Emperor New Rule

geonsocal · December 2016

Elladan_Eloheimik wrote: »

geonsocal wrote: »

Elladan_Eloheimik wrote: »

ZOS_AntonioP wrote: »

, please consider thinking your comments through,

LOL....ZOS does have a sense of humor. Awesome.

@Elladan_Eloheimik, we'll hey look at that - you now have 3 stars...very well deserved, really enjoyed reading through some of your other threads...

keep up the great work, and most importantly - keep being you

Thanks! LOL...I don't even know what it means to have 3 stars. I will have to look into that.

nice pic sir

NBrookus · December 2016

Elladan_Eloheimik wrote: »

Each time EMP is killed, he/she/it loses 10% current campaign AP to killing player and counts on leaderboard.

Your thoughts?

1) Encourages timid wall-sitting emps. I.E. bad ones.
2) Encourages griefing: i.e. bringing a cross-faction zerg to hunt the emp to bump up another player on the emp's or your faction
3) Encourages emp-swapping when the emp lets his buddies kill him so they can bump another player into first position then swap emp. Alternately, the emp lets a cross-faction friend kill him repeatedly so they get #1 on their own leaderboards; said emp then stops defending.

I realize people want participation trophies and that ill-conceived throne for their house. But this idea would create more issues, not less, and people who put in more time and effort are still going to out-earn those who don't.

Vurian97 · December 2016

I think the system works fine as is now, otherwise, there should be a vote system where during a crowning all those in attendance at the emperor keep captures that are online get to vote on who is Emperor out of either AP Leaderboard's top 10 or through just the overall total of those online.

As stated though, I think the current system is fine. Not everyone should be an Emperor.

TX12001rwb17_ESO · December 2016

Elladan_Eloheimik wrote: »

ThePonzzz wrote: »

If the goal is to cycle through emperors, suggesting something like only being able to be emperor once per campaign duration. This would give 2nd, 3rd, and so on a shot of making it.

But then we'll likely be back to emp grinding for guilds.

So you're saying only couch potato players should be emps?

The point of the game is to become emp. You do what you have to do to get there.

No the point of the game is to get your soul back form Molag Bal, Being Emperor, well False Emperor really as only Dragonborn are fit to be Emperor is only a insiginificant part of the game as PvP is the Minority of the content.

zuto40 · December 2016

i agree with this if its just from the leaderboard and not actual AP from the player, emps would actually have to think instead of just slapping on a destro and wiping 40 players then die to the remaining 20

IxSTALKERxI · December 2016

Emps die a fair bit during a reign - atleast on PC trueflame anyway. My stats from when I was emp at the start of the campaign, died like 47 times lol, genreally from fighting large amounts of players.

Emps usually have 5-10mil ap on the leaderboard to...
Also, you talk about it like as if taking the 6 emp keeps is easy... it's pretty hard - you might get #1 on the leaderboard but good luck taking the emp keeps.

Emperor also is bad for the faction unless it's a really strong emp with a good group, the faction gets doubled teamed and loses a lot of score on the scoreboard so the emp has to do a good enough job to make it worth it. Getting crowned is the easy part, being emperor is 5 times more stressful - and you have to play long hours otherwise you get deposed, or your faction gets pushed to their gates. What faction wants an emperor who is offline spending time with their family?

Sanct16 · December 2016

I think everyone should permanently get the Emperor buff while being in Cyrodiil.

UppGRAYxDD · December 2016

Why not just give opposing factions "champions". What I mean by this is the overall leader of any faction that does not currently have emperor has a small buff like 10% or 5% on all stats...

Valencer · December 2016

Elladan_Eloheimik wrote: »

ThePonzzz wrote: »

If the goal is to cycle through emperors, suggesting something like only being able to be emperor once per campaign duration. This would give 2nd, 3rd, and so on a shot of making it.

But then we'll likely be back to emp grinding for guilds.

So you're saying only couch potato players should be emps?

The point of the game is to become emp. You do what you have to do to get there.

Your suggestion simply seems like a spiteful attempt at screwing over people who actually do get emp. Not sure why you're acting all surprised about the backlash.

Chuga_Rei · December 2016

Emperor isn't a right. Sorry, we had our period of emp trading on a grand scale and all it did was sully the title.

Emperor isn't something that should be awarded to everyone, or even "a lot of people"

You kids and your participation trophies

Chuga_Rei · December 2016

And every time I hear the insult of "but we have real lives"

Ya no. 'Most the "hardcore" pvpers I know do as well.

Some are students, some work multiple jobs,have families, you name it. Just because you can't find a healthy balance and attain the position doesn't mean others struggle as well. The game doesn't revolve around you, and appeasing the lowest common denominator gives us things like proc set metas.

Elladan_Eloheimik · December 2016

Good intelligent points. I appreciate the alternative perspectives.

Thanks

pcar944 · December 2016

rule #1: don't get Emp unless you have the power - and your Emp is online - to defend it

Emperor generally is bad, but there is enough cross faction going on where what you propose simply would get abused - and it won't help you get the title or the robes ... and in fact might even make it worse for you to get it

GreenSoup2HoT · December 2016

I'd rather Emperor not be a sh*t bucket contest.

If i could change one thing about Emperor it would be this: Emperor AP does not increase your leader-board total. Now the race for Emperor never ends. Whoever is Emperor cannot drastically lead in AP over the players in rank 2-10. This also gives insensitive for the players ranked 2-10 to pass rank 1 and try to obtain Emperor as well.

With this change you will have dynamic leader-boards and a more competitive race for the full 30 days of a campaign instead of just the start.

Elladan_Eloheimik · December 2016

pcar944 wrote: »

rule #1: don't get Emp unless you have the power - and your Emp is online - to defend it

Emperor generally is bad, but there is enough cross faction going on where what you propose simply would get abused - and it won't help you get the title or the robes ... and in fact might even make it worse for you to get it

Acquiring Emp is not so much about power as it is longevity of game play to acquire more AP than the next player.

Unless one can time acquiring emp at the start of a new campaign with little to moderate game play then as the campaign continues chances of acquiring Emp greatly reduces unless has the longevity of game play to play all day all night for several days straight. To acquire Emp you have to kill the most, reinforce all walls and door throughout the empire and get your boss buff every hour.

I for one simply do not have this type of gaming longevity. So I may never achieve Emp. Many of you are right that Emp is not for every one and it should be earned. I fully agree. But with the achievement so far out of reach longevity-wise I am less inclined and motivated to play. Fewer players in PVP = less fun for everyone.

I am a gamer that enjoys the pursuit of an achievement and purpose, the victory and win. Without the possibility of that it becomes meaningless and unfulfilling to me. Sometimes I do enjoy playing for sake of play and fun. Thanks

Valencer · December 2016

But all you did was come up with a suggestion that punishes people while they're emp. That doesnt make the system more fun at all.

Maybe the suggestion seems good if youre just trying to get the achievement/title/dye/costume, but it makes the actual experience of being emp so very frustrating.

Elladan_Eloheimik · December 2016

Valencer wrote: »

But all you did was come up with a suggestion that punishes people while they're emp. That doesnt make the system more fun at all.

Maybe the suggestion seems good if youre just trying to get the achievement/title/dye/costume, but it makes the actual experience of being emp so very frustrating.

As someone pointed out the AP reduction could only count on the leaderboard not actual AP from your account that you have earned.

As far as being Emp for a period you will be Emp until you are dethroned no matter what your leaderboard position is during your Emperorship.

This rule would only guarantee that the next Emp in a faction will be someone different and not the same individual that has the most AP because he has the most longevity and maintains his top position on leaderboard continuously with a large margin.

This rule reduces that large margin and gives other players a possible chance rather than impossibility.

I hope this helps. Thanks

Joy_Division · December 2016

IxSTALKERxI wrote: »

Emps die a fair bit during a reign - atleast on PC trueflame anyway. My stats from when I was emp at the start of the campaign, died like 47 times lol, genreally from fighting large amounts of players.

Emps usually have 5-10mil ap on the leaderboard to...
Also, you talk about it like as if taking the 6 emp keeps is easy... it's pretty hard - you might get #1 on the leaderboard but good luck taking the emp keeps.

Emperor also is bad for the faction unless it's a really strong emp with a good group, the faction gets doubled teamed and loses a lot of score on the scoreboard so the emp has to do a good enough job to make it worth it. Getting crowned is the easy part, being emperor is 5 times more stressful - and you have to play long hours otherwise you get deposed, or your faction gets pushed to their gates. What faction wants an emperor who is offline spending time with their family?

How did your game run for this long without crashing, being put into an endless loading screen, randomly disconnecting you, or one of the many lovely unintended features provided by ZoS that would reset your kill-counter?

That feat in my eyes is more impressive than being emperor.

Elladan_Eloheimik · December 2016

GreenSoup2HoT wrote: »

I'd rather Emperor not be a sh*t bucket contest.

If i could change one thing about Emperor it would be this: Emperor AP does not increase your leader-board total. Now the race for Emperor never ends. Whoever is Emperor cannot drastically lead in AP over the players in rank 2-10. This also gives insensitive for the players ranked 2-10 to pass rank 1 and try to obtain Emperor as well.

With this change you will have dynamic leader-boards and a more competitive race for the full 30 days of a campaign instead of just the start.

This is a good idea as well.

Emp earned AP doesn't count on leaderboard while Emp.

vs

Emp when killed loses 10% (or some %) leaderboard points which is given as AP to killing player.

Ultimately both provide the same result of more dynamic leaderboard racing and change-over of Emp rather same individual consecutively and continuously.

Or maybe when Emp is dethroned he loses some % leaderboard points. There should be some risk and loss to being dethroned or killed as Emp.

Other thoughts?

Thanks

Elladan_Eloheimik · December 2016

Elladan_Eloheimik wrote: »

This is a good idea as well.

Emp earned AP doesn't count on leaderboard while Emp.

vs

Emp when killed loses 10% (or some %) leaderboard points which is given as AP to killing player.

Ultimately both provide the same result of more dynamic leaderboard racing and change-over of Emp rather same individual consecutively and continuously.

Or maybe when Emp is dethroned he loses some % leaderboard points. There should be some risk and loss to being dethroned or killed as Emp.

Other thoughts?

Thanks

Another thought...with this risk and loss there should be Emp rewards for maintaining Emp over a period let's 12 hours, 24 hours, 48 hrs, 72 hrs, etc. Maybe crown crate points for reward or some desirable thing.

The reward could be scaled higher grade the longer one maintains Emp.

This should be pleasing to most...right?

ToRelax · December 2016

Elladan_Eloheimik wrote: »

Elladan_Eloheimik wrote: »

This is a good idea as well.

Emp earned AP doesn't count on leaderboard while Emp.

vs

Emp when killed loses 10% (or some %) leaderboard points which is given as AP to killing player.

Ultimately both provide the same result of more dynamic leaderboard racing and change-over of Emp rather same individual consecutively and continuously.

Or maybe when Emp is dethroned he loses some % leaderboard points. There should be some risk and loss to being dethroned or killed as Emp.

Other thoughts?

Thanks

Another thought...with this risk and loss there should be Emp rewards for maintaining Emp over a period let's 12 hours, 24 hours, 48 hrs, 72 hrs, etc. Maybe crown crate points for reward or some desirable thing.

The reward could be scaled higher grade the longer one maintains Emp.

This should be pleasing to most...right?

People would try to farm it on less competitive campaigns obviously. That doesn't necessarily have to be a bad thing as it might help to spread out populations - but honestly, with an incentive to actively avoid other players I don't think we'll get better PvP.

IxSTALKERxI · December 2016

GreenSoup2HoT wrote: »

If i could change one thing about Emperor it would be this: Emperor AP does not increase your leader-board total. Now the race for Emperor never ends. Whoever is Emperor cannot drastically lead in AP over the players in rank 2-10. This also gives insensitive for the players ranked 2-10 to pass rank 1 and try to obtain Emperor as well.

With this change you will have dynamic leader-boards and a more competitive race for the full 30 days of a campaign instead of just the start.

I actually really like this idea. It would work well.

God_flakes · December 2016

DRXHarbinger wrote: »

Bear in mind most emps have twice the ap the next person below them has it'll make no difference. They'll turn up at next siege hoover up a zerg and back to enormous ap levels anyway.

Thanks. Now I have the Hoover imagery in my mind....

Artis · December 2016

Elladan_Eloheimik wrote: »

I am a gamer that enjoys the pursuit of an achievement and purpose, the victory and win. Without the possibility of that it becomes meaningless and unfulfilling to me. Sometimes I do enjoy playing for sake of play and fun. Thanks

Did you get all other achievements in game already? Because if you didn't and that's what you enjoy - there are tons of them to pursue.

On the other hand, if you enjoy the pursuit of an achievement - that means the process of trying to get, then it's not so bad that emp is hard to get. The pursuit will be longer or probably will never end.

leepalmer95 · December 2016

GreenSoup2HoT wrote: »

I'd rather Emperor not be a sh*t bucket contest.

If i could change one thing about Emperor it would be this: Emperor AP does not increase your leader-board total. Now the race for Emperor never ends. Whoever is Emperor cannot drastically lead in AP over the players in rank 2-10. This also gives insensitive for the players ranked 2-10 to pass rank 1 and try to obtain Emperor as well.

With this change you will have dynamic leader-boards and a more competitive race for the full 30 days of a campaign instead of just the start.

^^ this idea is many times better.

You could even just have your ap leaderboards reset when you get emp and frozen until you lose it.

So you won't have the same emp for 30 days on the run.

Sheuib · December 2016

xblackroxe wrote: »

Elladan_Eloheimik wrote: »

ThePonzzz wrote: »

If the goal is to cycle through emperors, suggesting something like only being able to be emperor once per campaign duration. This would give 2nd, 3rd, and so on a shot of making it.

But then we'll likely be back to emp grinding for guilds.

So you're saying only couch potato players should be emps?

The point of the game is to become emp. You do what you have to do to get there.

Exactly then do what you have to. Simple as that. Only thing I see here is jelly people that cant get emp bc they cant/ dont want to be dedicated enough to get it.

Dedicated enough? You mean pay enough gold to the right guild to emp you.

So, what's the going rate to be made emp on haderus anyway?

NBrookus · December 2016

Sheuib wrote: »

xblackroxe wrote: »

Elladan_Eloheimik wrote: »

ThePonzzz wrote: »

If the goal is to cycle through emperors, suggesting something like only being able to be emperor once per campaign duration. This would give 2nd, 3rd, and so on a shot of making it.

But then we'll likely be back to emp grinding for guilds.

So you're saying only couch potato players should be emps?

The point of the game is to become emp. You do what you have to do to get there.

Exactly then do what you have to. Simple as that. Only thing I see here is jelly people that cant get emp bc they cant/ dont want to be dedicated enough to get it.

Dedicated enough? You mean pay enough gold to the right guild to emp you.

So, what's the going rate to be made emp on haderus anyway?

Get your quests done before hand.
Log in before campaign flip.
Get your AP buff.
Turn everything in.
Bust your ass all day and don't be one to your faction.

That was the price.

I don't disagree that Haderus has turned into the server where people go to get their emp achieve -- particular for EP but this week it's been AD. A lot of that blame can be laid at the doors of the players who log off any time it gets rough.