Upcoming Campaign Changes

Aliniel

I'd kiss you if I could.

Unlikely_Ghostbuster

I made it through about five pages of "feedback" which was about all I could take. Too many people hard-up to have the be-all, end-all suggestion that will magically improve the PvP experience.

Ever heard the phrase "too many cooks in the kitchen?"

Whatever changes come, I'll roll with it. If I don't like them, I'll stop playing. It's that simple for everybody. ESO isn't going to cater to each person, individually. Nor are they going to go on the word of one person who claims to speak for their "very large guild."

Fact is, I'll just wait and see if the solutions ESO has proposed actually work to solve the problems PvP currently has.

I play on AB -- have since I hit level 50. I've enjoyed it. I'd look at the map before I log out, see the conquered forts/outposts, and go to sleep with a small bit of catharsis because I contributed to those achievements. What I don't enjoy is waking up in the morning, logging in to get my hireling emails and feed my horse, only to see the map was completely steamrolled by a single faction while I slept. That's what happens when you have one campaign dominated by one faction during non-peak, NA hours.

I'll never understand why that particular timezone likes elves so much. Maybe the vast majority of players in that timezone think PvP is about rolling the map, unchallenged. Fine. Doesn't sound fun to me, and the constant gate camping has turned AB into a ghost town (just like everyone said it would). But sure, you play your game as you wish. That's your right. Although I will say this -- those "big men" who said they'd chase the challenge wherever it goes... they didn't all go to Wabbajack. Still have full AD population when EP and DC are both at low. Still see the same names. Coincidentally, they're the same people who used to spam bat swarm before the ultimate cost was repaired. Go figure!

Suffice it to say, I read all through the "serious problem on AB" thread. A lot of wounded pride and machismo flying around and very little (if any) real talk about the problem. I do believe that the metrics after these proposed changes take effect will mitigate the population imbalance, which is the source of all PvP woes, in my opinion.

Or at the very least, the changes will force certain types of players to show their true nature. VR12s who like chewing up newbies (the type of player who never met an exploit they didn't like) will flock to the shared campaigns. Hardcore vets who cut their teeth the hard way will go to the vet-only campaign. Newbies who need to learn the ropes will go to non-vet PvP.

I'll go ahead and make a prediction: AD is going to dominate the shared campaigns, but the vet-only and non-vet campaigns will be balanced. Fair-weather zerglings will stay where they have VR12s to hide behind, and the VR12s who consider spamming one attack to be fun will have plenty of back-up to supplement their poor play style.

Watch it happen.

This problem *could* be fixed by a solution I saw suggested several times, which is dynamic population caps. One faction cannot outnumber both factions, combined, at any given time. Simple. Otherwise, prepare to see the newly minted shared campaigns end up just like Auriel's Bow -- AD camping the gates every night.

Tendeep

Good start, BUT...

PvP needs to be more rewarding for those of us who would like to PvP over PvE, yes, we do exist!



Thanks,

DK70

I have been fighting for the Ebonheart Pact in my campaign like the devil was on my tail in Dawnbreaker. From level 10 to veteran level 2. Hours of nonstop blood, gore, drama and victories on the entire map. We are going to win that campaign with the effort me and my friends have put into that. Now I read that the campaign will not see the end of its 90 days and am supposed to like this? I am deepy shocked. This is horrible news. Wait with those changes until the 90 days are over. Why should I play this game when our victory is going to be shut down before we had the chance to enjoy our hard fought campaign victory? I dont see a reason to continue playing and paying for something that is going to be taken away from me and my friends.

The changes on itself are fine but dont take our victory out of the air.

pete_gb_ESO

These would be a step in the right direction, but PVP/AvA/Campaigns need long term/permanent rewards to hold my interest. DaoC did this quite well, in my opinion. That game is quite old, but still manages to have a paying subscriber base. Realm Ranks have quite a bit to do with that.
If you're worried about balance, then make the rewards cosmetic - outfits, pets, mounts, etc...

Voidstar

All the changes proposed are great - can hardly wait.

Kewljag_66_ESO

pete_gb_ESO wrote: »

These would be a step in the right direction, but PVP/AvA/Campaigns need long term/permanent rewards to hold my interest. DaoC did this quite well, in my opinion. That game is quite old, but still manages to have a paying subscriber base. Realm Ranks have quite a bit to do with that.
If you're worried about balance, then make the rewards cosmetic - outfits, pets, mounts, etc...

Realm Ranks and the progression is what kept people playing their characters for years and years. This really needs to be added to eso. you already have the ranks just skill points for these ranks and rewards to choose from

Tintinabula

I'm not clear on the original post. They are ending all campaigns prematurely? How many long term campaigns for V12s will there be?

TheGrandAlliance

Tintinabula wrote: »

I'm not clear on the original post. They are ending all campaigns prematurely? How many long term campaigns for V12s will there be?

1, Undefinded
2. ONly 1 30 day campaign

ninjajucerb14_ESO

Per DAoC, what worked and didnt in the battlegrounds, would like to see possibly smaller fighting areas. A /leveloff command to cease leveling while in pvp. More types of siege attacks, grapples and towers would be nice. Maybe introduce bombs that can be set (and possibly disarmed) to take out a wall (and everyone in vincinity). Would like to see snare traps (like the ones in pve where you fought harpy hunters) to set and forget. Crossbows, halberds, nets, bolos, and other snare/root inducing weapons would be nice as well.

Also

MOUNTED COMBAT (and barding for horses, jousting)

Infraction

Instead of changing the campaign duration why not fix the existing loopholes and underlying issues.

I am sure several people are thinking shorter campaigns means different people get a shot at emperor. One change that could facilitate this instead is having the highest point earner online at the time the keeps are taken to grant emperor become the emperor. With the way it works now if someone gets out far enough ahead of the pack then even if they don't play it goes to them rather than the people actively playing at the time.

Fix being able to teleport into other peoples campaigns and the guesting issues. Guesting to me should net you alliance points but that's it. You don't get to bring your campaign bonuses into a different campaign, or just default to the current campaign bonuses to the person while they are active in a different campaign.

Making shorter duration campaigns isn't really going to address any of the underlying issues that people see but don't realize is happening.

cortechsnub18_ESO

Kewljag_66_ESO wrote: »

For the Non Veteran Only campaign this should be a GUEST only campaign for these players. That way it works just like a training campaign, And you can still set your home campaign to same campaign as your guild and join them in guild events and at the keep the guild owns and retain your bonuses from the "REAL WAR"
The Non Vet Only campaign should also have reduced AP rewards and no Emperor. You dont want people trying to stay in here without progressing just so they can get emperor passives.

Non-vets have just as much right to a real campaign as veteran players. Remember, many of these vets grew up in a campaign without vets themselves, as nobody was that level yet.

Unless you are suggesting that only veteran players deserve these bonuses and the chance for emperor, in which case we need to strip those players of those emp powers who earned them back before there were vets. But that is silly, right?

TheGrandAlliance

cortechsnub18_ESO wrote: »

only veteran players deserve these bonuses and the chance for emperor, in which case we need to strip those players of those emp powers who earned them back before there were vets. But that is silly, right?

What is silly is seperating vets from non-vets in the first place.

cortechsnub18_ESO

TheGrandAlliance wrote: »

cortechsnub18_ESO wrote: »

only veteran players deserve these bonuses and the chance for emperor, in which case we need to strip those players of those emp powers who earned them back before there were vets. But that is silly, right?

What is silly is seperating vets from non-vets in the first place.

/eyeroll

Ojustaboo

Something that has just occurred to me, I'm not sure how campaigns work for alts, is our main and guest per character or per account?

If its per account that could cause problems if my mains a vet and my alt isn't?

kaleka

love the ideas can't wait!

TheGrandAlliance

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/discussion/108412/sos-save-our-servers

Plez vote in this thread... the poll on whether all severs should be shut down or not.

Sheneria

I dunno if you even survey the EU Servers.

Here some stuff you can change so EU Players won't riot on the forums once this is live .

Nuke Bow of Shadows and make it a standard 30/60 day campaign.
Blackwater Blade is fine.
Haderus nuke this one and change it to a 30 day standard campaign.
chillrend is fine.
Thornblade is fine.

Just for your own sanity don't copy pasterino what may works for US and implant it to EU. EU players play different.

Fine

Could we have some campaigns where the cap of population is lower? Not all of us likes to be forced into zerging.

Tintinabula

I'm glad non vets will not be thrown to the wolves anymore unless they want to be. I really wish i had the option a month ago.(no i wont be creating a new character to test it out. )

WhiteTigerex

Honestly, you broke large scale pvp with the aoe caps. The massive "bulks" of players that just stand on top of eachother to mitigate damage, instead of learning to spread out to avoid aoe has made the most dedicated pvpers and guilds leave the game already.

Sadly, there hasnt been a single verbal or written feedback from ANYONE in zenimax regarding the players thoughts and feedback on that issue, why start now with something as minicule as this, before you go into a discussion on the larger issues?

Alomar

The addition of a VR only campaign and lowering the total amount of campaigns are the only promising features here imo. In this game's pvp there's already not much of a feeling of "server pride" that has proven to be the driving force by any successful 3-faction pvp system.

To make matters worse Emperorship is the main end-game goal/accomplishment in this game and I believe making campaigns this short (5-7 days) will just make it a common feature that everyone can easily achieve. Anyone who likes this idea, emperor being easy to get, doesn't understand the term Emperor and the significance it represents.

All in all, it's pvp-changes suggested and requested by players in the beta's and PTS coming much too late. The population that could of brought large-scale competitive 3-faction pvp has left, along with 80% of the pvp guilds worth being in.

My sub is already cancelled so I hope ZOS can turn things around for the rest of you guys.

Ytterin

Alomar wrote: »

To make matters worse Emperorship is the main end-game goal/accomplishment in this game and I believe making campaigns this short (5-7 days) will just make it a common feature that everyone can easily achieve. Anyone who likes this idea, emperor being easy to get, doesn't understand the term Emperor and the significance it represents.

Emperor already means nothing, as people used exploits to get leveled and trade it off.

The entire system needs an overhaul with regard to that, and while these may help, AvA will still see a LOT of people avoiding it until emperorship is changed significantly. Simply put, it is zero fun for people who did not rush to emperor to play against 10-20 former emperors, even without counting a current emperor.

I like some of the ideas proposed, like making it one person per campaign, and having them be emperor next campaign, and former after that unless they take another win. Even then, the numbers need to be nerfed on the passives for active emperors... 400% regen boost in combat makes for players that regen health faster than the regeneration skill off resto staff.

Until that happens, greater balance is achieved with stamina builds, and things are put in to stop the annoyances like 400 mercs spawned at one node, AvA will remain dead to many of the players who would go in. *I state these as common complaints I have heard from friends, guildies, and co-workers who play.*

Honestly, however, emperor is already not rare like it should be... so I don't get the whining about short campaigns.

Terminus

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

• Haderus: seven-day standard Campaign that anyone can join.
• Chillrend: seven-day standard Campaign that anyone can join.
• Thornblade: 30-day standard Campaign that anyone can join.

Instead of 7, 7, 30,
can we get 7, 15, 30?

ShinChuck

I support these changes.

offenbergb16_ESO

This is my number 1 concern:

This will be a huge let down the the PvP guilds and communities build around the actual campaigns. What concerns me is that this will force people into certain campaigns or worse - split them up and tear them apart.

I'm afraid with these changes and only 1 longer running campaign, you take away peoples long term goals and make Cyrodill into some semi bland pudding.

My prediction is EU Thornblade will be a complete mess, way overcrowded with looooong queues.

Regards

DuelWieldingCheesyPoofs

Can you add some modes to capure mines ect, with 15vs 15 smaller cap bases for the flag,scroll and again 15 v 15 or something were you can instance of bits of croydill so it effectively makes small scale pvp? And then who ever captures bases,flag count toward over all resources, i miss small scale pvp its too zergy, this way you will have beat of both worlds, small scale pvp and large.

i think if you did this it would give players something to do for mooonths while you work on pve content!

Tai

Considering that all campaigns scores have been plagued by various exploits (mainly vampire's one), and that some campaigns have become just e-peen's wars, i'd welcome a fresh start.
I would not introduce both five and seven days campaigns; i would prefer the shortest to last a week, and a medium one to last two weeks.
You could even launch special events, like weekends campaigns.
In addition to that, i'd like to see crowned emperor the player with the highest score who is online when his faction captures the last keep; that would add a bit of variety and reward player's dedication.

Takanami

Haha do this and you will get SO many unsubs

MasterSpatula

Some decent ideas in there, but I enjoy the long-term give and take of a 90-day server. Being on a low-pop server has its problems but also its benefits. I feel like this proposal is like killing a fly with a hydrogen bomb.