Gold Road: Path to eliminating loose pain points. Doc do you agree?

Pinja

Something I feel alot of us dreamed about from the original vision and immersion of the games three alliances was all out war. Cyrodiil provided it and I’ve seen several names stick around as a result. Sadly due to the performance demand of the player engagements on server software and bugs in script, animation, and cross country internet latency its incentives content was deprioritized. To the accomplishment of the devs after 10 years of quality of life and performance patches they have returned if not if not improved the consistency and reliability of its fast paced combat.

Since High Isle the lore has been hinting at a return to revitalize and promote pvp with Gold Road being no exception. Spellcrafting was a fan favorite of the previous Elders Scrolls games returned as scribing. It was a disappointment to fans originally when a Dev showcased their prototype years ago, but the system was cut back from release. Aiming to please at this year's announcements revealed scribing and hinted at a pvp element being added later this year.

Over the years the team has been trying to close off loose ends of irritants, like by releasing the all in one attunable crafting stations to shorten guild house visits. I’ve repeatedly heard over the years and myself have experienced that the games overland zone content is too easy. I have also read, supported, and petitioned for pvp flag systems like dueling, however, ones more expansive, active, and cooperative. One current tone being set in the mmo and ESO space is that the games pvp is fun, but there are no collectible incentives for longevity of vet players especially in housing or motifs. Another grip by some players is that theirs too many useless sets.

Pvp only has 5 motif chapters and a handful daedric designs which dec my house so you can tell I Pvp.

Here’s the suggestion/prediction: Integrate the current proven years old systems into a groupable flagable mode that puts PvE and PvP debuffs on players to simulate a vet mode that:

• Allows for alliance war pvp.
• Makes them take extra damage.
• Stuns players intermittently when they take damage.
• Gets worse effects the more experience they obtain until death.
• Summons bosses on players.
• Makes use of the unused lesser set effects to help provide balance data to help revitalize those sets. (Mathed out by the metrics of the duration of the intensity of the debuffs on player kill. To then be balanced by K’D ratios.)
• Doubles the drops of the zone like an event, quadrupling in an overlapping event.
• Gives gold bonuses to the alliance with the most player kills, incentivising more casuals to occasionally compete. Resetting with the weekly traders.
• Gives trial and arena gear to Pvpers who are on the top of the leaderboard across all of tamriel.

The fact that its a debuff vs a hardmode saves the work of a PvE overhaul adjusting 100s of different enemy variables mathematically, but still emulates a similar result.

It gives access to overland rewards like racial furniture designs at a different experience of play.

Opens players to overworld ganking, and adds surprise encounters.

Lore: After peace talks and years of fighting, Alliance war Nobles have grown tired and discouraged of funding soldiers. Passionate, invested warriors and war bands have now begun looting the countryside to supplement income. Funded by rogue lords.

phaneub17_ESO

My answer: Wut.

Pinja

phaneub17_ESO wrote: »

My answer: Wut.

Will try to edit.

To try and clarify I'm talking about options from both in and out of the ESO community, but in the ESO space. Some people are really happy with the game. But popular youtuber's who main ESO repeat and put out these perceptions. I asked about the game on my social media in an mmo space and I took rating hits on a post for calling it a great game.

I know plenty of gamers that have gotten into a meta cycle progressed and quit long term for repeated reasons. I want to be able to invite my old friends back to the game, but I'd like to see their excuses resolved.

I personally get displeased from time to time like when they nerfed a set or 1vX pvp. But I know and understand the reasons so I'm forgiving. That and I still have plenty of fun, challenge, and objectives that keep me busy when I'm not afraid to put the time into it.

When I was getting my Associates degree I was highly afraid I'd fail spending too many hours on it, and gave my console to my sister.

ESO_player123

What does "Opens players to overworld ganking, and adds surprise encounters." mean? Open world PvP? A big NOPE.
Not sure I understood the rest.

Sarannah

As a PvEer: Hell no! All of this sounds terrible, sorry!

Pinja

ESO_player123 wrote: »

What does "Opens players to overworld ganking, and adds surprise encounters." mean? Open world PvP? A big NOPE.
Not sure I understood the rest.

There's been alot of civil deliberation and reasoning for that over the years, but I have unique experiences that make open world pvp challenging and fun. I'm not too far into a niche group, but I know open world pvp has a steeper learning curve and is harder to get into.

The term gank means surprise ambush, usually resulting in a quick death.

The issue with ESO PvE centered reward approach is that its out of touch with players that like directly competing as a way to compare stats. There are plenty of them from all the Pvp games that are on the market where losing 50% of the time is fine.

Past the Initial grind of 0 to 50 or 0 to a geared out 160 overland ads looses challenge value. Granted portions of the dlc zones have harder content in the form of world bosses. However, for a pvp player there's yet to be a way to get these rewards doing what they enjoy.

There's also the concern with solo RPG content. It follows elders scrolls tradition that players are overpowered when they master the content. I did see improvements though with flashy more spontaneous animations and only get to be new once so I can't say. But returning rpg players that are past that point would have the same issue with unlocking challenging solo story or keeping up with groups and digesting content in full.

Serpari

No, I would like PVE and PVP to remain separate. The Elder Scrolls series is, for better or for worse, defined by its solo player exploration. This is a MMO, however, so I'm willing to make some concessions in the name of the genre. So, dungeons/trials, and the PVP mode itself. As it stands I believe ESO has a good balance of what makes the Elder Scrolls the Elder Scrolls and an MMO.

Also, this is difficult to follow. My suggestion? Have someone peer edit your document. From how your sentences are constructed I sense English is not your first language. This reads awkwardly, which is why you're getting comments about how it's hard to understand what you're trying to say.

Best of luck.

ESO_player123

Pinja wrote: »

ESO_player123 wrote: »

What does "Opens players to overworld ganking, and adds surprise encounters." mean? Open world PvP? A big NOPE.
Not sure I understood the rest.

There's been alot of civil deliberation and reasoning for that over the years, but I have unique experiences that make open world pvp challenging and fun. I'm not too far into a niche group, but I know open world pvp has a steeper learning curve and is harder to get into.

The term gank means surprise ambush, usually resulting in a quick death.

The issue with ESO PvE centered reward approach is that its out of touch with players that like directly competing as a way to compare stats. There are plenty of them from all the Pvp games that are on the market where losing 50% of the time is fine.

Past the Initial grind of 0 to 50 or 0 to a geared out 160 overland ads looses challenge value. Granted portions of the dlc zones have harder content in the form of world bosses. However, for a pvp player there's yet to be a way to get these rewards doing what they enjoy.

There's also the concern with solo RPG content. It follows elders scrolls tradition that players are overpowered when they master the content. I did see improvements though with flashy more spontaneous animations and only get to be new once so I can't say. But returning rpg players that are past that point would have the same issue with unlocking challenging solo story or keeping up with groups and digesting content in full.

It's not about the learning curve. A lot of players have no interest in PvP (myself included), and no amount of pushing them into this content will change their mind. Open world PvP is good on a separate server dedicated for this purpose so that PvPers can enjoy their favorite playstyle and leave those that do not want to participate alone.

phaneub17_ESO

Okay this is about adding PvP to PvE areas. Then no, I disagree with the premise. At least I don't want to be forced into that situation in my day to day gameplay.

I'm also not voting as all your options are biased leaning towards your view point.

Pinja

ESO_player123 wrote: »

Pinja wrote: »

ESO_player123 wrote: »

What does "Opens players to overworld ganking, and adds surprise encounters." mean? Open world PvP? A big NOPE.
Not sure I understood the rest.

There's been alot of civil deliberation and reasoning for that over the years, but I have unique experiences that make open world pvp challenging and fun. I'm not too far into a niche group, but I know open world pvp has a steeper learning curve and is harder to get into.

The term gank means surprise ambush, usually resulting in a quick death.

The issue with ESO PvE centered reward approach is that its out of touch with players that like directly competing as a way to compare stats. There are plenty of them from all the Pvp games that are on the market where losing 50% of the time is fine.

Past the Initial grind of 0 to 50 or 0 to a geared out 160 overland ads looses challenge value. Granted portions of the dlc zones have harder content in the form of world bosses. However, for a pvp player there's yet to be a way to get these rewards doing what they enjoy.

There's also the concern with solo RPG content. It follows elders scrolls tradition that players are overpowered when they master the content. I did see improvements though with flashy more spontaneous animations and only get to be new once so I can't say. But returning rpg players that are past that point would have the same issue with unlocking challenging solo story or keeping up with groups and digesting content in full.

It's not about the learning curve. A lot of players have no interest in PvP (myself included), and no amount of pushing them into this content will change their mind. Open world PvP is good on a separate server dedicated for this purpose so that PvPers can enjoy their favorite playstyle and leave those that do not want to participate alone.

It's an option for a mode that can be turned on and or off like normal vs Vet mode. Same option if you want to participate. It's like walking past fighting NPC ads.

Since I know some might not want to always see Alliance conflict in all zones one compromise would be to cycle through zones like an event. But It is a major imbalance in fairness to say we have to PvE for rewards when we're not interested in pve. I'm only interested in the PvE for the reward so I can pvp.

Pixiepumpkin

Blizzard solved this long ago with wow. Simply allow people to flag for PvP with increased rewards like experience gain or 15% more harvested materials, etc.

In this way it does not affect the pve player, but allows like minded PvP players the ability to engage.

Now whether people use it or not is another story. But this could be a good way for PvP guilds to coordinate with other PvP guilds to have skirmishes.

Open world PvP should have been a thing years ago, just as long as it's opt in.

dRudE

Yes if this was opt in for double harvest resources etc

AnduinTryggva

At least one thing mentioned sounds like an irritant and I can see the momentum of some good Idea's

If we are at it imperial city should be reworked too. At the moment we are swamped with spawn campers which makes it impossible to play. Why don't we have TWO separate spawn points (and no, spawning in another district and running to the appropriate gates is not a solution because we have spawn point camping generally in almost all districts because of course with alliance imbalances we have we have a one alliance dominating everything at one given time slot)

TaSheen

Nope. No way in hell. That happens, I cancel 3 annual subs and go play something else.

Pixiepumpkin

I applaud the OP for coming up with creative ideas to improve ESO PVP.

ArchangelIsraphel

No, not what I want in this game.

I PVP, and I think this idea offers nothing of interest to me.

First of all, when I'm in the overland, I want peace and quiet- not an alliance war raging around me. This would be highly disruptive and inconsiderate to players who just want to quietly enjoy Tamriel. Sure, it's a flaggable mode, but that doesn't mean I want to see PVP or hear PVP, or watch PVP commands flood zone chats.

PVP is a "culture" in and of itself and needs to be kept separate from the normal overland- your idea would need to be instanced separately in order to preserve the peace for those who do not want to be surrounded by this mindset.

Not only that, but requests for a harder PVE overland would not be met by combining it with PVP. People who want a harder overland, generally, want PVE, not PVP.

Overall, it sounds like something I would avoid, even as a PVP player. I'm interested in the mechanics of PVP zones, meant for PVP players- not in disrupting the peace and quiet of a PVE zone that I enjoy too.

Syldras

From what I understand, OP wants it to be an opt-in feature. So I won't complain about that.

They seem to suggest it as something like a "vet mode" for overland though - increasing difficulty through also having to PvP other players in that area. And I don't think that's really what people want. From what I read, people want meaningful fights during questlines and bosses that don't die after three seconds, also for the sake of immersion. Having to fend off other players during the usual super easy overland fights doesn't change a thing about that problem.

Tandor

Absolutely not. Terrible ideas.

Tommy_The_Gun

Well, lets just say there is a reason why IC and Cyro are kinda "dead zones". IC in particular as the zone is way too small for PvE & PvP to work at the same time. Cyro is way bigger & open so it is actually possible to do PvE questing there, while in IC it makes actually PvE an PvP both a terrible experience.

So I guess that means a big fat "nope" for any possibility of adding PvP to PvE zones, even if that would work using a tag system and would be totally optional. Why ? Well, lets just say that even if we would have a tag sytem, and you not use the PvP, but even then it would make PvE experience way worse, as the Zones would become much more laggy while having less PvE players. On top of that PvP tends to attract players that can be very toxic and I would even not like to think what kind of exploits people could come up in a zones that were never designed to be PvP zones in a 1st place. It is a Pandora Box that should stay closed.

spartaxoxo

Absolutely not. I would be pretty annoyed if they decided to address the many complaints about being able to kill NPCs too quickly by letting a player kill you. It does nothing to enhance the story or its immersion.

valenwood_vegan

No thanks, not interested in having the entire game turned into a pvp playground where a few elites get special rewards while those who don't want to pvp become second class citizens.

You want pve rewards, do the content. That's what people get told when they ask for a non-pvp way to get AP / telvar / mayhem event tickets, right? Well it cuts both ways.

That said, I fully support them adding more features and rewards to pvp, for those who enjoy it.

Ragnork

Whilst I believe that PvP in the game is neglected, in my opinion this is not the solution.

I enjoy immensely the PvE story telling, role playing and general feel of the game.
I also have enjoyed many hours of PvP

I would not play any game that is "balanced" in the way described.

Trejgon

The poll is missing an option: OP did not specify any specific pain point to address, only came up with an elaborate idea for a new opt-in system that will enable PvP in PvE maps, and introduce alot of headache for the people opting-in for additional loot modifiers.

Idea itself is fairly meh, trying to wrap it as a list of loose pain points to address is... awkward.

sarahthes

I'm all for this, if it's an opt-in flag.

I think it would be hilarious.

Varana

Agree with Trejgon. I haven't really found out from reading the OP what those "pain points" are actually supposed to be. Overland difficulty? PvP rewards? Not enough people in Cyrodiil/IC? Would be my guess. But for a post that claims to talk about these "pain points", they remain curiously vague and in the background.

Instead, this quickly turned into yet another post about two of the most annoying topics ever, namely harder overland (I can see the allure, it's just so much flogging of a dead horse at this point) and forcing PvP on people who don't want to have anything to do with it. And that includes having it go on in their vicinity, not just taking part.

So - no. PvP in overland zones would be a very good opportunity to reconsider my addiction commitment to ESO. As ArchangelIsraphel said, PvP has its own special culture, and to be honest, it's not a fun one (to me). I dabble in PvP now and then, but the surrounding attitude can be very offputting. So I'd like to deal with it when I want to, not when running surveys in Auridon.

Dax_Draconis

Is this is about forcing PvP chaos into PvE Zones? I would most likely delete the game during the announcement of anything like that. I wouldn't want PvP battles ruining my questing experience and would never sign up for a game like that to begin with. It's bad enough having duels going on right next to crafting stations and guild traders.

Maitsukas

RuneScape had something called DarkScape, which enabled PvP outside of the Wilderness boundaries. But it didn't last long because of a lack of interest (16 September 2015 to 28 March 2016).

I'd imagine this "Overland PvP" would have a similar fate.

ArchMikem

I am happy and proud of the state of the game, no matter what.

Your solution to a perceived "irritant", would itself be an irritant to many others.

I dabble in PvP, but when I feel like it, I go to Cyro or the Imp City, and when I'm over it, I leave. These forums would feel my neckbearded Wrath if PvP followed me home to Overland.

IF open world PvP ever did happen, it would need to be a flag toggle in the settings, and it'd NEED to be set to off by default.

TaSheen

ArchMikem wrote: »

Your solution to a perceived "irritant", would itself be an irritant to many others.

I dabble in PvP, but when I feel like it, I go to Cyro or the Imp City, and when I'm over it, I leave. These forums would feel my neckbearded Wrath if PvP followed me home to Overland.

IF open world PvP ever did happen, it would need to be a flag toggle in the settings, and it'd NEED to be set to off by default.

Opt in toggles aren't really completely effective. It's all too easy to fix it so someone not flagged winds up doing something (like healing someone without realizing they're flagged) that gets them toggled on for PVP. That happened a lot in RIFT, and even back when in WoW. Don't know about now in WoW, because I've been gone from that game for a decade.

Freelancer_ESO

Personally, it's not really the direction I'd like to see the game go but also, I think your implementation might hit some issues.

Someone that actually likes ESO's PvP or is a more interested in a harder Overland could likely point out more issues or the issues in a better fashion.

First, ESO is really really big and the PvP population isn't that big. Having a portion of the PvP population leave the IC, Cyrodiil, and Battlegrounds to spread out over the entire rest of the the game may lead to less PvP happening not more.

Second, I believe a significant concern from the people upset with the difficulty is regarding how things die too fast. I don't think you are really addressing that.

Third, increasing the drops isn't necessarily going to be a great incentive because in many cases the drops simply aren't that good. You might get a few PvP gatherers but, beyond that I doubt you'd pull much with that incentive.

Fourth, Alliance Rewards might influence which faction people play for but, ESO has enough players that the odds of your activity shifting the success of your faction isn't that great and so most people will not bother.

Fifth, my impression is that one of the methods players use to kill others in PvP is to stun people as they burst them. If the npc's are regularly handing out stun immunity that's not going to work well. From time to time you also see threads complaining that the npc's present too much of a threat to players that are trying to fight groups of other players due to negates ect.

Sixth, I'm not sure the lack of predictability with the stuns and summons will go over well.

Seventh, you'd likely run into issues with trolling. The npcs that spawn to attack you could potentially be used to kill other players. Players could get into a fights in areas where it might be disruptive to others and they might also attempt to use guards to help them or get their own side killed. You might also end up with issues with people flagging off and on/tricking new players into flagging then killing them.

Eighth, the population in the mode could easily end up being low enough for players to mess up the data collection on set balance if you are not careful and many of the sets will not get used because the audience for the function will likely lean towards min-maxers.

Ninth, from a role play perspective the incentives for participation are weak.

SilverBride

Making an idea optional doesn't automatically make it doable.