petraeus1 wrote: »

RinaldoGandolphi wrote: »

It all comes down to this...Money.

As it stands right now, ZOS is not going to add new features to the game unless you can only get those features with a DLC. Adding in a PVP Justice System would have to apply to the entire game which means ZOS would have to put it in a reg update and not a DLC thus they realized this wouldn't work so they scraped the plans.

...

Why? Why can't they add another PvP DLC down the line? They did IC, and sure, many people don't like it in its current state, but I can completely imagine a zone in which Justice PvP was a thing, without it affecting vanilla ESO. I heard all Markarth's and Solitude's guards died fighting off Dark Anchors, and an influx of Imperial deserters, organized under the name 'Ooh, shiny', is harassing those cities stealing valuables and murdering travelers. BAM. Zone: PvE content, Justice system, only difference: here there are player guards. Battle-leveling, intelligent zone design, flagging system if you will.

The only reason this won't be done, is if they reckon a normal PvE DLC would be more popular. Maybe. I think it's great to have something different. Only appealing to the masses makes for a potentially bland MMO. But hey, who am I? I don't know.

Thats my point...the PVP Justice System was promised as a "Update to the Base part of the game" over a year ago, it was promised to be added. Once they realized they couldn't sell it in the cash shop as a DLC, they canceled it. they may add another PVP DLC at some point, but they won't add something like that unless they can sell it as a DLC or as a cash shop item, the days of getting new features via incremental updates are over with the removal of sub fees, its all about the cash shop and selling DLC now...

@azraelkrieg I think holding on to the Justice System as a world wide thing is odd. The problems are obvious, so you'd rather not have it. But why does it have to be world wide? Cyrodiil isn't world wide? Just because they said it would be world wide 1,5 years ago? I know too little about ZOS' plans to give a verdict, but I'd much rather have one or two zones with Justice PvP than no Justice PvP at all, or even Justice PvP everywhere. There's no need to try to make it global imo.

What I would like to know from opponents of the Justice System:

The second part was not merely designed for PvP. It was a dynamic, player-driven system that allowed player-interaction in a meaningful way, something that ESO is lacking more than any MMO I have ever seen.
What, in your opinion, is going to take the Justice System's place to fill that sandbox-shaped hole in ESO's feature list?
Because I see nothing but more themepark rides on the horizon.

I think with some simple rule sets, we could prevent this from becoming a pve slaughter fest. Here's my idea:

• If you steal small things, like a bread or a drink and get caught, this should not make you attackable by other players. instead you gain a bounty just like it's now.
• If your bounty reaches a certain level (maybe 5k), this should make you attackable.
• This way you could easily avoid becoming attackable by not trying to get caught or paying off your bounty before it's too late.
• If you attack someone, you should gain a bounty and the guards should take care of you. But if you kill someone, this should make you attackable.
• With these simple rule sets it's possible to stay out of the pvp portion of the justice system by being careful, trying to be a good thief and by paying off your bounty before it reaches a certain level.
• You can still be a small-time criminal and steal things to make money, and you can still punch a npc in the face if they say something stupid, but you cannot kill someone and expect to be safe. At this point you gotta pay with your blood.

What do you guys think about these ideas?

What makes you think that bringing the justice system would not bring zerg gangs and lag that is in cyrodiil into other traditionally pve zones throughout tamriel?

clupeiub17_ESO wrote: »

What makes you think that bringing the justice system would not bring zerg gangs and lag that is in cyrodiil into other traditionally pve zones throughout tamriel?

What makes you think they could not design it so this doesn't happen? They could limit it to a PvP enabled PvE zone, outside of the vanilla zones. They could force people to flag up and create rulesets such as proposed by @MADshadowmans_Ghost to limit PvP there, limit it by having smart zone design that discourages zerging and having rewards scale towards player involvement.

Of course people could 'abuse' the system by becoming Enforcers/criminals en masse and fighting out battles outside Cyrodiil. But they could do that in IC too, and it doesn't happen, cause it ain't got incentives to do so.

To finally be able to do small scale pvp and avoid lag.

Also, was excited for people to try and claim my bounty. Emphasis on try.

The sad part isn't even that the pvp part of the justice system was scapped. Well, that was sad, but the saddest part is this PvE vs PvP nonsense happening in this thread I see happening everywhere on this forum. ZOS has done such a mediocre job giving us either PvE or PvP endgame content that people feel the need to fight over scraps. Trials are 8+ months old, pvp lag has gotten worse and instead of ganging up on ZOS to tell them they need to get it together we jump down each other's throats because "we know ZOS can't handle x or y". How about we tell ZOS to get it together rather than simply encouraging them to be lazy and pass by anything that could be fun because it'd be too hard to implement. This could easily be handled with a system allowing people to flag up for the pvp part of it so PvE players who want to keep stealing for profit can, and can't be ganked/farmed.

However instead once again it's just being scrapped/put on the back burner. Like trials for the last 8 months. Like spellcrafting. Like arenas and battlegrounds for at least the next 6 months. The issue isn't "PvE" or "PvP" players. We need to hold those responsible to their promises. That does NOT mean raging entitled fits, or profanity laced tirades. Those get us nowhere. We need to organize and let ourselves be heard as one community. If they refuse to listen then we vote with our wallets and walk away. Things will not change if we keep aiming the vitriol at each other when we all know who actually makes the decisions. We need to stop encouraging lazy design.

My initial reaction is "I can stop being a witness to crimes and start punishing it!"

But implementing any PvP without something akin to Battle Spirit in Cyrodiil is folly. We all know how high damage is. How high shields are. How high healing is. Even the 50% reductions in Battle Spirit barely keep it all in check. So enabling PvP in any area without Battle Spirit is a mistake.

Balancing the game around PvP will allow for PvP to be implemented outside of Cyrodiil. Remember the numbers we had prior to Update 6? The Battle Spirit prior to Update 6? It increased Max Health, like it always has, but it increased our armor penetration. The Battle Spirit of old increased our offensive power. The numbers then were balanced around PvP so only a small transition was needed to shift from PvE. Over the coming year(s) I hope to see ESO's numbers rebalanced around PvP, so we won't need a 50% reduction to everything, so the transition from PvE to PvP is not so jarring, so PvP can be enabled in other areas of the game.

After balancing the numbers so Battle Spirit is unnecessary, it will be a matter of reducing spawn camping, setting flags for when players are attackable and preventing players on either side of the law from zerging. These are big tasks and the last two are intertwined.

If the flags are set so only criminals of a certain heat can engage player guards in combat, it prevents outlaws from zerging enforcers. By imposing a limit on the number of active enforcers in a zone, it prevents outlaws from getting zerged. Ideally it would be a dynamic cap on active enforcers, adjusting to the number of criminals with high heat. This way if players decide to organize a flash mob to take over a city, the players that can react to and counter it are not limited. When the cap on active enforcers reduces as the criminals reduce, a warning is given to all active enforcers that there are too many in service and a countdown is started. As long as there are more enforcers than allowed when the countdown finishes, all enforcers are removed from active duty and forced to re-queue to be active. This countdown could also affect random enforcers rather than all but then it may as well automatically remove their active status rather than give them a countdown since they are forced to standby either way.

Bounty hunters, or players not affiliated with enforcers, can engage outlaws above a certain bounty threshold as opposed to a heat threshold. Players with high bounties can effectively become Kill On Sight for the entire player base. Of course, this can ruin the game for someone who unwittingly amasses a large bounty, so the threshold needs to be high. 10,000 gold bounty is a starting point. 1,000 gold may also be acceptable since misdemeanors only accrue a couple hundred gold in bounty. Though, with a state where all players are enemies, it can be argued to not implement bounty hunters and all player-on-player enforcement to enforcers.

Spawn camping, at both wayshrines and from outlaw/enforcer bases, will require level design and system design to reduce. Outlaw/enforcer bases will need multiple exit points so normally there are not enough players to camp all points (there is still the risk of flash mobs). Wayshrine resurrection can be treated like keep resurrection in Cyrodiil, allowing the player to decide which wayshrine to respawn at. But only from PvP deaths. The system will be used to bloodport otherwise. Alternatively players at risk of PvP can be given a grace period after resurrecting, similar to the safe zones in the Imperial City. This grace period could be a timer, starting when they load in alive, or could be a safe zone encompassing the wayshrine. If the latter, players at risk of PvP need to be incapable of fast travel as it allows an unfair method of escape. The wayshrines also risk becoming like the Imperial Sewers ladders were in a past patch when long loading screens were an issue, a place for gankers to run and hide with impunity, simply waiting for their pursuers to turn around. So barring multiple minute loading screens, an invulnerability timer is the method to implement for wayshrine resurrection.


All this speculation and suggestion is nothing without the rebalancing of stats. And that is a far more complex and time consuming endeavor. Like the lag in Cyrodiil, we need to deal with each imbalance as they come until there are no more.

Lefty_Lucy wrote: »

robkrush wrote: »

I take it you didn't get yesterday's memo.

Read it here:
http://www.elderscrollsonline.com/en-us/news/post/2016/01/12/eso--the-year-ahead

I take it you did not watch the video where he addresses this while reading it or watched it but didn't understand what he meant?

NeillMcAttack wrote: »

Iluvrien wrote: »

NeillMcAttack wrote: »

Iluvrien wrote: »

I haven't played a game where there is a PvP Justice system, but I have played ones where I have taken part in Justice type situations in wPvP enabled systems. Including this in the voting options is an appeal to authority: "You only get your views on the subject taken seriously if you have done it in the past and haven't liked it". No. Just no.

Your response to the person who didn't want to see PvP going on was also lacking. "Come on dude" isn't a reasoned response. It isn't playing devil's advocate. It is dismissing the concern of another player based on your own bias. The same goes for not having heard "a single reason that has convinced" you. There have been plenty of reasons given since launch. I suspect the issue is that you dismiss them based on your desire for this system, rather than that they are actually bad, or even unconvincing, arguments.

And, for the record, the reason I am glad that this isn't being implemented is because I don't want to see it. Ever. This game was launched without wPvP. If they are going to introduce it then they are going to need to make a much stronger argument than anyone has done before I will accept how this will impact on my own play time. The current version of the justice system already does, sometimes when I am in a bank, the entire environment explodes as some hapless idiot takes on the guards in there. You think that contributes to my ability to critically consider what I should/shouldn't keep... or how best to fulfill a crafting order? Do you honestly believe that this will occur less if the PvP part of the justice system is implemented?

Quite simply, unless someone can promise that all Justice flagged players would be phased out of my sight, I am going to be against this... and remain against it.

"Come on dude" is about as justifiable an argument as, "it didn't have it before so I don't want it" or "it might distract me"!

No, it isn't. "Come on dude" is an exclamation that contains no factual content.

"it didn't have it before so I don't want it" is related to the idea that you bought a product with certain expectations based on preview material, interviews, etc. world PvP was not one of those things. I suggested that they would need a better argument, or certain conditions, in place before being happy for them to make yet another fundamental alteration to the game.

"it might distract me" wasn't what I said. I said "the current level of justice content does distract me". This is one the reasons I argued against it when they started talking about it. My view hasn't changed. I asked the OP if he expected the added wPvP elements to decrease that possibility. Still waiting for my answer.

So no, the statements aren't equivalent. One was an exclamation that added nothing to the discussion but the OP's incredulity... the latter two actually contained the basis of an argument. You really still think that they are similarly justifiable? Or do you want to take another run up at that?

K, perhaps what I should have said was, your arguments against, carry about as much weight as "come on dude".
To call it world PvP is basically an over exaggeration first off. You are against a killable player character being able to deal out justice, but not an unkillable NPC. Calling that a "fundamental change to the game" is absurd. I could, with the same logic, argue that I bought the game based on the promise that the enforcer system was being implemented (see how I didn't call it wPvP) and now that it isn't, I require much more justification for the fundamental change to the game I thought ESO was going to be.

Secondly, no the OP can't promise you that, but wasn't that a part of the game you bought, the MMO you purchased. Just like no one can promise you that every single person isn't going to wage all out war on every NPC in the game now that we know there is basically no punishment for leading a life of crime besides a tricky dash to the crafting tables. This argument actually reeks of a sense of entitlement so much that I regret spending a portion of my lunch break having to address it.

"come on dude" isn't an argument and therefore cannot carry weight as one. One thing you may notice is that I included reasons for my views, and even a suggestion that would mean I would support the introduction of the system as described. (Hint: It's the bit where I mention phasing)

Calling it a fundamental change to the game isn't absurd. The introduction of PvP in any form into what are currently purely PvE areas is a fundamental change. That you refuse to see it as such, even going as far as to construct a strawman argument in an attempt to dismiss it, suggests a fair amount about your own bias. Further to this, you couldn't argue the opposite position with the same logic, because to do that you would have to find articles and interviews that specify that the justice system would be implemented in the game with a PvP component at launch. The justice system, if memory serves, started getting reported about in or around October 2014... or about 6 months after release. That would make those promo materials pretty hard to find, don't you think?

Of course the OP can't promise me that the introduction of PvP justice won't contribute to the distractions. That was the point I was originally making. Of course what I do remember is that people said that bringing the first phase of the Justice system into towns wouldn't impinge on the playing activities of anyone who wasn't actively carrying out criminal activities, and that those of us who raised concerns at the time were fear-mongering. Seems rather similar to your argument now.

If you think a rationally worded argument, raising concerns about the way this debate is being framed, is based around a sense of entitlement... while not actually bothering to address the points made... well, then maybe your time really would have been better spent concentrating on your food because you sure-as-heck aren't contributing anything useful here.

I don't care either way, but I understand that development resources are finit and if you ask your average PvP player if they'd prefer arenas or Justice System PvP, I think the majority would say arenas. That would also likely be easier to program.

So I'll take more PvP objetives and arenas over the PvP potion of the Justice System.

I'd like a bounty board with criminals who happened to have eluded the guards and got away with the crime. If their bounty is 500g and you find them, kill them and collect 500g from THEIR pockets. It's a brutal system, but people would think twice about trying for the murderer achievement.. lol. This is really the only way to implement this without it being exploited, but the risk vs rewards concept has always been appealing to me. The ability to HUNT other players without them being marked on the compass would be really awesome. I too like stealing and murdering, which would add a "trust nobody", hide from society type game play. This would make the game fun again for me, because now, it's just the same crap over and over.

Iluvrien wrote: »

If you think a rationally worded argument, raising concerns about the way this debate is being framed, is based around a sense of entitlement... while not actually bothering to address the points made... well, then maybe your time really would have been better spent concentrating on your food because you sure-as-heck aren't contributing anything useful here.

And you sure as heck do not contribute to a polite and constructive exchange of views.
Your basic argumentation looks elaborate but it can be summarized as "I don't want it because I don't like it and therefore don't need it. I will not tolerate it either for the sake of other players who might enjoy it because I don't care about anyone else but myself".

The part where you state that whatever guard/thief fight occurring near you disrupts your bank operations deserves no more than "come on Dude..." but if you really want a detailed explanation, here it is : this is an MMO, which means a shared playground, if you're not ready to endure such basic events like a fight near you, you'd better play a single player game.

As to the argument that "it wasn't advertised as such when I bought the base game", itsounds very opportunistic. With arguments like that, you could put down any innovative step from ZOS that would not have been announced in 2014 already. If it was something you'd actually like, and someone else would come with such an argument, you'd find it just as out of place.

MMO are meant to evolve, else they die. That's their nature. Arguing that they cannot be different from what they were at launch is just nonsensical when it comes to MMOs.

.