The issue is not going away just because you ignore it.
[Moderator Note: Edited per our rules on Thread Bumping]

1. Not really possible as 4 out of the 5 campaigns end before your suggested time frame. It's also not possible on the 30 day campaign as it ends when you finally become eligible for emperor.

2. Earning the most AP in your alliance is already a requirement.

3/4. You can't get emperor unless you've held the title the longest, but then you can't get it if you aren't emp by the time the campaign ends. Yet you can't get even if you have had it at the end because you didn't hold it the longest.

Basically there will be no emperors because none of the campaigns meet the 1st requirement. When you become eligible on the 30 day it resets wiping your position on the leader board. Not to mention emperor could easily be avoided by having everyone turtle inside the inner keeps the day the campaign resets.

how about, instead of it being based on earned AP, its based on actual SKILL. K/D ratios.... teamwork....... actually being there for keep battles.... helping get scrolls.... stuff like that. if it was like that, the 90% that just AP farmed and traded it would not be able to get it ever again unless they actually devoted some effort into PvP, and emperors would no longer be a joke. we would see emperors that actually earned it. if emperorship is STILL based solely on AP earned, then these changes would mean nothing(not that they make sense in the first place to be honest)

Emperor should be based on leadership ability - not how much AP you can grind.

I earned my emperor title. I got to lvl 10 on launch day and did nothing but PVP since.
I had to work bloody hard to get it. I was only lvl 36 when i got it (since very little xp was gained in pvp then)
I had to compete against vr10s, both enemy and alliance, who could dominate.
I had to be very tactical and smart.
I also had to do overnight sessions just to stay ahead of the vr10s on my leaderboard.

I should not be punished because of the idiots who farm.
You could then suggest a time limit thing. But I was overthrown within a couple of days since a large guild on my campaign had an alliance with another faction to farm emp.

There was nothing I could do about it.

I would be ok with something cosmetic, rather then a passive. But i did work hard for it.
The passives also require skill points, they're not just given.
The passives are also very small.

I think the devs had said they are making the amount of campaigns smaller, so campaigns aren't dominated by only one faction

I think you should get god mode through emporer, and it should last until you are killed once, and then no benefits (debatable, i mean really emp benefits only give -5% ult cost the way i see it, but still that is a leg up). The person who killed you should then get the title of emporer, and so forth. There might need to be an inactivity expiration though.

That way you actually have to be able to be good to be emporer.

Being emporer would actually mean something.

About to get some tweaks. I do agree we have emperors out there today that busted butt to get. Alas we have a lot more slime bags that "trade" and don't forget those that exploited things like DK Vamp OP combos that ZOS took it's sweet time to resolve even after videos showed up.

I firmly think these PVP bonuses should stay PVP only. Removing buffs and title is a tad overboard, but can't change the past. Timed runs on anything for gear rewards just forces things like trading to happen to keep folks in elite gear.

Maybe AP is being done wrong? Maybe your AP should roll over and each time an emperor is needed folks secret BID for the title? This would over time let people save up (like a years worth) of AP to cash in the points. Just a random idea to allow the average PVP player a chance.

Smaller campaigns will be better.

Get rid of passives.

Get to keep cosmetics - Costume and Former title.

A reset would be nice, but would risk making a lot of players angry. I honestly doubt that ZOS is willing to do that.

I think the Alliance War ranks speak more volumes about the player then the Emperor title does - and there are very few that are even above level 30.

I agree with resetting Emperor. they did not earn them and the title has been spit upon. Emperor-ship is equivalent to toilet paper.

To be honest, I never understood why people care so much about virtual goodies. I am not an Emperor but a former two time Rank 14 and Gladiator at the game we don't speak of.

I never felt superior because of it, nor do I feel less worthy now without the top pvp rank.

In my opinion people should relax more and take online gaming more easy.

david271749 wrote: »

Please explain 2.

Vizier wrote: »

2. Earn most AP in Alliance. (Can obtain title but not passives unless had earned most AP between all alliances period.)

Sure- the suggestion is that the title may not be rare but the passives should be and so only the one that stands out above all others regardless of alliance should get the title and passives. Meaning the ONE that got more AP than any other in the campaign in any alliance.

This may be overly harsh and now that I think on it may be a disincentive to fight if there is one player that is so far ahead of even the top players in opposing factions. Let me adjust this rule. The idea was to provide disincentive for Emperor Swapping, but perhaps the way to do that is still within the factions only and is strengthened by the subsequent rule that you don't keep anything about title and ability unless you're sitting the throne at campaigns end.

So the possible amendment to rule two would be that a player has to earn the most AP in their faction period. So if someone earned more and abdicates or leaves the campaign the next in line can not be emperor.

xsfkxnub19_ESO wrote: »

1. Not really possible as 4 out of the 5 campaigns end before your suggested time frame. It's also not possible on the 30 day campaign as it ends when you finally become eligible for emperor.

It is possible. It just means your not eligible until after the 30th day of your home campaign. So you have to be a foot soldier before you can be Emperor. Is that so bad?

Besides this is merely a discussion and a means of getting feedback. The reason for this rule is that people have been switching unpopulated or low activity campaigns exploiting AP then becoming emperor all within a day or two. Then rinse repeat for the next pretender Emperor. It may be more appropriate for the cool off period after making a campaign home to be one campaign cycle to become eligible.

xsfkxnub19_ESO wrote: »

2. Earning the most AP in your alliance is already a requirement.

Actually I was suggesting that in order to get the title you have to have more AP than anyone in all alliances total.

As I suggest above this may be overly prohibitive, but the concept is to keep Emperor to who did the best, not to who was "next in line" after an Emperor "abdicates" his title after being browbeat into getting out of the way.

The plus side of the original suggestion is that emperorship would be rare and even factions would be competing not just in the ownership of Keeps but also with AP. It would make the title mean so much more IMO.

xsfkxnub19_ESO wrote: »

3/4. You can't get emperor unless you've held the title the longest, but then you can't get it if you aren't emp by the time the campaign ends. Yet you can't get even if you have had it at the end because you didn't hold it the longest.

Exactly- You got it. You should NOT be able to "King of Hill" unless your the last man standing on it.

xsfkxnub19_ESO wrote: »

Basically there will be no emperors because none of the campaigns meet the 1st requirement. When you become eligible on the 30 day it resets wiping your position on the leader board. Not to mention emperor could easily be avoided by having everyone turtle inside the inner keeps the day the campaign resets.

That's the way the Crown bounces.

There will be Emperors. They just won't be a dime a dozen. It should be rare and honestly so what if you have to sit through a campaign or two before being eligible for emperor in that campaign. Who becomes a General the first day in uniform?

I'm not totally against the idea of an emperor reset both because I don't like that a lot of people cheesed their way to it and because in the future it will be significantly harder to earn, but I'm not sure it's the ideal solution.

What I don't want is to simply make it harder to become emperor in the future. That only rewards those who cheesed their way to the title and punishes those who didn't. It would be validation of their methods.

Best thing to do is get rid of the perks for former emperors. You know that's why people cheesed their way to emperor in the first place. If you are current emperor you get the passives, if you are former emperor you get a nifty title.

1/ Resetting the former emperors while make every single one of them rage, most of all those who have put a lot of hard work and time to achieve it, and have a very valid claim to the "honesty" of their title.

These players in particular, should not be deprived of their prizes.

But as you can't tell the "honest" ones from the "less honest" ones .... better to just do nothing. Forget that reset, it shouldn't happen.

2/ Allegedly, the emperor title has been traded between the members of several groups of players, some of them organised across factions.

So what ? Since when have politics been strangers to leadership ?

If you further restrict the ability to be emperor, those groups will continue hounding the title - and because they are organised, and the vast majority of us are not, they will succeed.

So what happens ? They keep the lock on the title. We lose any sliver of a chance we might have had of obtaining it.

Your "solution" won't work.

And I maintain (because I've previously said it elsewhere) that there is in fact no problem. There is only a bunch of sour players who, since they can't have it, don't want anyone else to have it either.

ViciousWayz wrote: »

Point is: Stop hiding behind legit players for an excuse and just admit the fear to not being able to acquire it the legit way --- which honestly is not hard if you have no job, plan to spend all of your time in Cyrodiil, and have no other real life responsibilities. It's a time sink, not a skill sink.

Legit players are not an "excuse"
I got my title legit, (I do work full time) and it required alot of skill to compete with the vr10s.

Why should I be punished!?

I'm annoyed by the emp farming. it does suck.
But I don't want to have my achievement removed because some filthy casuals complain about it.

It's near impossible to get! And like it was said before, the scum that are farming emp are organized! They will find another way. Making it less and less likely anyone else can get it legitimately.

The simplest solution would be a campaign lock. That would stop the farming.
But since they can swap campaigns, they switch once they get emp, that's how it works.

JoffyToffy69 wrote: »

ViciousWayz wrote: »

Point is: Stop hiding behind legit players for an excuse and just admit the fear to not being able to acquire it the legit way --- which honestly is not hard if you have no job, plan to spend all of your time in Cyrodiil, and have no other real life responsibilities. It's a time sink, not a skill sink.

Legit players are not an "excuse"
I got my title legit, (I do work full time) and it required alot of skill to compete with the vr10s.

Why should I be punished!?

I'm annoyed by the emp farming. it does suck.
But I don't want to have my achievement removed because some filthy casuals complain about it.

It's near impossible to get! And like it was said before, the scum that are farming emp are organized! They will find another way. Making it less and less likely anyone else can get it legitimately.

The simplest solution would be a campaign lock. That would stop the farming.
But since they can swap campaigns, they switch once they get emp, that's how it works.

If I was you, I would disagree

I would not want to hold onto a title that's supposed to mean something big as in the emperor, if I knew that it had become a worthless thing.

Doesnt matter how hard you worked for it, fact is, if I or many others see an emperor, we instantly think they are nothing more than a paper hat wearer and you can say until you are blue in the face that you legitimately got it and 99% of people in game won't believe you.

Hence, if I had legitimately got emperor, I would still rather it be reset so that I can legitimately try and get it again, rather than it now being a meaningless thing.

I have the achievement for killing an emperor, I would like that reset too as it was something I was looking forward to getting in the future when my pvp skills improved, not getting it from killing someone with worse pvp skills than me, it makes my achievement worthless.

I think Zenimax needs to act much quicker when exploits are being used, waiting weeks or months before its fixed simply does more damage than good, they should have disabled the emperor title as soon as it became obvious it was being abused and not turned back on until it was fixed.