[NOT LONGER REQUESTED] Option to NOT collect Tel'var stones

XSTRONG

Alienoutlaw wrote: »

Imperial city is a risk reward arena and is working as intended

0.8% of ESO players like the way Imperial city works... Yeah must be working as intended.

Im for High risk high reward but that meaning cheesy gankers sitting and waiting in the corners with a cheese burst when you walk by is not fun.
I can think of 100 high risk high reward stuff they could put in the game that would fit the other 99.2% of ESO players better.

phileunderx2

Not having telvar is not going to prevent one from being ganked.

emilyhyoyeon

Necrotech_Master wrote: »

emilyhyoyeon wrote: »

I saw someone mention this earlier in the thread, but the amount of load screens/how the respawning works is also pretty frustrating, and I like pvp, so I can only imagine how annoying it is for someone who doesn't.

One of the things I don't get is that when you're killed, you have the option to pick a district you own to respawn in, or ''return'' or whatever the word is. The return option sounds like it brings you back to base, but it doesn't, if you own at least one of the districts. When I'm trying to do stuff in Elven Gardens, and my alliance owns some other district, I'm forced to go back to that one, then go back down the trapdoor into base, then go back up to Elven Gardens, instead of just being able to immediately respawn in the sewers and save myself the time.

OP's originally talking about tel var, but I can't help but think that making the respawn process less annoying wouldn't help frustrated players, PVEers or not.

"release" is back to the nearest allied faction controlled district (if your on the surface) or back to the sewer base (if your in the sewer, or your faction has no districts controlled on the surface)

thats part of where the extra load screens come in, if your faction has no control over the surface, thats 2 load screens to get back to the surface (one load back down to sewer base, one load back to surface) (and this is because zos though it was a good idea to tie respawning to owning the district)

That's what I'm saying.

Release should put you back to the sewers, since the other option lets you pick your respawn point anyway. You are forced into more load screens, if your alliance has a district you don't want to be in, when you die.

Sarannah

Carcharodontosaurus wrote: »

Personally, I would define IC griefing as continuing to kill a player again and again when it's obvious that they are unable/unwilling to fight back. Or hiding by the entrance and nailing the same person again and again as they come back to deposit. Yes, they're being an idiot falling for the same trap again and again, but that just means you're fighting someone way below your intelligence, skill, and expertise. Yes, you could also say it's on the person being griefed to get good or something and just continue to get dunked on until they get good.

As a player who often gets killed over and over and over and over again by the same person(s), I do feel it is griefing. The reason these players are able to do so, is because I am forced to go to these zones for my tickets(plus other rewards). And as I am a persistent/stubborn person, I keep going back and back and back until I achieve what I wanted to. To finish the goal/quest(s) for the rewards. Has nothing to do with low IQ( I think... wait what? ).

Outside events I avoid PvP like the plague, even in IC and Cyrodiil I do not attack others during events(luckily many PvEers don't either). Yet some players kill me over and over and over, even when I do not fight back or am not a threat to them. They are just stroking their e-peen and satisfying their sadistic tendencies at my expense. And that sucks majorly! Actually takes away any motivation to keep playing for that day.

My high tense gaming days are long over, so I do not 'learn' or 'get good' anymore. Nor would I want to, as I do NOT even want to be in those PvP zones. I'd rather a real PvPer takes that spot, instead of ZOS feeding me to continuously get ganked/preyed on.

For the record, killing easy targets is NOT even real PvP. Real PvP is being up against a person who is equipped and ready for PvP, regardless of their skilllevel. Most of the stuff going on in the IC and often in Cyrodiil towns is just PvE'ers being fed to sadistic PvPers/gankers to keep them happy. ZOS holding events like these is actually hurting PvP more than it helps, as many players will never ever want to touch PvP again. Which is actually caused by some players who are just preying on easy targets.

Now I do not think ZOS should allow us to stop dropping tel var, but I do feel ZOS needs to remove any rewards from killing the same person more than twice within xx minutes(30), and maybe make players invulnerable to a certain person after x kills in a short time period. But as long as players in PvE gear are easy targets, nothing in/about PvP will ever change. So PvE gear should be viable for any game mode as well. Re-stealthing too easily should also be looked at, the way stealth works now leaves no room for other players to even engage a ganker(let alone kill them), as they re-stealth and hide till they can target an easy player again. Allowing players to totally terrorize an entire location non-stop without anyone being able to stop them, especially if they are up against non-PvPers.

Did Vlastarus today, where some stealth ganker has been ganking questing players for well over an hour(including me). This player had no intention to take the town, to do the quests, or to actively take part in real PvP, he was just there to victimize other players. This isn't PvP, and this should not be allowed! Totally ruined my fun for the day.

But I do have to give props to the players who are actually in these zones to really PvP. Those who go for sieges, keeps, IC flags, etc. That is real PvP, and that is the type of content ZOS needs to focus on more. If they are ever doing anything new with PvP content that is.

PS: I do not mind dying once or twice.
PPS: Why on earth do we need to go to two separate PvP zones for all three tickets, just let any activity which now grants either one or two tickets during PvP events grant all three tickets at once. Why force us into two different zones?!?

Jaraal

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

Overall I would be happy if gankers and griefers would have to carry a higher risk. Force everybody to run around with 1000 telvar min or so before entering a district. This could populate the sewers also a bit further.

Gankers already have a high risk. It's called being squishy.

I literally had a ganker kill himself on me yesterday. The second I saw him (yes, believe it or not, there are several ways to see hidden gankers before they attack), I cast Spiked Bone Shield, which reflects the attackers own damage to themselves, blocked, cast it again, my Infernal Guardian procced, and he was dead within five seconds. And I made no offensive countermoves.

I got a lot of free tel var, too!

AnduinTryggva

Jaraal wrote: »

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

Overall I would be happy if gankers and griefers would have to carry a higher risk. Force everybody to run around with 1000 telvar min or so before entering a district. This could populate the sewers also a bit further.

Gankers already have a high risk. It's called being squishy.

I literally had a ganker kill himself on me yesterday. The second I saw him (yes, believe it or not, there are several ways to see hidden gankers before they attack), I cast Spiked Bone Shield, which reflects the attackers own damage to themselves, blocked, cast it again, my Infernal Guardian procced, and he was dead within five seconds. And I made no offensive countermoves.

I got a lot of free tel var, too!

anecdotical evidence. I run around IC with a halfway tanky stamdk (about 32k health with buffes). But these 32k health bleed away in nil time if 2 gankers with optimized burst dmg kill you near the doors leading to the next sector or any other similar bottleneck location.

I of course try to keep essential skills up most of the time. But as always this is a trade-off. Do I sacrifice stamina for keeping up an expensive heal over time or do I use a cloak revealing skill? It is one or the other and if you are outnumbered well, much more than often they simply surprise you and catch you on the wrong foot most of the time. That's what they are after. It's as close as base camping in FP shooter games as possible. There is a reason why base camping is part of the griefers set of tools and much disliked.

And let's not forget: Cloak can be reapplied as soon as you cast a reveal skill nilifying your skill (and its hefty cost in nil time). To be honest, some of the reveal skills are just crab and it boils down to a ressource race.

Amottica

ArchMikem wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

ArchMikem wrote: »

Amottica wrote: »

Alienoutlaw wrote: »

Imperial city is a risk reward arena and is working as intended

Exactly. If we are asking to turn off the rewards then we are asking to kill what is left in the zone. That will not be happening.

Where do you think the Tel Var you looted off players came from. Removing players as a source of Tel Var doesn't remove it from the zone entirely.

Good point, but the PvP source tends to be the best return so it would be a major chilling effect. Then there is the fact it is a zone intended and designed to have PvP as part of it which means if a player does not want to risk dealing with PvP they have no business being in that Zone.

So yea, Zenimax is not likely to create PvE-only access to either of the two zones designed to have PvP.

If ZOS places Quests in that zone then they will always have business being in that zone, regardless of their opinion on being farmed as cash cows.

and as far as IC is concerned, going into that zone is making a very specific choice to risk dealing with PvP regardless of a player's desire to deal with PvP.

As for being a cash cow, players can bank their tel var early and often. It is a choice as well.

Amottica

mattaeus01b16_ESO wrote: »

Fkey wrote: »

False dilemma.
Pvpers, even gankers, don't kill other players --just-- for the Telvar reward.
PvP is more fun to some of us than PvE.

Also, it isn't -your- Telvar until you successfully get it home.

To be honest Iplayers should pay no more attention to other players' getting Telvar than they do to the
NPCs and Bosses who get paid in gold when players die to them.
Yes they do get a gold reward, it is called Repairs.

OMG, Almost everything about this is WRONG WRONG WRONG. (Three wrongs in there for each statement)

Three wrongs make a right?

For players who prefer PvP they will find it more fun than PvE which is what that person was saying.

Any Tel var a player is carrying in IC combat areas is Tel var that is up for grabs by any enemy player out there.

And yes, a player in IC, well one that is interested in keeping their Tel var, should pay more attention to the movement of enemy players than anything else as they are the greatest risk and often the most challenging to detect due to sneaking.

So it seems they did make three correct statements.

Jaraal

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

Overall I would be happy if gankers and griefers would have to carry a higher risk. Force everybody to run around with 1000 telvar min or so before entering a district. This could populate the sewers also a bit further.

Gankers already have a high risk. It's called being squishy.

I literally had a ganker kill himself on me yesterday. The second I saw him (yes, believe it or not, there are several ways to see hidden gankers before they attack), I cast Spiked Bone Shield, which reflects the attackers own damage to themselves, blocked, cast it again, my Infernal Guardian procced, and he was dead within five seconds. And I made no offensive countermoves.

I got a lot of free tel var, too!

anecdotical evidence. I run around IC with a halfway tanky stamdk (about 32k health with buffes). But these 32k health bleed away in nil time if 2 gankers with optimized burst dmg kill you near the doors leading to the next sector or any other similar bottleneck location.

I of course try to keep essential skills up most of the time. But as always this is a trade-off. Do I sacrifice stamina for keeping up an expensive heal over time or do I use a cloak revealing skill? It is one or the other and if you are outnumbered well, much more than often they simply surprise you and catch you on the wrong foot most of the time. That's what they are after. It's as close as base camping in FP shooter games as possible. There is a reason why base camping is part of the griefers set of tools and much disliked.

And let's not forget: Cloak can be reapplied as soon as you cast a reveal skill nilifying your skill (and its hefty cost in nil time). To be honest, some of the reveal skills are just crab and it boils down to a ressource race.

Well it's a good thing there are multiple ways to detect hidden players that don't require using resource hogging skills then, isn't it?

Like I said, knowledge is key.

Rowjoh

Braffin wrote: »

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

Braffin wrote: »

Why exactly is it "griefing" to PvP in a PvP zone? Care to elaborate?

ArchangelIsraphel wrote: »

You do realize that what you are requesting is a broken mechanic, right?

If a player can still kill/be killed or kill mobs, but not gain or loose telvar, then you are capable of messing around with IC objectives while not actively participating in the mechanics of IC.

Why should you, who choses not to carry tel var, be able to flip a district for your faction without being rewarding to kill if you get caught doing it?

Why should you, who chooses not to carry tel var, be able to kill district bosses and let the tel var they drop go to waste, while players who actually want to participate in the mechanics need to keep searching for those bosses, but can't find them because a "no telvar" group killed them to troll?

Why should you get the telvar rewards and benefits from quest reward boxes if you choose not to actively participate in the mechanics of risk/reward that define IC?

Why should you even get tickets?

I don't even enjoy IC as a pvp mode very much, but I wouldn't want someone with the ability to completely troll the districts running around, messing with objectives, with nothing to loose because they're "safe" from the people who legitimately want to play in this game mode.

And no, banking your tel-var is not the same as being able to go to IC and completely waste a boss others could have killed who don't want a free pass through IC.

Have you read the proposal thru? If you disable telvar collection you ONLY can do the district quests. Nothing else and nothing PvP relevant.

Overall I would be happy if gankers and griefers would have to carry a higher risk. Force everybody to run around with 1000 telvar min or so before entering a district. This could populate the sewers also a bit further.

Sure I read your suggestion, but my question referred to another player's assumption griefers were the only sort of players doing PvP in IC, which is simply not true regardless the bad state of this zone.

And I like the idea of a minimum tel-var carry to enter districts. Combined with removal of flags and the inability to leave the district by porting outside home base it could repopulate IC.

No one has said ALL IC pvp'ers are griefers.

Like it or not, the fact is that griefers are attracted to, and exist in sufficient numbers, to have significantly contributed to Imperial City's unpopular and at times toxic environment.

AnduinTryggva

Jaraal wrote: »

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

Overall I would be happy if gankers and griefers would have to carry a higher risk. Force everybody to run around with 1000 telvar min or so before entering a district. This could populate the sewers also a bit further.

Gankers already have a high risk. It's called being squishy.

I literally had a ganker kill himself on me yesterday. The second I saw him (yes, believe it or not, there are several ways to see hidden gankers before they attack), I cast Spiked Bone Shield, which reflects the attackers own damage to themselves, blocked, cast it again, my Infernal Guardian procced, and he was dead within five seconds. And I made no offensive countermoves.

I got a lot of free tel var, too!

anecdotical evidence. I run around IC with a halfway tanky stamdk (about 32k health with buffes). But these 32k health bleed away in nil time if 2 gankers with optimized burst dmg kill you near the doors leading to the next sector or any other similar bottleneck location.

I of course try to keep essential skills up most of the time. But as always this is a trade-off. Do I sacrifice stamina for keeping up an expensive heal over time or do I use a cloak revealing skill? It is one or the other and if you are outnumbered well, much more than often they simply surprise you and catch you on the wrong foot most of the time. That's what they are after. It's as close as base camping in FP shooter games as possible. There is a reason why base camping is part of the griefers set of tools and much disliked.

And let's not forget: Cloak can be reapplied as soon as you cast a reveal skill nilifying your skill (and its hefty cost in nil time). To be honest, some of the reveal skills are just crab and it boils down to a ressource race.

Well it's a good thing there are multiple ways to detect hidden players that don't require using resource hogging skills then, isn't it?

Like I said, knowledge is key.

Care to share your knowledge?

Like: Oh there is knowledge but it is secret!!! It is hard won knowledge and I cannot share. But you know... The usual gate keeping attitude.

It's like "with the right build you do fine but you don't find these builds on internet and I won't tell you what build you need." Gate keeping.
And fighting that nothing changes because the current situation fits best.

ArchangelIsraphel

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

Braffin wrote: »

Why exactly is it "griefing" to PvP in a PvP zone? Care to elaborate?

ArchangelIsraphel wrote: »

You do realize that what you are requesting is a broken mechanic, right?

If a player can still kill/be killed or kill mobs, but not gain or loose telvar, then you are capable of messing around with IC objectives while not actively participating in the mechanics of IC.

Why should you, who choses not to carry tel var, be able to flip a district for your faction without being rewarding to kill if you get caught doing it?

Why should you, who chooses not to carry tel var, be able to kill district bosses and let the tel var they drop go to waste, while players who actually want to participate in the mechanics need to keep searching for those bosses, but can't find them because a "no telvar" group killed them to troll?

Why should you get the telvar rewards and benefits from quest reward boxes if you choose not to actively participate in the mechanics of risk/reward that define IC?

Why should you even get tickets?

I don't even enjoy IC as a pvp mode very much, but I wouldn't want someone with the ability to completely troll the districts running around, messing with objectives, with nothing to loose because they're "safe" from the people who legitimately want to play in this game mode.

And no, banking your tel-var is not the same as being able to go to IC and completely waste a boss others could have killed who don't want a free pass through IC.

Have you read the proposal thru? If you disable telvar collection you ONLY can do the district quests. Nothing else and nothing PvP relevant.

Overall I would be happy if gankers and griefers would have to carry a higher risk. Force everybody to run around with 1000 telvar min or so before entering a district. This could populate the sewers also a bit further.

You even understand how IC works? In order to interact with mobs, you are interacting with pvp objectives. You can't separate the two.

Jaraal

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

Care to share your knowledge?

Like: Oh there is knowledge but it is secret!!! It is hard won knowledge and I cannot share. But you know... The usual gate keeping attitude.

It's like "with the right build you do fine but you don't find these builds on internet and I won't tell you what build you need." Gate keeping.
And fighting that nothing changes because the current situation fits best.

I don't mind sharing information with those who are willing to learn. But many already know everything they want to know.

BlueRaven

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

Jaraal wrote: »

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

Overall I would be happy if gankers and griefers would have to carry a higher risk. Force everybody to run around with 1000 telvar min or so before entering a district. This could populate the sewers also a bit further.

Gankers already have a high risk. It's called being squishy.

I literally had a ganker kill himself on me yesterday. The second I saw him (yes, believe it or not, there are several ways to see hidden gankers before they attack), I cast Spiked Bone Shield, which reflects the attackers own damage to themselves, blocked, cast it again, my Infernal Guardian procced, and he was dead within five seconds. And I made no offensive countermoves.

I got a lot of free tel var, too!

anecdotical evidence. I run around IC with a halfway tanky stamdk (about 32k health with buffes). But these 32k health bleed away in nil time if 2 gankers with optimized burst dmg kill you near the doors leading to the next sector or any other similar bottleneck location.

I of course try to keep essential skills up most of the time. But as always this is a trade-off. Do I sacrifice stamina for keeping up an expensive heal over time or do I use a cloak revealing skill? It is one or the other and if you are outnumbered well, much more than often they simply surprise you and catch you on the wrong foot most of the time. That's what they are after. It's as close as base camping in FP shooter games as possible. There is a reason why base camping is part of the griefers set of tools and much disliked.

And let's not forget: Cloak can be reapplied as soon as you cast a reveal skill nilifying your skill (and its hefty cost in nil time). To be honest, some of the reveal skills are just crab and it boils down to a ressource race.

Well it's a good thing there are multiple ways to detect hidden players that don't require using resource hogging skills then, isn't it?

Like I said, knowledge is key.

Care to share your knowledge?

Like: Oh there is knowledge but it is secret!!! It is hard won knowledge and I cannot share. But you know... The usual gate keeping attitude.

It's like "with the right build you do fine but you don't find these builds on internet and I won't tell you what build you need." Gate keeping.
And fighting that nothing changes because the current situation fits best.

Detect potions (which now have ridiculous range), sentry (?) set, that sort of stuff.

LouisaB75

I am mostly PvE because I am rubbish at PvP but even I can see that the suggestion here would never work.

I have been killed multiple times by the same person camped right outside the alliance sewer entrance and after the second time of getting zero tel var from me you would have thought they would get a clue that I have none on me. But they carried on killing me repeatedly. Those who engage in this sort of play style have no interest in Tel Var so it would make no difference even if there was a big neon sign above my head saying how much or little I am carrying.

These are the same sort of players who kill you while you are absorbing a skyshard (yes, that happened to me in IC too) or camp out the platforms in large groups, or camp out the forge in the area where that the quest is that requires you to destroy it. Removing the Tel Var option won't stop them.

Personally I find Cyro less frustrating than IC and try to at least play PvP properly there rather than just doing the quests like I do in IC.

Though that too can have it's moments and its fair share of toxic players. Today I was even wishing death on one of my own alliance and actively avoiding being anywhere he posted that he was headed in the zone chat.

Anyway, my point is that Tel Var isn't the issue. It is just the nature of the beast that is PvP.

I am just glad that I can avoid PvP when I want to and that I have enough quests banked now for IC and Cyro to last until Monday (barring any more major server issues like last weekend) when I can finally get my Icebreath Indrik.

spartaxoxo

Jaraal wrote: »

Gankers already have a high risk. It's called being squishy.

No. They don't. Because they have the tools to escape against most opponents easily thanks to stealth. Shoot, now that they can have streak, it's even easier for them to get out of range of many stealth counterplay skills.

kargen27

SeaGtGruff wrote: »

kargen27 wrote: »

SeaGtGruff wrote: »

the1andonlyskwex wrote: »

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

the1andonlyskwex wrote: »

Muizer wrote: »

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

How is that not spitefull to thwart other players doing the zone quests (hint: part of game design)?

Yes, PvP and questing: two parts of the IC design that you cannot unpick. It's what makes the content unique. When you go out to quest in IC, you do so while PVPing whether you like it or not. There is no opt-out. Your request is based on a sentiment of being wronged, but you're not. Not in any way.

Also, more simply, engaging in PvP in a PvP zone is just playing the game the way it's meant to be played. There's (generally) no malice there.

On the other hand, intentionally forgoing rewards just to deny someone else those same rewards is pretty much the definition of spiteful.

ROFL. Darn players that put their telvars in the bank... how spiteful of them. Your argument is pretty inconsistent.

There's a big difference between banking tel var stones (which is fine) and opting out of earning them in the first place, which is spiteful (and what you appear to be asking for).

Me: "So I guess you think that anyone who's just banked all of their TV before heading into IC, or who has already lost all of their TV to other players, is somehow being spiteful because you apparently feel like players are obligated to be carrying TV around with them in IC so other players can reap their justly-earned rewards?"

You are skipping the part where you have to get those stones back to the bank. If you collect and deposit your stones you won that round of PvP. If you collect then lose half you lost that round.

And you are skipping the part where I put my TV in the bank AND WHY. According to my reading of the objections that some people have to the OP's request, I did it out of MALICIOUS SPITE. And I'm perfectly okay with them saying that as long as they can successfully convince ZOS to remove the ability to bank TV in the first place-- because, ya kniw, we can't be denying those PvP players their justly-earned and well-deserved spoils, now can we?

No I understand your part. You are trying to justify something by relating it to something really not related at all. There is an incentive for putting your Telvar in the bank or spending it. You benefit from depositing Telvar. Not ever getting Telvar offers no benefit nor gain at all to you. It is only suggested to stop others from added benefit when they defeat you. The basic premise of the request is punish yourself so that others likewise suffer.
Again those PvP'rs don't earn nor deserve the spoils if they allow you to get back to the bank. They failed. You won. The OP suggestion wants to take away the reward even if they succeed.

kargen27

LouisaB75 wrote: »

I am mostly PvE because I am rubbish at PvP but even I can see that the suggestion here would never work.

I have been killed multiple times by the same person camped right outside the alliance sewer entrance and after the second time of getting zero tel var from me you would have thought they would get a clue that I have none on me. But they carried on killing me repeatedly. Those who engage in this sort of play style have no interest in Tel Var so it would make no difference even if there was a big neon sign above my head saying how much or little I am carrying.

My guess is that person is not a regular PvP'r and is taking advantage of the event to try and get PvP achievements for killing players. Or they are just not good people and like causing grief. Most the PvP crowd is out doing PvP things, not camping doors.

spartaxoxo

kargen27 wrote: »

. The OP suggestion wants to take away the reward even if they succeed.

No, because it wouldn't take away Telvar they earned. A player is not guaranteed Telvar just because they get a kill. It is already possible to kill someone and receive 0 telvar. A player can only earn what the target is worth. If someone banked their telvar and someone else kill them as they are exiting spawn and get nothing, then that kill was not worth Telvar.

Nobody earns telvar from all kills. Picking targets is already part of the zone. This suggestion is tailored to ensuring that pvp still happens and that for the person killing, there is no difference in gameplay. Zero value targets already exist, this suggestion simply increases the number of 0 value targets. The only person who this changes things for is the person who turns it on, since they no longer earn telvar.

ArchangelIsraphel

spartaxoxo wrote: »

kargen27 wrote: »

. The OP suggestion wants to take away the reward even if they succeed.

No, because it wouldn't take away Telvar they earned. A player is not guaranteed Telvar just because they get a kill. It is already possible to kill someone and receive 0 telvar. A player can only earn what the target is worth. If someone banked their telvar and someone else kill them as they are exiting spawn and get nothing, then that kill was not worth Telvar.

Nobody earns telvar from all kills. Picking targets is already part of the zone. This suggestion is tailored to ensuring that pvp still happens and that for the person killing, there is no difference in gameplay. Zero value targets already exist, this suggestion simply increases the number of 0 value targets. The only person who this changes things for is the person who turns it on, since they no longer earn telvar.

But the thing is, this doesn't just "protect" people who want to do quests from gankers- it protects gankers as well. If someone wants to go gank people just to troll with 0 risk and 0 interest in tel-var, you've just enabled them to do so. There's so many ways this system can be abused and used to prevent people from actually getting telvar.

And what happens to people who ARE gaining tel-var in IC who get killed by "0 Tel-Var" players? Does their lost tell var on death disappear into the void as it would when one is killed by a mob? (Which would be awful because players could exploit having 0-telvar on them to simply delete the tel-var of others for fun. Why should anyone loose telvar to someone risking nothing killing them for the lolz?) Or would no tel-var be lost, which defeats the purpose of the mechanics in IC?

Or are you totally disabling the ability of a 0-Telvar player to defend themselves at all?

It changes gameplay in IC for certain. A group of players who have turned on the "0 Tel-Var Earned" mechanic can go kill bosses just to troll and prevent legitimate players from earning anything from them. This isn't just going to be used by questers with benevolent intentions. It's going to be exploited by actual PVP players to grief eachother.

Are we also disabling the gain of AP and other rewards for 0-Telvar Players? Because they shouldn't be allowed to harvest any reward from kills if they aren't actually participating in the mechanics.

And no matter what you guys keep saying, banking tel-var isn't the same as this mechanic you are suggesting. Even if you bank tel-var, you have no choice but to gain tel-var again if you interact with mobs at all while questing, which means you DO have tel-var on you no matter how small the amount. Sure, a player who has just jumped down from their base is likely a 0-value target, but they won't be soon enough if they are questing at all.

Again, I don't really enjoy IC, but I still think this suggestion is terribly broken and ruins the mechanics of what IC is supposed to be.

kargen27

spartaxoxo wrote: »

kargen27 wrote: »

. The OP suggestion wants to take away the reward even if they succeed.

No, because it wouldn't take away Telvar they earned. A player is not guaranteed Telvar just because they get a kill. It is already possible to kill someone and receive 0 telvar. A player can only earn what the target is worth. If someone banked their telvar and someone else kill them as they are exiting spawn and get nothing, then that kill was not worth Telvar.

Nobody earns telvar from all kills. Picking targets is already part of the zone. This suggestion is tailored to ensuring that pvp still happens and that for the person killing, there is no difference in gameplay. Zero value targets already exist, this suggestion simply increases the number of 0 value targets. The only person who this changes things for is the person who turns it on, since they no longer earn telvar.

That doesn't change anything I said. This is a person deciding to punish themselves to punish others. Yes zero targets exist. If you hit someone entering the sewers or a district there is a decent chance during these events they have no Telvar on them. The players targeting these players are after kills. Players wanting Telvar look for their targets in other areas. I'm not saying they deserve Telvar every kill. I am saying Telvar is a part of Imperial City and players should not be able to opt out. The opening post is quite clear about motive. It is a petty motive at best.

spartaxoxo

ArchangelIsraphel wrote: »

But the thing is, this doesn't just "protect" people who want to do quests from gankers- it protects gankers as well. If someone wants to go gank people just to troll with 0 risk and 0 interest in tel-var, you've just enabled them to do so. There's so many ways this system can be abused and used to prevent people from actually getting telvar.

If you can't gain Telvar, then you obviously wouldn't be able to take Telvar from other players either. So, I don't know why it would help gankers, except possibly encourage some people to do normal pvp.

spartaxoxo

kargen27 wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

kargen27 wrote: »

. The OP suggestion wants to take away the reward even if they succeed.

No, because it wouldn't take away Telvar they earned. A player is not guaranteed Telvar just because they get a kill. It is already possible to kill someone and receive 0 telvar. A player can only earn what the target is worth. If someone banked their telvar and someone else kill them as they are exiting spawn and get nothing, then that kill was not worth Telvar.

Nobody earns telvar from all kills. Picking targets is already part of the zone. This suggestion is tailored to ensuring that pvp still happens and that for the person killing, there is no difference in gameplay. Zero value targets already exist, this suggestion simply increases the number of 0 value targets. The only person who this changes things for is the person who turns it on, since they no longer earn telvar.

That doesn't change anything I said. This is a person deciding to punish themselves to punish others.

Yes, it does. Because in order to lose something earned, there has to be something taken away. Since the existence of zero telvar targets already exists, and there is no such thing as guaranteed telvar, then it cannot be said that introducing more zero telvar targets takes away earned rewards. There was already not a reasonable expectation that all kills would net telvar.

Reverb

Vulkunne wrote: »

BlueRaven wrote: »

Vulkunne wrote: »

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

I get constantly ganked by 2 or more players and I lose a lot of Telvar stones to the benefit of other players who just outnumber me (yeah so far for a sort of "interesting" pvp). As I have absolutely no measure to counter that I don't want to forcibly "paying" them (being pulled off by them is more appropriate) I want to turn off automatic telvar collection.

This removes benefits for them but also for me as I don't get that currency either.

So each player can chose to collect Telvars or not.

That's not the point. This is kin to saying if I should have Telvars, I don't want to lose them either. It is what it is. I've actually been messing around in Imperial City for a few days now and many players in there don't seem to have any trouble defending themselves in some way.

Something I think that was more concerning was everyone leaving the server when I would show up. Seriously several DC were farming, I attacked and they started leaving. I remember back in the day no one ever did that but now it seems that rather than fight back their first action is to try and leave the server.

Wow.

I am surprised you’re surprised.

If the common perception to the average (casual) player is that they cannot win a pvp match, ever, why stick around? What incentive is there for the other players to stay. If they are continually killed?

Yeah... I wasn't really that surprised you know but... I suppose its one of those things where seeing makes a believer kind of.

Its just leaving the server was the code word on the street back in the day right... we did it as absolutely necessary not the first move made on the board. Abusing things like that gets them patched like from back in the day when the way shrines actually worked in Cyrodiil and I could go home real quick.

Which omg that was so very helpful. This is why we can't have nice things.

It may not have anything to do with wanting to get out of a fight. Many of us are only in IC to wait out our cyrodiil queue. When that queue pops it gets auto accepted by my add on and I go *poof*. More often than not I’m in the middle of a fight when that happens. A fight I’d be more than happy to continue, but not at the expense of getting into the campaign I’ve waited 30 min for.

AnduinTryggva

Jaraal wrote: »

AnduinTryggva wrote: »

Care to share your knowledge?

Like: Oh there is knowledge but it is secret!!! It is hard won knowledge and I cannot share. But you know... The usual gate keeping attitude.

It's like "with the right build you do fine but you don't find these builds on internet and I won't tell you what build you need." Gate keeping.
And fighting that nothing changes because the current situation fits best.

I don't mind sharing information with those who are willing to learn. But many already know everything they want to know.

Prove it that you like to share knowledge

AnduinTryggva

ArchangelIsraphel wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

kargen27 wrote: »

. The OP suggestion wants to take away the reward even if they succeed.

No, because it wouldn't take away Telvar they earned. A player is not guaranteed Telvar just because they get a kill. It is already possible to kill someone and receive 0 telvar. A player can only earn what the target is worth. If someone banked their telvar and someone else kill them as they are exiting spawn and get nothing, then that kill was not worth Telvar.

Nobody earns telvar from all kills. Picking targets is already part of the zone. This suggestion is tailored to ensuring that pvp still happens and that for the person killing, there is no difference in gameplay. Zero value targets already exist, this suggestion simply increases the number of 0 value targets. The only person who this changes things for is the person who turns it on, since they no longer earn telvar.

But the thing is, this doesn't just "protect" people who want to do quests from gankers- it protects gankers as well. If someone wants to go gank people just to troll with 0 risk and 0 interest in tel-var, you've just enabled them to do so. There's so many ways this system can be abused and used to prevent people from actually getting telvar.

And what happens to people who ARE gaining tel-var in IC who get killed by "0 Tel-Var" players? Does their lost tell var on death disappear into the void as it would when one is killed by a mob? (Which would be awful because players could exploit having 0-telvar on them to simply delete the tel-var of others for fun. Why should anyone loose telvar to someone risking nothing killing them for the lolz?) Or would no tel-var be lost, which defeats the purpose of the mechanics in IC?

Or are you totally disabling the ability of a 0-Telvar player to defend themselves at all?

It changes gameplay in IC for certain. A group of players who have turned on the "0 Tel-Var Earned" mechanic can go kill bosses just to troll and prevent legitimate players from earning anything from them. This isn't just going to be used by questers with benevolent intentions. It's going to be exploited by actual PVP players to grief eachother.

Are we also disabling the gain of AP and other rewards for 0-Telvar Players? Because they shouldn't be allowed to harvest any reward from kills if they aren't actually participating in the mechanics.

And no matter what you guys keep saying, banking tel-var isn't the same as this mechanic you are suggesting. Even if you bank tel-var, you have no choice but to gain tel-var again if you interact with mobs at all while questing, which means you DO have tel-var on you no matter how small the amount. Sure, a player who has just jumped down from their base is likely a 0-value target, but they won't be soon enough if they are questing at all.

Again, I don't really enjoy IC, but I still think this suggestion is terribly broken and ruins the mechanics of what IC is supposed to be.

Maybe this thread should just be closed? What do you think?

LouisaB75

kargen27 wrote: »

My guess is that person is not a regular PvP'r and is taking advantage of the event to try and get PvP achievements for killing players. Or they are just not good people and like causing grief. Most the PvP crowd is out doing PvP things, not camping doors.

It wasn't during an event. It was just on a day when Tel Var was one of the daily endeavours.

VaranisArano

Sarannah wrote: »

PPS: Why on earth do we need to go to two separate PvP zones for all three tickets, just let any activity which now grants either one or two tickets during PvP events grant all three tickets at once. Why force us into two different zones?!?

Amen. Unfortunately, ZOS doesn't want to. And I say this as a PVPer who'd far prefer to get my tickets from just Cyrodiil.

So, during the earliest Midyear Mayhem, we actually did just get our tickets from any of the PVP activities. However, a crucial difference here, we were still having separate Imperial City events (that also had a ticket option from the PVE dungeons too).

Gradually ZOS swapped to 2 tickets from Cyro/BGs and 1 ticket from Imperial City. One year, we had two MYM and 1 IC event. Three different events of doing the same Imperial City Dailies was A LOT.

I still think it would be far more respectful of player time and effort to give us 3 tickets for whatever Mayhem activity we want, considering the queues and player dislike of PVP/PVE zones. But ZOS is the ones in charge of the event, not me, and so they keep splitting the tickets.

Necrotech_Master

emilyhyoyeon wrote: »

Necrotech_Master wrote: »

emilyhyoyeon wrote: »

I saw someone mention this earlier in the thread, but the amount of load screens/how the respawning works is also pretty frustrating, and I like pvp, so I can only imagine how annoying it is for someone who doesn't.

One of the things I don't get is that when you're killed, you have the option to pick a district you own to respawn in, or ''return'' or whatever the word is. The return option sounds like it brings you back to base, but it doesn't, if you own at least one of the districts. When I'm trying to do stuff in Elven Gardens, and my alliance owns some other district, I'm forced to go back to that one, then go back down the trapdoor into base, then go back up to Elven Gardens, instead of just being able to immediately respawn in the sewers and save myself the time.

OP's originally talking about tel var, but I can't help but think that making the respawn process less annoying wouldn't help frustrated players, PVEers or not.

"release" is back to the nearest allied faction controlled district (if your on the surface) or back to the sewer base (if your in the sewer, or your faction has no districts controlled on the surface)

thats part of where the extra load screens come in, if your faction has no control over the surface, thats 2 load screens to get back to the surface (one load back down to sewer base, one load back to surface) (and this is because zos though it was a good idea to tie respawning to owning the district)

That's what I'm saying.

Release should put you back to the sewers, since the other option lets you pick your respawn point anyway. You are forced into more load screens, if your alliance has a district you don't want to be in, when you die.

realistically it is still 2 load screens either way, if you wanted to get back to the surface

if you respawn on surface in wrong district you have to load into sewer and load back to surface

if you have no districts, your loading into the sewer anyway and then loading back to the surface

the best option they could do to prevent the extra load screens is to just do away with the respawning tied to flags then you could respawn where you want on the surface without the extra load screen

SeaGtGruff

I think ZOS wants to encourage players to go to IC. The IC DLC was Rich's baby, wasn't it? It can be a fun zone, and from what I've read some players feel like the zone questline is one of the more satisfying ones in the game. I wouldn't know, as I've yet to reattempt it after numerous prior occasions of getting killed by enemy players while trying to complete the district quests-- not the dailies, which I've completed many times, but the district zone quests.

As I understand it, the whole format (if that's the right word) of IC used to be different, inasmuch as you couldn't even enter IC unless your alliance controlled all of the keeps around Lake Rumare. I wasn't playing the game back then, so I don't know how it all worked then.

I do remember when you had to enter IC via one of the three sewer entrances in Cyrodiil, and I think that had it's good points. For one thing, it meant you had to go to Cyrodiil first, so it exposed new players to Cyrodiil instead of the way they can now go to IC without ever setting foot in Cyrodiil. And you had to do more than simply go to Cyrodiil-- you had to explore it at least a little bit to reach one of the sewer entrances from the closest friendly keep. The new way is a lot more convenient, but the old way was fun and had more of an element of danger.

But the reason I mentioned the original format-- which I never experienced-- is because, the way I understand it, you didn't get as much interaction between the three alliances in IC since the only time you'd get players from more than one alliance there was when one alliance gained entry to IC by controlling all of the key keeps, but then another alliance managed to get control over all of the jey keeps and was able to enter IC while the previous alliance was still inside. The way it is now, where all three alliances can enter and leave IC at will, must surely create a different... scenario? atmosphere?... than how it used to be.

I have a lot of fun in IC and the sewers, but not as far as the PvP is concerned. I've had a few enjoyable PvP moments there, but that was because I got attacked by players who were roughly equal to me in terms of tankiness and power, hence those fights lasted more than a few seconds and I felt like I had a fighting chance. But the vast majority of encounters were/are nothing like that, and it is not fun to get ganked by surprise by an OP player when you're in the middle of a boss fight or are trying to work on a quest. So I can totally understand why so many players dislike IC so strongly and have no desire to ever set foot there. Personally, I've learned to accept the dangers and aggravations, and am able to have fun there despite all the players who want nothing more than to ruin my fun. But I get why a lot of players want nothing to do with IC.

I disagree with the idea that IC would be more populated if only ZOS made this or that change. In my opinion, players who enjoy IC for what it is are going to go there all year long, whether or not there is a PvP event going on. Players who only enjoy going to IC when there's a PvP event going on are (in my opinion) not there for IC, but rather are there for the easy kills. If they were there for a well-balanced fight, they'd fight each other and would not need a PvP event to draw them to IC. They want an unbalanced fight against weaker or less skilled players who've only gone to IC because they want to get an event ticket there. Again, that is my opinion. To anyone who disagrees, I ask you-- If you love the PvP in IC so much, then why aren't you there year round? Why does it take an event to draw you there?

In contrast, I go to IC pretty regularly, year round, outside of these PvP events-- usually once a week, sometimes two or more-- yet I'm not there for the PvP. It's interesting to me that I do enjoy engaging in PvP in Cyrodiil, and will happily jump into a zerg of enemy players knowing that I'm certain to die, just so I can try to set fire to their siege before I get wiped out. But knowing that I have nothing to lose is just about the only reason I dabble in PvP in Cyrodiil at all. Knowing that I do have something to lose in IC actually discourages me from wanting to PvP there, rather than giving me an incentive to PvP there.