that. I don't like band aid solutions fixing one problem and creating other problems.

And please now with camps solving the issue of stale maps. Is this a joke? Camps literally enable stale maps. That's the whole point of asking for the removal camps. To enable fights outside of a couple of keeps that are being sieged for hours cause every can constantly rez at camps.

The reason people use to spread out was for map control because winning the campaign meant something. If a push somewhere failed or you got ganked going to the keep or one of 100 things you could look at your map and see 4-5 different camps to choose from.

This meant you could try go help at any location you wanted and if your back line keeps got flagged you could death port to go defend meaning that back line keep takes weren't just a matter of siege race.

Now admittedly they have changed the game quite a lot since those times. It may be too difficult with the current siege systems to allow resing at flagged keeps from anywhere like this but I stand by the fact that camps used to bring fun and interesting situations.

I also remember camping behind the enemy gate at the dummy spot and stealing scrolls. Was a lot of fun and provided some panic to the faction to go defend etc

Im not saying that just removing camps will suddenly fix PVP. It wont. I dont think that anything they do will magically fix this whole spread out thing cause the map is simply too large for the current population. However camps at their current state only make things worse. The entire map is literally dead. Even the concept of reinforcements doesnt exist anymore cause you only need to go once at the keep and thats it. You just rez over and over again.

So you prefer running between sej and brk constantly and bleakers and chal with no other fights on the map and no possibility to take either keep unless vastly outnumbering?

VaranisArano

pieratsos wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

thankyourat wrote: »

Players would die and have to run back to the keep meaning there were a lot more small scrimmages in open fields and that's what's missing from eso right now. It's basically just 60v60 keep fights right now. And even though forward camps are popular I feel this won't change until they are removed

Have you played when forward camps were removed? The most typical scenario happening on a daily basis would be a huge crossword on top of Alessia Bridge, Chal milegate and sometimes Nikel milegate. Stale fights happening for hours with a side winning from time to time and pushing to the next objective until they get wiped for being too far away from the spawn.

I am not sure exactly where the removal of forward camps is supposed to favor small scrimmages in open fields. Unless what you mean by that is to gank people riding back to the bridge or milegates? Could you elaborate more?

zyk wrote: »

There are probably a lot of current players who didn't play during the period when Forward Camps were removed.

In today's game, groups aren't punished for bad decisions like they were then. Running deep in enemy territory took much more skill and focus. There was less of an 'omglol' mentality when making mistakes. Groups couldn't just kite indefinitely by dropping camps gratuitously. Good groups couldn't afford to carry bad players as easily.

Without forward camps, we would barely see anybody taking the decision to push deep in enemy territory to spread out the fight. Only on super rare occasions and from very specific groups we would see such events happening.

With offensive camps, it allows and encourages people to fight at different places, out of the emp ring.

I disagree entirely about groups not being punished enough when they do an effort to fight by themselves far away from their faction and any spawn point other than a camp. The problem is when people are able sneak camps while defending a keep, avoiding all kind of fights and running straight inside the inner postern to reinforce. A "Forward camp" used defensively. This tactic allows the fight to last forever and does not punish anybody resing at the camp. Those people can just safely wait inside with a massive amount of sieges until they are off cooldown to try another mindless push outside.

Removal of camps favors solo/small scale in terms of enabling fights in between keeps. A keep is UA and people die. They will naturally run back from the closest keep. Solo/small scale players know that and go in between those keeps to find small scale fights. Those fights could last a while, more people gather up from both alliances which potentially leads to a cool skirmish.

With camps there is no reason to go in between keeps, everyone stack in one keep which leads to an endless lag blob.

I understand your point. With people being able to drop camps in the courtyard of a keep they want to defend, and attackers being able to drop a camp close to the keep outside of the tick range, they only have to ride there once and then they can use the camp, wait for the cooldown, push again, rez at the camp, rince and repeat. As a result there are less people riding from one objective to the other.

This being said, you also have to understand the point I explained in the post you quoted. When camps were removed, people would very rarely push deep in enemy territory to make their own fights. What I mean by that is attacking and taking keeps. Not simply capturing resources. With camps I have seen a drastic change in the way even casual groups / guilds will take the risk to get out of the emp ring and push outside of the transit line.

My solution to your problem would be to make it so you can only use forward camps offensively (as where their name comes from) and defenders should only be able to place a camp outside of a tick range of any objective. As a result, people defending would have to be very careful. No more stealth camp deploy to rez 12 players that ignore all kind of enemies and run straight inside the inner postern like if the doors could only be opened for defenders.

How is removing camps also removing ur ability to attack deep in enemy lines. Feel free to do it. Its still the same concept. You take it by surprise. The only difference is that if you die, well you simply wipe. Being able to rez over and over again after the entire group dies even tho u are deep in enemy territory doesnt make much sense to begin with.

Objectives are the issue that prety much forces everyone to fight in the emp ring.

It is not about what it changes for people already engaging deep in enemy territory. It is about encouraging groups and guilds who are not used to do it to commit to it and give it a try. Without camps, most casual players will stay on the transit line and avoid any kind of high risk / challenge as we have seen when camps were removed.

The map stays on a very stale state for hours straight, as I mentioned in my first post, with a huge cross sword on top of the bridge and the milegates. Until one faction makes a push and start dying when they get too far from their spawn.

But that's an issue with the objectives which doesn't encourage people to go off the transit line.

Why would a casual group of players looking to fight other people go deep in enemy territory to take an empty keep.

Camps or no camps doesn't change that and if ur solution to that is give people the ability to just rez over and over again no matter how many times they die well we won't agree on that. I don't like band aid solutions fixing one problem and creating other problems.

And please now with camps solving the issue of stale maps. Is this a joke? Camps literally enable stale maps. That's the whole point of asking for the removal camps. To enable fights outside of a couple of keeps that are being sieged for hours cause every can constantly rez at camps.

The reason people use to spread out was for map control because winning the campaign meant something. If a push somewhere failed or you got ganked going to the keep or one of 100 things you could look at your map and see 4-5 different camps to choose from.

This meant you could try go help at any location you wanted and if your back line keeps got flagged you could death port to go defend meaning that back line keep takes weren't just a matter of siege race.

Now admittedly they have changed the game quite a lot since those times. It may be too difficult with the current siege systems to allow resing at flagged keeps from anywhere like this but I stand by the fact that camps used to bring fun and interesting situations.

I also remember camping behind the enemy gate at the dummy spot and stealing scrolls. Was a lot of fun and provided some panic to the faction to go defend etc

Im not saying that just removing camps will suddenly fix PVP. It wont. I dont think that anything they do will magically fix this whole spread out thing cause the map is simply too large for the current population. However camps at their current state only make things worse. The entire map is literally dead. Even the concept of reinforcements doesnt exist anymore cause you only need to go once at the keep and thats it. You just rez over and over again.

The only thing that will suddenly fix PVP and bring back the population is for ZOS to fix the lag and performance issues.

Sacredx

All roads lead to lag. It's the core issue with the game causing gameplay chaos during "peak" hours. No lag issues on SEA time so some of us are unaffected, but good luck to the NA people to get it solved!

The Uninvited

Oh please, half of the time you can't even spawn at a camp because it's already on fire.

pieratsos

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

thankyourat wrote: »

Players would die and have to run back to the keep meaning there were a lot more small scrimmages in open fields and that's what's missing from eso right now. It's basically just 60v60 keep fights right now. And even though forward camps are popular I feel this won't change until they are removed

Have you played when forward camps were removed? The most typical scenario happening on a daily basis would be a huge crossword on top of Alessia Bridge, Chal milegate and sometimes Nikel milegate. Stale fights happening for hours with a side winning from time to time and pushing to the next objective until they get wiped for being too far away from the spawn.

I am not sure exactly where the removal of forward camps is supposed to favor small scrimmages in open fields. Unless what you mean by that is to gank people riding back to the bridge or milegates? Could you elaborate more?

zyk wrote: »

There are probably a lot of current players who didn't play during the period when Forward Camps were removed.

In today's game, groups aren't punished for bad decisions like they were then. Running deep in enemy territory took much more skill and focus. There was less of an 'omglol' mentality when making mistakes. Groups couldn't just kite indefinitely by dropping camps gratuitously. Good groups couldn't afford to carry bad players as easily.

Without forward camps, we would barely see anybody taking the decision to push deep in enemy territory to spread out the fight. Only on super rare occasions and from very specific groups we would see such events happening.

With offensive camps, it allows and encourages people to fight at different places, out of the emp ring.

I disagree entirely about groups not being punished enough when they do an effort to fight by themselves far away from their faction and any spawn point other than a camp. The problem is when people are able sneak camps while defending a keep, avoiding all kind of fights and running straight inside the inner postern to reinforce. A "Forward camp" used defensively. This tactic allows the fight to last forever and does not punish anybody resing at the camp. Those people can just safely wait inside with a massive amount of sieges until they are off cooldown to try another mindless push outside.

Removal of camps favors solo/small scale in terms of enabling fights in between keeps. A keep is UA and people die. They will naturally run back from the closest keep. Solo/small scale players know that and go in between those keeps to find small scale fights. Those fights could last a while, more people gather up from both alliances which potentially leads to a cool skirmish.

With camps there is no reason to go in between keeps, everyone stack in one keep which leads to an endless lag blob.

I understand your point. With people being able to drop camps in the courtyard of a keep they want to defend, and attackers being able to drop a camp close to the keep outside of the tick range, they only have to ride there once and then they can use the camp, wait for the cooldown, push again, rez at the camp, rince and repeat. As a result there are less people riding from one objective to the other.

This being said, you also have to understand the point I explained in the post you quoted. When camps were removed, people would very rarely push deep in enemy territory to make their own fights. What I mean by that is attacking and taking keeps. Not simply capturing resources. With camps I have seen a drastic change in the way even casual groups / guilds will take the risk to get out of the emp ring and push outside of the transit line.

My solution to your problem would be to make it so you can only use forward camps offensively (as where their name comes from) and defenders should only be able to place a camp outside of a tick range of any objective. As a result, people defending would have to be very careful. No more stealth camp deploy to rez 12 players that ignore all kind of enemies and run straight inside the inner postern like if the doors could only be opened for defenders.

How is removing camps also removing ur ability to attack deep in enemy lines. Feel free to do it. Its still the same concept. You take it by surprise. The only difference is that if you die, well you simply wipe. Being able to rez over and over again after the entire group dies even tho u are deep in enemy territory doesnt make much sense to begin with.

Objectives are the issue that prety much forces everyone to fight in the emp ring.

It is not about what it changes for people already engaging deep in enemy territory. It is about encouraging groups and guilds who are not used to do it to commit to it and give it a try. Without camps, most casual players will stay on the transit line and avoid any kind of high risk / challenge as we have seen when camps were removed.

The map stays on a very stale state for hours straight, as I mentioned in my first post, with a huge cross sword on top of the bridge and the milegates. Until one faction makes a push and start dying when they get too far from their spawn.

But that's an issue with the objectives which doesn't encourage people to go off the transit line.

Why would a casual group of players looking to fight other people go deep in enemy territory to take an empty keep.

Camps or no camps doesn't change that and if ur solution to that is give people the ability to just rez over and over again no matter how many times they die well we won't agree on that. I don't like band aid solutions fixing one problem and creating other problems.

And please now with camps solving the issue of stale maps. Is this a joke? Camps literally enable stale maps. That's the whole point of asking for the removal camps. To enable fights outside of a couple of keeps that are being sieged for hours cause every can constantly rez at camps.

The reason people use to spread out was for map control because winning the campaign meant something. If a push somewhere failed or you got ganked going to the keep or one of 100 things you could look at your map and see 4-5 different camps to choose from.

This meant you could try go help at any location you wanted and if your back line keeps got flagged you could death port to go defend meaning that back line keep takes weren't just a matter of siege race.

Now admittedly they have changed the game quite a lot since those times. It may be too difficult with the current siege systems to allow resing at flagged keeps from anywhere like this but I stand by the fact that camps used to bring fun and interesting situations.

I also remember camping behind the enemy gate at the dummy spot and stealing scrolls. Was a lot of fun and provided some panic to the faction to go defend etc

Im not saying that just removing camps will suddenly fix PVP. It wont. I dont think that anything they do will magically fix this whole spread out thing cause the map is simply too large for the current population. However camps at their current state only make things worse. The entire map is literally dead. Even the concept of reinforcements doesnt exist anymore cause you only need to go once at the keep and thats it. You just rez over and over again.

So you prefer running between sej and brk constantly and bleakers and chal with no other fights on the map and no possibility to take either keep unless vastly outnumbering?

I prefer to open my map and have a few options instead of just two moshpits at a couple of keeps with 98734252 people cause everyone can just rez over and over again. Thats the idea behind removing camps or at least changing their current iteration. To enable the concept of reinforcements and therefore fights in between keeps cause you cant just simply rez over and over at a camp.

pieratsos

VaranisArano wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

thankyourat wrote: »

Players would die and have to run back to the keep meaning there were a lot more small scrimmages in open fields and that's what's missing from eso right now. It's basically just 60v60 keep fights right now. And even though forward camps are popular I feel this won't change until they are removed

Have you played when forward camps were removed? The most typical scenario happening on a daily basis would be a huge crossword on top of Alessia Bridge, Chal milegate and sometimes Nikel milegate. Stale fights happening for hours with a side winning from time to time and pushing to the next objective until they get wiped for being too far away from the spawn.

I am not sure exactly where the removal of forward camps is supposed to favor small scrimmages in open fields. Unless what you mean by that is to gank people riding back to the bridge or milegates? Could you elaborate more?

zyk wrote: »

There are probably a lot of current players who didn't play during the period when Forward Camps were removed.

In today's game, groups aren't punished for bad decisions like they were then. Running deep in enemy territory took much more skill and focus. There was less of an 'omglol' mentality when making mistakes. Groups couldn't just kite indefinitely by dropping camps gratuitously. Good groups couldn't afford to carry bad players as easily.

Without forward camps, we would barely see anybody taking the decision to push deep in enemy territory to spread out the fight. Only on super rare occasions and from very specific groups we would see such events happening.

With offensive camps, it allows and encourages people to fight at different places, out of the emp ring.

I disagree entirely about groups not being punished enough when they do an effort to fight by themselves far away from their faction and any spawn point other than a camp. The problem is when people are able sneak camps while defending a keep, avoiding all kind of fights and running straight inside the inner postern to reinforce. A "Forward camp" used defensively. This tactic allows the fight to last forever and does not punish anybody resing at the camp. Those people can just safely wait inside with a massive amount of sieges until they are off cooldown to try another mindless push outside.

Removal of camps favors solo/small scale in terms of enabling fights in between keeps. A keep is UA and people die. They will naturally run back from the closest keep. Solo/small scale players know that and go in between those keeps to find small scale fights. Those fights could last a while, more people gather up from both alliances which potentially leads to a cool skirmish.

With camps there is no reason to go in between keeps, everyone stack in one keep which leads to an endless lag blob.

I understand your point. With people being able to drop camps in the courtyard of a keep they want to defend, and attackers being able to drop a camp close to the keep outside of the tick range, they only have to ride there once and then they can use the camp, wait for the cooldown, push again, rez at the camp, rince and repeat. As a result there are less people riding from one objective to the other.

This being said, you also have to understand the point I explained in the post you quoted. When camps were removed, people would very rarely push deep in enemy territory to make their own fights. What I mean by that is attacking and taking keeps. Not simply capturing resources. With camps I have seen a drastic change in the way even casual groups / guilds will take the risk to get out of the emp ring and push outside of the transit line.

My solution to your problem would be to make it so you can only use forward camps offensively (as where their name comes from) and defenders should only be able to place a camp outside of a tick range of any objective. As a result, people defending would have to be very careful. No more stealth camp deploy to rez 12 players that ignore all kind of enemies and run straight inside the inner postern like if the doors could only be opened for defenders.

How is removing camps also removing ur ability to attack deep in enemy lines. Feel free to do it. Its still the same concept. You take it by surprise. The only difference is that if you die, well you simply wipe. Being able to rez over and over again after the entire group dies even tho u are deep in enemy territory doesnt make much sense to begin with.

Objectives are the issue that prety much forces everyone to fight in the emp ring.

It is not about what it changes for people already engaging deep in enemy territory. It is about encouraging groups and guilds who are not used to do it to commit to it and give it a try. Without camps, most casual players will stay on the transit line and avoid any kind of high risk / challenge as we have seen when camps were removed.

The map stays on a very stale state for hours straight, as I mentioned in my first post, with a huge cross sword on top of the bridge and the milegates. Until one faction makes a push and start dying when they get too far from their spawn.

But that's an issue with the objectives which doesn't encourage people to go off the transit line.

Why would a casual group of players looking to fight other people go deep in enemy territory to take an empty keep.

Camps or no camps doesn't change that and if ur solution to that is give people the ability to just rez over and over again no matter how many times they die well we won't agree on that. I don't like band aid solutions fixing one problem and creating other problems.

And please now with camps solving the issue of stale maps. Is this a joke? Camps literally enable stale maps. That's the whole point of asking for the removal camps. To enable fights outside of a couple of keeps that are being sieged for hours cause every can constantly rez at camps.

The reason people use to spread out was for map control because winning the campaign meant something. If a push somewhere failed or you got ganked going to the keep or one of 100 things you could look at your map and see 4-5 different camps to choose from.

This meant you could try go help at any location you wanted and if your back line keeps got flagged you could death port to go defend meaning that back line keep takes weren't just a matter of siege race.

Now admittedly they have changed the game quite a lot since those times. It may be too difficult with the current siege systems to allow resing at flagged keeps from anywhere like this but I stand by the fact that camps used to bring fun and interesting situations.

I also remember camping behind the enemy gate at the dummy spot and stealing scrolls. Was a lot of fun and provided some panic to the faction to go defend etc

Im not saying that just removing camps will suddenly fix PVP. It wont. I dont think that anything they do will magically fix this whole spread out thing cause the map is simply too large for the current population. However camps at their current state only make things worse. The entire map is literally dead. Even the concept of reinforcements doesnt exist anymore cause you only need to go once at the keep and thats it. You just rez over and over again.

The only thing that will suddenly fix PVP and bring back the population is for ZOS to fix the lag and performance issues.

Completely agree on that. Mechanics that enable endless fights in keeps with 200 people doesnt help with that. Right?

Mintaka5

I disagree. FCs are just another strategic element of the game. You don't have to use them, but if you do, and you use them right, they give you a good strategic advantage. This is no different IRL with forward bases of operation for modern military. It's logistics, dummy.

VaranisArano

pieratsos wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

thankyourat wrote: »

Players would die and have to run back to the keep meaning there were a lot more small scrimmages in open fields and that's what's missing from eso right now. It's basically just 60v60 keep fights right now. And even though forward camps are popular I feel this won't change until they are removed

Have you played when forward camps were removed? The most typical scenario happening on a daily basis would be a huge crossword on top of Alessia Bridge, Chal milegate and sometimes Nikel milegate. Stale fights happening for hours with a side winning from time to time and pushing to the next objective until they get wiped for being too far away from the spawn.

I am not sure exactly where the removal of forward camps is supposed to favor small scrimmages in open fields. Unless what you mean by that is to gank people riding back to the bridge or milegates? Could you elaborate more?

zyk wrote: »

There are probably a lot of current players who didn't play during the period when Forward Camps were removed.

In today's game, groups aren't punished for bad decisions like they were then. Running deep in enemy territory took much more skill and focus. There was less of an 'omglol' mentality when making mistakes. Groups couldn't just kite indefinitely by dropping camps gratuitously. Good groups couldn't afford to carry bad players as easily.

Without forward camps, we would barely see anybody taking the decision to push deep in enemy territory to spread out the fight. Only on super rare occasions and from very specific groups we would see such events happening.

With offensive camps, it allows and encourages people to fight at different places, out of the emp ring.

I disagree entirely about groups not being punished enough when they do an effort to fight by themselves far away from their faction and any spawn point other than a camp. The problem is when people are able sneak camps while defending a keep, avoiding all kind of fights and running straight inside the inner postern to reinforce. A "Forward camp" used defensively. This tactic allows the fight to last forever and does not punish anybody resing at the camp. Those people can just safely wait inside with a massive amount of sieges until they are off cooldown to try another mindless push outside.

Removal of camps favors solo/small scale in terms of enabling fights in between keeps. A keep is UA and people die. They will naturally run back from the closest keep. Solo/small scale players know that and go in between those keeps to find small scale fights. Those fights could last a while, more people gather up from both alliances which potentially leads to a cool skirmish.

With camps there is no reason to go in between keeps, everyone stack in one keep which leads to an endless lag blob.

I understand your point. With people being able to drop camps in the courtyard of a keep they want to defend, and attackers being able to drop a camp close to the keep outside of the tick range, they only have to ride there once and then they can use the camp, wait for the cooldown, push again, rez at the camp, rince and repeat. As a result there are less people riding from one objective to the other.

This being said, you also have to understand the point I explained in the post you quoted. When camps were removed, people would very rarely push deep in enemy territory to make their own fights. What I mean by that is attacking and taking keeps. Not simply capturing resources. With camps I have seen a drastic change in the way even casual groups / guilds will take the risk to get out of the emp ring and push outside of the transit line.

My solution to your problem would be to make it so you can only use forward camps offensively (as where their name comes from) and defenders should only be able to place a camp outside of a tick range of any objective. As a result, people defending would have to be very careful. No more stealth camp deploy to rez 12 players that ignore all kind of enemies and run straight inside the inner postern like if the doors could only be opened for defenders.

How is removing camps also removing ur ability to attack deep in enemy lines. Feel free to do it. Its still the same concept. You take it by surprise. The only difference is that if you die, well you simply wipe. Being able to rez over and over again after the entire group dies even tho u are deep in enemy territory doesnt make much sense to begin with.

Objectives are the issue that prety much forces everyone to fight in the emp ring.

It is not about what it changes for people already engaging deep in enemy territory. It is about encouraging groups and guilds who are not used to do it to commit to it and give it a try. Without camps, most casual players will stay on the transit line and avoid any kind of high risk / challenge as we have seen when camps were removed.

The map stays on a very stale state for hours straight, as I mentioned in my first post, with a huge cross sword on top of the bridge and the milegates. Until one faction makes a push and start dying when they get too far from their spawn.

But that's an issue with the objectives which doesn't encourage people to go off the transit line.

Why would a casual group of players looking to fight other people go deep in enemy territory to take an empty keep.

Camps or no camps doesn't change that and if ur solution to that is give people the ability to just rez over and over again no matter how many times they die well we won't agree on that. I don't like band aid solutions fixing one problem and creating other problems.

And please now with camps solving the issue of stale maps. Is this a joke? Camps literally enable stale maps. That's the whole point of asking for the removal camps. To enable fights outside of a couple of keeps that are being sieged for hours cause every can constantly rez at camps.

The reason people use to spread out was for map control because winning the campaign meant something. If a push somewhere failed or you got ganked going to the keep or one of 100 things you could look at your map and see 4-5 different camps to choose from.

This meant you could try go help at any location you wanted and if your back line keeps got flagged you could death port to go defend meaning that back line keep takes weren't just a matter of siege race.

Now admittedly they have changed the game quite a lot since those times. It may be too difficult with the current siege systems to allow resing at flagged keeps from anywhere like this but I stand by the fact that camps used to bring fun and interesting situations.

I also remember camping behind the enemy gate at the dummy spot and stealing scrolls. Was a lot of fun and provided some panic to the faction to go defend etc

Im not saying that just removing camps will suddenly fix PVP. It wont. I dont think that anything they do will magically fix this whole spread out thing cause the map is simply too large for the current population. However camps at their current state only make things worse. The entire map is literally dead. Even the concept of reinforcements doesnt exist anymore cause you only need to go once at the keep and thats it. You just rez over and over again.

The only thing that will suddenly fix PVP and bring back the population is for ZOS to fix the lag and performance issues.

Completely agree on that. Mechanics that enable endless fights in keeps with 200 people doesnt help with that. Right?

No.

We used to be able to have large fights without crippling amounts of lag.

For that matter, if we didnt have the lag and performance issues driving people away from PVP, we'd have more people to fight in greater numbers at more places on the map. Including available reinforcements.

You want the forward camps changed to change the lack of fights and reinforcements, something that is a symptom of the real problem: low pop due to lag and performance issues.

I want the real problem fixed, because less lag means more people means more fights and more spread out fights and more reinforcements.

pieratsos

VaranisArano wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

frozywozy wrote: »

thankyourat wrote: »

Players would die and have to run back to the keep meaning there were a lot more small scrimmages in open fields and that's what's missing from eso right now. It's basically just 60v60 keep fights right now. And even though forward camps are popular I feel this won't change until they are removed

Have you played when forward camps were removed? The most typical scenario happening on a daily basis would be a huge crossword on top of Alessia Bridge, Chal milegate and sometimes Nikel milegate. Stale fights happening for hours with a side winning from time to time and pushing to the next objective until they get wiped for being too far away from the spawn.

I am not sure exactly where the removal of forward camps is supposed to favor small scrimmages in open fields. Unless what you mean by that is to gank people riding back to the bridge or milegates? Could you elaborate more?

zyk wrote: »

There are probably a lot of current players who didn't play during the period when Forward Camps were removed.

In today's game, groups aren't punished for bad decisions like they were then. Running deep in enemy territory took much more skill and focus. There was less of an 'omglol' mentality when making mistakes. Groups couldn't just kite indefinitely by dropping camps gratuitously. Good groups couldn't afford to carry bad players as easily.

Without forward camps, we would barely see anybody taking the decision to push deep in enemy territory to spread out the fight. Only on super rare occasions and from very specific groups we would see such events happening.

With offensive camps, it allows and encourages people to fight at different places, out of the emp ring.

I disagree entirely about groups not being punished enough when they do an effort to fight by themselves far away from their faction and any spawn point other than a camp. The problem is when people are able sneak camps while defending a keep, avoiding all kind of fights and running straight inside the inner postern to reinforce. A "Forward camp" used defensively. This tactic allows the fight to last forever and does not punish anybody resing at the camp. Those people can just safely wait inside with a massive amount of sieges until they are off cooldown to try another mindless push outside.

Removal of camps favors solo/small scale in terms of enabling fights in between keeps. A keep is UA and people die. They will naturally run back from the closest keep. Solo/small scale players know that and go in between those keeps to find small scale fights. Those fights could last a while, more people gather up from both alliances which potentially leads to a cool skirmish.

With camps there is no reason to go in between keeps, everyone stack in one keep which leads to an endless lag blob.

I understand your point. With people being able to drop camps in the courtyard of a keep they want to defend, and attackers being able to drop a camp close to the keep outside of the tick range, they only have to ride there once and then they can use the camp, wait for the cooldown, push again, rez at the camp, rince and repeat. As a result there are less people riding from one objective to the other.

This being said, you also have to understand the point I explained in the post you quoted. When camps were removed, people would very rarely push deep in enemy territory to make their own fights. What I mean by that is attacking and taking keeps. Not simply capturing resources. With camps I have seen a drastic change in the way even casual groups / guilds will take the risk to get out of the emp ring and push outside of the transit line.

My solution to your problem would be to make it so you can only use forward camps offensively (as where their name comes from) and defenders should only be able to place a camp outside of a tick range of any objective. As a result, people defending would have to be very careful. No more stealth camp deploy to rez 12 players that ignore all kind of enemies and run straight inside the inner postern like if the doors could only be opened for defenders.

How is removing camps also removing ur ability to attack deep in enemy lines. Feel free to do it. Its still the same concept. You take it by surprise. The only difference is that if you die, well you simply wipe. Being able to rez over and over again after the entire group dies even tho u are deep in enemy territory doesnt make much sense to begin with.

Objectives are the issue that prety much forces everyone to fight in the emp ring.

It is not about what it changes for people already engaging deep in enemy territory. It is about encouraging groups and guilds who are not used to do it to commit to it and give it a try. Without camps, most casual players will stay on the transit line and avoid any kind of high risk / challenge as we have seen when camps were removed.

The map stays on a very stale state for hours straight, as I mentioned in my first post, with a huge cross sword on top of the bridge and the milegates. Until one faction makes a push and start dying when they get too far from their spawn.

But that's an issue with the objectives which doesn't encourage people to go off the transit line.

Why would a casual group of players looking to fight other people go deep in enemy territory to take an empty keep.

Camps or no camps doesn't change that and if ur solution to that is give people the ability to just rez over and over again no matter how many times they die well we won't agree on that. I don't like band aid solutions fixing one problem and creating other problems.

And please now with camps solving the issue of stale maps. Is this a joke? Camps literally enable stale maps. That's the whole point of asking for the removal camps. To enable fights outside of a couple of keeps that are being sieged for hours cause every can constantly rez at camps.

The reason people use to spread out was for map control because winning the campaign meant something. If a push somewhere failed or you got ganked going to the keep or one of 100 things you could look at your map and see 4-5 different camps to choose from.

This meant you could try go help at any location you wanted and if your back line keeps got flagged you could death port to go defend meaning that back line keep takes weren't just a matter of siege race.

Now admittedly they have changed the game quite a lot since those times. It may be too difficult with the current siege systems to allow resing at flagged keeps from anywhere like this but I stand by the fact that camps used to bring fun and interesting situations.

I also remember camping behind the enemy gate at the dummy spot and stealing scrolls. Was a lot of fun and provided some panic to the faction to go defend etc

Im not saying that just removing camps will suddenly fix PVP. It wont. I dont think that anything they do will magically fix this whole spread out thing cause the map is simply too large for the current population. However camps at their current state only make things worse. The entire map is literally dead. Even the concept of reinforcements doesnt exist anymore cause you only need to go once at the keep and thats it. You just rez over and over again.

The only thing that will suddenly fix PVP and bring back the population is for ZOS to fix the lag and performance issues.

Completely agree on that. Mechanics that enable endless fights in keeps with 200 people doesnt help with that. Right?

No.

We used to be able to have large fights without crippling amounts of lag.

For that matter, if we didnt have the lag and performance issues driving people away from PVP, we'd have more people to fight in greater numbers at more places on the map. Including available reinforcements.

You want the forward camps changed to change something that is a symptom of the real problem: low pop due to lag and performance issues.

I want the real problem fixed, because less lag means more people means more fights and more spread out fights and more reinforcements.

Large scale fights and endless moshpits at keep gates are not the same thing.

The concept of reinforcements doesnt exist with the current iteration of camps. Thats not an issue with the population. Thats an issue with the way camps work. The concept of reinforcements is people travelling from an adjacent keep to help the fight, defensively or offensively doesnt actually matter. What matters is that once people go to that keep they can prety much stay there indefinitely essentially removing the concept of reinforcements. A keep can be under attack for like half an hour and you literally struggle to find a single person going to that keep from any other keep nearby. This is dumb. People dont even bother to try to find a fight like this anymore. They all just go and take a resource to basically tell people "hey im here come and fight me".

When we didnt have camps and BRK was UA for example you could go in between arrius and BRK and you would find constantly people running to BRK for help. Some people would just ignore you and just ride straight to the keep some would attack you. The 1v1 - 1v2 fight becomes a 1v4 then its a 2v5 then 3+ v 5+ and then out of nowhere you basically have a skirmish. Hell, i remember times when i was going in between keeps to find a couple of people to fight and the 1v1 suddenly became a large scale fight. More and more people were arriving and you had 20-30 people all over the place in between keeps fighting in places where half of those people didnt even know existed. Thats the idea, enabling those dynamic fights and giving life to the map.

Can the current pop sustain fights everywhere? Absolutely no. The current size of them map is basically designed for a game that doesnt even exist anymore. But small or big population wont change this stupid concept of endless moshpits at keeps. You can double the population if u want. People wont just go in the middle of nowhere and start fighting for no reason. The only thing that will happen is the 2 moshpits at 2 keeps will become 3 moshpits at 3 keeps.