Just remove True Flame and Axe from NA PC

Tomato · January 2016

Enough said

Manoekin · January 2016

Need 3 campaigns. 2 servers now experience lag, and you want to reduce the amount of campaigns to only two?

PhatGrimReaper · January 2016

Manoekin wrote: »

Need 3 campaigns. 2 servers now experience lag, and you want to reduce the amount of campaigns to only two?

+1.... terrible call!!

Rylana · January 2016

#BringBackChillrend

Karamis_Vimardon · January 2016

Rylana wrote: »

#BringBackChillrend

#BringBackWabba

kevlarto_ESO · January 2016

If the lag was under control I would agree, we have to many campaigns that are just taking up resources at the moment, but you never know if they were to get the lag under control might fill those up, guess we will have to wait and see.

riverdragon72 · January 2016

Its not AD's fault you all would rather play on a friggin slide show.

Minnesinger · January 2016

Those of us who play a couple factions this isn´t a good idea. Still can´t unassign or play on the same campaign. TF and Hade have some good fights anyways. Not sure about Axe.

Tomato · January 2016

Those campaigns are for people to get emp without actually doing any work

BigTone · January 2016

Getting rid of one campaign and slightly lowering pop caps AGAIN would help reduce lag in azura/had and remove one dead server.

ListerJMC · January 2016

Minnesinger wrote: »

Those of us who play a couple factions this isn´t a good idea. Still can´t unassign or play on the same campaign. TF and Hade have some good fights anyways. Not sure about Axe.

Exactly. I need to keep my characters in different campaigns since they're in opposing alliances, so making less campaigns would make it harder to juggle them.

I've also seen some good fights on TF and Haderus, but as for Axe... it seems to be a ghost town. A little while back I had to move my DC character from Haderus because my EP character's guild has it as their home campaign, so I dumped him in Axe just to see what it was.

He did one scouting mission, saw no enemies along the way, and ended up 10th in line for emperor

(Names blocked out)

Taybeh%2BShould%2BNot%2BBe%2BEmperor.jpg

Yeah... I haven't been back on Axe since. I think something needs to be done to boost the numbers, but I'm not sure what that something is.

Weberda · January 2016

kevlarto_ESO wrote: »

If the lag was under control I would agree, we have to many campaigns that are just taking up resources at the moment, but you never know if they were to get the lag under control might fill those up, guess we will have to wait and see.

Quoted for truth. The key issue above all other things is the server performance in Cyrodiil. The failure to fix it after two years leads me to believe they can't. PvP will never be what we all want it to be. The devs know what the conditions are like. There's no way they can find it acceptable. The fact that the conditions remain the same means to me that there's no fix possible. Add campaigns, close campaigns, no aoe cap, etc. etc.. It doesn't matter.

MountainHound · January 2016

It is always bad when you see one faction on 3 bars and the other two on one bar with there being literally nothing you can do to stop the horde.

I would prefer it if they made TF + AZ gated and open axe.

DisgracefulMind · January 2016

I'd say get rid of Axe, keep Trueflame. There is no need for Axe to just serve as the AD buff server. It needs to go.

Crown · January 2016

MountainHound wrote: »

It is always bad when you see one faction on 3 bars and the other two on one bar with there being literally nothing you can do to stop the horde. I would prefer it if they made TF + AZ gated and open axe.

The higher AD population in Axe is usually people farming sewers.

I believe that all IC instances should be the same, so you can get in from ANY campaign to the SAME IC. Then all campaigns can be set to gated. It may bring back the "buff campaign" concept, though any group looking for a good fight can go to an opponent's "buff campaign" and be sure to get a response. With AoE caps removed, the PvE'ers will need to play smarter and not just overwhelm taking advantage of AoE caps to win vs the smaller numbers.

Hadan_of_Rift · January 2016

Tomato wrote: »

Enough said

Only if they remove faction restrictions. Some people play more than one faction and it's already silly to try and do PvP with the current tiny number of campaigns. So removing campaigns is not an option unless they remove faction restrictions.

Zyle · January 2016

riverdragon72 wrote: »

Its not AD's fault you all would rather play on a friggin slide show.

So you guys would rather play on an empty server?

FENGRUSH · January 2016

Half the server population until lag is fixed, add more campaigns. Wont do it because game must be 'mass PVP' and better to be mass pvp game with 999 ping then lower scale campaign with playable content.

RIP

CtrlAltDlt · January 2016

I agree OP, but like some people said, I'm afraid lag would be terrible with just w campaigns so maybe closing 1 will be a good start. There is no need for 4 vet campaigns....

Manoekin · January 2016

Hadan_of_Rift wrote: »

Tomato wrote: »

Enough said

Only if they remove faction restrictions. Some people play more than one faction and it's already silly to try and do PvP with the current tiny number of campaigns. So removing campaigns is not an option unless they remove faction restrictions.

They've said they're removing them.

Psilent · January 2016

Remove Trueflame and make Axe of Belharza a 30 day campaign with the same ruleset as Azura's Star, except keep the gated access.

Jules · January 2016

Fix the lag and watch all those campaigns fill up.

Ezareth · January 2016

DisgracefulMind wrote: »

I'd say get rid of Axe, keep Trueflame. There is no need for Axe to just serve as the AD buff server. It needs to go.

If you don't let the highest population faction control proportionally more campaigns then they will only zerg down the next campaign when the campaign they inhabit is removed. Let the players who choose to inhabit a buff server play on that server and let the players who want competitive PvP play on the competitive campaigns.

I think we need 2 MORE campaigns and a pop cap that is half of what it is now.

riverdragon72 · January 2016

bchulettub17_ESO wrote: »

riverdragon72 wrote: »

Its not AD's fault you all would rather play on a friggin slide show.

So you guys would rather play on an empty server?

What does that have to do with my statement? There is AD present on TF, If EP and DC want to chug along at 10 fps or less somewhere else that is fine.

Bfish22090 · January 2016

How about just 1 campaign that didn't lag at all

FENGRUSH · January 2016

Ezareth wrote: »

DisgracefulMind wrote: »

I'd say get rid of Axe, keep Trueflame. There is no need for Axe to just serve as the AD buff server. It needs to go.

If you don't let the highest population faction control proportionally more campaigns then they will only zerg down the next campaign when the campaign they inhabit is removed. Let the players who choose to inhabit a buff server play on that server and let the players who want competitive PvP play on the competitive campaigns.

I think we need 2 MORE campaigns and a pop cap that is half of what it is now.

Copy cat

Ezareth · January 2016

FENGRUSH wrote: »

Ezareth wrote: »

DisgracefulMind wrote: »

I'd say get rid of Axe, keep Trueflame. There is no need for Axe to just serve as the AD buff server. It needs to go.

If you don't let the highest population faction control proportionally more campaigns then they will only zerg down the next campaign when the campaign they inhabit is removed. Let the players who choose to inhabit a buff server play on that server and let the players who want competitive PvP play on the competitive campaigns.

I think we need 2 MORE campaigns and a pop cap that is half of what it is now.

Copy cat

Lol, great minds evidently think alike. I didn't even continue reading after I saw Bee's comment and posting so I never even saw your same suggestion.

Still it makes sense to anyone with a logical mind. Reduce pop caps and increase number of campaigns until lag becomes marginal. Unfortunately it appears ZoS has been doing the opposite.

How long has it been since any of you have waited in a campaign queue? I haven't seen ONE in 4 or 5 months now. Even when it says "locked" I queue, and get instapopped.

Manoekin · January 2016

Ezareth wrote: »

FENGRUSH wrote: »

Ezareth wrote: »

DisgracefulMind wrote: »

I'd say get rid of Axe, keep Trueflame. There is no need for Axe to just serve as the AD buff server. It needs to go.

If you don't let the highest population faction control proportionally more campaigns then they will only zerg down the next campaign when the campaign they inhabit is removed. Let the players who choose to inhabit a buff server play on that server and let the players who want competitive PvP play on the competitive campaigns.

I think we need 2 MORE campaigns and a pop cap that is half of what it is now.

Copy cat

Lol, great minds evidently think alike. I didn't even continue reading after I saw Bee's comment and posting so I never even saw your same suggestion.

Still it makes sense to anyone with a logical mind. Reduce pop caps and increase number of campaigns until lag becomes marginal. Unfortunately it appears ZoS has been doing the opposite.

How long has it been since any of you have waited in a campaign queue? I haven't seen ONE in 4 or 5 months now. Even when it says "locked" I queue, and get instapopped.

Last night. I think half is too much. I wish there were blue and red buff servers. I'd take that over Azura's in a heartbeat at this point.

OdinForge · January 2016

Bfish22090 wrote: »

How about just 1 campaign that didn't lag at all

That means ZOS has to actually work on the issue.

You must be new here, GTFO.

Keiryan · January 2016

Tomato wrote: »

Those campaigns are for people to get emp without actually doing any work

If this is your only reasoning.. Why does this even matter? It's not like people can farm for Former Emp passives.. all they get is a ridiculous costume and a lame title that really means next to nothing.

I don't even understand how people play Azura's and Haderus is becoming Azura's junior.. A third one is necessary for overflow but I mean personally I'm pretty turned off from PvP the last week. I think I'm going to become a PvE overlord for a while until they fix some of this ***..

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/137503/pvp-lag-fights-unplayable#latest

Reading this thread and realizing that we've been complaining for over 18 months for them to constantly stop breaking the game and roll back patches all the way to the lighting patch and we've been ignored over and over honestly makes me feel like I've been begging the bus driver not to kick me off the shortbus this whole time.

DisgracefulMind · January 2016

Ezareth wrote: »

DisgracefulMind wrote: »

I'd say get rid of Axe, keep Trueflame. There is no need for Axe to just serve as the AD buff server. It needs to go.

If you don't let the highest population faction control proportionally more campaigns then they will only zerg down the next campaign when the campaign they inhabit is removed. Let the players who choose to inhabit a buff server play on that server and let the players who want competitive PvP play on the competitive campaigns.

I think we need 2 MORE campaigns and a pop cap that is half of what it is now.

Sure, reduce the pop cap and I'm game. But without that, no point.