Maintenance for the week of February 23:
· [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – February 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – February 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 17:00 UTC (12:00PM EST)
· [COMPLETE] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – February 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for maintenance – February 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] EU megaservers for maintenance – February 23, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 17:00 UTC (12:00PM EST)
· [COMPLETE] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – February 23, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
Please remove forward camps.
rophez_ESO
✭✭✭✭✭
FC are ruining the game experience for anyone who doesn't like to endlessly smash two zergs against each other. Two examples:
1- On Chillrend we, EP, finally managed to take a keep on Sunday. We managed to fight off the much larger force of DC as they came to reclaim their keep. Maybe a dozen times? Unfortunately, they have an endless supply of FC. They just keep coming. It's silly. If they had to at least respawn at a nearby keep, we could get a breather to repair, set up ambushes on the road, etc.
2- Nobody travels. If you are fighting a war across the map, you send one scout to plant a FC, then everyone suicide and spawns at the camp. It's lame, and it makes the huge world kind of pointless. Why set up beautiful choke points like bridges when nobody uses them?
1- On Chillrend we, EP, finally managed to take a keep on Sunday. We managed to fight off the much larger force of DC as they came to reclaim their keep. Maybe a dozen times? Unfortunately, they have an endless supply of FC. They just keep coming. It's silly. If they had to at least respawn at a nearby keep, we could get a breather to repair, set up ambushes on the road, etc.
2- Nobody travels. If you are fighting a war across the map, you send one scout to plant a FC, then everyone suicide and spawns at the camp. It's lame, and it makes the huge world kind of pointless. Why set up beautiful choke points like bridges when nobody uses them?
20
-
crowfl56✭✭✭✭✭FC is a good idea, only problem is the abused way they are used. I would say allow a camp if there isn't a keep near enough to have a realistic travel time, back into the battle.1
-
Sallington✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Making them cost 100k AP would help. People would be more reluctant to use 7-10 at one keep, and it would take a group effort to have enough camps.
As a downside, it would be more difficult/expensive to take keeps back from AD after they spent 0AP on camps during their daily night capping session.Edited by Sallington on October 20, 2014 4:37PMDaggerfall Covenant
Sallington - Templar - Stormproof - Prefect II
Cobham - Sorcerer - Stormproof - First Sergeant II
Shallington - NightBlade - Lieutenant |
Balmorah - Templar - Sergeant ||9 -
Jaxsun✭✭✭✭night capping session.[/quote]
lulz, go play a first person off-line shooter, the game should not stop being played because you aren't logged in6 -
kevlarto_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭I think it should be you need to die on the grounds where the tent is placed, not bypassing the transit system, or suicide trips to the camps, I dunno
6 -
Sallington✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭
lulz, go play a first person off-line shooter, the game should not stop being played because you aren't logged in
Did I say they shoudn't be allowed to play at night? They can play whenever they want, and if they take over the whole map at 3am EST, then whatever. All I said was a forward camp price increase might not affect them as negatively as the other 2 factions.
You bob for apples in the toilet, and you LIKE it!Edited by Sallington on October 20, 2014 4:45PMDaggerfall Covenant
Sallington - Templar - Stormproof - Prefect II
Cobham - Sorcerer - Stormproof - First Sergeant II
Shallington - NightBlade - Lieutenant |
Balmorah - Templar - Sergeant ||5 -
rophez_ESO✭✭✭✭✭Huh, yeah... jack that cost up to 100k, and people might slow down and care about their death a little more.1
-
Morvul✭✭✭✭✭rophez_ESO wrote: »Huh, yeah... jack that cost up to 100k, and people might slow down and care about their death a little more.
I have to say, I kind of like that idea!1 -
Sallington✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭rophez_ESO wrote: »Huh, yeah... jack that cost up to 100k, and people might slow down and care about their death a little more.
I have to say, I kind of like that idea!
Another idea from someone else that I like was to have respawning at an FC cost an increasing amount of gold. Kind of the way fast travel works when you're not at a wayshrine.
First rez at FC: 150g
Second rez: 800g
Third rez: 1.5k g
Wait 15 minutes without FC rez, back down to 150g.
Something like that.
Daggerfall Covenant
Sallington - Templar - Stormproof - Prefect II
Cobham - Sorcerer - Stormproof - First Sergeant II
Shallington - NightBlade - Lieutenant |
Balmorah - Templar - Sergeant ||4 -
rophez_ESO✭✭✭✭✭Sallington wrote: »rophez_ESO wrote: »Huh, yeah... jack that cost up to 100k, and people might slow down and care about their death a little more.
I have to say, I kind of like that idea!
Another idea from someone else that I like was to have respawning at an FC cost an increasing amount of gold. Kind of the way fast travel works when you're not at a wayshrine.
First rez at FC: 150g
Second rez: 800g
Third rez: 1.5k g
Wait 15 minutes without FC rez, back down to 150g.
Something like that.
That's a nice idea - but make it more like 500ap -> 2500ap -> 10000ap -> reset after 20 minutes.0 -
Sallington✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭rophez_ESO wrote: »Sallington wrote: »rophez_ESO wrote: »Huh, yeah... jack that cost up to 100k, and people might slow down and care about their death a little more.
I have to say, I kind of like that idea!
Another idea from someone else that I like was to have respawning at an FC cost an increasing amount of gold. Kind of the way fast travel works when you're not at a wayshrine.
First rez at FC: 150g
Second rez: 800g
Third rez: 1.5k g
Wait 15 minutes without FC rez, back down to 150g.
Something like that.
That's a nice idea - but make it more like 500ap -> 2500ap -> 10000ap -> reset after 20 minutes.
Yeah, AP is a better idea.Daggerfall Covenant
Sallington - Templar - Stormproof - Prefect II
Cobham - Sorcerer - Stormproof - First Sergeant II
Shallington - NightBlade - Lieutenant |
Balmorah - Templar - Sergeant ||0 -
ghengis_dhan✭✭✭The real problem with forward camps is blood porting. Groups suicide so they can fast travel to the other side of the map. If you only allow camp spawns to players who die within a short distance, you solve this problem.
The true value of camps is that they are player-created tactical objectives. As such, forward camps are crucial to keeping PvP dynamic and interesting. (Unlike flags which are always in the same location with the same number of guards.)
When you breach the outer wall of a keep, you don't know where they have placed their camp. You can try to muscle your way into the inner keep, or you can search for their camp. If you destroy it and any more they put up, you can win by attrition.
By the same token, if you are on defense and you are able to keep your camp up, you have a chance to defend your keep. You can also lead a group to find and take out the attackers camp. If you take out their camp and any more they put up, their offense will dwindle away.
I was on keep defense one-time against a superior force who were setting up to take down the inner keep postern. Half our group stayed inside to slow down the attackers. The other half stealthed over to the mine to where we gambled they had their camp. We took the resource, destroyed their camp, and rushed back to the inner keep where they were about to take the second flag. We managed to take the back flag just as the front flag fell. The battle went back and forth, but because they didn't have a camp, we eventually won the day.
If they placed their camp somewhere else or if they had found ours, we would have lost. Forward camps have repeatedly shown to be crucial tactical objectives that can win or lose battles. Remove them from the game, and we are left with static objectives (flags, towers, upper level of inner keep).Edited by ghengis_dhan on October 20, 2014 5:43PM"It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself for a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat."
Teddy Roosevelt, Paris, 19104 -
Jaxsun✭✭✭✭Sallington wrote: »
lulz, go play a first person off-line shooter, the game should not stop being played because you aren't logged in
Did I say they shoudn't be allowed to play at night? They can play whenever they want, and if they take over the whole map at 3am EST, then whatever. All I said was a forward camp price increase might not affect them as negatively as the other 2 factions.
You bob for apples in the toilet, and you LIKE it!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sbyg5XfTRv0 2 -
CoolsHisHands✭✭✭If they just made it so you could only bloodport to them if you died within the radius as it appears on the map, that would solve most of the problems. No need to change the price.
I strongly believe this is how they were meant to function in the first place, but for some reason they changed it.0 -
ghengis_dhan✭✭✭
I remember reading something during the beta about only being able to spawn at a camp when you die in the white circle. I think it was something planned but never implemented.CoolsHisHands wrote: »I strongly believe this is how they were meant to function in the first place, but for some reason they changed it."It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself for a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat."
Teddy Roosevelt, Paris, 19100 -
Joy_Division✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭I like FCs and not afraid to admit it.
I like epic sieges and battles. I don't like looking at horses' asses. Just need to eliminate blood-porting: if you get killed by an NPC outside of a keep, then you can't use a FC.Make Rush of Agony "Monsters only." People should not be consecutively crowd controlled in a PvP setting. Period.4 -
rophez_ESO✭✭✭✭✭Joy_Division wrote: »I like FCs and not afraid to admit it.
I like epic sieges and battles. I don't like looking at horses' asses. Just need to eliminate blood-porting: if you get killed by an NPC outside of a keep, then you can't use a FC.
I get what you are saying, but, as currently implemented, FCs completely negate the following design principles of Cyrodiil:- The idea that you need to maintain keeps near your current battle for staging.
- The idea that defenders who are outnumbered can use structure, and guards to fight off larger forces - not possible when the larger force is made infinite by FCs.
- The idea that the world is built with terrain and structures forming choke points for pitched battles in which reinforcements can be delayed.
- The idea that a player should should feel some sense of danger or a bit of loss from death (travel time) - instead, we have mindlessly running from FC to breach, over and over,until the outnumbered defenders are overwhelmed.
What I'm getting at, is that Cyrodiil would be a lot more dynamic and interesting a place without FCs. There would still be large castle fights, but a lot less mindless rushing into breaches, etc. People would be faced with a short run, if you own the nearby keeps, and if you don't, why are you trying to hit a target deep in enemy territory? Shouldn't there be a consequence?
Personally, I like strategy a FC could bring to a campaign, but it needs to be a lot more rare, and a lot more costly. And charge people who USE it - this might stop lowbies from burning through them, anyway.Edited by rophez_ESO on October 20, 2014 6:46PM7 -
RedTalon✭✭✭✭✭
✭Like a song says suicide is painless and it brings on many changes.
Such is the nature of alliance wars, find a ganker in a predicted hidey spot get killed and don't fight back and poof your in a better spot.
And rule one of the alliance wars, its Zerg or nothing. When your in a fully controlled map by another faction and decide to start cleaning it from another faction you need to bring a big zerg with you or its a waste of time.0 -
c0rp✭✭✭✭✭
✭Whats funny is, the people who designed Cyrodiil and obviously had a specific gameplay in mind, cant even see that FCs have completely negated ALL of their gameplay design.
If I was Brian Wheeler....and if I actually played the game myself to see what was going on, I would have had FCs removed months ago, or at least make them cost 150k AP.
But what do we get instead? A rank 6 required to buy them. Lol.....ok....Force weapon swap to have priority over EVERYTHING. Close enough.
Make stamina builds even with magicka builds.
Disable abilities while holding block.
Give us a REASON to do dungeons more than once.
Remove PVP AoE CAP. It is ruining Cyrodiil.
Fix/Remove Forward Camps. They are ruining Cyrodiil.
Impenetrability needs to REDUCE CRIT DAMAGE. Not negate entire builds.
Werewolf is not equal to Vamps/Bats.2 -
RedTalon✭✭✭✭✭
✭Whats funny is, the people who designed Cyrodiil and obviously had a specific gameplay in mind, cant even see that FCs have completely negated ALL of their gameplay design.
If I was Brian Wheeler....and if I actually played the game myself to see what was going on, I would have had FCs removed months ago, or at least make them cost 150k AP.
But what do we get instead? A rank 6 required to buy them. Lol.....ok....
And there are still some dupe bugs out there, and heard that foreward camps is one of them.
0 -
Morvul✭✭✭✭✭
exactly this.rophez_ESO wrote: »FCs completely negate the following design principles of Cyrodiil:- The idea that you need to maintain keeps near your current battle for staging.
- The idea that defenders who are outnumbered can use structure, and guards to fight off larger forces - not possible when the larger force is made infinite by FCs.
- The idea that the world is built with terrain and structures forming choke points for pitched battles in which reinforcements can be delayed.
- The idea that a player should should feel some sense of danger or a bit of loss from death (travel time) - instead, we have mindlessly running from FC to breach, over and over,until the outnumbered defenders are overwhelmed.
What I'm getting at, is that Cyrodiil would be a lot more dynamic and interesting a place without FCs. There would still be large castle fights, but a lot less mindless rushing into breaches, etc. People would be faced with a short run, if you own the nearby keeps, and if you don't, why are you trying to hit a target deep in enemy territory? Shouldn't there be a consequence?
Personally, I like strategy a FC could bring to a campaign, but it needs to be a lot more rare, and a lot more costly. And charge people who USE it - this might stop lowbies from burning through them, anyway.
RARE forward camps are a nice tactical component.
but unlimited FCs, who's placement is only limited by troll-camps, actually take away most of the depth that was initially designed for cyrodiil
3 -
Xexpo✭✭✭✭✭One of the drawbacks of removing forward camps, is that Cyrodiil would become a horse riding simulator.
No thank youKiki Dickson ~~~ Dixmanian Devil ~~~ Cornelius Buckshank Jr.
Histy-Fitz ~~~ Boozemer ~~~ Chace X'expo
Lluvia De'Fuego ~~~ Shakes Spear
Macro and Cheese NA/PC8 -
Sallington✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭One of the drawbacks of removing forward camps, is that Cyrodiil would become a horse riding simulator.
No thank you
After playing so much Dayz, I feel like I'm playing Need 4 Speed when I'm riding around in Cyrodil.Edited by Sallington on October 20, 2014 7:26PMDaggerfall Covenant
Sallington - Templar - Stormproof - Prefect II
Cobham - Sorcerer - Stormproof - First Sergeant II
Shallington - NightBlade - Lieutenant |
Balmorah - Templar - Sergeant ||5 -
rophez_ESO✭✭✭✭✭One of the drawbacks of removing forward camps, is that Cyrodiil would become a horse riding simulator.
No thank you
You can already fast transit to your furthest keep. It takes like 3 minutes to run from keep to neighboring keep. If you are pushing deep into enemy territory, shouldn't you have any sort of travel time? Shouldn't there be a cost to death?6 -
MrGhosty✭✭✭✭✭I agree that FCs are a serious issue that needs to be addressed both with the troll camps and how they can negatively impact the gameplay.
My issue with being forced to travel long distances, is that there is little in between keeps. I would rather they place many more objectives on the map that could be captured and would allow closer spawn points between keeps. These resources could be something for smaller groups to dedicate themselves to in order to provide some meaningful resources to the overall war effort. The imperial gates, and the bridge forts could be taken over by one faction providing a nearer spawn point.
While it is mostly comparing apples and oranges, one of my favorite aspects of Planetside 2 gameplay is that there are multiple facilities across the continent and a push to claim them requires coordination and no matter the size of your party there is a fight for you. I would like to see those principles come into play in Cyrodiil. These additional resources could affect how battles play out by providing small buffs. Example: If you capture a small village and also hold X amount of lumbermills in the area you can get siege equipment at reduced cost (but you can only carry one of each type at a time) or maybe you hold an area that has a field hospital in it so health regeneration in battle is increased by a small percentage. I'm not talking huge advantages here, just nice perks for controlling an area rather than just attacking a keep on the other side of the map while losing every other keep between it and your home gate.
Another aspect to consider is also that while dying to the batswarm/impulse conga line or other cheese tactics is annoying now, if that death forced you to start over on the other side of the continent how much worse would the problem be?"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 -
ghengis_dhan✭✭✭
I don't agree with everything you say, but you make a lot of valid points. However, the point above is negated by the fact that the defenders are also made infinite by FCs.rophez_ESO wrote: »The idea that defenders who are outnumbered can use structure, and guards to fight off larger forces - not possible when the larger force is made infinite by FCs.Edited by ghengis_dhan on October 20, 2014 8:48PM"It is not the critic who counts: not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles or where the doer of deeds could have done better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood, who strives valiantly, who errs and comes up short again and again, because there is no effort without error or shortcoming, but who knows the great enthusiasms, the great devotions, who spends himself for a worthy cause; who, at the best, knows, in the end, the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least he fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who knew neither victory nor defeat."
Teddy Roosevelt, Paris, 19100 -
rophez_ESO✭✭✭✭✭ghengis_dhan wrote: »
I don't agree with everything you say, but you make a lot of valid points. However, the point above is negated by the fact that the defenders are also made infinite by FCs.rophez_ESO wrote: »The idea that defenders who are outnumbered can use structure, and guards to fight off larger forces - not possible when the larger force is made infinite by FCs.
On the surface, you would think so, but defenders have limited real estate on which to place a camp - once the outer wall is breached by a large force, it's easy for them to spot/burn camps the defenders try to put up.1 -
JamilaRaj✭✭✭✭✭
✭ghengis_dhan wrote: »The real problem with forward camps is blood porting. Groups suicide so they can fast travel to the other side of the map. If you only allow camp spawns to players who die within a short distance, you solve this problem.
The true value of camps is that they are player-created tactical objectives. As such, forward camps are crucial to keeping PvP dynamic and interesting. (Unlike flags which are always in the same location with the same number of guards.)
When you breach the outer wall of a keep, you don't know where they have placed their camp. You can try to muscle your way into the inner keep, or you can search for their camp. If you destroy it and any more they put up, you can win by attrition.
By the same token, if you are on defense and you are able to keep your camp up, you have a chance to defend your keep. You can also lead a group to find and take out the attackers camp. If you take out their camp and any more they put up, their offense will dwindle away.
I was on keep defense one-time against a superior force who were setting up to take down the inner keep postern. Half our group stayed inside to slow down the attackers. The other half stealthed over to the mine to where we gambled they had their camp. We took the resource, destroyed their camp, and rushed back to the inner keep where they were about to take the second flag. We managed to take the back flag just as the front flag fell. The battle went back and forth, but because they didn't have a camp, we eventually won the day.
If they placed their camp somewhere else or if they had found ours, we would have lost. Forward camps have repeatedly shown to be crucial tactical objectives that can win or lose battles. Remove them from the game, and we are left with static objectives (flags, towers, upper level of inner keep).
Fine with me, because unless it is some late hour or largely empty campaign with few players and still fewer APs, it's in fact completely different story: there is no point whatsoever in burning tents down, because they go down often within seconds anyway by sheer numbers spawning there, and likewise within seconds up again. They do not add anything on tactical level, just make combat utterly dull.Edited by JamilaRaj on October 20, 2014 10:50PM0 -
Keron✭✭✭✭✭
✭Just had a fun idea. Make FCs dirt cheap, remove the white circles completely, let them be put everywhere without any limitation.
Then have respawning at a camp cost 5% of your current balance of alliance points. You have 5million in your pocket? 1 spawn costs you 250k ap. You have 10k? 1 spawn = 500 ap.
You get killed again? Spawn at nearest keep, it's free! Or, pay another hefty tax to get back into the fray again.0 -
pmn100b16_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭Why don't we just delete them for a month and see how we get on. Personally I think it'll work out well, it'll no doubt help reduce the horrendous lag around keeps.3
