Upcoming Campaign Changes

Samadhi

shirt10 wrote: »

Samadhi wrote: »

shirt10 wrote: »

Sharee wrote: »

Personally i'd prefer just two campaigns - one for vets, one for non-vets. Cyrodiil is big enough

I just want to make sure there is a voice against this.
Most guilds and groups of close friends have people split between Vet and pre-Vet. Do not add yet another barrier to grouping up in this game. There are already far too many horrendously implemented 'features' in the game which keep you from grouping together.

At least 3 of the campaigns will be mix between Veteran and Non-Veteran.
By contrast, there is only 1 of each of the exclusive campaigns.

I think this makes the option available without being intrusive.

Absolutely, the initial post here does detail that.

My post was born from quite a few comments earlier in the thread which were asking purely for Vet & non-Vet campaigns.
I just wanted to make sure that the counter argument was out there, just in case Zenimax changed tack based on the louder side of the conversation.

Ah, fair. I misinterpreted your intention.
Thank you for clarifying.

bruceb14_ESO5

Isibis wrote: »

DCGoth_OTG wrote: »

Talins wrote: »

What is going to be done about "alts"? While I do have a "main" I also have 6 other characters over 10 that I like to head to Cyrodiil with. Am I simply going to be unable to PVP with my other alts?

On an unrelated note, the Non Vet campaign may not turn out to be the training wheel campaign that new players expect. There will be some hardcore players that get to 50 gear up and concentrate on killing noobies. I'm not saying Non Vet is a bad idea, but something to watch for.

Lead to twink toons and guilds dominating. Another reason for more than 5 overall campaigns.

Kalanar Highwatch

bruceb14_ESO5 wrote: »

Lead to twink toons and guilds dominating. Another reason for more than 5 overall campaigns.

Battle leveling pretty much makes your gear irreleveant and finding powerful low leveled gear is what I normally think of when someone talks about twinking. Any gear you can make or find at level 49 or lower is still going to pale in comparison to what can be achieved by veterans, so it is still much more starter friendly than now. In any case, how would more campaigns prevent experienced players from starting alts to play in the non-vet campaign?

dennis.schmelzleb16_ESO

tengri wrote: »

Very good move introducing non-VET campaign.

However, one non-VET campaign is probably not enough - it will be locked due to population numbers most of the time because no sane no-vet will want to go anywhere else...

And what about ppl who want to play all three factions?
Need at least 3 non-VET campaigns because ppl who are playing multiple factions wont be able to join the one and only campaign suitable for their level...

So we need 3 non vet campaigns 5 days
3 non vet campaigns 7 day
3 non vet campaigns 30 day
3 vet campaigns 5 day
3 vet...
.
.
.
3 open for all campaigns 30 day

= 27 campaigns!

You cant expect everyone to be happy.


Also imo you dont need 5 day and 7 day.campaigns.

Just make it
2 vet campaigns 30 days
1 vet campaign 7 days
2 non vet campaigns 7 days
1 free for all 30 days

Imo non vet campaigns should be short because of many leveling out of it within those 30 days.
Free for all wont have many peeps in it, as noone will go there under vr1 if there is a non vet campaign.

Kewljag_66_ESO

SC0TY999 wrote: »

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

When campaigns end, the scores and leaderboards reset, but the ownership status of keeps/resources/scrolls/emperorship does not reset. There is a small downtime where no scoring can occur.

So what's the point of resetting campaigns! That makes no sense at all! Resetting campaigns should mean what it says on the tin everything is reset fresh slate and give everyone a fighting chance for the next campaign. That's going be a big mistake! You may as well keep everything as it is now because it'll be like the campaign hasn't ended at all. At least reset Keeps and scrolls for crying out loud!

NO NO NO, Its a persisstant world where actions and accomlishment stand until enemies take actions to change that. When you start reseting the map then you have Warhammer and GW2 all over again. People just give up and wait for resets. "Whats the point of doing anything today when the map will reset in a few days"...
Not having map resets makes things feel like they had purpose and you didnt waste money, resources, or even time.

And there is a huge point in resetting the scoreboard, so someone else can actually be Emporor and people get rewarded for how they currently play

Kewljag_66_ESO

thelg wrote: »

These campaign durations will turn the game into GW2 but only worse because there is no server competition.

Dont do it.. just don't

100k to switch is a joke, you might as well just put up a 3 day timer and just leave it there. people will be hopping around just like now. Same with guesting..

Here is my suggestion. Keep current most populated campaigns and kill of the bottom low pop 30-40%. Set switch cost to be around 500k minimum. Completely disable guesting, it is not needed once campaigns are consolidated.

If this is what you guys come up with you might as well just add battlegrounds and make it easier for us to just cancel subscription and leave.

Look to DAOC Zeni.. look there and find what you need to do

TheGrandAlliance wrote: »

thelg wrote: »

These campaign durations will turn the game into GW2 but only worse because there is no server competition.

Finally somone (else) with a functioning brain posts on this thread.

But its not like GW2, Its like DAOC

The campaign duration really doesnt matter, because its still a persistant world where the map NEVER resets just like in DAOC. All the campaign duration effects is who is the emperor and some very small gold rewards for your place on the boards in that campaign. Other than that, what you do stands until enemies take action to change it

Kewljag_66_ESO

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Hi, everyone! Like Matt mentioned in his Road Ahead post, we’re looking closely at PvP in Cyrodiil right now. We’re actively working on reducing performance issues by optimizing Cyrodiil, and we’re also undergoing efforts to improve the feel of combat, but that’s not all we’re thinking about. As the Campaigns progress, we’ve been gathering lots of data and reading your comments here, on social media, and on other sites. We have some ideas for changes we’d like to make, but we want to get your direct feedback. Here’s a look at what we’re thinking about.

First and foremost, we want to assure you that any Campaigns we close before their natural shutdown time will properly reward players based on their tier reward, alliance placement, and leaderboard status.

We want to make significant changes to the types and durations of Campaigns. To do this, we’d shut down the currently-existing Campaigns and introduce five new ones per megaserver. Here are the Campaign types and durations we’re thinking about adding:

• Bow of Shadows: Veteran Rank only Campaign (five-day campaign)
• Blackwater Blade: Non-Veteran only Campaign (five-day campaign)
• 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.

To go along with these new Campaigns, we’d like to adjust guest passes to have a 72-hour lockout, and to make changing your home Campaign cost 100,000 AP (also with a 72-hour lockout).

Let us know what you think of these changes!

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. Also the PVE should all be set to level 49 or 50

There is no need for a Vet only campaign since the non vets have their own campaign to join and that was the problem. vet only campaigns would cause problems for guilds not being able to play togeather and have problem recruitng new players.

This would be a good system compared to DAOC. There was no level 50 requirment to go to the frontiers but low level players could go to the BGs (non vet campaign) but all the bonuses still came from the real war in the frontiers

Ojustaboo

alex3274b16_ESO wrote: »

5-day and 7-day campaigns are too short...It should be at least 14 days! But 30 days sounds also good.

Agree with this 100%. I think 90 days is far too long but I also think 5 days is far too short.

Ojustaboo

ahardy1476b14_ESO wrote: »

I think these changes sound good, but I don't think we need a Vet only campaign. Just make those open to anyone and if a lowbie wants in let them in. The lowbie campaign is a wonderful idea for new players to adjust to the pvp in this game.

One thing that bothers me in pvp right now is the oil. In my honest opinion I believe that if you put a pot of oil on the ground and pour it on your feet you should get damaged also. I have no problem with pouring it over walls or anything of that nature but it seems stupid to be able to pour hot burning oil at your feet and not get hurt by it. I am also not against friendly siege causing damage, you should have to be careful at what you shoot at and where you stand.

Agree with your first paragraph entirely

As for the oil, while I know what you mean, I can imagine if we took this to its logical conclusion, all my spells will be able to damage my own team, and all my heals would also heal the enemy. Making a lot of the aoe spells etc useless

Ojustaboo

TheBucket wrote: »

I wish they would allow us to lock our XP bar.

So those who want to stay in level 50 PvP could! lol

I agree with this 100% and not just for PvP,

Just to point something out that I wasn't aware of until I hit level 50 last week.

Level 50 is V1

I thought I had to gain another level to reach vetran, you don't, the second you get to level 50 you are vet 1.

Ojustaboo

Regarding the lockouts, presuming that's so that people loosing a campaign don't simply switch to another one mid fight etc,

Having your main and guest that you can transfer between at will still could allow this easily to happen.

What about something like always being able to get into your main, being able to go into any guest campaign but each time you join one and go back to your main, you get a 24 hr cooldown before you can go into any guest campaign again.

Ojustaboo

Hlaren_shortsheath wrote: »

right now you can see the obvious lagg and serious problems when campaigns have alot of people in them.
it would be best of there was a cap of 100 people per campaign or maybe 150 people, instead of the current 200 people.
it just laggs out too much with alot of people.

If there was only 200 people, PvP would be very very boring. I'm in England, PvP on Blackhorn, nothing better than literally hundreds of players on the screen at the same time, gives it a great feel of realism.

Yes there are lag problems, at the same time, I've often been at a keep etc where there are players everywhere (way over 100), siege weapons everywhere , and have had zero lag (and I'm based in the UK)

Kilmister

Hello ZOS,

I have some real concerns regarding the proposed changes to PvP campaigns.

1. Will period end rewards be the same for each campaign? If they are why would we join a 30 day campaign and get one reward instead of the six identical rewards from 6x5 day campaigns? I think more detailed information on this is requied for us to be able to make a reasonable judgement.

2. Given that campaign based PvP is the only significant endgame content for veteran ranked ESO players, does it make sense to limit the vet only campaign to just five days? I ask this because it seems to me that the vet only campaign will become a rapidly repeating Zerg cycle with little opportunity to employ diplomacy with other guilds, apply some strategy and allow time for significant player generated content of this nature. Surely your veteran only campaign should embrace player generated content, encourage faction rivalry and leave some space for a metagame to develop, and not turn it into a five day version of modern Alterac valley.

3. Do we really need to split vet and non-vet campaigns at all? Maybe a few tweaks to the system that manages stats for lower level players entering ESO would do the job without wholesale changes. I don't feel that the split offers much in the way of allowing lower ranked players to play alongside higher ranked players who will then perhaps recruit them to a guild and mentor them along the way.

What information has this decision been based on? Is there evidence that low ranked players don't do Cryodiil for specific reasons? What level of demand is there for a split campaign other than the forums, a survey? Could you share this with the whole community to give us a better idea of what problem may currently exist?

Without answers to some of those questions and perhaps a more open discussion with the community you risk throwing away the end game, and with it a good number of the people that are currently sticking with ESO despite the rather long list of serious mistakes that you have already made, like an EU server that is not in the EU and a bit of a gamebreaker for a lot of EU PvP players, like the lag free mass PvP which is anything but lag free, the changes to AoE target cap that really handicap small well organised groups when countering larger less organised zergs, like broken classes, and probably a lot more.

Perhaps learn a lesson, and listen, and make change progressive, consultative and positive.

DavidTwice

Unfortunately, I feel my biggest fear is coming to pass. ZoS is scrambling to revive PvP as all but 1 server is ever at anything besides low population. Cyrodiil looked great on paper but when people get inside and realize what a cluster jam it is, people quickly lose interest. The major difference between faction versus faction and smaller 8v8 style games (like WarZones/Battlegrounds) is, if you have a bad game (or stupid teammates) in a small structured PvP battle, it will be over soon and you can try again. In AvA on going battles, people stupidity will have long lasting affects for the duration of the campaign. Take Auriel's Bow, AD is so far ahead both other factions that it would be nearly impossible for the other two factions to ever catch up. This causes a major moral decline where most of the other major guilds picked up and leave. This is why Wabbajack is "balanced" and full while the other 9 campaigns are sad, empty shells of their formal glory. Furthermore, these new campaign ideas will only divide the community more! Think of this like a first person shooter. The more game modes and shooter game has (TDM, domination, CTF) the more a community gets divided. Non-veteran players won't like go in any campaign other than Blackwater Blade since they know they will not stomped buy VR players (I know I would). All the other "open" campaigns won't have anybody in them because everybody else will either be in the Veteran only or Non-Veteran only campaigns. And with a 100,000AP cost to transfer home campaigns, anybody who picked anything but the first two campaigns is going to be stuck. I think ZoS' decision to launch ESO without arenas or skirmishes will be this games undoing, as there is nothing else for PvPers to do as AvA goes from bad to worse. At the end of the day, this is merely a band aid for a hemorrhaging game that is already suffering for lag, unresponsive controls, bugs, and class imbalance. I know I originally said I was not planning on quiting ESO, but with news like this, I feel I will not return.

Ojustaboo

NeeScrolls wrote: »

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

All current campaigns will be shut down, and players will be rewarded appropriately according to the campaign score, leaderboard status and reward tier at the time of shut down.

Veteran rank modifiers on NPCs will be looked into to see what we can do for the non veteran rank players but if we can't adjust the NPC levels, we will more than likely crank up the bolstered stats higher.

Please don't change the PVE V5 mobs or NPC V5 Keep mobs anymore. imho, the way they are currently is darn near perfect (challenge wise, a solo player can take on just a couple at a time but it's do-able...slow but do-able. And groups can go faster thru them obviously but still have to pay attention. )

Do you guys use in-game 'metrics' at all? Or are you simply going by the typical whining & complaining of the 'vocal MINORITY' who always seem to over-influence Dev Teams on forums (which most subscribers don't even read) into unfortunately (and futily) trying to satisfy a section of the playerbase who will NEVER be satisfied.

(aka 'power gamers' , who are by nature like locusts and therefore will never ever be satisfied with ESO nor any other MMORPG. So why even bother catering to them? It's pointless. )

Now then, if you guys do end up making these sweeping "changes" , you mustn't undermine nor lose the one thing that attracted so many players to Cyrodiil in the first place: FREEDOM

Cyrodiil, at it's core, is meant to be a free-for-all OPEN WORLD PvP zone, is it not? That means that everyone, regardless of "level" or "skill" is mixed together (albeit "bolstered" ) in like a 'wild west' of ESO.

Please don't change that by now starting to *segragate* players even more. Segragation = bad imo.

Look at someone like me, for example: I started out in Cyrodiil at around level 15 (Volendrung HOME campaign, Week 1) and never left. Why? Because i enjoy long term goals (aka 90 days) and the challenge of going against other players; even "higher level" ones.

I worked my way up the Emp Leaderboard, challenging as it was since i was so "low level" (an almost empty 'number' btw, since it does not and cannot account for anyone's individual player SKILL; as a human gamer) and since our Volendrung server is so "low population" most of the time.

Through hard work, smart tactics, and seemingly insurmountable odds (since most of our sides' better Vet players kept abandoning the server for perceived greener-pastures on Wabbajack or wherever) I went from level 15 to level 38 , when, with help from other EP guilds who appreciated my dedication & leadership, i became possibly the lowest-level *Emperor* ever crowned.

Then, despite being "only" a level 38 Sorc *Emperor* , our side managed to hold Emp for 5 days with mostly just a small Vet team of 20 to 40 players max, plus low-level me, against upwards of 100 DC & AD enemies, culminating with a truly EPIC final battle defending our last Keep for literally 3 HOURS straight (now famously referred to as 'The Chalamo' ) .

THAT is what Cyrodiil is all about.

Freedom. Choice. Challenge.

The ultimate PVP 'sandbox' . Never forget that.

Address the population issues? Sure np. Fix all the exploits? Of course. Smooth out the lag & load-times? Please.

But never lose sight of what Cyrodiil (and 'Emperor' ) is INTENDED to mean.

Integrity matters; even in a video game.

So find a way to encourage (and reward) players who STAY within their 'home Campaign' for it's total duration. Instead of allowing entire guilds to swap servers so easily that they can just "farm emperors" (for the title) without any regard for actually winning the Campaign itself.

./end-soapbox, Nee

p.s. Any chance we can get an update on why the actual *Imperial City* (and 'Ruby Throne' ) content (aka the heart of Cyrodiil , aka the very thing we're supposed to be fighting for, aka one of the aspects of ESO you guys promoted/promised leading up to game launch) is still not implemented? And when it will be implemented please?

I agree with most of what you say, I went in at level 10 and never left my campaign and have had excellent fun.

Also with a non vet campaign, those players level 10 - 30 that find PvP unplayable due to the vets, are going to have exactly the same problem with the level 40 - 49 players.

At level 10, I looked on my map at what was being attacked, went there solo and just joined in with the hoards of other players on my side, some high level some not. It really has never been a problem for me meeting vet players during my levelling as I never went into PvP with the intention of playing by myself. and while I do normally group up with guild mates now, even when I didn't, I just looked on zone chat etc and played along side others on my team. people still healed me, rezzed me etc.

One of the problems with a 90 day campaign is people that abuse something not working as intended, then end up so far ahead of the majority it's almost Impossible to catch them up.

That said, I too prefer a longer campaign, even if it was say 2 months. I will never ever make it to emperor, but I don't care. I like watching me slowly rising up the ranks through a long period, it gives me a sense that I'm starting to play better and am achieving something, that simply wont happen on a short campaign.

Talins

Isibis wrote: »

DCGoth_OTG wrote: »

Talins wrote: »

What is going to be done about "alts"? While I do have a "main" I also have 6 other characters over 10 that I like to head to Cyrodiil with. Am I simply going to be unable to PVP with my other alts?

It would be my guess that the current lockout mechanism would have to go away if this were to be put into practice as it stands.

That may not be such as bad idea though, as the lockout system has had problems in the past. Hopefully the fact that there are less camapigns would help keep collusion down, as the population would be higher and more difficult to collude with others. Plus, you can only be in with one player at a time on an account anyway. (As far as I am aware.)

The current lock out mechanism would also need to be WORKING in the first place. As it is, it does the opposite of what its supposed to and locks alts into your main's home campaign. I have actually seen someone get emperorship on two factions in the same campaign. Emperor passing taken to an extreme.

This does nothing to help those of us who read the rules, and actually play by them (I deleted a young alt for just that reason - since both ESO AND our guild rules do not currently allow for PVP directly between guild members). I can't currently select Wabba as a home campaign for my AD characters (my main DC was in Wabba first), and I'm not interested in cheating in order to do so.

priecher

You can say that the infrastructure changes are for another time, I personally don't think so. You can make all the campaign changes you want in respect to levels and duration, but painting a turd doesn't change the fact that it is still a turd. All you are going to do is make different options for people to not play in.

brian.blackstonenub18_ESO

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Sadly Scourge players will not be rewarded retroactively.

I'm sorry, but this is pure *** and you know it.

JeffKnight

thelg wrote: »

These campaign durations will turn the game into GW2 but only worse because there is no server competition.

Dont do it.. just don't

100k to switch is a joke, you might as well just put up a 3 day timer and just leave it there. people will be hopping around just like now. Same with guesting..

Here is my suggestion. Keep current most populated campaigns and kill of the bottom low pop 30-40%. Set switch cost to be around 500k minimum. Completely disable guesting, it is not needed once campaigns are consolidated.

If this is what you guys come up with you might as well just add battlegrounds and make it easier for us to just cancel subscription and leave.

Look to DAOC Zeni.. look there and find what you need to do

I agree with this in part.

I do like having some variance in campaign length, but the shortest should be 2-weeks. Anything less is just silly. 2-weeks, 30 days, 45 days, and 60 days are nice lengths. Heck, if you really wanted, keep around a 90 day campaign for those who really like the "long haul."

I would keep the non-vet campaigns limited to just 1, 2-week campaign, and as was suggested, make it guest only.

I would not have any vet-only campaigns. It just seems silly to divide the top-end that way. VR1 is still a very far cry from VR8 or 9, let alone 12. VR-only camps will mean the VR10-12s stick together and do to the lower VRs what is currently happening to the non-vets.

Aside from that, I would have 1 campaign of each length. When we see what the most popular length is, add in another campaign of that length.

I completely agree with making mid-campaign home switching expensive. I also agree with disabling guesting UNLESS your home campaign is full-pop on your side (or you are under VR1 so you can guest into the non-vet campaign).

Juraigr

gg guys zenimax on point with pvp

Reuz

priecher wrote: »

I personally feel the Emperor should be an NPC. No more player emperors,

you know...I sort of wonder if when they open the imperial city what is going to happen is the faction leaders become emperor/empress.

CosmicChaos

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Hi, everyone! Like Matt mentioned in his Road Ahead post, we’re looking closely at PvP in Cyrodiil right now. We’re actively working on reducing performance issues by optimizing Cyrodiil, and we’re also undergoing efforts to improve the feel of combat, but that’s not all we’re thinking about. As the Campaigns progress, we’ve been gathering lots of data and reading your comments here, on social media, and on other sites. We have some ideas for changes we’d like to make, but we want to get your direct feedback. Here’s a look at what we’re thinking about.

First and foremost, we want to assure you that any Campaigns we close before their natural shutdown time will properly reward players based on their tier reward, alliance placement, and leaderboard status.

We want to make significant changes to the types and durations of Campaigns. To do this, we’d shut down the currently-existing Campaigns and introduce five new ones per megaserver. Here are the Campaign types and durations we’re thinking about adding:

• Bow of Shadows: Veteran Rank only Campaign (five-day campaign)
• Blackwater Blade: Non-Veteran only Campaign (five-day campaign)
• 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.

To go along with these new Campaigns, we’d like to adjust guest passes to have a 72-hour lockout, and to make changing your home Campaign cost 100,000 AP (also with a 72-hour lockout).

Let us know what you think of these changes!

Over all I like the new changes. And I am happy you will be condensing servers so there will be consistent fighting. I just hope you solve your lag issues that you see in the populated ones before you do this. Also 100k seems a bit steep to change your Home. Then again the AP cost of Repair mats are high too.

Iselin

What are those "end of campaign rewards"? How far down the leaderboard do they go? How do they compare to rewards in other places (e.g. Craglorn)?

In my mind the glaring issue with AvA is that neither in XP gains nor in reward quality does it compare with the far superior PVE rewards, especially if you take difficulty, participation and time into consideration.

It's trivial to pop-in to Craglorn, become a peripheral member of a raid-sized group and begin to rack-up the experience and purple drops. When does this ever happen in PVP?

And I'm not calling for Craglorn XP and rewards nerfs: I think those are more or less where they should be especially considering the excrutiatingly slow place of typical VR zone game play.

Are these shorter campaigns an attempt to bring the rewards for the redheaded stepchild of ESO more in line with the PVE rewards? If so, all I can say is more.... faster...

trooper_cameron_ESO

This changes sound really good. Thanks for giving us a heads up.

Ojustaboo

NeeScrolls wrote: »

Skirmish840 wrote: »

I think these changes make it a lot more interesting, especially for folk who aren't veteran yet and are tired of being "oneshot" in Cyrodiil.

You're probably going to take this the wrong way but... If you (or anyone) is getting "one shot" in PVP , low-level or not, you need to either gear up or learn to play your Class better. (or both)

I'm far from being a 'hardcore' PvP'er , yet as a level 15 to now 46 , i honestly don't recall ever being *oneshot* killed by anyone . (3 shot'd? sure. 4-shot'd after being shield-bashed? yep . But never "ONE shot'd" ) .

Is it more challenging in Cyrodiil as a non-Vet? Well yeah sure, obviously.

But if you read my previous post in this thread, it's far from impossible to compete (and even excel, as i have) . It just takes a bit more effort & execution.

Problem is, imo, most players nowadays expect to either immediately dominate (without using any tactics or smarts...or groups) ...OR they want everything handed to them (without working for it like the better players do) .

ESO Devs: please don't cater to the 'lowest common denominator' player.

Nor to the 'hardcore' extreme player.

Cater to the 'average or above-average' player (the *middle class* , so to speak) . That way, people/subscribers have something to STRIVE TOWARD.

Rather than more spoon-fed easy-mode charity casing. (at least not in Cyrodiil please)

I agree 100% I am far far far from a good PvP player, I absolutely love it. I don't understand what people are doing, are you wondering around by yourself? Not sneaking and getting ganked by the enemy? Is that what spoils it for you? It's PvP you will die often regardless of your level or skill.

I play PvP at least 3 times a week and have done since level 10. I only reached level 50/vet 1 a week ago. Sure a few times while riding back to battle I got destroyed by the opposition, but a few times I and a few friends have done the same to them.

Your going to have the same problem if your a single or couple of level 20 players and come across 4 level 49 players, exactly the same problem.

As I've said in earlier posts, go to where the action is, even if you want to play solo and you will have just as much chance of staying alive as anyone around you. If you think you shouldn't be dying in PvP then PvP isn't for you. My guild often wipes completely and that includes vet 12 players.

I have learnt far more from experienced players on how to survive PvP than I would have if I was on a server with low level players.

I'm fine with this game catering for all tastes, but please don't ruin what is a great experience for everyone I know, for the benefit of those that want an easy life.

Still they will soon see if they have made the right choice, personally I suspect the 30 day everyone allowed will be the most popular and I suspect if there was a 60 day one, that would be the most popular too.

madangrypally

Seems the majority think 5 days is to short of a normal campaign.

So how about:

1: A fourteen day non vet campaign. Ill likely spend much of my time leveling alts this way.

2: Standard 28 day campaigns. At first 3 and when all three reach a certain capacity then add more.

3: Novelty Campaign with a seven day campaign timer. At first there is only one novelty campaign but more can be added later if playerbase likes them. Example 1: Player can only die 10 times before he no longer can select the campaign. Example 2: Imperials enter the fray and all keeps start out under imperial control with a very powerful raid style boss on the flag. Once a keep has been taken it has a chance to be attacked by a new Imperial force that needs to be killed or the keep is lost and needs to be retaken. (Think of trying to fight a raid boss with an enemy faction trying to kill you).


A player is rewarded every 7 days instead of only at the end of the PvP campaign. Greatly increase the underdog AP bonus and make it update more often.
Fix the lag issues.
Reduce AP required on the higher vet rank bags.
Add basic potions to AP vendors.
Change the material in zone to the highest tier (Potency 9 for example)
Give templars a lollipop.

Wolfaen

Things I would like to see..

1. Make leveling in Cyrodiil more in line with the leveling in PvE.
2. Better PvP rewards, even if it is just aesthetic rewards i.e. costumes or mounts. Something that would give us a goal to work towards. Currently there really isn't anything that I get motivated by to gain AP outside of just PvPing for fun. Also add in some gold gain in PvP please. Sucks when I just want to PvP while trying to save up for a better mount. Not possible.
3. Continue to fix broken skills and work on balancing!

Love the direction you guys are going though! Thanks for this. It re-instills faith in Zeni.

EDIT: I think the 5 and 7 day campaigns are too short! I think they should at least be 14 days.

Darlgon

First off.. @ZoS_BrianWheeler. Why dont the following posts appear in the Dev Tracker?

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

All current campaigns will be shut down, and players will be rewarded appropriately according to the campaign score, leaderboard status and reward tier at the time of shut down.

Veteran rank modifiers on NPCs will be looked into to see what we can do for the non veteran rank players but if we can't adjust the NPC levels, we will more than likely crank up the bolstered stats higher.

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

If you level up into the Veteran Ranks while in the non Vet campaign, the next time you zone or log out, you will be removed from that Campaign.

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

When campaigns end, the scores and leaderboards reset, but the ownership status of keeps/resources/scrolls/emperorship does not reset. There is a small downtime where no scoring can occur.

It almost appears that the only reason your OP appears in the Dev Tracker is because @ZoS_GinaBruno edited it.

Now.. down to business:

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Hi, everyone! Like Matt mentioned in his Road Ahead post, we’re looking closely at PvP in Cyrodiil right now. We’re actively working on reducing performance issues by optimizing Cyrodiil, and we’re also undergoing efforts to improve the feel of combat, but that’s not all we’re thinking about. As the Campaigns progress, we’ve been gathering lots of data and reading your comments here, on social media, and on other sites. We have some ideas for changes we’d like to make, but we want to get your direct feedback. Here’s a look at what we’re thinking about.

Good so far. However.. many of us have heard such promises of "listening to the players" innumberable times from devs in other games, (and kinda have that feeling on some things even in this game) and then the player feedback just gets put into the round filing cabinets. So, you will have a LOT of skeptics, as you have already seen in the currently nine pages of feedback.

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

First and foremost, we want to assure you that any Campaigns we close before their natural shutdown time will properly reward players based on their tier reward, alliance placement, and leaderboard status.

Soo.. does that mean you will leave the updated Cyrodiil on the PTS until the current 90-day campaigns are finished? After all, that gives you almost 30 days to tweak their proformance and other issues in a test environment, with less player screaming and hissyfits...

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

We want to make significant changes to the types and durations of Campaigns. To do this, we’d shut down the currently-existing Campaigns and introduce five new ones per megaserver. Here are the Campaign types and durations we’re thinking about adding:

1. Bow of Shadows: Veteran Rank only Campaign (five-day campaign)
2. Blackwater Blade: Non-Veteran only Campaign (five-day campaign)
3. Haderus: seven-day standard Campaign that anyone can join.
4. Chillrend: seven-day standard Campaign that anyone can join.
5. Thornblade: 30-day standard Campaign that anyone can join.

1 & 2 ,. Good idea, too short. As others have pointed out, this will make armies of ex-emperors out there.. Try 14 days. (See below.)
3&4. Well. Good if you are in a guild who is large eno to dominate a map. Still suicide to take an uplevel into unless said guild will protect and babysit an uplevel. Also, again making armies of ex-emporers. (Makes me think of everyone being a Jedi in SWG, and I never played the game.)
5. About right, Maybe some kind of buffed reward (Gold/gear/title) tho for those who stick to that campaign for the full 30 days without hopping ship to another campaign?

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

To go along with these new Campaigns, we’d like to adjust guest passes to have a 72-hour lockout, and to make changing your home Campaign cost 100,000 AP (also with a 72-hour lockout).

Let us know what you think of these changes!

Good idea on the lockouts for 72 hours, as long as the exploits mentioned by others are addressed. (Seriously? Can travel to another player in another campaign without spending AP? When you hit that loading screen for the travel, a box should pop up saying "This will cost you X Alliance points." AND, it should have the declining cost thing, like wayshrine travel in PVE, starting with every AP you have and taking you DOWN to the cost of the guest pass.)

Also good idea on the 100K AP to move home campaigns.. However, I have to ask.. is that really eno, with only the short campaigns you have mentioned? I mean, the "hard-core" AvA crowd probably will need some way in which to make sure they are in the same campaign as others in different faction.

On emperor buffs.. great idea, even if I will most likely never become one.. HOWEVER, just as a former king keeps loosing power after being dethroned, until finally becoming just pretty much a normal citizen, those buffs should fade.. QUICKLY if you are doing short campaigns.

How about this.. His ex-emperor buff fades in proportion to his length of rule, maybe times 1.5. So, a person who is emperor in your 30 day campaign, for the entire campaign, would have the buff for 45 days, with it decreasing as time went along. A person for 6 hours in one of your 5 day campaigns would see it fade in 9 hours, after another alliance crowns an emperor. It would give people a reason to stick in AvA and not just run around with the "I used to be uber, but then I took an arrow in the knee" buff for the eternity of the game. It would give guilds and alliances more reason to defend keeps to keep their emperor in power.

(EDIT) One other thing to consider.. but this is even further outside the park... How about making campaigns fill, then pop another one. Points go into a common fund, and only one emperor in the game.

Xexpo

I don't understand.
Are they really going to close all these original campaigns before they are even over? How does that make sense? I know people in my guilds that are just getting into pvp now, just starting to get familiar with the rivalries and alliances just now... thinking they still have a month to contribute, not everyone plays 8+ hours a day.
The average player isn't someone who cries on these forums... or even checks them. If you want some feedback that consists of a bit more depth than the people who live on these forums, why not try the survey follow-up email you used for beta? (but for the love of god, get someone to proofread it first before mailing it)

It's been two months, and most of pvp has been a joke due to broken mechanics and those not shy about abusing them. How could you have possibly gained any useful info in that short of time especially if it's been mostly diluted by these players.
I know there are a few servers beyond repair as of now but, that is almost completely due to those exploiters stomping people early on.

It also comes off as really pathetic and sad that you can't even keep one campaign open for the initial three month duration.


As for the rest... 5-7 day campaigns seem pointless, as they will be dead empty after the first couple of days. It also appears too short, I mean whats the next step?
a 1 day campaign? 1 hour?
How about a campaign that only lasts 10 mins , can only have 20 max people in it (must be v12 ) and reduce Cyrodill to the size of one keep ... hmmmm

Too few campaigns being proposed; 3 to 5 normal campaigns with 30-60 day durations seems like a much better middle ground than this overreaction.


Lowbie pvp seems like a great idea... but it is usually the breeding ground for twink exploits, so I guess we'll see. But I support it in theory.

Costs and lockouts seem fine but, why not make people not want to leave their chosen server in the first place. It seems like you are going about this system backwards.

tl;dr stop being lazy and just read it , it's not that long

Bleakraven

I want more long-term campaigns, at least have one 60 day, please. Long-term objectives are fun