Gated Access Campaigns

Kupoking

We need them on every campaigns.

It must be the reward, to get access to the cool gear.

edit: and remove at least 1 campaign while your at it please.

Silverminken

I agree.

mook-eb16_ESO

The gated access is still not working out for pvpers ,basically a couple guilds take the keeps on axe campaign then we have free loaders who want to just do IC and don't participate in the pvp. Personally I think IC is killing the cyro pvp part . I think IC should be a completely separate instance, with its own population and separate entrance from the main cyro. The pvp guild I'm part of have to port around campaigns looking for cyro pvp action. Cyro has just become a buff for IC. IC is very hit and miss when it comes to pvp you can wander around that place for ages and find none. I think IC as part of standard cyro pvp was a mistake.

Takes-No-Prisoner

@mook-eb16_ESO I want old pvp back so badly.... I'm such a lost puppy without pvp. But alias, there needs to be better incentive to actually pvp in cyrodiil now. Only thing that will bring folks back is v15/v16 specialty gear from pvp vendors.

Kartalin

mook-eb16_ESO wrote: »

Personally I think IC is killing the cyro pvp part

We've had emp on NA Axe of Ballswhatever for the last 3+ days (unless something happened early this morning) and while the populations stay pretty low, we've been getting some pretty good small scale pvp lately as EP and DC try to regain access. We were running around yesterday evening with 5 or 6 of us (with the emp some of the time) and a few pugs and had some pretty good fights. I think with a bit more concerted effort EP and DC will be able to take back their access (and maybe more) without calling in the more massive guilds to pvdoor the map.

Takes-No-Prisoner wrote: »

@mook-eb16_ESO I want old pvp back so badly.... I'm such a lost puppy without pvp. But alias, there needs to be better incentive to actually pvp in cyrodiil now. Only thing that will bring folks back is v15/v16 specialty gear from pvp vendors.

Yep, in particular the sets that only drop in dungeons at the moment, not the ones you can buy with tv stones.

BrassRazoo

No.
People want to play the DLC they paid for.

Kupoking

BrassRazoo wrote: »

No.
People want to play the DLC they paid for.

and once everyone will have squeezed all the fun out of it in a week or two, what will happen then?

driosketch

Gating all the campaigns is bad for PvP.

First off, even with open access, you can get Cyrodiil over land PvP action going as long as there is some population balance in that campaign. I've seen it.

Now while IC is mostly PvE, there are two types of PvP to be found there, the sewer fights and the district brawls. And both of those work better with open access. Otherwise you just have one faction steamrolling the others without the back and forth.

Gating will also encourage "buff servers", not fix them. You give the first faction to cap the map an incentive to hold it so that their faction can grind IC in relative peace and safety. And you'll also have PvEers filling up the queues, forcing them to add more campaigns, not reduce them.

What about being able to retake the map while that faction is busy inside IC? If you've been around long enough, you've seen the pop go from one bar to three for a faction the second someone invaded their buff server and dared to recapture one of the gate keeps. You better believe they would leave IC to defend their campaign. And even if they don't, what's left for the other factions, PvDoor? That's not PvP, which brings us back.

Gated campaigns is bad for PvP.

MountainHound

What they need is a campaign with no IC but the top 2% get actual decent end of tier rewards, especially when they are in the top 2% on the winning team. When I say decent, I mean gold Essence thiefwith nirn/divines or venom pieces achieved in unlocking the trophy rooms in WGT and the prison with the chance of Gold, yes gold jewellery and improved glyphs only attainable in PVP. Would also be sweet if the winners get access to a travelling gold merchant whereby v16 Cyrodiil sets can be purchased for double price AP until a new winner is declared.

PVPers need a reason to PVP and keep PVEers out.

Silverminken

driosketch wrote: »

Gating all the campaigns is bad for PvP.

First off, even with open access, you can get Cyrodiil over land PvP action going as long as there is some population balance in that campaign. I've seen it.

Now while IC is mostly PvE, there are two types of PvP to be found there, the sewer fights and the district brawls. And both of those work better with open access. Otherwise you just have one faction steamrolling the others without the back and forth.

Gating will also encourage "buff servers", not fix them. You give the first faction to cap the map an incentive to hold it so that their faction can grind IC in relative peace and safety. And you'll also have PvEers filling up the queues, forcing them to add more campaigns, not reduce them.

What about being able to retake the map while that faction is busy inside IC? If you've been around long enough, you've seen the pop go from one bar to three for a faction the second someone invaded their buff server and dared to recapture one of the gate keeps. You better believe they would leave IC to defend their campaign. And even if they don't, what's left for the other factions, PvDoor? That's not PvP, which brings us back.

Gated campaigns is bad for PvP.

Well so far I have the exact opposite experience of this...

My main campaign is most of the time full of PvE:rs at the moment, this means that the few of us that actually care about the PvP and stuff, most of the time are outnumbered, and when the other teams decides to pay our campaign a visit, they can with 20-30 people outnumber the active "guardians" 2:1 in many cases! And still our team is population locked! And to add insult to this, they get low population bonus too! So they are outnumbers active players in and get bonuses for it!


There is NO incentive whatsoever for the people inside IC to care even remotely about the campaign.

*I would expect to see GATED access everywhere to gain entry to IC.
*I would expect to see when you loose you keeps needed for access, and some more, you loose the option to restart inside IC, forcing you to restart back at the base camps OUTSIDE IC!
*I would expect if you loose ENOUGH home keeps, all your teammates inside IC would get purged from IC, much like how the protective barrier on the scroll temple works! Deal 1 million unresistable damage!
*I would expect people who enters WTG or Prison from IC, would exit to IC when they leave WTG or Prison!


This would force most of the IC population to actually need to care for their home campaign.


I would also expect that the loophole for traveling to OTHER campaigns be shut down! you have one home and one guest, that is where you are supposed to be playing on, not hop around all the campaigns flipping them over abusing low population bonuses.


I wonder what happened to the controlling various parts of IC? now it is just a ridiculous re-spawn run to die, and repeat all over again thing going on. Much like how it was when we had camps, people just re-spawned and then rushed to their deaths and kept on repeating that cycle.



So right now, IC is destroying PvP, unless you want to play 1-2 lagged out campaigns, and most of the other ones are deserted for PvP, with full population farming in IC, and couldn't less what happens outside IC.

driosketch

Well it sounds like you're dealing with an unbalanced campaign. Again, gating will do nothing to fix that.

Silverminken

driosketch wrote: »

Well it sounds like you're dealing with an unbalanced campaign. Again, gating will do nothing to fix that.

It will do a lot more than not having gated access...

As of now, there is almost no downside to whoever is inside IC when you loose the map. Sure you loose Emp health buff, and some minor buffs to XP gains... minor stuff...


If you would get purged from IC when loose to many of home keeps, you would have two options.
1. Go out fighting an retake keeps, so you can go back to IC to farm
2. Leave campaign until the access is restored.

So if most people do #2, population will drop, allowing much needed room for reinforcements to arrive! Where somedays, the queue is over 1 hour long for the reinforcement to wait in.



So can't you share your wisdom why a gated campaign would do nothing to fix this? Do not forget my addition of the purge of players inside IC.


Or what do you mean by solving any unbalanced issues? I do not consider it to be a problem if the other two sides do not want to play in the campaign, I consider it to be a problem if they come in 1-3 raids and flip the entire map and at the same time can gain low population bonuses while at the same time outnumbering the defenders with atleast 2:1 ratio. Because all the rest are in sitting comfortably inside IC with no real downsides to what actually happens outside!

driosketch

Silverminken wrote: »

driosketch wrote: »

Well it sounds like you're dealing with an unbalanced campaign. Again, gating will do nothing to fix that.

Or what do you mean by solving any unbalanced issues? I do not consider it to be a problem if the other two sides do not want to play in the campaign, I consider it to be a problem if they come in 1-3 raids and flip the entire map and at the same time can gain low population bonuses while at the same time outnumbering the defenders with atleast 2:1 ratio. Because all the rest are in sitting comfortably inside IC with no real downsides to what actually happens outside!

So from the sound of it, you're interested in the campaign score, and you're on a campaign controled and pop capped most of the time by your alliance while the other two usually are not. So every once in a while guilds from the other alliances come in and flip the map, spoiling what should be an easy win.

So now let's gate and purge IC.
First scenario, the players in IC, largely PvE, come out. They are unable to retake the map, leave campaign in fustration. Reinforcements come in, retake map, IC players are back the next day along with the queue. Every so often the campaign is disrupted by guilds in the other alliances because they have no queue. So pretty much the same thing, except now you feed the invaders some AP while they do what they do.

Second scenario, with access on the line, your alliance owns the whole map. They swarm out of IC the second the other alliances try to take their own gate keep. Campaign is secure for your alliance, to farm IC, but also boring. Queue remains high, and your pvp friends leave for another campaign.

Third scenario, like the last, but the other alliances are able to night cap the map. IC players get tired of having to gain access back every day, they only take enough to earn access back. Your alliance is now losing the campaign because that's too little to overcome a night of scoring on a flipped map. And the IC players will not help you take more because now there is a minimum effort line, and that's all they'll want to do. In this scenario, your queue is still high and the other alliance still gets the low pop bonus.

Last scenario, IC players get tired of regaining access, they leave permanently. PvP players for your alliance remain, but now come to both a flipped map and and a losing score. Some of the leave as well, putting your side at a greater disadvantage, other alliance now claims the campaign because gated access forces them to control it like the above scenarios. You find yourself forced to move on.

Meanwhile, I'm not sure why it is, but NA:PC Azura is running regular balanced PvP with open access. Gated access only encourages toxic tactics and drives the weaker alliances out of a campaign. It's IC existing at all that is the issue, not the access. It would be better to request a campaign with no IC rather than a gated one.

Jimboo84

BrassRazoo wrote: »

No.
People want to play the DLC they paid for.

True, if not, sub cancelled.

Publius_Scipio

It's funny, this isn't the first thread discussing need for all campaigns to have gated Imp City. We do have one, and that campaign is one of the most empty constantly.