Maintenance for the week of April 6:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – April 6

Guild Based PVP zone suggestion

hexentb16_ESO
hexentb16_ESO
✭✭✭✭
So first of all this isn't in one of the pvp sections because its a suggestion for a new pvp zone and not about something already in the game.

Also, some people on the forums can be incredibly toxic and afraid of change and new content. They love to shut down literally any new idea that isn't "nerf the guy who keeps killing me". IF YOU ARE ONE OF THESE PEOPLE instead of leaving a comment trashing my or anyone else's idea I ask that you post an alternative idea in the comments that you think would be better but still fit the theme of the post. Let's do our best to keep the comments section from devolving into a toxic mess shall we?


So I was listening to my pvp guild master talk with another one. They were talking about which pvp guilds are moving to which campaigns. They also mentioned the big pvp guild that riggs the campaigns by working together while taking control of two different factions. Since our faction never does this (on our server) we end up having the worst experience and tend to be in any other campaign besides the one controlled by the cheating guild.


It got me thinking though. Why not go all in on the guild vs guild pvp eh? I mean, most campaigns have already devolved into guild vs guild pvp anyways. Most guilds are chill and never work with the enemy but even so guild loyalty always comes before faction loyalty. So why not roll with it and make a new pvp zone similar to Cyrodil but instead based upon guilds fighting each other and not the deeply flawed 3 banner war?


Here's what I was thinking.

1. It would be quite similar to Cyrodil when it comes keeps, gates, travel routes, and scoring.

2. Guilds MUST register for each campaign beforehand. During the registration process two guilds may ally together for the campaign. Multi-chapter guilds are NOT allowed to ally together. Guilds not allied will be automatically paired together as spots fill or when the campaign starts. When you first join this campaign you may choose between multiple guilds if more than one of your guilds are part of the campaign. If only one of your guilds are in the campaign you will automatically be on their team. If none of your guilds are in the campaign you must either join a guild that is OR wait until a home keep is lost. You become locked to your guild's team until they lose their home keep or win the campaign.

3. There would be 10 home keeps in total. At the start each home keep is controlled by a team consisting of two guilds. If a guild allies with another guild during registration they control a home keep together. Guilds not allied will be randomly paired together and control a keep. Teams DO NOT get to choose which home keep they get at the start of the campaign because home keeps will be randomly assigned.

4. At first each home keep will be isolated from other enemy home keeps. Unclaimed keeps will be placed along a transitus network that extends to the center of the map. Half way to the the center there is a portion of terrain, wall, or some other obstruction that can be destroyed and then passed so one team may start taking over their opponents territory.

5. At the center of the map lays a pve/npc stronghold. The stronghold cannot be fully taken or destroyed. It will be surrounded by a few pve objectives and very strong bosses. Completing the pve objectives or killing the incredibly difficult bosses will reward resources and/or buffs to teams. The difficulty of these objectives and bosses are high enough that teams need to sacrifice manpower elsewhere to take care of them, leaving them open to other teams.

6. Teams, instead of taking on the pve objective and bosses, may go around it and continue along the transitus network into another allied/paired guild's territory to start taking their keeps.

7. Home keeps can be lost but not claimed by other teams. In the event a home keep is lost it then becomes controlled by a team made of random players. Said teams are filled randomly and may be from any faction or guild not controlling another home keep. Should more than one home keep be lost this way a player will be put on the team of a random lost keep each time they join the fight.

8. Scoring differences. In addition to an over-all guild score that functions similarly to Cyrodil's faction scoring there will also be a personal score.

9. Personal rewards will be the same as Cyrodil's rewards. Should a team win this campaign a substantial reward shall be deposited into the guild banks of the two guilds that were part of the team and additional rewards will be sent to player who fought with that guild.

10. This pvp zone and campaign mode will be policed by ZOS. Teams caught working together when they are on opposing teams will be disqualified and lose both their home keep and guild rewards. Repeated offenses will bar guilds from joining this campaign all together. If it turns out only one guild of a team is guilty of this the one guild will be removed from the campaign and lose rewards but the other may continue. Another different guild may then take the place of the cheating guild.



Okay so that's my suggestion. I wrote it like this so its easier for you guys to pick a specific number you have an alternative idea for instead of having to quote the entire post.

The basic idea I'm going for here is a way to fix guilds cheating in Cyrodil by working together while on opposing guilds without actually punishing them. Personally I think every player who is boosting or working with the enemy as one team should be perma-banned from pvp entirely but I doubt that'll ever happen. Maybe if a pvp zone and campaign like this existed they would stop ruining Cyrodil's pvp.

Replies.

To VaranisAreno

Hmm. You raise some good points. Perhaps I was thinking too big. Maybe it should be a much smaller 5 home keep and 8 or even 5 hour campaign. Maybe it being smaller would fix some of those issues and keep the other problems from being problems for too long.

Honestly I don't think ZOS will ever police pvp or punish cheaters in pvp despite it being desperately needed. #10 was really just wishful thinking.
Edited by hexentb16_ESO on January 6, 2021 9:34PM
  • VaranisArano
    VaranisArano
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    I guess I've got a couple questions.

    Do you envision this being a 24/7 battle map like Cyrodiil? Because while I love my PVP guild, I'm not logging on at 2 in the morning to fight. Neither am I going to make time to fight in raid every night of the week. Are we expected to ally with guilds in other time zones to defend our keeps? Or are we expected to lose everything overnight, then come back and retake it later on in the week when we raid again?

    Is there any option to change which guild you allied with? I'm envisioning a situation where two guilds get randomly matched up and one of them becomes unable to field a raid on a regular basis, or the guild leaders turn out to hate each other, or, you know, its just not working out. What happens then?

    I guess I'm most unsure about the integrity of the registration process and ZOS' ability/willingness to police the campaign to prevent cross-team cheating. Is ZOS really going to police multi-chapter guilds? Is ZOS going to actively monitor play and private/group/guild chats on the campaign to prove when cross-team cheating is happening? I mean, the last time I saw a Gamemaster around was years ago clearing out bots in Rivenspire. So I'm not sure what you envision this policing will look like.
  • Vlad9425
    Vlad9425
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭
    Let’s fix Cyrodiil first before adding more broken content.
  • hexentb16_ESO
    hexentb16_ESO
    ✭✭✭✭
    Vlad9425 wrote: »
    Let’s fix Cyrodiil first before adding more broken content.

    Thats actually the point of this suggestion. It would fix Cyrodil by adding new content.
  • VaranisArano
    VaranisArano
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Vlad9425 wrote: »
    Let’s fix Cyrodiil first before adding more broken content.

    Thats actually the point of this suggestion. It would fix Cyrodil by adding new content.

    It wouldn't do anything for the performance issues, which is the primary long term problem facing my PVP guild and the players I play with.

    And honestly, if ZOS doesn't fix performance, your guild v guild zone is going to face the same problems. Your suggestion seems very geared towards producing ball groups fights and big, drawn-out keep sieges, both of which seem to produce performance problems in abundance in Cyrodiil.

    So in that sense, yeah, fixing the performance in Cyrodiil is definitely a prerequisite for your guild v guild zone working well.
    Edited by VaranisArano on January 6, 2021 9:32PM
  • hexentb16_ESO
    hexentb16_ESO
    ✭✭✭✭
    I guess I've got a couple questions.

    Do you envision this being a 24/7 battle map like Cyrodiil? Because while I love my PVP guild, I'm not logging on at 2 in the morning to fight. Neither am I going to make time to fight in raid every night of the week. Are we expected to ally with guilds in other time zones to defend our keeps? Or are we expected to lose everything overnight, then come back and retake it later on in the week when we raid again?

    Is there any option to change which guild you allied with? I'm envisioning a situation where two guilds get randomly matched up and one of them becomes unable to field a raid on a regular basis, or the guild leaders turn out to hate each other, or, you know, its just not working out. What happens then?

    I guess I'm most unsure about the integrity of the registration process and ZOS' ability/willingness to police the campaign to prevent cross-team cheating. Is ZOS really going to police multi-chapter guilds? Is ZOS going to actively monitor play and private/group/guild chats on the campaign to prove when cross-team cheating is happening? I mean, the last time I saw a Gamemaster around was years ago clearing out bots in Rivenspire. So I'm not sure what you envision this policing will look like.

    Hmm. You raise some good points. Perhaps I was thinking too big. Maybe it should be a much smaller 5 home keep and 8 or even 5 hour campaign. Maybe it being smaller would fix some of those issues and keep the other problems from being problems for too long.

    Honestly I don't think ZOS will ever police pvp or punish cheaters in pvp despite it being desperately needed. #10 was really just wishful thinking.
  • hexentb16_ESO
    hexentb16_ESO
    ✭✭✭✭
    Vlad9425 wrote: »
    Let’s fix Cyrodiil first before adding more broken content.

    Thats actually the point of this suggestion. It would fix Cyrodil by adding new content.

    It wouldn't do anything for the performance issues, which is the primary long term problem facing my PVP guild and the players I play with.

    And honestly, if ZOS doesn't fix performance, your guild v guild zone is going to face the same problems. Your suggestion seems very geared towards producing ball groups fights and big, drawn-out keep sieges, both of which seem to produce performance problems in abundance in Cyrodiil.

    So in that sense, yeah, fixing the performance in Cyrodiil is definitely a prerequisite for your guild v guild zone working well.

    Ah. You were talking about the performance issues. On Xbox US I only really encounter that now when guilds start cheating or when that stupid hammer comes out.

    ..And I suppose when a player DDOS or lagswitches an enemy group. Though that last one is much harder for players to get proof of.

    But you're right. The performance issues do need to be fixed.
  • kargen27
    kargen27
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    Another problem with this is an already thin PvP population. Adding more PvP content will spread an already thin population out even farther.

    With that in mind maybe take the basics of your idea and have special events. Say six events a month that last for several hours. They would need to start at different times (beyond just different days) to take into account we don't all play at the same time.
    The problem with doing it this way is knowing how many will want to participate. If to many then some will be locked out of the event for performance reasons. To few and not much fighting. The to many could be remedied by providing more instances but that could lead to members of the same guild being on different instances. Guild on guild events sound fun just not sure they can be done given the current state of PvP.
    and then the parrot said, "must be the water mines green too."
  • bmnoble
    bmnoble
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭
    What about smaller PVP guilds, its all well and good with the full big guilds going at one another but there are plenty of smaller and mid size PVP guilds to take into consideration as well.

    Maybe instead of making a new Cyrodiil make a new sort of Battlegrounds, a smaller zone map around the same size as the starter islands with a keep, one group gets chosen as the defender one group as the attacker.

    Add a guild requirement to enter the queue for it, defender and attacker randomly chosen, throw in some leaderboards/daily/weekly prizes etc...

    Both sides get a limited number of revives, attacking team captures and holds the keep for X amount of time or wipe out the defenders they win, defenders wipe out the attackers or hold out for X amount of time they win.

    Only problems I see, is groups taking turns winning and losing to get their weekly or daily prize out of the way. That and having enough players interested in it to fill the queues.
  • coj901
    coj901
    ✭✭✭
    No just fix cyro. This would fracture the already dieing community
  • Ackwalan
    Ackwalan
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    This idea is being worked into other games that are coming out soon. Where a guild needs to build and defend a town/city in order to have a trader and other perks, other guilds try to destroy or take over. Some variation might come to ESO.
  • Jaraal
    Jaraal
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    They also mentioned the big pvp guild that riggs the campaigns by working together while taking control of two different factions.

    I've noticed this behavior, even though I'm not in any PvP focused guilds. Two factions almost never attack each other, while one faction is usually gated by pressure from both sides at certain times of the day.

    Good to know this is an actual thing, rather than just a weird coincidence.

  • Greasytengu
    Greasytengu
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    bmnoble wrote: »
    What about smaller PVP guilds, its all well and good with the full big guilds going at one another but there are plenty of smaller and mid size PVP guilds to take into consideration as well.

    Maybe instead of making a new Cyrodiil make a new sort of Battlegrounds, a smaller zone map around the same size as the starter islands with a keep, one group gets chosen as the defender one group as the attacker.

    Add a guild requirement to enter the queue for it, defender and attacker randomly chosen, throw in some leaderboards/daily/weekly prizes etc...

    Both sides get a limited number of revives, attacking team captures and holds the keep for X amount of time or wipe out the defenders they win, defenders wipe out the attackers or hold out for X amount of time they win.

    Only problems I see, is groups taking turns winning and losing to get their weekly or daily prize out of the way. That and having enough players interested in it to fill the queues.

    would love to see a 12v12 BG. Bonus points if you can set up a fight against a specific group like some glorious multi-person duel!
    " I nEeD HeAlInG!!! "
  • ThreeXB
    ThreeXB
    ✭✭✭✭
    Here is my 2 cents .... This game is 6 years old , gamers hardware has gotten more powerful ( pc alot faster , ps4-ps4 pro-ps5, same with xbox ) , most standard internet speeds have increased . When the game came out Cyrodiil's population cap was 2000 and now it is 400-450 ....FIX THE GAME then raise the population cap.
    Edited by ThreeXB on January 7, 2021 8:04AM
  • hafgood
    hafgood
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    I disagree with this idea, it would fragment the PvP player base still further, plus what about the casuals and small guilds? If the big guilds are off fighting each other Cyrodiil will have a small population made up mainly of independents, PvErs, casuals and small guilds.

    Plus you are promoting the very issues that cause the problems in Cyrodiil. Performance for those left behind would be great, performance for those in this new PvP mode would be awful, so why would they want to do it.

    Plus part of the fun of PvP is coming up against different players. It gets boring when its the same opponents all the time, and thats what this would be. My PvP guild vs your PvP guild. Sure the players would change a little but those that play the same time as me would largely be the same each night. And what happens when we sleep? Someone on the other side of the world nightcaps the map? Or we have to make sure we have players from all over the world so we can nightcap. And that all falls on less than 500 players on each side? In practical terms it would probably be no more than about 30 to 50 vs 30 to 50 at anyone time. And this would take a lot of programming and time - and therefore money - for little use.

    Better to fix the issues in Cyrodiil and get those populations to a more healthy place before adding more in
Sign In or Register to comment.