Stop "Travel to Player" to enter Cyrodiil

Erock25

Sorry OP, but I believe your guesstimates are way off on how many people you are seeing. You have this idea in your mind that people are circumnavigating the player pop counting so automatically you are counting way more people than are actually there. You are right in that if people who travel to player aren't counted towards the overall pop, that needs to be fixed, but you are wrong in everything else. 70 people each in two different fights at the same time? Ssssuuuurrreee buddy. In no way could they have FC ported similar to what you yourself did to see two keeps at once.

Rune_Relic

Its a back door to bypass the whole point of the home and guest campaigns.
Its exploiting one mechanic to overcome another mechanic.

Can I travel to anywhere in the map in any campaign instantly with this ?
As it sounds like a great way to bypass the need for forward camps.

Rune_Relic

Rylana wrote: »

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.

Wow, you mean you could actually be leading 3 factions and switching at leisure ? You dont see this as a problem in PVP ?

Erock25

Rune_Relic wrote: »

Its a back door to bypass the whole point of the home and guest campaigns.
Its exploiting one mechanic to overcome another mechanic.

Can I travel to anywhere in the map in any campaign instantly with this ?
As it sounds like a great way to bypass the need for forward camps.

No you zone in to the starting area just like if you joined regularly.

Rune_Relic

Erock25 wrote: »

Rune_Relic wrote: »

Its a back door to bypass the whole point of the home and guest campaigns.
Its exploiting one mechanic to overcome another mechanic.

Can I travel to anywhere in the map in any campaign instantly with this ?
As it sounds like a great way to bypass the need for forward camps.

No you zone in to the starting area just like if you joined regularly.

So the player I am travelling to, could be on the other side of cyrodiil when I arrive ?
Doesnt seem to be that user friendly anyway and not really....travelling to a player.
In fact it appears to offers no benefit over the typical method.
Clearly only useful for circumventing the rules.

Keron

Erock25 wrote: »

Sorry OP, but I believe your guesstimates are way off on how many people you are seeing. You have this idea in your mind that people are circumnavigating the player pop counting so automatically you are counting way more people than are actually there. You are right in that if people who travel to player aren't counted towards the overall pop, that needs to be fixed, but you are wrong in everything else. 70 people each in two different fights at the same time? Ssssuuuurrreee buddy. In no way could they have FC ported similar to what you yourself did to see two keeps at once.

You have your opinion, I have mine. I know what I saw and it is what I described. I have explained how I came to the numbers and that I don't consider them proof in any perceivable way but a strong indicator, socalled anecdotal confirmation.

As to the bloodporting: Of course there is a possibility that the whole bunch of people at the first fight dropped it as soon as they saw that I was gone and went to the other fight, somehow implemented enough network occlusion so they could respawn at the chosen resource camp, run to the keep, put up all siege, distribute all over the field and all that before I could respawn at the camp within the keep and climb the walls.

I find my theory to be more probable, but that may be only me. Mostly because I do not think of myself as the be-all-end-all player of the universe that will pull every single enemy player of all opposing faction to whereever I am while being constantly surveyed and followed by a bunch of spies to make sure I can never bring my bombastic skills to a location without sufficient opposition.

Oh yeah, as an aside, thanks for all the LOLs someone put up on my posts in this thread You may want to go to my profile and abuse the other ~900 posts I have made so far and put LOLs there too if you think it required.

Davadin

FYI, bloodporting will get fixed soon. theyre going to limit the range of it.

Agrippa_Invisus

Davadin wrote: »

FYI, bloodporting will get fixed soon. theyre going to limit the range of it.

Citation needed.

Keron

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

Davadin wrote: »

FYI, bloodporting will get fixed soon. theyre going to limit the range of it.

Citation needed.

Agreed. Too good to be true.

LOLer: Here's a new post since you seem to have problems of finding others after the 15 LOLs you gave me in the last 10 Minutes.

Davadin

Keron wrote: »

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

Davadin wrote: »

FYI, bloodporting will get fixed soon. theyre going to limit the range of it.

Citation needed.

Agreed. Too good to be true.

LOLer: Here's a new post since you seem to have problems of finding others after the 15 LOLs you gave me in the last 10 Minutes.

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/discussion/comment/1292002/#Comment_1292002

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

We have talked about resurrections only be allowed within the radius of the Forward Camp and shrinking the size of the radius as well with increasing the respawns. This is a bit more tricky than it sounds and the programmers want to make sure it's clean as can be before putting it out there.

I'm assuming "Blood porting" is dying at an enemy resource to spawn at a friendly FC quickly?

Well, they're goin to do something about FC's range....

Indirect, yes. But effective. If they are getting this done.... sometime this decade.

Agrippa_Invisus

Davadin wrote: »

Keron wrote: »

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

Davadin wrote: »

FYI, bloodporting will get fixed soon. theyre going to limit the range of it.

Citation needed.

Agreed. Too good to be true.

LOLer: Here's a new post since you seem to have problems of finding others after the 15 LOLs you gave me in the last 10 Minutes.

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/discussion/comment/1292002/#Comment_1292002

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

We have talked about resurrections only be allowed within the radius of the Forward Camp and shrinking the size of the radius as well with increasing the respawns. This is a bit more tricky than it sounds and the programmers want to make sure it's clean as can be before putting it out there.

I'm assuming "Blood porting" is dying at an enemy resource to spawn at a friendly FC quickly?

Well, they're goin to do something about FC's range....

Indirect, yes. But effective. If they are getting this done.... sometime this decade.

Citation requested and provided. Respect, and thanks.

That sounds like a great idea. Also, yes, Blood Gating (or porting, or tentaporting) is dying somewhere intentionally to use FCs to quick port around the map.

Keron

Let me just put this back on first page. Any news or new inconsequentialism-defenders?

Kromus

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.

Not sure from where you got that number of 200 players for each faction at time, as in QA with Matt Firor, game director, is stated that overall pop limit is around 1800 per campaign, which means 600 players per faction.

"We will have two megaservers – one for North American players, and one for European players, although you will be able to create characters on both if you wish. The game's PvP area (Cyrodiil) has a population limit of about 1800 players per campaign, but we'll have many campaigns running simultaneously."

Keron

Kromus wrote: »

Not sure from where you got that number of 200 players for each faction at time, as in QA with Matt Firor, game director, is stated that overall pop limit is around 1800 per campaign, which means 600 players per faction.

"We will have two megaservers – one for North American players, and one for European players, although you will be able to create characters on both if you wish. The game's PvP area (Cyrodiil) has a population limit of about 1800 players per campaign, but we'll have many campaigns running simultaneously."

I've been asking for numbers for population in this thread, sadly without any kind of reply.

I remember green statements giving "2000 players per campaign" limit around early access time and a subsequent reduction of the limit to "200 players per faction per campaign" because of the lag issue. I can't find any confirmation for either of those two statements any longer.

I have heard numbers ranging from "200 per faction per campaign" to "500 per faction per campaign" and up to "1000 per faction". Now you bring in 1800 total limit. But none of those except for the two initially mentioned numbers I have heard from a green mouth.

Of course, if the max population for a faction is 600, a two hundred player zerg is still medium pop, provided all players are in one spot.

Incidentally, the example I was quoting with numbers, we also had medium pop indicator or maybe even high. We didn't have half the numbers. So while the absolute numbers are unknown and including all the uncertainties of "counting forces", the feel of the situation remains.

As I said, I have experienced this time and again. I was in that situation while in the minority faction as well as in the majority faction (or beneficiary of the "glitch"). Population has felt off many times. It also gets worse nowadays, as if more and more people unknowingly use that "glitch".

As @demonlkojipub19_ESO has put it before, the only people who can provide solid evidence for or against this claim are those green ones who are (once again) completely silent on this issue.

Enodoc

I agree that travel to player should not be allowed to get into a Campaign that you are not allowed to set as your Guest campaign (ie, if you have other faction's characters in there). Whether that in itself is a sensible restriction I will leave to another time.

I don't agree however that travel to player is bypassing the population counter. You are still "entering Cyrodiil" when using travel to player, and you still go through the loading screen which puts you into a campaign. That is what I believe increments the counter - loading into Cyrodiil, not how you got there.

Keron

Enodoc wrote: »

...That is what I believe increments the counter - loading into Cyrodiil, not how you got there.

Fun zayn moyl, in Gots oyer. My observations still say differently.

Joy_Division

Keron wrote: »

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.

I see you have a totally open mind about this and are amenable to actual conversation If I can't convince you the jump-to-player mechanic is intended functionality, then perhaps the head of the PvP development team can:

Brian Wheeler:
"Guest Pass/Jump-to-Player – Being that ESO is an MMO, adding limits to when/where I can play with friends is a key issue we’re aware. That’s why the Jump-to-Player option is currently allowed to enter Cyrodiil. It’s our belief that allowing players to group up and play together is one of the most important aspects of an MMO, and removing the capability to jump to your friends or use a guest pass would be detrimental."

For what it's worth I do agree it's kind of pointless to have restrictions and ways to circumvent them. Since this is entertainment, not real-life national security, I prefer less restrictions on said entrainment and gladly trade suffering the occasional troll camp or the dozen people who have nothing else better to do on a Friday night than allegedly (this hasn't been proven at all) circumvent the population cap so I can play with my friends.

Keron

Joy_Division wrote: »

I see you have a totally open mind about this and are amenable to actual conversation

@Joy_Division You're right on that one. I just cant stand the inherent contradiction in their (ZOS) point of view on this issue.

As mentioned: If they let everyone join every campaign with as many toons from as many factions as a player wants and remove the necessity to set a guest campaign and have all campaigns treated like the guest campaign is nowadays, it would at least be consistent. I'd stop arguing this point immediately, because at the end it is their decision what to do. I wouldn't like it at all, but I'd keep my mouth shut.

And yes again, if my gut feeling is correct (not that I ever hope to get a clear confirmation or denial by ZOS) on the population count issue, then this needs to be fixed. Simply using the mechanism that @Enodoc mentioned would do the trick. And I'll continue to push this for a while in the hopes that someone (green) will deign to say something about it.

Hypertionb14_ESO

ok i have tried this and i know for a fact it just stick you in a Que.

the only other thing is that you can travel as a entire party if you form before queuing up..

Turelus

You can't bypass the counter in this way, I have tried it.
Unless there is some unknown trick (exploit) to make it work.

Keron

I'll repeat myself here: This is not about being able to circumvent the entering queue if the population is already locked. The topic being discussed (at least part of it) is the fact that this functionality may (and probably does) allow you to enter a campaign, that is not yet population locked, and you being there after having used this functionality are not counted towards the total faction population.

Other words: This functionality may (and probably does) allow players to enter a campaign, increasing the available players for that faction, by still allowing the same number of players to enter the campaign by the "normal" way as the other factions.

Numbered example (due to lack of information only fantasy numbers):
Let's assume the maximum allowed population for a campaign is 200 players for each faction. As long as a faction is not yet locked (has less than 90% of 200 players maximum), people can travel to friend into the campaign without limitation, theoretically bringing the total number of players for that faction to 1000 without ever having the population go into lock. Players can then continue to join in via the "normal" ways until the total number of players having used these normal ways are at population lock.

This part of the functionality, amongst other also discussed above, needs to disappear.

Oh yeah, bump.

Turelus

Sorry for misunderstanding the thread topic.

Do you have any proof of this though? It seems something which players themselves would have a hard time testing to get data.

Keron

Turelus wrote: »

Do you have any proof of this though? It seems something which players themselves would have a hard time testing to get data.

Exactly this. Unless someone can mobilize a 400+ player guild all with toons in the same faction and get them to be online at the same time and home/guest on the same campaign, it can't be tested.

So no, as also written several times along the discussion, I don't have proof or hard evidence. The only thing I have is my gut, this has given me the same answer time and again: too many! turtle up and use your spears!

Waiting for any kind of information from the green hornets. Or, at least an acknowledgement that it is being looked at. Until I get this, help me bump the topic

Cinnamon_Spider

Keron wrote: »

So no, as also written several times along the discussion, I don't have proof or hard evidence. The only thing I have is my gut, this has given me the same answer time and again: too many! turtle up and use your spears!

Unless your gut works for zos, you're just insisting on something you can't prove is true. Gut instincts are not reliable and you are simply overestimating the number of players you are seeing.

It doesn't make any logical sense that travel to player puts you into a campaign via a different enough method that you are not counted. Its like a temporary guest pass and guests entering are counted.

Being able to travel to and play with friends, even on a campaign you do not home, has been stated by zos as something they want. And it is something many players want.

Keron

@ratgoddess495
Yes, you and others have stated time and again that I overestimate numbers and can't prove what I say. On the other hand, you can't prove that I overestimate. To use this implication of fallacy as an argument to retain the status quo without being able to prove the opposite any more than I am, does not make your viewpoint any more valid.

Bugs never make sense. Using an argument like "it does not make sense to have it work that way" neither proves nor disproves anything.

Time and again, I will repeat the core of my argument: If this functionality is something that is so highly valued by players and developers alike (as seen in many of the comments and even quotes of official statements), then why the hell do they retain the limitations in place for all other ways?

Keron wrote: »

If they let everyone join every campaign with as many toons from as many factions as a player wants and remove the necessity to set a guest campaign and have all campaigns treated like the guest campaign is nowadays, it would at least be consistent. I'd stop arguing this point immediately, because at the end it is their decision what to do. I wouldn't like it at all, but I'd keep my mouth shut.

Weberda

This is becoming a borderline obsession with the OP. Not healthy.

Cinnamon_Spider

Keron wrote: »

@ratgoddess495
Yes, you and others have stated time and again that I overestimate numbers and can't prove what I say. On the other hand, you can't prove that I overestimate. To use this implication of fallacy as an argument to retain the status quo without being able to prove the opposite any more than I am, does not make your viewpoint any more valid.

Bugs never make sense. Using an argument like "it does not make sense to have it work that way" neither proves nor disproves anything.

Time and again, I will repeat the core of my argument: If this functionality is something that is so highly valued by players and developers alike (as seen in many of the comments and even quotes of official statements), then why the hell do they retain the limitations in place for all other ways?

Keron wrote: »

If they let everyone join every campaign with as many toons from as many factions as a player wants and remove the necessity to set a guest campaign and have all campaigns treated like the guest campaign is nowadays, it would at least be consistent. I'd stop arguing this point immediately, because at the end it is their decision what to do. I wouldn't like it at all, but I'd keep my mouth shut.

You have made the claim. The burden of proof is on you.

Keron

EDIT: This is in reply to @Weberda:
You may feel that way, but to be honest that statement does not add any value to the discussion.

My obsession told me to ask you to please refrain from useless posts.

@ratgoddess495
Actually, the burden is on ZOS to disprove the claim, since we all agree on the fact that "a player" can't deliver proof. I have given the reason why I feel this has to be looked at. I tried to explain why the reason I have given is in my opinion substantial enough to call for at least a statement from the greens.

I have not read any player supplied refutation that convinces me that my impression is untrue. As opposed to what I have detailed, the only "arguments" of my opposition are:

• You can't count
• You exaggerate because butthurt
• Even if you are right, the developers want "travel to player" to be available
• Oh my, you have an unhealthy obsession.

Bramir

The lack of comment by ZOS saying this is not the case leads me to believe this is true. They had better know how it works...or at least how it is supposed to work. I can't believe something like this would have ever been allowed into a competitive environment...there is a reason a red card in soccer is such a severe punishment. Teams should have an equal number of players if you want your competition to have any legitimacy.

Rune_Relic

I guess this was one argument for having fixed population NPC factions. You cant replace what doesnt exist. They kind of act like a hardcap. If there was no NPC available to replace...you couldnt enter.