suggested campaign: 5 to 7 day "hardcore" campaign

HeroOfNone

Assuming the lag pvp clears up sometime soon, I would like to see a 5 or 7 day hardcore campaign for cyrodiil. In this, the death penalty for dying would be removal for the length of the campaign, removal from the emperor list, and 0% quality of armor. The positives would be rewards would be higher, especially for those that live to the end of the campaign, better rotation of emperor (if they die), fewer 'speed up' tactics like suicide zerging and suicide camp teleporting, and this would provide a higher challenge to folks. A few optional tweaks could include:

General Options:

• higher gold and chance for set item drops per the level
• vet rank or higher
• more AP for kills, defending keeps, taking objectives, and quests.
• specialized quests to kill targets in pvp (bounty hunter with leader board names that are active in the campaign area and not behind their home gate.
• short time frame, 5 to 7 days, maybe as short as 3 days.

Difficulty Options:

• disallow the use of transit to keeps, you need to ride you horse to the keep.
• your own siege can hurt you if you're operating it (i.e. oil spaming the ground around yourself)
• disable zone chat, you can only say, party, or yell things out.
• any faction can hear what is said in say or yell. Taunt your enemies, beg for you life, shout out tactics by accident to let them know you're coming
• armor degrades as you take hits. Get repair kits or visit vendors to keep yourself viable.
• All Players put into first person mode
• keeps have ALOT more health. (Cody)
• NPCs do not respawn until attackers are driven from the keep. (Cody)
  
• being unable to use abilities while blocking. You are in PvP; in a hardcore campaign, so fight, not hide behind block the whole time. (Cody)
  
  

Carebear Options

• allow a short time frame a soul gem can be used to revive people, in case hardcore is a bit too 'rough' for everyone
• Give players a certain number of Deaths, rather than full death, before getting kicked. suggested number may be around 10 to 20, soul gem ressing may only cost 1, while spawning at keeps or camps could cost 2 or more depending on distance.
• being killed drops your leader board rank to zero and you need to regain AP (WarrioroftheWind_ESO)
• Forward camps: spawn with only 25% of your resources, healing done and received is reduced by 50-75% for lets say 15 seconds or so. camps being unable to be placed inside keeps. (Cody)
• if you are sieging a keep for.... lets say 2 hours or more, the attackers will suffer "siege fatigue": all stats reduced by 25%, including armor, spell resistance, damage, all of your resources, and any other stat I did not mention. FCs will cost 2 spawns per player instead of one(feel free to comment on this. again, just brainstorming) siege weapons will do 25% less damage, and deteriorate 25% faster. (Cody)

Edit: Moved to Feedback & Suggestions

Glantris

the only way to never die in PvP is to sit in a corner in a keep and leech ticks. everyone dies in PvP, even the best of the best. locking people out of their campaign for any reason as insignificant as dying is a terrible idea.

HeroOfNone

Glantris wrote: »

the only way to never die in PvP is to sit in a corner in a keep and leech ticks. everyone dies in PvP, even the best of the best. locking people out of their campaign for any reason as insignificant as dying is a terrible idea.

You can sit in a corner and cower for your life, however if they take the keep you'll still need to escape with your life if you hope to leech again. You also wouldn't get the lion's share of AP you could get by actually fighting. All about risk and reward, this just offers higher risk with higher reward.

And yes, everyone dies, but it's still interesting to see how people play when they are put up against a one life to live option. Will you see the same glass cannon builds that are snipe out so easily? Will you risk solo ganking when your enemy might have a group behind them? All this can change when you have one life to live and your limited in some of the common travel tactics. As I offered, there are care bear options like allowing soul gem ressing within a limited time frame.

Also, this is a suggested campaign, these are not intended to changes for all campaigns. You can still play on those other campaigns if you die, wait for the campaign to end, or try your luck with an alt if something does happen as well. You can also choose not to take the risk at all and stay on the "safe" campaigns.

WarrioroftheWind_ESO

I'd say instead of removing you from the camp and breakingyour armor just remove you from leaderboards until you have to claw yourself back up to the top.

I agree. Special events should be more than just a recurring emp farmfest or sub-vet playground.

Cody

Here is how I think it should be. feel free to agree or disagree, im just brainstorming.

1. keeps have ALOT more health.
2.I like your suggestion about the chat. I actually never thought about it.
3. I don't agree with disabling the transit system, then it would be nearly impossible to defend your stuff. instead; I recommend a serious.... nerf(guess that's what I will call it) to Forward camps:
spawn with only 25% of your resources
healing done and received is reduced by 50-75% for lets say 15 seconds or so.
camps being unable to be placed inside keeps.

4. being unable to use abilities while blocking. You are in PvP; in a hardcore campaign, so fight, not hide behind block the whole time.
5. NPCs do not respawn until attackers are driven from the keep.
6. some kind of death penalty..... idk what though. I HEAVILY despise spawn timers. Simply because I pay to play, not pay to stare at a countdown on a screen half the time(not all of us get 30 kills and 2 deaths on a daily basis. lol) ill let other people make up death penalties.
7. "siege fatigue"
if you are sieging a keep for.... lets say 2 hours or more, the attackers will suffer "siege fatigue": all stats reduced by 25%, including armor, spell resistance, damage, all of your resources, and any other stat I did not mention. FCs will cost 2 spawns per player instead of one(feel free to comment on this. again, just brainstorming) siege weapons will do 25% less damage, and deteriorate 25% faster.

darkdruidssb14_ESO

Interesting idea, but I seriously doubt you would get a person to live for the duration of the campaign. I would also be very interested in what those people that could live for the duration actually contributed to the campaign.

I think removing someone from the campaign is a little much. The time to kill is pretty low.. I would think it would turn into a Snipe paradise. Resetting someone's ranking from death might be a better option, but that will still lead to players being fairly useless and leeching AP ticks instead of actually contributing on objectives.

The rest sounds fine.. except that Oil is going to have a dead zone in update 5 so it's not going to be able to be used on the ground. Now if all siege hit regardless of ally or enemy.... that could be interesting. You wouldn't have people rushing through oils or standing in oil drops.

serenenightmare

No more campaigns please >_<

kkravaritieb17_ESO

We dont need more campaigns or any of the so called ''hardcore'' stuff. We need server stability, fix crashes and population balance. If zos manages to achieve these stuff the game will become much more fun.

WarrioroftheWind_ESO

;o the siege fatigue would be a cool addition to the regular game. shoot. I mean yah equipment wears out, food runs low, morale is down etc.

Yes they should prioritize server stability but people really are shooting themselves in the foot cramming into thornblade and ignoring all other servers just because they're 'buff servers'. Perhaps if you're really good at ganking people and avoiding all damage, go play on CR or AS and upset the status quo.

Play on a competitive server for a change.

HeroOfNone

Thanks for the feedback, separated some of the options a bit based on the "Core" idea here of making a PVP campaign where dying would matter into a few more options.

Cody,
Some of your ideas mesh well with this, some of them seem like they would be better implemented as a global change to all alliance war stuff. I would encourage promoting these in another post and seeing if any of them fly

serenenightmare wrote: »

No more campaigns please >_<

Sorry you feel that way. In my opinion most of those other campaigns aren't being played on because people have given up hope to win them and there aren't any interesting features, gains, or new challenges to them. if this replaced one of them, maybe you'd see a bit of separation between campaigns

kkravaritieb17_ESO wrote: »

We dont need more campaigns or any of the so called ''hardcore'' stuff. We need server stability, fix crashes and population balance. If zos manages to achieve these stuff the game will become much more fun.

and

WarrioroftheWind_ESO wrote: »

;o the siege fatigue would be a cool addition to the regular game. shoot. I mean yah equipment wears out, food runs low, morale is down etc.

Yes they should prioritize server stability but people really are shooting themselves in the foot cramming into thornblade and ignoring all other servers just because they're 'buff servers'. Perhaps if you're really good at ganking people and avoiding all damage, go play on CR or AS and upset the status quo.

Play on a competitive server for a change.

As I stated in the first line:

heroofnoneb14_ESO wrote: »

Assuming the lag pvp clears up sometime soon...

Stability and playability always comes first to any system, however there should still be suggestions like these on the table so when that goal is met there can be fun and challenging battles to keep things interesting. This is just one of those ideas and I hope you don't hate on it too much from prior poor experiences in PVP. look toward what something could be and dream big =3

HeroOfNone

Moved to Feedback & Suggestions