They had a gated campaign for IC. No one played it.

I'm beginning to think that all those people who played DAoC need to realize it's not 2001 anymore.

To be completely honest....and not to take away from the PvP aspects

The whole IC needs to be free. Refund everyone who either subbed or who bought crowns for it and make it a base game update.
Access should in all campaigns only be available to the keeps in Curodil
Once X amount are taken IC should belong to a faction for 2-3 hours and then Cyrodil keeps should reset (as in the campaign resets and access starts again)

In the resource Curodil...set X number and do the same as above X amount of hours and then reset
Some campaigns should have longer timers or maybe you own it for a day or a week but...as is, it's kinda silly to be tied to Cyrodil

I know...this throws off emperors...well maybe it's time for a change since ZOS is trying to charge for an incomplete Curodil. Or come up with some other idea but as is....it's pretty silly to me

1. Ugh another small-scale PvP lover griping about large-scale PvP and zerging.
2. Large-scale PvP involves "zerging", especially a war setting where the groups are actually legions of soldiers.
3. Not only are you trying to compare ESO to other games but for the wrong reasons. Seriously, just stop OP...

If you want to fix IC, They need to change the way the 10/80 system works. Right now it's nothing but a gankfest of PvP'ers picking on PvE'ers. If we want to entice the PvE'ers to come we need to stop being *** to them.

Make it so that when you kill someone in IC you get 80% of their stones equal to the amount you are risking.

Risk 0 stones and gank someone, get nothing. That way if they do manage to kill you, they get something too!

Also, by increasing the timer on the banner mobs, they should also drop significantly more or better loot. Perhaps make them a bit tougher as well?

Snowgoons wrote: »

Everyone that whined they wanted full access to IC all the time is a moron.

This would get people back in cyrodiil fighting and give you some grace time to use IC while your side opens it.

This would also let a group that is inside IC while it's not open to their side prove just how good they are as they vs the legions of people swarming in from the side that just opened IC.

I'm beginning to think ZOS and a vast amount of ESO players here have never heard of or played DAoC or any Pvp game outside of WoW type arenas and capture the flag....

ESO was made by some of the people that made DAOC. The root of most of this game's problems.

Snowgoons wrote: »

PBpsy wrote: »

Snowgoons wrote: »

Everyone that whined they wanted full access to IC all the time is a moron.

This would get people back in cyrodiil fighting and give you some grace time to use IC while your side opens it.

This would also let a group that is inside IC while it's not open to their side prove just how good they are as they vs the legions of people swarming in from the side that just opened IC.

I'm beginning to think ZOS and a vast amount of ESO players here have never heard of or played DAoC or any Pvp game outside of WoW type arenas and capture the flag....

ESO was made by some of the people that made DAOC. The root of most of this game's problems.

PBpsy, I know you love to see your name everywhere, but the third post in this thread already said that, this confirms that people like you posting here don't even read the thread before posting. Not surprising to be honest but it's concrete evidence.

Amazing1 How insightful.

IC was a giant mistake because they simply did not think it through. It would have been 1000x better if instead of devoting so much time to a failure, they made some simple fun changes.

1. Created an outdoor pve zone with good drops in the center of Cyrodil that anyone could enter. Good drops being the key because it would have given a reason to be there, and it would have created some interesting pvp dynamics.

2. Created instanced tunnels between keeps and keep resources that allowed for small groups to enter. These smallish caverns would allow you to control a resource or weaken a keep, or have an effect on the larger cyrodil battle.
This would satisfy smaller groups based pvp, lag, and of course would still have an effect on cyrodils success, so it would be a benefit to the campaign community.

3. Have better rewards based on AP and change how AP is rewarded to make it more stable.

4. Create a 1v1 cross faction duel arena with leaderboard and rewards.

5. Redo the keep layouts to help smaller pop servers and allow them to have stronger guards. Write an actual algorithm to better pre-blanace the servers, instead of just a dumb hard cap.

6. Fix the bugs that frustrate the PvP player base on a nightly basis.

...

Darkness falls, outside of RvR, was the best concept DAOC ever had. It should have been copied almost exactly. However, with the change to B2P, ZOS needed content to monetize immediately (DLC) rather than over time (by increasing/retaining subs). Thus, IC was turned into the only area in the game that a player can reasonably make progress in. And therefore, it HAD to be made open access. Personally, I don't agree with any of these decisions. But, you can't understand, or fix one without the other.

(Considering these facts, along with the ease in changing campaigns, means that the failure of the gated campaign does not mean gated access wouldn't have worked. All it means is that players in MMOs, when they have a choice, tend to participate in activities where they can progress the most. I.e., ungated has more progression that gated.)

Having exclusive (PvP themed) gear in IC? Great. Having top-tier mats only available there (for the most part)? Not a good decision. And having been told that devs did not want to create sPvP or arenas due to fears of splitting PvP population, they go ahead and do just that with IC.

This is what happens when you change course mid-stream. Your new philosophies and methods of monetizing the game conflict with the design and principles of the game as already established. Players feel this in different ways, and the result is a loss in population and revenue.

Hopefully, Orsinium is a middle ground.

Jura23 wrote: »

That train is long gone. I payed for IC, so I want to play it when I choose. I would like though if they tweak it somehow to motivate ppl to play there for the future.

The best I could see them doing if such a major change came around, is giving all players that bought Imperial City previously 2500 Crowns.

Jura23 wrote: »

Riko_Futatabi wrote: »

Jura23 wrote: »

That train is long gone. I payed for IC, so I want to play it when I choose. I would like though if they tweak it somehow to motivate ppl to play there for the future.

The best I could see them doing if such a major change came around, is giving all players that bought Imperial City previously 2500 Crowns.

Call me a pessimist, but I dont see ZOS ever considering this kind of solution.

Yeah, they'd most likely change it and give you nothing or leave it as is. Although, they did give PC players a bunch of crowns and a mount before they made the major business model change.

Snowgoons wrote: »

Everyone that whined they wanted full access to IC all the time is a moron.

This would get people back in cyrodiil fighting and give you some grace time to use IC while your side opens it.

This would also let a group that is inside IC while it's not open to their side prove just how good they are as they vs the legions of people swarming in from the side that just opened IC.

I'm beginning to think ZOS and a vast amount of ESO players here have never heard of or played DAoC or any Pvp game outside of WoW type arenas and capture the flag....

I am not interested in being forced into Cyrodiil. The lag in regular cyrodiil makes the game unplayable and at the moment my faction is completely rolling every thing with massive numbers in Cyrodiil. I'd rather go straight to IC for PvP.

I have a simple solution to connect IC access to Cyrodiil control. Make access be based on a token system per hour in IC. Each faction controls 6 of the 18 keeps base. The base cost will be 6 tokens per hour and this number will rise and fall based on the number of keeps controlled by your faction. With no keeps controlled it will cost 12 and with 12 keeps controlled it will cost nothing. These tokens can be earned from reward bags and claiming keeps and resources in Cyrodiil( not earnable inside IC).If you institute a cap on how many tokens a player can have at one time, to 24 you limit access to IC and force players to compete in the alliance war. This system could be extended into district control in IC with each district also lowering the cost to stay inside IC, or district control could increase your time by 1/2 hour per district controlled(I.e. 6 tokes every 1 1/2 hours) This allows all players access to the dlc without leaving it open 100% of the time.

This would provide a solid incentive for control in Cyrodiil without locking people out of a dlc they purchased and allows small groups( resources)and large groups a chance to earn tokens.

americansteel wrote: »

seems to me that people who play this game do not want to participate in taking keeps forts resources. this PvP is designed to do that. this Is a war with 3 alliances, meaning we must partake in groups to take or atleast attempt to take the opposing alliances keeps. this means siege weapons this means big groups, in lore the alliances were not fighting over IC with a group of 15 people. did any of you not watch the cinematic trailers for ESO? what did that look like? looked to me like huge groups with daedric intrusion.

I think people just want a 4v4 or a 10v10 to fit their needs they have become so accustomed to when playing call of duty and halo.

doing 1v1s are boring especially when my DK is up against sorcs who shield stack with crazy amount of CP all i ever get into is a stalemate.

but yes it would be nice to have a small scale arena type PvP deal to break up the monotony.

Finally someone that gets it. Bravo sir.