Revert Faction Locks. We've Been Through This Already

Ranger209

ks888 wrote: »

My time on EP yesterday was spent a little like this:

A) sit and twiddle my thumbs at the gate for a bit until EP stops gating DC or
our group literally has to make decisions on where to go that won't help EP further destroy the map, thus giving us not many fun fights in the process (the whole reason why most of my buddies on EP play)
C) log off

Before the reinstated faction locks our group could have hopped on low pop DC to challenge the PvDoor zerg that is daytime EP. At least that would have given DC 8 more players to their 2-3 bars vs pop locked EP and pop locked AD.

For those of you that support faction lock - tell me how it's "fun" and enjoyable gameplay to be in a PvP zone but not actually have any PvP fights? Is it that you prefer easy mode? Because that's what is happening now. All sides are guilty of it and it seems the faction hoppers are the only ones willing to try to do anything to balance the map when we can. Even with faction locks in place, the faction hoppers are the ones I see not pushing past certain spots on the map (at least on a semi-regular basis).

It's one thing to hit a back keep because you want aggro and people to fight. It's another to keep hitting back keeps after your opponent has lost both of their scrolls and you're 10, 20, 30 vs 1, 2, 5 players that just want someplace to spawn past their gates. I've pulled some jerk moves on occasion, but this is now a daily occurrence.

In my opinion, you can't call yourself a PvPer or a PvP guild if you're not fighting other players in a fashion that at least gives your opponent some odds at winning the fight.

Have you and your 7 friends considered joining DC next campaign and having good fights all the time against the EP zerg that plays at your time?

ellahellabella

Ranger209 wrote: »

ks888 wrote: »

My time on EP yesterday was spent a little like this:

A) sit and twiddle my thumbs at the gate for a bit until EP stops gating DC or
our group literally has to make decisions on where to go that won't help EP further destroy the map, thus giving us not many fun fights in the process (the whole reason why most of my buddies on EP play)
C) log off

Before the reinstated faction locks our group could have hopped on low pop DC to challenge the PvDoor zerg that is daytime EP. At least that would have given DC 8 more players to their 2-3 bars vs pop locked EP and pop locked AD.

For those of you that support faction lock - tell me how it's "fun" and enjoyable gameplay to be in a PvP zone but not actually have any PvP fights? Is it that you prefer easy mode? Because that's what is happening now. All sides are guilty of it and it seems the faction hoppers are the only ones willing to try to do anything to balance the map when we can. Even with faction locks in place, the faction hoppers are the ones I see not pushing past certain spots on the map (at least on a semi-regular basis).

It's one thing to hit a back keep because you want aggro and people to fight. It's another to keep hitting back keeps after your opponent has lost both of their scrolls and you're 10, 20, 30 vs 1, 2, 5 players that just want someplace to spawn past their gates. I've pulled some jerk moves on occasion, but this is now a daily occurrence.

In my opinion, you can't call yourself a PvPer or a PvP guild if you're not fighting other players in a fashion that at least gives your opponent some odds at winning the fight.

Have you and your 7 friends considered joining DC next campaign and having good fights all the time against the EP zerg that plays at your time?

It's been talked about in Vanguard (in fact, I think it was Norri who brought the subject up) and the majority of its members (including our GM) decided that they've put too much into the toons they have. Many members of the guild have been maining that special toon since the beginning and they're not willing to just drop them.

Honestly I can't help but chuckle at the situation. Campaigns got locked and the victors gave multifactioners the middle finger. Now the imbalance is real and they want the very people they flipped off to now drop everything to fix this mess.

Ranger209

ellahellabella wrote: »

Honestly I can't help but chuckle at the situation. Campaigns got locked and the victors gave multifactioners the middle finger. Now the imbalance is real and they want the very people they flipped off to now drop everything to fix this mess.

I apologize if anything I have said has been offensive to anyone in arguing the case for faction locks. That was certainly never the intent, however, I will certainly not cease to argue in favor of locks nor back down when challenged with logical counter arguments or any sideways comments that result of me expressing my opinion on the matter. Really that is all any of us are able to do, express one opinion.

That being said, the question I posed above to people who play all factions seems like a logical question that emotional reasons may lead to an answer of no. If people who enjoy good fights are really looking for just that, then aligning themselves with an underpopulated faction would seem to guarantee good fights most all of the time. Now chances are there are myriad reasons for choosing whichever faction is selected and they obviously get weighed against each other to make that decision. So if finding good fights is not the primary reason for choosing a faction, or just doesn't weigh up against the other reasons then swapping to that faction doesn't make sense. If it does outweigh any other reasons then it makes perfect sense as they will always be facing greater numbers and should almost always find good fights.

It makes no difference to me personally which alliance they fight for, what does make a difference is that they pick a side and fight for it. With me, against me, I am not concerned either way, but pick a side for 30 days and roll with it. The next 30 days start all over again with whatever faction makes the most sense at that time. Over time, several campaigns, this will become more balanced. Trying to balance population in the moment by faction hopping is a short lived solution that really bears no weight to the overall campaign. People have tried to say that factions are not teams, but that is exactly what they are in AvAvA. The microcosm of small groups within those factions are not the team in this scenario even though to some people that is what they want to see as their respective team. AvAvA is the macrocosm of these smaller teams. It is greater than the group based team ideology.

ellahellabella

Ranger209 wrote: »

ellahellabella wrote: »

Honestly I can't help but chuckle at the situation. Campaigns got locked and the victors gave multifactioners the middle finger. Now the imbalance is real and they want the very people they flipped off to now drop everything to fix this mess.

I apologize if anything I have said has been offensive to anyone in arguing the case for faction locks. That was certainly never the intent, however, I will certainly not cease to argue in favor of locks nor back down when challenged with logical counter arguments or any sideways comments that result of me expressing my opinion on the matter. Really that is all any of us are able to do, express one opinion.

That being said, the question I posed above to people who play all factions seems like a logical question that emotional reasons may lead to an answer of no. If people who enjoy good fights are really looking for just that, then aligning themselves with an underpopulated faction would seem to guarantee good fights most all of the time. Now chances are there are myriad reasons for choosing whichever faction is selected and they obviously get weighed against each other to make that decision. So if finding good fights is not the primary reason for choosing a faction, or just doesn't weigh up against the other reasons then swapping to that faction doesn't make sense. If it does outweigh any other reasons then it makes perfect sense as they will always be facing greater numbers and should almost always find good fights.

It makes no difference to me personally which alliance they fight for, what does make a difference is that they pick a side and fight for it. With me, against me, I am not concerned either way, but pick a side for 30 days and roll with it. The next 30 days start all over again with whatever faction makes the most sense at that time. Over time, several campaigns, this will become more balanced. Trying to balance population in the moment by faction hopping is a short lived solution that really bears no weight to the overall campaign. People have tried to say that factions are not teams, but that is exactly what they are in AvAvA. The microcosm of small groups within those factions are not the team in this scenario even though to some people that is what they want to see as their respective team. AvAvA is the macrocosm of these smaller teams. It is greater than the group based team ideology.

There were some comments prior where there was a bit of a lash out by you but there have been some by me too so I'm not going to hold you for any of that.
It's more of a general statement because several players now have been making demands in forums and pvp zones that former multifactioners have to leave their main factions to balance the campaigns. The demanders can't do it because they are 'faction loyal' so it's 'not their problem.'

The one big main factor for the 30 day is just that, a 30 day lock. It isn't until a campaign begins that it shows who the big alliance is this round. Most of the faction hoppers went home to ep and are now bored out of their minds.
They might go dc next campaign but if enough people move to balance, An alliance can go from the underdog to the dominant, with the faction norms overwhelming maps in petty revenge for what they endured last campaign.

So instead of having these players twiddling their thumbs on red, they're now doing it on blue. We could have guilds swapping around every campaign willy nilly to try to make balance but how is that any different than what we had?
This whole 30 day lockout just isn't well thought out. A cooldown to move around in the 30 day? I'd be all for that, so long as there are consequences so people won't hop to the winning side and only those that want to play the underdog will benefit from this feature.

Oh and for as the AvAvA, I have to disagree with you there. They are not teams because teams can be told when to stop.
If there is a goal to focus, such as a scroll to claim/reclaim or a dethrone to make, an alliance will work together yes. But then that very faction could say, take aleswell only for others to keep going for dc tri keeps when they don't even have scrolls, there is no teamwork.
Those like me that won't kick an alliance while it's down, will refuse to push glade, while others don't care about ruining another sides game time and will take it 'because they can'. That's no team I want to be a part of.

NBrookus

It's pretty ironic that suddenly it's being demanded that the very players who were already balancing factions bear the brunt of the fallout from this decision after the tools they needed to have been taken away.

Ranger209 wrote: »

That being said, the question I posed above to people who play all factions seems like a logical question that emotional reasons may lead to an answer of no. If people who enjoy good fights are really looking for just that, then aligning themselves with an underpopulated faction would seem to guarantee good fights most all of the time. Now chances are there are myriad reasons for choosing whichever faction is selected and they obviously get weighed against each other to make that decision. So if finding good fights is not the primary reason for choosing a faction, or just doesn't weigh up against the other reasons then swapping to that faction doesn't make sense. If it does outweigh any other reasons then it makes perfect sense as they will always be facing greater numbers and should almost always find good fights.

When I played Shor and Haderus, I swapped to maining the underdog as needed, so I have fully leveled toons on all factions. With the 7 day camp long since dead, I ended up mostly playing EP on 30 day because I met more people there whom I had fun playing with. But I could play days on DC when DC needed help with some friends, and then in the evening play with other friends on EP.

If we want to play together we can 1) go to an empty campaign and do nothing 2) go to IC, which sadly has not regained it's former fun or 3) go play another game. I've been mostly picking #3.

Now I have one daytime guild that is talking about going to DC next campaign and another prime time guild that wants to stay EP, which is a community-killing issue for the handful of us in both. There are members who are totally burned out on leveling characters that are largely driving those faction decisions. Akatosh knows I can't stomach grinding Undaunted for the 15th time on my necro.

Sandman929

Not to advocate for the faction locks or how they were implemented, but the story of how multi-faction players used to be heroically saving us from ourselves and now they can't is more than a tad disingenuous. There's always been plenty of campaign population imbalance, non-peak gating, campaign "killing" by zerging the map, etc, etc, and I'm sure all that will continue because the issues with PvP in Cyrodiil isn't something that locks can solve or that no-locks removes.

Hashtag_

Sandman929 wrote: »

Not to advocate for the faction locks or how they were implemented, but the story of how multi-faction players used to be heroically saving us from ourselves and now they can't is more than a tad disingenuous. There's always been plenty of campaign population imbalance, non-peak gating, campaign "killing" by zerging the map, etc, etc, and I'm sure all that will continue because the issues with PvP in Cyrodiil isn't something that locks can solve or that no-locks removes.

You notice it with scoring in off hours more than you willl primetime.

Jules

Man, I really wish they listened.

Ranger209

NBrookus wrote: »

It's pretty ironic that suddenly it's being demanded that the very players who were already balancing factions bear the brunt of the fallout from this decision after the tools they needed to have been taken away.

Not a demand, nor an expectation, but merely a suggestion in question form.
Nothing was balanced before faction locks either at certain times of the day, and I don't expect 8 people or less picking a new faction next campaign cycle to balance anything either, but it should provide good fights for those 8 if that is what they are after. Balance will be decided by the guilds and ebb and flow from time zone to time zone. It has always been this way and continues to be now.

RedGirl41

IronWooshu wrote: »

RedGirl41 wrote: »

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.

Thanks but I actually wasn’t screwed I guess because I didn’t enter the campaign. Also there’s litterally one window that says it’s going to lock it and I clearly said I accidentally spammed through the one window warning. Thanks for the advice

Mr_Walker

It's not an imbalance, we've been told, it's because 'faction hopper vermin are deliberately playing EP to give the middle finger to faction loyalist HEROES'. Oh, wait, that was week 1, week 2 was 'AD and DC HEROES are playing Elseweyr, but EP are too poverty to even able to afford Elseweyr'. What's this weeks excuse for the imbalances? Venus and Jupiter aren't in alignment?

thegreat_one

Fact is, DC knows we are going to be screwed for a time.
EP will get bored fighting nobody and some will re-roll, Its happened plenty of times before and after faction lock.
Right now AD and EP gated us and are stealing both DC scrolls and killing pugs. If this keeps up AD and EP will have no one easy to fight. They will either leave aswell or reroll. Or and most unlikely, they will fight each other.

The gimmicks they added have made Pvp in ESO a Joke. unattainable score from day 1. EBONZOS PACT!

Grimhallow

Luckylancer wrote: »

People react like all campaigns are locked.

The only campaign that matters is locked. What's the difference?

Ramber

I've noticed a LOT less alliance teaming so im all for this change. All this complaining just sounds like i cant cheat any more!

Grimhallow

Marcus684 wrote: »

Nah. You’ve created a false equivalency. The meal is PvP. Faction lock vs. no lock is like steak vs. lobster. Either one is a meal, but some people prefer one over the other, and having both kinds should satisfy both appetites.

@Marcus684 The meal is PvP yes, but there is no PvP in the 7 day campaign.

As it stands, faction lock vs no faction lock is like steak vs. the old leftover insides of a ketchup packet.

Rin_Senya

thegreat_one wrote: »

Fact is, DC knows we are going to be screwed for a time.
EP will get bored fighting nobody and some will re-roll, Its happened plenty of times before and after faction lock.
Right now AD and EP gated us and are stealing both DC scrolls and killing pugs. If this keeps up AD and EP will have no one easy to fight. They will either leave aswell or reroll. Or and most unlikely, they will fight each other.

The gimmicks they added have made Pvp in ESO a Joke. unattainable score from day 1. EBONZOS PACT!

ohhh so you want disgusting faction hoppers to re-roll and play DC now? I thought you guys wanted to get rid of them because obviosly "faction lock" was a solution to all problems!

Derra

Rin_Senya wrote: »

thegreat_one wrote: »

Fact is, DC knows we are going to be screwed for a time.
EP will get bored fighting nobody and some will re-roll, Its happened plenty of times before and after faction lock.
Right now AD and EP gated us and are stealing both DC scrolls and killing pugs. If this keeps up AD and EP will have no one easy to fight. They will either leave aswell or reroll. Or and most unlikely, they will fight each other.

The gimmicks they added have made Pvp in ESO a Joke. unattainable score from day 1. EBONZOS PACT!

ohhh so you want disgusting faction hoppers to re-roll and play DC now? I thought you guys wanted to get rid of them because obviosly "faction lock" was a solution to all problems!

Even better is the idea that someone would simply reroll the majority of their characters

Sanct16

The main problem is that players have very different expectations of Cyrodiil. There are mainly two groups of players.

There are of course different subgroups as well as people who can relate to both of these groups as they care about both aspects. However from this point forward I won't mention this specifically as it is irrelevant for my argumentation.)

On one hand we have players who see Cyrodiil as a big playground where you team up with friends and have fun for a couple of hours. Getting interesting and challenging fights is the priority here. On the other hand we have players who see Cyrodiil as a warzone where you need to take objectives for your faction. Winning the Alliance War is the priority here.

I want to emphasize the importance of respecting both of these playstyles without judgement.

This difference in priorities leads to a very different perception of faction locks: For the "playground"-type it's very annoying and prevents them from playing with their friends. For the "Alliance War"-type it creates a feeling of loyalty and gives more meaning to fighting for your faction.

I think it is important to find a solution that both sides can accept. Neither keeping the current lock-system nor completly removing locks will achieve this. There is no point in trying to "convince" the other side with very subjective arguments like "the majority wants X" or "data shows that Y" or "you're clueless".

The best way to achieve this is by giving incentives to stay loyal to one faction without completly locking other options. A very simple solution could be to change the reward system so players who were loyal to one faction receive an additional end-of-campaign reward mail. Let's say 1 golden item per 250k AP they earned on all chars combined with a max of 10 items. This way everyone has the option to play with their friends on other factions however you'll need to consider if it's worth it or not.

Of course there are other options like reducing the rewards for non-loyal players (like only give them transmute stones but no gear) or having the campaign queue prioritize loyal players.

killimandrosb16_ESO

what about only giving ap for kills. Would be interesting to see what faction ends up top place. Point system staying as it is, but ap system revamped to player kills only.

Grimhallow

killimandrosb16_ESO wrote: »

what about only giving ap for kills. Would be interesting to see what faction ends up top place. Point system staying as it is, but ap system revamped to player kills only.

Every Emp a tyrant.

(I do like the idea of Emps being emps because they kill players, not because they repair the most walls).

However, if you pick Emp and give AP out by kills, then healers will climb to the top since they have the highest "kill participation". If you adjust to only incorporate killing blows, then sorcs and nightblades will take the emp spots, on account of their powerful executes.

It's the fine details that make the plan more difficult to implement.

zyk

ks888 wrote: »

For those of you that support faction lock - tell me how it's "fun" and enjoyable gameplay to be in a PvP zone but not actually have any PvP fights? Is it that you prefer easy mode? Because that's what is happening now. All sides are guilty of it and it seems the faction hoppers are the only ones willing to try to do anything to balance the map when we can. Even with faction locks in place, the faction hoppers are the ones I see not pushing past certain spots on the map (at least on a semi-regular basis).

What game have you been playing all these years?

JaJaLuka

Sanct16 wrote: »

The main problem is that players have very different expectations of Cyrodiil. There are mainly two groups of players.

There are of course different subgroups as well as people who can relate to both of these groups as they care about both aspects. However from this point forward I won't mention this specifically as it is irrelevant for my argumentation.)

On one hand we have players who see Cyrodiil as a big playground where you team up with friends and have fun for a couple of hours. Getting interesting and challenging fights is the priority here. On the other hand we have players who see Cyrodiil as a warzone where you need to take objectives for your faction. Winning the Alliance War is the priority here.

I want to emphasize the importance of respecting both of these playstyles without judgement.

This difference in priorities leads to a very different perception of faction locks: For the "playground"-type it's very annoying and prevents them from playing with their friends. For the "Alliance War"-type it creates a feeling of loyalty and gives more meaning to fighting for your faction.

I think it is important to find a solution that both sides can accept. Neither keeping the current lock-system nor completly removing locks will achieve this. There is no point in trying to "convince" the other side with very subjective arguments like "the majority wants X" or "data shows that Y" or "you're clueless".

The best way to achieve this is by giving incentives to stay loyal to one faction without completly locking other options. A very simple solution could be to change the reward system so players who were loyal to one faction receive an additional end-of-campaign reward mail. Let's say 1 golden item per 250k AP they earned on all chars combined with a max of 10 items. This way everyone has the option to play with their friends on other factions however you'll need to consider if it's worth it or not.

Of course there are other options like reducing the rewards for non-loyal players (like only give them transmute stones but no gear) or having the campaign queue prioritize loyal players.

Perhaps considering giving guilds a way to level in Cyrodiil would be a better way to start having groups running regularly in Cyrodiil (tied to whatever faction the guild is). XP tied to the guild leader (or selected guild ranks, like the privileges given to members in guild tab) the more XP, the more rewards. It would give more of an incentive to being in a PvP guild. Perhaps consider PvP exclusive minor buffs (tied to the duration of the campaign) or items. I have found that people tend to have more pride in guilds rather than factions, but having guilds tied to a faction would encourage people to play the objectives more in guild groups rather than trying to fight solo in Cyrodiil.
Maybe even go as far as guild ranking in a campaign and rewards to those people in the guilds that score highest.
It's always hard to predict how changes can pan out, but we've had faction locks before and they were removed. Why bring them back? I agree with OP, we've been here and it was removed for a reason.

IronWooshu

Mr_Walker wrote: »

It's not an imbalance, we've been told, it's because 'faction hopper vermin are deliberately playing EP to give the middle finger to faction loyalist HEROES'. Oh, wait, that was week 1, week 2 was 'AD and DC HEROES are playing Elseweyr, but EP are too poverty to even able to afford Elseweyr'. What's this weeks excuse for the imbalances? Venus and Jupiter aren't in alignment?

All sides have been faction locked now as opposed to only EP for the first 2 week so EP got a heavy start and its gonna be really hard to close that gap. Wait til next campaign before you make this speach.

IronWooshu

What I find funny is the people claiming they balanced factions by having it unlocked were doing a service to the game when in reality they were AP farming.

Ex. Red takes the map so they log into Yellow or Blue and retake some keeps only to log back onto red and retake them all over again.

How is that balance? You were doing nothing but creating more keeps for yourselves to just re-farm for more AP.

No service was done. You didnt balance anything, balancing something would be joining the faction that needs the help to most and sticking with them the entire campaign and getting good fights because you know the previous faction you left has good players. Now with your new faction you can teach the newer players and lead by example.

That is balancing.

You're all out to lunch believing you actually balanced cyro before the faction locks.

Agrippa_Invisus

IronWooshu wrote: »

Mr_Walker wrote: »

It's not an imbalance, we've been told, it's because 'faction hopper vermin are deliberately playing EP to give the middle finger to faction loyalist HEROES'. Oh, wait, that was week 1, week 2 was 'AD and DC HEROES are playing Elseweyr, but EP are too poverty to even able to afford Elseweyr'. What's this weeks excuse for the imbalances? Venus and Jupiter aren't in alignment?

All sides have been faction locked now as opposed to only EP for the first 2 week so EP got a heavy start and its gonna be really hard to close that gap. Wait til next campaign before you make this speach.

I think you greatly overestimate the number of players that will swap to AD and DC next for PC/NA next month.

Humans, inherently, will follow the path of least resistance. Sure, some will swap, but the majority will continue to play for the faction that a) allows them to play most of their toons in Cyrodiil or b) wins and holds most of the map.

Using my own account as an example, if I were to roll a DC toon, it would make it so that there are 7 characters on my account could not zone into Cyrodiil with for a month.

Not going to happen. Especially not to help the people who have been advocating for the faction locks. You folks can just suffer the consequences of your decisions.

IronWooshu

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

IronWooshu wrote: »

Mr_Walker wrote: »

It's not an imbalance, we've been told, it's because 'faction hopper vermin are deliberately playing EP to give the middle finger to faction loyalist HEROES'. Oh, wait, that was week 1, week 2 was 'AD and DC HEROES are playing Elseweyr, but EP are too poverty to even able to afford Elseweyr'. What's this weeks excuse for the imbalances? Venus and Jupiter aren't in alignment?

All sides have been faction locked now as opposed to only EP for the first 2 week so EP got a heavy start and its gonna be really hard to close that gap. Wait til next campaign before you make this speach.

I think you greatly overestimate the number of players that will swap to AD and DC next for PC/NA next month.

Humans, inherently, will follow the path of least resistance. Sure, some will swap, but the majority will continue to play for the faction that a) allows them to play most of their toons in Cyrodiil or b) wins and holds most of the map.

Using my own account as an example, if I were to roll a DC toon, it would make it so that there are 7 characters on my account could not zone into Cyrodiil with for a month.

Not going to happen. Especially not to help the people who have been advocating for the faction locks. You folks can just suffer the consequences of your decisions.

That's fine and that's not what I am really saying. I am saying next campaign red wont have 2 weeks alone in the map to get that far ahead. Yes red has alot of players but so so many of them are easy AP farms and the better PVP players will switch because they are not sheep like bad PVP players and take the path of least resistance if they want good fights.

(Not all will but some will)

Palidon

Got an idea ZOS make another 30 day campaign that is not faction locked then players can choose between 30 day faction locked or 30 day non faction locked. Would be interesting to see which campaign turns out having more players in it. Most important though, it would now be a players choice. This way it satisfies everyone.

Marcus684

IronWooshu wrote: »

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

IronWooshu wrote: »

Mr_Walker wrote: »

It's not an imbalance, we've been told, it's because 'faction hopper vermin are deliberately playing EP to give the middle finger to faction loyalist HEROES'. Oh, wait, that was week 1, week 2 was 'AD and DC HEROES are playing Elseweyr, but EP are too poverty to even able to afford Elseweyr'. What's this weeks excuse for the imbalances? Venus and Jupiter aren't in alignment?

All sides have been faction locked now as opposed to only EP for the first 2 week so EP got a heavy start and its gonna be really hard to close that gap. Wait til next campaign before you make this speach.

I think you greatly overestimate the number of players that will swap to AD and DC next for PC/NA next month.

Humans, inherently, will follow the path of least resistance. Sure, some will swap, but the majority will continue to play for the faction that a) allows them to play most of their toons in Cyrodiil or b) wins and holds most of the map.

Using my own account as an example, if I were to roll a DC toon, it would make it so that there are 7 characters on my account could not zone into Cyrodiil with for a month.

Not going to happen. Especially not to help the people who have been advocating for the faction locks. You folks can just suffer the consequences of your decisions.

That's fine and that's not what I am really saying. I am saying next campaign red wont have 2 weeks alone in the map to get that far ahead. Yes red has alot of players but so so many of them are easy AP farms and the better PVP players will switch because they are not sheep like bad PVP players and take the path of least resistance if they want good fights.

(Not all will but some will)

You may be overestimating how many “better” players are left.

Nordic__Knights

As a release day player going through the old locks and looking at the new locks for campaigns I would say zos has really missed the Mark here because I don't think we should have a character being locked to a fashion I think all characters should be open to Fashion and you are able to choose your fashion with in the campaign you choose to play in so that when people won't have to complain that I only have a d or I only have DC or I only have EP characters they're simple point would be oh I already have the character I want lock in to X Y or Z

Ackwalan

RedGirl41 wrote: »

IronWooshu wrote: »

RedGirl41 wrote: »

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.

Thanks but I actually wasn’t screwed I guess because I didn’t enter the campaign. Also there’s litterally one window that says it’s going to lock it and I clearly said I accidentally spammed through the one window warning. Thanks for the advice

So you're the reason we get those confirm windows after we confirm that we confirm, thanks.