I hadn't considered having it instanced; would that be like a battleground?

Of course an issue with the suggestion of having it as a Warfront Mission would be that, because of the random nature of players, there's no guarantee that an attack would ever occur. Although this could be alleviated based on, in addition to the number of resources controlled by the enemy around a specific keep, whether the game has just given out a Capture mission to another alliance. For example, say DC owns two of the three resources around Alessia (owned by AD), and DC are being given "Capture Castle Alessia" from the board. That would make "Defend Castle Alessia" a high probability on the AD board.

Do we know if there is any precedence over how Warfront Missions are given at the moment? Are they completely random based on keeps you don't own, or is there a logical progression to it? Does everyone get the same mission from the board within a set amount of time, or is it client-side-random?

In my opinion, there should be a precedence of keep missions, detailed below (assuming your alliance owns nothing at the top of the list, and everything at the bottom), in which the ones higher up in the list are more likely to be given:

1. Join an in-progress Assault/Defence (inner wall above 50%)
2. (Re-)Capture Home Gate Keeps
3. Defend Home Gate Keeps (enemy controls 2 or 3 resources)
4. (Re-)Capture Home Hub Keep
5. (Re-)Capture Home Ring Keeps
6. Defend Home Hub/Ring Keeps (enemy controls 2 or 3 resources)
7. (Re-)Capture Home Outer Keep
   At this point, your alliance owns all of their Home keeps, and none of the Enemy keeps. No bonuses are given for controlling Enemy keeps if you don't control all Home keeps, so recapturing Home keeps should have mission precedence over capturing Enemy ones.
8. Capture Enemy Ring Keeps
9. Defend Home Outer Keep (enemy controls 2 or 3 resources)
10. Capture Enemy Hub/Outer Keeps
11. Defend Controlled "Enemy" Keeps (enemy controls 2 or 3 resources)
12. Capture Enemy Gate Keeps
13. Defend Home Keeps (enemy controls 1 resource)
14. Defend Controlled "Enemy" Keeps (enemy controls 1 resource)

Black-Bird wrote: »

The PvP quests are already shocking as is.. example: You own your 3 home keeps, go capture the enemy gate keep along with a resource from the other enemy gate keep... adding "defend" to this list would only add more in-completable quests that sit in your log. I do like the idea but its not practical I would prefer smarter managed PvP quests to be honest with you.

Agreed, they are badly implemented right now. If a precedence was applied as I suggested above, that would alleviate the random assignment of quests and make them more logical. The enemy resource-requirement would hopefully alleviate invalid Defence quests to a point, but you can always abandon a quest which is going nowhere.

A potential solution for what you call "incompletable" quests would be to have them auto-cancel under certain conditions.

• If you have a Capture quest, and the keep is captured without you being there, that is cancelled.
• If you have a Defend quest, and your alliance captures one of the resources around the same keep, that is cancelled.
• If you have a Defend quest, and the enemy doesn't turn up for [an amount of time], that is cancelled. (How long would someone wait at a keep for?)
• If you leave Cyrodiil, all Warfront Missions are cancelled after [an amount of time], as the situation will likely have changed before you get back.

Edit: Also, quests which are not possible would not be assigned at all (eg, there would be no Capture Missions if you own all the keeps, no Defence if you own none).

Black-Bird wrote: »

Or lower the reward and make resource/keep quests like old BRK quest..

I don't know what that is ...... :P

I was thinking a bit more about how the game would allocate a Defend mission; Siege Weapons are recorded by the system as soon as they're deployed, I think? So if the game notices a load of siege engines popping up around a keep, that would be a good instance to initiate a defence of that keep. (Likelihood of that quest appearing would still be based on number of resources, as above.)

It could also be the case that, if you go to a keep under attack, the Quartermaster of that keep could give you directly the quest to defend that keep. (Compare this with my idea of being able to pick up a Warfront Mission at any keep, and turn it in to any Quartermaster; that's in another thread somewhere.)

I would love to see quests like this in addition to the offensive quests, so you can work on both, attacking Ash and defending warden at the same time and not having offensive and defensive quests alternating.

The defensive quests could use the "def tick" as an indicator for a successfull defense, shouldn't be too hard to add to the game... but well, we are still talking about ZOS here so you never know.