Emperorship Changes in Summerset

GoodFella146 · April 2018

Would you like to see a new system regarding Emperor where basically once you get Emperor, you can't get it again on that character for the rest of the campaign? We would have to also add a clause to the becoming Emperor where a player would have to be online to get it as well, as it would really suck to be offline and lose you time as Emperor before you ever logged back in.

Turelus · April 2018

No. This comes up often and I always feel the same, if someone is good enough or dedicated enough to fight for the top they shouldn't then be relegated to the bottom because they ranked that high.

Normally this desire always boils down to people who can't rank getting annoyed with others who can constantly getting crowned.

I am open for a new system over all which isn't entirely dependent on AP rankings, but I don't think we should be penalising dedicated, skilled and committed players from being Emperor.

TequilaFire · April 2018

Turelus wrote: »

No. This comes up often and I always feel the same, if someone is good enough or dedicated enough to fight for the top they shouldn't then be relegated to the bottom because they ranked that high.

Normally this desire always boils down to people who can't rank getting annoyed with others who can constantly getting crowned.

I am open for a new system over all which isn't entirely dependent on AP rankings, but I don't think we should be penalising dedicated, skilled and committed players from being Emperor.

Dude we have the same emp year in and year out on PS4 Vivec NA.
If his own alliance could kill him they would.
He is a good player but other shenanigans are at play.

MyKillv2.0 · April 2018

Turelus wrote: »

No. This comes up often and I always feel the same, if someone is good enough or dedicated enough to fight for the top they shouldn't then be relegated to the bottom because they ranked that high.

Normally this desire always boils down to people who can't rank getting annoyed with others who can constantly getting crowned.

I am open for a new system over all which isn't entirely dependent on AP rankings, but I don't think we should be penalizing dedicated, skilled and committed players from being Emperor.

I wish Emperor (and for that matter Campaigns in general) would get reworked in some fashion, though I do not want to see the current system be completely abolished either.

PvP is simply too time consuming, rewarding players who have more time and punishing players who do not have as much time. Do not take this as a "PvP is no skill" comment. PvP requires a heck of a lot of skill. However if you only have ten hours to spend a week in PvP... you will NEVER be emperor, unless you cheese it on a dead campaign. You can achieve everything in PvE by only playing ten hours a week... it just takes you longer.

PvP needs more short term goals. Not a complete rework by any stretch. Players who have time/want to spend a lot of time in PVP should have the current avenues to spend their time and be rewarded as such. However I personally feel players with a limited amount of time should be able to achieve the same levels of accomplishment.

Just my thoughts.

Hurtfan · April 2018

The way it is now doesn't bother me, and I do play in Vivec PS4, seems the same people are emperors every campaign. If it played a huge part in who wins the campaign, maybe I'd think differently but it really doesn't affect the outcome that much imo.

I think people hate faction hopping more, but I'm not one of those people.

Nemeliom · April 2018

I'm in favor of emperor having to be online, but not to once per campaign. They really work hard for that.
I have never been an emp and never will be.

DeadlyRecluse · April 2018

While I think the emperorship mechanic could use a second look, I haven't seen a change that doesn't, in some way, potentially screw the player putting in the most work.

I do wish people would be more proactive about the social part of the emperor mechanic--I've been emp a few times, and every single time I've left the campaign after being dethroned to give the next person a shot--I had good runs and was happy to take a break, plus we had chatted and they were decent people. That obviously isn't going to work every time, but I've seen plenty of people waste a perfectly good emp run by being overly salty to the person in the #1 slot, who then stayed in campaign or ahead of them out of spite.

ZOS_Mika · April 2018

We have recently removed some unnecessary comments from this thread. Please keep in mind that conspiracy theories, accusations of misconduct, and naming and shaming are all violations of our Community Rules. Please be sure to keep this discussion civil and constructive. Thank you for your understanding.

WillhelmBlack · April 2018

Option 3.

I don't care. Many of us PvP'rs don't. I've never been Emperor, nor do I have the time, the patience or belief that it actually amounts to any sort of achievement. It's actually a bit sad. I've killed a few tho, the bad ones lol.

GoodFella146 · April 2018

DeadlyRecluse wrote: »

While I think the emperorship mechanic could use a second look, I haven't seen a change that doesn't, in some way, potentially screw the player putting in the most work.

I do wish people would be more proactive about the social part of the emperor mechanic--I've been emp a few times, and every single time I've left the campaign after being dethroned to give the next person a shot--I had good runs and was happy to take a break, plus we had chatted and they were decent people. That obviously isn't going to work every time, but I've seen plenty of people waste a perfectly good emp run by being overly salty to the person in the #1 slot, who then stayed in campaign or ahead of them out of spite.

What about accounts that seem to be online 24/7? I have to believe it's multiple players playing the same account as it's not humanly possible to stay up seemingly permanently.

badmojo · April 2018

No. That would lead to people letting emp go so they can crown the next person on the list, doing that over and over until their entire guild has had it.

If you are in second place and want emp, git gud.

DeadlyRecluse · April 2018

GoodFella146 wrote: »

DeadlyRecluse wrote: »

While I think the emperorship mechanic could use a second look, I haven't seen a change that doesn't, in some way, potentially screw the player putting in the most work.

I do wish people would be more proactive about the social part of the emperor mechanic--I've been emp a few times, and every single time I've left the campaign after being dethroned to give the next person a shot--I had good runs and was happy to take a break, plus we had chatted and they were decent people. That obviously isn't going to work every time, but I've seen plenty of people waste a perfectly good emp run by being overly salty to the person in the #1 slot, who then stayed in campaign or ahead of them out of spite.

What about accounts that seem to be online 24/7? I have to believe it's multiple players playing the same account as it's not humanly possible to stay up seemingly permanently.

See, imo that's a problem with people sharing accounts--NOT the emperor mechanic. I wouldn't want emp adjusted in a way that punishes honest players in order to fix an issue that, while related, is different.

Like I mentioned, dealing with emp-hogs socially won't always work...but that's why there are multiple factions/campaigns etc., I guess.

TequilaFire · April 2018

Wish there were multiple factions again, they have all become one with faction jumping.
And interestingly they all become emp on whatever alliance.
It would be nice if all good players had a chance.

Marginis · April 2018

I like the idea of not letting someone who's already been emperor not get it again. Maybe let them get some sort of bonus, but afford for new players the ability to get a title and outfit when the odds are stacked against them.

Serjustin19 · April 2018

It's tough choice, so option 3. (invisible) But, players don't have to be good, to get emp. Many new PvPer get emp all the time. 3 times I tried get emp. Wasn't meant to be, in honestly I don't want emp. Until I settled down in one alliance. But reason I said yes. Is due to many others don't want others to surpass them. So many of same emps, former emp refuses to play other characters. That's fine and all, but same time not fair. But there is no such thing as fair to.

reiverx · April 2018

Account sharing and boosting are rampant on PS4.

Turelus · April 2018

TequilaFire wrote: »

Turelus wrote: »

No. This comes up often and I always feel the same, if someone is good enough or dedicated enough to fight for the top they shouldn't then be relegated to the bottom because they ranked that high.

Normally this desire always boils down to people who can't rank getting annoyed with others who can constantly getting crowned.

I am open for a new system over all which isn't entirely dependent on AP rankings, but I don't think we should be penalising dedicated, skilled and committed players from being Emperor.

Dude we have the same emp year in and year out on PS4 Vivec NA.
If his own alliance could kill him they would.
He is a good player but other shenanigans are at play.

That's not a reason to change the entire system and penalise the people who are not using shenanigans.
If there is something going on against the games ToS/EULA then you should be reporting it to ZOS, not asking for game changes that effect everyone.

MyKillv2.0 wrote: »

Turelus wrote: »

No. This comes up often and I always feel the same, if someone is good enough or dedicated enough to fight for the top they shouldn't then be relegated to the bottom because they ranked that high.

Normally this desire always boils down to people who can't rank getting annoyed with others who can constantly getting crowned.

I am open for a new system over all which isn't entirely dependent on AP rankings, but I don't think we should be penalizing dedicated, skilled and committed players from being Emperor.

I wish Emperor (and for that matter Campaigns in general) would get reworked in some fashion, though I do not want to see the current system be completely abolished either.

PvP is simply too time consuming, rewarding players who have more time and punishing players who do not have as much time. Do not take this as a "PvP is no skill" comment. PvP requires a heck of a lot of skill. However if you only have ten hours to spend a week in PvP... you will NEVER be emperor, unless you cheese it on a dead campaign. You can achieve everything in PvE by only playing ten hours a week... it just takes you longer.

PvP needs more short term goals. Not a complete rework by any stretch. Players who have time/want to spend a lot of time in PVP should have the current avenues to spend their time and be rewarded as such. However I personally feel players with a limited amount of time should be able to achieve the same levels of accomplishment.

Just my thoughts.

I don't entirely disagree, but games generally always benefit those who can invest the most time into them.

I do think there could be better systems in place (although in four years we've never found one everyone agrees on) but I think one of the simplest solutions would be to remove the Emperor title and achievements (move rewards to something else).
Most people want to be emperor because of the unlocks rather than the power/fact you're emperor, moving them to somewhere else would go a good way towards appeasing people who can't be it without penalising those who get there and enjoy the benefits of boosted stats.

GoodFella146 · April 2018

badmojo wrote: »

No. That would lead to people letting emp go so they can crown the next person on the list, doing that over and over until their entire guild has had it.

If you are in second place and want emp, git gud.

Yeah this is the point. And having a job or other real life things to take care of is not a skill based issue.

TequilaFire · April 2018

@Turelus These people do get reported nothing happens can't go into detail because we aren't allowed to talk about problems like this on these forums. Other players are already penalized by the fact that no matter how hard they play, how good they are they can't achieve the position because of the runaway ap effect once a person gets emp - they generate more ap. So a person that plays 24/7 and always has emp is mathematically impossible to catch up with.
On PS4 Emp is required for platinum trophy to complete the game.

GoodFella146 · April 2018

TequilaFire wrote: »

@Turelus These people do get reported nothing happens can't go into detail because we aren't allowed to talk about problems like this on these forums. Other players are already penalized by the fact that no matter how hard they play, how good they are they can't achieve the position because of the runaway ap effect once a person gets emp - they generate more ap. So a person that plays 24/7 and always has emp is mathematically impossible to catch up with.

I'd argue it'd be a lot more fun to have a bunch of different proclaimed Emperors rather than the same ppl again and again....

mb10 · April 2018

Lame clickbait title

Not bothering to vote in your pole

Casul · April 2018

I mainly want it for the achievements, honestly I would prefer the achievement be unlocked when you get max rank in PvP, then it is still achievable (yet not easy by any stretch of the imagination). Title would also be nice but I can understand why that would be off limit.

Turelus · April 2018

TequilaFire wrote: »

Turelus These people do get reported nothing happens can't go into detail because we aren't allowed to talk about problems like this on these forums. Other players are already penalized by the fact that no matter how hard they play, how good they are they can't achieve the position because of the runaway ap effect once a person gets emp - they generate more ap. So a person that plays 24/7 and always has emp is mathematically impossible to catch up with.
On PS4 Emp is required for platinum trophy to complete the game.

That's the issue, not the Emperor system.

You're asking to change a system so everyone can get a trophy with little effort when it shouldn't have been a trophy to start with.

TequilaFire · April 2018

Little effort? You still have to earn it. smh
And yet you ignore the runaway effect.
Selective reading.

DurzoBlint13 · April 2018

I would just be happy if they actually did something to the exploiters that farm AP off one of their guilds in another faction to get Emp. It happens A LOT and nothing ever happens to the people that participate on either side

lucky_Sage · April 2018

ive never tried to get emp I don't have the time. getting emp doesn't take skill its just time and ap farming with friends that give you emp and stop others. its became very political on ps4na. when ever you actually fight a emp they just spam a AOE and they are almost always bad ive cought some by them selfs and fought them for 5 minutes till there zerg came and they just spam steel tornado and vigar till friends come they cant kill anyone by them self

when there was more campaigns there was a boosting server so people would boost everyone to emp so they could get passives and title.

Rickter · April 2018

I'd like to see a rework asap.

Idk what it'll be, but it needs to happen.

I agree with @Turelus 's first post to the OP, that players that put in work shouldnt be punished but im going to go the not-naive way and go ahead and say that a lot of the people who are "number 1" pay gold to zerg guilds to flip the map, rss flip and farm ap, leech ap as in show up whenever there is crossed swords and just stand there to get the ap etc

thats not work, its taking advantage of a broken and poorly thought system. it needs a rework. 10 patches ago.

NobleX35 · April 2018

I completely disagree with concept of only being able to get emperor once per toon per campaign. The reason for this is that it is entirely possible to get emp and then one of the opposing sides hits their prime time, forms a Zerg, and a hour (or less) later the player loses emp because of forces out of their control. They were never really able to enjoy being the emperor and are now locked from obtaining it again and actually enjoying the experience.

If you want to propose changes to how you acquire emperor that’s not one thing, but it should NOT be locked to once per character per campaign.

GoodFella146 · April 2018

Honestly I'd be really nice to at least try for a few months (like for an update cycle). If everyone ends up hating it then it could easily be reverted.

NobleX35 · April 2018

GoodFella146 wrote: »

Honestly I'd be really nice to at least try for a few months (like for an update cycle). If everyone ends up hating it then it could easily be reverted.

I’d rather not...

I’m not opposed to a new system, but it should not be that restrictive.

GoodFella146 · April 2018

NobleX35 wrote: »

GoodFella146 wrote: »

Honestly I'd be really nice to at least try for a few months (like for an update cycle). If everyone ends up hating it then it could easily be reverted.

I’d rather not...

I’m not opposed to a new system, but it should not be that restrictive.

But you can at least agree that the players should decide, yeah?

The Elder Scrolls Online

Emperorship Changes in Summerset

Emperorship Changes in Summerset 212 votes