PVP Update, June 2015

Grunim

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Just to clarify, you will keep the Emperor Dye and "former emperor" titles.

And that in itself just be sufficient enough reward. Thank you for making this change, this was something I and many others requested back in beta.

Eirella

Pretty interesting changes, I look forward to seeing them implemented. Removing the former Emp buffs doesn't affect me, but I feel for the people who worked hard to get them .

TheVikker

I suffered for 1 month in 2 Champaigns to get the Emperorship. spending 12-16 hours / day to get more and more AP, keep my 1st place, get enemy keeps, keep ours, repair walls... AND YOU WANNA DELET IT IN 1 SEC? ...
...
...
...

SickDuck

Philthyorc wrote: »

Rage quit incoming ... pretty crap ur taking away our former EMP buffs, way to screw over a lot of people who earned it legitimately.

If that help, in my eyes you're always be a hero.

kamarob14_ESO

Am I the only one that is upset to see the PVE Buffs being removed. The only reason I pvped is to get those buffs so I could get the extra experience. I do not see why removing them fixes anything. Can someone explain? As a pve player I will have no incentive to join pvp anymore. I just feel that this can be fixed in so many other ways.

Suntzu1414

i agree with a majority of the posts..regarding "locking" campaigns.

One suggestion. Provide Hour/Daily/Weekly (according to campaign) incentives (gold/gear/AP/Sweetrolls/free beer),
to lure new(er) participants...espeically, when campaigns are imbalanced (either by numbers or better teams)...

Numbers cannot always counter-balance against a great squad.
But, it doesn't hurt either...and the more people we get in...the (better) chance they will stay.

But, if the map is always red / yellow / blue.
It hard for an inexperience person...to make the jump.

So, there needs to be incentives for new(er) players.
get them over the hump...and into the fight!


Kill Well
ST

Soul_Demon

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Just to clarify, you will keep the Emperor Dye and "former emperor" titles.

I did not spend three days with just a couple hours sleep to get dye or titles, I did it for the passives and the satisfaction of achieving it. Working hard to see the inherit gain by dismissing something like this as a 'solution' to anything currently impacting the game play in cyro.

But, I will keep reading the 'supporters' comments to see if I have missed just what this does to help mechanics of the game that have not been addressed over time and led to abuse and exploiting. Much higher on my list of things to do, but maybe that is just me...

All the other changes seem to be directly connected to issues that impact games current state and I can clearly see where you are going with them, great job at listening to some of the concerns with PvP players in the game.

Garion

kamarob14_ESO wrote: »

Am I the only one that is upset to see the PVE Buffs being removed. The only reason I pvped is to get those buffs so I could get the extra experience. I do not see why removing them fixes anything. Can someone explain? As a pve player I will have no incentive to join pvp anymore. I just feel that this can be fixed in so many other ways.

PvE guilds would often take the time to wipe the whole map one colour in order to get the buffs. This could destroy a competitive campaign. It's a good thing these are being removed.

Psilent

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Just to clarify, you will keep the Emperor Dye and "former emperor" titles.

Told you guys! No more being upset with removal of former emperor passives; your dye color is safe!

Thank Mr. Wheeler, if you removed this dye I don't know what color I could use to match my beautiful red hair. Now, I don't have to worry!

Cagro

All great changes. However, I will go extreme and eliminate all AOEs from Cyrodiil. I do not want anything that can make me lag even a little.

PeggymoeXD

As a former Emperor, I say THANK YOU ZENIMAX. The buff is so insignificant, I could care less about having it. I am afraid turd guilds will still make an attempt to farm for the title (unless we lose that too) I am looking forward to ALL of these changes!

kamarob14_ESO

Garion wrote: »

kamarob14_ESO wrote: »

Am I the only one that is upset to see the PVE Buffs being removed. The only reason I pvped is to get those buffs so I could get the extra experience. I do not see why removing them fixes anything. Can someone explain? As a pve player I will have no incentive to join pvp anymore. I just feel that this can be fixed in so many other ways.

PvE guilds would often take the time to wipe the whole map one colour in order to get the buffs. This could destroy a competitive campaign. It's a good thing these are being removed.

I get that point but if they limited the amount of servers people can join what is stopping another guild from the other side doing the same thing before you know it you have one big brawl. I think just removing the buffs does nothing to help the state of pvp right now.

Kartalin

JTorus wrote: »

DisgracefulMind wrote: »

I honestly don't like the idea of removing the former emperor passives to players who have gotten it in the past year. Perhaps disable it from happening for future players, but why punish ALL players for a system that others abused. It doesn't seem right or fair to take them away when there are plenty of players who actually and legitimately worked hard to obtain their Emperor status, which ultimately led to the passives of former emperor. I agree that emperor farming has been a problem in the past, but I'm tired of honest players being punished because of dishonest and abusive players. There is no way to sift through who or who wasn't farmed emperor, but because of that, I don't think anyone who obtained it should be punished for the lack of response from ZoS on the issue.

Like I said, restrict it for the future, do not punish the rest of us.

I agree with you, in that I don't think its fair for someone to lose what they legitimately earned. But I also agree with removing incentive for farming, and I don't like that those who farmed in the past would retain the benefits. I think a middle ground solution would be an option. Like a former emperor only ability/ultimate. One that is strictly conducive to group play mechanics and not self-serving at all. One would think that a former emperor would still inspire the troops to go to battle, it isn't unreasonable to take that approach in a game environment.

Hmm, like maybe a spell that increased siege damage by x% for a radius of y meters over a period of z seconds, since increased siege damage is part of an Emperor's repertoire. The numbers would have to be small though to not be gamebreaking. Like 10% increase with 20 meter radius for 30 seconds, with a pretty big spell cost like siege shield. Morphs would affect either radius or duration. Eh, just spitballin'

Sensesfail13

If this is what you actually plan on implementing in game, and hopefully soon, I applaud all the changes to pvp and hope you can start balancing classes along with this. A huge step in the right direction.

Darnathian

NO. NO. NO.

Removing former emp buffs has not been requested by the majority of the player base. Anyone that likes this change has not been emperor. You have no idea how hard that is. It is a great reward for literally not sleeping days on end during vacation/work.

This is a terrible idea. You want to get rid of emp trading get rid of some of the servers. I know ZOS is afraid to do that because it might make lag worse but oh well. This is not the solution.

I know a couple of people that literally tried for the first year to get it. They will be crushed.

The rest of the changes are great.

Removing emp buffs? Wow. All i can say is wow.

VirtualElizabeth

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

When we fire up the campaign changes, we will wipe your current home\guest assignments.

Will this mean I won't have to assign a character to a campaign that was in one before? Oh please, oh please make it so!

Darnathian

kamarob14_ESO wrote: »

Am I the only one that is upset to see the PVE Buffs being removed. The only reason I pvped is to get those buffs so I could get the extra experience. I do not see why removing them fixes anything. Can someone explain? As a pve player I will have no incentive to join pvp anymore. I just feel that this can be fixed in so many other ways.

Because PVE'rs literally ruin campaigns. If you fought for those buffs instead of waiting for everyone to go to bed it would have never got this extreme.

We are the opposite. We dont want to PVE and dont do anything to ruin your experience. So why would those buffs be allowed in PVE from PVP in the first place? Doesnt make sense. Probably the best change on there.

Psilent

Darnathian wrote: »

NO. NO. NO.

Removing former emp buffs has not been requested by the majority of the player base. Anyone that likes this change has not been emperor. You have no idea how hard that is. It is a great reward for literally not sleeping days on end during vacation/work.

This is a terrible idea. You want to get rid of emp trading get rid of some of the servers. I know ZOS is afraid to do that because it might make lag worse but oh well. This is not the solution.

I know a couple of people that literally tried for the first year to get it. They will be crushed.

The rest of the changes are great.

Removing emp buffs? Wow. All i can say is wow.

I'm a former emperor and am all for the removal of the buffs.

I would love for them to take it one step further and remove emperor from the game.

Agrippa_Invisus

Darnathian wrote: »

NO. NO. NO.

Removing former emp buffs has not been requested by the majority of the player base. Anyone that likes this change has not been emperor. You have no idea how hard that is. It is a great reward for literally not sleeping days on end during vacation/work.

This is a terrible idea. You want to get rid of emp trading get rid of some of the servers. I know ZOS is afraid to do that because it might make lag worse but oh well. This is not the solution.

I know a couple of people that literally tried for the first year to get it. They will be crushed.

The rest of the changes are great.

Removing emp buffs? Wow. All i can say is wow.

*shrugs*

I like the change.

If it gets rid of the ridiculous emperor swapping, I'm for it.

PeggymoeXD

I will say that Guard and Prox Det need to be tweaked as "zerg busting skills"

Guard is basically useless and Proximity Detonation is about the same if one person is casting it in a zerg. The only use for it now are for sorcs and sometimes sypher fanboy nightblades. No offense sypher you're awesome. And when an entire zerg uses it, there is no escape. I think the damage needs to scale off of players inside the AoE. If it hits one person and everyone manages to escape the AoE, it doesn't hurt too bad, but you've managed to split the zerg up some. But if it hits 10 people at once then I think the damage should increase for every player it hit. Also nobody wants to use a skill point on a skill that costs stamina, doesnt allow stamina regen while toggled, and causes you to lose stamina while using it. That's just too much stamina.

Recremen

Interesting, I definitely like some of these changes, but some of them seem either irrelevant (to my knowledge) or actually detrimental to the objectives.

I'm fine with the changes to Emperor, there's no real reason to give former emperors an advantage over others, and we still have the title and amazing red dye for keepsakes, so it's all good from my perspective. I don't think this will have any impact on "Emperor Farming", though. Can anyone give an actual definition for what that even is? Keep trading between alliances? That hasn't happened, to my knowledge, in literally a year. Are there just too many people getting Emperor for people's sense of accomplishment? That's kind of too bad, because that's just going to keep happening. The experienced PvPers are really good at coordinating these pushes and timing them well so that there's a shot at getting it, and I don't see anything wrong with that, it's the highlight of an evening.

I like removing the out-of-Cyro buffs, because that used to be quite an issue, but I don't honestly know how much of an issue it's been for months now. I know the night crews like to roll over whatever map their on at like 4AM and flip every keep, but by primetime things tend to be far more balanced again, and that's when most people are running their dungeons and trials. Heck, one of the reasons my guild jumps around campaigns so much is to keep from owning a whole map for too long.

Speaking of jumping around campaigns, I cannot recommend the changes to campaign jumping you're looking at, at least with things as they are now. There's nothing I'd like more than to stick in a single campaign, have good fights against good players, and get them gold rewards by the end of it, but this just doesn't happen right now. It's been my experience that when one faction is overpopulated and either of the others aren't, you don't get more people coming in to defend, you get a dead campaign. Right now, we can at least jump to another campaign, fight some folks on more even terms there, and drag (hopefully only one of) the competitive guilds with us into new territory to help spread the population and zergs. If, on the other hand, we can't jump to friends/group members/guest campaigns, we're stuck with two options: get consistently rolled by 3x the numbers or quit for the night.

Wycks

All these changes are a really good step in the right direction, despite the whining.

If your crying about emp buffs, to bad, its ruins the meta game which is more important that your selfish BS.

The only think I would add is to buff the keeps/guards on low pop servers, they need a fighting chance and a high pop server can take over a keep in minutes giving the smaller force no time to defend.

Remember DOAC gaurds? They could get buffed enough that it required a game plan to take a lvl 10 keep or they would wipe a zerg, we need some of that.

Ojustaboo

Garion wrote: »

Heresiarch wrote: »

Why is everybody so salty about the travel to friends bit? Because your faction can't be in all campaigns at all times? Oh no. I get that it is not allowing for freedom of playstyle, but if people don't think that it was being abused, you're in denial.

The former emps who received the title through blood, sweat and tears having their passive stripped away does suck, but this should have been removed from the game when the emperor farming was at its height. Now... it's just sort of an afterthought. I think it would have been a big slap in the face to the RIGHT people if it had been done many months ago. Not that emperor farming isn't still a thing, of course, but it's not as easy.

I don't really care since I don't have emp buffs to lose, but there are a few good emps out there who get some of my feels.

I don't understand though, how is it apparently "abused". Yes people campaign hop - but I still don't see why this is a problem? If I am playing on TB and it turns into a laggy messy where the only fights are train vs train, I'm going to move elsewhere. Remove the ability to move elsewhere and I am going to log out. How is this a good thing?

I THINK the abuse goes something like:

You have your main in EP. You create a DC alt. You can't put your alt into the same campaign as your main.

But you can enter that campaign with your alt by travelling to a friend. Then you can guide your EP friends right to the DC players.

Not sure if I've got it exactly right, but it's something along those lines.

We sussed out a few DC players who weren't really. We hide, EP come literally straight to us, no searching for us, as they are being guided.

Valnas

the zos motto is if you can't fix it, remove it.

Former Former Emperor (single player objective)
Former Forward Camps (fast transit and pace of play)
Former Mercenary contracts (population)
Former Ground Oil (lag/congestion of groups)
Former Oil Catapult no purge
Former 100% heal debuff

You had a bunch of mechanics that worked and allows small groups and large to impact Cyrodiil, removed them do to feedback from 'players', and wonder why the game struggles to perform at the level it used to and why play has turned into tho zergs seiging eachother.

Please add more skills/passives for the alliance war trees. I think at 45 or 50 a unique group buff / ultimate, or a marker on the map would be nice.

PeggymoeXD

milthalas wrote: »

JTorus wrote: »

DisgracefulMind wrote: »

I honestly don't like the idea of removing the former emperor passives to players who have gotten it in the past year. Perhaps disable it from happening for future players, but why punish ALL players for a system that others abused. It doesn't seem right or fair to take them away when there are plenty of players who actually and legitimately worked hard to obtain their Emperor status, which ultimately led to the passives of former emperor. I agree that emperor farming has been a problem in the past, but I'm tired of honest players being punished because of dishonest and abusive players. There is no way to sift through who or who wasn't farmed emperor, but because of that, I don't think anyone who obtained it should be punished for the lack of response from ZoS on the issue.

Like I said, restrict it for the future, do not punish the rest of us.

I agree with you, in that I don't think its fair for someone to lose what they legitimately earned. But I also agree with removing incentive for farming, and I don't like that those who farmed in the past would retain the benefits. I think a middle ground solution would be an option. Like a former emperor only ability/ultimate. One that is strictly conducive to group play mechanics and not self-serving at all. One would think that a former emperor would still inspire the troops to go to battle, it isn't unreasonable to take that approach in a game environment.

Hmm, like maybe a spell that increased siege damage by x% for a radius of y meters over a period of z seconds, since increased siege damage is part of an Emperor's repertoire. The numbers would have to be small though to not be gamebreaking. Like 10% increase with 20 meter radius for 30 seconds, with a pretty big spell cost like siege shield. Morphs would affect either radius or duration. Eh, just spitballin'

I too have the former emp passives. And it's kinda sad that the farming of emp has caused those who earned it honestly with hard work and long nights are losing the passives now. But I think it's a necessary step to making Cyrodiil enjoyable once again. Plus, the buffs aren't really all that great. The only one that's really noticeable is the reduced ultimate cost.

FluffiestOne

Valnas wrote: »

the zos motto is if you can't fix it, remove it.

Former Former Emperor (single player objective)
Former Forward Camps (fast transit and pace of play)
Former Mercenary contracts (population)
Former Ground Oil (lag/congestion of groups)
Former Oil Catapult no purge
Former 100% heal debuff

You had a bunch of mechanics that worked and allows small groups and large to impact Cyrodiil, removed them do to feedback from 'players', and wonder why the game struggles to perform at the level it used to and why play has turned into tho zergs seiging eachother.

Please add more skills/passives for the alliance war trees. I think at 45 or 50 a unique group buff / ultimate, or a marker on the map would be nice.

+1

Darnathian

Valnas wrote: »

the zos motto is if you can't fix it, remove it.

Former Former Emperor (single player objective)
Former Forward Camps (fast transit and pace of play)
Former Mercenary contracts (population)
Former Ground Oil (lag/congestion of groups)
Former Oil Catapult no purge
Former 100% heal debuff

You had a bunch of mechanics that worked and allows small groups and large to impact Cyrodiil, removed them do to feedback from 'players', and wonder why the game struggles to perform at the level it used to and why play has turned into tho zergs seiging eachother.

Please add more skills/passives for the alliance war trees. I think at 45 or 50 a unique group buff / ultimate, or a marker on the map would be nice.

Hate to agree with this but definitely sounds true.

Please someone start a poll on removing emp buffs. Make sure to include in vote whether you are a former emp or not.

Also worth noting this will be a direct impact on the core player base that have been here since the beginning. Hope you thought this through. As a lot of the player base are former emps.

emma666

Valnas wrote: »

the zos motto is if you can't fix it, remove it.

Former Former Emperor (single player objective)
Former Forward Camps (fast transit and pace of play)
Former Mercenary contracts (population)
Former Ground Oil (lag/congestion of groups)
Former Oil Catapult no purge
Former 100% heal debuff

You had a bunch of mechanics that worked and allows small groups and large to impact Cyrodiil, removed them do to feedback from 'players', and wonder why the game struggles to perform at the level it used to and why play has turned into tho zergs seiging eachother.

Please add more skills/passives for the alliance war trees. I think at 45 or 50 a unique group buff / ultimate, or a marker on the map would be nice.

TRUTH ^ - Brian Wheeler says this is a PvP update with new implements, when in reality it's just more removal of things they didn't know how to fix or balance. Yet people are cheering. I don't get it.

Enodoc

Don't forget guys that these changes are all due in the next major update. i.e, the one that adds Imperial City. That should give enough people an incentive to go to Cyrodiil, even if just for a short while to see what it's all about.

Darnathian

PeggymoeXD wrote: »

milthalas wrote: »

JTorus wrote: »

DisgracefulMind wrote: »

I honestly don't like the idea of removing the former emperor passives to players who have gotten it in the past year. Perhaps disable it from happening for future players, but why punish ALL players for a system that others abused. It doesn't seem right or fair to take them away when there are plenty of players who actually and legitimately worked hard to obtain their Emperor status, which ultimately led to the passives of former emperor. I agree that emperor farming has been a problem in the past, but I'm tired of honest players being punished because of dishonest and abusive players. There is no way to sift through who or who wasn't farmed emperor, but because of that, I don't think anyone who obtained it should be punished for the lack of response from ZoS on the issue.

Like I said, restrict it for the future, do not punish the rest of us.

I agree with you, in that I don't think its fair for someone to lose what they legitimately earned. But I also agree with removing incentive for farming, and I don't like that those who farmed in the past would retain the benefits. I think a middle ground solution would be an option. Like a former emperor only ability/ultimate. One that is strictly conducive to group play mechanics and not self-serving at all. One would think that a former emperor would still inspire the troops to go to battle, it isn't unreasonable to take that approach in a game environment.

Hmm, like maybe a spell that increased siege damage by x% for a radius of y meters over a period of z seconds, since increased siege damage is part of an Emperor's repertoire. The numbers would have to be small though to not be gamebreaking. Like 10% increase with 20 meter radius for 30 seconds, with a pretty big spell cost like siege shield. Morphs would affect either radius or duration. Eh, just spitballin'

I too have the former emp passives. And it's kinda sad that the farming of emp has caused those who earned it honestly with hard work and long nights are losing the passives now. But I think it's a necessary step to making Cyrodiil enjoyable once again. Plus, the buffs aren't really all that great. The only one that's really noticeable is the reduced ultimate cost.

The ulti cost is HUGE. And a great reward for an achievement that you lose a ton of sleep and the stress associated with it. WOW.