Feels like the point of it all is to make a campaign matter to you. So one 30 day CP campaign means you have to pick a side to fight for, which makes sense to me. A campaign can’t matter to you if you play every side.
Playing with friends is really the only valid argument against the locks. And for that reason I can understand the resentment. But one thing that baffles me is “solo players” complaining about it.
Feels like the point of it all is to make a campaign matter to you. So one 30 day CP campaign means you have to pick a side to fight for, which makes sense to me. A campaign can’t matter to you if you play every side.
Playing with friends is really the only valid argument against the locks. And for that reason I can understand the resentment. But one thing that baffles me is “solo players” complaining about it.
All that crying about faction lock, is that you can't pick the strongest side in the morning and change to the stronger alliance in the evening anymore. And you don't get the rewards for all 3 alliances anymore.
I don't know why we have to even have this … You have a choice. If you don't like the faction locks, go play on a server that doesn't have them. If you like them, play on a server that does. It's that simple.
Not everyone that is either for or against this thing spends time on the forums. There are great many people that are the silent majority and think these forums are too trolllish to even bother with using them. Gee … given the screaming from the same people in every thread having to do with this, I'd say they were right.
Dear ZOS, please don't let a minority of loud mouthed complainers ruin this game for everyone else. We've already lost enough people to other games because of all the trolling and complaining.
Master_Kas wrote: »All that crying about faction lock, is that you can't pick the strongest side in the morning and change to the stronger alliance in the evening anymore. And you don't get the rewards for all 3 alliances anymore.
No just that we can not use all our characters on a campaign which is populated.
Some people prefer 30day nocp, some prefer 30day cp. Telling them "just play nocp/cp campaign with your other characters then" is no solution.
7days is a barren wasteland.
And why you have to use all your chars on one campaign? Just curious.
Sanguinor2 wrote: »
And why you have to use all your chars on one campaign? Just curious.
I recommend reading what you quoted. He might prefer no CP, no 2nd no CP Campaign to be found anywhere, or he might prefer CP and doesnt want to Play no CP but the only other CP enabled Campaign is About as dead as a magwarden dps in PvE.
Sanguinor2 wrote: »
And why you have to use all your chars on one campaign? Just curious.
I recommend reading what you quoted. He might prefer no CP, no 2nd no CP Campaign to be found anywhere, or he might prefer CP and doesnt want to Play no CP but the only other CP enabled Campaign is About as dead as a magwarden dps in PvE.
Then he should play what he prefers. When I prefer to go in a club which is empty, I have the choice to stay or look for another club, which is crowded. I might prefer flying mounts, which are not in the game. Maybe I should complain now.
Deal with the situation. If you don't like it, just leave the game.
Royalthought wrote: »Sanguinor2 wrote: »
And why you have to use all your chars on one campaign? Just curious.
I recommend reading what you quoted. He might prefer no CP, no 2nd no CP Campaign to be found anywhere, or he might prefer CP and doesnt want to Play no CP but the only other CP enabled Campaign is About as dead as a magwarden dps in PvE.
Then he should play what he prefers. When I prefer to go in a club which is empty, I have the choice to stay or look for another club, which is crowded. I might prefer flying mounts, which are not in the game. Maybe I should complain now.
Deal with the situation. If you don't like it, just leave the game.
That reading thing can be tricky.
His issue is not being able to get in.
Feels like the point of it all is to make a campaign matter to you. So one 30 day CP campaign means you have to pick a side to fight for, which makes sense to me. A campaign can’t matter to you if you play every side.
Playing with friends is really the only valid argument against the locks. And for that reason I can understand the resentment. But one thing that baffles me is “solo players” complaining about it.
Campaigns don't matter as long as nightcapping determines who wins.
Feels like the point of it all is to make a campaign matter to you. So one 30 day CP campaign means you have to pick a side to fight for, which makes sense to me. A campaign can’t matter to you if you play every side.
Playing with friends is really the only valid argument against the locks. And for that reason I can understand the resentment. But one thing that baffles me is “solo players” complaining about it.
Actually in No CP on PC NA there were a lot of people who would swap between factions who would fight against those people who were night capping or would swap to the under represented side to help balance the populations out. Now that you can’t swap there are many times that the map is almost unplayable due to one faction or another having an overwhelming population, to the point of no pvp taking place.
Royalthought wrote: »Sanguinor2 wrote: »
And why you have to use all your chars on one campaign? Just curious.
I recommend reading what you quoted. He might prefer no CP, no 2nd no CP Campaign to be found anywhere, or he might prefer CP and doesnt want to Play no CP but the only other CP enabled Campaign is About as dead as a magwarden dps in PvE.
Then he should play what he prefers. When I prefer to go in a club which is empty, I have the choice to stay or look for another club, which is crowded. I might prefer flying mounts, which are not in the game. Maybe I should complain now.
Deal with the situation. If you don't like it, just leave the game.
That reading thing can be tricky.
His issue is not being able to get in.
All I read is, all I could do before, I can't do anymore because of faction lock.
As I said, you don't like it, leave the game. Or deal with the sitiuation.
It's simple
Sanguinor2 wrote: »
And why you have to use all your chars on one campaign? Just curious.
I recommend reading what you quoted. He might prefer no CP, no 2nd no CP Campaign to be found anywhere, or he might prefer CP and doesnt want to Play no CP but the only other CP enabled Campaign is About as dead as a magwarden dps in PvE.
Then he should play what he prefers. When I prefer to go in a club which is empty, I have the choice to stay or look for another club, which is crowded. I might prefer flying mounts, which are not in the game. Maybe I should complain now.
Deal with the situation. If you don't like it, just leave the game.
Feels like the point of it all is to make a campaign matter to you. So one 30 day CP campaign means you have to pick a side to fight for, which makes sense to me. A campaign can’t matter to you if you play every side.
Playing with friends is really the only valid argument against the locks. And for that reason I can understand the resentment. But one thing that baffles me is “solo players” complaining about it.
Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »I don't know why we have to even have this … You have a choice. If you don't like the faction locks, go play on a server that doesn't have them. If you like them, play on a server that does. It's that simple.
Not everyone that is either for or against this thing spends time on the forums. There are great many people that are the silent majority and think these forums are too trolllish to even bother with using them. Gee … given the screaming from the same people in every thread having to do with this, I'd say they were right.
Dear ZOS, please don't let a minority of loud mouthed complainers ruin this game for everyone else. We've already lost enough people to other games because of all the trolling and complaining.
I'm sorry this argument simply doesn't work. It is not a fair comparison to say "you have a choice" when one of those choices is not vaiable.
It's like your parents saying "you can have a pet" and the choice is between a snail or a dead parrot. You just want a dog but they go "well you have a choice, if you don't want a pet np"
Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »I don't know why we have to even have this … You have a choice. If you don't like the faction locks, go play on a server that doesn't have them. If you like them, play on a server that does. It's that simple.
Not everyone that is either for or against this thing spends time on the forums. There are great many people that are the silent majority and think these forums are too trolllish to even bother with using them. Gee … given the screaming from the same people in every thread having to do with this, I'd say they were right.
Dear ZOS, please don't let a minority of loud mouthed complainers ruin this game for everyone else. We've already lost enough people to other games because of all the trolling and complaining.
I'm sorry this argument simply doesn't work. It is not a fair comparison to say "you have a choice" when one of those choices is not vaiable.
It's like your parents saying "you can have a pet" and the choice is between a snail or a dead parrot. You just want a dog but they go "well you have a choice, if you don't want a pet np"
Who determines what is viable? I happen to like the fact that people must choose a side and not be wishy washy about it. I would concede that perhaps a 30 day unlocked campaign could be good so that people who like to flip flop can do so on their own campaign. However, there are a lot of people who don't frequent the forums that like the 30-day locked. So why not do that? Some guilds actually like being loyal to only one faction and want to fight their opponents that way.
I'm wondering though if part of the problem is that the gankers and small mans realize that it is the larger groups that actually provide the fights by being interested in taking objectives for scoring purposes. By hitting objectives with a larger group, larger and larger groups of opponents must gather to repel it, thus making the bigger fights possible and the bigger ticks of AP. Without objective incentives, people could just sit around inside keep or in stealth for hours until some unsuspecting noobie player rides by! 'GET 'EM GUYS!!!!!"
Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »I don't know why we have to even have this … You have a choice. If you don't like the faction locks, go play on a server that doesn't have them. If you like them, play on a server that does. It's that simple.
Not everyone that is either for or against this thing spends time on the forums. There are great many people that are the silent majority and think these forums are too trolllish to even bother with using them. Gee … given the screaming from the same people in every thread having to do with this, I'd say they were right.
Dear ZOS, please don't let a minority of loud mouthed complainers ruin this game for everyone else. We've already lost enough people to other games because of all the trolling and complaining.
I'm sorry this argument simply doesn't work. It is not a fair comparison to say "you have a choice" when one of those choices is not vaiable.
It's like your parents saying "you can have a pet" and the choice is between a snail or a dead parrot. You just want a dog but they go "well you have a choice, if you don't want a pet np"
Who determines what is viable? I happen to like the fact that people must choose a side and not be wishy washy about it. I would concede that perhaps a 30 day unlocked campaign could be good so that people who like to flip flop can do so on their own campaign. However, there are a lot of people who don't frequent the forums that like the 30-day locked. So why not do that? Some guilds actually like being loyal to only one faction and want to fight their opponents that way.
I'm wondering though if part of the problem is that the gankers and small mans realize that it is the larger groups that actually provide the fights by being interested in taking objectives for scoring purposes. By hitting objectives with a larger group, larger and larger groups of opponents must gather to repel it, thus making the bigger fights possible and the bigger ticks of AP. Without objective incentives, people could just sit around inside keep or in stealth for hours until some unsuspecting noobie player rides by! 'GET 'EM GUYS!!!!!"
Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »I don't know why we have to even have this … You have a choice. If you don't like the faction locks, go play on a server that doesn't have them. If you like them, play on a server that does. It's that simple.
Not everyone that is either for or against this thing spends time on the forums. There are great many people that are the silent majority and think these forums are too trolllish to even bother with using them. Gee … given the screaming from the same people in every thread having to do with this, I'd say they were right.
Dear ZOS, please don't let a minority of loud mouthed complainers ruin this game for everyone else. We've already lost enough people to other games because of all the trolling and complaining.
I'm sorry this argument simply doesn't work. It is not a fair comparison to say "you have a choice" when one of those choices is not vaiable.
It's like your parents saying "you can have a pet" and the choice is between a snail or a dead parrot. You just want a dog but they go "well you have a choice, if you don't want a pet np"
Who determines what is viable? I happen to like the fact that people must choose a side and not be wishy washy about it. I would concede that perhaps a 30 day unlocked campaign could be good so that people who like to flip flop can do so on their own campaign. However, there are a lot of people who don't frequent the forums that like the 30-day locked. So why not do that? Some guilds actually like being loyal to only one faction and want to fight their opponents that way.
I'm wondering though if part of the problem is that the gankers and small mans realize that it is the larger groups that actually provide the fights by being interested in taking objectives for scoring purposes. By hitting objectives with a larger group, larger and larger groups of opponents must gather to repel it, thus making the bigger fights possible and the bigger ticks of AP. Without objective incentives, people could just sit around inside keep or in stealth for hours until some unsuspecting noobie player rides by! 'GET 'EM GUYS!!!!!"
From what I have seen of your groups you had a full group before faction locks and still have a full group after it. So how does the the lock benefit you or is it more that others having less fun is a positive? What difference does it make to your group currently?
Master_Kas wrote: »Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »I don't know why we have to even have this … You have a choice. If you don't like the faction locks, go play on a server that doesn't have them. If you like them, play on a server that does. It's that simple.
Not everyone that is either for or against this thing spends time on the forums. There are great many people that are the silent majority and think these forums are too trolllish to even bother with using them. Gee … given the screaming from the same people in every thread having to do with this, I'd say they were right.
Dear ZOS, please don't let a minority of loud mouthed complainers ruin this game for everyone else. We've already lost enough people to other games because of all the trolling and complaining.
I'm sorry this argument simply doesn't work. It is not a fair comparison to say "you have a choice" when one of those choices is not viable.
It's like your parents saying "you can have a pet" and the choice is between a snail or a dead parrot. You just want a dog but they go "well you have a choice, if you don't want a pet np"
Who determines what is viable? I happen to like the fact that people must choose a side and not be wishy washy about it. I would concede that perhaps a 30 day unlocked campaign could be good so that people who like to flip flop can do so on their own campaign. However, there are a lot of people who don't frequent the forums that like the 30-day locked. So why not do that? Some guilds actually like being loyal to only one faction and want to fight their opponents that way.
I'm wondering though if part of the problem is that the gankers and small mans realize that it is the larger groups that actually provide the fights by being interested in taking objectives for scoring purposes. By hitting objectives with a larger group, larger and larger groups of opponents must gather to repel it, thus making the bigger fights possible and the bigger ticks of AP. Without objective incentives, people could just sit around inside keep or in stealth for hours until some unsuspecting noobie player rides by! 'GET 'EM GUYS!!!!!"
And by "realize that it is the larger groups that actually provide the fights by being interested in taking objectives for scoring purposes" you mean taking empty or almost empty keeps and undefended scrolls at off peak hours?
Because that what's winning campaigns for a long time on PC EU