Regarding "travel to player" option in PvP

Lord_Draevan

I see a lot of complaints in the forums and in-game chat about the "travel to player" option and PvP. Supposedly, even if the campaign is full (i.e 600 vs 600 vs 600 or whatever the new max is), using this option will allow you to enter the campaign anyways, resulting in one faction potentially having many more players than the other 2 factions.
However, this is not how it works.
While you can enter the campaign this way, you can only do so if there's no queue. If you try when there's a queue, you'll get the following message: "Jump failed because campaign is full".
So while one faction may have a few more players than another when a population is locked, as soon as there's a queue you cannot enter via the "travel to player" option.

So enough "faction X is only winning on campaign Y because they have lots of players enter with travel to player to bypass the population lock". I've tried it, it doesn't work, you cannot enter if there's a queue via this method.

Starshadw

This option still needs to go. It allows players to completely bypass the guesting feature and "guest" in any campaign, no matter which one is designated as their actual guest campaign. I was frankly shocked when I found out this was supposedly working as intended. Why have a guest feature at all, then?

Lord_Draevan

Starshadw wrote: »

This option still needs to go. It allows players to completely bypass the guesting feature and "guest" in any campaign, no matter which one is designated as their actual guest campaign. I was frankly shocked when I found out this was supposedly working as intended. Why have a guest feature at all, then?

That I agree with, it should be guest, home or not at all, I was just adressing the supposed "hundreds of people over the population lock due to travel-to-player" theory.

nukeyoo

Lord_Draevan wrote: »

I've tried it, it doesn't work, you cannot enter if there's a queue via this method.

So you've dropped Wabbajack as a home campaign and/or guest campaign. Set another campaign(s) as your home/guest then when Wabbajack was locked attempted to teleport to party member inside the Wabbajack campaign already?

Limitless

nukeyoo wrote: »

Lord_Draevan wrote: »

I've tried it, it doesn't work, you cannot enter if there's a queue via this method.

So you've dropped Wabbajack as a home campaign and/or guest campaign. Set another campaign(s) as your home/guest then when Wabbajack was locked attempted to teleport to party member inside the Wabbajack campaign already?

Tried it myself today just as an experiment, and I could not join Wabba while it was locked in population.

Lord_Draevan

nukeyoo wrote: »

Lord_Draevan wrote: »

I've tried it, it doesn't work, you cannot enter if there's a queue via this method.

So you've dropped Wabbajack as a home campaign and/or guest campaign. Set another campaign(s) as your home/guest then when Wabbajack was locked attempted to teleport to party member inside the Wabbajack campaign already?

Yup. Changed my home to Bloodthorn, had a Guildie go into Wabbajack, joined his group, used "travel to player" and got the "Jump failed because campaign is full". Then set Wabba as my guest, tried again, same thing.

chaosme

You cannot use travel to player to enter a locked campaign without joining the normal queue. You can however, use travel to player to enter a campaign that is not population locked for your side regardless of whether it is your home/guest campaign or not. This 2nd point is the main issue with allowing traveling to players in Cyrodiil.

Phaade

o.O

I am learning all kinds of stuff in the forums today ;-)

galiumb16_ESO

Starshadw wrote: »

This option still needs to go. It allows players to completely bypass the guesting feature and "guest" in any campaign, no matter which one is designated as their actual guest campaign. I was frankly shocked when I found out this was supposedly working as intended. Why have a guest feature at all, then?

Guest lets you go to another server without having to rely on someone else to get there, it does not need to do more then that.

PvP is about players fighting players. In order for that to happen you must find other players to fight. I use the 'travel to player' feature to switch campaigns where I might be able to find a fight. Without this feature you are stuck having to stack on an over populated server, ie wabbalag.

This may not be as required when the campaigns are reduced to 5, let us hope.

Anazasi

Testing this feature on wabba only tests the pop cap lock. The true impact is felt on unpopulated servers. When small group typically like 20 v 20 fights until someone decides to call in friends. Then it can quickly become a 200 vs 20 through the travel to player mechanic. This is why and typically where the issue becomes game breaking.

JeffKnight

I never said the locks were broke. If I did, I did not intend to. What I did say was that the population counters are broke. If you enter the campaign via this method, you are not counted against the population cap - of course there is the hard lock, but that doesn't come into play until people enter legitimately. That is how the populations get to be so unbalanced.