Please bring a time restricted campaign

skckzeybek

Hello Zenimax,

do us the favor and bring a time restricted campaign that is only open for several hours in a day. Also the evaluation time could be enourmously long (like 8hours), if it is late hour or in the midnight (GMT). So people who have to work can join this campaign and go for sleep after good pvp and go work on next day.

NBrookus

Not everyone plays in your time zone or has your work schedule, and of all the things PvP needs, a bunch of campaigns to cater to niche user schedules is just nowhere on the list.

Turelus

Or just merge the mega servers and have real 24/7 PvP.

mike.eso

Turelus wrote: »

Or just merge the mega servers and have real 24/7 PvP.

This would likely cause the servers to explode...literally explode.

Weberda

Mikmak wrote: »

Turelus wrote: »

Or just merge the mega servers and have real 24/7 PvP.

This would likely cause the servers to explode...literally explode.

Very true. But this should be the ultimate goal that ZOS is going for with regards to PvP. It would eliminate complaints about zergs, nightcapping, daycapping, the weather, and countless other things. It's what many of us expected way back before beta because of the way ZOS promoted the game. Until a single server AvAvA becomes reality PvP is just going to be a big disappointment to many of us.

Cogo

Hi!

EU PC have 24/7 thank you very much. You yanks have to look elsewhere!

Cody

no. Not everyone plays on your schedule.

Turelus

Mikmak wrote: »

Turelus wrote: »

Or just merge the mega servers and have real 24/7 PvP.

This would likely cause the servers to explode...literally explode.

At least then they would have to buy new ones like everyone keeps demanding, then the lag would be magically fixed because they have new servers. That's how lag works BTW, I know because I read it on the internet.

Duiwel

I am not Australian but how should the poor AUS guys feel when they want to PvP & you deny them that because it's not your time zone...

Sheogorath should punish you OP

Perhaps you should be turned into a nice wheel of CHEESE

FatKidHatchets

I agree with the OP. You all cry about Aussies not being on the same time zone, but they could easily make an aussie time locked campaign also. It's not like the other campaigns are really being used. Just make it so flags cant turn during off hours.

Duiwel

In that case why not restrict day cap too? Considering most people only play from 5pm -perhaps 12am? (a.k.a. Prime time)

Why be so one sided if you want to do something do it right don't be a hypocrite...

Bulljoker

stop blues from nightcaping !

Nahz

I would be on board with ZOS implementing several 30-day campaigns which have different schedules. Players could then choose a campaign which best fits their needs (campaigns with no time restrictions could still exist for people who are interested in 24/7 pvp). Personally, I would probably stick to a 24/7 campaign as my pvp guild has members who live in different countries and time zones, but that still play with the rest of the group occasionally.

I'm able to play the game for 2-4 hours after work most days. I know how frustrating it is to go into a campaign knowing that, no matter how well your group plays, you have no chance of winning the campaign because the map resets to one color while you and your group are sleeping/at work. On some campaigns, some alliances may simply not have enough of a presence to stay competitive during off-hours.

I don't like throwing around the words "day capping" or "night capping" though, because people simply have different times during which they can play. Why shouldn't someone who works night shifts be allowed to take back their alliance's scrolls that were captured during prime time?

However, I don't think adding campaigns is within the best interests of the game's health at this time. Pvpers are fed up with ZOS, and I don't think there would be enough of a pvp population to fill those campaigns. They would likely remain empty and become buff servers.

In my opinion, the best course of action (given ZOS' poor problem solving abilities) would be to increase the defenses of keeps based on the attacking faction's population count. Stronger npcs, walls that auto repair faster, and improving npc AI so that all guards within a keep respond when a keep bursts would be steps to help prevent maps flipping without any competition. When a keep's controlling faction is at a significantly lower population count than the attacking faction, keeps could even spawn npc-controlled siege weapons on their walls which automatically target enemy siege.

I don't think it's unreasonable to expect a fully upgraded keep, with fully upgraded npcs, to give medium sized groups a strong run for their money. Imagine the faction skirmishers and menders that spawn outside the towers near the front door rushing to a wall that was breached. The honor guards inside those towers currently guard portals. Imagine more waves of npcs spawning from those portals while the attacking group sieges the inner keep. Once down, a larger wave of npcs could spawn and make it's way to the inner breach, encouraging the attacking group to delay rushing to the flags or else fight the inner keep npcs while being flanked from behind by another wave.

This would encourage unopposed groups to take advantage of mechanics which weaken keeps before sieging (i.e., taking farms to weaken npcs). These time sinks would allow any defending players more time to organize themselves for fights against greater numbers.

People would argue that this is adding too much pve to pvp; but if you're not receiving any resistance from players, wouldn't better keep defense mechanics be more fun than PVdooring without any kind of opposition? I'm biased of course though because I enjoy pvp and pve content, so I don't mind integrating the two; especially if it means reducing the amount of toxic discussions about night capping.