Two Extremes of Cyrodiil

Credible_Joe

Hello Vestiges. A couple years back I proposed a refactor of Cyrodiil inspired by a game called Conqueror's Blade. I call it the Champion Queue

Wanna make this clear right off the bat: there is no intent to replace or displace Cyrodiil as we know it today. In a nutshell:

• One Raid per Alliance - max 36 players per queue
• No named campaigns
• Rotating queues that fill up endlessly. 36 at a time port into empty battlefields; queued players fill drop-outs, whichever pops first you go into
• Take command of a platoon of alliance soldiers via the Companion System
• Expanded companion commands for setting up siege, defending, and attacking
• Forward camps respawn your soldiers
• Players respond to each others' map moves directly, by-and-large fighting either one-v-one or in groups of two to three at any given objective. Single players can capture keeps, single players can defend, and the map balance would be much more dynamic, objectives changing hands as all three raids try to outmaneuver and exploit each other

The idea is for each and every player to feel like the champion player-stand-ins portrayed in the cinematics. Command the foot-soldiers, be the pivotal fulcrum of every single battle in Cyrodiil.

This was not received well. By and large, no one wanted to let go of the large scale conflict advertised.And with the Vengeance campaign, I get it. Fully eating my words. With everyone more-or-less on even footing, those massive scope battles were absolutely breathtaking. No other experience like it in gaming.

That being said, there are those among us that aren't too keen on giving up our carefully crafted character builds for the sake of performance, and I agree. While these huge battles are wildly chaotic and exhilarating, I personally wouldn't exchange everything I've built my character into over the course of years for them. Even with other activities like Imperial City and Battlegrounds. I want my full power on display in Cyrodiil, and others have said the same.

So, I humbly request reconsidering this real-time-tactics proposal. I think that between the Vengeance campaign (with the addition of weapon, assault, support, guild, and world skills, plus stamina morphs), regular Cyrodiil campaigns, and this Champion Queue proposal, everyone can be satisfied. The full spectrum of players, from PvE purists to battleground leaderboard pros can fully enjoy the advertised massive-scale experience in Vengeance, more experienced PvP players can keep what we've got in a slightly reduced scope with normal campaigns, and those of us that really wanna test ourselves against players face to face can enjoy a more direct experience with a smaller scope in Champion Queue.

A few notes regarding the discourse in the thread I linked before I post:

• The notion of displacing any aspect of PvP as we know it today is completely abandoned. Worry not.
• One prominent criticism was that tactics is a fundamentally different experience than melee and ranged fray that we've got now. I disagree, but to address the concern, the platoon NPCs single purpose would be to solo capture objectives. I personally think it would be more exciting if we had advanced control of the platoons and utilized them in conflict with players, but that's probably infeasibly out of scope for what the companion system could currently handle. So the conflict would remain heavily focused on direct player versus player, except during initial sieges when you're setting up offense and defense.
• God, I'm re-reading my original 2023 proposal and I don't know what mood I was in, but yikes I was way too verbose. I really hope I've reigned that in.

Thank you for reading, thank you for your consideration.

LadyGP

I think any change or additional camps ultimatley comes down to population and if a main camp, no proc, spin of camps, etc. would be sustainable or not.

Right now - out side of prime time - the population just really isn't there.

Credible_Joe

LadyGP wrote: »

I think any change or additional camps ultimatley comes down to population and if a main camp, no proc, spin of camps, etc. would be sustainable or not.

Right now - out side of prime time - the population just really isn't there.

I would argue that all three of these PvP modes would build up population fairly steadily.

The best thing about Vengeance is that it's accessible. Newbies don't have to worry about ruthless PvP purists decked out in the best gear smiting them in four seconds.

PvP as it was pre-vengeance was not a good experience for new players, or anyone dipping their toes into it. The technical cliff is just too steep.

Even without my Champion Queue, I say keep Vengeance (with balance and stamina considerations) so people have a place to go where they can contribute more meaningfully than manning an oil or spamming vigor from the back. I guarantee then that population would grow to support a much more robust PvP community.

ArchMikem

This sounds like it turns Cyrodiil into a League of Legends-esque RTS, with the player leading groups of NPC soldiers. Since you mentioned the Camps would be 32v32v32, but players would solo siege keeps, how would you keep one side from dumping all their players and accompanying soldiers on a single objective at a time?

Since you can't divide 32 by 3 i take it then this either does away with the 1v1v1, or it's 32 players per faction?

Credible_Joe

ArchMikem wrote: »

This sounds like it turns Cyrodiil into a League of Legends-esque RTS, with the player leading groups of NPC soldiers. Since you mentioned the Camps would be 32v32v32, but players would solo siege keeps, how would you keep one side from dumping all their players and accompanying soldiers on a single objective at a time?

Since you can't divide 32 by 3 i take it then this either does away with the 1v1v1, or it's 32 players per faction?

Math is a little off there. And maybe I didn't convey quite enough. One full raid per alliance per battlefield. 36 on the field, 12 per alliance. Concentrating forces is definitely an option, but putting more than three players at any objective leaves a LOT of map vulnerable to solo capture.

Funny you mention league of legends; I was considering comparing ESO PvP to that in a more generalized way. Not in genre or gameplay, but in that it's not very accessible to new players. Basically have to be indoctrinated into that scene. Our community is less toxic at most levels, I'd say, but the skill differential between new and even casual PvP players STRONGLY discourages return visits in both games.