Cyrodiil, Skirmish PvP, & Economics

Draehl · July 2014

I'm just going to prelude my post with the simple notion that I really don't like PvP that feels forced. Be it keep/castle control, battlegrounds, or arena style, they all can feel artificial and contrived in one way or another. That being said, I am very much aware that the industry and a large portion of the player base like score mechanics and would like to propose some features that could improve Cyrodiil within the existing framework- Keeps being the central focus of Cyrodiil, but with auxiliary content for players who like smaller scale PvP and prefer fighting over a more tangible asset- gold & resources. Fighting over a more tangible resource just adds to the thrill and authenticity of PvP, without necessarily interfering with the overarching goals of the zone. With that I'll dive right into my bullet-point format...

Mines/Mills/Farms: Location appropriate gathering nodes spawn periodically.This encourages holding these resources, providing easy access to gather as well as promoting a certain level of encroachment by small enemy groups that might not be able to completely take the resource, but pick off a couple of guards to get close enough to the nodes to gather...

(Optional feature: These locations would be player-instanced nodes as to provide greater incentive, without competing with one's faction)

Keep Guards & Chests: Simply put, place ~intermediate quality chests accessible only to enemy factions in areas close to keeps within outbuildings or whatnot. Give guards a loot table, and have some (of a more defeat-able variety) guarding them. Again, this gets players out exploring around enemy keeps, looking for loot (and mischief?) and can spawn some great random PvP.

(Optional feature: Incorporate killing guards into the justice system, "marking" players who have looted chests/killed guards on the map to players of the slighted faction. Killing this player would award bonus gold

Underdog/Behind Enemy Lines Bonuses: I'll be the first to admit this seems a little contrived, but would do more good than harm: Grant a bonus to loot/gold/gathering based on an inverse of the number of towers held by your faction and/or the distance you (or the delve you are in) are from the nearest allied tower. This benefit is twofold- firstly exploring and venturing deep into enemy territory promotes a risk for reward incentive. Always a good design philosopy and its fun going where you shouldn't be! Secondly... it gets players into maps where they're losing. How many times have you gone into a map where your faction is getting stomped- the zone is empty. You can't mount a comeback. If there were a reason to be in the zone when losing, it could be enough to build critical mass to be able to stage a comeback.

World Bosses: This might be stepping over the line, but I mention it if only to spark discussion. Would world bosses that take, say, 10 players to down be something you would like to see? What variety? Should we have to look for them and be rewarded for finding them before the enemy faction? Or should the boss arrogantly announce itself in zone chat, causing players from across the map to scramble to his location? Defeat him for loot, or some buff to help come back from behind? Both?

Towns: We know there is a LOT of potential here, but why not start with making the towns capture-able with quests available only to the controlling faction, and bumping up the rewards for the quests held within? Guard presence could be minimal, but with a capture point system within the main quest hub building (or town center) that takes longer to cap than a Mine... it could make for some great incentive based PvP. I could go into the hiring NPC militia from the towns to held in keep sieges, but I haven't fully fleshed that idea out just yet

Delves: Not a whole lot needs to change here. They are already fairly rewarding gathering within- particularly Aspect Runes in a couple notable locations. All we need is some mechanic to focus players into certain delves. Be it a daily quest to slay the leader of a goblin camp within or some other mechanic... Some of the best PvP I've experience has been when fighting a boss, getting ganked, and somehow coming out on top. Despite the disadvantage...

To finish, I'd just like to say I'm looking forward to Imperial City. It seems to have elements that us skirmishers are looking for. I'm a bit worried that control of the towers might keep a losing faction out of the city, but whether this is the case or not, it would be great for the wilds of Cyrodiil to be a harsh, yet appealing mistress

KBKB · July 2014

A lot of that is quality, Cyrodiil has endless potential yet it being used at about 15% Faction hero guards, Towns supplying some sort of bonus be it monetary or buff wise, World bosses and smarter NPC guards that don't chill on one side of the keep as the wall is knocked down is a few I would like to see. Random events off the top of my head a small NPC faction army roaming the hills would also be nice Only gripe I have is resources you can't make them a gathering node spawn or you will hit the camp cap with players not fighting just farming and then its a major disadvantage. Something does need to be done to make these more desirable though 1point/hour isn't really cutting the mustard.

Perhaps if your guild owns a keep you could sink 100k AP into it while UA to call for aid from NPCs could be something cool like a mage summoning daedra or cavalry skirting the walls form outside. Just a thought

Dilly_Waffles · July 2014

To be fully honest, all this is is adding PvE into Cyrodiil.

When I'm running with a raid, the last thing we want to do is take down a named mob. We want to be attacking keeps and killing players, not doing PvE.

This will also attract players who only play PvE, meaning factions could be locked out and put at a disadvantage because half their pop isn't adding to the war.

The less PvE in Cyrodiil the better.

Draehl · July 2014

Dilly_Waffles wrote: »

To be fully honest, all this is is adding PvE into Cyrodiil.

When I'm running with a raid, the last thing we want to do is take down a named mob. We want to be attacking keeps and killing players, not doing PvE.

This will also attract players who only play PvE, meaning factions could be locked out and put at a disadvantage because half their pop isn't adding to the war.

The less PvE in Cyrodiil the better.

Perhaps. Though by the same token, we're not getting ay PvP in the PvE zones. It can (and often does in every game) leads to the world feeling stale. PvEvP gives the best of both worlds. You're always looking over your shoulder when fighting mobs and it allows a higher reward for higher risk situations. The PvP in turn feels more meaningful and personal. Cyrodiil can be fun, but you either end up feeling like a cog in a machine or you get trampled by another machine...

Imperial City may be the answer, it may not. It would be nice to perhaps have a Craglorn PvP sub-shard with all factions present, slightly altered to accomodate 3 factions and with increased gains from drops/nodes...

Dilly_Waffles · August 2014

In that case then PvP in a PvE zone is the only way to go about it. Cyrodiil is currently our only PvP area and I, personally, don't want anything near PvE in Cyro because I fully enjoy the huge war and anything that takes away from that, be it aggro from mobs during a battle or less population via people doing PvE, I would be against.

But again, that is solely because Cyrodiil is our only PvP area. And youre definitely right about people wanting the PvEvP element. Your Craglorn idea is actually one of the best I've heard yet.

That adds increased difficulty and gives better loot for the danger. These are the two main things we've been crying out for and you've just solved them in a three line paragraph.

bitaken · August 2014

You are getting a PvE zone that depends on the PVP zone for it's functionality. Believe me it's enough. I played DAOC for 6 years - Darkness Falls was a massive engine to the PvP game - and the PvP inside DF was truly epic.

We just have to hope it's implemented well. It seems good on paper - we will see how it comes out int he wash.

Ghenra · August 2014

The OP is a professional post, thanks man, but nothing of this will be added to TESO

Draehl · August 2014

Ghenra wrote: »

The OP is a professional post, thanks man, but nothing of this will be added to TESO

Maybe not, but if you care about the game you need to try =D

Xexpo · August 2014

Draehl wrote: »

... Though by the same token, we're not getting ay PvP in the PvE zones. It can (and often does in every game) leads to the world feeling stale. PvEvP gives the best of both worlds.

I think the justice system is a good first step at getting pvp in the pve zones.
I also agree with an above poster that the Imperial City will also be another good mix of both.
Imo, the topic is asking for a more Guild Wars-style ESO, I'd rather it not go that direction.

Draehl · August 2014

kaer426 wrote: »

Imo, the topic is asking for a more Guild Wars-style ESO, I'd rather it not go that direction.

How so? Last I checked GW2 pvp was just as much of a zergball keep-fest as this game.

Draehl · August 2014

bump- what are people's thoughts on the idea of a pvp enabled craglorn you could opt into? better drops/node gathering.

nicholaspingasb16_ESO · August 2014

Draehl wrote: »

Towns: We know there is a LOT of potential here, but why not start with making the towns capture-able with quests available only to the controlling faction

I asked for seige-able towns in a post on the beta forums, apparently people don't like the idea of quests being locked out because they refuse to PvP in a PvP zone. I wholeheartedly agree with your post and this point especially.

Karmanorway · January 2020

Draehl wrote: »

I'm just going to prelude my post with the simple notion that I really don't like PvP that feels forced. Be it keep/castle control, battlegrounds, or arena style, they all can feel artificial and contrived in one way or another. That being said, I am very much aware that the industry and a large portion of the player base like score mechanics and would like to propose some features that could improve Cyrodiil within the existing framework- Keeps being the central focus of Cyrodiil, but with auxiliary content for players who like smaller scale PvP and prefer fighting over a more tangible asset- gold & resources. Fighting over a more tangible resource just adds to the thrill and authenticity of PvP, without necessarily interfering with the overarching goals of the zone. With that I'll dive right into my bullet-point format...

Mines/Mills/Farms: Location appropriate gathering nodes spawn periodically.This encourages holding these resources, providing easy access to gather as well as promoting a certain level of encroachment by small enemy groups that might not be able to completely take the resource, but pick off a couple of guards to get close enough to the nodes to gather...

(Optional feature: These locations would be player-instanced nodes as to provide greater incentive, without competing with one's faction)

Keep Guards & Chests: Simply put, place ~intermediate quality chests accessible only to enemy factions in areas close to keeps within outbuildings or whatnot. Give guards a loot table, and have some (of a more defeat-able variety) guarding them. Again, this gets players out exploring around enemy keeps, looking for loot (and mischief?) and can spawn some great random PvP.

(Optional feature: Incorporate killing guards into the justice system, "marking" players who have looted chests/killed guards on the map to players of the slighted faction. Killing this player would award bonus gold

Underdog/Behind Enemy Lines Bonuses: I'll be the first to admit this seems a little contrived, but would do more good than harm: Grant a bonus to loot/gold/gathering based on an inverse of the number of towers held by your faction and/or the distance you (or the delve you are in) are from the nearest allied tower. This benefit is twofold- firstly exploring and venturing deep into enemy territory promotes a risk for reward incentive. Always a good design philosopy and its fun going where you shouldn't be! Secondly... it gets players into maps where they're losing. How many times have you gone into a map where your faction is getting stomped- the zone is empty. You can't mount a comeback. If there were a reason to be in the zone when losing, it could be enough to build critical mass to be able to stage a comeback.

World Bosses: This might be stepping over the line, but I mention it if only to spark discussion. Would world bosses that take, say, 10 players to down be something you would like to see? What variety? Should we have to look for them and be rewarded for finding them before the enemy faction? Or should the boss arrogantly announce itself in zone chat, causing players from across the map to scramble to his location? Defeat him for loot, or some buff to help come back from behind? Both?

Towns: We know there is a LOT of potential here, but why not start with making the towns capture-able with quests available only to the controlling faction, and bumping up the rewards for the quests held within? Guard presence could be minimal, but with a capture point system within the main quest hub building (or town center) that takes longer to cap than a Mine... it could make for some great incentive based PvP. I could go into the hiring NPC militia from the towns to held in keep sieges, but I haven't fully fleshed that idea out just yet

Delves: Not a whole lot needs to change here. They are already fairly rewarding gathering within- particularly Aspect Runes in a couple notable locations. All we need is some mechanic to focus players into certain delves. Be it a daily quest to slay the leader of a goblin camp within or some other mechanic... Some of the best PvP I've experience has been when fighting a boss, getting ganked, and somehow coming out on top. Despite the disadvantage...

To finish, I'd just like to say I'm looking forward to Imperial City. It seems to have elements that us skirmishers are looking for. I'm a bit worried that control of the towers might keep a losing faction out of the city, but whether this is the case or not, it would be great for the wilds of Cyrodiil to be a harsh, yet appealing mistress

Very good ideas mate, lets cross fingers that they will improve cyrodiil with more content in the future 😉

caperb · January 2020

I think this is one of the oldest necro threads I have ever seen.

Still relevant though. Volendrung is not the solution.

ZOS_Ragnar · January 2020

We have closed this thread as it was originally posted int 2014. As the game has undergone many changes since then this thread may contain information that is outdated and could cause confusion for current players. If you feel that the subject is still relevant you are welcome to create a new thread on the subject.

Cyrodiil, Skirmish PvP, &amp; Economics

Cyrodiil, Skirmish PvP, & Economics