Axe and why it really failed

Rayste

Sewer PvP is actually quite fun and brings much needed small scale. For numerous reasons Axe will likely be one side dominant which takes this away. If we stop and think about it, why was there such an uproar about gated campaigns? I think they made a great decision to only gate one campaign.

Having said that, it is my opinion that Axe should be shut down in a further consolidation effort. Thoughts? @ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_BrianWheeler

skillastat

Axe should remain.

But there should be mechanics like :

• If you disconnect in Imperial City and while you are gone your alliance loose the access, you are teleported to the main gate in Cyrodiil when you reconnect.
• If you die in the Sewers when your alliance has lost the access, you are teleported to the main gate in Cyrodiil if you aren't rezzed (using respawn option)
• However you would be able to respawn in the districts and fight as usual.

Those mechanics could be interesting actually.

Minno

This is one of those changes uprooted as failure due to the following:

1) one campaign set with this change (axe) while rest of campaigns followed "always open" rule.

2) player base spread out across all servers with Azura set on heavy population.

It could have been a great mechanic but honestly it should have been on all campaigns or none.

kevlarto_ESO

On NA PC take a look at the pop there are zero DC homed on the Axe and less than less than a hundred total between AD and EP

Takllin

It also failed because as soon as the campaign started, EP flipped it entirely red and took all the scrolls.

Sorry, but I'm not going to home a campaign where before it has even started to gain traction, one faction is going to resort to that bs. I know there are many others who felt the same way.

I also call bs on the excuse that if they didn't do it, others would have. Be above that, help foster a healthy PvP campaign and don't resort to that.

Turelus

The problem with Axe was it was the ONLY gated campaign and it was a new/dead campaign.

Why would anyone go and fight on a campaign for access when thee are already others entirely open to you? There wasn't a population active enough to test these because everyone is so spread out across all of the buff/farm campaigns. The only campaign which matters for PvP content is Azura's Star.

People can say "oh x campaign has PvP" but this isn't a 24/7 PvP like AS offers and unless the populations are pushed together enough that all campaigns are 3 bars or locked at peak times then there won't be viable alternatives and worthy testing of gated campaigns.

/endrant

RDMyers65b14_ESO

Takllin wrote: »

It also failed because as soon as the campaign started, EP flipped it entirely red and took all the scrolls.

Sorry, but I'm not going to home a campaign where before it has even started to gain traction, one faction is going to resort to that bs. I know there are many others who felt the same way.

I also call bs on the excuse that if they didn't do it, others would have. Be above that, help foster a healthy PvP campaign and don't resort to that.

THIS!

I had homed on Axe with one alt as soon as I finished the update. The EP were already taking Warden and Rayles. I logged out and I have never logged that alt again for PVP.

zyk

IC and Cyrodiil are so disparate, they should be decoupled. Do both the fans of Alliance War and IC gameplay a favor and give IC its own servers. Make it accessible without pointlessly traveling through Cyrodiil.

A decoupled IC will be improved via a condensed population looking for that kind of gameplay, and a decoupled Cyrodiil will be improved because it will have less potential for population imbalances.

The concept of gated content only makes sense if the content is actually exclusive. It's not. Nor would this playerbase ever allow it to be.

Jura23

What if the winning faction gets access only if they leave enemy triangle keeps alone. That might be positive change since whoeve wants to flips the map can't have both on the same time - all map + access to IC farming.

azoriangaming

too many open campaigns on EU sadly and everyone flocks to 1 campaign for non-stop pvp, other campaigns you've got a zerg from 1 faction using it as a ic buff campaign

#closesomeeucampaigns

Deandril

What is the point of gating a PVP enabled area in the 1st place? If a fight was necessary to unlock it the people only interested in farming uninterrupted would passively wait until someone else unlocked it. I'm starting to believe IC itself needed actual PVP objectives. Gating not only locks PVE farmers out but also PVPers and it was supposed to be a PVP dlc.

Rayste

Deandril wrote: »

What is the point of gating a PVP enabled area in the 1st place? If a fight was necessary to unlock it the people only interested in farming uninterrupted would passively wait until someone else unlocked it. I'm starting to believe IC itself needed actual PVP objectives. Gating not only locks PVE farmers out but also PVPers and it was supposed to be a PVP dlc.

Tend to agree. It was initially thought of as a Darkness Falls from Daoc type zone. That didn't exactly work ..... not sure why but something feels different.

redspecter23

As a DC player, I don't really care what they do to Axe. It's a non issue for me. Red and yellow can fight over access if they want I suppose. I really was under the impression that Zos didn't like the idea of buff campaigns. I guess I was wrong.

Lucky28

Minno wrote: »

This is one of those changes uprooted as failure due to the following:

1) one campaign set with this change (axe) while rest of campaigns followed "always open" rule.

2) player base spread out across all servers with Azura set on heavy population.

It could have been a great mechanic but honestly it should have been on all campaigns or none.

Not really. i mean IC is pretty much dead i only go there on rare occasions. people wanted gated access because everyone was in IC when it was first released and very few people where topside but that phase is now behind us Gated access at this point would do more harm than good for the content.

Rayste

Lucky28 wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

This is one of those changes uprooted as failure due to the following:

1) one campaign set with this change (axe) while rest of campaigns followed "always open" rule.

2) player base spread out across all servers with Azura set on heavy population.

It could have been a great mechanic but honestly it should have been on all campaigns or none.

Not really. i mean IC is pretty much dead i only go there on rare occasions. people wanted gated access because everyone was in IC when it was first released and very few people where topside but that phase is now behind us Gated access at this point would do more harm than good for the content.

IC is actually making a comeback the past few days. I believe this is because of the center fix. Go try it sometime, there is a lot of action down there now.

Lucky28

Rayste wrote: »

Lucky28 wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

This is one of those changes uprooted as failure due to the following:

1) one campaign set with this change (axe) while rest of campaigns followed "always open" rule.

2) player base spread out across all servers with Azura set on heavy population.

It could have been a great mechanic but honestly it should have been on all campaigns or none.

Not really. i mean IC is pretty much dead i only go there on rare occasions. people wanted gated access because everyone was in IC when it was first released and very few people where topside but that phase is now behind us Gated access at this point would do more harm than good for the content.

IC is actually making a comeback the past few days. I believe this is because of the center fix. Go try it sometime, there is a lot of action down there now.

Where, because on Azura's it's still dead as ever. i ask because i still need a couple things from Molag Bal.

Suru

skillastat wrote: »

Axe should remain.

But there should be mechanics like :

• If you disconnect in Imperial City and while you are gone your alliance loose the access, you are teleported to the main gate in Cyrodiil when you reconnect.
• If you die in the Sewers when your alliance has lost the access, you are teleported to the main gate in Cyrodiil if you aren't rezzed (using respawn option)
• However you would be able to respawn in the districts and fight as usual.

Those mechanics could be interesting actually.

This would completely make it a safe haven for the faction in control.

Its like the biggest penalty for dieing. Die and PvDoor multiple keeps. I'm all for immersion but this a game. There are only a handful of people from the other faction in the sewers from the side not in control.

CaptainObvious

Minno wrote: »

This is one of those changes uprooted as failure due to the following:

1) one campaign set with this change (axe) while rest of campaigns followed "always open" rule.

2) player base spread out across all servers with Azura set on heavy population.

It could have been a great mechanic but honestly it should have been on all campaigns or none.

The gate on the campaign was designed to push more people back into Cyrodiil proper and out of IC. At the time, there was a lot of whining that campaigns were pop locked with everyone in IC.

So that was why Thornblade was converted to Axe. Convert the popular PvP campaign to what the vocal PvPers on the forums wanted. In theory, the Thornblade groups would move to Axe and IC would have to be earned. However, having is not the same as wanting and that development time was a massive waste of effort.

SmalltalkJava

People just need to go there and take the keeps from AD. They own that place. From the EP perspective we need a good guild to man up and take leadership of Axe. It has potential. right now its just an AD farm for telvar stones and XP grinders