The issues related to logging in to the North American PC/Mac megaserver have been resolved at this time. If you continue to experience difficulties at login, please restart your client. Thank you for your patience!
Forward Camp Respawn Timer Too Short
-
zyk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭I'd like to see something like:
- a rolling 15 minute timer that allows a maximum of 3 respawns by rez or Forward Camp
- players respawning respawning via FC start with 50%/25%/10% Magicka and Stamina and 75% health - based on the respawn number within the rolling 15m window
- 10 second activation time after an FC is deployed so there is an opportunity to destroy it before it becomes active; the player deploying it needs to be free and clear of combat or have the ability to defend it1 -
Takuto✭✭✭I'd like to see the following:
-Placing a forward camp puts the same timer on you that you get from respawn at a forward camp.
-A forward camp can't be placed by someone with a forward camp respawn-timer on themselves.
-Respawning at forward camp causes you to respawn with some amount less than full resources, preferably less than that given by a templar's resurrection.
-Increased respawn timer
-Adjustment on the burning mechanic to allow the forward camp to be burnt by someone taking DoT damage.
In addition, there is currently a 30 second timer after someone respawns during which they are not worth any AP, I would purpose that during this 30 minute timer their death would not cause anyone to gain any AP, EXP, or Tel-Var, and likewise they would not be able to gain AP, EXP, or Tel-Var.
This means a player can't instantly drop 2 forward camps to 'summon' 40 players, and none of the respawned players can do so either. It also means those players won't gain any AP from an enemy that the summon on top of, and would further be vulnerable to bombing due to not respawning with 100% health.
Eternal Destiny (PC/NA)
Dead Wait (PC/NA Haderus AD)1 -
AllPlayAndNoWork✭✭✭✭✭Sandman929 wrote: »Remove them. It's a ridiculous idea. If you fail to take a keep, you face the long ride of shame.
This +1..... well +100.
Bin them, they are crap.0 -
Sharee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Throwing another idea into the mix:
- adjust auto-release timer to be shorter than the camp-respawn timer.
Reasoning: Currently you can not get rid of an enemy group. All they have to do is have one member stay cloaked out of sight, and drop a camp everytime the group wipes for an instant group rez. If you wipe the group again and they now are facing the 2-minute camp respawn timer, the hidden camp-placer just waits 2 mins before placing a new camp -> whole group insta-rezzed again. Repeat ad infinitum.
You can not prevent this by destroying the camp because there is no time to destroy it after it is placed - the whole enemy force instantly respawns as soon as the tent appears. All you can hope for is to find the hidden camp-placer by sheer luck (you have to cover an area equivalent to the camp rez radius, and you must find him withing two minutes).
Alternative solution might be putting a timer on the camp itself, not allowing rezzes at it before certain time elapses after it was built, so there is a chance for the opposition to spot the tent and destroy it.1 -
Docmandu✭✭✭✭✭
✭Player looting would be too extreme for most who play this game. But if every death in a 10min time frame after the first death; costed 3-5% of a player's accumulated ap and removed x amount of ap off of the leader boards it may slow down some of that type play. Even those with millions of ap would be affected.
Which would result in 100% of Cyrodiil playing a magicka NB.3 -
Docmandu✭✭✭✭✭
✭ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »Forward camp respawn timers are under discussion for the next patch.
Is resurrection sickness / debuff something that is being considered or has been discussed internally?!
0 -
Rune_Relic✭✭✭✭✭
✭Our biggest problem is massive battles always take place at keep, resource, bridge.
Guess where we all place the camps to make sure we stay in the thick of battle
See...the whole point of camps is to (currently) stay in the thick of battle rather than move us quickly around the battlescape like a forward camp is meant to do.
Was you @ZOS_BrianWheeler not begging us to split up ?
Can you simply have a camp denial radius around keeps and resources.
Then;
1. you cant be instantly back into battle
2. you can also avoid horse simulator
3. you by default spread players around the field of battle instead of instantly into the same spot as everyone else...reducing lag.
4. battles become more transient and reinforcement dont have time to enter the battle arena before it ends...also reducing players on site and thus lag.
5. ress sickness mechanics is not required.
6. attackers are denied instant reinforcements....defenders are also denied instant reinforcements
7. death has serious consequences...you lose the battle.Edited by Rune_Relic on June 17, 2016 11:31AMAnything that can be exploited will be exploited1 -
Zheg✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭I'd like to see the following:
-Placing a forward camp puts the same timer on you that you get from respawn at a forward camp.
-A forward camp can't be placed by someone with a forward camp respawn-timer on themselves.
-Respawning at forward camp causes you to respawn with some amount less than full resources, preferably less than that given by a templar's resurrection.
-Increased respawn timer
-Adjustment on the burning mechanic to allow the forward camp to be burnt by someone taking DoT damage.
In addition, there is currently a 30 second timer after someone respawns during which they are not worth any AP, I would purpose that during this 30 minute timer their death would not cause anyone to gain any AP, EXP, or Tel-Var, and likewise they would not be able to gain AP, EXP, or Tel-Var.
This means a player can't instantly drop 2 forward camps to 'summon' 40 players, and none of the respawned players can do so either. It also means those players won't gain any AP from an enemy that the summon on top of, and would further be vulnerable to bombing due to not respawning with 100% health.
These are great ideas (especially the second), particularly when coupled with the respawn timer going up. If you put down a camp for pugs, you're doing so mostly for their benefit and not for yours. If someone in our group lived and put down the camp, it shouldn't matter if they have the respawn timer now because they're running with the group and everyone now has the timer. This might actually help make defeats mean something.
I long for the days when groups wouldn't just constantly fling themselves from the wall because they know a camp will put them right back inside the keep. I long for the days when fending off a group attacking your siege forces you to make the call of trying to keep people on tagging the wall so you can get it burst before the enemies die, making them commit to a failed push and risking the keep for their folly. I long for the days when you wipe an entire raid and they need to either get manual rezzes one at a time (allowing you to move onto flags or whatever else you need to do) and time when that group will return to the fray as you deal with the remaining enemies, rather than knowing they'll instantly be running back to the inner if a camp is down. I long for the days when you kill someone and they revive that they're vulnerable because their stats are low, rather than full and likely far higher than your own.Edited by Zheg on June 17, 2016 1:37PM2 -
WebBull✭✭✭✭✭
✭I am OK with camps but I do think that they should be set up significantly outside radius of keeps (like a third of the way to the next closest keep). I also think enemy camps should show on the map. This would spread keep battles out more.0 -
vamp_emily✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Oh, lets do away with FCs so a zerg can roll right over the defenders.. how fun is that? It must be a learn to play issue that I can't fight 10v1, and I need to hop on my horse and waist more time traveling.
I don't see what the problem is? Is it that time of the month where you guys just want to Nerf something AGAIN? One day you want FCs the next day you Don't.
If you do away with FCs might as well do away with rezzing period.
I vote to keep FCs until they come up with a better plan of balancing some of these campaigns.
[ Edit ] I also have to say, I've had some of the funnest game play when our enemy put an FC up at a resource. Hours of fun, isn't that why we are playing? To have fun?
Edited by vamp_emily on June 17, 2016 4:58PM
If you want a friend, get a dog.
AW Rank: Grand Warlord 1 ( level 49)3 -
Zheg✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭vamp_emily wrote: »Oh, lets do away with FCs so a zerg can roll right over the defenders.. how fun is that? It must be a learn to play issue that I can't fight 10v1, and I need to hop on my horse and waist more time traveling.
I don't see what the problem is? Is it that time of the month where you guys just want to Nerf something AGAIN? One day you want FCs the next day you Don't.
If you do away with FCs might as well do away with rezzing period.
I vote to keep FCs until they come up with a better plan of balancing some of these campaigns.
Chicken little much? We played the game for over a year without camps, and did just fine. Keeps were defended just fine. Rezzing was just fine. In fact, the pvp was actually better in many people's opinions. With the exception of last emp keeps, the majority of keep fights were smaller in total numbers than they have been with the reintroduction of forward camps. These are metrics, you can argue they don't mean anything, but data is data.
Most of the time now when we lose a keep it's because the assaulters have grossly larger numbers and can just keep camping over and over. In previous patches you could tactically whittle down their numbers, or make them pay for a poor push - enough to turn the tides. It's almost impossible to do that with camps now.
The fact that it sounds like you don't see any problems at all with camps speaks for itself. Even the people that like camps and want them to stay realize they aren't perfect and should have adjustments made to them.Edited by Zheg on June 17, 2016 5:00PM1 -
Zheg✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭vamp_emily wrote: »[ Edit ] I also have to say, I've had some of the funnest game play when our enemy put an FC up at a resource. Hours of fun, isn't that why we are playing? To have fun?
"Hours of fun" is because the fight never ends. It's not healthy for the performance or overall campaign. Half or more of your alliance will sit at that resource/keep waiting for a Dtick while they lose every other keep they own. It's moronic.1 -
vamp_emily✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭The fact that it sounds like you don't see any problems at all with camps speaks for itself.
To be honest you you, you lost me at "Increase the rez timer for FCs to at least 5 minutes". There is a reason why they brought back FCs, remember that.
If you want a friend, get a dog.
AW Rank: Grand Warlord 1 ( level 49)0 -
Satiar✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭vamp_emily wrote: »
Let me put it like this. Imagine you have 8-9 people defending a breach vs 30. You use your ults to get a good bomb in, dropping half of them in a spot where they can't be rezzed easily. This should be a turning point in the fight, but not with Forward Camps. They just Rez and run back within 30 seconds. Now you have no ults, and they're all still alive.
It always favors the bigger raid, end of story.Vehemence -- Commander and Raid Lead -- Tri-faction PvP
Knights Paravant -- Co-GM and Raid Lead -- AD Greyhost1 -
Zheg✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭vamp_emily wrote: »
There's a reason they buffed siege damage, it doesn't mean it was a good one. There's a reason they made IC a DLC and not part of the base game, it doesn't mean it was a good one. There's a reason they made prox det, it doesn't mean it was a good one.
They re-introduced FCs to make death easier than its already consequence-free state. I wouldn't be surprised if Brian and Wrobel thought that FCs would somehow be to the detriment of large groups, instead they're used to greatest effect by those groups and worse - by gigantic mega zergs.1 -
Crispen_Longbow✭✭✭✭✭vamp_emily wrote: »Oh, lets do away with FCs so a zerg can roll right over the defenders.. how fun is that? It must be a learn to play issue that I can't fight 10v1, and I need to hop on my horse and waist more time traveling.
I don't see what the problem is?
Really you don't see how camps are actually hurting you with a 10 V 1?
10 v 1 is actually possible when you are defending a keep. You can kill them and stop them rezing. This is so much easier then if they are to drop camps and Zombie in on you over and over. Eventually you will lose to the zombie horde. Without camps you can actually hold them off as the zombie army disappears.Edited by Crispen_Longbow on June 17, 2016 5:10PMCrispen Longbow - Daggerfall Covenant (DC): NB - Rank:50 (NA/PC) - RIP (Blue VE, Khole, LoM, MO)
Crispen Longboww - Aldmeri Dominion (AD): NB - Rank:50 (NA/PC) - Crispen's House of Pain RIP (KP, Yellow VE, Omni)
Crispen Longbow-EP - Ebonheart Pact (EP): NB - Rank:50 (NA/PC) - RIP (Red VE)2 -
moiraleafcull✭✭✭HoloYoitsu wrote: »
I'll put on my Fasallas. We'll just need to wait for me to get CC'd first so I can get the moving Negate.
I would gladly launch you with a catapult. Sorc meatbag - debuff your enemies with a flying troll.HoloYoitsu wrote: »
Btw, do you think you could synchronize me standing inside a catapult and crit rushing over the walls the same instant you fire the catapult, so it looks like you're launching me into the air?HoloYoitsu wrote: »You guys ask too much of ZOS, let's be honest here. ZOS couldn't even delete FCs from the game, all they could do was turn them off in merchant tables and make them bound.
Then it took a year to:- Add a 'check if player is in (x) radius of camp' call.
- Add a 'check if player has used a camp in (x) ticks' call.
- Change the radius of camps from (x) to (y).
- Change the AP cost of camps in the merchant tables.
That's literally the only things that have been changed in the code, in a year of time that Wheeler was "redesigning" FCs. Zheg-scrub, just increasing the rez timer would probably take months alone. Imagine how long it would take ZOS to code in the ability for camps to give players debuffs, and then code in the debuff.
Btw, still waiting on that Mercenary redesign...
Listen sorc, it did take them about a year, but we've had then back for about 6 months now, so if we tell them it's a problem and make a stink about it we'll be full circle and have them addressed in about that same year long timeframe.
I need it for my immurshuns.
Prox Det! Don't forget Prox Det!
Flying, moving Negate, prox det!
Magika sorcs will once again have purpose!
@moiraleafcull == 551+ Champion
Daggerfall Covenant: Moira Leafcull - Temp AR 27 | Fara Nightsky - NB AR 6
Proud to wear the tabards of Daggerfall Pride and LoM1 -
vamp_emily✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Crispen_Longbow wrote: »10 v 1 is actually possible when you are defending a keep. You can kill them and stop them rezing. This is so much easier then if they are to drop camps and Zombie in on you over and over. Eventually you will lose to the zombie horde. Without camps you can actually hold them off as the zombie army disappears.
Just an example:
Early morning 10 to 15 AD are attacking Ash. We have say 4 or 5 defenders. One of the defenders get hit with a coldfire and dies.. now we have 4 players. AD rushes in as I am trying to rez the dead guy and kills me.
Now I have to hop my happy A$$ on my horse and travel back to the keep. Ok I can except that but I have been in situations such as these were we took out larger groups just because we had FCs. FCs helped the smaller groups, they don't always help the larger groups.
Even if you did do away with FCs, larger groups have more rezzing capabilities then smaller groups. I've been in situations where we did not have a FC and we had dead bodies laying around that could not be rezzed because the enemy was of greater size.
However, taking rezzing out of the game completely would really hurt large groups. Sounds like this is what you guys want.
Edited by vamp_emily on June 17, 2016 5:40PM
If you want a friend, get a dog.
AW Rank: Grand Warlord 1 ( level 49)0 -
Ghost-Shot✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭vamp_emily wrote: »Crispen_Longbow wrote: »10 v 1 is actually possible when you are defending a keep. You can kill them and stop them rezing. This is so much easier then if they are to drop camps and Zombie in on you over and over. Eventually you will lose to the zombie horde. Without camps you can actually hold them off as the zombie army disappears.
Just an example:
Early morning 10 to 15 AD are attacking Ash. We have say 4 or 5 defenders. One of the defenders get hit with a coldfire and dies.. now we have 4 players. AD rushes in as I am trying to rez the dead guy and kills me.
Now I have to hop my happy A$$ on my horse and travel back to the keep. Ok I can except that but I have been in situations such as these were we took out larger groups just because we had FCs. FCs helped the smaller groups, they don't always help the larger groups.
Even if you did do away with FCs, larger groups have more rezzing capabilities then smaller groups. I've been in situations where we did not have a FC and we had dead bodies laying around that could not be rezzed because the enemy was of greater size.
However, taking rezzing out of the game completely would really hurt large groups. Sounds like this is what you guys want.
Another example, your group of 4 or 5 defenders manage to wipe the group of 10 or 15, they have one person get out and camp and you instantly have 10 or 15 people with full resources after you just blew through your own and your ults to wipe them in the first place and what should have been an impressive victory for you is now a loss. GG3 -
Zheg✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭vamp_emily wrote: »Crispen_Longbow wrote: »10 v 1 is actually possible when you are defending a keep. You can kill them and stop them rezing. This is so much easier then if they are to drop camps and Zombie in on you over and over. Eventually you will lose to the zombie horde. Without camps you can actually hold them off as the zombie army disappears.
Just an example:
Early morning 10 to 15 AD are attacking Ash. We have say 4 or 5 defenders. One of the defenders get hit with a coldfire and dies.. now we have 4 players. AD rushes in as I am trying to rez the dead guy and kills me.
Now I have to hop my happy A$$ on my horse and travel back to the keep. Ok I can except that but I have been in situations such as these were we took out larger groups just because we had FCs. FCs helped the smaller groups, they don't always help the larger groups.
Even if you did do away with FCs, larger groups have more rezzing capabilities then smaller groups. I've been in situations where we did not have a FC and we had dead bodies laying around that could not be rezzed because the enemy was of greater size.
However, taking rezzing out of the game completely would really hurt large groups. Sounds like this is what you guys want.
The number of examples where camps hurt smaller groups far outweighs the exception cases where they are beneficial. The exact same scenario you gave still worked when camps were gone entirely. I once wiped a small 7-8 man gos group on old school haderus while I tried to solo defend dragonclaw. Camps weren't in the game. If they were, I would have lost.
Yes, myself and many others want them gone completely. I think they're a crutch for zergs and promote mindless play with little consequence for poor tactics and situational awareness. This thread is asking for the respawn timer be increased. That should NOT affect your example in the least. If your 4-5 are dying multiple times, you're not playing well and should not be successful in defending the keep against larger numbers anyway. The camp will still give you a second chance because you messed up, changing the timers just means that you can't mess up over and over and over again and reward bad play.Edited by Zheg on June 17, 2016 5:46PM1 -
zyk✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Ghost-Shot wrote: »Another example, your group of 4 or 5 defenders manage to wipe the group of 10 or 15, they have one person get out and camp and you instantly have 10 or 15 people with full resources after you just blew through your own and your ults to wipe them in the first place and what should have been an impressive victory for you is now a loss. GG
This is what's normal. Every night I play I am part of a small group of randoms that pulls off an unlikely victory against a raid, only for them to respawn endlessly until they finally win.
Every reasonable person can see this. The reason there's pushback is because the core game is super casual and these players can't stand "horse simulator". They want instant respawn COD gameplay in AvA. The huge dtick quagmires that go on for an hour? They *like* this. "OMG SO EPIC!!!" /headache
I miss active lanes. To me, it is a disaster that so much of Cyrodiil is completely useless because 99.9% of the activity is in 1-4 locations.3 -
Ghost-Shot✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Ghost-Shot wrote: »Another example, your group of 4 or 5 defenders manage to wipe the group of 10 or 15, they have one person get out and camp and you instantly have 10 or 15 people with full resources after you just blew through your own and your ults to wipe them in the first place and what should have been an impressive victory for you is now a loss. GG
This is what's normal. Every night I play I am part of a small group of randoms that pulls off an unlikely victory against a raid, only for them to respawn endlessly until they finally win.
Every reasonable person can see this. The reason there's pushback is because the core game is super casual and these players can't stand "horse simulator". They want instant respawn COD gameplay in AvA. The huge dtick quagmires that go on for an hour? They *like* this. "OMG SO EPIC!!!" /headache
I miss active lanes. To me, it is a disaster that so much of Cyrodiil is completely useless because 99.9% of the activity is in 1-4 locations.
Exactly, whether you are doing small group or large group or solo PvP, the negative impacts of camps seriously outweigh the benefits and the game was better off without them.2 -
Zheg✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Ghost-Shot wrote: »Another example, your group of 4 or 5 defenders manage to wipe the group of 10 or 15, they have one person get out and camp and you instantly have 10 or 15 people with full resources after you just blew through your own and your ults to wipe them in the first place and what should have been an impressive victory for you is now a loss. GG
This is what's normal. Every night I play I am part of a small group of randoms that pulls off an unlikely victory against a raid, only for them to respawn endlessly until they finally win.
Every reasonable person can see this. The reason there's pushback is because the core game is super casual and these players can't stand "horse simulator". They want instant respawn COD gameplay in AvA. The huge dtick quagmires that go on for an hour? They *like* this. "OMG SO EPIC!!!" /headache
I miss active lanes. To me, it is a disaster that so much of Cyrodiil is completely useless because 99.9% of the activity is in 1-4 locations.
Actually, that's another great point I never thought about. People used to have to ride between keeps more than once. It gave small groups and solo players a chance to fight on transit lines. Camps remove a huge swath of that because all of those players will stay at the keep fight for the entire duration until it's completely resolved. You used to have people running back because they realized they potato'd into a bad spot and no one was going to go rez them. Not only are you diminishing the small scale fighting on transit lines, you're shifting it all onto the already performance-jeopardizing large fight at the objective.2 -
vamp_emily✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Every reasonable person can see this. The reason there's pushback is because the core game is super casual and these players can't stand "horse simulator". They want instant respawn COD gameplay in AvA. The huge dtick quagmires that go on for an hour? They *like* this. "OMG SO EPIC!!!" /headache
Every reasonable person?
If you are loosing every single fight your group might have a learn to play issue, and are just blaming FCs. Or are you exaggerating a little?
OMG FCs are SO OP /lol
If you want a friend, get a dog.
AW Rank: Grand Warlord 1 ( level 49)2 -
Zheg✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭vamp_emily wrote: »Every reasonable person can see this. The reason there's pushback is because the core game is super casual and these players can't stand "horse simulator". They want instant respawn COD gameplay in AvA. The huge dtick quagmires that go on for an hour? They *like* this. "OMG SO EPIC!!!" /headache
Every reasonable person?
If you are loosing every single fight your group might have a learn to play issue, and are just blaming FCs. Or are you exaggerating a little?
OMG FCs are SO OP /lol
You argued you need camps because you can't stay alive without them, and are now telling good pvpers to L2P? Makes sense.2 -
_Chaos✭✭✭✭✭
✭This thread is making my head hurt, some people just can't see the forest through the trees.
'Chaos1 -
Ghost-Shot✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭vamp_emily wrote: »Every reasonable person can see this. The reason there's pushback is because the core game is super casual and these players can't stand "horse simulator". They want instant respawn COD gameplay in AvA. The huge dtick quagmires that go on for an hour? They *like* this. "OMG SO EPIC!!!" /headache
Every reasonable person?
If you are loosing every single fight your group might have a learn to play issue, and are just blaming FCs. Or are you exaggerating a little?
OMG FCs are SO OP /lol
You argued you need camps because you can't stay alive without them, and are now telling good pvpers to L2P? Makes sense.
Zheg don't argue with Pug, Pug is unreasonable and you will get no where fast here.1 -
Zheg✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Ghost-Shot wrote: »vamp_emily wrote: »Every reasonable person can see this. The reason there's pushback is because the core game is super casual and these players can't stand "horse simulator". They want instant respawn COD gameplay in AvA. The huge dtick quagmires that go on for an hour? They *like* this. "OMG SO EPIC!!!" /headache
Every reasonable person?
If you are loosing every single fight your group might have a learn to play issue, and are just blaming FCs. Or are you exaggerating a little?
OMG FCs are SO OP /lol
You argued you need camps because you can't stay alive without them, and are now telling good pvpers to L2P? Makes sense.
Zheg don't argue with Pug, Pug is unreasonable and you will get no where fast here.
I always win my arguments with you though...1 -
vamp_emily✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭You argued you need camps because you can't stay alive without them, and are now telling good pvpers to L2P? Makes sense.
I'm just pointing out that FCs do not need a time increase ( 5 minutes is kind of crazy when you can travel keep to keep within that time frame ). I am also pointing out that FCs are good for small groups.
If you want a friend, get a dog.
AW Rank: Grand Warlord 1 ( level 49)1 -
Ghost-Shot✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Ghost-Shot wrote: »vamp_emily wrote: »Every reasonable person can see this. The reason there's pushback is because the core game is super casual and these players can't stand "horse simulator". They want instant respawn COD gameplay in AvA. The huge dtick quagmires that go on for an hour? They *like* this. "OMG SO EPIC!!!" /headache
Every reasonable person?
If you are loosing every single fight your group might have a learn to play issue, and are just blaming FCs. Or are you exaggerating a little?
OMG FCs are SO OP /lol
You argued you need camps because you can't stay alive without them, and are now telling good pvpers to L2P? Makes sense.
Zheg don't argue with Pug, Pug is unreasonable and you will get no where fast here.
I always win my arguments with you though...
Not true, remember how I won the Jesus Beam is OP argument
0