The Elder Scrolls Online

Maintenance for the week of November 18:
• PC/Mac: No maintenance – November 18
• ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – November 19, 9:00AM EST (14:00 UTC) - 6:00PM EST (23:00 UTC)
• 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

Please put a limit on people allowed in Cyrodiil per alliance

Leave a Reply
Luxtester
Luxtester
✭
No alliance should be able to have an overwhelming amount of players in cyrodiil while the other alliances have very few. This is the case on my campaign, We are dominating every day and it is getting really boring.

Please change it so that 1 alliance can only have like 10-40 people more in a campaign than any other alliance. I would rather spend more time queueing and play in a campaign that is balanced with action at all times instead of the way it is now, watching the map and hoping action starts somewhere. Usually that ends up in the enemy players getting zerged and then it's back to watching the map.

I've gotten to a point where I just don't pvp anymore as long as the other alliances have no keeps. There are probably better ways to somewhat balance it out than what I suggest here, but please, DO SOMETHING.
  • Dleatherus
    Dleatherus
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭
    simple solution - guest in another campaign where the map is totally dominated by an enemy alliance - there are campaigns where any of the three alliances dominate

    when the action heats back up in your home campaign - play in that one

    it's not optimal - but the game and the campaigns are still young and these horrible imbalances are currently the nature of the beast, and will hopefully equal out as more and more folks finish their pve leveling and get into pvp

    D.
    Stands in Puddles VR12 NB
    Dleatherus VR10 Templar

    Emperor Farmers, cheaters and exploiters - just like cockroaches in real life, Tamriel will never be rid of them
  • nukeyoo
    nukeyoo
    ✭✭✭
    Yes, your idea is not a very good one. You do realize they have a couple options available to everyone. First one is called "guesting!" Using this feature you will be able to test other servers and play on them to experience its sense of balance. After trying out this crazy feature a few times you might decide to use this other feature called a "server transfer!" This completely innovative feature allows you to change your home server to perhaps one of the servers you tested with your guesting! Like oh my god, right?!

    Maybe try those out before asking for a major overhaul of the system? Or change your request to a possible server merge.
    - done w/ it
  • Memnock
    Memnock
    ✭✭✭
    Aren't there player caps for each faction already ? I thought that you could only have 500 players of your faction per campaign.
    http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?p=7731161#post7731161
  • nukeyoo
    nukeyoo
    ✭✭✭
    Memnock wrote: »
    Aren't there player caps for each faction already ? I thought that you could only have 500 players of your faction per campaign.
    The idea the OP was offering was a faction population cap relative to the lowest populated faction currently in Cyrodiil. So for example there is a side zerging with 200 people against the other two only holding 50 and 20 people. The proposed cap would result in population cap being 30-60. Lowest pop (20) + 10-40 to help balance population and putting 150+ people in a queue.
    - done w/ it
  • maholi
    maholi
    ✭✭✭
    People would never log out to make sure and avoid the queue. It would be a disaster. Also, people like to play this game because you can actually play the game when you want. No 1/2 an hour queue's etc. to destroy a game session.
  • Holycannoli
    Holycannoli
    ✭✭✭✭✭
    ✭✭
    Honestly the best idea right now is to eliminate those barely populated campaigns. There's no need for them right now. I think the game can currently handle four campaigns, possibly five, and each one would be highly populated.

    Maybe after this current campaign calendar ends more can be added.
  • maholi
    maholi
    ✭✭✭
    Holycannoli wrote: »
    Honestly the best idea right now is to eliminate those barely populated campaigns. There's no need for them right now. I think the game can currently handle four campaigns, possibly five, and each one would be highly populated.

    Maybe after this current campaign calendar ends more can be added.

    And just ignore the fact that people are still playing those campaigns and getting ranks? No, you don't just tell those people that their efforts have been wasted.
  • Infraction
    Infraction
    ✭✭✭
    maholi wrote: »
    Holycannoli wrote: »
    Honestly the best idea right now is to eliminate those barely populated campaigns. There's no need for them right now. I think the game can currently handle four campaigns, possibly five, and each one would be highly populated.

    Maybe after this current campaign calendar ends more can be added.

    And just ignore the fact that people are still playing those campaigns and getting ranks? No, you don't just tell those people that their efforts have been wasted.

    They should be told that since they aren't pvping......
  • nukeyoo
    nukeyoo
    ✭✭✭
    Infraction wrote: »
    maholi wrote: »
    Holycannoli wrote: »
    Honestly the best idea right now is to eliminate those barely populated campaigns. There's no need for them right now. I think the game can currently handle four campaigns, possibly five, and each one would be highly populated.

    Maybe after this current campaign calendar ends more can be added.

    And just ignore the fact that people are still playing those campaigns and getting ranks? No, you don't just tell those people that their efforts have been wasted.

    They should be told that since they aren't pvping......
    ^^
    pvdoor rank... gratz?

    - done w/ it
Sign In or Register to comment.