Are there plans to introduce campaign objectives into the Imperial City?

KenaPKK · October 2015

Is it on the horizon at least? It needs to be... I've made posts in other forums making suggestions, but I figure this would be the best place to come to to get in front of devs involved in future content.

silky_soft · October 2015

Never, IC is behind a paywall.

Shouldn't even be part of cyro.

Saturn · October 2015

I don't think that would happen. Essentially all the people without Imperial City would have a disadvantage that others would get for having IC = pay2win essentially

dsalter · October 2015

Saturn wrote: »

I don't think that would happen. Essentially all the people without Imperial City would have a disadvantage that others would get for having IC = pay2win essentially

not quite, if done right can just aid cyro but not actually help it win, for example own arena district? beef up cyro guards by double, own garden? spawn more guards, own market? change teleport to keep from 50% to 40%, stuff like that yaknow? they help but no way win the camp

Saturn · October 2015

dsalter wrote: »

Saturn wrote: »

I don't think that would happen. Essentially all the people without Imperial City would have a disadvantage that others would get for having IC = pay2win essentially

not quite, if done right can just aid cyro but not actually help it win, for example own arena district? beef up cyro guards by double, own garden? spawn more guards, own market? change teleport to keep from 50% to 40%, stuff like that yaknow? they help but no way win the camp

It would still be an advantage that is barred behind a pay wall.

KenaPKK · October 2015

silky_soft wrote: »

Never, IC is behind a paywall.

Shouldn't even be part of cyro.

Saturn wrote: »

I don't think that would happen. Essentially all the people without Imperial City would have a disadvantage that others would get for having IC = pay2win essentially

Saturn wrote: »

dsalter wrote: »

Saturn wrote: »

I don't think that would happen. Essentially all the people without Imperial City would have a disadvantage that others would get for having IC = pay2win essentially

not quite, if done right can just aid cyro but not actually help it win, for example own arena district? beef up cyro guards by double, own garden? spawn more guards, own market? change teleport to keep from 50% to 40%, stuff like that yaknow? they help but no way win the camp

It would still be an advantage that is barred behind a pay wall.

These are all logical fallacies perpetuated by people who don't have IC.

One, the pay wall is equally accessible by each faction. All three factions have enough players that approximately the same % of each population has access. The fighting in IC has been rather even as well. This is not an issue.

Second, the objectives in IC could be fashioned in such a way that they contribute strongly to the campaign without actually being necessary to win it, and in such a way that they can be contested or negated without actually entering IC. I have proposed elsewhere that percentage campaign point gain amplification objectives be implemented in IC. These would increase the passive gains from Cyrodiil objectives without actually contributing flat points themselves. Each faction would have to have Cyrodiil objectives in order to gain IC campaign points, and players without the IC "paywall" would be able to contest IC objectives by taking Cyrodiil objectives -- the actual source of campaign points -- while the other faction is occupied with IC.

byrom101b16_ESO · October 2015

KenaPKK wrote: »

silky_soft wrote: »

Never, IC is behind a paywall.

Shouldn't even be part of cyro.

Saturn wrote: »

I don't think that would happen. Essentially all the people without Imperial City would have a disadvantage that others would get for having IC = pay2win essentially

Saturn wrote: »

dsalter wrote: »

Saturn wrote: »

I don't think that would happen. Essentially all the people without Imperial City would have a disadvantage that others would get for having IC = pay2win essentially

not quite, if done right can just aid cyro but not actually help it win, for example own arena district? beef up cyro guards by double, own garden? spawn more guards, own market? change teleport to keep from 50% to 40%, stuff like that yaknow? they help but no way win the camp

It would still be an advantage that is barred behind a pay wall.

These are all logical fallacies perpetuated by people who don't have IC.

One, the pay wall is equally accessible by each faction. All three factions have enough players that approximately the same % of each population has access. The fighting in IC has been rather even as well. This is not an issue.

Second, the objectives in IC could be fashioned in such a way that they contribute strongly to the campaign without actually being necessary to win it, and in such a way that they can be contested or negated without actually entering IC. I have proposed elsewhere that percentage campaign point gain amplification objectives be implemented in IC. These would increase the passive gains from Cyrodiil objectives without actually contributing flat points themselves. Each faction would have to have Cyrodiil objectives in order to gain IC campaign points, and players without the IC "paywall" would be able to contest IC objectives by taking Cyrodiil objectives -- the actual source of campaign points -- while the other faction is occupied with IC.

Wrong - Blueberries have vastly more active PvP'ers than other factions in EU - just take a stroll around the blue capped maps in the majority of campaigns there to confirm it as I have.

Three way PvP in which one side has an inbalance of 24/7 PvP'ers who cap everything in the middle of the night is stupid game design - like crossing your fingers and hoping one side won't get all the no-lifers to take advantage of a pathetically easy system of controlling the entire map.

Well crossing your fingers doesn't work - you have to engage your brain and try to make the game fun, inviting and encourage conflict between factions - not drop it into the deep freeze with lame design decision.

Saturn · October 2015

KenaPKK wrote: »

silky_soft wrote: »

Never, IC is behind a paywall.

Shouldn't even be part of cyro.

Saturn wrote: »

I don't think that would happen. Essentially all the people without Imperial City would have a disadvantage that others would get for having IC = pay2win essentially

Saturn wrote: »

dsalter wrote: »

Saturn wrote: »

I don't think that would happen. Essentially all the people without Imperial City would have a disadvantage that others would get for having IC = pay2win essentially

not quite, if done right can just aid cyro but not actually help it win, for example own arena district? beef up cyro guards by double, own garden? spawn more guards, own market? change teleport to keep from 50% to 40%, stuff like that yaknow? they help but no way win the camp

It would still be an advantage that is barred behind a pay wall.

These are all logical fallacies perpetuated by people who don't have IC.

One, the pay wall is equally accessible by each faction. All three factions have enough players that approximately the same % of each population has access. The fighting in IC has been rather even as well. This is not an issue.

Second, the objectives in IC could be fashioned in such a way that they contribute strongly to the campaign without actually being necessary to win it, and in such a way that they can be contested or negated without actually entering IC. I have proposed elsewhere that percentage campaign point gain amplification objectives be implemented in IC. These would increase the passive gains from Cyrodiil objectives without actually contributing flat points themselves. Each faction would have to have Cyrodiil objectives in order to gain IC campaign points, and players without the IC "paywall" would be able to contest IC objectives by taking Cyrodiil objectives -- the actual source of campaign points -- while the other faction is occupied with IC.

"Logical Fallacy" my ass. You just have a different opinion, but just because you disagree it is no reason to try and take our opinions and invalidate them like that. While it would be nice for the Imperial City to have a bigger role in Cyrodiil, there is no way they would ever implement it. You may not be of the opinion that it is pay2win, but it is exactly pay2win.
Here is a good example of what is not pay2win:

A "fair" microtransaction (or even not so micro) is one that does not offer a competitive advantage unless a similar advantage could of been gotten with a reasonable amount of time, effort, and/or skill otherwise.

If you put special amplifiers behind pay walls then it is considered an advantage. You argument that people on all sides have equal access (source?) is like saying, "Well it's not unfair that I can buy this Overpowered weapon, because everyone else who bought it is as strong as me."

Also, for your information I do have the Imperial City. However, I firmly believe that the Alliance War and the Imperial City should be kept separate as they are, it seems like Zenimax would agree since they designed it like that.

Enodoc · October 2015

Imperial City could still have objectives that are solely bound to IC. For example, nothing that would affect the Campaign scoring or provide buffs in the rest of Cyrodiil, but something that could provide advantages while in the City.

See an extended concept here: District Control Concept and why Imperial City needs it

Wycks · October 2015

Just let IC die, it was a huge mistake.

Enodoc · October 2015

bob.ellisonb16_ESO wrote: »

Just let IC die, it was a huge mistake.

IC wasn't a huge mistake. Scrapping District Control was the mistake, and it can be rectified.

Eleusian · October 2015

silky_soft wrote: »

Never, IC is behind a paywall.

Shouldn't even be part of cyro.

+1. Let's get the whole thing in the rear view mirror asap

KenaPKK · October 2015

Enodoc wrote: »

bob.ellisonb16_ESO wrote: »

Just let IC die, it was a huge mistake.

IC wasn't a huge mistake. Scrapping District Control was the mistake, and it can be rectified.

This.

Eleusian wrote: »

silky_soft wrote: »

Never, IC is behind a paywall.

Shouldn't even be part of cyro.

+1. Let's get the whole thing in the rear view mirror asap

And I already explained why this is false. Please read...

Garwulf · October 2015

Saturn wrote: »

dsalter wrote: »

Saturn wrote: »

I don't think that would happen. Essentially all the people without Imperial City would have a disadvantage that others would get for having IC = pay2win essentially

not quite, if done right can just aid cyro but not actually help it win, for example own arena district? beef up cyro guards by double, own garden? spawn more guards, own market? change teleport to keep from 50% to 40%, stuff like that yaknow? they help but no way win the camp

It would still be an advantage that is barred behind a pay wall.

As an owner of Imperial City I do not want to be helping the poor and destitute stuck in Cyrodiil. <saracsm>

In reality there are already advantages in owning IC . Extra skill points not withstanding. Orsinium will only add to that advantage.A form of pay-to-win is already here. so might as well make IC more useful as it is heading to be Craglorn all over again. Devoid of players.

nimander99 · October 2015

If it were accessible to all (i.e free) then adding objectives would be feasible. At this point a game within a game (District Control) is the best thing to do but it may be too late. Guess that'll teach us all not to gripe about a concept prior to its release

KenaPKK · October 2015

nimander99 wrote: »

If it were accessible to all (i.e free) then adding objectives would be feasible. At this point a game within a game (District Control) is the best thing to do but it may be too late. Guess that'll teach us all not to gripe about a concept prior to its release

People will still be morons.

And developers will still listen to them.

Happens in every game.

RDMyers65b14_ESO · October 2015

Actually, this was addressed recently in one of the PVP threads.

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/2378572#Comment_2378572

Enodoc · October 2015

RDMyers65b14_ESO wrote: »

Actually, this was addressed recently in one of the PVP threads.
http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/2378572#Comment_2378572

So it was

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Your requests for a capturable district [...] has not fallen on def ears, however there are no plans to change that at this time.

A shame there's no plans for it. Hopefully since it was mostly developed already they can spend a few weeks some time to finish it off.

Leifnier · October 2015

Honestly stuff like this is just beyond zos's capabilities.

Cathexis · October 2015

A PvP zone without pvp objectives is like a jar of peanut butter without peanut butter.

Really sad.

Stalwart385 · October 2015

I don't think IC needs to be tied into Cyrodil (except I would like more gating campaigns). The sewers are still going to be a good place to grind and really the only way to get prismatic essence. They may need to make tel var stones buy more things to get more people in there. They do need to make upper IC worth going to though. The daily quest rewards need to be rewarding enough to bring people up there.

Zinaroth · October 2015

KenaPKK wrote: »

Is it on the horizon at least? It needs to be... I've made posts in other forums making suggestions, but I figure this would be the best place to come to to get in front of devs involved in future content.

Out of curiousity, what were some of these suggestions? If you want the developers to read your constructive feedback and solutions I think it would be a good idea to put them in this post aswell.

Enodoc wrote: »

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Your requests for a capturable district [...] has not fallen on def ears, however there are no plans to change that at this time.

A shame there's no plans for it. Hopefully since it was mostly developed already they can spend a few weeks some time to finish it off.

This would certainly follow the trend ZOS has displayed; add content and let people farm it to the point where there is nothing left to achieve and then later down the line add more incentives to go back and farm that content again.

Don't know how I feel about this. In one way it's an effecient way to utilize content and minimize developer time, on the other hand if feels rather punishing for us hardcore players. One very good example were how royally *** over the hardcore players got when they released the Undaunted Pledges, and allowed people to raise their Undaunted skill level by doing the dungeon achievements. Us hardcore players had already earned those achievements and thus took a lot longer on our already established characters to achieve it, compared to the people who made new characters or hadn't been playing the game much.

KenaPKK · October 2015

Zinaroth wrote: »

KenaPKK wrote: »

Is it on the horizon at least? It needs to be... I've made posts in other forums making suggestions, but I figure this would be the best place to come to to get in front of devs involved in future content.

Out of curiousity, what were some of these suggestions? If you want the developers to read your constructive feedback and solutions I think it would be a good idea to put them in this post aswell.

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/225683/long-five-realistic-changes-to-amp-up-pvp-that-would-actually-work#latest

Basically, to get some changes done with minimal development work, I'm suggesting percentage campaign point gain buffs for the faction that kills district bosses ("capturing" the district) and Molag Bal.

I believe they should be percentage based so that holding Cyrodiil objectives, which award flat point gain, would still be required to obtain rewards for holding IC districts, and so that contesting Cyrodiil objectives indirectly contests IC objectives, avoiding the issue of a "pay wall."

I also suggested several other changes to PvP scoring to make campaign points and campaign victory actually significant and motivating to the general playerbase.

KenaPKK · October 2015

[misclick post, am trolled by the edit button once again]