Twohothardware wrote: »Twohothardware wrote: »They need to remove the Campaign lock which did nothing and come up with a new queue system for Cyrodiil that balances out numbers on all three Alliances. If there’s no Campaign lock you can get on an alt for a different Alliance if your queue is too long.
Either that or revamp Cyrodiil to work like Battlegrounds maybe where we just do away with Alliances and have three teams.
Nope. Alliance locks are clearly popular as the locked campaign has always been the most populated. I'd definitely PvP less if there wasn't a locked campaign, as I think of my fellow DC regulars in a similar light as my real-life vet buddies. We're compatriots in the never-ending battle versus the evil forces of the clown king Emeric and the weak queen Ayrenn.
As others have said, ZOS needs to fix the low pop bonus and give players a better incentive to play on the underdog alliances.
Alliance lock has nothing to do with why the main campaign is the most popular. It's the most popular because it's the MAIN campaign. Prior to the lock ever being added the main campaign was always by far the most populated and there was a lot more active players then than there are now.
Citation needed.
It's the "Main Campaign" BECAUSE it's the most popular, not the other way around. It's the campaign players go to when they want the best chance of action. This has been discussed to death ever since a faction-locked campaign was introduced, and to be fair no one has ever been able to provide any evidence as to why the faction-locked campaign is the most popular. The only thing we have to go on is history, and historically speaking, the faction-locked campaign has always been the most popular, by a huge margin. This leads to the conclusion that faction locks are more popular than the lack of them, even in the face of our current low population levels overall.