PvP Bounty System [Combat the Zerg] My Opinion on a PvP Fix.

xii-santa

Player Bounty's! YEP, Bounty's!

This is just an example and these are not calculated numbers.

I'm going to cut straight to it and tell you how it would work.


If a player has a bounty size of 3000 and gets killed by a player in a group of 24, then that 3000 would be divided by 24.
Everyone in that group would receive 125 AP and also evenly raises their current bounty's by a % of the player(s) killed' bounty.

---

If a player has a bounty worth 2000 and gets killed by a player in a group of 4, then that 2000 would be evenly divided among the group.
Each player would receive 500 AP for the kill and raises their current bounty's by a % of the player(s) killed' bounty.

---

Larger groups gain more bounty points.
If a group of 24 are on 30+ kill streak, their bounty's would be just as large as a group of 6 on a 10+ kill streak.

The idea is. Kill streaks raise bounty's, The larger the group, the larger the bounty per player, once you die it resets to a minimum (group %).

The greater the risk, the greater the reward!
This would give more players the incentive to run in smaller more organised groups though chances are you would still need to run a larger group to take keeps.
In my opinion this would be perfect if AoE caps are completely removed.

Thanks for reading.

MrDerrikk

I saw "opinion" in teh title and immediately had a feeling of dread...



...but this is much better than I thought! (not a moaning thread).

I assume this is only in Cyro then? Player bounties would be interesting in this manner, so I'll wait and see what the actual PvPers think

xii-santa

MrDerrikk wrote: »

I assume this is only in Cyro then? Player bounties would be interesting in this manner, so I'll wait and see what the actual PvPers think

I changed the title to something more appealing.

Yes, I only see this working in a PvP instance, not sure how a system like this would work with any of the PvE rewards.

Nyteshade

I think you're on to something here. But I'm not totally clear on it. So what would prevent people running together but ungrouped in an attempt at the big payoff rather than share the bounty? Might that become an issue?

Artjuh90

won't make me zerg less. just less time ap farming in cyro so i can get out of it asap

MrDerrikk

All I want is friendly-fire to be toggled on some campaigns with all AoE caps gone...

xii-santa

Nyteshade wrote: »

I think you're on to something here. But I'm not totally clear on it. So what would prevent people running together but ungrouped in an attempt at the big payoff rather than share the bounty? Might that become an issue?

The group that gets the kill gets the bounty, every other contender just receives AP based on the % of damage dealt.

Artjuh90

xii-santa wrote: »

Nyteshade wrote: »

I think you're on to something here. But I'm not totally clear on it. So what would prevent people running together but ungrouped in an attempt at the big payoff rather than share the bounty? Might that become an issue?

The group that gets the kill gets the bounty, every other contender just receives AP based on the % of damage dealt.

not fair for tanks and healers

xii-santa

Artjuh90 wrote: »

xii-santa wrote: »

Nyteshade wrote: »

I think you're on to something here. But I'm not totally clear on it. So what would prevent people running together but ungrouped in an attempt at the big payoff rather than share the bounty? Might that become an issue?

The group that gets the kill gets the bounty, every other contender just receives AP based on the % of damage dealt.

not fair for tanks and healers

They have a system for AP gains for healers and tanks, I am just not sure how it works I guess its damage taken without dying and healing given? Anyhow, it would work the same way.

MrDerrikk

Tanks don't have a special way so far as I know, but healing allies does net you AP

Sublime

Perfect, a bigger arrow on top of my head that lures the pugs into the choke-point.

As having a high bounty would be very desirable for larger groups, I don't see why this would discourage stacking.

xii-santa

Sublime wrote: »

Perfect, a bigger arrow on top of my head that lures the pugs into the choke-point.

As having a high bounty would be very desirable for larger groups, I don't see why this would discourage stacking.

It won't remove zergs but it may encourage a lot more people to split off and do their own thing.

There will always be the people that run a 24 player group, nothing can change that, and i accept that but they could make it so EVERYONE is not in a 24 man group and you get rolled over by 48+ people all the time.

C0pp3rhead

@MrDerrikk Tank isn't really a viable role in PvP, especially in large groups, due to taunts not working on players. Going all out on defense basically makes you a sitting target because your damage output is negligible.

In response to this thread @xii-santa: Do you even zerg, brah?

A large group (a.k.a. zergball) is a much more efficient killing machine than a small group. Hypothetical situation: a 4-person group and a 24-person raid attack a keep. More often than not, the raid will tag and kill more people than the small group with fewer deaths as a percentage of their size. In other words, more kills and fewer deaths per capita. Even though each member of the raid gets less AP per kill, the sheer volume of people that a raid can tear through will make the raid more profitable in terms of AP. Plus, small groups wipe more often than large groups when engaged in large-scale battles, hence their travel (non-combat) times will be longer, i.e. they will be missing out on collecting bounties. And yes, many of these small groups will be participating in large scale battles because of the AP associated with taking/defending keeps.

Moreover, if players accrue bounties through kill streaks, the bounties will probably stay rather small. Aside from the occasional lone stealthy ganker, the vast majority of players will accrue a small bounty then die. Even raids wipe several times per night.

In sum, because of more kills and fewer deaths per capita, the average member of a large group will have a bigger bounty than a member of a small group. Hence, zergballs become a more attractive target. Unfortunately, the only way to kill a zergball is with an opposing zergball. Increasing potential AP gains will only increase the attractiveness of playing with large groups that are already oriented towards maximizing AP gains.

xii-santa

C0pp3rhead wrote: »

@MrDerrikk Tank isn't really a viable role in PvP, especially in large groups, due to taunts not working on players. Going all out on defense basically makes you a sitting target because your damage output is negligible.

In response to this thread @xii-santa: Do you even zerg, brah?

A large group (a.k.a. zergball) is a much more efficient killing machine than a small group. Hypothetical situation: a 4-person group and a 24-person raid attack a keep. More often than not, the raid will tag and kill more people than the small group with fewer deaths as a percentage of their size. In other words, more kills and fewer deaths per capita. Even though each member of the raid gets less AP per kill, the sheer volume of people that a raid can tear through will make the raid more profitable in terms of AP. Plus, small groups wipe more often than large groups when engaged in large-scale battles, hence their travel (non-combat) times will be longer, i.e. they will be missing out on collecting bounties. And yes, many of these small groups will be participating in large scale battles because of the AP associated with taking/defending keeps.

Moreover, if players accrue bounties through kill streaks, the bounties will probably stay rather small. Aside from the occasional lone stealthy ganker, the vast majority of players will accrue a small bounty then die. Even raids wipe several times per night.

In sum, because of more kills and fewer deaths per capita, the average member of a large group will have a bigger bounty than a member of a small group. Hence, zergballs become a more attractive target. Unfortunately, the only way to kill a zergball is with an opposing zergball. Increasing potential AP gains will only increase the attractiveness of playing with large groups that are already oriented towards maximizing AP gains.

I agree 100% but when you log into Cyrodiil during prime game time, these ball groups of 20-30+ players cause mass latency/connection problems, thus a system like this would offer the players who don't mind running small scale an alternative. And yes I zerg, brah. I don't have much of a choice right now I cannot beat 20+ people with my group of 5, not a chance. i think i have come across about 4 other small groups since console release.

Lets be real here, PvP is slow becoming one of the least attractive aspects of ESOTU.

C0pp3rhead

It's not the large groups of players, per se. I remember once my 24-person raid got close to another 24-person raid, and just as we engaged in combat probably 80% of the members of both groups suffered DC's/crashes. Besides they promised us action on this scale, but failed to deliver.

In order to really capitalize on this idea, however, you would have to incentivize such a system. That is to say, you would have to implement some sort of tracking/advertising bounty system to reward players who engage in bounty hunting.

xii-santa

C0pp3rhead wrote: »

It's not the large groups of players, per se. I remember once my 24-person raid got close to another 24-person raid, and just as we engaged in combat probably 80% of the members of both groups suffered DC's/crashes. Besides they promised us action on this scale, but failed to deliver.

In order to really capitalize on this idea, however, you would have to incentivize such a system. That is to say, you would have to implement some sort of tracking/advertising bounty system to reward players who engage in bounty hunting.

The only way to counter a 24 man group is a 24 man group and when that many people are clashing it causes DC's and extreme lag that is the entire problem I am addressing here.

Now, i'm not saying get rid of the big groups, they just need to give the small groups people to fight.
About 20 minutes ago, in a group of 6 we came up against a group of about 40 before we got the chance to run we started lagging and disconnecting. THAT is a huge problem, and as a group of 6 we CAN NOT find other groups of 6 in the current meta.

The way I see it a system that allows people equal or more reward from small scale PvP vs large scale is going in the right direction.

I don't want small groups to be stronger, I just want quality over quantity.

If they remove AoE caps and allow the skilled group of 8 to fight a group of 16 randoms and win, being outnumbered by double their group size they should get a better reward than the group of 16 would get if they were victorious. In the current meta where AoE's only affect a small number of people in the AoE the smaller group is going to get wiped pretty quickly due to sheer numbers.

There is plenty of 24v24, where is the 6v6?