Proportionally reducing the map size of Cyrodiil.

TheAngelofDeath99 · August 2016

Unsent.Soul wrote: »

Would it be wrong if they reduced the size of the map of cyrodiil? Reduce the map by 20%-30%.

Players are tired of playing "horse simulator 2.0" and would rather get to the action faster.

Obviously there would be balance and respawn rate would be reduced to prevent zergs to spam areas to attack / defend. The districts already provide non stop action for certain factions in certain districts.

I've always thought this would make things better.

I'd be open to view pros and cons for a discussion, maybe a new thread entirely.

Could it work?

What do you guys think? And yea, respawn rates would need to be adjusted. But still...

MerkzM8 · August 2016

No and this is why:

No reducing the map size would bring more harm than good, not to mention it would require a lot of work on world scaling and what not on zenimaxs part.

QUEZ420 · August 2016

Yes and here's why:

Riding simulator.

Unsent.Soul · August 2016

Yes and here's why:

Do I need to say more.

Xsorus · August 2016

Ummm No

If you want to play a smaller map game, go play that game.

Unsent.Soul · August 2016

Yes and here's why:

Vote didn't show, that looks bad.

makreth · August 2016

No and this is why:

No because if I wanted instant fights I would have gone for counter-strike.

Traveling is already catered down with teleporting to keeps, try old school when you had to actually travel on foot in some cases.

Lucius_Aelius · August 2016

No and this is why:

I disagree wholeheartedly, if anything I'd like the maps to be bigger with more stuff in it and everyone playing together without different campaigns... Totally impractical sure but I think that would be amazing, and making the map smaller is a change in the wrong direction that could only ever possibly make this game less epic than it is, which I cannot stress enough would be a mistake.

leepalmer95 · August 2016

No and this is why:

They could just add horse movement speed to the battle spirit, '20% faster horse speed while mounted in cyrodiil'

Should cut down the horse simulator time.

Unsent.Soul · August 2016

Yes and here's why:

It seems people are against it just to be against it. Is it just because it's a different idea? Would this not reduce lag and other performance issues?

I'm just looking for a discussion because the only cons so far are traveling is already easy, and it's the wrong direction for the game.

Those are rather general opinions and do not offer much to discuss.

Change isn't always bad, I love the map of cyrodil, I really do. There are times where I ride by something I've never seen before, and that's amazing. I love to explore but if you look at the map as a whole. There's a whole lot of empty and there are key points where battles take place. It's the same old same, reducing the size means more options since it's less travel time.

At least think about the idea, don't be so quick to shut it down. How would this negatively effect the current game?

makreth · August 2016

No and this is why:

Your arguments for me aren't strong enough to support something like that.

Traveling time may be long for you but for me it seems normal. As I said there are too many "teleport hubs" already. You attack a keep and 2 minutes after a whole bunch of people appear.

If cyrodiil feels empty is because Zos hasn't given some in depth emphasis on it. Reducing the map size isn't the answer since that will result in reducing the population cap. You think a small sized map can handle the population size the current campaigns have?

Even if the size gets smaller there will still be empty places and key places with action. It's just how it is, accept it. Unless you want to go towards to battleground/warzone direction and that's another thing.

I agree with @Lucius_Aelius because that's what cyrodiil should be about. Not some tiny instanced pvp.

KICHZY · August 2016

Yes and here's why:

Smaller Cyrodill = better performance, It feels more of an exploration horse riding simulator than a PVP Warzone currently.

Lucius_Aelius · August 2016

No and this is why:

For me, the size of the map directly effects how epic of a game it is, the bigger the map the more epic the game. I like epic in my games, and any idea that would make it less epic is an idea I'm automatically against without any need for further discussion to hear counterpoints, there just isn't a counterpoint to this since it's purely my opinion about what I like.

I may not like having to ride back somewhere after dying, but it's balanced and I wouldn't change it if I could. Riding across the map right now in PvP is a genuine adventure, with a higher stress level the further you get from anywhere you can spawn, and I love it. It takes a good long while to get anywhere far, and if it didn't the feel of how epic the whole thing is would be taken away (or at least reduced).

Honest to god, if this game were made to be so big that it would take days to ride across (and somehow still have meaningful things to do that don't take a preposterous amount of time to reach) I would absolutely love it, it couldn't ever possibly work in this kind of game since any form of travel that made it practical would also flagrantly violate lore (not that Wayshrines don't already), but I would still love the idea even if it was completely unplayable as a game.

Quite apart from changing the size either way, in my opinion they should definitely get rid of Wayshrines, and I think it was a mistake to ever have them at all, I'd love this game so much more without them it defies description. Every trip every place would be an adventure, and although it would need some quick travel to and from dungeons to stay practical you could accomplish that with the Undaunted people opening a portal for you and your group there and back again.

So no, I've already thought about this a lot and no amount of discussion is going to change my mind about what I think and feel would make the most entertaining game, I fully respect that other people think and feel differently and I don't think there's any right or wrong here, just preferences, and I've made mine clear enough I think.

Stovahkiin · August 2016

No and this is why:

Distance between keeps really doesn't need to be shorter. Hell, if anything it should almost be longer, reinforcements are able to move from one keep to one being sieged plenty fast as it is, especially after you get some horse training.

NovaShadow · August 2016

No and this is why:

Come on.

PVP is in ONE zone in the entire game.

PVE has what...25 zones.

Leave Cyrodiil alone, if you don't like riding go play another game. This one clearly isn't for you.

Unsent.Soul · August 2016

Yes and here's why:

makreth wrote: »

Your arguments for me aren't strong enough to support something like that.

I agree with @Lucius_Aelius because that's what cyrodiil should be about. Not some tiny instanced pvp.

reducing the map by 20% max would not mean instanced pvp.

I'm not trying to destroy you're cyrodil. I'm not in any way mad about the size or map of cyrodil. I'm not against you nor lucius.

I'm just bringing an idea to the table. Allow yourself to contemplate it for a moment before refusing it. Reducing the size could be a change in the right direction. Try 5-10% on pts, maybe 15-20% after that. Let the streamers get involved. Allow a showcase of a smaller cyrodil and instantly provide more action without any consequences.

I'm currently playing on xbox. This may be thr main reason I share my view.

I know I could play with larger populations on PC but that's not an option.

Compare pc campaign size to xbox/ ps4. We obviously don't see the massive battles that are showcased on pc pvp quite frequently. Once in a blue moon, maybe during an emp push...

Stovahkiin · August 2016

No and this is why:

NovaShadow wrote: »

Come on.

PVP is in ONE zone in the entire game.

PVE has what...25 zones.

Leave Cyrodiil alone, if you don't like riding go play another game. This one clearly isn't for you.

Here ya go

Unsent.Soul · August 2016

Yes and here's why:

Incredible... really. The responses are captivating.

"Quit the game because I shared an opinion"

Ackwalan · August 2016

No and this is why:

It wouldn't help with lag.
Having room to hide and hunt is what some people want.
having room between keeps, makes room for tactics.
If you want close quarters combat, there is IC and choke points on the map.
Dueling and arena is coming.

Stovahkiin · August 2016

No and this is why:

Unsent.Soul wrote: »

Incredible... really. The responses are captivating.

"Quit the game because I shared an opinion"

Sooo... Lemme get this straight. You're upset because people told you that if you don't like the game, then you should leave? Umm.. Personally if I'm not happy with a game then I'm not going to keep playing (which is precisely why I no longer play this game, I'm just lurking on the forums). Not everything is always going to be tailored to your exact specification, so in my opinion if you don't like it, then yes you'd might as well go and try to find something that you do like.

Unsent.Soul · August 2016

Yes and here's why:

Stovahkiin wrote: »

Unsent.Soul wrote: »

Incredible... really. The responses are captivating.

"Quit the game because I shared an opinion"

Sooo... Lemme get this straight. You're upset because people told you that if you don't like the game, then you should leave? Umm.. Personally if I'm not happy with a game then I'm not going to keep playing (which is precisely why I no longer play this game, I'm just lurking on the forums). Not everything is always going to be tailored to your exact specification, so in my opinion if you don't like it, then yes you'd might as well go and try to find something that you do like.

Can you not read? It's clear you probably read 5-10% of what I posted.

I've never once said I was mad....

Jesus don't be so thick headed.... read.

Stovahkiin · August 2016

No and this is why:

Unsent.Soul wrote: »

Stovahkiin wrote: »

Unsent.Soul wrote: »

Incredible... really. The responses are captivating.

"Quit the game because I shared an opinion"

Sooo... Lemme get this straight. You're upset because people told you that if you don't like the game, then you should leave? Umm.. Personally if I'm not happy with a game then I'm not going to keep playing (which is precisely why I no longer play this game, I'm just lurking on the forums). Not everything is always going to be tailored to your exact specification, so in my opinion if you don't like it, then yes you'd might as well go and try to find something that you do like.

Can you not read? It's clear you probably read 5-10% of what I posted.

I've never once said I was mad....

Jesus don't be so thick headed.... read.

Quite the opposite, I did indeed read your post, more than once in fact. That was simply how I read what you posted, tone doesn't often transfer well over text, so don't just walk around getting upset and calling people thick headed when someone simply misunderstood what you wrote.

Lucius_Aelius · August 2016

No and this is why:

Unsent.Soul wrote: »

Incredible... really. The responses are captivating.

"Quit the game because I shared an opinion"

The funny thing is that you clearly said you don't mind the map size at all, and were merely trying to discuss it to see what other people thought. I can understand the argument being made to someone who doesn't like all the riding around that they might be playing the wrong game since that's largely what this one is all about, but saying that to someone who clearly says they don't mind it seems like a strange choice of argument to me.

I think one alternative might be to have waypoints allow you to automatically ride somewhere and not force you to control your character the entire time you're riding, it has some detractors and maybe wouldn't work well but it would make it less annoying I think if people could use the time riding as a breather to take a sip if coffee or smoke or whatever.

I'm not too bothered by the riding but I'd love to take a moment to catch my breath and maybe let go of the controller for a minute. You couldn't leave the room without risking being attacked and killed, so it would still force people to attend to their character and pay attention to the screen even if they put the controller down for a minute.

As it is this is a very fast-paced game with most big groups not really taking breaks, just going non-stop at full speed, so having the ability to keep playing non-stop but also take a breather at the same time could potentially be a very beneficial change I believe, at least partially satisfying people bothered by the riding without actually getting rid of it or shortening it at all.

It does get boring riding the same routes over and over, and having the game take over some of that work for you could help with that as long as it's not doing too much and still allows you to feel like you're actually riding somewhere instead of watching someone else riding somewhere. Just a random idea I had though, has lots of holes in it, I'm big with immersion for instance so if this compromised that in any way I wouldn't want it.

Unsent.Soul · August 2016

Yes and here's why:

Lucius_Aelius wrote: »

Unsent.Soul wrote: »

Incredible... really. The responses are captivating.

"Quit the game because I shared an opinion"

The funny thing is that you clearly said you don't mind the map size at all, and were merely trying to discuss it to see what other people thought. I can understand the argument being made to someone who doesn't like all the riding around that they might be playing the wrong game since that's largely what this one is all about, but saying that to someone who clearly says they don't mind it seems like a strange choice of argument to me.

I think one alternative might be to have waypoints allow you to automatically ride somewhere and not force you to control your character the entire time you're riding, it has some detractors and maybe wouldn't work well but it would make it less annoying I think if people could use the time riding as a breather to take a sip if coffee or smoke or whatever.

I'm not too bothered by the riding but I'd love to take a moment to catch my breath and maybe let go of the controller for a minute. You couldn't leave the room without risking being attacked and killed, so it would still force people to attend to their character and pay attention to the screen even if they put the controller down for a minute.

As it is this is a very fast-paced game with most big groups not really taking breaks, just going non-stop at full speed, so having the ability to keep playing non-stop but also take a breather at the same time could potentially be a very beneficial change I believe, at least partially satisfying people bothered by the riding without actually getting rid of it or shortening it at all.

It does get boring riding the same routes over and over, and having the game take over some of that work for you could help with that as long as it's not doing too much and still allows you to feel like you're actually riding somewhere instead of watching someone else riding somewhere. Just a random idea I had though, has lots of holes in it, I'm big with immersion for instance so if this compromised that in any way I wouldn't want it.

Thank you. I value the opinions made and it's not an arguement. Not every thread has to be an arguement.

I've always had this discussion with guild mates and the conversation never really goes too far. I merely posted my original quoted op in another thread purely firing from the hip.

fastolfv_ESO · August 2016

No and this is why:

it sounds like you havnt been in cyro long, when you get to fights faster it means more people in fewer places which is bad. Then reduce travel times to each keep so more is lit and its even worse. The distance currently actually helps keep one entire alliance out of each and every fight unless its something like a dethrone at one keep

Gulkrim-mur · August 2016

No and this is why:

Its fine. Use rapids until speed is ideal maube like 15% at least and youll get to kees in roughly 4mins

Ghettokid · August 2016

No and this is why:

If you dont like running long distances go to IC or play as Orc, so it wont take long. Or upgrade ur horse speed to 60, and use rapid manuever, or bow passive or quick cloak...

Ayantir · August 2016

No and this is why:

Battelgrounds are incoming in few months, let rvr as is, it's only a map objective issue, not map size.
and rapid manoeuver is your friend.

Drdeath20 · August 2016

No and this is why:

Because no matter how large or small they make the map, seiging keeps will remain the same Old repetitive game mechanic.

s_jscorpiorwb17_ESO · August 2016

Drdeath20 wrote: »

Because no matter how large or small they make the map, seiging keeps will remain the same Old repetitive game mechanic.

My thought exactly its the same because every keep.fort/castle is very much the same.

soll · August 2016

No and this is why:

No, no, no

first of all, it's not even "that big" 2 minutes between keeps. even when I was collecting all skyshards around whole map, it didn't feel that big. For the more, reducing it will make it only worse. Then steam rolled zergs can take whole map even faster, is it what you want? another thing, no one will fight on front line – you can always ride fast to enemies home keeps and take scrolls. And last – help to UA keep will come faster too. what if it's going to be a huge zerg? Now, fast sneak sige have a good chance of success. and it can play a huge role in campaign.

to conclude – only mess.

casual players complains are making no sense.

anyway, no way ZOS will change Cyro. And it's good

The Elder Scrolls Online

Proportionally reducing the map size of Cyrodiil.

Proportionally reducing the map size of Cyrodiil. 106 votes