Neutrality Order

Saucy_Jack · July 2020

Would I love a PvE Cyro? Yes. HOWEVER:

1. Allowing pure PVE people in Cyro takes up population slots that people who actually WANT to PvP would otherwise use. Being poplocked out of something you want to do because of others who don't want to do that thing is bad.

2. This proposed faction would effectively become a faction of scouts. Log on to your neutral faction, go everywhere, see everything, whisper to your PvP friends that such and such keep is undefended, such and such zerg is heading in a certain direction, etc.

The ONLY way I would advocate a PvE Cyro is if it was on a dedicated PvE instance. But with that said, you'd run into a question: how would cities/keeps be handled? Are all city/keep troops hostile to all PvErs? Are they all friendly? Frankly i'd think a PvE instance of Imperial City would be more useful, since that zone actually has a questline, vs. Cyro's town fetch-quest dailies.

PrimusNephilim · July 2020

really?...It's an MMO...why are so many of you so scared of PvP?....its a game for crying out loud

CMDR_Un1k0rn · July 2020

I_am_Groot wrote: »

really?...It's an MMO...why are so many of you so scared of PvP?....its a game for crying out loud

Was the same in the last game I played, which was open-world PvP *everywhere*.

Everything is cool but as soon as you tried to start PvP with someone it was all "I didn't consent" and "Game too hard!".

It's not an ESO problem, it's a gamer problem. You either know that PvP games have different RoE, or you blindly hate on PvP'ers as terrible players, even though frankly, PvP players tend to be significantly more well-rounded simply because of the necessity to do everything to get to a higher level of gameplay.

PrimusNephilim · July 2020

CMDR_Un1k0rn wrote: »

I_am_Groot wrote: »

really?...It's an MMO...why are so many of you so scared of PvP?....its a game for crying out loud

Was the same in the last game I played, which was open-world PvP *everywhere*.

Everything is cool but as soon as you tried to start PvP with someone it was all "I didn't consent" and "Game too hard!".

It's not an ESO problem, it's a gamer problem. You either know that PvP games have different RoE, or you blindly hate on PvP'ers as terrible players, even though frankly, PvP players tend to be significantly more well-rounded simply because of the necessity to do everything to get to a higher level of gameplay.

agreed

Elsonso · July 2020

The real problem with this idea is a growing influx of non-targets for the PVP players, which means less of a reason for PVP players to be there. One simple change can fix that...

The player with a character that is member of the neutrality order will not be able attack other players in Cyrodiil and Imperial city

changes to

The player with a character that is member of the neutrality order will not be able attack other players in Cyrodiil and Imperial city, however, anyone not a member of the neutrality order will be able to kill them.

(Although I jest, the concern at the top remains a problem)

AlnilamE · July 2020

Iluvrien wrote: »

kargen27 wrote: »

Ozby wrote: »

I think during midyear mayhem there should be a PVE event at same time so PVER's can get their tickets and maybe vice/versa for PVPer's during PVE events.

That defeats the purpose of events. the events are there to entice you to do things you otherwise would not do.

I'm not particularly for or against the idea in the OP.

... but this approach to events fails for me. Every time.

This isn't about player agency or encouragement, it's about constraint. For me it doesn't say "we encourage you to try these new things in a way that will encourage your enjoyment of them" it says "its the deep end... or nothing".

If this was actually about agency then for each PvE event there would be a PvP counterpart, and for every PvP event there would be a PvE counterpart... and in each cases there would be structures to support people trying these new activities.

That isn't what we have.

So you have a group of people who like ice-cream for dessert and a group of people who like cake for dessert (and a majority of people who will have either, even if they prefer one over the other).

You want to encourage the ice-cream eaters to try cake and vice versa. Do you:

1. Offer both ice-cream and cake for dessert every day (but you can only pick one per day)
2. Offer only ice-cream for one week and only cake for the next (and you can choose between having dessert or not having any).

Which option is more likely to get people to try the dessert they think they don't like?

Inaya · July 2020

I_am_Groot wrote: »

really?...It's an MMO...why are so many of you so scared of PvP?....its a game for crying out loud

Why do you assume people are scared? I go there to do PVE quests and getting ganked is an annoyance and not how I ENJOY playing my game.

That being said NO neutrality order. Most PVP'ers are not gankers or jerks it's just the ones who are stand out.

GenjiraX · July 2020

Nonsense.

Nagastani · July 2020

Actually I have no problem whatsoever with them introducing another faction, like Imperial or Akaviri. There is no 'neutral' faction though, hahaha. To begin with a faction has to have pride and stand for something other than farming Tel Vars.

The problem is, Cyrodiil and Imperial City were made for PvP. That's why there are exclusive rewards in both zones gear towards PvP. If you take out the PvP element just leaving PvE then that would pretty much kill the entire point of having the zone to start with.

I personally love the IC experience, with great rewards come great danger. However, this is the same thing I said about other changes, you have to learn how to play the game and be smart about what you do. That's what makes Imperial City so awesome is getting what you want, being smarter than other players and not getting caught.

I find players in IC all the time doing stupid things like killing street bosses by themselves, same person carrying 50k to 100k in Tel Vars. Seriously? If you get ganked doing that... that's your fault not mine. Or other people farming in the middle of the streets in a district that's frequently getting flipped. Not paying attention, not a care in the world. But then you're mad you got stomped by a hungry group of EP WWs.

If they made IC PvE only I'd probably leave the game because that place is just so interesting and people should not be able to just make a fortune off that zone without any serious risk. Which is REALLY what this is all about because quests give decent amounts of Tel Vars too.

Dojohoda · July 2020

We cannot have white tagged players running around among the soldiers; nothing could stop them from being unkillable spies and reporting via something like discord.

Reverb · July 2020

So you want to be a war tourist and be guaranteed safety in combat zones? No.

This request is nonsensical, and will also have a negative impact on pvp. Either these neutral players won’t count against the population caps, which will have a negative impact on game performance due to higher player load; or they will count against the pop caps which means fewer actuall pvp’ers will be allowed in each instance, further degrading already demoralizing pvp gameplay.

TL;DR - NO

AliasRed · July 2020

Oh yes! Wonderful idea, lets have lots of neutral un-engageable players following PvP zergs round passing intel on to the alliances their friends are participating in. Can't see an idea like this being exploited at all by our deviously enterprising PvPers

But in all seriousness, NO, terrible idea.

I am only able to play solo content or small group content but I don't expect Zos to change trials so I can do those. People need to take the rough with the smooth and stop trying to get everything changed to suit their playstyle!

Iluvrien · July 2020

mairwen85 wrote: »

Unfortunately there aren't enough PvP options for that to always be the case

[snip]

Ideally, if for every zone DLC they added at least 1 BG map, you could make that part of zone events.If for every new chapter, they added a small PvPvE area with chapter related objectives (like a battle for ownership or incursion, skirmish), the same could be true. But they don't, they neglect PvP with every new addition to the game.

[snip]

The possibilities are endless, but the options we have lack imagination.

Apologies for the [snip]age but I wanted to address what I see as the meat of the post.

I agree. Absolutely and totally. ZOS should have been adding areas that could be enjoyed by PvP-favouring players during this time. This is a game. It is here to be enjoyed. The idea that people should be paying to play this game in a way that they don't fundamentally enjoy just because the developer lacks the will to take even the small steps that you have, very reasonably, outlined is ludicrous to me.

But it is my hope that just because ZOS hasn't done these things in the past, it does not preclude them doing so in the future.

idk · July 2020

dem0n1k wrote: »

None of the Alliance War factions like fence sitters! Surely they should be attacked on sight by all factions!

LOL. This would give OP their 4th faction.

Might I remind players that Zos specifically chose to put some PvE quests and their achievements, skill points, sky shards and some beneficial skills into a PvP zone (Cyrodiil). Demonstrating that this was a deliberate decision Zos made they
recently put parts of the new system into Cyrodiil that requires anyone that wants to deal with those leads to enter a PvP zone.

In other words, it does not appear Zos has any intention of making a PvE Cyrodiil or have some means for players to enter Cyrodiil without risk of facing PvP.