Do you think that the travel time in PvP is too much?

Torasi

A lot of people have been complaining about the amount of distance you have to travel while you're in Cyrodil. Normally this is coming from people who don't control many keeps so clearly that would hold them back from certain fast travel perks. Do you think that they should allow people to recall perhaps, or should they keep it the way that it is because it forces players to think more tactically. Should the change it, or not?

stylernaku

No

I would love to see a few posts of "Do you LOVE (insert here) about ESO. I'm sorry but all these polls seem to be encouraging hate spam, and little more.

I'm not saying that was definately your intention, but it wiffs of it to me.

Baraz

No

I have seen worse and better in terms of "time to get back into the fray", but the votes will speak for themselves. I think it is really fine at the moment.

KiroElmarok

No

I would love to see campaigns with rules that force you to spawn at your teams gate and run back to where you were. Gives death in pvp a more visceral feel. (Rezzing with gems/forward camps would still be allowed.)

Phaet

No

So you've traveled very far away to your objective and got killed right away or even very very close to your objective and you don't want to travel again all the way. Well it hahppened to me too. It happens.

Helspyre

No

When I was a kid, we didn't have horses. I had to march to and from battles for 10 leagues or more, through snow, uphill...both ways.

Zaxq

No

lol, poll kinda backfired on the muppets whining about everything.

Brank

No

How do you think it would affect reinforcement if you could just respawn right beside the battle? Not only does it provide consequence for dying, but it also makes possible this style of castle warefare. I think it's perfect. Does it suck to run/ride all the way to the battle, only to die on the way or as soon as you get there? Yes. Can you be more careful about picking your routes, to travel in groups, be aware of gankers, and not run head first into a fray when you get there? I hope so.


Your opening line made me think of the following video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NYA9ufivbDw

Torasi

No

@Brank I appreciate your detailed and well spoken criticism. The video is a graceful touch as well. Kudos to you good sir. I myself voted "No", because I find the complaints to be (for lack of a better term) ill advised. As people childishly throw temper tantrums as the get slaughtered through PvP because of their lack of tactical sense. I often find that I myself get caught up in this as well, thus my hunger for the forums opinion was born. I'm happy to say that you sir, have satiated that hunger.

Kingslayer

No

This is a tough one, Yes and no i guess the travel time has to be brought in line with how long it normally takes to capture a keep. Currently Its about right, reinforcements can arrive in time. If they are to shorten it they need to shorten the time to capture keeps.

Funkitron

No

It needs to take a sufficiently long time to get back to make defending worthwhile, if you can slowly whittle down the enemies numbers you still have a chance. Particularly against greater numbers. Otherwise you end up with GW2 style keep capture races where you avoid the enemies forces as much as possible.

Kewljag_66_ESO

No

Long travels means that death actually means something. You kill someone at a battle and they are out of the battle or keep siege. This system also make keep supply lines and ports important. you take away travel time and it would be like GW2 where you kill someone and they are right back in less than a minute.

A lot of people also forget there horses will get a lot faster as they feed them every day.

Also old school Darkage of Camelot took you 15 to 20 minutes to run back from your gate threw the frontiers to the hotspots of the milegates.

RivenEsq

No

A recent game with RvR had porting all over the map easily and short travel times. It was called Guild Wars 2 and the small size of the maps was possibly the worst thing to ever happen. Your entire force on the map was forced into being in one giant blob because any time a keep or tower was threatened, the entire map could port to the nearest waypoint and respond to the threat before anything could be taken. I will never play another game where the optimum tactic is being forced to run everyone in the same group.

I love the distance between objectives. It means you have to siege from the open field, giving defenders the advantage, it makes you choose tactical positioning and clever use of forward camps to be an offensive force on a map. Would never want to see any part of the map size changed, I'd be in favor of it being even bigger with more outposts between keeps as well.

Dleatherus

No

i would be totally in favor of NO fast travel in cyrodiil period

this would make strategy and consequences come into play

the 100 man zergs could easily be outplayed by a 40 man group split into working on two objectives at the same time

right now the 100 man zerg just zips here, zips there - and having been one of those involved before in a large zerg the amount of skill and strategy involved in that playstyle - ZERO

D.

greylox

No

Fine as it is.

Aballister

No

If think the travel time is about right. I like the way you can disrupt the opposition returning by taking out one of the travel links.

Royalty27

No

Fine as it currently is.

adri_sumb14_ESO

No

Reduce time travel and what you end up with is GW2 PvP.

LGAllastair

No

Dleatherus wrote: »

i would be totally in favor of NO fast travel in cyrodiil period

this would make strategy and consequences come into play

the 100 man zergs could easily be outplayed by a 40 man group split into working on two objectives at the same time

right now the 100 man zerg just zips here, zips there - and having been one of those involved before in a large zerg the amount of skill and strategy involved in that playstyle - ZERO

D.

I understand the point, but there comes a time when frustration outweights realism and strategy complexity. I think they got a good measure with the way it is now. It is complex enough to be fun and engaging. Strategy plays a big part in it, movement, speed and coordination still matter. But at the same time it's not so frustrating that when things go south people wanna leave out of frustration.

It is a fine line, hardcore players will normally stay no matter what and do what it takes to achieve the goal, but hardcore players are the minority. Most people quit when they perceive their time is being thrown away (running from A to B in 10 minutes, dying, running again, dying again, repeat). THe fast travel they have up still makes death impacting and meaningful and enables a good chunk of possible effective strategies without being too frustrating for disorganized/ casual public, which is ideal for an MMO to suceed IMO.

Dleatherus

No

@LGAllastair‌

i agree with you that many people would find it frustrating to the point of rage quitting

I can always hope for the day when ZOS comes out with campaigns with varying rulesets

hell, i'd even PAY (within reason) for a campaign where you could select from a menu a set of customizeable rules

D.

Zerl

No

It's fine as it is now.

You really worried about the travel times, then go buy some damn soulstones!

LGAllastair

No

Zerl wrote: »

It's fine as it is now.

You really worried about the travel times, then go buy some damn soulstones!

When a player kills you you can't ress in place with a soulstone, only other people can ress you. You can only ress in place with a stone when you die to a PvE source.

Torasi

No

I don't understand why so many people think that you can rez yourself with soul gems....it's not PVE....so buying them is not beneficial to you, but certainly saves your team.

Orchish

No

Nope. You can teleport between your own keeps. Having to walk/run/ride to the enemies is perfectly fine with me.

Gisgo

Its ok with a fast horse.

Thechemicals

No

this poll got smashed lol.

Tobiz

No

Dont go to Cyrodiil without a horse. I tried, it sucks.
Besides that I applaud the devs and decicion makers that dared make a truly large scale AvA. Granted its mostly ZvZ but every now and then there are tactical groups forming for a diversion here, a successful capture deep behind enemy lines there. I cant wait to be viable in Cyrodiil, 'cause currently at 32 and clueless as how to kill other players unless theyre around my level.

rich_nicholsonb16_ESO

No

the OP is probably from GW2 where the maps were too small and u could get from top to bottom within a few mins....it's fine as it is thanks, it spreads the action out and allows small groups to roam without being zerged down every few minutes. I love it.

Rustybucket

No

What!? People want a huge map for Cyrodiil and then they want to be able to instantly travel around it? NO. I like feeling like the land is huge and it makes me give thought to my tactics.

OtarTheMad

No

I think it's just fine, it's a huge map so what did people expect? I played Skyrim, Oblivion and I am used to things like this. Just grab a horse and you'll be fine and also that is what the Forward Camps are for... and yes they probably should make the limited one purchasable for less AP.

pad11

No

I voted No...I just feel that it is the penalty of all the travel makes dying suck LOL! So i'm fine with it...HOWEVER...boy howdy it'd be nice if the Forward camps worked correctly...holy bananas they get annoying...