Play with other Alliance members announced!

xXNesTXx · July 2015

Nice.....why not disappears all alliances directly? ¬¬

Pman85 · July 2015

im starting to wonder why there is even 3 different alliances.

UltimaJoe777 · July 2015

Sausage wrote: »

All guilds are already cross-faction and Imperial Edition let players play any race in any alliance. Sure its coming. This was mainly done because of faster queue times and they werent sure if one alliance is so underdog, they need to take heavy action against it. Thats one of my concern, as Faction Pride is definitely fading fast, I think we really need that each alliance has own types of Castles and Siege weapons at least. Actually this opens pretty fun new opportunities.

Actually Guilds are not yet cross-faction but since Accounts join Guilds instead of Characters people can be in a Guild that belongs to 1 faction while being another regardless of how disadvantageous it can be all in all but this update will very much change that.

SahrotRein · July 2015

It will probably only stay in dungeons for a long time, just as we are able to dye our gear but not shield.

Faulgor · July 2015

Considering their earlier statement that they are done with "level gating content", I suspect a huge change to all PvE zones along with the removal of veteran ranks.

- All zones will be max level (50) like Orsinium and Cyrodiil
- Players will scale up to the zone they're in
- Only 1 version of each zone; Members of all factions play in the same Glenumbra, for example
- Once you finish the mainquest, you can go to to other faction areas without further restrictions (silver/gold removed)
-> No more barriers between players, regardless of level or faction
-> Only content gate that remains is the mainquest

Further, but this is only wishful thinking:
- All veteran materials are removed and replaced with Ebony/Ebonthread/Yew
- Higher quality items require special materials (such as the new Daedric stuff in IC), but remain the same level (50)

Milktray · July 2015

Pman85 wrote: »

im starting to wonder why there is even 3 different alliances.

Same here, rate they are going they may have well not bothered with 3 factions

Tandor · July 2015

It's difficult to see how characters of different alliances can freely quest in the same areas when those quests are often based around invasion by the opposing alliances. Opening this up outside of dungeons makes no more sense to me than the whole Cadwell's crossover stuff which, rightly, was never part of the original design. Then again, having multi-alliance guilds made no sense to me either. The alliances are either at war with each other or not.

Desolationz · July 2015

Milktray wrote: »

Pman85 wrote: »

im starting to wonder why there is even 3 different alliances.

Same here, rate they are going they may have well not bothered with 3 factions

Let's not get salty about this change please and appreciate the more important thing which is having more people to play with as opposed to being limited to factions like it is now. This is a change we should be welcoming, stopping Molag Bal has nothing to do with what faction we're on.

Milktray · July 2015

The guilds i sort of understand as they are account based, maybe add a tax on if in different faction ;-)

Marques · July 2015

Desolationz wrote: »

Milktray wrote: »

Pman85 wrote: »

im starting to wonder why there is even 3 different alliances.

Same here, rate they are going they may have well not bothered with 3 factions

Let's not get salty about this change please and appreciate the more important thing which is having more people to play with as opposed to being limited to factions like it is now. This is a change we should be welcoming, stopping Molag Bal has nothing to do with what faction we're on.

Very much agree with this. It's a welcome change that people should be excited about. It benefits gameplay and interaction after all. In terms of lore and immersion Molag Bal is the major threat to Tamriel and its very existence; true heroes should put aside their little disputes for power in Cyrodiil, often driven by ego, when it comes to the survival and future of Nirn.

jluchau · July 2015

The enemy of my enemy is my friend...

Marques · July 2015

@jluchau There is great strength in union even among divergent minds.

Bars · July 2015

this reminds me so much of a game I used to play ,and that went 2 crap ( its just not doing well on pc )

Rox83 · July 2015

Thank you! Outside of PvP Factions are so dated.

Milktray · July 2015

I'm not sure why devs bother designing their games these days, ppl seem to not bother reading what the game actually entails and then moan they can't do X,Y,Z as they like, so want it changed to like X game.

Then also moan about X game being carbon copied by devs lol

Enodoc · July 2015

Faulgor wrote: »

Considering their earlier statement that they are done with "level gating content", I suspect a huge change to all PvE zones along with the removal of veteran ranks.

- All zones will be max level (50) like Orsinium and Cyrodiil
- Players will scale up to the zone they're in
- Only 1 version of each zone; Members of all factions play in the same Glenumbra, for example
- Once you finish the mainquest, you can go to to other faction areas without further restrictions (silver/gold removed)
-> No more barriers between players, regardless of level or faction
-> Only content gate that remains is the mainquest

Further, but this is only wishful thinking:
- All veteran materials are removed and replaced with Ebony/Ebonthread/Yew
- Higher quality items require special materials (such as the new Daedric stuff in IC), but remain the same level (50)

This actually fits in very closely with what I hope removal of veteran ranks will mean -> here

asteldian · July 2015

Korah_Eaglecry wrote: »

Rev Rielle wrote: »

Korah_Eaglecry wrote: »

Marques wrote: »

VoidBlue wrote: »

i dont think it will grow to other content. i think it will stay dungeon only.

Actually it's stated in a very straightforward way that it will start as dungeons and they want it to expand into PvE.
It would be really nice to have some input from the developers concerning this or at least confirming the extent of those intended changes.

Youre new here. They say a lot of things in this manner only to do half of what they said. This upcoming late fall will be a year since they spoke of removing VR ranks....Yesterday at Quakecon they said they still intend on removing them but so far there has been absolutely no gameplan laid out.

When it comes to ZOS and promises like this. Dont hold your breath.

Regarding Veteran Rank removal it was said we can expect it some time after Orsinium is released.

Ill believe it when I see it. Theyve said a lot of things that they have yet to deliver on. It makes no sense that they would add two more Vet Levels if they intend to rip them out of the game in 6+ months.

To be fair, I don't think it is as crazy as it sounds. Vr16 makes a soft gear reset prior to the change. Older vr gear becomes obsolete, so with removal of vr the vr14 and below becomes one tier for early max lvlers, the vr16 gear is then 2nd tier (or even vr16 is first tier and the old gear is obsolete). It kinda help paves the way.

Faulgor · July 2015

Enodoc wrote: »

Faulgor wrote: »

Considering their earlier statement that they are done with "level gating content", I suspect a huge change to all PvE zones along with the removal of veteran ranks.

- All zones will be max level (50) like Orsinium and Cyrodiil
- Players will scale up to the zone they're in
- Only 1 version of each zone; Members of all factions play in the same Glenumbra, for example
- Once you finish the mainquest, you can go to to other faction areas without further restrictions (silver/gold removed)
-> No more barriers between players, regardless of level or faction
-> Only content gate that remains is the mainquest

Further, but this is only wishful thinking:
- All veteran materials are removed and replaced with Ebony/Ebonthread/Yew
- Higher quality items require special materials (such as the new Daedric stuff in IC), but remain the same level (50)

This actually fits in very closely with what I hope removal of veteran ranks will mean -> here

I also think something like this makes sense with their release schedule of new content.

- Imperial City is the first DLC added, because it's in a space where people already scale to the zone. Further, it establishes the framework for new itemization post-veteran removal, with special materials for better equipment. This serves to phase out the old materials that will eventually be removed.
- Further, group dungeons will scale up to VR16, because they already have a scaling mechanic implemented since Update 5. Craglorn, on the other hand, will not scale (including Trials and DSA) because the work required is not reasonable considering the eventual veteran rank removal and rescaling of all zones.
- Orsinium will be the first full PvE zone were people will scale to (already confirmed in an AmA). Once this has been established as working as intended, the removal of veteran ranks can progress further. Whether all alliances share the same zone in this update is to be determined.
- In between, cross-alliance grouping for group dungeons will be implemented - again, because grouping mechanisms are already implemented in this space.
- Eventually, all zones (including Craglorn) will scale like Orsinium does. This will probably happen before TG and DB are released, which will probably be smaller updates considering the workload of the veteran rank removal.

Just guessing here, but it seems plausible.

Avenias · July 2015

Marques wrote: »

Hello everyone.

Yesterday on QuakeCon 2015 during the live panel from Bethesda (also transmitted live on Twitch) they announced that they are working on allowing characters to play with members of different alliances. They stated that this will start being implemented in dungeons but that it will grow to other content as well. This sounds like a pretty interesting change and beneficial to the evolution of the game but I'm curious as how it will be implemented.

Does this mean that a character of one alliance will be allowed to PvE with members of other alliances in their native areas and do such content? How will this work with the current system where players are allowed to go through the campaigns of the other two alliances in veteran ranks?

Looking forward to your input.

As the soldier from starcraft said- "hell Its about time."

MornaBaine · July 2015

I really hope they add in a PvE quest zone that is also multi-faction. It's just not realistic that everyone is "magically" kept away from each other except in Cyrodiil...where they "magically" can't talk to each other either.

99Mile · July 2015

I've been waiting for a while for this to be implemented, but I wasn't expecting it to be in dungeon first.

Marques · July 2015

Faulgor wrote: »

Enodoc wrote: »

Faulgor wrote: »

Considering their earlier statement that they are done with "level gating content", I suspect a huge change to all PvE zones along with the removal of veteran ranks.

- All zones will be max level (50) like Orsinium and Cyrodiil
- Players will scale up to the zone they're in
- Only 1 version of each zone; Members of all factions play in the same Glenumbra, for example
- Once you finish the mainquest, you can go to to other faction areas without further restrictions (silver/gold removed)
-> No more barriers between players, regardless of level or faction
-> Only content gate that remains is the mainquest

Further, but this is only wishful thinking:
- All veteran materials are removed and replaced with Ebony/Ebonthread/Yew
- Higher quality items require special materials (such as the new Daedric stuff in IC), but remain the same level (50)

This actually fits in very closely with what I hope removal of veteran ranks will mean -> here

I also think something like this makes sense with their release schedule of new content.

- Imperial City is the first DLC added, because it's in a space where people already scale to the zone. Further, it establishes the framework for new itemization post-veteran removal, with special materials for better equipment. This serves to phase out the old materials that will eventually be removed.
- Further, group dungeons will scale up to VR16, because they already have a scaling mechanic implemented since Update 5. Craglorn, on the other hand, will not scale (including Trials and DSA) because the work required is not reasonable considering the eventual veteran rank removal and rescaling of all zones.
- Orsinium will be the first full PvE zone were people will scale to (already confirmed in an AmA). Once this has been established as working as intended, the removal of veteran ranks can progress further. Whether all alliances share the same zone in this update is to be determined.
- In between, cross-alliance grouping for group dungeons will be implemented - again, because grouping mechanisms are already implemented in this space.
- Eventually, all zones (including Craglorn) will scale like Orsinium does. This will probably happen before TG and DB are released, which will probably be smaller updates considering the workload of the veteran rank removal.

Just guessing here, but it seems plausible.

That sounds like a good implementation and a plausible roadmap. If developer plans are somewhat aligned with your ideas and they can be implemented in a timely manner I think there are great things ahead in the future of ESO.

UrQuan · July 2015

99Mile wrote: »

I've been waiting for a while for this to be implemented, but I wasn't expecting it to be in dungeon first.

Why not? If it's implemented bit by bit (which makes sense, given the types of changes that will be needed to accommodate it), then it makes sense to do group dungeons first. Because the group dungeons are separate instances, and because there are no inherent differences between them based on your alliance (unlike the home zones of the alliances, which are instanced to different levels depending on what alliance you're in) all you have to do is open them up. You don't have to make any actual changes to the instances themselves. Craglorn and Coldharbour are the logical next steps (new DLC aside), as they both meet the criteria of not having any inherent differences based on your faction. The complication these zones have that the group dungeons don't is that they'd have to account for an increased player population in those zones one way or another.

warpower9 · July 2015

This is totally a step in the opposite direction of the design of the game and its factions. If I have to group with player's that have killed me in pvp or that have "ganked" me I would leave that group. Why imagine the trolling that will occur because of this. Have none of you any HONOR in your faction? This and any idea of cross faction guilds kills the idea of faction vs. faction entirely. This actually has me considering leaving the game and most likely will be the factor that disbands our EP based guild. No I do not think any of you care and I can careless so save your trolling for someone else. Dungeon finder does not work well because most people hate pug's you either get a troll or a noob that does not listen or know what to do or even care what you have to say. Ebonheart non vet pvp has suffered lately because of lack of team work and /or the ability to accept new idea's about pvp tactic's. I will definitely not
be able to change the dev's thoughts on this or your's most likely so I will just watch and hope this idea is never ever ever implemented into the game. I even had someone try to recruit me to a 3 faction pvp guild that had plans to control the pvp map by means of having all 3 factions under its control in this unnamed guild. In my opinion they might as well rename the game and remove the faction vs faction and make it open world pvp and make the story about fighting molog bol only. If they do implement this idea I hope you enjoy the new game because the old game will be lost.

Sausage · July 2015

warpower9 wrote: »

This is totally a step in the opposite direction of the design of the game and its factions. If I have to group with player's that have killed me in pvp or that have "ganked" me I would leave that group. Why imagine the trolling that will occur because of this. Have none of you any HONOR in your faction? This and any idea of cross faction guilds kills the idea of faction vs. faction entirely. This actually has me considering leaving the game and most likely will be the factor that disbands our EP based guild. No I do not think any of you care and I can careless so save your trolling for someone else. Dungeon finder does not work well because most people hate pug's you either get a troll or a noob that does not listen or know what to do or even care what you have to say. Ebonheart non vet pvp has suffered lately because of lack of team work and /or the ability to accept new idea's about pvp tactic's. I will definitely not
be able to change the dev's thoughts on this or your's most likely so I will just watch and hope this idea is never ever ever implemented into the game. I even had someone try to recruit me to a 3 faction pvp guild that had plans to control the pvp map by means of having all 3 factions under its control in this unnamed guild. In my opinion they might as well rename the game and remove the faction vs faction and make it open world pvp and make the story about fighting molog bol only. If they do implement this idea I hope you enjoy the new game because the old game will be lost.

Its probably optional, if you want to be loyal to your alliance, you can do it. I personally thikn they can make pretty fun Faction Pride system with this, theres going to be Traitors and Loyalist and earn tons of Honor. Traitors are sent to low pop alliance. The fact is that AD has been punching bag in EU PC since launch, they have complained alot of "red EP zerg" for example, also everybody hates low pop bonus, one day AD is losing like by 10k point and next day are winning by 5k, and they didnt do anything at all.

Or who knows, maybe things have changed but before PC launch dev said themselves, Faction Pride is important to them, so that makes be believe, they have something nice for us too.

Nestor · July 2015

For someone who does not PvP much, if at all, this is good news. Factions don't mean anything to me. Just give me more people to group with.

Besides, I don't have a Healer in all 3 factions, nor do I have a DPS or a Tank. So, this will mean I can run more group dungeons with more people.

Enodoc · July 2015

UrQuan wrote: »

The complication these zones have that the group dungeons don't is that they'd have to account for an increased player population in those zones one way or another.

Not necessarily. Considering there are numerous different "shards" of each zone, say each shard has capacity of 600. Currently that's 600 from one faction, but it could easily be altered so that it was 200+200+200, or even dynamically set so that a+b+c=600 for 1 < a,b,c < 600.

UrQuan · July 2015

Enodoc wrote: »

UrQuan wrote: »

The complication these zones have that the group dungeons don't is that they'd have to account for an increased player population in those zones one way or another.

Not necessarily. Considering there are numerous different "shards" of each zone, say each shard has capacity of 600. Currently that's 600 from one faction, but it could easily be altered so that it was 200+200+200, or even dynamically set so that a+b+c=600 for 1 < a,b,c < 600.

But that's exactly the kind of "accounting for an increased player population" that I'm talking about... They'd have to decide on how they want to have the population balanced across the alliances in each shard, and then create a mechanism to maintain that balance. With a group dungeon where the population is only the 4 people in the group, you don't have to worry about any of that, so you don't have to write any code to take it into account.

Enodoc · July 2015

UrQuan wrote: »

Enodoc wrote: »

UrQuan wrote: »

The complication these zones have that the group dungeons don't is that they'd have to account for an increased player population in those zones one way or another.

Not necessarily. Considering there are numerous different "shards" of each zone, say each shard has capacity of 600. Currently that's 600 from one faction, but it could easily be altered so that it was 200+200+200, or even dynamically set so that a+b+c=600 for 1 < a,b,c < 600.

But that's exactly the kind of "accounting for an increased player population" that I'm talking about... They'd have to decide on how they want to have the population balanced across the alliances in each shard, and then create a mechanism to maintain that balance. With a group dungeon where the population is only the 4 people in the group, you don't have to worry about any of that, so you don't have to write any code to take it into account.

Ah sure, fair enough. I thought maybe you meant they would directly triple the capacity, which is possible but less likely.

99Mile · July 2015

UrQuan wrote: »

99Mile wrote: »

I've been waiting for a while for this to be implemented, but I wasn't expecting it to be in dungeon first.

Why not? If it's implemented bit by bit (which makes sense, given the types of changes that will be needed to accommodate it), then it makes sense to do group dungeons first. Because the group dungeons are separate instances, and because there are no inherent differences between them based on your alliance (unlike the home zones of the alliances, which are instanced to different levels depending on what alliance you're in) all you have to do is open them up. You don't have to make any actual changes to the instances themselves. Craglorn and Coldharbour are the logical next steps (new DLC aside), as they both meet the criteria of not having any inherent differences based on your faction. The complication these zones have that the group dungeons don't is that they'd have to account for an increased player population in those zones one way or another.

I am just glad to see that they are now letting us see the other side of the Alliance's.