Maintenance for the week of April 6:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6
How about "Free for all" overland PVP mode?
MartiniDaniels
✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭
FREE FOR ALL WORLD PVP.
Purpose: to make exploring of overland dangerous, immersive and rewarding, without impacting other players and without much effort from developers.
Features:
- fully optional, can be toggled on/off in neutral zones once per hour
- solo only, you can't group up while toggled on
- all other players with mode turned on are hostile to each other, alliance doesn't matter
- overland mobs do quadruple damage to player in world pvp mode and take only 50%, but drop telvar
- telvar dropped only if monster wasn't attacked by somebody else
- damage done from players to each other +100% to avoid immortal builds for safe farming -> kill or be killed or run away, no draws
- damage done from stealth reduced 2 times to compensate for 100% above
- you give 50% of your telvar to player who killed you
- in case you received damage from 2 or more players, you still lose 50% of telvar, but they get only 10% shared between them (to avoid discord grouping up)
Purpose: to make exploring of overland dangerous, immersive and rewarding, without impacting other players and without much effort from developers.
Features:
- fully optional, can be toggled on/off in neutral zones once per hour
- solo only, you can't group up while toggled on
- all other players with mode turned on are hostile to each other, alliance doesn't matter
- overland mobs do quadruple damage to player in world pvp mode and take only 50%, but drop telvar
- telvar dropped only if monster wasn't attacked by somebody else
- damage done from players to each other +100% to avoid immortal builds for safe farming -> kill or be killed or run away, no draws
- damage done from stealth reduced 2 times to compensate for 100% above
- you give 50% of your telvar to player who killed you
- in case you received damage from 2 or more players, you still lose 50% of telvar, but they get only 10% shared between them (to avoid discord grouping up)
16
-
Lysette✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭What about - NO!
not even optional - dueling is already a mess because it takes place in cities where is anyway a lot of lag already. You guys wouldn't do that in the open world outside of towns anyway, but stick to hubs where you can harass others with your activities - so NO, not going to happen.Edited by Lysette on April 29, 2020 11:07AM31 -
MartiniDaniels✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭What about - NO!
not even optional - dueling is already a mess because it takes place in cities where is anyway a lot of lag already. You guys wouldn't do that in the open world outside of towns anyway, but stick to hubs where you can harass others with your activities - so NO, not going to happen.
Do you even read first line? This is not for cities, this is to make exploring rewarding and dangerous + make building your character for overland interesting because you need to balance ton of things out2 -
Lysette✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭MartiniDaniels wrote: »What about - NO!
not even optional - dueling is already a mess because it takes place in cities where is anyway a lot of lag already. You guys wouldn't do that in the open world outside of towns anyway, but stick to hubs where you can harass others with your activities - so NO, not going to happen.
Do you even read first line? This is not for cities, this is to make exploring rewarding and dangerous + make building your character for overland interesting because you need to balance ton of things out
interesting on paper, but it wouldn't turn out like this - it would be used to harass people in hubs - that is just how things like that always turn out in an MMO which allows this.
And ambushs at quest givers and quest turn in spots would be the other place where this would happen - it is just not good to do that.Edited by Lysette on April 29, 2020 11:15AM17 -
Golden_Cat✭✭✭If ZOS implements such feature, I believe most people will just toggle it off and play as usual (at least I will). ZOS will waste their time and resources developing a nearly useless feature while not making any profit back so no.24 -
Arca94✭✭✭✭interesting on paper, but it wouldn't turn out like this - it would be used to harass people in hubs - that is just how things like that always turn out in an MMO which allows this.
If it was made to be a toggle like the OP suggested, then how would it be used to harass other players?
The players who didn't want to participate in PvP would simply toggle it off and they wouldn't be harassed. It could even be off by default to prevent new players from being targetted through ignorance.
The only players who would be able to be 'harassed' would be people who toggled it on, in which case they wouldn't be being harassed as they made an active decision to participate in it.6 -
Lysette✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭The pure existence of this option is in the same way invasive as dueling already is, just that it would be as well at quest givers and in vital other spots - if you want PvE and PvP mixed go to the imperial city - there you get what you want already. if it truely is what you want, that is - but I doubt it.11 -
Lysette✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Golden_Cat wrote: »If ZOS implements such feature, I believe most people will just toggle it off and play as usual (at least I will). ZOS will waste their time and resources developing a nearly useless feature while not making any profit back so no.
I would even consider to not play ESO anymore in that case. Murder going on everywhere with no guards interfering would just crash any immersion in the game world. It would be a horrible decision by ZOS to go for it.10 -
MartiniDaniels✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Golden_Cat wrote: »If ZOS implements such feature, I believe most people will just toggle it off and play as usual (at least I will). ZOS will waste their time and resources developing a nearly useless feature while not making any profit back so no.
You have no proof that they won't make profit, most popular and financially successful games are PVP games. (LoL, CS, Overwatch, CoD, Fortnite, Apex.. even WoW has world PVP mode)
Personally for me it will spark interest to the game again and ESO+ re-sub as well as regular cosmetic purchases.1 -
Lysette✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭MartiniDaniels wrote: »Golden_Cat wrote: »If ZOS implements such feature, I believe most people will just toggle it off and play as usual (at least I will). ZOS will waste their time and resources developing a nearly useless feature while not making any profit back so no.
You have no proof that they won't make profit, most popular and financially successful games are PVP games. (LoL, CS, Overwatch, CoD, Fortnite, Apex.. even WoW has world PVP mode)
Personally for me it will spark interest to the game again and ESO+ re-sub as well as regular cosmetic purchases.
All those games mentioned are the worst of their kind - Fortnite, the game for nasty kids with no social skills whatsoever. Just no, not in ESO.Edited by Lysette on April 29, 2020 11:28AM12 -
svendf✭✭✭✭You got enough PVP in this game. What I want to see is PVE and PVP separated more - like dedicated gear for PVE and PVP.
We need to have an end to this nerfing here and there beccause of PVP issues12 -
robertthebard✭✭✭✭✭interesting on paper, but it wouldn't turn out like this - it would be used to harass people in hubs - that is just how things like that always turn out in an MMO which allows this.
If it was made to be a toggle like the OP suggested, then how would it be used to harass other players?
The players who didn't want to participate in PvP would simply toggle it off and they wouldn't be harassed. It could even be off by default to prevent new players from being targetted through ignorance.
The only players who would be able to be 'harassed' would be people who toggled it on, in which case they wouldn't be being harassed as they made an active decision to participate in it.
The same way it is in other games where it's an option. In swtor a stealth class would flag up and stealth on a quest node, or gathering node, and when you clicked for the node, and got them you were flagged for PvP and they'd then try to kill you. It's called griefing. They could run into an AoE and flag you too. Hell, Aion was advertised as PvPvE, OW PvP is a thing, but it's always on. Yet, I had a legion of 200 accounts that moved to RoM from Aion because of OW PvP… They had to make a "Fast Track" server for leveling for those that couldn't handle PvP in the early levels, which was exacerbated by allowing anyone to use rifts, instead of level capping them to zones, as they had initially launched.2 -
L_Nici✭✭✭✭✭
✭No. There are not enough PvPlers to fill the entire continent with active combat. Just leave it in Cyro, since that region is designed for it.PC|EU9 -
BlueRaven✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Here is what will happen;
-The already low amount of people who pvp will now be spread out thinner across a wider array of zones. Making battlegrounds, IC, and Cyrodiil even emptier.
-Players will figure out a way to “trick” unsuspecting players into pvp.
-Players will also purposely use this to disrupt/harass overland RP events.
(It goes on.)
Wow used to have separate “shards” of their world for this. And then when nobody was using them, offered incentives to get players to use them (xp boosts, etc).
I get that you are getting bored of cyrodiil, but what you are asking for is super niche. Should developers really sink all this money and effort into it, if it makes the population of the current pvp areas go down? Making them less functional due to low population?7 -
daim✭✭✭✭✭I generally think any optional activity/feature is a good thing. I dislike PVP but I would support this, like I'm supporting solo dungeon mode.""I am that which grips the heart in fright, hearkens night and silences the light." It was written on my sword, long…long ago." ―Ajunta Pall
PC|EU4 -
BlueRaven✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭I can also imaging one guild bringing 30+ people to fight another guild of 30+ people to say a city in Auridon for the express purpose of stressing the local shard so it will crash.7 -
Lysette✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭I generally think any optional activity/feature is a good thing. I dislike PVP but I would support this, like I'm supporting solo dungeon mode.
Optional as in those not wanting it not having to see it would be great- but this would mean a separate server set just for this mode - not going to happen.1 -
redgreensunset✭✭✭✭✭
✭No. The possibility for griefing/trolling is way too large and pvp is already proven to be a minor part of this game,I sincerely doubt ZOS has much of any interest in putting more effort into such a small part of the game.5 -
Knightpanther✭✭✭✭✭
✭Not another Battle Royale thread, [snip]
Be Safe
[edited for baiting]Edited by ZOS_Lunar on April 29, 2020 12:35PM3 -
MartiniDaniels✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Knightpanther wrote: »Not another Battle Royale thread, [snip]
Be Safe
I just want to explore overland without falling asleep. ZOS can make overland PVP or overland veteran zone or whatever, what we have now is just unbearable (for me and for many other players because threads about lackluster overland appear every week). PVP mode is simply a cheaper and easier way to do this, because players will be responsible for creating difficulty by themselves.
For those who say that there are not enough PVP-ers to fill 20 zones! True! Everybody can play just fine in that mode until there will be enough farmers to make hunting them profitable and amount of players in open world PVP will be balancing automatically. Of course telvars drop should be lesser then in IC, so IC farming remained viable.Edited by ZOS_Lunar on April 29, 2020 12:35PM1 -
MattT1988✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭As long as it’s completely optional with no strings attached (not attached to the justice system, etc) then I couldn’t give a toss. I’d leave mine off and knowing this playerbase, I think most other people would too, so you might find it a bit hard to find somebody to fight, so it might not be as good of an experience as you think it will be. Personally I think it’ll be a waste of developers time and resources but if it can be done quickly, not to the detriment of the PvE experience, cheaply and most importantly, without breaking anything else. Then whatever, knock yourselves out.1 -
robertthebard✭✭✭✭✭MartiniDaniels wrote: »Knightpanther wrote: »Not another Battle Royale thread, [snip]
Be Safe
I just want to explore overland without falling asleep. ZOS can make overland PVP or overland veteran zone or whatever, what we have now is just unbearable (for me and for many other players because threads about lackluster overland appear every week). PVP mode is simply a cheaper and easier way to do this, because players will be responsible for creating difficulty by themselves.
For those who say that there are not enough PVP-ers to fill 20 zones! True! Everybody can play just fine in that mode until there will be enough farmers to make hunting them profitable and amount of players in open world PVP will be balancing automatically. Of course telvars drop should be lesser then in IC, so IC farming remained viable.
The bolded part is exactly why "No" is the right answer. I'm beginning to wonder if this isn't more of a "I try to farm telvar in Cyro, but wind up being farmed instead, and so I need to be able to get someone I might be able to beat". I've actually seen this kind of thing before...Edited by ZOS_Lunar on April 29, 2020 12:36PM10 -
Vogtard✭✭✭For the sake of an argument:
There are ways of making it perfectly blended into the game world without breaking immersion at all.
The alliance rules could be respected, also including guards, to not only maintain but even improve the immersion.
It would be optional - in game terms it would mean volunteering to participate in the ongoing war.
I like the idea because it adds extra spice to the boring overland. Always having to be aware of the surroundings, the threat in the air.
But yes, at this point in time, with many pvp-oriented players leaving the game due to the terrible performance issues, we probably don't want to spread out the existing pvp population.
Another solution would be to add overland content with forced pvp to Cyrodiil because that area is huge and mostly empty anyway. Something like town quests or delves but more and better.1 -
Tandor✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭The OP's suggestion is based on a false premise, namely that it would not impact on other players. It most certainly would both in terms of the actual gameplay (lag, harassment, ruining immersion etc) and in the diversion of developer resources to provide for its implementation.
While there are successful PvP-only titles, they are not quest-based MMORPGs. Those types of game that have tried to apply a major PvP element have all back-tracked. UO had to introduce mirror shards to cater for those who were leaving the game due to the open world PvP, EQ had to close its PvP servers through lack of population, and WoW had to do the same. Warhammer Online tried to combine PvE and PvP and closed down through lack of population.
ESO is not an open world PvP game, it wasn't designed to be and it never will be. If the 5% or whatever it is of players who only want to PvP don't like that then they're in the wrong game.10 -
MartiniDaniels✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭As long as it’s completely optional with no strings attached (not attached to the justice system, etc) then I couldn’t give a toss. I’d leave mine off and knowing this playerbase, I think most other people would too, so you might find it a bit hard to find somebody to fight, so it might not be as good of an experience as you think it will be. Personally I think it’ll be a waste of developers time and resources but if it can be done quickly, not to the detriment of the PvE experience, cheaply and most importantly, without breaking anything else. Then whatever, knock yourselves out.
You underestimate human nature. If remaining in this mode will be profitable, there will be a lot of players who will go there. As for now IC is half-empty because without decent group or special affinity to ganking, it is simply not worth it to be there. Cyrodiil consists of zergs (who are just relaxing, taking keeps whatever, I see nothing bad in that) and people (raids, smallscalers, solo) who prey on those zergs. In both cases doing crafter writs, trading or participating in pay runs is way more profitable. But if everybody will be able to farm telvar while exploring, doing their Cadwell's gold or gathering skyshards it will be completely another story. Even if you'll lose half of telvar, you'll still have another half which is better then nothing.1 -
MartiniDaniels✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭robertthebard wrote: »MartiniDaniels wrote: »Knightpanther wrote: »Not another Battle Royale thread, jesus go play something else (not going to mention that trash game) and stop trying to ruin ours.
Be Safe
I just want to explore overland without falling asleep. ZOS can make overland PVP or overland veteran zone or whatever, what we have now is just unbearable (for me and for many other players because threads about lackluster overland appear every week). PVP mode is simply a cheaper and easier way to do this, because players will be responsible for creating difficulty by themselves.
For those who say that there are not enough PVP-ers to fill 20 zones! True! Everybody can play just fine in that mode until there will be enough farmers to make hunting them profitable and amount of players in open world PVP will be balancing automatically. Of course telvars drop should be lesser then in IC, so IC farming remained viable.
The bolded part is exactly why "No" is the right answer. I'm beginning to wonder if this isn't more of a "I try to farm telvar in Cyro, but wind up being farmed instead, and so I need to be able to get someone I might be able to beat". I've actually seen this kind of thing before...
You can't farm telvar in Cyro. Next.1
