Stop "Travel to Player" to enter Cyrodiil

Keron

Not going to let this rest in peace. Another day, another 200 player raid taking a keep while the respective faction has "low" population.

You got to be kidding me.

Tintinabula

I have used travel to player in a locked campaign and went directly in..no cue.

Lava_Croft

Tintinabula wrote: »

I have used travel to player in a locked campaign and went directly in..no cue.

Here we go again....

The lock icon is showed at (iirc) 90% capacity. So it's entirely possible to enter a campaign while it looks 'locked'.

Tintinabula

Yes Lava I remember you posting this before.(or someone) We are all aware of "whats possible" now..at both ends of the spectrum.

Joy_Division

Keron wrote: »

Seriously. Pull the rain cover out of your backside, stop that lame excuse with "friends need to be able to play together" and disable it.

It's not a lame excuse. There is one server with PvP action. Just properly count the population. You don't have to get rid of the intended functionality to play with friends/guildmates.

Keron

It is, too. Why implement things like population limitations, campaign lockouts to prevent cross faction griefing, and home & guest campaigns that cost AP to change and then invalidate all those by a function like "travel to player"?

You can't convince me in any way that this is an intended functionality.

If there is such a high priority to allow people play together, then don't put in these kind of limitations.

If you feel that these limitations are required and important, then don't let it be circumvented.

This is an "either-or"-choice. Not "may-as-well-anyways".

Maybe if this kind of exploit wouldn't be possible, we would have had more than one good campaign? And btw, on EU we managed to turn Azura's into a pretty nice campaign.

Of course, it would be even better without the green alliance. Just kidding. Nom nom nom.

Columba

Sypherpkub17_ESO wrote: »

I play on three alliances.

I am not going to spend my day PvPing on a dead/buff server because I can only have one account on thornblade.

that's your problem. the game shouldn't cater to allow you to cross faction and cheat.

Cinnamon_Spider

Columba wrote: »

Sypherpkub17_ESO wrote: »

I play on three alliances.

I am not going to spend my day PvPing on a dead/buff server because I can only have one account on thornblade.

that's your problem. the game shouldn't cater to allow you to cross faction and cheat.

Just because someone plays on multiple alliances doesn't mean they cheat.

Columba

sorry. that's highly suspicious behavior.

Rylana

Columba wrote: »

sorry. that's highly suspicious behavior.

Well damn, hoss, I play on all three factions too.

Looks like you might be in a minority soon.

Davadin

Columba wrote: »

Sypherpkub17_ESO wrote: »

I play on three alliances.

I am not going to spend my day PvPing on a dead/buff server because I can only have one account on thornblade.

that's your problem. the game shouldn't cater to allow you to cross faction and cheat.

I don't see why people can't play with 3 factions on a single account on the same campaign.... go ahead.

But please remove the "travel to friend" to Cyro. Isn't that's what the thread is all about?

Having a full pop against 2 bars and I see with my own eyes that there are at least 50 of the low-pop running around PER KEEP... that's just BS....

Bramir

Its like ZOS expects people not to abuse loopholes like this...where have they been for the history of MMOs?

Davadin

Bramir wrote: »

Its like ZOS expects people not to abuse loopholes like this...where have they been for the history of MMOs?

...not developing MMO games.

Keron

Another night, same thing.

Yusuf

Bramir wrote: »

If this mechanic is actually allowing population numbers to remain skewed even when populations are locked, it needs to be removed or fixed.

I really hope this is not the case. Competition in Cyrodiil is already a joke because of ZOS's unwillingness to punish cheaters and exploiters, and the population balance between AD and the other factions. If ZOS is allowing a broken mechanic like this to further exacerbate the population imbalance, I think I am done bothering.

Please tell me this isn't true...

2 Posts above you.

surge914b14_ESO

Interesting topic. So the OP is claiming that an alliance can have more peeps than the limit is allowed when the pop isn't maxed out by using the "travel to player" feature but (and I'm not saying your wrong) without some sort of proof it's hard to expect Zen to do anything about it when there are other known problems that they are working on. It sounds like a big enough problem to warrant an investigation though if your right. Maybe there's a guild out there that has a good amount of members that would be willing to put this to the test.

Sypher

Columba wrote: »

Sypherpkub17_ESO wrote: »

I play on three alliances.

I am not going to spend my day PvPing on a dead/buff server because I can only have one account on thornblade.

that's your problem. the game shouldn't cater to allow you to cross faction and cheat.

God damn it you caught me.

*slaps knee*

demonlkojipub19_ESO

Everyone who plays all 3 alliances and PVP's uses 2 of them for troll camps, and in the past for pulling up their real main alliance allies up to keeps with fiery grip.

I see nothing but espionage activity happening in cyrodil from someone who plays all 3 alliances. Theres no loyalty to be expected to the alliance from that person, at all. There should be no surprise why anyone would be suspicions of what you do in cyrodil, call you a spy, block you, never group you, etc. Its how it usually is. All the troll camps come from people that "play all 3 alliances" in the first place.

And being able to travel to their buddies when they shouldn't be able to have another one of their characters on that pvp server is what is helping this happen. They have the main restriction in place for that reason but allow it to be circumvented. Its ludicrous.

JaJaLuka

skeletorz_ESO wrote: »

Sypherpkub17_ESO wrote: »

I play on three alliances.

I am not going to spend my day PvPing on a dead/buff server because I can only have one account on thornblade.

This needs to be stopped too. Accounts should have to pick a faction. Drastically cut down on cheaters.

But yeah, travel to player, for Cyrodiil, needs to go.

I'm sorry but I disagree. Playing with other people and being able to play against the people I usually play with (sometimes just to test myself) is part of what makes this game fun. A different experience from time to time is what keeps me playing.

Keron

JaJaLuka wrote: »

I'm sorry but I disagree. Playing with other people and being able to play against the people I usually play with (sometimes just to test myself) is part of what makes this game fun. A different experience from times to time is what keeps me playing.

I'm sorry but I disagree. That's what you have guesting for. Get you friends to guest on another campaign and put your other faction toon there.

JaJaLuka

no

Keron

I like this picture.

JaJaLuka

ok try this. When I try to fight my friends on another server in small scale fights, they get ganked. there is nothing I can do to stop it as the gankers are on my alliance and there is never enough people to do proper sieges. I have tried asking the gankers to stop and moving the spot where we fight but as our fights always show up on the map we get found and trolled again making it a complete waste of time. does that give you a small insight?

Keron

No.

Sharee

Keron wrote: »

Sadly, none. Only anecdotal evaluation.

Can't test it by myself. But seeing two full fledged attacks by the same faction with more than 70 players each while having medium population (and two other fights, although I didn't see the numbers involved) seems kind of improbable with maximum population of 200 players for each faction.

Can you distinguish between 70 attackers and 50 attackers?

From my experience anything above 20-30 becomes a swirling mass blob of players that is virtually impossible to count, especially as they die, respawn, and run back, which creates a seemingly endless stream of players. I know i always tend to overestimate the number of players when i see them in a bob (and adjust downwards when i see them trickle from one resource to another so i am able to get a better count). So what might seem as a 70 player attack might in fact be a 45-50 player attack.

Not saying you are wrong, but i think the evidence is too subjective to be conculsive.

demonlkojipub19_ESO

The only people with evidence or data of how many players are present in cyrodil for any given alliance are zos and server hackers. Any server hackers here? I should hope not. I dont think there are any addons that show the exact number of players in each alliance in cyrodil either which would be nice.

So all anyone can go by is observation. I too have observed on various occasions too many present for the current population level. Its very possible that traveling to player does not add that player to the population. Its also possible that entering cyrodil via wayshrine does the same thing, tho that will put you in your home server only. Maybe a guild of trolls is hiding in a corner somewhere just jumping with a macro program to prevent logoff therefor lowering your alliances maximum force. Many possibile theories of why one alliance seemingly has a lot more players even when they are all on queue.

Keron

Sharee wrote: »

Can you distinguish between 70 attackers and 50 attackers?

From my experience anything above 20-30 becomes a swirling mass blob of players that is virtually impossible to count, especially as they die, respawn, and run back, which creates a seemingly endless stream of players. I know i always tend to overestimate the number of players when i see them in a bob (and adjust downwards when i see them trickle from one resource to another so i am able to get a better count). So what might seem as a 70 player attack might in fact be a 45-50 player attack.

Not saying you are wrong, but i think the evidence is too subjective to be conculsive.

It is, I agree. That is why I hesitate to call it "proof".

In that special circumstance, I have seen two separate trains running around keep outer walls, one of which had something like 30 people (easily counted because they were not that stacked) and the other were more than 50, densely packed.

While that is difficult to count, you can do it by sectioning 10packs of players passing a visible line like a step.

In addition, there were maybe 20 people already sieging and some sneaks guarding the doors.

Then there is the players running back in from camp, etc.

After I died, I jumped to the other battle due to lack of camp. That other fight had 20 opposing siege up and a hell of a flank guard. My numbers are worse on that one, because there were more sneaks around, but from what I saw the number given was again a very low estimate.

As I said in the post quoted by you, the estimates given were reduced, and by a lot (20% from the values I "counted") exactly for this reason.

Davadin

JaJaLuka wrote: »

skeletorz_ESO wrote: »

Sypherpkub17_ESO wrote: »

I play on three alliances.

I am not going to spend my day PvPing on a dead/buff server because I can only have one account on thornblade.

This needs to be stopped too. Accounts should have to pick a faction. Drastically cut down on cheaters.

But yeah, travel to player, for Cyrodiil, needs to go.

I'm sorry but I disagree. Playing with other people and being able to play against the people I usually play with (sometimes just to test myself) is part of what makes this game fun. A different experience from time to time is what keeps me playing.

yes, but not at the expense of breaking population limit.

Draxys

Joy_Division wrote: »

Keron wrote: »

Seriously. Pull the rain cover out of your backside, stop that lame excuse with "friends need to be able to play together" and disable it.

It's not a lame excuse. There is one server with PvP action. Just properly count the population. You don't have to get rid of the intended functionality to play with friends/guildmates.

Finally someone thinks straight. Instead of removing the feature, just fix the fact that it doesn't affect the overall population. Problem solved.

Keron

Draxys wrote: »

Finally someone thinks straight. Instead of removing the feature, just fix the fact that it doesn't affect the overall population. Problem solved.

Still no. Unless you are allowed to have toons of several factions in the same campaign by default, you still need to remove "travel to player" as it still allows circumventing this rule.

I get it, there is a not (well, judging by replies in this thread only) insignificant number of players with legitimate reasons for having toons of different factions in the same campaign. But either this is allowed or it is not. Have it be prevented by rule and then allow it via exploit is stupid.

And I'll repeat that as often as someone tells me that this is fine as is.

Fight inconsequentialism!