Introduction
My opinion is that the Iron Wheel guild story line and skill line should come as an extension of the Dark Brotherhood DLC, since it is lacking true endgame content. It is ultimately to ZOS to look at the revenue of each particular DLC, and decide whether they will upgrade some of the past DLC, or sell it as a part of a new DLC.
I am using names like Outlaw, Enforcer, the Iron Wheel guild, Prison etc. as general terms that most forum users will recognize and understand instantly. That does not mean some other names could not be given that are more appropriate.Enforcer activities
- There is an extensive Iron Wheel storyline, during which you will encounter many new NPC characters, along with some TG and DB NPCs like Walks Softly, Silver Claw, Kor and Hildegard.
- Certain repeatable quests send the Enforcer in search of missing persons (NPCs) or wanted criminals (NPCs) that the Enforcer must find with vague descriptions and sketches. Note: some of those NPCs will turn aggressive when interacted with. Finding two or three missing persons before handing in will grant better rewards.
- There are also different kinds of repeatable quests called "Community Service" quests. Those include anything from escorting Merchants, delivering crafting crates, finding lost pets and other.
I hope you can see our proposals are not that dissimilar. The only difference is that I propose adding PvP options alongside it.
So is that a YES, adding the content i describe would cause you outrage maybe to straw break levels if it was not paired with a PVP justice inclusion?
Yes, that is exactly what I am saying.
And not just a maybe, I would definitely quit the game if that were to happen.
Now, let's turn that around.
Let's say you get exactly the kind of PvE update you propose.
Is there any reason why it should not be paired with the PvP concept that is proposed here?
Remember, it is fully optional for both sides, and consentual.
MercyKilling wrote: »
Remember, it is fully optional for both sides, and consentual.
So what happens when nobody opts in to this proposed sytem, or the numbers are so unfairly balanced, it kills said system?
No, far better to just work on a non-PvP solution to a botched attempt. I'd even go so far as to say scrap the entire thing and start over, from scratch.
See, the exact same thing is going on about Open space and solo play in this other game. Those in the one mode of play (the PvP mode) are not finding anyone to pick on except other people wanting combat and in combat oriented builds. The non-combat oriented people are puttering about with their non-combat builds in non-combat places while the PvP crowd literally foams at the mouth wanting to somehow get those people out of solo play AND FORCE THEM INTO GAME PLAY THEY DO NOT WANT.
Guaranteed that'll happen here. It's not just isolated incidents in another game. When your "consensual PvP" idea comes up against the concept that nobody wants open world PvP going on around them, it completely shatters. Then it won't be long until people are up in arms about forcing those opting out to opt in. Enticing them. Making uneven and imbalanced gameplay for choosing to opt out of combat.
Long story short, not just no, but h-e-double hockey sticks no.
They might have as well ditched Dueling because someone in the dev team said:
"But what if nobody duels?"
"Yeah, you're right, let's not risk that!"
A compromise means that you have to be willing to give up something too. No changes for opt out players isn't giving up a thing. A complete unwillingness to compromise at all.
You can be a condescending as you want about players not liking npcs being murdered in front of them or bodies lying in the street. Your gaming experience isn't more important then anyone else's.
The justice system is flawed and incomplete.
A compromise means that you have to be willing to give up something too. No changes for opt out players isn't giving up a thing. A complete unwillingness to compromise at all.
You can be a condescending as you want about players not liking npcs being murdered in front of them or bodies lying in the street. Your gaming experience isn't more important then anyone else's.
The justice system is flawed and incomplete.
It can fairly be argued that accepting the principle of PvP being added to PvE content in PvE areas is a pretty big compromise in the first place for those who believe PvP should be kept in the PvP zones. It's proponents conceding the need for it to be optional is simply matching that compromise.
A compromise means that you have to be willing to give up something too. No changes for opt out players isn't giving up a thing. A complete unwillingness to compromise at all.
You can be a condescending as you want about players not liking npcs being murdered in front of them or bodies lying in the street. Your gaming experience isn't more important then anyone else's.
The justice system is flawed and incomplete.
It can fairly be argued that accepting the principle of PvP being added to PvE content in PvE areas is a pretty big compromise in the first place for those who believe PvP should be kept in the PvP zones. It's proponents conceding the need for it to be optional is simply matching that compromise.
I either have a serious disagreement here or i dont.
if you mean allowing even if opt-in to decline a specific duel vs a specific person - then yeah i can see that as a compromise on the pvper side because it allows the PVP player to dabble with friends and not be exposed to others.
if you mean the opt-out totally setting, no, not a compromise on the pvp side but a basic starting core principle.
...
Once both those points are conceded, we can all have a meaningful discussion about the best way of implementing any such changes, but that's prevented from happening in most of these threads because while one side is prepared to make the compromise of having PvP in PvE areas the other side won't make the compromise of having that change made purely optional in an unconditional way.
...
I have not seen any PVP justice system which allows you to choose to ignore *as an opted in player* a given specific individual without significant consequences. (except the CJP outline i presented.) So that means by opt-ing-in I automatically open myself to either directly play with another player i have cause to not want to be involved with. There is no dueling opt-in but decline a specific duel request equivalent in this or the other pvp justice proposals i am aware of outside of CJP. There is no "I'll take my chances with the guards, not you" option to turn down someone who you feel you dont want to play with.
Outlaw rewardsBahraha's Curse
Syvarra's Scales
Shadow Dancer
Darkstride
Night Mother
Stygian
Sithis' Touch
[/list]
Enforcer rewardsBahraha's Curse
Syvarra's Scales
Magicka Furnace
Fiord's Legacy
Prisoner's Rags
AkatoshMeridia's Blessed Armor
Jyggalag's Order (new*)
[/list]Jyggalag's Order
This set comes in any weight.
2 piece bonus: adds Magicka regeneration
3 piece bonus: adds 4% healing taken
4 piece bonus: adds maximum Health
5 piece bonus: Jyggalag's Blessing
Immunity duration after using Break Free increased by 3 seconds.
When breaking free from a Fugitive effect, gain Major Expedition and Major Berserk for 4 seconds.
I can't really comment at this stage in that respect. Until One Tamriel launches I haven't been able to do the relevant DLC content because the only character I have at level 50 is a holy paladin type templar who is not doing the Thieves Guild or Dark Brotherhood, and my assassin nightblade and other more suitable characters are at levels where doing the DLC content would result in them being ridiculously over-leveled when returning to the base content. I don't therefore have enough knowledge or experience of those DLCs to know how their PvE content would be impacted by your tying them into the PvP element of the Justice System. That will of course change with One Tamriel and I anticipate my assassin nightblade in particular trying out those DLCs shortly.
In the meantime, however, it is clear that your proposals are very tied in with DLCs that I haven't done and can't comment on, and indeed researching the implications of your proposals would in any event involve my being hit by a lot of spoilers for content I haven't yet done. Naturally I want to avoid that!
It was certainly always my belief and hope that those two guilds should be a central part of the Justice System but I only ever saw them as providing PvE improvements to the Justice System rather than contributing to the PvP open world "creep" (by which I mean its gradual spread beyond Cyrodiil and Imperial City) that we are seeing already with dueling. As a principle, therefore, I would much prefer to approach improvements to the Justice System from a PvE point of view and then see how that could (if then deemed still to be needed) be extended consensually to include some PvP elements - rather than ignoring the obvious PvE tie-in between the Justice System and the TG and DB guilds and aiming purely for PvP changes to the Justice System no matter the assurances that they didn't impact on the PvE content.
I have not seen any PVP justice system which allows you to choose to ignore *as an opted in player* a given specific individual without significant consequences. (except the CJP outline i presented.) So that means by opt-ing-in I automatically open myself to either directly play with another player i have cause to not want to be involved with. There is no dueling opt-in but decline a specific duel request equivalent in this or the other pvp justice proposals i am aware of outside of CJP. There is no "I'll take my chances with the guards, not you" option to turn down someone who you feel you dont want to play with.
I completely disagree with what you say here.
You accept all and any risk by opting yourself for PvP Justice.
There would be no sense in opting in if you could still "decline" an Enforcer interaction. This is not in any way different than being opted out.
Besides, you cannot choose which players you will fight when you enter Cyrodiil. You willingly took the risk by entering a PvP area, you need to take responsibility and not expect the game to hold your hand every step of the way.
The same applies when you opt-in for PvP Justice.
You don't want to be involved? Opt out and play purely PvE.
Simple.
Daemons_Bane wrote: »
I have not seen any PVP justice system which allows you to choose to ignore *as an opted in player* a given specific individual without significant consequences. (except the CJP outline i presented.) So that means by opt-ing-in I automatically open myself to either directly play with another player i have cause to not want to be involved with. There is no dueling opt-in but decline a specific duel request equivalent in this or the other pvp justice proposals i am aware of outside of CJP. There is no "I'll take my chances with the guards, not you" option to turn down someone who you feel you dont want to play with.
I completely disagree with what you say here.
You accept all and any risk by opting yourself for PvP Justice.
There would be no sense in opting in if you could still "decline" an Enforcer interaction. This is not in any way different than being opted out.
Besides, you cannot choose which players you will fight when you enter Cyrodiil. You willingly took the risk by entering a PvP area, you need to take responsibility and not expect the game to hold your hand every step of the way.
The same applies when you opt-in for PvP Justice.
You don't want to be involved? Opt out and play purely PvE.
Simple.
I agree here.. If you voluntarily sign up for the multiplayer justice part, you are in for the whole package.. Any player joining PvP knows this, and should expect it to be so
I can't really comment at this stage in that respect. Until One Tamriel launches I haven't been able to do the relevant DLC content because the only character I have at level 50 is a holy paladin type templar who is not doing the Thieves Guild or Dark Brotherhood, and my assassin nightblade and other more suitable characters are at levels where doing the DLC content would result in them being ridiculously over-leveled when returning to the base content. I don't therefore have enough knowledge or experience of those DLCs to know how their PvE content would be impacted by your tying them into the PvP element of the Justice System. That will of course change with One Tamriel and I anticipate my assassin nightblade in particular trying out those DLCs shortly.
In the meantime, however, it is clear that your proposals are very tied in with DLCs that I haven't done and can't comment on, and indeed researching the implications of your proposals would in any event involve my being hit by a lot of spoilers for content I haven't yet done. Naturally I want to avoid that!
It was certainly always my belief and hope that those two guilds should be a central part of the Justice System but I only ever saw them as providing PvE improvements to the Justice System rather than contributing to the PvP open world "creep" (by which I mean its gradual spread beyond Cyrodiil and Imperial City) that we are seeing already with dueling. As a principle, therefore, I would much prefer to approach improvements to the Justice System from a PvE point of view and then see how that could (if then deemed still to be needed) be extended consensually to include some PvP elements - rather than ignoring the obvious PvE tie-in between the Justice System and the TG and DB guilds and aiming purely for PvP changes to the Justice System no matter the assurances that they didn't impact on the PvE content.
Apart from the "Becoming an Enforcer" section where there are tiny spoilers in the starting quests of both DB and TG, there is nothing in here to be worried about, really.
Also, it is quite interesting to realize you haven't even read the concept so far, but you manage to input some feedback regardless.
So far I came to an understanding that both you and STEVIL agree that the current (PvE) Justice System needs improvements.
I made some PvE suggestions, but decided to abandon them completely because they were only used as counter arguments for the implementation of the PvP part.
I'll leave any and all suggestions that touch on the PvE (opt-out) part of the Justice System and Enforcer storyline to you, STEVIL, the devs or anyone else for that matter.
What I am interested about is the feedback about this concept, in it's current form where it is completely optional and it does not impose on players that don't want to PvP.
Is there any reason why there should not be a PvP addition to the PvE Justice system in any current of future form?
Daemons_Bane wrote: »
I have not seen any PVP justice system which allows you to choose to ignore *as an opted in player* a given specific individual without significant consequences. (except the CJP outline i presented.) So that means by opt-ing-in I automatically open myself to either directly play with another player i have cause to not want to be involved with. There is no dueling opt-in but decline a specific duel request equivalent in this or the other pvp justice proposals i am aware of outside of CJP. There is no "I'll take my chances with the guards, not you" option to turn down someone who you feel you dont want to play with.
I completely disagree with what you say here.
You accept all and any risk by opting yourself for PvP Justice.
There would be no sense in opting in if you could still "decline" an Enforcer interaction. This is not in any way different than being opted out.
Besides, you cannot choose which players you will fight when you enter Cyrodiil. You willingly took the risk by entering a PvP area, you need to take responsibility and not expect the game to hold your hand every step of the way.
The same applies when you opt-in for PvP Justice.
You don't want to be involved? Opt out and play purely PvE.
Simple.
I agree here.. If you voluntarily sign up for the multiplayer justice part, you are in for the whole package.. Any player joining PvP knows this, and should expect it to be so
I agree with that too. As I understood it, however, the point @STEVIL was making was that it isn't the way it works in dueling where you can opt in for dueling but still have control over which duels you accept. I can imagine a situation in the Justice System where you could opt in to the PvP as a criminal but get constantly harrassed by an enforcer who constantly follows you around and - assuming you can't defeat him - that could conceivably lead to a situation in which you're happy to face enforcers but not that particular one because he's just after a cheap kill time and time again. That's the only justification I could see for having the same opting arrangements that dueling has, but it's of no consequence to me as I don't PvP.
My point was that when looking at how each implementation works to bring in players or drive them off, dueling with its broad opt-in AND then a per request decline will have more appeal than the usual all-in pvp style being carried forth here in pvp justice.
We already had one player just yesterday am it to intentionally doing things to annoy pve justice players to drive them away and even counting kills. When zos loops at metrics to assess players interested, harass reports likely will play a role unless they can allow you to be selective as dueling does.
Telling the players concerned over harassment that they must play one on one with their harassed if they opt-in means fewer would play.
But hey maybe the audience is so big they don't need to worry with it.
Their data guys prolly already figured it for tham.
Outdated rant, this has been changed.AmberLaTerra wrote: »This system is still 100% broken as it still gives the enforcer first strike assured.
"an Outlaw that can be attacked"?OK lets go with an example of how broken this it. My Khajiit NB is an enforcer. I see an outlaw who can be attacked. I attack. Incap strike freezes the outlaw. Rapid Strikes procs my Veldriths, Red Mountian, and Vpiers. Outlaw dead. 9 seconds later I can insta kill another outlaw.
This is not PVP Justice, it is PVP Ganking
Once again, although Outlaws have the upper hand now because they can first strike, the only eligible targets are Enforcers that marked themselves as "On-Duty". Again, hardly an unsuspecting target, those Enforcers should not opt in for PvP if they are not prepared to get jumped on.And reversing as you did in the last post just makes it outlaw Ganking the enforcers. Still completely broken.
You obviously missed a few details from the proposal I wrote.Name one class that can survive 54k proc damage along with the damage from incap and rapid strikes. After all this is not in Cyro there is no battle spirit halving my damage.
In the end no matter what concept you come up with for PVP Justice that is what it will boil down to instant kill ganks by one side or the other. That is why it will never work, in less of course your answer is to outlaw solo justice play in which case I guess we can just delete the thieves guild and DB DLC's people bought as they will their solo quests and storylines will be banned.
AmberLaTerra wrote: »And proc sets still one hit regardless of any statement about being ready. People in Cyrodiil and IC are ready for PVP and still get ganked.
You obviously do not PVP much if you do not understand that very basic exists in mass there, and this system would just bring it outside Cyro and have no impact other then easy kills for one side or the other as it is made.
Once again it comes down to not a lack of reading on a part of a critic of yours but a complete lack of even understanding the concept of how PVP in this game actually works, and how your carefully crafted system will lead to nothing more then stealthed enforcers ganking Outlaws the moment they get marketed for PVP or stealthed outlaws ganking enforcers the moment they mark themselves "on duty".
Those are simply the logical facts of what such a system will boil down to in the end. One side or the other simply griefing the opposite side with quick strikes from stealth to kill them.
In the end a system like that makes justice PVP even more pointless then not having it at all. Then again of course you did say earlier in this thread camping is rare in Cyro, when the bridges are almost constantly camped in less one alliance has the keeps on both sides of the bridge as they are choke points and can only be passed when the campers are cleared. Also proving how little you PVP to know how it works in this game.
To actually believe the ganking meta is just going to vanish and not be the core of justice PVP without serious terms on how it works much like dueling has is like pigs will fly.
Not to mention how much advantage you want to give Enforces over outlaws with higher damage mitigation and any other way that the you can to keep the balance in their favor skill advantages that make there combat better to OP reward potions and ways of detecting outlaws well beyond the current ways they can be detected.
The deck is stacked against the outlaw in every respect enough so to making ganking their only option to attempt to even the playing field.
Opted in players can only be killed-on-sight in two ways:
- attacking a Guard or Enforcer (yes, only the Outlaws have the first strike now)
- choosing to "flee" a Guard or Enforcer
I_killed_Vivec wrote: »Opted in players can only be killed-on-sight in two ways:
- attacking a Guard or Enforcer (yes, only the Outlaws have the first strike now)
- choosing to "flee" a Guard or Enforcer
Are the guards invincible? Because it doesn't sound much fun if you attempt to flee from a guard only to find yourself battling an invincible guard and a ganking enforcer.
If they aren't invincible then there will be squads of ruffians killing off the guards before going on a murder spree!
Now, how does that affect non-PvP justice players? Will there be no guards because the PvP justice players killed them all? Or will there be invincible guards? But that brings us back to the first problem - PvP justice with invincible guards doing all the work while "enforcers" stand around waiting to finish someone off...
So... invincible guards, or not?
Becoming an Outlaw
- Wanted Outlaws are able to damage and kill Guards.
I boosted the damage preventing passives:
- Scales of Pitiless Justice DB passive now additionally reduce damage taken from Enforcers by 5/10/15/2020/30/40/50%.
- Unyielding Guard passive reduces damage taken from Wanted Outlaw players by 10/20/30/4015/30/45/60%.
This is to compensate at least a bit for not having the 5000 Health bonus from the Battle Spirit buff.
If you have any other suggestions, I'd like to hear them.