a few PvP Cyro pain points that need to be fixed

Wing

just pointing some things out. . .

but, here are a few of the larger pain points of Cyro, as a result of how it plays (by design)



-PvDoor: flagging and flipping keeps before anyone has a chance to fight, the map does not even update fast enough with amount of siege and if you don't have people with eyes on screaming in chat by the time you get to a transitus its 50% and flagged, by the time you ride to it its flipped.

-Siege: on the flip side the amount of resources required to actually fight and take a keep require overwhelming advantage in some fashion, be it numbers or group skill, as with the ability to instantly respawn defenders can just throw bodies at the situation without fear of repercussion from death, where as attackers only have 1 life then a 5 min cooldown on camps or a long ride back. I feel this is somewhat one of the reasons we get pvdoor, its just more efficient to burst a keep without defenders, obviously.

-outer keep defense is *usually* the only one that actually offers a chance at defense, as once the enemy is able to siege inner they can turn the outer against the inner and siege the defenders with more siege then the defenders can even place. If this is as intended that's fine, but it would be nice to know that. it would be nice for ZOS to take a look at how sieges play out and make sure everything is working out, just pointing out the initial outer keep fight has the most room for strategy and emergent gameplay in how things can play out compared to inner. heck some new keep designs would be cool, what if the gate keeps were 3 layer instead of 2, bigger, and had more flags? orsinium and alinor had some gorgeous verticality in the layout that would be amazing to see implemented in keeps.

-de emp should occur at one keep remaining, what I mean is that the emp faction should need to hold TWO ring keeps, and when they drop to one they lose emp. by current design de emping goes against various ideas of spreading out, avoiding lag, not all stacking in one place, and heavily favors the emp faction. requiring the holding of two keeps would just be more healthy for the game from both a gameplay perspective and a server perspective.

-scrolls: the concept and gameplay needs to be looked at and perhaps re tuned. from how the buffs work to stealing and securing them. the buffs seem a little counter intuitive from a gameplay perspective, so a faction is strong enough to steal a scroll and what does it do? it weakens the faction they beat and makes them stronger. . .wait what? so a situation where the weaker faction gets punished even more? scrolls are a little overbearing in points / buffs, but they also don't offer any unique gameplay, we are already sieging keeps, now we just have to siege them, again. what if there were specific locations to deposit scrolls for the factions, so that when scrolls did get stolen and secured they offered unique gameplay experiences at interesting locations. yeah, just re examine this whole system.

-loss of keep resources should not prevent transitus to that keep, in reality it does nothing because players can still keep recall and blood port to a keep if needed, it should continue to effect keep health, points, and be a target for smaller groups that want to help with the war effort. as well as being a place to fight over and fall back to. more often then not its used by vet small man groups to troll and feed on noobs. we want to ignore them, but cannot let the keep get cut, so they force you to come play there game until a zerg has to come roll them over. . .then one melts away to put up a camp and do it again.

-cyro terrain / fighting locations. at this point I would not mind some areas of cyro just being impassible as a result of terrain to create more interesting fighting locations and bottleneck areas of the zone a bit. as stated previously with zones like elsweyr, alinor, orsinium, etc. the team has gotten a lot better at world building and interesting terrain / lcations. not to the point of mile gates and bridges, but enough to move people into areas with other people. the further you get away from the ring keeps the more barren and open and boring it gets. having more just single flag resource like locations spread throughout the map, that dont provide spawn points but have maybe 1-2 faction guards and possibly provide a score point would be really fun at the various lone towers, shacks, villages, etc. and provide another option even smaller then capping keep resources, and without the threat of an enemy keep right next to you waiting to zerg down any lone player silly enough to wander up and try and cap a resource.

anyway, I know pvp is not really a thing really worked on or cared about to much, and that's a shame as when its lag free eso pvp is really amazing. and it would be nice to see it get some attention rather then neglected T_T


EDIT (these edits are based on either things I forgot or suggestions in the thread)

-Siege part 2: normal vs coldfire. this needs to go away if we are going to get any balance in siege damage. as it stands if coldfire is balanced and doing decent damage then normal siege is crap and does nothing. on the flip side if normal siege is balanced and doing decent damage then coldfire becomes OP and is overperforming. coldfire either needs different bonuses that don't effect gameplay in such an overt way (like improved durability or something) or needs to just be removed altogether so that the siege we do have can be perfectly balanced and performing at exactly the level that the developers intend.

-NPC mobs: remove any and all npc mobs not related to the alliance war or the dolmens, that includes various wolves, and NPC's around delves and skyshards. this should further improve performance (the great deer purge did as much)

-Offensive ticks: reduce the base amount of AP gained from offensive ticks to further incentivize fighting people and not reward capture of empty resources. if it cannot be dealt with at least stop rewarding it.

-Scale NPC guards: even if local scaling was too difficult to work out a global scaling based on bar population OR something like current eval points (so high point factions would have weak guards and low point factions would have strong guards this would dynamically scale every eval tick to help balance the alliance war.

-Scroll gates: I already posted that the scroll system needs an overhaul, but at least something to the effect of not allowing the gates to open if a faction is only 1 bar would also do some good, only allow gates to open a 2 bar or higher at least.

-Milegates / bridges: the bridges are still horrid gate options for AD compared to the milegates afforded to the other factions, they do not offer the distinct advantage in AD's favor compared to the way milegates are set up and the directions they face AND (worst of all) now that they are destructible they are even WORSE. DC and EP can cross their destroyed gates to the opposing faction while denying that faction the ability to do the same, this is a very large strategic and gameplay advantage, the bridges offer NO SUCH BENIFIT. when they are destroyed neither AD or EP can cross. these bridges have been perfectly even in the offensive and defensive capabilities afforded to the bordering factions for too long compared to the one sided nature of milegates afforded to the other factions, that balance has now been exaggerated now that there destructible, its simply NOT FAIR. flatten and widen the bridges and slap milegates on top of them, done.

-Low Population: this was somewhat touched on in a few other points, but giving low pop a point bonus does not help the problem, the problem is the *gameplay* the results from low population, you cannot push, you cannot defend, you end up losing the map, possibly your scrolls, when you lose your scrolls you lose combat effectiveness (that the high pop faction now has) I have already touched on that the scrolls need to just be re looked at, and a couple other ideas for population. but adding in some tangible gameplay bonuses for being low pop would also go a long way, the NPC boost was a suggestion, but others include things like increasing siege damage, this would DIRECTLY help to counter low pop, as it helps you hold and push keeps. where as things like stat buffs to the players would still result in low pop small man groups ignoring the map and trolling locations with now buffed stats. but SIEGE DAMAGE would directly help with the problem of taking and defending keeps while being legitimately outnumbered, as losing the map has always been the core problem of low pop.

@ZOS_BrianWheeler

Davadin

Wing wrote: »

just pointing some things out. . .

but, here are a few of the larger pain points of Cyro, as a result of how it plays (by design)



-PvDoor: flagging and flipping keeps before anyone has a chance to fight, the map does not even update fast enough with amount of siege and if you don't have people with eyes on screaming in chat by the time you get to a transitus its 50% and flagged, by the time you ride to it its flipped.

..put... a trial-level boss on the flag. people need to flip both flags AND kill the boss, who patrols the two flags, in order to flip the keep.

Haashhtaag

Should have better scouts so you don’t get PvDoor. Should not make offensive tics better than defensive.

Blinkin8r

Wing wrote: »

just pointing some things out. . .

-cyro terrain / fighting locations. at this point I would not mind some areas of cyro just being impassible as a result of terrain to create more interesting fighting locations and bottleneck areas of the zone a bit. as stated previously with zones like elsweyr, alinor, orsinium, etc. the team has gotten a lot better at world building and interesting terrain / lcations. not to the point of mile gates and bridges, but enough to move people into areas with other people. the further you get away from the ring keeps the more barren and open and boring it gets. having more just single flag resource like locations spread throughout the map, that dont provide spawn points but have maybe 1-2 faction guards and possibly provide a score point would be really fun at the various lone towers, shacks, villages, etc. and provide another option even smaller then capping keep resources, and without the threat of an enemy keep right next to you waiting to zerg down any lone player silly enough to wander up and try and cap a resource.

Couldn't agree more with this part. The terrain is boring. No bottle necks other than bridges and milegates. Especially down in AD territory where everything is just hills. Northern territory is definitely more interesting and mountainous. I'm definitely dreaming here but it'd be so cool to get a redesigned Cyrodiil. Especially if they put in unique keeps instead of the copy paste keeps we have now.

VaranisArano

Solutions for PvDoor

1. Make CyroHUD a base game function so players get faster reaction time.

2. Increase defensive ticks - the last time we have increased D ticks, people actually rushed to defend and people who scouted at back keeps got rewarded for it.

frostz417

Nerf offense ticks

Joy_Division

Wing wrote: »

-outer keep defense is *usually* the only one that actually offers a chance at defense, as once the enemy is able to siege inner they can turn the outer against the inner and siege the defenders with more siege then the defenders can even place. If this is as intended that's fine, but it would be nice to know that. it would be nice for ZOS to take a look at how sieges play out and make sure everything is working out, just pointing out the initial outer keep fight has the most room for strategy and emergent gameplay in how things can play out compared to inner. heck some new keep designs would be cool, what if the gate keeps were 3 layer instead of 2, bigger, and had more flags? orsinium and alinor had some gorgeous verticality in the layout that would be amazing to see implemented in keeps.

At one of out meeting with ZOS, they said it was not intended that the inner keep would be at a hefty disadvantage when it comes to siege. As it turns out, buffing siege has some undesirable consequences.

Wing

Joy_Division wrote: »

Wing wrote: »

-outer keep defense is *usually* the only one that actually offers a chance at defense, as once the enemy is able to siege inner they can turn the outer against the inner and siege the defenders with more siege then the defenders can even place. If this is as intended that's fine, but it would be nice to know that. it would be nice for ZOS to take a look at how sieges play out and make sure everything is working out, just pointing out the initial outer keep fight has the most room for strategy and emergent gameplay in how things can play out compared to inner. heck some new keep designs would be cool, what if the gate keeps were 3 layer instead of 2, bigger, and had more flags? orsinium and alinor had some gorgeous verticality in the layout that would be amazing to see implemented in keeps.

At one of out meeting with ZOS, they said it was not intended that the inner keep would be at a hefty disadvantage when it comes to siege. As it turns out, buffing siege has some undesirable consequences.

hey thanks for the insight! I hope they do something about it in the future because as it stands the inner siege is nowhere near as fun or interesting as the outer siege. would love some new keep designs as part of the solution.

ScruffyWhiskers

Assuming the lag isn't too bad, going out onto the walls and taking out people sieging the inner is usually easy AP. Go after the ones with the cold fires and cold stones.

Durham

The #1 pain is LAG period ! fix this and PVP is fixed in my book ..

Wing

ScruffyWhiskers wrote: »

Assuming the lag isn't too bad, going out onto the walls and taking out people sieging the inner is usually easy AP. Go after the ones with the cold fires and cold stones.

you bringing up coldfires reminded me of something I forgot to mention in the original, post updated TY!

Wing

Durham wrote: »

The #1 pain is LAG period ! fix this and PVP is fixed in my book ..

I had suggested removing all npc mobs in the overland in another thread, as they purged the deer a while back to reduce lag, just get rid of all the wolves, imperial camps, mobs around delves and skyshards, etc. that will reduce some server calculations for sure.

frostz417

Wing wrote: »

Durham wrote: »

The #1 pain is LAG period ! fix this and PVP is fixed in my book ..

I had suggested removing all npc mobs in the overland in another thread, as they purged the deer a while back to reduce lag, just get rid of all the wolves, imperial camps, mobs around delves and skyshards, etc. that will reduce some server calculations for sure.

Fantastic idea to be honest. I bet removing all the useless NPC’s will do wonders, so many annoying NPC’s around that have no use.

CatchMeTrolling

If no one is at a keep, outpost or resource getting killed you shouldn’t get a offensive tick.

Keep/outposts npcs should be buffed and get more aggressive if there’s only a few people defending the objective.

Emp keeps need a rework but they also should add new titles with their own leaderboard. Such as top scout, defender, conqueror, scroll runner, battlefield hero etc. for doing things like defending, killing, taking objectives and capturing scrolls.

Iskiab

I think a faction should lose emperor is they don’t have both their ring keeps. Too much incentive to stay in the last keep and defend with a huge advantage, I’ve seen a pop locked faction (so 200
People) all defending one keep.

linoge63

Some really great points!

---maybe they could get these keep guards to speak up a little when an attack begins. I was on the keep wall as an early warning scout and was not that far away from the FD and could not hear one bleeping thing that would event hint a full out attack was underway, not even that battle music. Just birdsong meanwhile the FD was 45% down already. I learned about it from chat!

Anyone on the keep property should immediately be alerted to even the presence of an enemy on the grounds leave alone an attack.

Haashhtaag

L

Wing wrote: »

Durham wrote: »

The #1 pain is LAG period ! fix this and PVP is fixed in my book ..

I had suggested removing all npc mobs in the overland in another thread, as they purged the deer a while back to reduce lag, just get rid of all the wolves, imperial camps, mobs around delves and skyshards, etc. that will reduce some server calculations for sure.

They’re making towers at resources indestructible so why not revert mile gate and bridge changes too?

Wing

Haashhtaag wrote: »

L

Wing wrote: »

Durham wrote: »

The #1 pain is LAG period ! fix this and PVP is fixed in my book ..

I had suggested removing all npc mobs in the overland in another thread, as they purged the deer a while back to reduce lag, just get rid of all the wolves, imperial camps, mobs around delves and skyshards, etc. that will reduce some server calculations for sure.

They’re making towers at resources indestructible so why not revert mile gate and bridge changes too?

yeah that didn't really add anything, the fact that the cleaned up the milegates and the surrounding area to be a better fighting point was nice.

I had also pointed out in another thread how much the AD bridges suck compared to the milegates, and suggested that they widen and flatten the AD bridges and just replace them with milegates. (its actually worse now that they are destructible then it was before)

Haashhtaag

Wing wrote: »

Haashhtaag wrote: »

L

Wing wrote: »

Durham wrote: »

The #1 pain is LAG period ! fix this and PVP is fixed in my book ..

I had suggested removing all npc mobs in the overland in another thread, as they purged the deer a while back to reduce lag, just get rid of all the wolves, imperial camps, mobs around delves and skyshards, etc. that will reduce some server calculations for sure.

They’re making towers at resources indestructible so why not revert mile gate and bridge changes too?

yeah that didn't really add anything, the fact that the cleaned up the milegates and the surrounding area to be a better fighting point was nice.

I had also pointed out in another thread how much the AD bridges suck compared to the milegates, and suggested that they widen and flatten the AD bridges and just replace them with milegates. (its actually worse now that they are destructible then it was before)

They’re actually worse fighting points after the changes due to all the good LOS being removed.

Wizunas

Yup! It's all about numbers. You have the pop > you own the map... simple as that.

Maybe lower pop Alliance should benefit from a nice siege boost so they can or at least are able to defend somewhat against large numbers of attackers.

I mean, when u have 20-30 people defend against 80+ or sometimes an entire Alliance stack (more or less) ... siege boost could help even the fights a little... idk just sayin'

Wing

Wizunas wrote: »

Yup! It's all about numbers. You have the pop > you own the map... simple as that.

Maybe lower pop Alliance should benefit from a nice siege boost so they can or at least are able to defend somewhat against large numbers of attackers.

I mean, when u have 20-30 people defend against 80+ or sometimes an entire Alliance stack (more or less) ... siege boost could help even the fights a little... idk just sayin'

ill add they need to look at better population bonuses and the like, especially because if your low pop and lose scrolls (because your low pop) you lose PvP buffs and the high pop faction now has scroll buffs, good luck dealing with that.

but the SIGE damage buff is actually a brilliant idea, as the main problem with low pop is losing the map, and the inability to defend or push keeps, a buff to siege damage at low pop DIRECTLY deals with that problem, while avoiding the possible problem of straight buffing low pop players. (as I imagine many would still ignore the map and just go small man between other factions with now buffed stats)

ChefZero

Add a 3rd flagg to keeps and spread them more. 1st flagg on the 1st floor in the maingate tower, 2nd flagg ground floor inner keep and 3rd flagg 1st floor (2nd floor homekeep) inner keep.

bulbousb16_ESO

Wing wrote: »

ill add they need to look at better population bonuses and the like, especially because if your low pop and lose scrolls (because your low pop) you lose PvP buffs and the high pop faction now has scroll buffs, good luck dealing with that.

While I don't much agree with your ideas, I must admit, your English is better than my... whatever your first language is. Cheers!