Would be nice to insert an anti-PvDoor mechanic

pauld1_ESO

I don't know what it would be, maybe the less people on in a faction the stronger or more numerous guards are? It's stupid that 5 AD can take an entire map on Ravenwatch NA because the other two factions are a ghost town. This would actually help less populated factions defend against zergs as well. At least slow them some.

VaranisArano

Technically, that's still PvDoor, in the sense that it's players vs NPCs, not PVP. Keeps are designed to be defended by players. One or two players can take a keep or outpost by themselves if left alone. I've soloed Bleakers on my healer (slowly) on PTS, which is about as PvDoor a situation you can get.

If 5 AD are taking the entire map by themselves, it sounds like its not only the other two factions that are a ghost town. Was the whole server just at low pop?


Regardless, the main issue in the past with improving NPCs or making them tougher is that there's a dramatic difference between guards on the CP and No CP campaigns. No CP Guards hit like a truck. So ZOS has to be pretty careful with how hard they make it. "Just right" in No CP may be too easy in CP Cyrodiil. They have balanced them separately before, but that's needed tweaking, particularly with resource guard difficulty.

Kartalin

Probably the best tool would be awarding AP to be based on number of attackers and number of defenders. Equal numbers means capturing the keep is 6k AP like normal. Adjust it up and down accordingly from there based on player differential, with a set floor and ceiling.

Example:

A = number of attackers
D = number of defenders

A-D >= 20 gives 2000 AP each
D-A >= 20 gives 10000 AP each
Otherwise AP = 6000 - 200*(A-D)

Not counting additional AP for enemy kills.

xshatox

And DC quiet when they pvdooring blackreach but suddenly when AD do it they complaint.

JamieAubrey

Yes DC can night cap and thats OK ? one rule for them and one rule for AD

Muzza45

The answer is really simple...
The 5x AD that are taking the map need some competition. How about Some EP & DC logging on to stop them? Just because the specific AD are probably in a different time zone and are at THEIR prime-time, why penalise them?

SirAndy

Muzza45 wrote: »

The answer is really simple...
The 5x AD that are taking the map need some competition. How about Some EP & DC logging on to stop them? Just because the specific AD are probably in a different time zone and are at THEIR prime-time, why penalise them?

Exactly, those guys were playing, the OP was not.

And now he wants them penalized for playing the game while he was not.

xshatox

I think ZOS already account for defender in AP calculation for getting resource. You get more AP the more defender for the keep. Normal keep (outside event and without low pop bonus) without defender can only gives you 7k.

To be honest the most efficient way of getting AP is bombing. Few bomb can neat hundreds thousand of AP. Just need a rather big zerg.

pauld1_ESO

SirAndy wrote: »

Muzza45 wrote: »

The answer is really simple...
The 5x AD that are taking the map need some competition. How about Some EP & DC logging on to stop them? Just because the specific AD are probably in a different time zone and are at THEIR prime-time, why penalise them?

Exactly, those guys were playing, the OP was not.

And now he wants them penalized for playing the game while he was not.

Nice assumption, but actually I am playing...which is how I know they are doing it. And yes it is frustrating that I cannot deter 4 or 5 people from taking my entire side because no one else is online.

You guys are making this an faction argument, try and use some critical thinking. I should have known better than to even mention a faction.

NO ONE should be able to take the entire map with 5 people. It is way too easy to take undefended keeps in this game. I had the same complaint in WvW GW2. I don't care what side is doing it, it is too easy.

NordSwordnBoard

pauld1_ESO wrote: »

SirAndy wrote: »

Muzza45 wrote: »

The answer is really simple...
The 5x AD that are taking the map need some competition. How about Some EP & DC logging on to stop them? Just because the specific AD are probably in a different time zone and are at THEIR prime-time, why penalise them?

Exactly, those guys were playing, the OP was not.

And now he wants them penalized for playing the game while he was not.

Nice assumption, but actually I am playing...which is how I know they are doing it. And yes it is frustrating that I cannot deter 4 or 5 people from taking my entire side because no one else is online.

You guys are making this an faction argument, try and use some critical thinking. I should have known better than to even mention a faction.

NO ONE should be able to take the entire map with 5 people. It is way too easy to take undefended keeps in this game. I had the same complaint in WvW GW2. I don't care what side is doing it, it is too easy.

On the other hand, if your faction is gated and you want to get a castle back, making pvdoor harder will make your own siege longer and give the enemy more time to react. I also think part of the reasoning is the shorter the siege -> less people congregate in an area -> less lag.

Also, as others mentioned no CP guards are more difficult. If you want more challenging PvDoor try no CP? (edit - forgot Raven was a no-cp camp)

I don't think door health will help, all those 5 players need to do is bring a few more to overcome the extra health or guards. One or two people helping you could successfully defend against the siege of 5 players. Given the solutions of adjusting the game versus recruiting a few more players to the action you know the answer already.

MinnesotaKid

Simple solution... allow the guards to use siege...

oh and put in a moat... w/ crocs and slaughterfish

VaranisArano

pauld1_ESO wrote: »

SirAndy wrote: »

Muzza45 wrote: »

The answer is really simple...
The 5x AD that are taking the map need some competition. How about Some EP & DC logging on to stop them? Just because the specific AD are probably in a different time zone and are at THEIR prime-time, why penalise them?

Exactly, those guys were playing, the OP was not.

And now he wants them penalized for playing the game while he was not.

Nice assumption, but actually I am playing...which is how I know they are doing it. And yes it is frustrating that I cannot deter 4 or 5 people from taking my entire side because no one else is online.

You guys are making this an faction argument, try and use some critical thinking. I should have known better than to even mention a faction.

NO ONE should be able to take the entire map with 5 people. It is way too easy to take undefended keeps in this game. I had the same complaint in WvW GW2. I don't care what side is doing it, it is too easy.

5 people ought to be able to take the map if they are opposed by NPC guards and apparently only one player. ZOS generally doesn't balance for 1v5 fights.

I mean, seriously, 4 players take on PVE dungeons and win all the time. Exactly how hard do you want to make the NPC guards?

This really seems like a case of trying to change how Cyrodiil works in the rare situation of extremely low population. You were really the only person on your faction online? Or you couldn't scrape up enough players to help you make a stand? I understand why that would be frustrating, but the latter is more of a faction cooperation problem, again not something that needs to be fixed by better NPCs.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

pauld1_ESO wrote: »

I don't know what it would be, maybe the less people on in a faction the stronger or more numerous guards are? It's stupid that 5 AD can take an entire map on Ravenwatch NA because the other two factions are a ghost town. This would actually help less populated factions defend against zergs as well. At least slow them some.

I've always thought it would be interesting to scale defending NPCs (number and difficulty) based on remaining number of keeps. For example if a faction is down to 2 keeps remaining surely the 'alliance' would plow all their remaining resources into them.

SirAndy

pauld1_ESO wrote: »

You guys are making this an faction argument, try and use some critical thinking.

Let me see if i get your "critical thinking" correct:

I was outnumbered 1x5 and i want ZoS to change the way PvP works to make sure that won't happen again



PS: Nowhere in my post above did i mention factions
PPS: No, it's not their fault that your side didn't have enough people to defend properly
PPPS: Your off hours are someone else's prime time

IAmIcehouse

Making the guards stronger would not make a difference. The population difference of "four people" is absolutely nothing and would never trigger stronger guards. That would be far too sensitive. You'd need something like a population gap of a whole bar. (at least).

Still, disagree with this idea. Defending keeps 1v5 is extremely fun and rewarding. By far my favorite thing to do in Cyrodil.

Duckkbutter23

IAmIcehouse wrote: »

Making the guards stronger would not make a difference. The population difference of "four people" is absolutely nothing and would never trigger stronger guards. That would be far too sensitive. You'd need something like a population gap of a whole bar. (at least).

Still, disagree with this idea. Defending keeps 1v5 is extremely fun and rewarding. By far my favorite thing to do in Cyrodil.

Absolutely mate, so much fun.

IAmIcehouse

This also would make no difference to the PvDoor of doors vs zergs which is far more an issue. No group of 24+ is wiping to guards with 2-3 players, no matter how strong they are.

Not sure how you're complaining about 5 people taking the map, which is far easier to handle regardless of population difference.

PvDoor will be unavoidable. It's just part of the game.

IAmIcehouse

Kartalin wrote: »

Probably the best tool would be awarding AP to be based on number of attackers and number of defenders. Equal numbers means capturing the keep is 6k AP like normal. Adjust it up and down accordingly from there based on player differential, with a set floor and ceiling.

Example:

A = number of attackers
D = number of defenders

A-D >= 20 gives 2000 AP each
D-A >= 20 gives 10000 AP each
Otherwise AP = 6000 - 200*(A-D)

Not counting additional AP for enemy kills.

Could be interesting. Similar to how D-ticks work now.. but honestly, it should more be based on the opposing factions total population.

PvDoor is not always exploiting lower population, but taking advantage of a fight elsewhere on the map. When there is one faction oppressing the map, the most common strategy is "defend against faction X until faction Z pushes faction X. Then we take something. " Being on your heels for an hour, when you finally get breathing room and getting a 1K O-Tick would be extremely underwhelming.

Kartalin

IAmIcehouse wrote: »

Kartalin wrote: »

Probably the best tool would be awarding AP to be based on number of attackers and number of defenders. Equal numbers means capturing the keep is 6k AP like normal. Adjust it up and down accordingly from there based on player differential, with a set floor and ceiling.

Example:

A = number of attackers
D = number of defenders

A-D >= 20 gives 2000 AP each
D-A >= 20 gives 10000 AP each
Otherwise AP = 6000 - 200*(A-D)

Not counting additional AP for enemy kills.

Could be interesting. Similar to how D-ticks work now.. but honestly, it should more be based on the opposing factions total population.

PvDoor is not always exploiting lower population, but taking advantage of a fight elsewhere on the map. When there is one faction oppressing the map, the most common strategy is "defend against faction X until faction Z pushes faction X. Then we take something. " Being on your heels for an hour, when you finally get breathing room and getting a 1K O-Tick would be extremely underwhelming.

Good points, what I threw together was just a quick example of how something could be implemented easily.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

pauld1_ESO wrote: »

I don't know what it would be, maybe the less people on in a faction the stronger or more numerous guards are? It's stupid that 5 AD can take an entire map on Ravenwatch NA because the other two factions are a ghost town. This would actually help less populated factions defend against zergs as well. At least slow them some.

I've always thought it would be interesting to scale defending NPCs (number and difficulty) based on remaining number of keeps. For example if a faction is down to 2 keeps remaining surely the 'alliance' would plow all their remaining resources into them.

I do like this idea a lot.

OP is from Ravenwatch on North American PC servers as am I. Right after NA prime time DC usually takes the entire map, due to a higher number of west coast players (among other things). AD and EP sometimes get back portions in the NA morning (when OP plays I think), then during the NA daytime DC or EP will sometimes take the map again (prior to prime time). Unfortunately it's not a great campaign to play on if you're not on during prime time when it's relatively balanced. Otherwise the factions just take turns pvdooring.

pauld1_ESO

SirAndy wrote: »

pauld1_ESO wrote: »

You guys are making this an faction argument, try and use some critical thinking.

Let me see if i get your "critical thinking" correct:

I was outnumbered 1x5 and i want ZoS to change the way PvP works to make sure that won't happen again



PS: Nowhere in my post above did i mention factions
PPS: No, it's not their fault that your side didn't have enough people to defend properly
PPPS: Your off hours are someone else's prime time

Completely took my posts out of context.

IAmIcehouse

Kartalin wrote: »

IAmIcehouse wrote: »

Good points, what I threw together was just a quick example of how something coul

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

pauld1_ESO wrote: »

I don't know what it would be, maybe the less people on in a faction the stronger or more numerous guards are? It's stupid that 5 AD can take an entire map on Ravenwatch NA because the other two factions are a ghost town. This would actually help less populated factions defend against zergs as well. At least slow them some.

I've always thought it would be interesting to scale defending NPCs (number and difficulty) based on remaining number of keeps. For example if a faction is down to 2 keeps remaining surely the 'alliance' would plow all their remaining resources into them.

I do like this idea a lot.

OP is from Ravenwatch on North American PC servers as am I. Right after NA prime time DC usually takes the entire map, due to a higher number of west coast players (among other things). AD and EP sometimes get back portions in the NA morning (when OP plays I think), then during the NA daytime DC or EP will sometimes take the map again (prior to prime time). Unfortunately it's not a great campaign to play on if you're not on during prime time when it's relatively balanced. Otherwise the factions just take turns pvdooring.

Personally, I don't care if I am fighting at Black Boot or fighting at BRK, if the fights are good fights. The problem is typically just overwhelming numbers from another faction. And frankly, stronger guards just aren't going to make a difference. When DC ravenwatch is pushing the map late at night, they aren't wiping the guards, let's be real.

At this time, usually I would make a play with maybe one other players to try to take Drakelowe (while its still EP, and a home keep) because any defense at a home keep is futile Fighting players on guards in small numbers is already difficult, ramping them up in these cases will just force you to be cannon fodder for a zerg, or stick to resource capping.

This may help OPs case of a small man (5 people) taking over the map--but frankly, is that an issue? Maybe I miss these times, but when I'm on in the morning, it's not really a PvDoor, though we joke about it because we only need to kill 3-6 defenders where normally it's far busier.

red_emu

What they gotta do is increase the siege damage vs players. It's silly that a group can literally bathe in 6 oils and take barely any damage.

Remember when oils were bugged? That was so much fun. Made taking a keep a nice challenge even when only defended by a few players.

Another idea would be to make the guards stronger and scale them with the amount of defenders. So let's say, 0 defenders inside the keep = 10x damage and health. 1 defender = 9x damage and so on, since 10 people can defend a keep well. We already have a mechanic that calculates number of defenders and attackers.

All in all, for a game mode that was designed for massive battles, it's just silly thay 2-3 players can take a keep.

idk

First, @VaranisArano is correct.

Second, the idea could easily have very negative consequences and one does not have to look farther than the intended purpose the OP presents.

There was a time that all three factions had agreed to permit each other to own certain campaigns most of the time due to the buff owning everything in campaigns offered outside of Cyrodiil. Pushing the benefits of being low pop could easily lead to manipulation and is likely why Zos left things at giving an AP boost when you get the low pop buff.

The reality is, Zos never intended Cyrodiil to be competitive PvP and OP is trying to push it in that direction even though it still would not be competitive PvP. Winning a campaign is meaningless and always will be with this type of PvP.

Muzza45

pauld1_ESO wrote: »

SirAndy wrote: »

Muzza45 wrote: »

The answer is really simple...
The 5x AD that are taking the map need some competition. How about Some EP & DC logging on to stop them? Just because the specific AD are probably in a different time zone and are at THEIR prime-time, why penalise them?

Exactly, those guys were playing, the OP was not.

And now he wants them penalized for playing the game while he was not.

Nice assumption, but actually I am playing...which is how I know they are doing it. And yes it is frustrating that I cannot deter 4 or 5 people from taking my entire side because no one else is online.

You guys are making this an faction argument, try and use some critical thinking. I should have known better than to even mention a faction.

NO ONE should be able to take the entire map with 5 people. It is way too easy to take undefended keeps in this game. I had the same complaint in WvW GW2. I don't care what side is doing it, it is too easy.

1 defender with well-placed siege and efficient use of available NPC can easily defeat 4 or 5 attackers... just sayin'

Kartalin

red_emu wrote: »

What they gotta do is increase the siege damage vs players. It's silly that a group can literally bathe in 6 oils and take barely any damage.

The problem is that while that may work on a campaign that stays active on all sides throughout the day and night, other campaigns such as Ravewatch on PC/NA where there is a small window of 4-5 hours where each faction is relatively active — these campaigns will suffer. Currently when we show up in the evenings for pvp, there’s a 50% chance one faction will have pvdoored the map before prime time. Overpowered siege only incentivizes this further. We know this to be true because it’s exactly what happened back when siege was suddenly boosted up in damage for a brief period some time ago. EP or DC would take the map off hours and reap the benefits of that all day and night as their left click heroes defended objectives much more easily than usual. Our guild did fine avoiding most of the siege during that period but the majority of the rest of AD was even less helpful than usual, and it was a nightmare successfully entering a breach without getting destroyed by the many layers of siege blanketing the ground. We’d spend a ton of effort clawing back each keep while the defenders reaped massive defensive ticks and then they’d just fall back to the next keep and rinse and repeat.

pauld1_ESO

Muzza45 wrote: »

pauld1_ESO wrote: »

SirAndy wrote: »

Muzza45 wrote: »

The answer is really simple...
The 5x AD that are taking the map need some competition. How about Some EP & DC logging on to stop them? Just because the specific AD are probably in a different time zone and are at THEIR prime-time, why penalise them?

Exactly, those guys were playing, the OP was not.

And now he wants them penalized for playing the game while he was not.

Nice assumption, but actually I am playing...which is how I know they are doing it. And yes it is frustrating that I cannot deter 4 or 5 people from taking my entire side because no one else is online.

You guys are making this an faction argument, try and use some critical thinking. I should have known better than to even mention a faction.

NO ONE should be able to take the entire map with 5 people. It is way too easy to take undefended keeps in this game. I had the same complaint in WvW GW2. I don't care what side is doing it, it is too easy.

1 defender with well-placed siege and efficient use of available NPC can easily defeat 4 or 5 attackers... just sayin'

Always that guy....

Depending on class/build one elite player can beat 4 or 5 sub-par players anywhere in this game. This is not the norm though and you know this. You would have to have 4 or 5 serious noobs to not be able to take a keep from 1 dude. That one guy can make it harder, sure, but you are not stopping them unless they just don't know what they are doing.

This "easily defeat" thing is an exaggeration. Deter, harass, sure. Defeat....no. Possible, but nothing easily about it other than the exception not the norm. I can stop them from using rams easily with oil, but if they have a clue they will just back off the gate and put up ballistas. Even if they only run one each and spread out no way I would be able to stop them. An average player can easily throw up two, so that is 8-10 ballistas. An experienced player can easily do 3 or 4 each....now we're talking 16-20 ballistas lol. What is one person going to do to stop that? Again, an elite player might be able to just kill enough of them. Again...that is the exception.

Which exactly highlights something else that can be nerfed. you should not be able to operate 4 siege solo unless it is to defend.

VaranisArano

pauld1_ESO wrote: »

Muzza45 wrote: »

pauld1_ESO wrote: »

SirAndy wrote: »

Muzza45 wrote: »

The answer is really simple...
The 5x AD that are taking the map need some competition. How about Some EP & DC logging on to stop them? Just because the specific AD are probably in a different time zone and are at THEIR prime-time, why penalise them?

Exactly, those guys were playing, the OP was not.

And now he wants them penalized for playing the game while he was not.

Nice assumption, but actually I am playing...which is how I know they are doing it. And yes it is frustrating that I cannot deter 4 or 5 people from taking my entire side because no one else is online.

You guys are making this an faction argument, try and use some critical thinking. I should have known better than to even mention a faction.

NO ONE should be able to take the entire map with 5 people. It is way too easy to take undefended keeps in this game. I had the same complaint in WvW GW2. I don't care what side is doing it, it is too easy.

1 defender with well-placed siege and efficient use of available NPC can easily defeat 4 or 5 attackers... just sayin'

Always that guy....

Depending on class/build one elite player can beat 4 or 5 sub-par players anywhere in this game. This is not the norm though and you know this. You would have to have 4 or 5 serious noobs to not be able to take a keep from 1 dude. That one guy can make it harder, sure, but you are not stopping them unless they just don't know what they are doing.

This "easily defeat" thing is an exaggeration. Deter, harass, sure. Defeat....no. Possible, but nothing easily about it other than the exception not the norm.

Would you like ZOS to reintroduce the Mercenary NPCs to Cyrodiil for those times when it's 5 players vs you+guard NPCs?

How exactly do you envision ZOS balancing 1v5 fights?

NordSwordnBoard

Again, we are presented with two solutions:

Change how siege works, re balance doors and guards, nerf things
-OR-
Add a few more players to strengthen the defense

It's not the game's fault nobody is there to help you be more competitive, it's on your alliance. You shouldn't expect to win vs 5 players just because you have some defensive advantages. I've solo defended (& attacked) lots of outposts and keeps, but it never occurred to me that it was unfair to lose when I'm outnumbered.

Also, keep in mind the number of things introduced to combat large/ball groups that in turn gets used by them to greater effect instead. Limiting offensive siege to less than 4 per player would hurt solo and small scale players taking an outpost much more than a large group - the typical "PvDoor Zerglings" would hardly be effected.

hafgood

Just a small point to consider.

Alliance A has taken all the keeps and cleaned up the map with Alliances B & C active and defending keeps and outposts.

Alliance A knowing it has the new PvDoor routines in its favour leaves Cyrodiil and goes off and does PvE stuff for the rest of the campaign knowing that Alliance B & C will be unable to take back their own home keeps because the new routines make it impossible to do so.

Tick after tick Alliance A gets all the points available because they know to stay out of the campaign while Alliances B & C cannot take back any keeps because there are no players defending the keeps.

Leave it as it is now, and if you are outnumbered play smart.

Vlad9425

I’ve solo defended keeps before against more than 5 enemies so it is possible with clever use of NPCs and your own skills, I do however dislike the PvDoor aspect of Cyrodiil and agree some kind of mechanics should be put in place to discourage it.

Muzza45

Vlad9425 wrote: »

I’ve solo defended keeps before against more than 5 enemies so it is possible with clever use of NPCs and your own skills, I do however dislike the PvDoor aspect of Cyrodiil and agree some kind of mechanics should be put in place to discourage it.

As I'm from Australia, there's been plenty of instances that my 'primetime' is lowly populated. Is it my fault the other factions are maybe even less populated? To make matters worse, the role-playing community decided to push for a faction lock so we couldn't potentially re-balance to get some good fights. If you are so upset at PvDoor, get some of your in-game mates & guildies to log-on and sort it. It's not that hard.