Idea for making Cyrodiil campaign more interesting

Sharee

The problem:

Once one faction gains big enough score lead that the others think "we can never catch up with that", it can just sit on their hands watching the other 2 factions go after themselves since "if we cant be first, lets at least be second". This can happen as soon as halfway through a campaign, or even sooner. It makes for a boring "we already won, again, yawn"(hello morning cappers!).

Theoretically, in a 3-way game, one faction pulling ahead should lead to it being targeted by the other two as a priority, but with that "2nd place" this just does not happen. So i thought of a way to nudge players towards this:

The solution:

1, Get rid of the second place. There will be one campaign winner, and two (equal) losers. (Mechanically, this just means the rewards after a campaign will be the same for the 2nd and 3rd place, and they won't be called as such)
2, Killing players of the faction that is currently leading the campaign score gives double the AP.

Both of these will encourage players of the losing factions to join forces against the winning faction (without actually forcing anyone to do that). This should lead to campaign battles that are much more close score-wise(and more exciting finishers!)

What do you think?

Publius_Scipio

I've been saying for a while now that an updated Cyrodiil (Cyrodiil 2.0 of sorts) would be cool. Redesign the keeps to each be unique. Flags in different locations unique to each keep. For example one keep would be more wide and open and another taller with more corridors for tight quarters combat, etc. This would force different siege and defense experiences at each keep.

Maybe new siege equipment. For instance a barrel of explosives or dynamite. Limit of one per wall allowed. Small timer to set and arm. Countdown clock before it blows. Those on defense can attempt to disarm it with a disarm timer. If it successfully detonates it "one shots" walls or doors. Those on offense would fight off the disarm and those on defense fighting while trying to disarm.

Look how good my ideas are. Now everyone go out and get a Greek yogurt.

https://youtu.be/_rsxsMfruP4

zyk

I don't think it's the score that drives this. When one faction is dominant, players on the other two factions are more inclined to fight each other for a better chance of (individual/group) success. The top faction then, usually, pushes the weakest.

If the campaign score was the motivating factor for most players, I believe scores would almost always remain close as the top faction would face the 2v1 more often; resulting in a rotating top spot. In ESO AvA, it's the opposite as players are incentivized to fight the weakest opponents for larger individual gains.

Sharee

zyk wrote: »

I don't think it's the score that drives this. When one faction is dominant, players on the other two factions are more inclined to fight each other for a better chance of (individual/group) success. The top faction then, usually, pushes the weakest.

But that's the thing, you see: The top faction often is not top because of it being hard to fight, but because of factors like population in non-primetime hours.

You don't actually have a worse chance of success fighting them as a group/individually during primetime. People just don't fight them because they feel there is no point, that they will get a better reward for fighting the other underdog(because 2nd place has better rewards than 3rd, and 1st is out of reach anyway)

zyk wrote: »

If the campaign score was the motivating factor for most players, I believe scores would almost always remain close as the top faction would face the 2v1 more often

The scores not being close is because of nightcapping, not because people don't care about scoring.

Anyway - regardless of people's motivation for not fighting the top faction right now, giving double AP(or something like that) for kills against the top faction players will be a big motivation to start fighting them. Even better, it would motivate players to leave the top faction and join the underdog because of the AP bonus. It would have a beautiful self-balancing effect for realm populations.

Drummerx04

Publius_Scipio wrote: »

I've been saying for a while now that an updated Cyrodiil (Cyrodiil 2.0 of sorts) would be cool. Redesign the keeps to each be unique. Flags in different locations unique to each keep. For example one keep would be more wide and open and another taller with more corridors for tight quarters combat, etc. This would force different siege and defense experiences at each keep.

Maybe new siege equipment. For instance a barrel of explosives or dynamite. Limit of one per wall allowed. Small timer to set and arm. Countdown clock before it blows. Those on defense can attempt to disarm it with a disarm timer. If it successfully detonates it "one shots" walls or doors. Those on offense would fight off the disarm and those on defense fighting while trying to disarm.

Look how good my ideas are. Now everyone go out and get a Greek yogurt.

https://youtu.be/_rsxsMfruP4

Cyrodiil 2.0 sounds pretty awesome.

New new siege suggestion sounds like more reliable way to pvdoor a keep without any chance of defense.