Imperial City--can't lose more stones than your attacker is carrying

limitswitch

sharquez wrote: »

The "complex" math (relative to how it works now) required to make this ante system work showcases its flaws inherently. When designing a system the fewer moving parts and possible failure points the better.

I've been an embedded systems programer for the last decade and have a degree in computer engineering. I promise, if ZoS can't make this work it's time to unplug and call it a day. It's really not that complicated...

limitswitch

RealLoveBVB wrote: »

Just join the dark force and make a nightblade too

I'm the kind of manic who would sooner make a perma-block tank and run around IC randomly with no stones drinking detect pots on cooldown.

Desiato

limitswitch wrote: »

RealLoveBVB wrote: »

Just join the dark force and make a nightblade too

I'm the kind of manic who would sooner make a perma-block tank and run around IC randomly with no stones drinking detect pots on cooldown.

That was my guess.

sharquez

limitswitch wrote: »

sharquez wrote: »

The "complex" math (relative to how it works now) required to make this ante system work showcases its flaws inherently. When designing a system the fewer moving parts and possible failure points the better.

I've been an embedded systems programer for the last decade and have a degree in computer engineering. I promise, if ZoS can't make this work it's time to unplug and call it a day. It's really not that complicated...

I appreciate the insight and chuckle, I do signs, and my math consists of how wide, how high, and does it fit?

That said I stand by the "if it aint broke don't fix it" philosophy.

Container farming is a viable low-risk means of accumulating tel var, for those not pvp inclined whether by dailys or scamp boxes as pointed out be the tel var article linked earlier. Far as I'm concerned we are good. I hope that those who dislike the system but still want to engage with it can learn how in a way that suits them rather than lobby for change that more than likely won't come and that will inevitably make no one happy.

xylena_lazarow

Desiato wrote: »

How do you think the proposed change would work in practice?

I'd actually gain stones when I kill the ganker.

Quackery

This is actually a really good idea. There should be a high risk/reward for the gankers.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

if you adjust the 'risk' then the 'reward' also needs to be adjusted.
Gankers fall into this category of 'risk' for tel'var farmers. By discouraging ganking the rewards would need to be adjusted to make farming slower and less valuable.

Ganking is easily balanced by players adjusting their gear and playstyles, detect setups etc there are already enough counters.

That being said if it does come down to this type of change I would advocate for the following:

1) The dying player always loses 50% of their stones
2) The 50% stone 'pool' is then divided as it is currently divided however an adjustment is made reducing by a % based on the 'risk' level of the ganker.
3) This 'risk' level is determined by the current 0/100/1000/10000 tiers (or maybe those tiers are adjusted to 0/1000/5000/10000). T1 = 25% of the stones, T2=35% of the stones T3 = 45% of the stones T4 = 50% of the stones (i.e. 100% of the 'pool') + a random tel'var 'gear' box.
4) Tel'var farmers must travel via the sewers to 'bank' their stones, campaign hopping treated as 'death'.

XSTRONG

Quackery wrote: »

This is actually a really good idea. There should be a high risk/reward for the gankers.

Exactly this! Where is the 'high risk' for the gankers?

NyassaV

The fact a ganker can risk nothing by carrying 0 TV and get half of what you have by making the kill is ridiculous. Have the TV multiplier apply to how much you get from other players.

limitswitch

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

1) The dying player always loses 50% of their stones
2) The 50% stone 'pool' is then divided as it is currently divided however an adjustment is made reducing by a % based on the 'risk' level of the ganker.
3) This 'risk' level is determined by the current 0/100/1000/10000 tiers (or maybe those tiers are adjusted to 0/1000/5000/10000). T1 = 25% of the stones, T2=35% of the stones T3 = 45% of the stones T4 = 50% of the stones (i.e. 100% of the 'pool') + a random tel'var 'gear' box.

I'm not 100% on board with the always lose half your stones bit, but I do like the idea of incorporating the multiplier to calculate gain.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

4) Tel'var farmers must travel via the sewers to 'bank' their stones, campaign hopping treated as 'death'.

Switching from IC to Cyrodiil and back is a loophole that needs to be closed, but I don't like the idea of treating it as a death. While the event was going on and the queue for Cyrodiil was an hour plus long, I found it pretty cool that I could run around IC and still be in the queue for Cyrodiil. Making it so there is a cooldown for campaign hopping would end the loophole, but not cost me half my stones if I wanted to switch campaigns only 1 time.

wazzz56

We should go back to a player taking 80% of your stones and npcs taking 20%.......

Braffin

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

if you adjust the 'risk' then the 'reward' also needs to be adjusted.
Gankers fall into this category of 'risk' for tel'var farmers. By discouraging ganking the rewards would need to be adjusted to make farming slower and less valuable.

Ganking is easily balanced by players adjusting their gear and playstyles, detect setups etc there are already enough counters.

That being said if it does come down to this type of change I would advocate for the following:

1) The dying player always loses 50% of their stones
2) The 50% stone 'pool' is then divided as it is currently divided however an adjustment is made reducing by a % based on the 'risk' level of the ganker.
3) This 'risk' level is determined by the current 0/100/1000/10000 tiers (or maybe those tiers are adjusted to 0/1000/5000/10000). T1 = 25% of the stones, T2=35% of the stones T3 = 45% of the stones T4 = 50% of the stones (i.e. 100% of the 'pool') + a random tel'var 'gear' box.
4) Tel'var farmers must travel via the sewers to 'bank' their stones, campaign hopping treated as 'death'.

Interesting idea. This way the high risk/high reward playstyle would be preserved for gankers as well as farmers.

I like it.

Rowjoh

RetPing wrote: »

Yep, already proposed and I think is a very good idea.

The idea of IC is to be a high risk / high reward zones but for nightblades there are zero risk cause of course they go with zero TV just to gank people that has spent hours to farm them.

This is why the zone is just empty all the times.
People hates to give TV to some very brave NB that attack you from stealth while you already fighing some NPC.
And if I kill that NB what I gain? Nothing.

How can it be zero?

When anyone kills anyone carrying Tel Var in IC, they gain a proportion of any Tel Var they are carrying.

Unless of course the Nightblades being discussed here return to base to 'bank the gank' after each kill, but that would be seriously tedious and virtually pointless.

xylena_lazarow

Rowjoh wrote: »

Unless of course the Nightblades being discussed here return to base to 'bank the gank' after each kill, but that would be seriously tedious and virtually pointless.

Tedious? Maybe subjectively. Pointless? Absolutely not given the amount of nigh zero-risk profit. Usually they're just queueing into another campaign though which is both faster and lower risk. That part definitely doesn't seem intended.

pokrakus

Its good as it is, no need to change. I loose and I gain sometimes....

Delimber

wazzz56 wrote: »

We should go back to a player taking 80% of your stones and npcs taking 20%.......

NO!!!
I survived the early days lol.

But it was those early days that taught me not to run around with over 2k TV...which from what I've seen lately is considered "low" by today's standards.

Bottom line is, solo'ing the IC stories to unlock the dailies isn't easy. You need to be lucky and don't carry lots of TV.

And if you are going to do the story content, then don't worry about losing TV, either to an NPC or other player.

IC is a compromise of builds, you can go in geared for pve or pvp. If you are set up for pve, you'll have no problem making back the TV lost. Just don't run around with thousands of TV.

And for those new to IC, if you really want to feel pain, get bombed after the Molag Bal fight in the center of the sewers...ahh the good old days lol.

Desiato

Delimber wrote: »

And for those new to IC, if you really want to feel pain, get bombed after the Molag Bal fight in the center of the sewers...ahh the good old days lol.

Players today can't even imagine what IC was like at launch!

For one thing, mobs were much more difficult than any other non-bosses in the game today. They didn't just melt instantly.

But the real danger were the kind of hyper-competitve PVP guilds roaming the sewers that just don't really exist anymore.

Also, CP was uncapped (the cap was introduced the next update) like it is today, but most players had under 300 and the competitive pvp players usually had 500-700+. I think methuselah was close to 1k.

On top of all that, IC could only be accessed through Cyrodiil via 3 access points with gankers present along the way!

It was truly dangerous, poplocked, and much more exciting.

Casul

You can only steal half the multiplier cap you are carrying.

1x - Steals 0
2x - Steals 50
3x - Steals 500
4x - Steals 5000

Virtually the same yield as currently (enemy holding 1000 <3x multiplier> would drop 500. But you would need to be carrying 1000 in order to steal that much)

Stones are awarded for kills, no assists or anything.

The general approach will be carrying at minimum 1000 stones.

Also bring back spawning in districts you don’t currently own.

geonsocal

Casul wrote: »

Also bring back spawning in districts you don’t currently own.

this more than anything...totally disrupted player combat (read: 24/7 endless fights)...

mzprx

IMHO IC is an empty zone because to have fun there you need to be -

a) a NB ganker (and you must know what you're doing)
b) a part of an organised group that is optimised for IC
c) a very, VERY good player, fully kitted out playing a class with great survivability and damage

otherwise you're just sitting at the bottom of a food chain to be devoured by everything and everyone, so to speak..

now, what i think would bring a lot more players to IC is something very simple - a cap on the Tel Vars you can lose. what it means is you'd lose 50% of your Tel Vars you carry up to a certain amount. say 5000. so no matter how many Tel Vars you have the most you could lose in a single death is 5k. the amount is good enough reward for any NB ganker and you wouldn't lose hours of your time spent farming in IC. from what i've been chatting with other people the fear of losing too many Tel Vars is the biggest rerason they don't go to IC. for them it's easier to farm 50k gold for Hakeijo than 5k Tel Vars. unless you're in the a), b) or c) category..

you can argue that getting at most 5k Tel Vars instead of 30 or 40k (if you're lucky) isn't good enough. you may want to keep things as they are ATM. but i am 100% sure this would bring a lot more people to IC, thus everyone would have a bigger pool of potential victims. which would, in the end, mean more rewarding IC experience. 5k Tel Vars from a person who would otherwise never go to IC is 5k Tel Vars you would never get..

AzuraFan

When I go into a PvP zone to PvE, I always go in with 0 stones. That way I don't lose anything when I get killed, and the ganker doesn't get anything either (well, I suppose there are some that get satisfaction from killing a PvE player that isn't built for PvP, but whatever).

DrSlaughtr

limitswitch wrote: »

I haven't scoured all the old threads, so this has probably already been proposed. But given that it hasn't been implemented yet, perhaps it needs to be said again.

The biggest issue I've had with Imperial City is that it is overrun with nightblades who will gank you from the shadows while you're PvEing. Not necessarily a problem in itself, but often these players are carrying no stones themselves and face no risk of loss if you manage to survive the initial assault and fight back and provide no reward if you manage to turn the tables on them.

Capping tel var loss to whatever your slayer has on them at the time would cause these coward-blade sucker punchers to actually wager something for the chance of a large payout.

So you want to punish the players who wisely port out to deposit their telvar? I sometimes wonder if PVE players don't realize they can do the same thing. Once you hit 1k or 2k or whatever your minimum is, hit an invis pot and hide somewhere then port to Cyrodiil, then port back to IC and deposit. It work's great. This is what NBs do.

Priyasekarssk

Yes completely agree