Maintenance for the week of March 30:
• [COMPLETE] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – April 1, 1:00PM EDT (17:00 UTC) - 5:00PM EDT (21:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – April 1, 1:00PM EDT (17:00 UTC) - 5:00PM EDT (21:00 UTC)
Changes to how Campaigns work- Wishlist
MrGhosty
✭✭✭✭✭
I've only just recently (the last month or so) gotten into the PvP aspects of Cyrodiil but there are a few things that are bothering me which I feel could benefit from some changes. Below is my wishlist.
1. Reset keeps and outposts to "Campaign default" when a campaign concludes.
Resetting the map gives everyone a fair shake to rally the troops and take up the fight once again. My DC character is currently set to home on Chillrend, DC owns the map almost entirely until a plucky band of AD or EP decide to retake some keeps, as soon as action begins DC swoop in and destroy the attackers and the campaign returns to silence. Resetting the map would give everyone a fair and even start, I also feel it will stop other factions that don't have pop advantage from giving up and going elsewhere.
2. Restrict Keep and Outpost taking only to those keeps and outposts that are currently connected to your faction's transitus network. This could lead to more dramatic and varied fights by factions being forced to take keeps a, b, and c in order to attack and take keep d. This sometimes happens, but I recently played on Thornblade and DC had no keeps except for one on the otherside of the map which could not be reinforced without blood porting, and didn't make sense other than those players wanting to farm a lucrative battle. For those players not part of a competitive PvP guild or with a large number of allies, this makes getting into the fight difficult and that ruins the enjoyment particularly for lower leveled players who aren't even able to reach their destination before getting caught by a gank squad and then they have to start the process all over again.
3. More locations that can be captured.
This one comes largely from being in a guild with a small PvP population, unless we fall in with a zerg or other large groups there is very little for us to do outside of follow and pick up the scraps from larger groups. Small fortifications could be located on the many bridges in Cyrodiil and at other locations around the map which could provide simple benefits like having more locations to respawn, and denying the enemy ease of access through an area. These bridges could be extremely useful when the enemy is making a mad dash with a scroll and would become highly contested areas. Having these smaller locations for small groups to capture provide a means for small groups to contribute beyond what is currently offered.
4. Remove campaign buffs
This one may be highly contentious but with all the problems these buffs create either by population imbalance, choosing the "easy" faction campaign or other such behaviors. If the buffs weren't part of the equation, part of the problem would be solved. I wouldn't be against some sort of reward for a faction when it caps and then wins a campaign, but I don't think it should be a persistent buff.
5. "zerg scaling"
When large numbers of players group in one area, it should lessen the overall damage abilities do. This is to reduce the usefulness of the Impulse zerg or any other enmass spamming of abilities. It's not fun for those on the receiving end and it lessens the importance of strategic planning and careful attack. This reduction should be set only to encourage these players to spread out more evenly not fight in another location altogether. This should also reduce some of the server strain as well making a more enjoyable experience for everyone.
I understand that most of these ideas will upset people, but they are the best ways I could personally think to alleviate some the problems I have seen plaguing PvP. I would love to have input and suggestions and maybe we can provide some ideas for ZOS.
1. Reset keeps and outposts to "Campaign default" when a campaign concludes.
Resetting the map gives everyone a fair shake to rally the troops and take up the fight once again. My DC character is currently set to home on Chillrend, DC owns the map almost entirely until a plucky band of AD or EP decide to retake some keeps, as soon as action begins DC swoop in and destroy the attackers and the campaign returns to silence. Resetting the map would give everyone a fair and even start, I also feel it will stop other factions that don't have pop advantage from giving up and going elsewhere.
2. Restrict Keep and Outpost taking only to those keeps and outposts that are currently connected to your faction's transitus network. This could lead to more dramatic and varied fights by factions being forced to take keeps a, b, and c in order to attack and take keep d. This sometimes happens, but I recently played on Thornblade and DC had no keeps except for one on the otherside of the map which could not be reinforced without blood porting, and didn't make sense other than those players wanting to farm a lucrative battle. For those players not part of a competitive PvP guild or with a large number of allies, this makes getting into the fight difficult and that ruins the enjoyment particularly for lower leveled players who aren't even able to reach their destination before getting caught by a gank squad and then they have to start the process all over again.
3. More locations that can be captured.
This one comes largely from being in a guild with a small PvP population, unless we fall in with a zerg or other large groups there is very little for us to do outside of follow and pick up the scraps from larger groups. Small fortifications could be located on the many bridges in Cyrodiil and at other locations around the map which could provide simple benefits like having more locations to respawn, and denying the enemy ease of access through an area. These bridges could be extremely useful when the enemy is making a mad dash with a scroll and would become highly contested areas. Having these smaller locations for small groups to capture provide a means for small groups to contribute beyond what is currently offered.
4. Remove campaign buffs
This one may be highly contentious but with all the problems these buffs create either by population imbalance, choosing the "easy" faction campaign or other such behaviors. If the buffs weren't part of the equation, part of the problem would be solved. I wouldn't be against some sort of reward for a faction when it caps and then wins a campaign, but I don't think it should be a persistent buff.
5. "zerg scaling"
When large numbers of players group in one area, it should lessen the overall damage abilities do. This is to reduce the usefulness of the Impulse zerg or any other enmass spamming of abilities. It's not fun for those on the receiving end and it lessens the importance of strategic planning and careful attack. This reduction should be set only to encourage these players to spread out more evenly not fight in another location altogether. This should also reduce some of the server strain as well making a more enjoyable experience for everyone.
I understand that most of these ideas will upset people, but they are the best ways I could personally think to alleviate some the problems I have seen plaguing PvP. I would love to have input and suggestions and maybe we can provide some ideas for ZOS.
"It is a time of strife and unrest. Armies of revenants and dark spirits manifest in every corner of Tamriel. Winters grow colder and crops fail. Mystics are plagued by nightmares and portents of doom."
0
-
Forestd16b14_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Good ideas except the first one cause if the reset the map after each campaign that mean we have to update the game client every 7 days due to haderus. It is a good idea that way the emperor [blood stain blocking out word] wouldn't have there buffs 24/7 and if they want them again they have to you know work for them instead of doing it once and become a divine being that takes 30 soldiers to kill. But like i said we have to update the client every week to reset it.0 -
MrGhosty✭✭✭✭✭It seems like there would be a way for them to implement a system that wouldn't require any more downtime than the basic regular server maintenance. I would gladly suffer the downtime for downloading once a week if it meant more robust and evenly spread PvP to dive into as soon as I got back in."It is a time of strife and unrest. Armies of revenants and dark spirits manifest in every corner of Tamriel. Winters grow colder and crops fail. Mystics are plagued by nightmares and portents of doom."1
-
JamilaRaj✭✭✭✭✭
✭1. Reset keeps and outposts to "Campaign default" when a campaign concludes.
Resetting the map gives everyone a fair shake to rally the troops and take up the fight once again. My DC character is currently set to home on Chillrend, DC owns the map almost entirely until a plucky band of AD or EP decide to retake some keeps, as soon as action begins DC swoop in and destroy the attackers and the campaign returns to silence. Resetting the map would give everyone a fair and even start, I also feel it will stop other factions that don't have pop advantage from giving up and going elsewhere.
That would not help one-sided campaigns at all, because one of problems weaker factions face is that they can muster their 10-20 players only for couple of hours, while dominant faction has some presence throughout the whole day and nothing else to do but take back whatever they by chance lost.
Instead, there should be some mechanism to help weaker faction preserve their progress or at least get them back into game when everything has been painted in one colour. Examples:
1) the less players faction has (or possibly relative to dominant faction), the more NPCs (or stronger) are in their home keeps, thicker walls etc.
2) home keeps in enemy's hands have fewer/weaker NPCs, thinner walls (note that as it is now, in typical one-sided campaign, dominant faction, holding keeps for most of the time, practically always defends keeps with maxed out resources - this needs to be reversed).2. Restrict Keep and Outpost taking only to those keeps and outposts that are currently connected to your faction's transitus network. This could lead to more dramatic and varied fights by factions being forced to take keeps a, b, and c in order to attack and take keep d. This sometimes happens, but I recently played on Thornblade and DC had no keeps except for one on the otherside of the map which could not be reinforced without blood porting, and didn't make sense other than those players wanting to farm a lucrative battle. For those players not part of a competitive PvP guild or with a large number of allies, this makes getting into the fight difficult and that ruins the enjoyment particularly for lower leveled players who aren't even able to reach their destination before getting caught by a gank squad and then they have to start the process all over again.
That would be absolutely deadly and fatal for one-sided campaigns, as weaker factions would be forced to attack without any element of surprise whatsover and the hardest keeps on top of it. For other campaigns just stupid, as fighting would be concentrated to a few, zergy spots.4. More locations that can be captured.
This one comes largely from being in a guild with a small PvP population, unless we fall in with a zerg or other large groups there is very little for us to do outside of follow and pick up the scraps from larger groups. Small fortifications could be located on the many bridges in Cyrodiil and at other locations around the map which could provide simple benefits like having more locations to respawn, and denying the enemy ease of access through an area. These bridges could be extremely useful when the enemy is making a mad dash with a scroll and would become highly contested areas. Having these smaller locations for small groups to capture provide a means for small groups to contribute beyond what is currently offered.
Could be, but base problem of small group action is blood porting to tents far away and to a degree keeps (otherwise cut off). Small group takes X, then someody comes, sets up tent, zergball ports in from other side of map, small group is roflstomped, X taken back, zergball jumps elsewhere. Right now, zergballs can be everywhere almost at the same time, there is no cost of throwing 30 people at 6.
If that was addressed, it would also help one-sided campaigns. Dominant faction would either have to split to deal with both other factions at the same time, but without crushing numerical advantage, or roflstomp one, but give the other time to establish itself.
Now that if faction has at least something on map, random players logging in, even without a group, will come to it and stick around, therefore heal their faction a bit. But when faction has nothing, these random people will see map all in one colour, say oh god and leave immediately. This vicious circle needs to be turned to virtuous one.
There is also a problem that already winning faction is getting even stronger. It could count for score and rewards, but preferably not give combat bonuses.4. Remove campaign buffs
This one may be highly contentious but with all the problems these buffs create either by population imbalance, choosing the "easy" faction campaign or other such behaviors. If the buffs weren't part of the equation, part of the problem would be solved. I wouldn't be against some sort of reward for a faction when it caps and then wins a campaign, but I don't think it should be a persistent buff.5. "zerg scaling"
When large numbers of players group in one area, it should lessen the overall damage abilities do. This is to reduce the usefulness of the Impulse zerg or any other enmass spamming of abilities. It's not fun for those on the receiving end and it lessens the importance of strategic planning and careful attack. This reduction should be set only to encourage these players to spread out more evenly not fight in another location altogether. This should also reduce some of the server strain as well making a more enjoyable experience for everyone.
I would go the other way round, and on tactical level: not to make zergball weaker, but some abilities stronger when applied on zergball to force them to spread out. E.g. some stacking DoT that would create small AoE circle around each affected player. Therefore players standing one on another would get hit multiple times, and AoEs could even synergize and hit for exponential damage.I understand that most of these ideas will upset people, but they are the best ways I could personally think to alleviate some the problems I have seen plaguing PvP. I would love to have input and suggestions and maybe we can provide some ideas for ZOS.
Edited by JamilaRaj on September 25, 2014 9:37AM1 -
MrGhosty✭✭✭✭✭@JamilaRaj I agree with you in some cases and I think you may have misunderstood me about the zerg scaling and campaign buffs.
First I stated that I want the buffs to go away, I don't think they're needed and would rather see players receive a rewards for the worthy type reward that is only given if you have contributed in some way.
I may not have properly explained my zerg scaling idea, the base idea behind it is to limit the usability and effectiveness of the impulse conga line or other ridiculous maneuvers. The idea roughly would be like this, if you have 20 sorc all firing off impulse at the same time within, say, 5m of each other the total damage output would be scaled down to equal, say 5 sorc all spamming impulse. If those sorcerers spread out and stayed out of the range of each other the damage output would remain unchanged. I'm no programmer so it's likely such a thing isn't possible or would require so much computing it would lag the servers. The reason I suggested this as an idea is that I don't want to see the weapon nerfed in PvE, or nerfed at all. If those sorcerers were all spread out it limits the damage potential and gives enemies a better chance to fight back.
I like the idea of scaling for keeps and NPCs to make them stronger or weaker depending on whether or not that faction is outnumbered or not.
I said in my entry about the additional capture points that these locations could be zerged over, but anything can be zerged over. What I aim for these is to provide more opportunities for smaller groups to have some impact on the battlefield and have something to do.
As for the transitus lines suggestion that you take issue with, I saw almost the same reactions when a similar system was implemented in Planetside 2. I based this idea off of that system as the basic mechanics are very similar. These lines tend to focus the fights into predictable zones, so while I would readily agree it removes some of the tactics and "surprise" of fights the benefits outweigh the potential problems.
I do want to thank you for your thought out and reasoned response, you brought some things up I didn't think of before."It is a time of strife and unrest. Armies of revenants and dark spirits manifest in every corner of Tamriel. Winters grow colder and crops fail. Mystics are plagued by nightmares and portents of doom."0
