Update 49 is now available for testing on the PTS! You can read the latest patch notes here: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/categories/pts
Maintenance for the week of January 19:
• [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for patch maintenance – January 21, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 10:00AM EST (15:00 UTC)
•[COMPLETE] EU megaservers for patch maintenance – January 21, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 15:00 UTC (10:00AM EST)
• [COMPLETE] NA megaservers for patch maintenance – January 21, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 10:00AM EST (15:00 UTC)
•[COMPLETE] EU megaservers for patch maintenance – January 21, 9:00 UTC (4:00AM EST) - 15:00 UTC (10:00AM EST)
Imperial City - Risk vs Reward Proposal
-
DaisyRay✭✭✭As a big scaredy‑cat who banks the tiniest amount of telvar just so no one gets the satisfaction of taking them, I disagree with this entirely. Putting a cap on how much telvar someone can steal feels really unfair. There are plenty of ways to protect your telvar without punishing other players.
For example, I use the IC port stones. I find a hiding spot, then port straight to base. You can also use stealth or build tanky, though being tanky tends to make you more of a target. Playing in a group is another option, especially if you’re not super confident in your ability to pvp.
Please don’t ruin the experience for other pvpers just because you don’t enjoy IC. There are plenty of other ways to pvp in this game. Just try something else instead.⭑･ﾟﾟ･*:༅｡.｡༅:*ﾟ:*:✼✿ DaisyRay ✿✼:*ﾟ:༅｡.｡༅:*･ﾟﾟ･⭑0 -
Avran_Sylt✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Blood_again wrote: »Avran_Sylt wrote: »
Then make the risk equal. Make gankers have to carry telvar too to even steal.
Same with groups. If I get dumpstered because there were two people fighting me I don't want to lose that Tel Var because they decided to fight unfairly, their combined Tel Var should be double mine before I lose any to them. (and if three, triple, etc.)
Bombers would be eager to hear what you suggest for a 1v10 encounter, yes, yes
Actually your idea would push players to play solo, which is the wrong way.
Playing in a group and coordinating with your group is currently a good tactic, and it should stay a good tactic.
Don't get me wrong, grouping as it is doesn't guarantee you any safety, whatever the players told us above. Grouping just raises your chances to stay alive and do the job. It is good for IC.
Please don't try to turn PvP in IC into the same thing as a boss fight, when players curse any unwanted ally.
If your idea were implemented, it would.
I would simply change the fixed 50% fine for death to a variable one, depending on the player's multiplier.
Like, if the attacker had 4x multiplier, they get 60% if won. If it is 2x - 20%. Something like that.
Maybe it should be affected by a ratio between the multipliers of both players.
1. this will really make an attacker risk more and have way more tv if they wanna get more.
2. Also the attacker will miss more % of their own telvars, being killed by a rich 4x farmer they ambushed. Risk-vs-reward, yep.
3. tv farmer can't be calm about his guaranteed budget anymore. "I'll always have my 50%" won't work, because you don't know who you'll encounter. It is a motivation to fight for your life
4. tv farmers won't have some safe threshold, after which they miss just a fixed amount and they won't bother. That point against the plain limit was the reasonable one in the topic.
Cons: multiplayer fights might turn it into a hellish amount of math, really. Well, I would trust in devs in this moment.
So basically: let ball-groups farm more tel-var from solo players given their security in numbers and safety on holding greater multipliers through co-op defense/offense, which also allows them to better contest district bosses.0 -
coop500✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Blood_again wrote: »Avran_Sylt wrote: »
Then make the risk equal. Make gankers have to carry telvar too to even steal.
Same with groups. If I get dumpstered because there were two people fighting me I don't want to lose that Tel Var because they decided to fight unfairly, their combined Tel Var should be double mine before I lose any to them. (and if three, triple, etc.)
Bombers would be eager to hear what you suggest for a 1v10 encounter, yes, yes
Actually your idea would push players to play solo, which is the wrong way.
Playing in a group and coordinating with your group is currently a good tactic, and it should stay a good tactic.
Don't get me wrong, grouping as it is doesn't guarantee you any safety, whatever the players told us above. Grouping just raises your chances to stay alive and do the job. It is good for IC.
Please don't try to turn PvP in IC into the same thing as a boss fight, when players curse any unwanted ally.
If your idea were implemented, it would.
I would simply change the fixed 50% fine for death to a variable one, depending on the player's multiplier.
Like, if the attacker had 4x multiplier, they get 60% if won. If it is 2x - 20%. Something like that.
Maybe it should be affected by a ratio between the multipliers of both players.
1. this will really make an attacker risk more and have way more tv if they wanna get more.
2. Also the attacker will miss more % of their own telvars, being killed by a rich 4x farmer they ambushed. Risk-vs-reward, yep.
3. tv farmer can't be calm about his guaranteed budget anymore. "I'll always have my 50%" won't work, because you don't know who you'll encounter. It is a motivation to fight for your life
4. tv farmers won't have some safe threshold, after which they miss just a fixed amount and they won't bother. That point against the plain limit was the reasonable one in the topic.
Cons: multiplayer fights might turn it into a hellish amount of math, really. Well, I would trust in devs in this moment.
Yes honestly, I would like your idea. Tie it into a system we already have, just apply it to players too. I don't think it'd be that difficult to implement either.Hoping for more playable races0 -
CameraBeardThePirate✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Blood_again wrote: »Avran_Sylt wrote: »
Then make the risk equal. Make gankers have to carry telvar too to even steal.
Same with groups. If I get dumpstered because there were two people fighting me I don't want to lose that Tel Var because they decided to fight unfairly, their combined Tel Var should be double mine before I lose any to them. (and if three, triple, etc.)
Bombers would be eager to hear what you suggest for a 1v10 encounter, yes, yes
Actually your idea would push players to play solo, which is the wrong way.
Playing in a group and coordinating with your group is currently a good tactic, and it should stay a good tactic.
Don't get me wrong, grouping as it is doesn't guarantee you any safety, whatever the players told us above. Grouping just raises your chances to stay alive and do the job. It is good for IC.
Please don't try to turn PvP in IC into the same thing as a boss fight, when players curse any unwanted ally.
If your idea were implemented, it would.
I would simply change the fixed 50% fine for death to a variable one, depending on the player's multiplier.
Like, if the attacker had 4x multiplier, they get 60% if won. If it is 2x - 20%. Something like that.
Maybe it should be affected by a ratio between the multipliers of both players.
1. this will really make an attacker risk more and have way more tv if they wanna get more.
2. Also the attacker will miss more % of their own telvars, being killed by a rich 4x farmer they ambushed. Risk-vs-reward, yep.
3. tv farmer can't be calm about his guaranteed budget anymore. "I'll always have my 50%" won't work, because you don't know who you'll encounter. It is a motivation to fight for your life
4. tv farmers won't have some safe threshold, after which they miss just a fixed amount and they won't bother. That point against the plain limit was the reasonable one in the topic.
Cons: multiplayer fights might turn it into a hellish amount of math, really. Well, I would trust in devs in this moment.
Yes honestly, I would like your idea. Tie it into a system we already have, just apply it to players too. I don't think it'd be that difficult to implement either.
It would be very difficult to implement. The problem with this is the math involved as soon as a group scenario arises. The server would need to do quite a bit of math on how much each player in a group earns from other player kills.Edited by CameraBeardThePirate on January 18, 2026 5:12PM0 -
coop500✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭CameraBeardThePirate wrote: »Blood_again wrote: »Avran_Sylt wrote: »
Then make the risk equal. Make gankers have to carry telvar too to even steal.
Same with groups. If I get dumpstered because there were two people fighting me I don't want to lose that Tel Var because they decided to fight unfairly, their combined Tel Var should be double mine before I lose any to them. (and if three, triple, etc.)
Bombers would be eager to hear what you suggest for a 1v10 encounter, yes, yes
Actually your idea would push players to play solo, which is the wrong way.
Playing in a group and coordinating with your group is currently a good tactic, and it should stay a good tactic.
Don't get me wrong, grouping as it is doesn't guarantee you any safety, whatever the players told us above. Grouping just raises your chances to stay alive and do the job. It is good for IC.
Please don't try to turn PvP in IC into the same thing as a boss fight, when players curse any unwanted ally.
If your idea were implemented, it would.
I would simply change the fixed 50% fine for death to a variable one, depending on the player's multiplier.
Like, if the attacker had 4x multiplier, they get 60% if won. If it is 2x - 20%. Something like that.
Maybe it should be affected by a ratio between the multipliers of both players.
1. this will really make an attacker risk more and have way more tv if they wanna get more.
2. Also the attacker will miss more % of their own telvars, being killed by a rich 4x farmer they ambushed. Risk-vs-reward, yep.
3. tv farmer can't be calm about his guaranteed budget anymore. "I'll always have my 50%" won't work, because you don't know who you'll encounter. It is a motivation to fight for your life
4. tv farmers won't have some safe threshold, after which they miss just a fixed amount and they won't bother. That point against the plain limit was the reasonable one in the topic.
Cons: multiplayer fights might turn it into a hellish amount of math, really. Well, I would trust in devs in this moment.
Yes honestly, I would like your idea. Tie it into a system we already have, just apply it to players too. I don't think it'd be that difficult to implement either.
It would be very difficult to implement. The problem with this is the math involved as soon as a group scenario arises. The server would need to do quite a bit of math on how much each player in a group earns from other player kills.
Server already has to do this whenever there's groups killing daedra though. Yeah it's a little worse, but I don't think it'd be THAT much worse.Hoping for more playable races0 -
CameraBeardThePirate✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭CameraBeardThePirate wrote: »Blood_again wrote: »Avran_Sylt wrote: »
Then make the risk equal. Make gankers have to carry telvar too to even steal.
Same with groups. If I get dumpstered because there were two people fighting me I don't want to lose that Tel Var because they decided to fight unfairly, their combined Tel Var should be double mine before I lose any to them. (and if three, triple, etc.)
Bombers would be eager to hear what you suggest for a 1v10 encounter, yes, yes
Actually your idea would push players to play solo, which is the wrong way.
Playing in a group and coordinating with your group is currently a good tactic, and it should stay a good tactic.
Don't get me wrong, grouping as it is doesn't guarantee you any safety, whatever the players told us above. Grouping just raises your chances to stay alive and do the job. It is good for IC.
Please don't try to turn PvP in IC into the same thing as a boss fight, when players curse any unwanted ally.
If your idea were implemented, it would.
I would simply change the fixed 50% fine for death to a variable one, depending on the player's multiplier.
Like, if the attacker had 4x multiplier, they get 60% if won. If it is 2x - 20%. Something like that.
Maybe it should be affected by a ratio between the multipliers of both players.
1. this will really make an attacker risk more and have way more tv if they wanna get more.
2. Also the attacker will miss more % of their own telvars, being killed by a rich 4x farmer they ambushed. Risk-vs-reward, yep.
3. tv farmer can't be calm about his guaranteed budget anymore. "I'll always have my 50%" won't work, because you don't know who you'll encounter. It is a motivation to fight for your life
4. tv farmers won't have some safe threshold, after which they miss just a fixed amount and they won't bother. That point against the plain limit was the reasonable one in the topic.
Cons: multiplayer fights might turn it into a hellish amount of math, really. Well, I would trust in devs in this moment.
Yes honestly, I would like your idea. Tie it into a system we already have, just apply it to players too. I don't think it'd be that difficult to implement either.
It would be very difficult to implement. The problem with this is the math involved as soon as a group scenario arises. The server would need to do quite a bit of math on how much each player in a group earns from other player kills.
Server already has to do this whenever there's groups killing daedra though. Yeah it's a little worse, but I don't think it'd be THAT much worse.
The math involved with tying the losing player TelVar drops to the victorious player's amount of TelVar would be way more complicated than Daedra TelVar drops.
Daedra TelVar drops are extremely simple. You take the TelVar the Daedra gets and divide it evenly among the players - let's say 12k split 3 ways to 4k each. That 4k is then multiplied by their modifier.
Player TelVar drops ignore modifiers, but if you were to then tie it to the amount a player holds, the math gets out of hand really fast.
How would ZOS even code it? What if you have a player with 20k TelVar die to a group of 4 players, each with 10k, 2k, 3k, and 500? Normally the 10k they get would be split evenly (4 * 2.5k), but what would ZOS code the system to prefer in this scenario? Does the person with 10k get EVEN MORE than the 2.5k they'd usually get? What about the person with 3k? Would the person with 10k be preferred over the person with 3k, even though they're both over the 2.5k limit that they would get from an even split? Does the extra TelVar get deleted or is it given to the players in the group with the most, even though they'd get more than 2.5k? Is the TelVar limit calculated by the entire group's TelVar? Or is it done player by player?Edited by CameraBeardThePirate on January 19, 2026 6:28AM0 -
Blood_again✭✭✭✭✭CameraBeardThePirate wrote: »
The math involved with tying the losing player TelVar drops to the victorious player's amount of TelVar would be way more complicated than Daedra TelVar drops.
Daedra TelVar drops are extremely simple. You take the TelVar the Daedra gets and divide it evenly among the players - let's say 12k split 3 ways to 4k each. That 4k is then multiplied by their modifier.
Player TelVar drops ignore modifiers, but if you were to then tie it to the amount a player holds, the math gets out of hand really fast.
How would ZOS even code it? What if you have a player with 20k TelVar die to a group of 4 players, each with 10k, 2k, 3k, and 500? Normally the 10k they get would be split evenly (4 * 2.5k), but what would ZOS code the system to prefer in this scenario? Does the person with 10k get EVEN MORE than the 2.5k they'd usually get? What about the person with 3k? Would the person with 10k be preferred over the person with 3k, even though they're both over the 2.5k limit that they would get from an even split? Does the extra TelVar get deleted or is it given to the players in the group with the most, even though they'd get more than 2.5k? Is the TelVar limit calculated by the entire group's TelVar? Or is it done player by player?
No need to overcomplicate things.
All those "one is preferred over another" and "extra telvar deleted" are odd here.
Entire group telvar amount is odd too. We don't change the whole system "who's eligible or not". It stays the same as now.
We just change the numbers.
We have multipliers and the percent table linked to the multipliers.
Let's say
x1 - 10%
x2 - 20%
x3 - 35%
x4 - 60%
Four players in your example have the following telvars, multipliers and percents:
1. 10k - x4 - 60%
2. 2k - x3 - 35%
3. 3k - x3 - 35%
4. 500 - x2 - 20%
Step one: the percent of telvars the dead one lose is the avg from: (60+35+35+20)/4 = 150/4 = 37.5%
Amount of telvar lost: 20000 * 0.375 = 7500
Step two: distribute telvars according to players' parts:
1. 7500 * 60 / 150 = 3000
2. 7500 * 35 / 150 = 1750
3. 7500 * 35 / 150 = 1750
4. 7500 * 20 / 150 = 1000
Yep, it is more than just divide on 4, but not a rocket science.
Basic battle dmg calculation is way more complicated.
For the group of 4 players all with x4, the killed one would lost 12k and every x4 would get 3k.
For the group of 4 with x2 -- 4k lost, 1k for each.
Seems logical?
It is one of the possible variants.
The table may be different. The way to count % lost may be different.
The point is the idea: the more tv you have, the more you get from PvP kill. The more tv had the attacker, the more tv the prey has lost.
Edit:
I just played with excel numbers a bit and optimized it. This math can be calculated even easier in one step.
We get the amount of tv on prey, divide on group count and apply the individual %
from multiplier (from the table). We get the same result.
For the example above it will be:
1. 20000 * 0.60 / 4 = 3000
2. 20000 * 0.35 / 4 = 1750
3. 20000 * 0.35 / 4 = 1750
4. 20000 * 0.20 / 4 = 1000
That's it. The same "divide by 4" just with a coefficient not 50%
Edited by Blood_again on January 20, 2026 12:17PM0 -
imPDA✭✭✭Avran_Sylt wrote: »x1 - 10%
x2 - 20%
x3 - 35%
x4 - 60%
I can imagine group in Imperial Physique sets chasing you, it will be astonishing view. And seeing this you can be 100% sure you will lose 60% of your current Tel Vars
It is even simpler math tbh, if you have 4x with 60% multiplier, you will get 60%*<target tv>/<number of attackers>, if does not depend on other players multiplier, no need to calculate average, etc. E.x. with 4x and 20k target TV you will get 60%*20k/4 = 12k/4 = 3k, with 35% -> 1750, etc.Edited by imPDA on January 20, 2026 12:08PMYour Friendly Neighborhood PvP Enjoyer (prior to U48)0 -
imPDA✭✭✭I honestly think it is not necessary at this point, but it will make ganking not so attractive, because gankers usually have no TV, so they receive bare minimum, but as it will change virtually nothing for me, I don't think it is brilliant idea and I doubt it will be implemented ever soon.Your Friendly Neighborhood PvP Enjoyer (prior to U48)0
-
Blood_again✭✭✭✭✭I can imagine group in Imperial Physique sets chasing you, it will be astonishing view. And seeing this you can be 100% sure you will lose 60% of your current Tel Vars
Well, some battles between groups of "lanterns" would be epic. Like in good old 2016It is even simpler math tbh, if you have 4x with 60% multiplier, you will get 60%*<target tv>/<number of attackers>, if does not depend on other players multiplier, no need to calculate average, etc. E.x. with 4x and 20k target TV you will get 60%*20k/4 = 12k/4 = 3k, with 35% -> 1750, etc.
Yep, got the same thing.
So the math and server load are not a problem here0 -
MXVIIDREAM✭✭✭Blood_again wrote: »I can imagine group in Imperial Physique sets chasing you, it will be astonishing view. And seeing this you can be 100% sure you will lose 60% of your current Tel Vars
Well, some battles between groups of "lanterns" would be epic. Like in good old 2016It is even simpler math tbh, if you have 4x with 60% multiplier, you will get 60%*<target tv>/<number of attackers>, if does not depend on other players multiplier, no need to calculate average, etc. E.x. with 4x and 20k target TV you will get 60%*20k/4 = 12k/4 = 3k, with 35% -> 1750, etc.
Yep, got the same thing.
So the math and server load are not a problem here
Giving me ptsd lol
0
