Necrotech_Master wrote: »
i dont think i would want the grouping though, a lot of the problem with zergs chasing down small scale groups is because of the way the respawn system on the surface lends itself to zerging, besides limiting the team size wont stop zerging, people can be ungrouped and zerg, or still use voice comms so limiting the team size will do little to nothing in regards of preventing Xv1 behavior
DrNukenstein wrote: »Necrotech_Master wrote: »
i dont think i would want the grouping though, a lot of the problem with zergs chasing down small scale groups is because of the way the respawn system on the surface lends itself to zerging, besides limiting the team size wont stop zerging, people can be ungrouped and zerg, or still use voice comms so limiting the team size will do little to nothing in regards of preventing Xv1 behavior
It would have an effect on how many people can benefit from one support player and how many people can coordinate with one crown. People can organize beyond 4 using discord, but they won't be sharing buffs like they do now and they'll be more likely to lose focus.
DrNukenstein wrote: »Then everyone likes rallying cry and the rallying cry's will be split less ways.
I guess it would be more symbolic than effective. Saying "this is small pvp town, if you don't like it go ride around in Cyrodil"
Necrotech_Master wrote: »DrNukenstein wrote: »Necrotech_Master wrote: »
i dont think i would want the grouping though, a lot of the problem with zergs chasing down small scale groups is because of the way the respawn system on the surface lends itself to zerging, besides limiting the team size wont stop zerging, people can be ungrouped and zerg, or still use voice comms so limiting the team size will do little to nothing in regards of preventing Xv1 behavior
It would have an effect on how many people can benefit from one support player and how many people can coordinate with one crown. People can organize beyond 4 using discord, but they won't be sharing buffs like they do now and they'll be more likely to lose focus.
that wont prevent the biggest buff share of all, heal stacking (radiating regen and echoing vigor both dont require teaming)
not to mention it would be easier to maintain those in IC due to the close quarters
IxSTALKERxI wrote: »imo a group size limit of 6 would make more sense in IC than 4. A lot of the game mechanics are balanced around numbers of 6, both abilities and flipping flags.
IC definately needs some kind of revamp. Maybe there can be a leaderboard taking track of telvar earned minus telvar lost. With leaderboard rewards like how there is for trail leaderboards / pvp leaderboards /tales of tribute leaderboard etc.
I'm likely in the minority, but I think IC activity should have some impact in Cyrodiil, potentially to spawn a daedric artifact (ex. Molag Bal killed 100 times in CP-IC, chance to spawn Mace of Molag Bal somewhere in Cyrodiil after each kill in each CP campaign).
I think it would be cool to see multiple artifacts spawning at different timing intervals and potentially being able to be triggered. Right now we have Volendrung that spawns ~5 hours and it is a delight to see fights over it.
No its clearly unfair people needs to reset their combat after some fights. just imagine you are fighting agaist big group (no need to be group lets say zerg) once you kill them they come again and again with full sustain especially healers how can you kill that group or how can you end the fight? well ofc intentionally dying is option for sure but then why people want to lose their telvar which they hardly gainedDrNukenstein wrote: »
-respawn anywhere. If a district is hot, keep the action moving. Let people respawn where the action is regardless of whether their team controls the flag
I don't think limiting group size is going to do IC population any favours, honestly. Groups are the only way some people even want to go there.
The inherent issue of IC is that ontop of the already extremely rough access curve of ESO PvP you have a setup that is designed around being an extremely punitive gankfest in which you even lose things on dying. An egoshooter match with invisibility, death costs, no guarantee of at least numerical equality and expensive and complicated character setup. Oh, and you're supposed to worry about all that while also fighting NPCs.
I don't believe IC can be made popular in a way that would please people currently enjoying it tbh.
Moba hybrid.
It would not be a good experiment. If it leads to an improvement then there is no way of knowing which points are good and which ideas are bad. As such it seems more like just another suggestion to change IC overall since I do not see how any of the points actually make IC more interesting.
DrNukenstein wrote: »Moba hybrid.
If they make a 2 team lane pushing mode where you win resources from "successful conflicts" and spend those on game mode specific power ups, contest timed PvEvP objectives, and destroy towers all in pursuit of dunking the enemy nexus then:
They can close this thread and take all my money.
DrNukenstein wrote: »Moba hybrid.
If they make a 2 team lane pushing mode where you win resources from "successful conflicts" and spend those on game mode specific power ups, contest timed PvEvP objectives, and destroy towers all in pursuit of dunking the enemy nexus then:
They can close this thread and take all my money.
Honestly kinda surprised the mode never gained traction in MMO'S seeing as moba games, especially league, drew from MMO'S in the first place. Alterac Valley in WoW had moba type elements that just never got fleshed out and got thrown out with the bath water. Surprised no one came back after league and Dota refined the concepts and put them into an MMO pvp mode.
Not sure if IC is the right place for such a mode other than it lacks any real identity and already has flags and PVE mobs that could be altered to fit the game mode. Tel Var could just become the game mode currency if you really want to keep it and have it operate the same way as it does now. More you turn in at a time the bigger the buff or allied NPC's it spawns. That way there is risk/reward to it while creating general AP rewards and coffers that have the current IC rewards so players feel like the mode respects their time relative to other activities. Probably a long shot though as I suspect Zos thinks the monster helm sets were incentive enough.
DrNukenstein wrote: »It would not be a good experiment. If it leads to an improvement then there is no way of knowing which points are good and which ideas are bad. As such it seems more like just another suggestion to change IC overall since I do not see how any of the points actually make IC more interesting.
I totally disagree. Almost each proposed adjustment has trackable player metrics associated with it. Things like:
-How many groups of how many players participated in this content over time.
-How many people bought transmutes from that vendor, how many also used the transmute station shortly after
-How many players participated in what dailies over time
-How many players were active in IC when the flags were turned off
-How many in district respawns occurred over time
Any increase over current metrics would confirm improvement, and where. They log inputs. Ofcourse they log content engagement too.