Emperorship and Low Pop campaigns

SwampRaider

Being as that i have seen BOTH sides of the issue, please remove the ability to have emperor on low pop campaigns.

after getting 1 shot by siege no matter how many purges, it gets old. The fact that a DK emperor can solo keeps and outposts...just no. he took down 10 players in front of my eyes that were level 30-Vr2. easily.

Mind you, this isn't a zerg campaign, Chrysamere[NA] is very very low pop. It is so low pop, that 12 AD took the whole map with 2 DC on.

the opposing emperor had about 12 guys (mostly vr8+) and EP and DC were attacking 4 places at once( collectively EP and DC had maybe 60 people). Yet the AD group managed to rush in and stop all attacks in tandem almost.

The reason why i bring this up, is that the Emperor is somewhat unkillable and matters more on low pop campaigns than anywhere else. They can do alot more with the utility and buss they have and it makes people leave the server. People on my side have quit because they just didn't want to deal with a DK emperor on a low pop server.

I have seen both sides. I have seen the side with an emperor and watching our enemies die in the masses. BUt now, I see the horror.

a 100 person EP guild left Chrysamere because a DC emperor kept 1 shotting everyone with siege.

Now this AD DK emperor is giving us a run for our money. PVP just isn't fun anymore. IF there was no such thing as emperor and everyone was on a level playing field..it would be amazing.

TLDR:

On low pop campaigns, remove Emperor, so everyone is on a level playing field since there are so few people. Emperor OPness makes people quit the server. and on low pop campaigns it hurts us badly sicne we need every man we can get.

@ZOS_BrianWheeler‌

Izatar

I have been emperor on a low pop server and I think you are overestimating the emperor's power. Your observation is generally correct, for example the main power of the emperor is double damage from siege engines.
The thing is, from my own experience, there are players out there that totally destroy a naive emperor build (I play templar). On NA Dawnbreaker, I have encountered toons that can be hit multiple times dead on my emperor siege and shrug it off like it is nothing.
For most players, being oiled buy an emperor is certain doom. But for some reason (perhaps fire resists), some players are not affected by it.
So, what I have to submit to you is that there are toons that use factors that I do not understand, perhaps they are exploits or cheats, that are basically invulnerable. Someone who already has these powers has an easier time getting AP, and can thus take emporership easier. So in fact you are seeing some sort of insane imbalance, and emperorship is really only insult to injury. They would destroy you even without the emperor buffs.

SwampRaider

Izatar wrote: »

I have been emperor on a low pop server and I think you are overestimating the emperor's power. Your observation is generally correct, for example the main power of the emperor is double damage from siege engines.
The thing is, from my own experience, there are players out there that totally destroy a naive emperor build (I play templar). On NA Dawnbreaker, I have encountered toons that can be hit multiple times dead on my emperor siege and shrug it off like it is nothing.
For most players, being oiled buy an emperor is certain doom. But for some reason (perhaps fire resists), some players are not affected by it.
So, what I have to submit to you is that there are toons that use factors that I do not understand, perhaps they are exploits or cheats, that are basically invulnerable. Someone who already has these powers has an easier time getting AP, and can thus take emporership easier. So in fact you are seeing some sort of insane imbalance, and emperorship is really only insult to injury. They would destroy you even without the emperor buffs.

It's a DK emperor. hes making all the lowbies not want to pvp anymore. Our low pop server was better balanced when no side had emperor. When No side had emperor, Tactics beat everything. Imagine this:

You are attacking 4 different keeps at once with 60+ people(EP and DC coalition) Somehow, the Emperor stops 3 of those attacks, and then QUICKLY takes back the 4th objective that he lost. It was 40 vs 20 vs 12, and the Emperor with 12 Vr6-10's was just making life hell. We were hitting Ash+Aleswell+Nikel+ Chalman. and some how, could not do ***. Every time one objective is close to being capped, the emperor pops out of nowhere and ruins it all

We Recently had a Templar Emperor on the server. He was easily killed I MEAN EASILY (he lost most 4 vs 1's if they were VR's), but DK's have some sort of Emperor synergy going on with their abilities, able to take on many foes, EVEN if we were spread out and ranging him down, he was able to spam Dragons blood which healed him for 2200 a pop..like he had infinite mana.


Case in point: Low pop servers could do well without an emperor. They already have a fragile population that decreases every time one side cant do anything.

@ZOS_BrianWheeler‌

Samadhi

Remove low-pop campaigns and put the players into the higher population campaigns; cut the amount of campaigns on the list until there is actual demand to add more.
Enough of the desolate campaigns with one alliance steamrolling; the PvP map needs to be about PvP, not about holding an empty map so that you can take all the PvP bonus stats everywhere else with you.

ThreeEyedCrow

SwampRaider wrote: »

Being as that i have seen BOTH sides of the issue, please remove the ability to have emperor on low pop campaigns.

after getting 1 shot by siege no matter how many purges, it gets old. The fact that a DK emperor can solo keeps and outposts...just no. he took down 10 players in front of my eyes that were level 30-Vr2. easily.

Mind you, this isn't a zerg campaign, Chrysamere[NA] is very very low pop. It is so low pop, that 12 AD took the whole map with 2 DC on.

the opposing emperor had about 12 guys (mostly vr8+) and EP and DC were attacking 4 places at once( collectively EP and DC had maybe 60 people). Yet the AD group managed to rush in and stop all attacks in tandem almost.

The reason why i bring this up, is that the Emperor is somewhat unkillable and matters more on low pop campaigns than anywhere else. They can do alot more with the utility and buss they have and it makes people leave the server. People on my side have quit because they just didn't want to deal with a DK emperor on a low pop server.

I have seen both sides. I have seen the side with an emperor and watching our enemies die in the masses. BUt now, I see the horror.

a 100 person EP guild left Chrysamere because a DC emperor kept 1 shotting everyone with siege.

Now this AD DK emperor is giving us a run for our money. PVP just isn't fun anymore. IF there was no such thing as emperor and everyone was on a level playing field..it would be amazing.

TLDR:

On low pop campaigns, remove Emperor, so everyone is on a level playing field since there are so few people. Emperor OPness makes people quit the server. and on low pop campaigns it hurts us badly sicne we need every man we can get.

@ZOS_BrianWheeler‌

I don't really see a problem with a v10 able to solo a group of level 30 to v1.

That would happen in any and every MMO. Take a max level, epic geared player and have him fight a group of people around half the maximum level in green(or equivalent) gear and the results are the same.

I'm sorry but your level 30s shouldn't be able to compete with a V10 in PvP, unless they are extremely skill and organized or the v10 is not very skilled.

Zershar_Vemod

Samadhi wrote: »

Remove low-pop campaigns and put the players into the higher population campaigns; cut the amount of campaigns on the list until there is actual demand to add more.
Enough of the desolate campaigns with one alliance steamrolling; the PvP map needs to be about PvP, not about holding an empty map so that you can take all the PvP bonus stats everywhere else with you.

This honestly. Whenever I check the campaign list 90% of the time they are almost always all "low" populations in all factions with the exception of maybe 2 of the campaigns being medium populations on rare occasions (NA).

Samadhi

Zershar_Vemod wrote: »

Samadhi wrote: »

Remove low-pop campaigns and put the players into the higher population campaigns; cut the amount of campaigns on the list until there is actual demand to add more.
Enough of the desolate campaigns with one alliance steamrolling; the PvP map needs to be about PvP, not about holding an empty map so that you can take all the PvP bonus stats everywhere else with you.

This honestly. Whenever I check the campaign list 90% of the time they are almost always all "low" populations in all factions with the exception of maybe 2 of the campaigns being medium populations on rare occasions (NA).

I have hopped repeatedly through almost all the low population campaigns a number of times as a guest to survey the situation since launch.
Basically each one gets completely dominated by one alliance colour.

To my comprehension, any time an alliance receives buffs from the Cyrodiil Home campaign, it applies to the character on all other maps.

Holding all keeps + emperor + scrolls on an empty PvP campaign = all members who home there get persistent stat buffs while PvEing outside of the campaign.

Eliminate all the low population campaigns, make people actually have to PvP if they want to keep their stat buffs.
Having them PvE guard NPCs to get buffs to PvE more effectively as a reward for steamrolling an empty PvP map is nonsensical.

ArcanusMagus

I like the low population campaigns because it's more personal, but I tend to agree with @swampraider on this one. I'm from NA Chrysamere as well. I have fought and killed both DC emperors and the current emperor. The difference is night and day. The DC ones were a challenge, no doubt, but they could be managed. They were a noticable presence in a fight, but not the only element. This new emperor is different. I have seen him wipe entire raids by himself. Strategies are built around the emperor being there or not. I know this, because I've been privy to the plans.

I hear that DC is having recruitment problems from this issue, and I can say that the Pact is as well. No one wants to do anything when they are reasonably sure they'll be stomped on by one guy and whoever happens to be with him, if anyone. When one guy can solo resources, who wants to run in a resource raiding group when the guy can undo what you've done just as quickly as your group can do it, or, more commonly, wipe your group at the resource you're taking? If someone says they enjoy that routine, they're a masochist.

Rather than removing the emperor mechanic, what about scaling it to population size? With this underdog system that's rolling out soon, perhaps those population samples could also be used to determine the intensity of the buffs the emperor receives. So, for example, a low-pop emperor would have smaller bonuses than a high-pop emperor in their home campaigns. This would keep the server competitive while at the same time giving the emperor a little boost over the other players that, in my opinion, the emperor deserves. This whole business of one guy running the entire server is lunacy, though. The other perks to being emperor, like the armor and titles and whatnot, don't really affect gameplay and shouldn't be removed.

ArcanusMagus

SwampRaider wrote: »

It's a DK emperor. hes making all the lowbies not want to pvp anymore. Our low pop server was better balanced when no side had emperor. When No side had emperor, Tactics beat everything. Imagine this:

You are attacking 4 different keeps at once with 60+ people(EP and DC coalition) Somehow, the Emperor stops 3 of those attacks, and then QUICKLY takes back the 4th objective that he lost. It was 40 vs 20 vs 12, and the Emperor with 12 Vr6-10's was just making life hell. We were hitting Ash+Aleswell+Nikel+ Chalman. and some how, could not do ***. Every time one objective is close to being capped, the emperor pops out of nowhere and ruins it all

@ZOS_BrianWheeler‌

This is true. I was there running the Chalman raid. We took it on the fourth try (if memory serves) simply because the emperor was a little late.

SwampRaider

ArcanusMagus wrote: »

I like the low population campaigns because it's more personal, but I tend to agree with @swampraider on this one. I'm from NA Chrysamere as well. I have fought and killed both DC emperors and the current emperor. The difference is night and day. The DC ones were a challenge, no doubt, but they could be managed. They were a noticable presence in a fight, but not the only element. This new emperor is different. I have seen him wipe entire raids by himself. Strategies are built around the emperor being there or not. I know this, because I've been privy to the plans.

I hear that DC is having recruitment problems from this issue, and I can say that the Pact is as well. No one wants to do anything when they are reasonably sure they'll be stomped on by one guy and whoever happens to be with him, if anyone. When one guy can solo resources, who wants to run in a resource raiding group when the guy can undo what you've done just as quickly as your group can do it, or, more commonly, wipe your group at the resource you're taking? If someone says they enjoy that routine, they're a masochist.

Rather than removing the emperor mechanic, what about scaling it to population size? With this underdog system that's rolling out soon, perhaps those population samples could also be used to determine the intensity of the buffs the emperor receives. So, for example, a low-pop emperor would have smaller bonuses than a high-pop emperor in their home campaigns. This would keep the server competitive while at the same time giving the emperor a little boost over the other players that, in my opinion, the emperor deserves. This whole business of one guy running the entire server is lunacy, though. The other perks to being emperor, like the armor and titles and whatnot, don't really affect gameplay and shouldn't be removed.

I agree.

popatiberiuoneb18_ESO

SwampRaider wrote: »

Being as that i have seen BOTH sides of the issue, please remove the ability to have emperor on low pop campaigns.

after getting 1 shot by siege no matter how many purges, it gets old. The fact that a DK emperor can solo keeps and outposts...just no. he took down 10 players in front of my eyes that were level 30-Vr2. easily.

Mind you, this isn't a zerg campaign, Chrysamere[NA] is very very low pop. It is so low pop, that 12 AD took the whole map with 2 DC on.

the opposing emperor had about 12 guys (mostly vr8+) and EP and DC were attacking 4 places at once( collectively EP and DC had maybe 60 people). Yet the AD group managed to rush in and stop all attacks in tandem almost.

The reason why i bring this up, is that the Emperor is somewhat unkillable and matters more on low pop campaigns than anywhere else. They can do alot more with the utility and buss they have and it makes people leave the server. People on my side have quit because they just didn't want to deal with a DK emperor on a low pop server.

I have seen both sides. I have seen the side with an emperor and watching our enemies die in the masses. BUt now, I see the horror.

a 100 person EP guild left Chrysamere because a DC emperor kept 1 shotting everyone with siege.

Now this AD DK emperor is giving us a run for our money. PVP just isn't fun anymore. IF there was no such thing as emperor and everyone was on a level playing field..it would be amazing.

TLDR:

On low pop campaigns, remove Emperor, so everyone is on a level playing field since there are so few people. Emperor OPness makes people quit the server. and on low pop campaigns it hurts us badly sicne we need every man we can get.

@ZOS_BrianWheeler‌

Its a huge pain everywhere to deal with these emperors that got there in the first place by abusing game mechanics and will not hold back from using the emperor bonuses in the same way.

Remove emperor bonuses altoghether, the emperorship system is broken and encourages people to cheat, glitch, abuse mechanics and so on. Make it a title only achievement.

SwampRaider

popatiberiuoneb18_ESO wrote: »

SwampRaider wrote: »

Being as that i have seen BOTH sides of the issue, please remove the ability to have emperor on low pop campaigns.

after getting 1 shot by siege no matter how many purges, it gets old. The fact that a DK emperor can solo keeps and outposts...just no. he took down 10 players in front of my eyes that were level 30-Vr2. easily.

Mind you, this isn't a zerg campaign, Chrysamere[NA] is very very low pop. It is so low pop, that 12 AD took the whole map with 2 DC on.

the opposing emperor had about 12 guys (mostly vr8+) and EP and DC were attacking 4 places at once( collectively EP and DC had maybe 60 people). Yet the AD group managed to rush in and stop all attacks in tandem almost.

The reason why i bring this up, is that the Emperor is somewhat unkillable and matters more on low pop campaigns than anywhere else. They can do alot more with the utility and buss they have and it makes people leave the server. People on my side have quit because they just didn't want to deal with a DK emperor on a low pop server.

I have seen both sides. I have seen the side with an emperor and watching our enemies die in the masses. BUt now, I see the horror.

a 100 person EP guild left Chrysamere because a DC emperor kept 1 shotting everyone with siege.

Now this AD DK emperor is giving us a run for our money. PVP just isn't fun anymore. IF there was no such thing as emperor and everyone was on a level playing field..it would be amazing.

TLDR:

On low pop campaigns, remove Emperor, so everyone is on a level playing field since there are so few people. Emperor OPness makes people quit the server. and on low pop campaigns it hurts us badly sicne we need every man we can get.

@ZOS_BrianWheeler‌

Its a huge pain everywhere to deal with these emperors that got there in the first place by abusing game mechanics and will not hold back from using the emperor bonuses in the same way.

Remove emperor bonuses altoghether, the emperorship system is broken and encourages people to cheat, glitch, abuse mechanics and so on. Make it a title only achievement.

though I partly agree, Make the emperor have some "okay" group buffs only. But having 1 emperor rule an entire server due to population just gets old

popatiberiuoneb18_ESO

SwampRaider wrote: »

popatiberiuoneb18_ESO wrote: »

SwampRaider wrote: »

Being as that i have seen BOTH sides of the issue, please remove the ability to have emperor on low pop campaigns.

after getting 1 shot by siege no matter how many purges, it gets old. The fact that a DK emperor can solo keeps and outposts...just no. he took down 10 players in front of my eyes that were level 30-Vr2. easily.

Mind you, this isn't a zerg campaign, Chrysamere[NA] is very very low pop. It is so low pop, that 12 AD took the whole map with 2 DC on.

the opposing emperor had about 12 guys (mostly vr8+) and EP and DC were attacking 4 places at once( collectively EP and DC had maybe 60 people). Yet the AD group managed to rush in and stop all attacks in tandem almost.

The reason why i bring this up, is that the Emperor is somewhat unkillable and matters more on low pop campaigns than anywhere else. They can do alot more with the utility and buss they have and it makes people leave the server. People on my side have quit because they just didn't want to deal with a DK emperor on a low pop server.

I have seen both sides. I have seen the side with an emperor and watching our enemies die in the masses. BUt now, I see the horror.

a 100 person EP guild left Chrysamere because a DC emperor kept 1 shotting everyone with siege.

Now this AD DK emperor is giving us a run for our money. PVP just isn't fun anymore. IF there was no such thing as emperor and everyone was on a level playing field..it would be amazing.

TLDR:

On low pop campaigns, remove Emperor, so everyone is on a level playing field since there are so few people. Emperor OPness makes people quit the server. and on low pop campaigns it hurts us badly sicne we need every man we can get.

@ZOS_BrianWheeler‌

Its a huge pain everywhere to deal with these emperors that got there in the first place by abusing game mechanics and will not hold back from using the emperor bonuses in the same way.

Remove emperor bonuses altoghether, the emperorship system is broken and encourages people to cheat, glitch, abuse mechanics and so on. Make it a title only achievement.

though I partly agree, Make the emperor have some "okay" group buffs only. But having 1 emperor rule an entire server due to population just gets old

Yes, i like your idea. By making the emperor have some group buffing abilities you would encourage group play but then they should design a better crowning sistem. The former emperors should have nothing but the title though

TheGrimaceOR

Crazy so you mean DK emperors can take on huge groups of players by themselves? But I thought ZoS nerfed vampire? But that would mean the problem was actually DK ultimate spamming and the fact of being emperor... crrrraaazzzzy.

SwampRaider

TheGrimaceOR wrote: »

Crazy so you mean DK emperors can take on huge groups of players by themselves? But I thought ZoS nerfed vampire? But that would mean the problem was actually DK ultimate spamming and the fact of being emperor... crrrraaazzzzy.

yes. The emperor can sneak into a keep, spam talons and standard and kill everyone who's standing on the flag capping it. and this is a problem on low pop campaigns where there are more lowbies than V10's. Basically the DK emperor can rule the server regardless of the amount of tactics and numbers you use.

at this point, its making people leave the server rather than be attracted to it.

Like Arcanus Magus has said, DC and EP are having trouble getting people to play on that server where this is happening because the emperor just deletes the progress we make when we sleep or makes people leave mid fight to go to another campaign. (lucky for EP, he leaves their 3 keeps alone because he said "they aren't a threat")

It's come down to where people on DC just drop group and go to AB or bloodthorn, because they had enough of the emperor.

If I have a group of 20, 7 or so people leave because of the OP emperor stats and abilities. and 7 people leaving is a crutch on a low pop server 20 DC is not enough to fight an emperor+ 20 AD. Even with 5-20 EP on, progress is slow and gets wiped really fast. without the Emperor, the campaign is more balanced and fun.

Granted, the Emperor needs those stats on high pop zerg campaigns, but the small scale tactical combat and personable experience of low pop campaigns gets ruined/destroyed when 1 player can upset the balance so much. Especially with an Emperor that doesn't sleep. and even when hes not sleeping we don't have enough people to dethrone him

EDIT: Not to mention, AD dominated campaign attracts AD for scroll bonuses and Emperor bonus. We don't want more AD or we can NEVER fix this issue

maholi

I have to agree, I think the problem isn't the Emperor buff, it is DK. And a DK with the Emperor buff just adds insult to injury.

Starshadw

I'll say this - I am very, very tired of our low-pop campaign (Goldbrand) being used as a way for the Pact and Covenant to bring in guest zergs to farm Emperorship for person after person. In essence, people call on others to come and guest and help a faction roll the map, and every time, a new person gets the Emperorship and gains access to that skillset. That person sticks around to just before their faction rolls the map again, and then quits the campaign, thus letting the "next person in the faction line" become Emperor.

I think we've had 3 different Pact Emperors and two different Covenant Emperors within the last week or so. It's past the point of ridiculousness.

maholi

Yes, that is what is happening on NA/DB too.