Remove base offensive/defensive ticks

Derra

for any resource/keep/outpost that is not your alliances native objective.

Slick_007

so remove any value in taking other factions keeps? no

idk

Seems it would remove a lot of PvP incentive from PvP.

Surprised OP give no justification for his suggestion.

Derra

idk wrote: »

Seems it would remove a lot of PvP incentive from PvP.

Surprised OP give no justification for his suggestion.

It removes incentive for a faction to cap the whole map - then let enemies retake one or two keeps just to recapture them in a 30 vs 5 scenario to gain offensive ticks again.
In the process making a map as the following (this is vivec EU 6 out of 7 days during CET morning time) less likely to happen - which is probably the biggest disincentive to pvp there is:



Incentive to capture enemy home keeps (or fight there) could be added by creating a buff similar to dungeon bosses:
5min 20% increased ap gains for capturing resources native to an enemy faction
10 min 20% increased ap gains for crpturing outposts native to an enemy faction
15 min 20% increased ap gains for capturing keeps native to an enemy faction

That way people do not get rewarded for pvdooring an almost empty map - but instead actual pvp gets incentivized.

Derra

Slick_007 wrote: »

so remove any value in taking other factions keeps? no

PvDooring keeps with just npcs in them should not have any value.
It currently promotes asinine gameplay where flipping keeps becomes more important than actually fighting players.

Rianai

I agree that PvE/PvD shouldn't be rewarded as much as it is now, but I don't think that removing the AP gain from enemy home objectives would change a lot. Players would still flip everything, simply because they can and because they want to win the campaign. When looking at the scoring system (and to some extent also the reward system) Cyrodiil seems more like a PvE game mode on a PvP enabled map and many players are going to play it like this. It would need a lot more changes in order to make actual PvP combat more relevant.

Derra

Rianai wrote: »

I agree that PvE/PvD shouldn't be rewarded as much as it is now, but I don't think that removing the AP gain from enemy home objectives would change a lot. Players would still flip everything, simply because they can and because they want to win the campaign. When looking at the scoring system (and to some extent also the reward system) Cyrodiil seems more like a PvE game mode on a PvP enabled map and many players are going to play it like this. It would need a lot more changes in order to make actual PvP combat more relevant.

I´d say a lot of the people currently joining the yellow paintrain in the morning are doing it for the AP they gain by flipping the whole map.
If there was no reward - and in the process they couldn´t get high placings on the leaderboard some/most would no longer care about it as much as they currently do.

If most of them should really do it to win the campaign - so be it. But then they should not get 132000 ap every morning without fighting enemy players on top of that.

NirnStorm

Derra wrote: »

I´d say a lot of the people currently joining the yellow paintrain in the morning are doing it for the AP they gain by flipping the whole map.
If there was no reward - and in the process they couldn´t get high placings on the leaderboard some/most would no longer care about it as much as they currently do.

If most of them should really do it to win the campaign - so be it. But then they should not get 100k ap every morning without fighting enemy players on top of that.

You do realize you are talking about a specific time of the day in a specific campaign on just one platform (no clue which).
In other campaigns across the platforms of ESO there are different players and guilds and zergs, each of them play a different way and have different reasons to take keeps or PvP in general.
If you are unhappy with how unbalanced a campaign is around the time of the day when you play, I'd recommend you gather people to fight the zerg off or switch to a different campaign. Asking for a massive change to remove incentives for players to spread around the map and try to take keeps, over a forum post, is not likely to solve your problem.

Beardimus

Derra wrote: »

Slick_007 wrote: »

so remove any value in taking other factions keeps? no

PvDooring keeps with just npcs in them should not have any value.
It currently promotes asinine gameplay where flipping keeps becomes more important than actually fighting players.

I don't agree with you suggestion, but I do agree with the problem. Saw this asinine action first hand at the weekend, and its infuriating.

PvP its so good, but it could be great with a few changes to motivations. the thing that wreck PvP is people playing it nefariously, and people love that action.

lao

Derra wrote: »

for any resource/keep/outpost that is not your alliances native objective.

i approve. infact all ticks across the board should be removed. keeps shouldnt be the incentive to pvp. competition should be.

dotme

lao wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

for any resource/keep/outpost that is not your alliances native objective.

i approve. infact all ticks across the board should be removed. keeps shouldnt be the incentive to pvp. competition should be.

Opposite. You'd turn Cyrodiil back into the farm it used to be when towers had doors and taking keeps offered no meaningful AP.

The issue is leadership and population imbalance. You can't solve that by removing incentives to take keeps. Like other posters, I agree with the problem but not the proposed solution.

Rianai

Offensive and defensive ticks generated by player kills are fine in general imo (but should happen in time intervalls, instead of only at the end of a siege/defense), since there is nothing wrong with motivating players to fight for objectives, but base off ticks could indeed be removed, because it rewards mostly PvE.

Vapirko

NirnStorm wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

I´d say a lot of the people currently joining the yellow paintrain in the morning are doing it for the AP they gain by flipping the whole map.
If there was no reward - and in the process they couldn´t get high placings on the leaderboard some/most would no longer care about it as much as they currently do.

If most of them should really do it to win the campaign - so be it. But then they should not get 100k ap every morning without fighting enemy players on top of that.

You do realize you are talking about a specific time of the day in a specific campaign on just one platform (no clue which).
In other campaigns across the platforms of ESO there are different players and guilds and zergs, each of them play a different way and have different reasons to take keeps or PvP in general.
If you are unhappy with how unbalanced a campaign is around the time of the day when you play, I'd recommend you gather people to fight the zerg off or switch to a different campaign. Asking for a massive change to remove incentives for players to spread around the map and try to take keeps, over a forum post, is not likely to solve your problem.

Nah, it’s pretry much like this in one form or another on NA campaigns and I assume on the rest of EU as well. There definitely needs to be some changes when it comes to how AP is gained as well as emp. Pvdooring the whole map is bs.

Derra

NirnStorm wrote: »

You do realize you are talking about a specific time of the day in a specific campaign on just one platform (no clue which).

The problem is universial though. In my opinion it should not be possible to get pvp rewards (AP) by only fighting non player caracters/doors/walls.

The platform is irrelevant and in this case just happens to prove my point best. People PvE their way to the tops of the leaderboards in the PvP zone. That should not happen.

NirnStorm

Derra wrote: »

The problem is universial though. In my opinion it should not be possible to get pvp rewards (AP) by only fighting non player caracters/doors/walls.

The platform is irrelevant and in this case just happens to prove my point best. People PvE their way to the tops of the leaderboards in the PvP zone. That should not happen.

I absolutely agree with that statement.
My previous comment was regaring your previous posts in this thread where you discussed removing ticks from certain keeps to try and demotivate a specific AD morning zerg.

I agree with what you just now commented, tho. This is a real issue in all campaigns. Even in populated campaigns like PC NA Vivec you have guilds on every time zone who just PvDoor distant keeps for AP then leave them undefended to PvDoor another.

I think the best fix for it would be to reduce the base amount of AP Oticks give to maybe 1/4 the current amount, and increasing the amount that is added to the tick (for both oticks and dticks) for every enemy player death.

Nutshotz

Shor is an emp trade campaign. I mean payed emp campaign.

Nothing you can do about it besides shut it down and force those players to actually pvp instead of pvdoor.

There are 3 guilds on vivec 1 from each faction might be more actually that pvdoor to the top.

All they do is flip resources. So stating that the AP should be removed is not justified.

Reources at 1.5k
Outposts at 3k
Keeps at 6k

That's nothing for AP. Yes with the AP buff it does add up but to get ppl to actually participate increase the defense ticks and keep capture ticks and figure out a way to spread players out. Like diminishing returns on AP if there is an xyz amount in the area. Yes I know that would be stress on the server which will suck.

Just some ideas but I'm all for shutting down the emp trading campaign.

Derra

PeaNutShotz wrote: »

Reources at 1.5k
Outposts at 3k
Keeps at 6k

That's nothing for AP.

Ok so you do realize that if you have the situation where 1 faction caps the whole map with a group those players gain minimum 132.000 AP per character present for doing that (assuming absolutely no enemy player present to retake any keeps or resources).

That´s nothing for you?

GimpyPorcupine

PvP is ESO is more than just a brawl with other players; it's also a strategy game. And that's what a lot of players enjoy about it.

For the people complaining about players taking empty keeps, remember that "attack where the enemy is weakest" is a time-tested method of warfare. It also gives options to small groups of players that are unable to survive in a head-on clash against a zerg.

So what if a 24-man group is running around taking empty keeps? You can take an empty keep quickly with 6 players that know what they're doing. On XB-NA Vivec, it's not uncommon to see 50+ EP at one keeping, and there's no way you can stop them. Oh well, go where they're not. Cut off their travel routes so they can't turn in their quests without blood-spawning. Take a single one of their home keeps so they lose the associated buffs, and stay ahead of them popping their home keeps so the zerg has to disband if they want to address it.

If I wanted to play a PvP game that was just about fighting and killing other players, I would switch to PUBG.

I would like to see defensive ticks increased so that holding keeps was as profitable as taking empty ones, but overall, I think PvP is in a good place right now.

Except for the lag.....

idk

Derra wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Seems it would remove a lot of PvP incentive from PvP.

Surprised OP give no justification for his suggestion.

It removes incentive for a faction to cap the whole map - then let enemies retake one or two keeps just to recapture them in a 30 vs 5 scenario to gain offensive ticks again.
In the process making a map as the following (this is vivec EU 6 out of 7 days during CET morning time) less likely to happen - which is probably the biggest disincentive to pvp there is:



Incentive to capture enemy home keeps (or fight there) could be added by creating a buff similar to dungeon bosses:
5min 20% increased ap gains for capturing resources native to an enemy faction
10 min 20% increased ap gains for crpturing outposts native to an enemy faction
15 min 20% increased ap gains for capturing keeps native to an enemy faction

That way people do not get rewarded for pvdooring an almost empty map - but instead actual pvp gets incentivized.

Your idea removes the incentive to PvP medley because two factions are not as active in the campaign. It meeely limits rewards to one faction if they happen to get attacked at a home keep or resource.

Recruit more to your campaign.

JamilaRaj

Derra wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Seems it would remove a lot of PvP incentive from PvP.

Surprised OP give no justification for his suggestion.

It removes incentive for a faction to cap the whole map - then let enemies retake one or two keeps just to recapture them in a 30 vs 5 scenario to gain offensive ticks again.

It does not, because there is nothing else in Cyrodiil those 30 players could do. If there were no APs at all, they would still do that, or if they were really desperate, they would just mop up that 5 player squad the moment they would poke a keep.
That prodding people with rewards one way or another is horrible antipattern and simply will not fix bad design. Either 5 players should be on defense, not sieging 30, or actually be able to achieve local superiority by picking battlefield, not being intercepted by 30 players who can travel from anywhere to anywhere and accrete in 40 seconds.

Rianai

idk wrote: »

Recruit more to your campaign.

But EP is busy with colouring Sotha red and DC enjoys a blue map on Shor and they won't give up their free rewards for no reason, so where should those players be recruited from?

zyk

Half the problem is apparent in this thread. There are many who enjoy taking nearly undefended keeps with 20-50 other players.

Most objective captures don't have any scoreboard value. The groups that go around flipping inner keeps and resources usually don't stick around to defend them. Their PVE effort usually results in another without any strategic value.

We don't need to speculate how map play would be without the large flat otick bonus. Before oticks were buffed, there were keep fights.

There were two main differences: Most objective fights were defended unless your group was fast and if you did take a keep uncontested, it was to hold it for as long as possible to earn large dticks through actual combat.

lao

dotme wrote: »

lao wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

for any resource/keep/outpost that is not your alliances native objective.

i approve. infact all ticks across the board should be removed. keeps shouldnt be the incentive to pvp. competition should be.

Opposite. You'd turn Cyrodiil back into the farm it used to be when towers had doors and taking keeps offered no meaningful AP.

The issue is leadership and population imbalance. You can't solve that by removing incentives to take keeps. Like other posters, I agree with the problem but not the proposed solution.

thats the point. all keeps do is create zerg hotspots but we dont want zergs. we want small scale pvp all over the map instead of brainless zerg battles at keeps while leaving 99% of the zone unused. there is nothing competitive about zerg fights. its just something casual noobs can do where they dont get instantly melted and where they can be as awful as they want cos they arent a factor anyway. the game needs to move away from that BS and move towards a highly competitive small scale battle arena where only the strongest survive. its beyond absurd that a random noob can join a pug zerg, go to a keepfight, have absolutely zero impact on the outcome and end up with more AP/hour than the best 1vX/small scale players cos he got some dumb AF tick for 30k from a capture while he has done *** all to deserve it. that crap needs to go, right now

Sharee

All this would be fixed by a single simple rule: A player queued for cyrodiil will not be allowed in if this would create (or reinforce) a population imbalance in the campaign.

Ley

I think people should be forced to PvP in a way that I approve and all other forms of PvP should be fruitless. /s

dotme

lao wrote: »

...all keeps do is create zerg hotspots but we dont want zergs. we want small scale pvp all over the map instead of brainless zerg battles at keeps while leaving 99% of the zone unused. there is nothing competitive about zerg fights. its just something casual noobs can do where they dont get instantly melted and where they can be as awful as they want cos they arent a factor anyway. the game needs to move away from that BS and move towards a highly competitive small scale battle arena where only the strongest survive. its beyond absurd that a random noob can join a pug zerg, go to a keepfight, have absolutely zero impact on the outcome and end up with more AP/hour than the best 1vX/small scale players cos he got some dumb AF tick for 30k from a capture while he has done *** all to deserve it. that crap needs to go, right now

Sorry but that all that talks about "we want" and "noobs" sounds a bit elitist in a game that is supposed to be friendly to new players (It has to be to survive economically). Do you not want inexperienced players to play the game? The day ESO stops appealing to new players is the day the money starts to run out.

ESO has battlegrounds for the "highly competitive small scale battle arena where only the strongest survive" and Cyrodiil is for large scale open world war. Strategically taking back keeps to draw the enemy back from the front lines, and earning points towards winning the campaign is all part of the game.

Point is, you care more for AP than others may. Some may just want to win the campaign, or farm, or gank, or quest. Different strokes for different folks.

Faction-locked maps have been happening before offensive ticks, and I honestly don't think removing ticks will change night-capping at all. Just my 2 cents.

Rainraven

Beardimus wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

Slick_007 wrote: »

so remove any value in taking other factions keeps? no

PvDooring keeps with just npcs in them should not have any value.
It currently promotes asinine gameplay where flipping keeps becomes more important than actually fighting players.

I don't agree with you suggestion, but I do agree with the problem. Saw this asinine action first hand at the weekend, and its infuriating.

PvP its so good, but it could be great with a few changes to motivations. the thing that wreck PvP is people playing it nefariously, and people love that action.

Low risk, high reward. It does seem to be a popular preference. Can't figure why the devs keep finding ways to reinforce that culture though.

Derra

Ley wrote: »

I think people should be forced to PvP in a way that I approve and all other forms of PvP should be fruitless. /s

Well the issue is that taking an undefended keep is no player versus player interaction. It´s player versus environment (namely npcs and keep doors).

Your argument is invalid as it´s no other form of pvp in the first place.

Ixtyr

I actually agree with OP on this. Remove ticks altogether. It decentivizes both turtling and PvDoor tick farming, and makes the focus of fighting more about actual PvP combat - when you finish defending a keep, push back and burn camps rather than sit inside waiting for your AP tick. When you have a group attacking back line keeps, it should be purely tactical, not "hey we can make a truckload of easy AP by flipping resources and back-line keeps with a full raid during off-hours".

Remove ticks, lock all AP to combat, as it should be.

GimpyPorcupine

Derra wrote: »

Ley wrote: »

I think people should be forced to PvP in a way that I approve and all other forms of PvP should be fruitless. /s

Well the issue is that taking an undefended keep is no player versus player interaction. It´s player versus environment (namely npcs and keep doors).

Your argument is invalid as it´s no other form of pvp in the first place.

Your definition of PvP is too narrow, because you're limiting it to head-to-head conflict.

If you organize your 24 players into one group and take keeps and resources, and I organize into two 12-person groups, and the third alliance organizes into 4 6-person groups, we're still playing against other in the strategy portion of Cyrodiil that some people find interesting.

You're reinforcing rather than invalidating Ley's argument.

Derra

GimpyPorcupine wrote: »

Derra wrote: »

Ley wrote: »

I think people should be forced to PvP in a way that I approve and all other forms of PvP should be fruitless. /s

Well the issue is that taking an undefended keep is no player versus player interaction. It´s player versus environment (namely npcs and keep doors).

Your argument is invalid as it´s no other form of pvp in the first place.

Your definition of PvP is too narrow, because you're limiting it to head-to-head conflict.

If you organize your 24 players into one group and take keeps and resources, and I organize into two 12-person groups, and the third alliance organizes into 4 6-person groups, we're still playing against other in the strategy portion of Cyrodiil that some people find interesting.

You're reinforcing rather than invalidating Ley's argument.

No you´re flipping keeps. The act as such is pve.

It may arguably still be alliance vs alliance with regards to the campaign scoreboard. But it´s not pvp.