Maintenance for the week of March 25:
• [COMPLETE] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – March 28, 9:00AM EDT (13:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EDT (16:00 UTC)

We need new campaigns

  • Alucardo
    Alucardo
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Wollust wrote: »
    Close Haderus and Spellbreaker. Make Ebony great again

    I almost forgot that was a campaign
  • Minno
    Minno
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    TBH, would any of this change without a new way to pvp? We would still have one busy campaign because players want to quickly get in and out and the battles are more easily found.

    Adding time limits to certain campaigns could be great but at that point, why waste development resources when the battlegrounds idea doesn't care if you are playing in Asia, Europe or NA from a logon perspective.

    In the end the game will fare better if we partition off pvp from Cyro entirely and make it one pve zone. They can control the performance better this way if 3 groups of 12 fight than 3 factions of 100 at one scroll. The balance between skills/classes can be controlled better too since they will have a strict environment to baseline from. And ultimately, they can create unique environments to give a fresh start to pvp.
    Edited by Minno on November 23, 2016 3:33PM
    Minno - DC - Forum-plar Extraordinaire
    - Guild-lead for MV
    - Filthy Casual
  • God_flakes
    God_flakes
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Minno wrote: »
    TBH, would any of this change without a new way to pvp? We would still have one busy campaign because players want to quickly get in and out and the battles are more easily found.

    Adding time limits to certain campaigns could be great but at that point, why waste development resources when the battlegrounds idea doesn't care if you are playing in Asia, Europe or NA from a logon perspective.

    In the end the game will fare better if we partition off pvp from Cyro entirely and make it one pve zone. They can control the performance better this way if 3 groups of 12 fight than 3 factions of 100 at one scroll. The balance between skills/classes can be controlled better too since they will have a strict environment to baseline from. And ultimately, they can create unique environments to give a fresh start to pvp.

    Idk I guess I was thinking some new campaigns would shake stuff up. Maybe some guilds would relocate so fresh meat could engage. I think a lot of people are sick of fighting the same names, who use the same tactics, night after night.
  • Sallington
    Sallington
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭
    WTB 8 hour campaign.

    EDIT: Map resets, everyone gets ported to alliance bases at campaign end.
    Edited by Sallington on November 23, 2016 8:17PM
    Daggerfall Covenant
    Sallington - Templar - Stormproof - Prefect II
    Cobham - Sorcerer - Stormproof - First Sergeant II
    Shallington - NightBlade - Lieutenant |
    Balmorah - Templar - Sergeant ||
  • God_flakes
    God_flakes
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    We have one active campaign and 3 dead campaigns . Why would we need more ? It would just end up a 5th buff server .

    Maybe I wasn't CLEAR enough for you. What I meant was get rid of the current campaigns and implement some new ones with new names and different lengths.
  • Vitaely
    Vitaely
    ✭✭✭
    Get rid of the "resources-only" style campaigns, it doesn't really make much of a difference in how people play the map.
    Reduce population caps (around 3 bars) -> it's better to have good performance than lag against 60+ players
    Remove IC from all or some larger campaigns and make its own campaign.

    CP :
    30-day campaign (full-time)
    30/90-day campaign (8 hours NA/EU primetime)
    7-day campaign (full-time, normal scoring)
    IC-only campaign (Accessible through sewer doors in other campaigns or by the Alliance page. No AvAvA scoring.)
    Battlegrounds. (Nuff said tyvm.)

    No CP :
    30-day campaign
    Also suggested: Another campaign where all players have max CP (7/30 days)
    Also suggested: Remove BWB to increase participation in no-CP campaigns. They serve the same purpose.

    These might answer the needs of many different types of players.
    Edited by Vitaely on November 23, 2016 8:49PM
    Factotum | PC NA
    AD E'lurin sNB | Curufinwë Fëanor mDK | Anaïs Le Fey mSC | Fréyja mT | Nïenna mW
    EP E'lured sNB | Vanÿa sT | Caïssä mDK
    DC E'lwing mNB
    PVE Brýnhildur mDK | E'lectra sSC | Antígone sDK | Valkýrja mNB | Yølanda sW
  • God_flakes
    God_flakes
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Vitaely wrote: »
    Get rid of the "resources-only" style campaigns, it doesn't really make much of a difference in how people play the map.
    Reduce population caps (around 3 bars) -> it's better to have good performance then lag cancer against 60+ players
    Remove IC from all campaigns and make its own campaign.


    CP :
    30-day campaign (full-time)
    30/90-day campaign (8 hours NA/EU primetime)
    7-day campaign (full-time, normal scoring)

    IC-only campaign (Accessible through sewer doors in other campaigns or by the Alliance page)

    Battlegrounds. (Nuff said tyvm.)

    No CP :
    30-day campaign
    Also suggested: Another campaign where all players have max CP (7/30 days)
    Also suggested: Remove BWB to increase participation in no-CP campaigns. They serve the same purpose.

    These might answer the needs of many different players.

    Sounds good!
  • RadioheadSh0t
    RadioheadSh0t
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Can we just get Battlegrounds already?

    They keep saying they're working on them, but that's Soon(TM) with #NoETA.

    There has been no PvP update throughout the game's history. The closest we've gotten was a dueling system, but that's not what I'm holding out hope for.

    Instanced PvP is what could save PvP in this game, if they implement it correctly. And the toughest part of waiting for it is imagining how good it could be.
    Aldonius Direnni - Vet Altmer Sorc (AD)
    Tyrus Telvanni - Vet Dunmer DK (AD)
    Al Donius Bundy - Vet Imperial NB (AD)
    Aldonius Brutus - Vet Orc DK (DC)
  • IxSTALKERxI
    IxSTALKERxI
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭
    Maybe our favourite developer @ZOS_BrianWheeler can help shed some light on the situation. :smiley:

    Have you been monitoring the influx of players during primetime hours, in particular on Friday & Saturday nights, and the queues on Trueflame as a lot of players make an effort to play on Trueflame rather than other campaigns?

    Have you been monitoring server performance during these times?

    Would a prime time restricted campaign be possible to implement from a development standpoint?

    If yes, has it ever been discussed internally? Are there reasons as to why it's a bad idea?

    Have you received any feedback on the unique Haderus scoring system? Do people actually like it?

    Have you thought of ways to increase the competitiveness on campaigns other than Trueflame?

    Are there still plans on separating Cyrodiil/IC population?

    Edited by IxSTALKERxI on November 24, 2016 1:11AM
    NA | PC | Aldmeri Dominion
    Laser Eyes AR 26 Arcanist | Stalker V AR 41 Warden | I Stalker I AR 42 NB | Stalkersaurus AR 31 Templar | Stalker Ill AR 31 Sorc | Nigel the Great of Blackwater
    Former Emperor x11 campaign cycles
    Venatus Officer | RIP RÁGE | YouTube Channel
  • Rohamad_Ali
    Rohamad_Ali
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    God_flakes wrote: »
    We have one active campaign and 3 dead campaigns . Why would we need more ? It would just end up a 5th buff server .

    Maybe I wasn't CLEAR enough for you. What I meant was get rid of the current campaigns and implement some new ones with new names and different lengths.

    What names and what length are you suggesting ?
  • Sallington
    Sallington
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭
    What's going to stop pre-mades all running proc sets and EotS (or whatever the current meta is) from rolling the opposing team? Any problems from overland PvP are just going to get condensed into a battleground.

    People keep screaming battleground, but I'd rather they just keep working on balancing on performance improvements.

    Daggerfall Covenant
    Sallington - Templar - Stormproof - Prefect II
    Cobham - Sorcerer - Stormproof - First Sergeant II
    Shallington - NightBlade - Lieutenant |
    Balmorah - Templar - Sergeant ||
  • God_flakes
    God_flakes
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    God_flakes wrote: »
    We have one active campaign and 3 dead campaigns . Why would we need more ? It would just end up a 5th buff server .

    Maybe I wasn't CLEAR enough for you. What I meant was get rid of the current campaigns and implement some new ones with new names and different lengths.

    What names and what length are you suggesting ?

    Since I'm not a creative developer at Zos, my name suggestions aren't relevant. But Zos has done this before so there IS precedent-Thornblade is a thing of the past because they canned the campaign and renamed it. It did change the dynamic and a lot of the guilds swapped campaigns and spread their wings in other places. As far as lengths, I like the ideas suggested of 90 day and 8 hour and instanced campaigns/pvp.
  • Rohamad_Ali
    Rohamad_Ali
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    God_flakes wrote: »
    God_flakes wrote: »
    We have one active campaign and 3 dead campaigns . Why would we need more ? It would just end up a 5th buff server .

    Maybe I wasn't CLEAR enough for you. What I meant was get rid of the current campaigns and implement some new ones with new names and different lengths.

    What names and what length are you suggesting ?

    Since I'm not a creative developer at Zos, my name suggestions aren't relevant. But Zos has done this before so there IS precedent-Thornblade is a thing of the past because they canned the campaign and renamed it. It did change the dynamic and a lot of the guilds swapped campaigns and spread their wings in other places. As far as lengths, I like the ideas suggested of 90 day and 8 hour and instanced campaigns/pvp.

    3 months is a long time . I would hope the reward would be something amazing to keep people engaged . The 8 hour campaign sounds like an extended battlefield more then a campaign , not sure if I am Interested in that or not , maybe . Good luck getting your suggestions .

    A weekend campaign being Friday afternoon till Monday morning 12am GMT , the hours the golden vendor are up would be something I would be engaged in . The reward being a golden vendor item in the mail . That sounds more exciting to me personally .
  • God_flakes
    God_flakes
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    God_flakes wrote: »
    God_flakes wrote: »
    We have one active campaign and 3 dead campaigns . Why would we need more ? It would just end up a 5th buff server .

    Maybe I wasn't CLEAR enough for you. What I meant was get rid of the current campaigns and implement some new ones with new names and different lengths.

    What names and what length are you suggesting ?

    Since I'm not a creative developer at Zos, my name suggestions aren't relevant. But Zos has done this before so there IS precedent-Thornblade is a thing of the past because they canned the campaign and renamed it. It did change the dynamic and a lot of the guilds swapped campaigns and spread their wings in other places. As far as lengths, I like the ideas suggested of 90 day and 8 hour and instanced campaigns/pvp.

    3 months is a long time . I would hope the reward would be something amazing to keep people engaged . The 8 hour campaign sounds like an extended battlefield more then a campaign , not sure if I am Interested in that or not , maybe . Good luck getting your suggestions .

    A weekend campaign being Friday afternoon till Monday morning 12am GMT , the hours the golden vendor are up would be something I would be engaged in . The reward being a golden vendor item in the mail . That sounds more exciting to me personally .

    I like weekend campaigns, too. See? Change is good. I just merely feel TB is stale and "played". We've all worn some serious tracks across that campaign. I also think BWB needs to go as Azura fits the needs of those not ready for vet campaigns.
  • Kartalin
    Kartalin
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭
    The problem is almost everyone wants to play in the "main" campaign. Whether they crave the constant action or are afraid of being exposed outside of their zerg, that's what is happening.

    For guilds like ours that has run 4-12 person groups lately it's not really ideal to play on TF, and we much prefer the no-cp campaign where people have to actually be concerned such strange concepts like sustain.

    The problem is always an issue of getting players to spread out, and simply having more campaigns doesn't address that issue. If a major guild from each faction rehomed to a different server, eventually the potatoes would figure it out and follow suit. We've talked about having lower population caps in the past but it sounds like people already regularly accept 80+ queues. As others have said we basically just need battlegrounds soon(tm).
    • PC/NA
    • Karllotta, AD Magplar, AR 50
    • Hatched-In-Glacier, DC Magden, AR 44
    • Miraliys, EP Warden, AR 35
    • Kartalin, AD Stamblade, AR 35
    • Kallenna, AD Magcro, AR 34
    • Miralys, EP Magsorc, AR 34
    • Milthalas, EP Magblade, AR 34
    • Lemon Party - Meanest Girls - @ Kartalin - Youtube
  • God_flakes
    God_flakes
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Kartalin wrote: »
    The problem is almost everyone wants to play in the "main" campaign. Whether they crave the constant action or are afraid of being exposed outside of their zerg, that's what is happening.

    For guilds like ours that has run 4-12 person groups lately it's not really ideal to play on TF, and we much prefer the no-cp campaign where people have to actually be concerned such strange concepts like sustain.

    The problem is always an issue of getting players to spread out, and simply having more campaigns doesn't address that issue. If a major guild from each faction rehomed to a different server, eventually the potatoes would figure it out and follow suit. We've talked about having lower population caps in the past but it sounds like people already regularly accept 80+ queues. As others have said we basically just need battlegrounds soon(tm).

    Again, I didn't ask for more campaigns. I asked for NEW.
  • vamp_emily
    vamp_emily
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭
    I agree we need guild vs guild vs guild because I get tired of the 3 bars vs 1 bar campaigns. Also, I get tired of players not working together. Some leaders will grab the entire pop in low pop campaigns and take them to one of the outer keeps when another alliance is getting ready to cap the last keep for Emp.

    I personally think they need to get rid of BwB that way you will see AS and Haderus be more evenly populated or even poplocked.

    But I would love to see GvGvG instances of campaigns.

    edit: Also I would like them to get rid of the flip flopping to different alliances. Pick an alliance and stick with it.


    Edited by vamp_emily on November 24, 2016 2:31PM

    If you want a friend, get a dog.
    AW Rank: Grand Warlord 1 ( level 49)

  • Kartalin
    Kartalin
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭
    God_flakes wrote: »
    Kartalin wrote: »
    The problem is almost everyone wants to play in the "main" campaign. Whether they crave the constant action or are afraid of being exposed outside of their zerg, that's what is happening.

    For guilds like ours that has run 4-12 person groups lately it's not really ideal to play on TF, and we much prefer the no-cp campaign where people have to actually be concerned such strange concepts like sustain.

    The problem is always an issue of getting players to spread out, and simply having more campaigns doesn't address that issue. If a major guild from each faction rehomed to a different server, eventually the potatoes would figure it out and follow suit. We've talked about having lower population caps in the past but it sounds like people already regularly accept 80+ queues. As others have said we basically just need battlegrounds soon(tm).

    Again, I didn't ask for more campaigns. I asked for NEW.
    Ahh, I see what you're saying now. But the bads will still figure out where the main guilds are playing eventually and ride their coat tails once again.
    • PC/NA
    • Karllotta, AD Magplar, AR 50
    • Hatched-In-Glacier, DC Magden, AR 44
    • Miraliys, EP Warden, AR 35
    • Kartalin, AD Stamblade, AR 35
    • Kallenna, AD Magcro, AR 34
    • Miralys, EP Magsorc, AR 34
    • Milthalas, EP Magblade, AR 34
    • Lemon Party - Meanest Girls - @ Kartalin - Youtube
  • God_flakes
    God_flakes
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Kartalin wrote: »
    God_flakes wrote: »
    Kartalin wrote: »
    The problem is almost everyone wants to play in the "main" campaign. Whether they crave the constant action or are afraid of being exposed outside of their zerg, that's what is happening.

    For guilds like ours that has run 4-12 person groups lately it's not really ideal to play on TF, and we much prefer the no-cp campaign where people have to actually be concerned such strange concepts like sustain.

    The problem is always an issue of getting players to spread out, and simply having more campaigns doesn't address that issue. If a major guild from each faction rehomed to a different server, eventually the potatoes would figure it out and follow suit. We've talked about having lower population caps in the past but it sounds like people already regularly accept 80+ queues. As others have said we basically just need battlegrounds soon(tm).

    Again, I didn't ask for more campaigns. I asked for NEW.
    Ahh, I see what you're saying now. But the bads will still figure out where the main guilds are playing eventually and ride their coat tails once again.

    But at least for a little while there might be some pvp balance and health. Remember after the TB exodus? Azura and Haderus were actually fun campaigns for a few months. Maybe I am wishful thinking too much. :disappointed:
  • God_flakes
    God_flakes
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    vamp_emily wrote: »
    I agree we need guild vs guild vs guild because I get tired of the 3 bars vs 1 bar campaigns. Also, I get tired of players not working together. Some leaders will grab the entire pop in low pop campaigns and take them to one of the outer keeps when another alliance is getting ready to cap the last keep for Emp.

    I personally think they need to get rid of BwB that way you will see AS and Haderus be more evenly populated or even poplocked.

    But I would love to see GvGvG instances of campaigns.

    edit: Also I would like them to get rid of the flip flopping to different alliances. Pick an alliance and stick with it.


    Scrapping BWB seems to be a general consensus with people I talk to. It really is an unnecessary campaign
  • asneakybanana
    asneakybanana
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    God_flakes wrote: »
    AzuraKin wrote: »
    rofl you already have a test on focus on a 30 day campaign. you can make 1m ap in 1 week without even pushing for it. that means 4m ap in a 30 day campaign. that position 4 on average on leaderboards. and that without requiring to be a good player, just an active one.

    Who cares about ap?!? I'm a filthy mediocre casual and I'm sitting my pretty butt on millions! Nothing to spend it on. :disappointed:

    We need to care about the campaign again. Nobody cares about TF anymore, it's obvious. We need a campaign shake up.

    Honestly no one on NA has really cared about campaigns since thornblade died. After that everyone said well we don't really want to go to hard on the campaign because the other faction will swap campaigns. Has been proven again and again.

    Also ap is really the only measure of how your group is performing. Not so much how much you make in a campaign but your average ap/hr. I personally feel that's one of the best way to judge the quality of a group due to how ap works, the more people in group the less ap you make so even if you almost never die but you're running around with 60 people and making 25k ap/hr I would say you're not performing nearly as good as an 8-12 man that's making 75k ap/hr. Sure that 12 man might get wiped from time to time you are far out performing what that 60 man group would be doing if they only had 12. This could also count towards a solo player. If that solo player is killing a lot of people before he dies and getting 1-2k ap per kill then he's going to be doing similar ap/hr to what an organized group is doing. So all in all I feel like ap/hr is a pretty good gauge for how a group is performing imo.
    Asneakybanana AD DK Former emperor of Chrysamere and Chillrend. World first hardmode Hel'ra and Quake con winner (Alliance rank 25)
    Asneakyhabenero EP DK Former emperor of Thornblade, Haderus. World first vMA Dk clear (Alliance rank 39)
    Asneakycucumber EP Sorc Former empress of Blackwater Bay and Trueflame (Alliance rank 32)
    Asneakypineapple EP Temp Former empress of Azuras Star and Haderus (Alliance rank 22)
    Asneakypickle EP NB Former empress of Trueflame (Alliance rank 47)
    Sweat Squad
    Crowned 27x on 12 different campaign cycles | 200M+ AP earned
    Fastest AA clear ever: 5:42 | Fastest HRC clear ever: 5:27 | NA first HM MoL
    609k Mag Sorc vMA
    NA first Tick Tock Tormentor
    NA first trinity (All No Death/HM/Speed run trials titles)
    2x Tick Tock Tormentor
  • God_flakes
    God_flakes
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    God_flakes wrote: »
    AzuraKin wrote: »
    rofl you already have a test on focus on a 30 day campaign. you can make 1m ap in 1 week without even pushing for it. that means 4m ap in a 30 day campaign. that position 4 on average on leaderboards. and that without requiring to be a good player, just an active one.

    Who cares about ap?!? I'm a filthy mediocre casual and I'm sitting my pretty butt on millions! Nothing to spend it on. :disappointed:

    We need to care about the campaign again. Nobody cares about TF anymore, it's obvious. We need a campaign shake up.

    Honestly no one on NA has really cared about campaigns since thornblade died. After that everyone said well we don't really want to go to hard on the campaign because the other faction will swap campaigns. Has been proven again and again.

    Also ap is really the only measure of how your group is performing. Not so much how much you make in a campaign but your average ap/hr. I personally feel that's one of the best way to judge the quality of a group due to how ap works, the more people in group the less ap you make so even if you almost never die but you're running around with 60 people and making 25k ap/hr I would say you're not performing nearly as good as an 8-12 man that's making 75k ap/hr. Sure that 12 man might get wiped from time to time you are far out performing what that 60 man group would be doing if they only had 12. This could also count towards a solo player. If that solo player is killing a lot of people before he dies and getting 1-2k ap per kill then he's going to be doing similar ap/hr to what an organized group is doing. So all in all I feel like ap/hr is a pretty good gauge for how a group is performing imo.

    Agree with all you've said. My point was, good fights don't always=earning lots of ap. And lots of ap doesn't always mean good fun fights. I play to have fun anymore, not necessarily to earn ap.
  • pcar944
    pcar944
    ✭✭✭✭
    cause lord knows there's a lot we can spend our AP on .. right ... Right? ... RIGHT ?!?
    One Tamriel killed PVP

    DC Magicka Orc Necromancer climbing those ranks ...
  • RadioheadSh0t
    RadioheadSh0t
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    WTB Dawnbreaker 2.0
    Aldonius Direnni - Vet Altmer Sorc (AD)
    Tyrus Telvanni - Vet Dunmer DK (AD)
    Al Donius Bundy - Vet Imperial NB (AD)
    Aldonius Brutus - Vet Orc DK (DC)
  • Rohamad_Ali
    Rohamad_Ali
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    WTB Dawnbreaker 2.0

    Wabbajack
  • NACtron
    NACtron
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Would this game really need is more guilds. More guilds means more unique opponents. It also means it is easier to fill and balance other campaign. On PC/NA TF there are only enough guilds to truly balance one campaign.
    Pact Militia GM
    Nikolai the Nord - Stamplar

Sign In or Register to comment.