Celarus Campaign

cjmarsh725b14_ESO

From the latest patch notes:

Alliance War Changes
Celarus, a new two week Campaign, has been introduced in this patch.
You may reassign your home campaign to Celarus. However, doing so will forfeit all progress in your current home campaign.
Celarus has reduced end of campaign rewards compared to the normal 90 day campaigns.

So my question is, who's going to hop onto the Celarus campaign and does anybody know what the end of campaign rewards are for the other campaigns?

drwoody44b14_ESO

So, all but 2 campaigns are having population issues.....so instead of merging the smaller ones.....they add another one with special rules to draw away players that none of the campaigns seem to have....and the aoe nerf to support skilles zerg combat

Is ZOS purposely trying to force people to unsub?

Malvokian

I really only started doing a lot of PvP regularly just in the past couple of weeks. While I'm working my way up the ladder in Bloodthorn, I think I'm going to jump into the new two week campaign. A fresh start on a short campaign sounds like fun.

Pad

@cjmarsh725b14_ESO‌

Celarus Campaign have lower rewards.

OtarTheMad

Is this a campaign that you can only make a home campaign? If not I'd love to try it as a guest to see what it's like. Interesting concept.

cjmarsh725b14_ESO

Pad wrote: »

@cjmarsh725b14_ESO‌

Celarus Campaign have lower rewards.

I understand they have lower rewards but since I don't know what the rewards are, that doesn't tell me much

Yshaar

My guess is that nearly everyone will jump on the shorter campaign. this is a test balloon from Zeni.

SwampRaider

lower rewards are probably like 8k gold . thats what the reward for the 3 day campaign was in beta

thelg

So do we know that this can not be guested in? Because that would be awesome..

Nijjion

Yes add another campaign when there only needs to be 2-3.

OtarTheMad

Nijjion wrote: »

Yes add another campaign when there only needs to be 2-3.

This is probably a test to see if shorter campaigns will reduce the number of complaints, exploiters and rage quitting that seem to be tied to the length of campaigns.

Adramelach

Well, I'm switching right over. 90 days was WAY too long, and the two weeks will be a lot more dynamic and fun. Definitely more in line with what I'd wanted from campaigns. The way PvP works in there, it's not like you develop "strategic campaigns" that require 30 days or two months to "play out". It's far quicker than that, and any kind of overall strategies like cutting off resources, taking/holding chokepoints, and capturing scrolls can easily be accomplished in two weeks. Frankly, these campaigns usually swing from one side to the other overnight...

So, two weeks is fine, and it'll be my new home, for sure

Agrippa_Invisus

At 2 weeks, every keep and scroll capture becomes important. Going to bed and thinking 'we'll get them tomorrow' just can't happen.

It's probably the duration campaigns should have been all along.

LordNoah1234

I believe they should keep this new campaign along with wabbajack AB and bloodthorn (we only need 4 campaigns. i mean this game has 1 million subs but 10 is to much because people get spread out) and make the campaigns only last like 4 weeks instead of only 2.

Veakoth

If the end of tier reward is only gold i'd be pissed off, that being said everyone is set to lvl 3 end of reward tier so it feels like everyone is getting a participation reward anyway. What i mainly want to know is will there be rewards for leader board rankings top 100/50/20?

Samadhi

OtarTheMad wrote: »

Nijjion wrote: »

Yes add another campaign when there only needs to be 2-3.

This is probably a test to see if shorter campaigns will reduce the number of complaints, exploiters and rage quitting that seem to be tied to the length of campaigns.

I don't think I attributed any of these things to the length of the campaign.
If anything, won't this just make it so that exploiters imbalancing the scoreboard are rewarded on a more regular basis?

We have too many campaigns already.
That said, if enough of the population shifts to the new campaign so will I. Going where the PvP is easiest to find instead of roaming in an empty campaign.

LilMcGinley

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

At 2 weeks, every keep and scroll capture becomes important. Going to bed and thinking 'we'll get them tomorrow' just can't happen.

It's probably the duration campaigns should have been all along.

GW2 has this same mindset, matches were originally to be 2 weeks long but never made it past 1 week because of scoring imbalances. This is a good take on both long and short term campaigns. I hope to see some more of these to come (and with different rules!).

The only change I'd like to see is: You can't guest to Celarus, must have it set as home. And if you have it set to home, you can't guest. Guesting abuse could be the downfall of this type of setup.

EDIT: Not to mention, new shorter campaigns give players a restart on trying to take Emperor, however I feel this campaign is going to be VERY busy.

darkdruidssb14_ESO

LilMcGinley wrote: »

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

At 2 weeks, every keep and scroll capture becomes important. Going to bed and thinking 'we'll get them tomorrow' just can't happen.

It's probably the duration campaigns should have been all along.

GW2 has this same mindset, matches were originally to be 2 weeks long but never made it past 1 week because of scoring imbalances. This is a good take on both long and short term campaigns. I hope to see some more of these to come (and with different rules!).

The only change I'd like to see is: You can't guest to Celarus, must have it set as home. And if you have it set to home, you can't guest. Guesting abuse could be the downfall of this type of setup.

EDIT: Not to mention, new shorter campaigns give players a restart on trying to take Emperor, however I feel this campaign is going to be VERY busy.

Guesting isn't the only issue. You can "travel to player" if you have people on your friends list that are in that campaign.. allowing you to bypass guesting all together.

LilMcGinley

darkdruidssb14_ESO wrote: »

LilMcGinley wrote: »

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

At 2 weeks, every keep and scroll capture becomes important. Going to bed and thinking 'we'll get them tomorrow' just can't happen.

It's probably the duration campaigns should have been all along.

GW2 has this same mindset, matches were originally to be 2 weeks long but never made it past 1 week because of scoring imbalances. This is a good take on both long and short term campaigns. I hope to see some more of these to come (and with different rules!).

The only change I'd like to see is: You can't guest to Celarus, must have it set as home. And if you have it set to home, you can't guest. Guesting abuse could be the downfall of this type of setup.

EDIT: Not to mention, new shorter campaigns give players a restart on trying to take Emperor, however I feel this campaign is going to be VERY busy.

Guesting isn't the only issue. You can "travel to player" if you have people on your friends list that are in that campaign.. allowing you to bypass guesting all together.

Yes, That is what I meant by guesting abuse should have been more clear - my fault

apterous

so if i leave my current campaign i lose all the progress and work i put towards leaderboards. not gonna happen.i'll just stay in the empty campaign and reap the rewards when time comes.

Lord_Draevan

darkdruidssb14_ESO wrote: »

Guesting isn't the only issue. You can "travel to player" if you have people on your friends list that are in that campaign.. allowing you to bypass guesting all together.

Seriously, you can do that? Wow... that's really stupid.

OtarTheMad

Samadhi wrote: »

OtarTheMad wrote: »

Nijjion wrote: »

Yes add another campaign when there only needs to be 2-3.

This is probably a test to see if shorter campaigns will reduce the number of complaints, exploiters and rage quitting that seem to be tied to the length of campaigns.

I don't think I attributed any of these things to the length of the campaign.
If anything, won't this just make it so that exploiters imbalancing the scoreboard are rewarded on a more regular basis?

We have too many campaigns already.
That said, if enough of the population shifts to the new campaign so will I. Going where the PvP is easiest to find instead of roaming in an empty campaign.

Well maybe not exploiters since they will be everywhere pretty much but probably cut down on some complaints and rage quitting.

Sucks that you can't guest, even if they made it once and something that couldn't be permanent... almost like a temporary pass to see if you like it or not.

LilMcGinley

Lord_Draevan wrote: »

darkdruidssb14_ESO wrote: »

Guesting isn't the only issue. You can "travel to player" if you have people on your friends list that are in that campaign.. allowing you to bypass guesting all together.

Seriously, you can do that? Wow... that's really stupid.

Been in since launch & probably sooner.

Solving guesting abuse would easily take care of some of the major issues with low population servers. There is simply no need to put time into a small pop campaign when a large guild can guest abuse over and flip it all.

SwampRaider

OtarTheMad wrote: »

Samadhi wrote: »

OtarTheMad wrote: »

Nijjion wrote: »

Yes add another campaign when there only needs to be 2-3.

This is probably a test to see if shorter campaigns will reduce the number of complaints, exploiters and rage quitting that seem to be tied to the length of campaigns.

I don't think I attributed any of these things to the length of the campaign.
If anything, won't this just make it so that exploiters imbalancing the scoreboard are rewarded on a more regular basis?

We have too many campaigns already.
That said, if enough of the population shifts to the new campaign so will I. Going where the PvP is easiest to find instead of roaming in an empty campaign.

Well maybe not exploiters since they will be everywhere pretty much but probably cut down on some complaints and rage quitting.

Sucks that you can't guest, even if they made it once and something that couldn't be permanent... almost like a temporary pass to see if you like it or not.

agree. due to this new PVp keep guard change, I can see low pop campaigns slowly dying, or 1 faction dominating the whole time now. Guesting option would be nice

darkdruidssb14_ESO

Lord_Draevan wrote: »

darkdruidssb14_ESO wrote: »

Guesting isn't the only issue. You can "travel to player" if you have people on your friends list that are in that campaign.. allowing you to bypass guesting all together.

Seriously, you can do that? Wow... that's really stupid.

Watch Pandamine on Twitch.. he does it all the time because he plays on AB, Wabbajack and Bloodthorn.

drwoody44b14_ESO

Continueing to make this more like GW2 pvp will only make people go back to GW2 pvp....because GW2 pvp doesnt have a sub fee

dba.2000_ESO

No Guesting on Celarus is on of the smartest decision they made. If you don't understand why, visit the Long Term Campaigns.

galiumb16_ESO

I have no issues with Celarus specifically, but adding a new campaign without significantly reducing the overall number of campaigns is just stupid. My guildies are off checking out wildstar right now, just because they have no interest on playing on lagjack or where DC is dominating, which leaves nothing.

dba.2000_ESO

I dunno, why 'punish' players on seemingly empty campaigns for the 'crimes' of the exploiters and abusers, by closing down their campaigns?

Although I do think more then one short-term campaign might end up being necessary.

Mends_from_Shadows

Great *** idea zenimax. Give people another campaign to run away to. Let's see what campaigns die next.

*** brilliant PVP minds over there.

Kewljag_66_ESO

drwoody44b14_ESO wrote: »

Continueing to make this more like GW2 pvp will only make people go back to GW2 pvp....because GW2 pvp doesnt have a sub fee

You also have to remember that ONLY the scoreboard resets. The map does not reset on any campaign end. Its still a persistant world wher what you do stands until enemies take action to change that. SO with that being said i think alot of people are thinking everything will reset and it will be a fresh start every 2 weeks and that will not be the case. If one is side much stronger it will always be much stronger regarless of the 2week scoreboard resets