Maintenance for the week of November 18:
[IN PROGRESS] PlayStation®: EU megaserver for maintenance – November 19, 23:00 UTC (6:00PM EST) - November 20, 17:00 UTC (12:00PM EST) https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/668861
[IN PROGRESS] PlayStation®: EU megaserver for maintenance – November 19, 23:00 UTC (6:00PM EST) - November 20, 17:00 UTC (12:00PM EST) https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/668861
Revert Faction Locks. We've Been Through This Already
-
jaws343✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭It's always been that way because people want to go where the action is and the 7 days are the campaign where faction flipping and EMP swapping has really been possible.
So it proves that faction swappers are not the people wanting to flip maps y'all claim them to be.
It also prove that people could go to a non-locked campaign if it was important to them, but they dont so aparantly it isnt important... i am playing on the faction locked camppaign, cosue thats important to me...
we dident have a choise before, we do now !
There are not enough players in this game who PVP to have a healthy population across two campaigns. Locks have nothing to do with one campaign being empty. What part of that do you not understand? The current lock system doesn't prove anything for faction locks. All it shows is that players who do not care either way will pick the path of least resistance, i.e. the first campaign on the list. And that players want to play in a campaign where there are actual players, which ends up being that first campaign, due to point 1. Once those two points are taken into account, the only campaign that gets a healthy population is the first campaign. Regardless of locks.
The only thing faction lock does is exacerbate the off peak map flipping and further drive players away when their faction has an insurmountable deficit in points or when they are constantly gate camped and unable to do anything but be farmed by a "winning" faction. Or they are a member of said "winning" faction and are tired of gate farming with the rest of the faction loyalists who think that is skill.
Prove it ?
would play on a faction locked campaign regardless, and so does alot of other people... and the mere notion that people are choosing the locked camapign is proof in itself, again yes i cna only speak for myself, but some of you that want to flip flop, dosent even play on the non-locked, that says alot... clearly it isnt important to you
So you don't actually care about good PvP and just want faction locks for the sake of it. Then why should anyone who cares about PvP take your opinion serious?
There is only one reasonable argument for faction locks and that's to prevent AP farming/emp trading on a dead campaign - which only happened on the 7-day campaign if it happened at all. So if anything, they should have locked this one and keep the 30-day campaigns unlocked. As it is implemented now, it doesn't make sense at all.
couse you dont switch sides in the middle of something, that be like saying you could change side when you loose in a bg and yoin the winning side... is brilliantly stupid...
Except cyrodiil is nothing like bgs. You don't have actual teams in Cyrodiil. You just have hundreds of different players, playing at different times, in different campaigns and with varying population over the course of the day and campaign cycle. Players can (and do) log off at any time, eg. if they are loosing to much. They can (and do) still swap to any campaign at any time and often do so to join the winning side.
But now players can't swap faction anymore to counterbalance those population fluctuations that are going to happen regardless.
I have experienced a lot more winning team joining by campaign swapping, than by faction swapping. Most who swapped faction did so to get better fights, and that's something you only get if you swap to the weaker side.
BGs, and here i thought the side with most points won... let me see cyrodil, the side with most points win... thats the basics of it, then you can try argue and insert alot of other things but like a BG, its essentially down to one side wins...
Except a win in BGs means monumentally more than a "win" in Cyrodil.0 -
Sandman929✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭It's always been that way because people want to go where the action is and the 7 days are the campaign where faction flipping and EMP swapping has really been possible.
So it proves that faction swappers are not the people wanting to flip maps y'all claim them to be.
It also prove that people could go to a non-locked campaign if it was important to them, but they dont so aparantly it isnt important... i am playing on the faction locked camppaign, cosue thats important to me...
we dident have a choise before, we do now !
There are not enough players in this game who PVP to have a healthy population across two campaigns. Locks have nothing to do with one campaign being empty. What part of that do you not understand? The current lock system doesn't prove anything for faction locks. All it shows is that players who do not care either way will pick the path of least resistance, i.e. the first campaign on the list. And that players want to play in a campaign where there are actual players, which ends up being that first campaign, due to point 1. Once those two points are taken into account, the only campaign that gets a healthy population is the first campaign. Regardless of locks.
The only thing faction lock does is exacerbate the off peak map flipping and further drive players away when their faction has an insurmountable deficit in points or when they are constantly gate camped and unable to do anything but be farmed by a "winning" faction. Or they are a member of said "winning" faction and are tired of gate farming with the rest of the faction loyalists who think that is skill.
Prove it ?
would play on a faction locked campaign regardless, and so does alot of other people... and the mere notion that people are choosing the locked camapign is proof in itself, again yes i cna only speak for myself, but some of you that want to flip flop, dosent even play on the non-locked, that says alot... clearly it isnt important to you
So you don't actually care about good PvP and just want faction locks for the sake of it. Then why should anyone who cares about PvP take your opinion serious?
There is only one reasonable argument for faction locks and that's to prevent AP farming/emp trading on a dead campaign - which only happened on the 7-day campaign if it happened at all. So if anything, they should have locked this one and keep the 30-day campaigns unlocked. As it is implemented now, it doesn't make sense at all.
couse you dont switch sides in the middle of something, that be like saying you could change side when you loose in a bg and yoin the winning side... is brilliantly stupid...
Except cyrodiil is nothing like bgs. You don't have actual teams in Cyrodiil. You just have hundreds of different players, playing at different times, in different campaigns and with varying population over the course of the day and campaign cycle. Players can (and do) log off at any time, eg. if they are loosing to much. They can (and do) still swap to any campaign at any time and often do so to join the winning side.
But now players can't swap faction anymore to counterbalance those population fluctuations that are going to happen regardless.
I have experienced a lot more winning team joining by campaign swapping, than by faction swapping. Most who swapped faction did so to get better fights, and that's something you only get if you swap to the weaker side.
BGs, and here i thought the side with most points won... let me see cyrodil, the side with most points win... thats the basics of it, then you can try argue and insert alot of other things but like a BG, its essentially down to one side wins...
Except a win in BGs means monumentally more than a "win" in Cyrodil.
Kinda hard to determine how others view a "win" isn't it?2 -
Miriel✭✭✭✭It's always been that way because people want to go where the action is and the 7 days are the campaign where faction flipping and EMP swapping has really been possible.
So it proves that faction swappers are not the people wanting to flip maps y'all claim them to be.
It also prove that people could go to a non-locked campaign if it was important to them, but they dont so aparantly it isnt important... i am playing on the faction locked camppaign, cosue thats important to me...
we dident have a choise before, we do now !
There are not enough players in this game who PVP to have a healthy population across two campaigns. Locks have nothing to do with one campaign being empty. What part of that do you not understand? The current lock system doesn't prove anything for faction locks. All it shows is that players who do not care either way will pick the path of least resistance, i.e. the first campaign on the list. And that players want to play in a campaign where there are actual players, which ends up being that first campaign, due to point 1. Once those two points are taken into account, the only campaign that gets a healthy population is the first campaign. Regardless of locks.
The only thing faction lock does is exacerbate the off peak map flipping and further drive players away when their faction has an insurmountable deficit in points or when they are constantly gate camped and unable to do anything but be farmed by a "winning" faction. Or they are a member of said "winning" faction and are tired of gate farming with the rest of the faction loyalists who think that is skill.
Prove it ?
would play on a faction locked campaign regardless, and so does alot of other people... and the mere notion that people are choosing the locked camapign is proof in itself, again yes i cna only speak for myself, but some of you that want to flip flop, dosent even play on the non-locked, that says alot... clearly it isnt important to you
So you don't actually care about good PvP and just want faction locks for the sake of it. Then why should anyone who cares about PvP take your opinion serious?
There is only one reasonable argument for faction locks and that's to prevent AP farming/emp trading on a dead campaign - which only happened on the 7-day campaign if it happened at all. So if anything, they should have locked this one and keep the 30-day campaigns unlocked. As it is implemented now, it doesn't make sense at all.
couse you dont switch sides in the middle of something, that be like saying you could change side when you loose in a bg and yoin the winning side... is brilliantly stupid...
Except cyrodiil is nothing like bgs. You don't have actual teams in Cyrodiil. You just have hundreds of different players, playing at different times, in different campaigns and with varying population over the course of the day and campaign cycle. Players can (and do) log off at any time, eg. if they are loosing to much. They can (and do) still swap to any campaign at any time and often do so to join the winning side.
But now players can't swap faction anymore to counterbalance those population fluctuations that are going to happen regardless.
I have experienced a lot more winning team joining by campaign swapping, than by faction swapping. Most who swapped faction did so to get better fights, and that's something you only get if you swap to the weaker side.
BGs, and here i thought the side with most points won... let me see cyrodil, the side with most points win... thats the basics of it, then you can try argue and insert alot of other things but like a BG, its essentially down to one side wins...
Except a win in BGs means monumentally more than a "win" in Cyrodil.
Well, aparantly to you... as for everyone else, seems alot plays n a faction locked campaign, not even you play in the non locked one so... if flip flopping means so much to you, why are you not in there ?...
I would allways choose the locked if i had the optionEdited by Miriel on 3 June 2019 17:311 -
jaws343✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭It's always been that way because people want to go where the action is and the 7 days are the campaign where faction flipping and EMP swapping has really been possible.
So it proves that faction swappers are not the people wanting to flip maps y'all claim them to be.
It also prove that people could go to a non-locked campaign if it was important to them, but they dont so aparantly it isnt important... i am playing on the faction locked camppaign, cosue thats important to me...
we dident have a choise before, we do now !
There are not enough players in this game who PVP to have a healthy population across two campaigns. Locks have nothing to do with one campaign being empty. What part of that do you not understand? The current lock system doesn't prove anything for faction locks. All it shows is that players who do not care either way will pick the path of least resistance, i.e. the first campaign on the list. And that players want to play in a campaign where there are actual players, which ends up being that first campaign, due to point 1. Once those two points are taken into account, the only campaign that gets a healthy population is the first campaign. Regardless of locks.
The only thing faction lock does is exacerbate the off peak map flipping and further drive players away when their faction has an insurmountable deficit in points or when they are constantly gate camped and unable to do anything but be farmed by a "winning" faction. Or they are a member of said "winning" faction and are tired of gate farming with the rest of the faction loyalists who think that is skill.
Prove it ?
would play on a faction locked campaign regardless, and so does alot of other people... and the mere notion that people are choosing the locked camapign is proof in itself, again yes i cna only speak for myself, but some of you that want to flip flop, dosent even play on the non-locked, that says alot... clearly it isnt important to you
So you don't actually care about good PvP and just want faction locks for the sake of it. Then why should anyone who cares about PvP take your opinion serious?
There is only one reasonable argument for faction locks and that's to prevent AP farming/emp trading on a dead campaign - which only happened on the 7-day campaign if it happened at all. So if anything, they should have locked this one and keep the 30-day campaigns unlocked. As it is implemented now, it doesn't make sense at all.
couse you dont switch sides in the middle of something, that be like saying you could change side when you loose in a bg and yoin the winning side... is brilliantly stupid...
Except cyrodiil is nothing like bgs. You don't have actual teams in Cyrodiil. You just have hundreds of different players, playing at different times, in different campaigns and with varying population over the course of the day and campaign cycle. Players can (and do) log off at any time, eg. if they are loosing to much. They can (and do) still swap to any campaign at any time and often do so to join the winning side.
But now players can't swap faction anymore to counterbalance those population fluctuations that are going to happen regardless.
I have experienced a lot more winning team joining by campaign swapping, than by faction swapping. Most who swapped faction did so to get better fights, and that's something you only get if you swap to the weaker side.
BGs, and here i thought the side with most points won... let me see cyrodil, the side with most points win... thats the basics of it, then you can try argue and insert alot of other things but like a BG, its essentially down to one side wins...
Except a win in BGs means monumentally more than a "win" in Cyrodil.
Well, aparantly to you... as for everyone else, seems alot plays n a faction locked campaign, not even you play in the non locked one so... if flip flopping means so much to you, why are you not in there ?...
I would allways choose the locked if i had the option
I have 15 characters and all of them are EP, so pretty impossible to flip flop, I've said this numerous times here. Also, I will not be playing in any of the campaigns, outside of Imp City, until this is changed, because the type of PVP (pvdoor) it promotes is bad for this game. So, maybe stop making assumptions about people you do not know...Edited by jaws343 on 3 June 2019 17:502 -
IronWooshu✭✭✭✭✭
✭IronWooshu wrote: »@IronWooshu we tried to make them popular 3 years ago when we had entire guilds moving over there - it's lasted 6 mos - and this was when we had tons of very competitive guilds that had bones to pick with one another. If we couldn't manage a strong and consistent pop then, what makes you think anyone is now? It's all hand-holding pvdoor zergs in cyro now. We have 1-2 competitive guilds on each faction in each prime time.
WE. HAVE. DONE. THIS. ALREADY.
Well then I don't know what to tell you, get use to playing faction lock campaign (the way PVP should be) until you can get it to work.
EDIT: There is more incentive now to make it work than there ever has been if people are that against faction lock campaigns.
There really isn’t though. Pvp population is lower than it has ever been. You will notice this because pop caps are 150 currently and queues being anywhere from no queue at pop lock to around 100.
Years ago the pop locks were 250-300(cant recall specific) and you would have queues of 100+ on weekdays primtime and 200-300 queues on weekends.
The numbers are lower because people are leveling Necromancers and questing. Where was all these posts when Summerset came and the exact same thing happened and 3 weeks later... Its back to normal.
Tell me again in a month how faction lock is killing PVP.. ok?
EDIT: If its overall numbers that is causing it then it's been happening before the faction lock, it seems if overall numbers have been steadily declining it would have been due to the factions being unlocked and the cheating running rampant, a direct correlation?
Pop locks were probably lowered to reduce lag.
Dont be obtuse, this data was collected by ZoS therefore it was put into action.IronWooshu wrote: »ellahellabella wrote: »IronWooshu wrote: »ellahellabella wrote: »IronWooshu wrote: »@IronWooshu we tried to make them popular 3 years ago when we had entire guilds moving over there - it's lasted 6 mos - and this was when we had tons of very competitive guilds that had bones to pick with one another. If we couldn't manage a strong and consistent pop then, what makes you think anyone is now? It's all hand-holding pvdoor zergs in cyro now. We have 1-2 competitive guilds on each faction in each prime time.
WE. HAVE. DONE. THIS. ALREADY.
Well then I don't know what to tell you, get use to playing faction lock campaign (the way PVP should be) until you can get it to work.
EDIT: There is more incentive now to make it work than there ever has been if people are that against faction lock campaigns.
lol at "The way pvp should be"
Are you a developer for this game?
no but I should be because apparently the developers and myself agree on something.
Your arrogant ignorance knows no bounds. Kudos
no, what is ignorant is this petition to remove a feature that has been needed for years for your own selfish gain.
Players have wanted this, raw data collected from the devs showed that this mode needed this and to appease everyone made a non faction lock campaign and yet its not good enough for you.
THAT IS IGNORANCE.
Cite the raw data please, I would love to review these numbers.Edited by IronWooshu on 3 June 2019 19:071 -
Hashtag_✭✭✭✭✭IronWooshu wrote: »IronWooshu wrote: »@IronWooshu we tried to make them popular 3 years ago when we had entire guilds moving over there - it's lasted 6 mos - and this was when we had tons of very competitive guilds that had bones to pick with one another. If we couldn't manage a strong and consistent pop then, what makes you think anyone is now? It's all hand-holding pvdoor zergs in cyro now. We have 1-2 competitive guilds on each faction in each prime time.
WE. HAVE. DONE. THIS. ALREADY.
Well then I don't know what to tell you, get use to playing faction lock campaign (the way PVP should be) until you can get it to work.
EDIT: There is more incentive now to make it work than there ever has been if people are that against faction lock campaigns.
There really isn’t though. Pvp population is lower than it has ever been. You will notice this because pop caps are 150 currently and queues being anywhere from no queue at pop lock to around 100.
Years ago the pop locks were 250-300(cant recall specific) and you would have queues of 100+ on weekdays primtime and 200-300 queues on weekends.
The numbers are lower because people are leveling Necromancers and questing. Where was all these posts when Summerset came and the exact same thing happened and 3 weeks later... Its back to normal.
Tell me again in a month how faction lock is killing PVP.. ok?
EDIT: If its overall numbers that is causing it then it's been happening before the faction lock, it seems if overall numbers have been steadily declining it would have been due to the factions being unlocked and the cheating running rampant, a direct correlation?
Pop locks were probably lowered to reduce lag.
Dont be obtuse, this data was collected by ZoS therefore it was put into action.IronWooshu wrote: »ellahellabella wrote: »IronWooshu wrote: »ellahellabella wrote: »IronWooshu wrote: »@IronWooshu we tried to make them popular 3 years ago when we had entire guilds moving over there - it's lasted 6 mos - and this was when we had tons of very competitive guilds that had bones to pick with one another. If we couldn't manage a strong and consistent pop then, what makes you think anyone is now? It's all hand-holding pvdoor zergs in cyro now. We have 1-2 competitive guilds on each faction in each prime time.
WE. HAVE. DONE. THIS. ALREADY.
Well then I don't know what to tell you, get use to playing faction lock campaign (the way PVP should be) until you can get it to work.
EDIT: There is more incentive now to make it work than there ever has been if people are that against faction lock campaigns.
lol at "The way pvp should be"
Are you a developer for this game?
no but I should be because apparently the developers and myself agree on something.
Your arrogant ignorance knows no bounds. Kudos
no, what is ignorant is this petition to remove a feature that has been needed for years for your own selfish gain.
Players have wanted this, raw data collected from the devs showed that this mode needed this and to appease everyone made a non faction lock campaign and yet its not good enough for you.
THAT IS IGNORANCE.
Cite the raw data please, I would love to review these numbers.
Class representative @Joy_Division cites otherwise. Please show me the raw data that ZOS has provided to show us the numbers supported it?0 -
IronWooshu✭✭✭✭✭
✭
What does Joy_Division cite? Link?IronWooshu wrote: »IronWooshu wrote: »@IronWooshu we tried to make them popular 3 years ago when we had entire guilds moving over there - it's lasted 6 mos - and this was when we had tons of very competitive guilds that had bones to pick with one another. If we couldn't manage a strong and consistent pop then, what makes you think anyone is now? It's all hand-holding pvdoor zergs in cyro now. We have 1-2 competitive guilds on each faction in each prime time.
WE. HAVE. DONE. THIS. ALREADY.
Well then I don't know what to tell you, get use to playing faction lock campaign (the way PVP should be) until you can get it to work.
EDIT: There is more incentive now to make it work than there ever has been if people are that against faction lock campaigns.
There really isn’t though. Pvp population is lower than it has ever been. You will notice this because pop caps are 150 currently and queues being anywhere from no queue at pop lock to around 100.
Years ago the pop locks were 250-300(cant recall specific) and you would have queues of 100+ on weekdays primtime and 200-300 queues on weekends.
The numbers are lower because people are leveling Necromancers and questing. Where was all these posts when Summerset came and the exact same thing happened and 3 weeks later... Its back to normal.
Tell me again in a month how faction lock is killing PVP.. ok?
EDIT: If its overall numbers that is causing it then it's been happening before the faction lock, it seems if overall numbers have been steadily declining it would have been due to the factions being unlocked and the cheating running rampant, a direct correlation?
Pop locks were probably lowered to reduce lag.
Dont be obtuse, this data was collected by ZoS therefore it was put into action.IronWooshu wrote: »ellahellabella wrote: »IronWooshu wrote: »ellahellabella wrote: »IronWooshu wrote: »@IronWooshu we tried to make them popular 3 years ago when we had entire guilds moving over there - it's lasted 6 mos - and this was when we had tons of very competitive guilds that had bones to pick with one another. If we couldn't manage a strong and consistent pop then, what makes you think anyone is now? It's all hand-holding pvdoor zergs in cyro now. We have 1-2 competitive guilds on each faction in each prime time.
WE. HAVE. DONE. THIS. ALREADY.
Well then I don't know what to tell you, get use to playing faction lock campaign (the way PVP should be) until you can get it to work.
EDIT: There is more incentive now to make it work than there ever has been if people are that against faction lock campaigns.
lol at "The way pvp should be"
Are you a developer for this game?
no but I should be because apparently the developers and myself agree on something.
Your arrogant ignorance knows no bounds. Kudos
no, what is ignorant is this petition to remove a feature that has been needed for years for your own selfish gain.
Players have wanted this, raw data collected from the devs showed that this mode needed this and to appease everyone made a non faction lock campaign and yet its not good enough for you.
THAT IS IGNORANCE.
Cite the raw data please, I would love to review these numbers.
Class representative @Joy_Division cites otherwise. Please show me the raw data that ZOS has provided to show us the numbers supported it?1 -
Rianai✭✭✭✭✭
✭It's always been that way because people want to go where the action is and the 7 days are the campaign where faction flipping and EMP swapping has really been possible.
So it proves that faction swappers are not the people wanting to flip maps y'all claim them to be.
It also prove that people could go to a non-locked campaign if it was important to them, but they dont so aparantly it isnt important... i am playing on the faction locked camppaign, cosue thats important to me...
we dident have a choise before, we do now !
There are not enough players in this game who PVP to have a healthy population across two campaigns. Locks have nothing to do with one campaign being empty. What part of that do you not understand? The current lock system doesn't prove anything for faction locks. All it shows is that players who do not care either way will pick the path of least resistance, i.e. the first campaign on the list. And that players want to play in a campaign where there are actual players, which ends up being that first campaign, due to point 1. Once those two points are taken into account, the only campaign that gets a healthy population is the first campaign. Regardless of locks.
The only thing faction lock does is exacerbate the off peak map flipping and further drive players away when their faction has an insurmountable deficit in points or when they are constantly gate camped and unable to do anything but be farmed by a "winning" faction. Or they are a member of said "winning" faction and are tired of gate farming with the rest of the faction loyalists who think that is skill.
Prove it ?
would play on a faction locked campaign regardless, and so does alot of other people... and the mere notion that people are choosing the locked camapign is proof in itself, again yes i cna only speak for myself, but some of you that want to flip flop, dosent even play on the non-locked, that says alot... clearly it isnt important to you
So you don't actually care about good PvP and just want faction locks for the sake of it. Then why should anyone who cares about PvP take your opinion serious?
There is only one reasonable argument for faction locks and that's to prevent AP farming/emp trading on a dead campaign - which only happened on the 7-day campaign if it happened at all. So if anything, they should have locked this one and keep the 30-day campaigns unlocked. As it is implemented now, it doesn't make sense at all.
couse you dont switch sides in the middle of something, that be like saying you could change side when you loose in a bg and yoin the winning side... is brilliantly stupid...
Except cyrodiil is nothing like bgs. You don't have actual teams in Cyrodiil. You just have hundreds of different players, playing at different times, in different campaigns and with varying population over the course of the day and campaign cycle. Players can (and do) log off at any time, eg. if they are loosing to much. They can (and do) still swap to any campaign at any time and often do so to join the winning side.
But now players can't swap faction anymore to counterbalance those population fluctuations that are going to happen regardless.
I have experienced a lot more winning team joining by campaign swapping, than by faction swapping. Most who swapped faction did so to get better fights, and that's something you only get if you swap to the weaker side.
BGs, and here i thought the side with most points won... let me see cyrodil, the side with most points win... thats the basics of it, then you can try argue and insert alot of other things but like a BG, its essentially down to one side wins...
"A wheelchair and a racing car are the same, because both have wheels".3 -
Miriel✭✭✭✭It's always been that way because people want to go where the action is and the 7 days are the campaign where faction flipping and EMP swapping has really been possible.
So it proves that faction swappers are not the people wanting to flip maps y'all claim them to be.
It also prove that people could go to a non-locked campaign if it was important to them, but they dont so aparantly it isnt important... i am playing on the faction locked camppaign, cosue thats important to me...
we dident have a choise before, we do now !
There are not enough players in this game who PVP to have a healthy population across two campaigns. Locks have nothing to do with one campaign being empty. What part of that do you not understand? The current lock system doesn't prove anything for faction locks. All it shows is that players who do not care either way will pick the path of least resistance, i.e. the first campaign on the list. And that players want to play in a campaign where there are actual players, which ends up being that first campaign, due to point 1. Once those two points are taken into account, the only campaign that gets a healthy population is the first campaign. Regardless of locks.
The only thing faction lock does is exacerbate the off peak map flipping and further drive players away when their faction has an insurmountable deficit in points or when they are constantly gate camped and unable to do anything but be farmed by a "winning" faction. Or they are a member of said "winning" faction and are tired of gate farming with the rest of the faction loyalists who think that is skill.
Prove it ?
would play on a faction locked campaign regardless, and so does alot of other people... and the mere notion that people are choosing the locked camapign is proof in itself, again yes i cna only speak for myself, but some of you that want to flip flop, dosent even play on the non-locked, that says alot... clearly it isnt important to you
So you don't actually care about good PvP and just want faction locks for the sake of it. Then why should anyone who cares about PvP take your opinion serious?
There is only one reasonable argument for faction locks and that's to prevent AP farming/emp trading on a dead campaign - which only happened on the 7-day campaign if it happened at all. So if anything, they should have locked this one and keep the 30-day campaigns unlocked. As it is implemented now, it doesn't make sense at all.
couse you dont switch sides in the middle of something, that be like saying you could change side when you loose in a bg and yoin the winning side... is brilliantly stupid...
Except cyrodiil is nothing like bgs. You don't have actual teams in Cyrodiil. You just have hundreds of different players, playing at different times, in different campaigns and with varying population over the course of the day and campaign cycle. Players can (and do) log off at any time, eg. if they are loosing to much. They can (and do) still swap to any campaign at any time and often do so to join the winning side.
But now players can't swap faction anymore to counterbalance those population fluctuations that are going to happen regardless.
I have experienced a lot more winning team joining by campaign swapping, than by faction swapping. Most who swapped faction did so to get better fights, and that's something you only get if you swap to the weaker side.
BGs, and here i thought the side with most points won... let me see cyrodil, the side with most points win... thats the basics of it, then you can try argue and insert alot of other things but like a BG, its essentially down to one side wins...
"A wheelchair and a racing car are the same, because both have wheels".
you can still compete with them... and the loosing wheelchair team wouldent leave their team mid race, to yoin up with the winning team so they could get the winning cup...2 -
Mr_Walker✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭bulbousb16_ESO wrote: »
Congratulations on your promotion to the the position of "Spokesperson for Everyone"....1 -
Joy_Division✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭IronWooshu wrote: »
What does Joy_Division cite? Link?IronWooshu wrote: »IronWooshu wrote: »@IronWooshu we tried to make them popular 3 years ago when we had entire guilds moving over there - it's lasted 6 mos - and this was when we had tons of very competitive guilds that had bones to pick with one another. If we couldn't manage a strong and consistent pop then, what makes you think anyone is now? It's all hand-holding pvdoor zergs in cyro now. We have 1-2 competitive guilds on each faction in each prime time.
WE. HAVE. DONE. THIS. ALREADY.
Well then I don't know what to tell you, get use to playing faction lock campaign (the way PVP should be) until you can get it to work.
EDIT: There is more incentive now to make it work than there ever has been if people are that against faction lock campaigns.
There really isn’t though. Pvp population is lower than it has ever been. You will notice this because pop caps are 150 currently and queues being anywhere from no queue at pop lock to around 100.
Years ago the pop locks were 250-300(cant recall specific) and you would have queues of 100+ on weekdays primtime and 200-300 queues on weekends.
The numbers are lower because people are leveling Necromancers and questing. Where was all these posts when Summerset came and the exact same thing happened and 3 weeks later... Its back to normal.
Tell me again in a month how faction lock is killing PVP.. ok?
EDIT: If its overall numbers that is causing it then it's been happening before the faction lock, it seems if overall numbers have been steadily declining it would have been due to the factions being unlocked and the cheating running rampant, a direct correlation?
Pop locks were probably lowered to reduce lag.
Dont be obtuse, this data was collected by ZoS therefore it was put into action.IronWooshu wrote: »ellahellabella wrote: »IronWooshu wrote: »ellahellabella wrote: »IronWooshu wrote: »@IronWooshu we tried to make them popular 3 years ago when we had entire guilds moving over there - it's lasted 6 mos - and this was when we had tons of very competitive guilds that had bones to pick with one another. If we couldn't manage a strong and consistent pop then, what makes you think anyone is now? It's all hand-holding pvdoor zergs in cyro now. We have 1-2 competitive guilds on each faction in each prime time.
WE. HAVE. DONE. THIS. ALREADY.
Well then I don't know what to tell you, get use to playing faction lock campaign (the way PVP should be) until you can get it to work.
EDIT: There is more incentive now to make it work than there ever has been if people are that against faction lock campaigns.
lol at "The way pvp should be"
Are you a developer for this game?
no but I should be because apparently the developers and myself agree on something.
Your arrogant ignorance knows no bounds. Kudos
no, what is ignorant is this petition to remove a feature that has been needed for years for your own selfish gain.
Players have wanted this, raw data collected from the devs showed that this mode needed this and to appease everyone made a non faction lock campaign and yet its not good enough for you.
THAT IS IGNORANCE.
Cite the raw data please, I would love to review these numbers.
Class representative @Joy_Division cites otherwise. Please show me the raw data that ZOS has provided to show us the numbers supported it?
You're pretty demanding for someone who blindly claims "this data was collected by ZoS therefore it was put into action." What exactly is "this data" and if it's so earth-shattering important and telling, why has ZOS not even referred to it? An undocumented source in which we have zero clue of it contents is worthless as far as evidence goes. You just putting blind faith in an authority because you happen to agree with the decision they made. It's just bias. You and all the other faction lock advocates would have never accepted an argument that ZOS got rid of faction locks because "the data" we've never seen made that a logical decision. You'll only accept "the data" when it's convenient.
As for what I cite, a face to face conversation with the ZOS developer who is in charge of Cyrodiil.
If you don't believe me, you are free to look at the Dev panels from PAX East when they announced the change and the reasoning for it. Wheeler told me the same thing in Maryland as he said at the Pax panels.Edited by Joy_Division on 4 June 2019 05:285 -
Miriel✭✭✭✭Joy_Division wrote: »IronWooshu wrote: »
What does Joy_Division cite? Link?IronWooshu wrote: »IronWooshu wrote: »@IronWooshu we tried to make them popular 3 years ago when we had entire guilds moving over there - it's lasted 6 mos - and this was when we had tons of very competitive guilds that had bones to pick with one another. If we couldn't manage a strong and consistent pop then, what makes you think anyone is now? It's all hand-holding pvdoor zergs in cyro now. We have 1-2 competitive guilds on each faction in each prime time.
WE. HAVE. DONE. THIS. ALREADY.
Well then I don't know what to tell you, get use to playing faction lock campaign (the way PVP should be) until you can get it to work.
EDIT: There is more incentive now to make it work than there ever has been if people are that against faction lock campaigns.
There really isn’t though. Pvp population is lower than it has ever been. You will notice this because pop caps are 150 currently and queues being anywhere from no queue at pop lock to around 100.
Years ago the pop locks were 250-300(cant recall specific) and you would have queues of 100+ on weekdays primtime and 200-300 queues on weekends.
The numbers are lower because people are leveling Necromancers and questing. Where was all these posts when Summerset came and the exact same thing happened and 3 weeks later... Its back to normal.
Tell me again in a month how faction lock is killing PVP.. ok?
EDIT: If its overall numbers that is causing it then it's been happening before the faction lock, it seems if overall numbers have been steadily declining it would have been due to the factions being unlocked and the cheating running rampant, a direct correlation?
Pop locks were probably lowered to reduce lag.
Dont be obtuse, this data was collected by ZoS therefore it was put into action.IronWooshu wrote: »ellahellabella wrote: »IronWooshu wrote: »ellahellabella wrote: »IronWooshu wrote: »@IronWooshu we tried to make them popular 3 years ago when we had entire guilds moving over there - it's lasted 6 mos - and this was when we had tons of very competitive guilds that had bones to pick with one another. If we couldn't manage a strong and consistent pop then, what makes you think anyone is now? It's all hand-holding pvdoor zergs in cyro now. We have 1-2 competitive guilds on each faction in each prime time.
WE. HAVE. DONE. THIS. ALREADY.
Well then I don't know what to tell you, get use to playing faction lock campaign (the way PVP should be) until you can get it to work.
EDIT: There is more incentive now to make it work than there ever has been if people are that against faction lock campaigns.
lol at "The way pvp should be"
Are you a developer for this game?
no but I should be because apparently the developers and myself agree on something.
Your arrogant ignorance knows no bounds. Kudos
no, what is ignorant is this petition to remove a feature that has been needed for years for your own selfish gain.
Players have wanted this, raw data collected from the devs showed that this mode needed this and to appease everyone made a non faction lock campaign and yet its not good enough for you.
THAT IS IGNORANCE.
Cite the raw data please, I would love to review these numbers.
Class representative @Joy_Division cites otherwise. Please show me the raw data that ZOS has provided to show us the numbers supported it?
You're pretty demanding for someone who blindly claims "this data was collected by ZoS therefore it was put into action." What exactly is "this data" and if it's so earth-shattering important and telling, why has ZOS not even referred to it? An undocumented source in which we have zero clue of it contents is worthless as far as evidence goes. You just putting blind faith in an authority because you happen to agree with the decision they made. It's just bias. You and all the other faction lock advocates would have never accepted an argument that ZOS got rid of faction locks because "the data" we've never seen made that a logical decision. You'll only accept "the data" when it's convenient.
As for what I cite, a face to face conversation with the ZOS developer who is in charge of Cyrodiil.
If you don't believe me, you are free to look at the Dev panels from PAX East when they announced the change and the reasoning for it. Wheeler told me the same thing in Maryland as he said at the Pax panels.
Regardless, there is support for both sides, and as i said for you to demand that we loose something that we been asking for years is rather selfish, and bad as a representative... Even more so when you we have options, that being said, im not against anouther 30 day camapign that isnt locked...
But regardless we are not going back, i rather play in a empty locked campaign then with flip floppers and so will alot of other pro faction lock, and there is your problem, its so important to us, that i even started subbing again , and playing more, while those pro flip flopping dosent even use the unlocked campaign, they rather play on the locked camapign...
So regardless what happens, you either have the player base split, or if the remove faction lock, ill just unsub, or leave... i am not playing on a unlocked campign again...
IF unlocked campaign is so important to you, i asume you play on the unlocked one ?Edited by Miriel on 4 June 2019 12:544 -
Joy_Division✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Joy_Division wrote: »IronWooshu wrote: »
What does Joy_Division cite? Link?IronWooshu wrote: »IronWooshu wrote: »@IronWooshu we tried to make them popular 3 years ago when we had entire guilds moving over there - it's lasted 6 mos - and this was when we had tons of very competitive guilds that had bones to pick with one another. If we couldn't manage a strong and consistent pop then, what makes you think anyone is now? It's all hand-holding pvdoor zergs in cyro now. We have 1-2 competitive guilds on each faction in each prime time.
WE. HAVE. DONE. THIS. ALREADY.
Well then I don't know what to tell you, get use to playing faction lock campaign (the way PVP should be) until you can get it to work.
EDIT: There is more incentive now to make it work than there ever has been if people are that against faction lock campaigns.
There really isn’t though. Pvp population is lower than it has ever been. You will notice this because pop caps are 150 currently and queues being anywhere from no queue at pop lock to around 100.
Years ago the pop locks were 250-300(cant recall specific) and you would have queues of 100+ on weekdays primtime and 200-300 queues on weekends.
The numbers are lower because people are leveling Necromancers and questing. Where was all these posts when Summerset came and the exact same thing happened and 3 weeks later... Its back to normal.
Tell me again in a month how faction lock is killing PVP.. ok?
EDIT: If its overall numbers that is causing it then it's been happening before the faction lock, it seems if overall numbers have been steadily declining it would have been due to the factions being unlocked and the cheating running rampant, a direct correlation?
Pop locks were probably lowered to reduce lag.
Dont be obtuse, this data was collected by ZoS therefore it was put into action.IronWooshu wrote: »ellahellabella wrote: »IronWooshu wrote: »ellahellabella wrote: »IronWooshu wrote: »@IronWooshu we tried to make them popular 3 years ago when we had entire guilds moving over there - it's lasted 6 mos - and this was when we had tons of very competitive guilds that had bones to pick with one another. If we couldn't manage a strong and consistent pop then, what makes you think anyone is now? It's all hand-holding pvdoor zergs in cyro now. We have 1-2 competitive guilds on each faction in each prime time.
WE. HAVE. DONE. THIS. ALREADY.
Well then I don't know what to tell you, get use to playing faction lock campaign (the way PVP should be) until you can get it to work.
EDIT: There is more incentive now to make it work than there ever has been if people are that against faction lock campaigns.
lol at "The way pvp should be"
Are you a developer for this game?
no but I should be because apparently the developers and myself agree on something.
Your arrogant ignorance knows no bounds. Kudos
no, what is ignorant is this petition to remove a feature that has been needed for years for your own selfish gain.
Players have wanted this, raw data collected from the devs showed that this mode needed this and to appease everyone made a non faction lock campaign and yet its not good enough for you.
THAT IS IGNORANCE.
Cite the raw data please, I would love to review these numbers.
Class representative @Joy_Division cites otherwise. Please show me the raw data that ZOS has provided to show us the numbers supported it?
You're pretty demanding for someone who blindly claims "this data was collected by ZoS therefore it was put into action." What exactly is "this data" and if it's so earth-shattering important and telling, why has ZOS not even referred to it? An undocumented source in which we have zero clue of it contents is worthless as far as evidence goes. You just putting blind faith in an authority because you happen to agree with the decision they made. It's just bias. You and all the other faction lock advocates would have never accepted an argument that ZOS got rid of faction locks because "the data" we've never seen made that a logical decision. You'll only accept "the data" when it's convenient.
As for what I cite, a face to face conversation with the ZOS developer who is in charge of Cyrodiil.
If you don't believe me, you are free to look at the Dev panels from PAX East when they announced the change and the reasoning for it. Wheeler told me the same thing in Maryland as he said at the Pax panels.
Regardless, there is support for both sides, and as i said for you to demand that we loose something that we been asking for years is rather selfish, and bad as a representative... Even more so when you we have options, that being said, im not against anouther 30 day camapign that isnt locked...
But regardless we are not going back, i rather play in a empty locked campaign then with flip floppers and so will alot of other pro faction lock, and there is your problem, its so important to us, that i even started subbing again , and playing more, while those pro flip flopping dosent even use the unlocked campaign, they rather play on the locked camapign...
So regardless what happens, you either have the player base split, or if the remove faction lock, ill just unsub, or leave... i am not playing on a unlocked campign again...
IF unlocked campaign is so important to you, i asume you play on the unlocked one ?
You can stop mischaracterizing me any time.
I *NEVER* "demanded this. I didn't even "ask" for this. I may not like this decision and may have pointed out the flaws in it, but when Brian Wheeler told me ZOS was doing this, I did *NOT* demand or ask ZOS to take away anything.
And just because I am a representative, I am allowed to hold my own opinions and assessments, and represent people who happen to hold a different view than yours. As you say, "there is support for both sides," so I would be a bad representative if I ignored them completely, wouldn't I?
You have no intention of having an actual discussion. You just come onto these threads, make up stuff about people who disagree with you, don;t even bother to even try and understand their points, and threaten to go home, unsub, and quit if you don't get your way. If you haven't figured out why I or the others don;t play on the unlocked campaign after 20 pages or multiple weeks of gameplay, that's just proof you aren't paying attention or even reading what people are actually typing.
Edited by Joy_Division on 4 June 2019 13:415 -
bulbousb16_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭
In general, not really. On a binary issue, it behooves a representative to side with the majority, even if their personal preferences are on the minority side.Joy_Division wrote: »As you say, "there is support for both sides," so I would be a bad representative if I ignored them completely, wouldn't I?
Lethal zergling1 -
RedGirl41✭✭✭✭So I accidentally just set kaal as my home campaign for DC but my guild is mainly on AD right now. I didn’t mean to set it as my home so I hope I’m not screwed. Been playing since launch, completely forgot we were reverting back to alliance lock.... 😭0
-
Miriel✭✭✭✭Joy_Division wrote: »Joy_Division wrote: »IronWooshu wrote: »
What does Joy_Division cite? Link?IronWooshu wrote: »IronWooshu wrote: »@IronWooshu we tried to make them popular 3 years ago when we had entire guilds moving over there - it's lasted 6 mos - and this was when we had tons of very competitive guilds that had bones to pick with one another. If we couldn't manage a strong and consistent pop then, what makes you think anyone is now? It's all hand-holding pvdoor zergs in cyro now. We have 1-2 competitive guilds on each faction in each prime time.
WE. HAVE. DONE. THIS. ALREADY.
Well then I don't know what to tell you, get use to playing faction lock campaign (the way PVP should be) until you can get it to work.
EDIT: There is more incentive now to make it work than there ever has been if people are that against faction lock campaigns.
There really isn’t though. Pvp population is lower than it has ever been. You will notice this because pop caps are 150 currently and queues being anywhere from no queue at pop lock to around 100.
Years ago the pop locks were 250-300(cant recall specific) and you would have queues of 100+ on weekdays primtime and 200-300 queues on weekends.
The numbers are lower because people are leveling Necromancers and questing. Where was all these posts when Summerset came and the exact same thing happened and 3 weeks later... Its back to normal.
Tell me again in a month how faction lock is killing PVP.. ok?
EDIT: If its overall numbers that is causing it then it's been happening before the faction lock, it seems if overall numbers have been steadily declining it would have been due to the factions being unlocked and the cheating running rampant, a direct correlation?
Pop locks were probably lowered to reduce lag.
Dont be obtuse, this data was collected by ZoS therefore it was put into action.IronWooshu wrote: »ellahellabella wrote: »IronWooshu wrote: »ellahellabella wrote: »IronWooshu wrote: »@IronWooshu we tried to make them popular 3 years ago when we had entire guilds moving over there - it's lasted 6 mos - and this was when we had tons of very competitive guilds that had bones to pick with one another. If we couldn't manage a strong and consistent pop then, what makes you think anyone is now? It's all hand-holding pvdoor zergs in cyro now. We have 1-2 competitive guilds on each faction in each prime time.
WE. HAVE. DONE. THIS. ALREADY.
Well then I don't know what to tell you, get use to playing faction lock campaign (the way PVP should be) until you can get it to work.
EDIT: There is more incentive now to make it work than there ever has been if people are that against faction lock campaigns.
lol at "The way pvp should be"
Are you a developer for this game?
no but I should be because apparently the developers and myself agree on something.
Your arrogant ignorance knows no bounds. Kudos
no, what is ignorant is this petition to remove a feature that has been needed for years for your own selfish gain.
Players have wanted this, raw data collected from the devs showed that this mode needed this and to appease everyone made a non faction lock campaign and yet its not good enough for you.
THAT IS IGNORANCE.
Cite the raw data please, I would love to review these numbers.
Class representative @Joy_Division cites otherwise. Please show me the raw data that ZOS has provided to show us the numbers supported it?
You're pretty demanding for someone who blindly claims "this data was collected by ZoS therefore it was put into action." What exactly is "this data" and if it's so earth-shattering important and telling, why has ZOS not even referred to it? An undocumented source in which we have zero clue of it contents is worthless as far as evidence goes. You just putting blind faith in an authority because you happen to agree with the decision they made. It's just bias. You and all the other faction lock advocates would have never accepted an argument that ZOS got rid of faction locks because "the data" we've never seen made that a logical decision. You'll only accept "the data" when it's convenient.
As for what I cite, a face to face conversation with the ZOS developer who is in charge of Cyrodiil.
If you don't believe me, you are free to look at the Dev panels from PAX East when they announced the change and the reasoning for it. Wheeler told me the same thing in Maryland as he said at the Pax panels.
Regardless, there is support for both sides, and as i said for you to demand that we loose something that we been asking for years is rather selfish, and bad as a representative... Even more so when you we have options, that being said, im not against anouther 30 day camapign that isnt locked...
But regardless we are not going back, i rather play in a empty locked campaign then with flip floppers and so will alot of other pro faction lock, and there is your problem, its so important to us, that i even started subbing again , and playing more, while those pro flip flopping dosent even use the unlocked campaign, they rather play on the locked camapign...
So regardless what happens, you either have the player base split, or if the remove faction lock, ill just unsub, or leave... i am not playing on a unlocked campign again...
IF unlocked campaign is so important to you, i asume you play on the unlocked one ?
You can stop mischaracterizing me any time.
I *NEVER* "demanded this. I didn't even "ask" for this. I may not like this decision and may have pointed out the flaws in it, but when Brian Wheeler told me ZOS was doing this, I did *NOT* demand or ask ZOS to take away anything.
And just because I am a representative, I am allowed to hold my own opinions and assessments, and represent people who happen to hold a different view than yours. As you say, "there is support for both sides," so I would be a bad representative if I ignored them completely, wouldn't I?
You have no intention of having an actual discussion. You just come onto these threads, make up stuff about people who disagree with you, don;t even bother to even try and understand their points, and threaten to go home, unsub, and quit if you don't get your way. If you haven't figured out why I or the others don;t play on the unlocked campaign after 20 pages or multiple weeks of gameplay, that's just proof you aren't paying attention or even reading what people are actually typing.
yes you are, but when people use you as a representative, you have taken a side, regardless, then your personal view enfroces the fact you are a spokes person, so either you go and tell those that use you as a example, to stop... you cant really have it both ways...
you as a representative represent me as well, dont you ?... so be very very carefull, with your personal views, and as a representative, couse at this point its very blurry
and as for unerstading you and those wanting flip flopping, yes i understand it, playing with people is more important to you the faction locks, while faction lockes is more important to me an others... and thats what we are trying to tell you, you want the cake, but you dont want to make the sacrifice to get it, again you can play on a faction non-locked campaign, and if you are so many that you speak of then go there... change have to happen one way or anouther, even with a new 30 day non-locked, the change will take time, you guys cant have all of the play bae on a flip flopping cmapaign, that train has sailed, its gone... there locked campaign and unlocked cmapaigns...
And if i were a representative, id speak for the comunity and help that transitiion between to the two grouping, and help people get a unlocked campaign and a locked campaign...1 -
Hashtag_✭✭✭✭✭So I accidentally just set kaal as my home campaign for DC but my guild is mainly on AD right now. I didn’t mean to set it as my home so I hope I’m not screwed. Been playing since launch, completely forgot we were reverting back to alliance lock.... 😭
@RedGirl41 you’re completely screwed. A buddy did the same on PC and he’s locked for 30 days even after submitting a ticket.Edited by Hashtag_ on 4 June 2019 14:060 -
RedGirl41✭✭✭✭So I accidentally just set kaal as my home campaign for DC but my guild is mainly on AD right now. I didn’t mean to set it as my home so I hope I’m not screwed. Been playing since launch, completely forgot we were reverting back to alliance lock.... 😭
@RedGirl41 you’re completely screwed. A buddy did the same on PC and he’s locked for 30 days even after submitting a ticket.
No way.... I was leveling a friend with my dc magblade and “joined” pvp to see the leaderboards. I didn’t enter the campaign or earn ap... kms.0 -
technohic✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭So I accidentally just set kaal as my home campaign for DC but my guild is mainly on AD right now. I didn’t mean to set it as my home so I hope I’m not screwed. Been playing since launch, completely forgot we were reverting back to alliance lock.... 😭
@RedGirl41 you’re completely screwed. A buddy did the same on PC and he’s locked for 30 days even after submitting a ticket.
No way.... I was leveling a friend with my dc magblade and “joined” pvp to see the leaderboards. I didn’t enter the campaign or earn ap... kms.
Yep. Can't have you conveniently be able to play your other characters or help friends when someone might take that privelage to earn some extra AP supposedly flipping the same keeps back and forth.1 -
RedGirl41✭✭✭✭So I accidentally just set kaal as my home campaign for DC but my guild is mainly on AD right now. I didn’t mean to set it as my home so I hope I’m not screwed. Been playing since launch, completely forgot we were reverting back to alliance lock.... 😭
@RedGirl41 you’re completely screwed. A buddy did the same on PC and he’s locked for 30 days even after submitting a ticket.
No way.... I was leveling a friend with my dc magblade and “joined” pvp to see the leaderboards. I didn’t enter the campaign or earn ap... kms.
Yep. Can't have you conveniently be able to play your other characters or help friends when someone might take that privelage to earn some extra AP supposedly flipping the same keeps back and forth.
Still can’t believe alliance lock is a thing. Pretty much boost with other alliances already when people just run past each other to flip empty keeps “just wait for them to leave guys and we will take it back” defending is too hard0 -
IronWooshu✭✭✭✭✭
✭So I accidentally just set kaal as my home campaign for DC but my guild is mainly on AD right now. I didn’t mean to set it as my home so I hope I’m not screwed. Been playing since launch, completely forgot we were reverting back to alliance lock.... 😭
You're are screwed but did you not see the many warnings saying this is the faction you will be locked too?
This is like ignoring a multiple sign that says keep off the property and after going on the property you are now being arrested and while you sit in jail saying I didnt mean to go on the grass, I just wanted to see the property" the rest of us are shaking our heads.
I'm sorry you're screwed but next time you should read warnings.5 -
TBois✭✭✭✭✭
✭bulbousb16_ESO wrote: »
In general, not really. On a binary issue, it behooves a representative to side with the majority, even if their personal preferences are on the minority side.Joy_Division wrote: »As you say, "there is support for both sides," so I would be a bad representative if I ignored them completely, wouldn't I?
Zos has not made any information available to determine who is in the majority on this issue. Also what you are saying depends on the representative system. Like is joy representing a certain subset of the population or the whole? Zos hasn't made their representative system clear in that regard so it's a moot point.PC/NA
T-Bois (Stam Sorc since 1.4) - AD
An Unsettling Snowball (Templar) - AD
Bosquecito (Stam Sorc) - DC
Peti-T-Bois (Stamden) - AD1 -
IronWooshu✭✭✭✭✭
✭bulbousb16_ESO wrote: »
In general, not really. On a binary issue, it behooves a representative to side with the majority, even if their personal preferences are on the minority side.Joy_Division wrote: »As you say, "there is support for both sides," so I would be a bad representative if I ignored them completely, wouldn't I?
Zos has not made any information available to determine who is in the majority on this issue. Also what you are saying depends on the representative system. Like is joy representing a certain subset of the population or the whole? Zos hasn't made their representative system clear in that regard so it's a moot point.
Common sense would say that the pro faction lock people are in the majority or why faction lock? Since Joy_Division and others dont believe ZoS did their homework before this happened and have no data then we goto the masses influenced this idea for the change.1 -
Hashtag_✭✭✭✭✭IronWooshu wrote: »bulbousb16_ESO wrote: »
In general, not really. On a binary issue, it behooves a representative to side with the majority, even if their personal preferences are on the minority side.Joy_Division wrote: »As you say, "there is support for both sides," so I would be a bad representative if I ignored them completely, wouldn't I?
Zos has not made any information available to determine who is in the majority on this issue. Also what you are saying depends on the representative system. Like is joy representing a certain subset of the population or the whole? Zos hasn't made their representative system clear in that regard so it's a moot point.
Common sense would say that the pro faction lock people are in the majority or why faction lock? Since Joy_Division and others dont believe ZoS did their homework before this happened and have no data then we goto the masses influenced this idea for the change.
Or you know you could take what they actually said themselves at PAX2 -
bulbousb16_ESO✭✭✭✭✭
✭
Sure, let's do that. I'm pretty sure they said, "We are bringing in Faction Locks because everyone wants them". At least, that's what I think they said. In my mind, anyway.Or you know you could take what they actually said themselves at PAX
Or, y'know you could quote what they ACTUALLY said instead of continually offhandedly referencing it.
Lethal zergling1 -
TBois✭✭✭✭✭
✭So what did they say about it at PAX?PC/NA
T-Bois (Stam Sorc since 1.4) - AD
An Unsettling Snowball (Templar) - AD
Bosquecito (Stam Sorc) - DC
Peti-T-Bois (Stamden) - AD0
