CYRODIIL SUGGESTIONS

Jabbs_Giggity

@ZOS_BrianWheeler

Just some casual suggestions for Cyrodiil. Reposted from Update 18 thread

Right now, campaigns seem stale. Server population is, at best underpopulated when using comparison between Factions and multiple Campaigns.

Faction Locking: Great Idea! However, would it not make more sense for Faction Locked Campaigns to be Account Wide? Instead of being locked in the faction your current character enters on, why not give us the choice at the start of a campaign/first entry to campaign - see below:
Player chooses to enter Main Campaign for the first time (During current campaign duration) and receives a Selection Screen that the player must choose one of three Alliances to commit to.
ALL Characters of this player's account is then Faction Locked to the chosen campaign - For duration of Campaign and Selected Campaign ONLY.
Once Campaign resets, player must again choose.
This would really give players a better choice to coordinate with their Guilds (Especially multi-faction guilds)

Siege and Keeps need a redesign. Most keeps are currently designed to favor the attacker, not the defender due to limited siege placement capabilities. Why not add addtional NPC options for defense, such as Archer siege for the top of keeps (5 per wall section) that activate once the Keep is flagged. You could add moats around Home Keeps, trenches that can be activated once the Keep reaches maximum level. What about the following options:

• Multi-Shot Balistae can shoot 6 Ballistae Bolts, but is restricted to range, number of active multi-shots per keep, Defensive Siege only and limited vertical panning. This would be great addition for siege defense between the outer/inner doors.
• Trap-trenches with spikes! Oh yea
• Ability to set dropped oils ablaze using Fire skills!
  Like a synergy effect

Emperor, Alliance Ranks, AP and rewards need a big overhaul...Right now, reaching Emperor is a great achievement. However, the concept has become extremely stale as less campaigns are concerning themselves with "scoring" rather than just beating each other up! Players are still being boosted to achieve Emperor for title and rewards because the AP system is constantly exploited! I suggest changes to the Emperor abilities (Siege related) to be more "command" abilities than just actives/passives, such as "When near an enemy keep reinforce your attack by commanding X NPC's to man the Ram" or something like that. Also, would be great to get minor skill lines unlocked for reaching Grand Overlord. These could be broken down into one of three usable trees - Warrior, Tactician and Commander. Only one tree may be active at a time, giving the players an incentive to reach max level for an added edge - such as damage/defense abilities, rogue-ish speed and traps abilities or Buff/Debuff abilities to match the three categories. Golden Vendor needs to be less RNG and more efficient in delivering End Content gear. As we delve further into our PVP addiction, we really don't want to go "parse test" to be accepted in End Game PVE groups for gear...

Add loot boxes inside keeps for added rewards of flipping a keep!
Or add a Faction currency wallet that can be funded by players in the Faction that have achieved an "Officer" Alliance War Rank and is acquired by the loot boxes from capturing a keep > currency can be spent by Emperor on things like more Keep defense, faster fire-rate seige, NPC-small-scale armies to do your bidding

In all seriousness, maybe even add a fourth Alliance to even the Map? Add hidden activities that randomly generate on the map, like Molag Bal sends his legions to wipe out the Factions. Keep us on our toes...don't let us spend 18 hours waltzing around resource capping until the 8 hour prime time...

Invest in more server resources for Cyrodiil, not just things only PC can utilize....???

Haashhtaag

Nothing should be done until they fix performance. Performance is the most detrimental thing to pvp right now.

Jabbs_Giggity

Haashhtaag wrote: »

Nothing should be done until they fix performance. Performance is the most detrimental thing to pvp right now.

Agree 100%. Mentioned in OP, though-beit last comment because ZOS needs a reason to do so. More population in PVP server = more attention to performance (in theory)...

Getting people more excited about entering Campaigns again for PVP with incentives is the best way to do this. Cyrodiil has been more or less the same since 2014. Updates here and there have made it more "diverse" than just a large cookie-cutter arena, but can really be taken to a whole new level if implemented.

Performance will not get audited until ZOS has an incentive. I PVP 100% of my time on ESO, unless I need to farm a new set to be competitive or try a new build but I don't like that, sure many can agree. However, I have been playing more BG's than Campaigns because of the following reasons:
1. Faster-paced. The current Heavy Armor/Tank/DPS/Perma-Snare/Perma-CC Meta is getting old, like reeallly old.
2. Better objectives than Round-the-Meri-go-round Zerg-off.
3. Cyrodiil is just too big to spend traveling on

nerfed

mount speed (Let alone "In-Combat" bugs) for the reward of satisfaction to finally find a fight.
4. CP system is broken

addressed by ZOS but still no given solution, yet.

and makes counterplay counter-intuitive.

More organized small-group gameplay, objectives and coordination of Factions is needed to breathe life

Not Templars' under-whelming Breath of Life

back in to Cyrodiil Campaigns.

Appreciate feedback! Let's get @ZOS_BrianWheeler to take notice and help suggest positive ways to keep him on his toes!

Haashhtaag

In reality a lot and I mean a lot of people have left cyrodiil because performance.

Jabbs_Giggity

Haashhtaag wrote: »

In reality a lot and I mean a lot of people have left cyrodiil because performance.

Amen brotha! (Or sista).

A lot of OG/Elite players have been banned from Xbox NA as well because of the dungeon glitch introduced when they broke Cyrodiil with unending load screens. I think some were on PC and PS4 as well.

Some left because they were simply tired of constant nerfs of their class and/or being pigeon-holed into certain builds because Devs reduced options to "play as you want".

None-the-less, this is a constructive feedback thread.

idk

Granted, I did not fully understand what OP is trying to explain so I could get things wrong.

However, it seems OP wants a player totally locked to one faction in all campaigns after choosing with only one character. I think it is short sighted to think it is a great idea that someone who has their toons split between two different alliances can only play have those characters because they are not in the faction they chose that campaign month.

If I have that wrong and OP is suggesting that once a player selects a faction for their account all characters can play in that faction regardless of where they were actually rolled then that is a different issue. That is clearly an attempt at working around no having a faction lock which Zos has distinctly stated they are not interested in.

Further, the end of campaigns do not align with each other which hinders having an account bound to one faction in either scenario. 7 day and 30 days rarely end at the same time so this is not really a workable idea to begin with.

Granted, I may have both wrong but if either of these are right I doubt either see the light of day. Besides, a majority of players have always flocked to one campaign (2 when we had enough players to fill them). Most do this because they are looking for active PvP which is not found in the low pop factions. Nothing in OP's idea would change that.

Jabbs_Giggity

idk wrote: »

Granted, I did not fully understand what OP is trying to explain so I could get things wrong.

However, it seems OP wants a player totally locked to one faction in all campaigns after choosing with only one character. I think it is short sighted to think it is a great idea that someone who has their toons split between two different alliances can only play have those characters because they are not in the faction they chose that campaign month.

If I have that wrong and OP is suggesting that once a player selects a faction for their account all characters can play in that faction regardless of where they were actually rolled then that is a different issue. That is clearly an attempt at working around no having a faction lock which Zos has distinctly stated they are not interested in.

Further, the end of campaigns do not align with each other which hinders having an account bound to one faction in either scenario. 7 day and 30 days rarely end at the same time so this is not really a workable idea to begin with.

Granted, I may have both wrong but if either of these are right I doubt either see the light of day. Besides, a majority of players have always flocked to one campaign (2 when we had enough players to fill them). Most do this because they are looking for active PvP which is not found in the low pop factions. Nothing in OP's idea would change that.

Just wanted to clarify, sorry if it came off confusing. However, in short this is how Factions should function.

• Character Selection does not have a Faction choice. Starting region is decided based on Racial selection. This is because PVE is not biased towards which Faction you are - you que and play with anyone from any faction.
• PVP Campaigns are solely tied to Faction. Explained in next points.
• Each Campaign is a seperate instance for Faction Choice. When you enter a Campaign for the first time (With any character) you choose your Alliance. Your Account is then locked to that Faction, for that Campaign - until ended. Once the Campaign has ended, you are free to re-enter that same Campaign by choosing the same Alliance as previous, or choosing a new Alliance.
  An example would be: I Enter Vivec and choose EP. All my characters are locked to the EP Alliance in Vivec Campaign until the Campaign ends. When a new Campaign cycle is started, I can now choose AD. All my characters will then be locked to the AD Alliance in Vivec Campaign until the Campaign ends.
• Shor would be a seperate instance from Vivec. I you entered Vivec as EP (First Example) you can still opt to play Shor's Campaign as AD.

idk

Jabbs_Giggity wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Granted, I did not fully understand what OP is trying to explain so I could get things wrong.

However, it seems OP wants a player totally locked to one faction in all campaigns after choosing with only one character. I think it is short sighted to think it is a great idea that someone who has their toons split between two different alliances can only play have those characters because they are not in the faction they chose that campaign month.

If I have that wrong and OP is suggesting that once a player selects a faction for their account all characters can play in that faction regardless of where they were actually rolled then that is a different issue. That is clearly an attempt at working around no having a faction lock which Zos has distinctly stated they are not interested in.

Further, the end of campaigns do not align with each other which hinders having an account bound to one faction in either scenario. 7 day and 30 days rarely end at the same time so this is not really a workable idea to begin with.

Granted, I may have both wrong but if either of these are right I doubt either see the light of day. Besides, a majority of players have always flocked to one campaign (2 when we had enough players to fill them). Most do this because they are looking for active PvP which is not found in the low pop factions. Nothing in OP's idea would change that.

Character Selection does not have a Faction choice. Starting region is decided based on Racial selection. This is because PVE is not biased towards which Faction you are - you que and play with anyone from any faction.

Character creation does have a faction choice. It is on the first page of the character creation. It is not based on racial selection so this statement is false. Granted, someone who does not have the any race any faction unlocked might not see this, but it is there.

Further, Zos has made clear there are factions when they said they are not interested in offering a faction choice and that they were implementing faction locks on some campaigns. So again, this seems to try to work around something Zos has distinctly stated they are not interested in.

As for the rest, it seems redundant as I think the faction lock we are about to get on some campaigns has each campaign separate. Meaning we can be in AD on one campaign and DC on another and for each campaign you can only access that campaign from the chosen faction.

So it does not seem to be any different than what is coming other than trying to work around the fact Zos is not interested in providing a means for faction change.

Jabbs_Giggity

@idk please re-read my response. Before the bullets I stated this is how it should be. Not how it is.

Also, in short the current coming faction lock is only for 30 day campaigns and will lock you to the faction you first enter on. This means if you enter the campaign with an AD character you cannot play any of your characters in that campaign unless they are AD. So if 8/9 of your characters are EP, but the one you enter on is AD your other 8 characters are locked out of that campaign until it ends.

The solution that I suggested would allow mutifaction accounts to retrospectively play in one campaign regardless of their chosen alliance at selection.

idk

Yes, and your idea is to work around the Zos has stated it does not want to offer faction change. That is why it will not happen.

Delsskia

The most immediate thing ZOS can do to help all of the performance issues in Cyr is to use Battle Spirit to disable ALL proc sets. The crappy and old game engine and servers simply cannot handle all of the calculations currently in the game.

Durham

Performance issues in Cyrodiil is just destroying PVP. My group of 6 last left Cyrodiil extremely upset with performance 3 logged off the game for the 3rd night in a row due to performance. 3 went to IC but there was no action there so they logged to....

It does not matter what they do in Cyrodiil until they adress the performance. Its sad !