More PvP Campaigns Are Needed – Immediately!

olemanwinter

As I begin writing this, every single campaign in Cyrodiil has at least one faction population locked. Most have 2 or 3 locked. All other factions are at 3 full bars. This is good. And this is horrible.

I think it's undeniable that the 1.6 changes and the introduction of Tamriel Unlimited have led to an influx of new and returning players. This is great.

@Zos, this is an OPPORTUNITY for you to build a long-term base of loyal (and crown purchasing) players.

It is possible that a majority of players prefer high-population servers, but a minority can still be a sizable chunk of your player base. And there is AT LEAST a large minority of us that prefer lower population pvp and we have seen our options DISAPPEAR over the last two weeks.

Don't trade 10 new players for 4 old players, when keeping the old players involves something so simple as bringing back more campaigns. They already existed once, and therefore it should be a relatively small task to reintroduce them. This should be done immediately, the very next patch or within this month at the latest.

MY EXPERIENCE:
My guild (200 members, social PvX) would previously take groups of 6-12 and enter Cyrodiil and do tremendously fun small-scale actions. We would use misdirection and speed to take outposts and keeps and then use coordinated strategy to hold them and complete against twice as many enemies (although still relatively few players). I think I can be so bold as to speak for everyone in saying this was some of the most fun any of us have ever had in this game.

This last week, many (if not all) of the 3-letter zerg guilds moved into this low-population campaign, and what followed was a predictable and sad series of events!

1) Server-side performance problems (difficulty with keep doors, dismounting, switching skill bars, etc)
2) Zone chat full of comments about r@pe and f1sting and anything else you can imagine.
3) AP farming/Emperor farming. - Where before the leaderboard was comprised of people playing only 5-6 hours per day, the leader suddenly was playing 14-18hrs per day and gaining 1 million AP in 4 days.
4) CHEATING – I personally witnessed DC players using AD alts to remove scrolls and run them north all the way to DC gates.

If you attempted to discuss any of these things in zone chat you would get some variation of the following predictable response from the dozens and dozens of members of these newly arrived 3 letter guilds: “U Sux, learn2play noob, omglol”

If you were near the zergs and not grouped with them you were accused of “leeching and soaking up their AP”. If you were not near them you were guilty of “Not contributing or helping the cause”.

Meanwhile, here is a screen shot of a group of 25+ people who arrived at a dolmen that myself and 2 friends were in the middle of completing. There were more than this, this is just the best shot I could get after it was over. Ironically (since I arrived first) and stupidly (since you don't get AP from dolmens) even here I was accused of "following them around".



PLEASE DO NOT MISUNDERSTAND ME: (Except for the cheating listed as #4 above) These people did not break any terms of service that I'm aware of, and I'm not calling for anything to be done to them. They should be free to play the game as they wish. However, the number of campaigns is too few for groups like them and players like myself to both play the game as we wish.

I won't pretend to be a software developer, but it seems to me that since Zos makes money from duration of a player's time in ESO and not the hours played, it would make sense to encourage a regular routine play-style instead of these binges that inevitably lead to burn-out.

TLDR:
High population campaigns are nothing but AP farms. Low population campaigns have had compelling combat but are now extinct. Please add additional campaigns immediately or you risk losing players that just joined or returned. There is no reason not to do this.

Forestd16b14_ESO

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/159044/more-servers#latest

Way ahead of you. And players either don't want them YET or at all. Here's the thing though raising pop lock would make the lag WORST cause more players means more connections and more connections means more stuff ZoS mega server has to process which means more LAG.

So yea think it's about time we got atleast 2 more servers maybe another 7 day campaign and 5 day.

olemanwinter

Forestd16b14_ESO wrote: »

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/159044/more-servers#latest

Way ahead of you. And players either don't want them

Actually, that poll indicates an almost even 50/50 split.

And since the addition of campaigns provides additional options instead of fewer, I see no reason not to do so.
Every single player playing in the current campaigns can feel free to remain there. No player would be forced to move.

Why not please half the people when the other half would not be hurt in any way? This seems like the biggest "no brain'r" ever.

Forestd16b14_ESO wrote: »

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/159044/more-servers#latest
raising pop lock would make the lag WORST cause more players means more connections and more connections means more stuff ZoS mega server has to process which means more LAG.

I am absolutely 100% AGAINST raising the pop-lock. The entire problem that I am addressing is too many players in the campaigns for some people's tastes (mine included of course).

Raising the pop limit would just increase this problem. Instead of a screen shot of 30 people at a dolmen, I would simply crash with 50 people at a dolmen and have no screen shot at all. lol

NTY to pop increase.

Forestd16b14_ESO wrote: »

So yea think it's about time we got atleast 2 more servers maybe another 7 day campaign and 5 day.

If it were up to me I would add 3 more servers. 1 more 14 day. 1 more 7 day. and 1 more Non-Vet

Dazin93

As DC I never have to wait long to join any campaign, locked or otherwise. There are some more people playing now, but the locks are due more to pop caps being cut in half compared to what they used to be. Also, the pop lock isn't always indicative of PvP players as ZOS has provided incentives to PvE in Cyrodiil.

The large scale PvP that was promised when ESO released has been diminished to the point that it's laughable. More campaigns would just turn Cyrodiil into an even worse snooze fest and is a terrible idea. If you want small scale fighting you should be lobbying for arenas instead of more campaigns.

olemanwinter

Dazin93 wrote: »

The large scale PvP that was promised when ESO released has been diminished to the point that it's laughable. More campaigns would just turn Cyrodiil into an even worse snooze fest and is a terrible idea. If you want small scale fighting you should be lobbying for arenas instead of more campaigns.

Lets consider it logically. You can't have it both ways. IF most players want large scale pvp, then nobody would leave for the other servers and you have nothing to complain about. However, if many players would leave for the new servers as you suspect, then that proves that many players would prefer lower population servers.

See how clear it becomes? The very nature of your argument proves there is a strong desire by many players for that which I lobby.

Unless you are suggesting that a large number of players be forced to remain where they don't want to play to please you. Surely you're not suggesting that are you?

Forestd16b14_ESO

olemanwinter wrote: »

Forestd16b14_ESO wrote: »

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/159044/more-servers#latest
raising pop lock would make the lag WORST cause more players means more connections and more connections means more stuff ZoS mega server has to process which means more LAG.

I am absolutely 100% AGAINST raising the pop-lock. The entire problem that I am addressing is too many players in the campaigns for some people's tastes (mine included of course).

Raising the pop limit would just increase this problem. Instead of a screen shot of 30 people at a dolmen, I would simply crash with 50 people at a dolmen and have no screen shot at all. lol

NTY to pop increase.

Forestd16b14_ESO wrote: »

So yea think it's about time we got atleast 2 more servers maybe another 7 day campaign and 5 day.

If it were up to me I would add 3 more servers. 1 more 14 day. 1 more 7 day. and 1 more Non-Vet

Atleast some players want PvP to be really fix. Me I'm fine with how pop locks are now and for servers I say just enough to spread players out but not to many were a faction can have buff server with out fearing it being lost.

bertenburnyb16_ESO

cant believe they havent added atleast 1 campain with Teso Unlimited.... I mean common did u all forgot to take ur brain pills?

technohic

DC: Its fine, we have enough servers
EP: ZOMG! I have a queue of 200 people! Add servers
AD: Yeah, can we get more servers. Getting tired of other factions ruining my buff campaign.

Sylvyr

need moar buff servers!

@ZoS when are you going to remove PvP buffs in PvE?

Dazin93

olemanwinter wrote: »

Dazin93 wrote: »

The large scale PvP that was promised when ESO released has been diminished to the point that it's laughable. More campaigns would just turn Cyrodiil into an even worse snooze fest and is a terrible idea. If you want small scale fighting you should be lobbying for arenas instead of more campaigns.

Lets consider it logically. You can't have it both ways. IF most players want large scale pvp, then nobody would leave for the other servers and you have nothing to complain about. However, if many players would leave for the new servers as you suspect, then that proves that many players would prefer lower population servers.

See how clear it becomes? The very nature of your argument proves there is a strong desire by many players for that which I lobby.

Unless you are suggesting that a large number of players be forced to remain where they don't want to play to please you. Surely you're not suggesting that are you?

Your logic is lacking and faulty. Players wouldn't leave for the new campaigns to PvP, but they would spend time in them for buff server purposes or emperor swapping. Neither of those is condusive to healthy PvP.

TL:DR Your response is full of assumptions and baseless fallacies.

Rakshat

Have fun waiting for new campaigns. I never understood the need to remove the old campaigns to begin with. Some people actually ENJOYED playing in what most considered 'dead' campaigns, because guess what, not everyone likes running in a 100 man zerg! Who could have thought? Now you either play in a lagland or don't play at all:(

Seraphyel

New campaigns, new servers?

Nearly no campaign is overcrowded or full, what are you even talking about?

And as long as the performance is just as bad as it is now, there is no need for more disaster.

UrQuan

First off, before I comment, let me make one thing clear: I'm not a PVPer. I do PVE. I have very little interest in PVP.

Now with that out of the way, I do go to Cyrodiil sometimes, but usually just for a skyshard run. I don't mind the chance of running into people who will kill me, but naturally I prefer to do this in a lower population server if possible. Of course, because I have alts in all alliances, my server choices for each character are extremely limited.

It seems to me that a big part of the problem with the high population servers is the fact that Cyrodiil is such a huge zone. If there was some way to break it down into 3 smaller zones without losing the "total war across the province" feel, that would solve a lot of problems.

The main issue I see with this idea are that you would have to create zone borders which, when you crossed them, would cause you to load in to the new zone. This could really screw with a scroll chase, or a similar action. I don't think it would really be possible to create these borders without somewhat changing the landscape to provide barriers with a few gates/passes to get from one zone to the next, and of course that would bring its own set of issues.

Even if Cyrodiil was sub-divided into 3 zones, you'd still want zone chat to be across all of them so that people in one of the 3 zones can raise the alert to people in the other zones about an incoming enemy force, and you'd still want the transitus shrine network to function the same way as it does now across all of Cyrodiil.

Heck, I don't know...

Forestd16b14_ESO

technohic wrote: »

DC: Its fine, we have enough servers
EP: ZOMG! I have a queue of 200 people! Add servers
AD: Yeah, can we get more servers. Getting tired of other factions ruining my buff campaign.

Sad part it's true

DC: No don't have enough servers.
EP: Move to a diffrent campaign.
AD: Screw your buff servers you don't need any.

Just my personal opinions though.

Also does bring up something.... ZoS any chance just to remove buffs from PvE that would pretty much make the purpose of buff servers gone and mean players who PVP actually wanna PvP..... That and if you wanna do quest in cryodiil won't have to worry about gankers that much cause they all be PvPing for keeps and all that. Cause I like to PvP but I like to finish the town quest and all that for the achievments and all with out having to worry about some ganker wrecking blow spamming me while I try to talk to the quest giver.

Elebeth

One should be mindful of the fact that increase in player population is due to recent ESO: TU launch and that those numbers might start falling soon.

And if they don't (which is a good thing ) only then should extra campaigns be added; otherwise they would become "buff campaigns" and/or obsolete in a month or two.

I'm sure ZOS monitors those fluctuations in player numbers and will act accordingly.

Although, with upcoming Welcome Beta Week i guess that one extra campaign would do more good than harm...

Garion

Yay more buff campaigns.

Fix the lag first.

Ty.

Pirhana7_ESO

We had more campaigns and all but 2 were dead and being used as buffs servers by 1 faction

Anvos

I've never seen even half of the current campaigns at full lock so I don't think we need more campaigns, unless their special rule campaigns.

Elebeth

Pirhana7_ESO wrote: »

We had more campaigns and all but 2 were dead and being used as buffs servers by 1 faction

Hence my comment. If ZOS would hastily add more campaigns they might get empty and unneeded when ESO: TU income of players start to decline.
Unless the numbers don't start to drop which would be awesome!

Elebeth

Anvos wrote: »

I've never seen even half of the current campaigns at full lock so I don't think we need more campaigns, unless their special rule campaigns.

Wow, really?
I see them locked even out of the prime time. I just checked and all except Haderus DC/EP and Azura's AD which are on high pop are locked. EU megaserver*

Bouvin

Dazin93 wrote: »

The large scale PvP that was promised when ESO released has been diminished to the point that it's laughable. More campaigns would just turn Cyrodiil into an even worse snooze fest and is a terrible idea. If you want small scale fighting you should be lobbying for arenas instead of more campaigns.

I think he's asking for the ability to play Cyrodil without waiting in a 2 hour queue or having to reroll DC.

Not for more small scale pvp...

prototypefb

how about add 1 more 30 or 45-60 day campaign with further increased +5% XP?

olemanwinter

Dazin93 wrote: »

Your logic is lacking and faulty. Players wouldn't leave for the new campaigns to PvP, but they would spend time in them

Players wouldn't leave but they would.....leave to spend time in them? lol
*shakes head*

- Leave, vacate, vacation away from, disappear, or "spend time". lmao
Your semantics don't change the point.

If nobody wants to leave your campaigns then you will not suffer a population decline. If they do want to, then LET THEM.

Who are you to say people should be forced to remain in high population campaigns to suite your personal playstyle.

All I ask is for options FOR MYSELF, you and any other player may feel free to continue to do whatever you like.

Reykice

olemanwinter wrote: »

4) CHEATING – I personally witnessed DC players using AD alts to remove scrolls and run them north all the way to DC gates.

They promised they would handle this and ban the people doing it... why is this not a fact?

Zenimax, why are you not banning them?! Is this allowed? If so say it so everyone can start doing it.

olemanwinter

Reykice wrote: »

olemanwinter wrote: »

4) CHEATING – I personally witnessed DC players using AD alts to remove scrolls and run them north all the way to DC gates.

They promised they would handle this and ban the people doing it... why is this not a fact?

Zenimax, why are you not banning them?! Is this allowed? If so say it so everyone can start doing it.

Not only is this still going on, but while I was telling them in zone chat how pathetic they were (I am sadly of the same alliance) another guild leader chimed in to tell me basically "shut up it's just a game bro" and ADMITTED in zone chat that his guild (a large 3 letter zerg guild I won't name because naming someone gets you banned) HAD DONE SO TWICE IN THE PAST.

Speaking of which, it sure is a shame that Zos takes the stance that it's better to be a cheater than to name a cheater.

dylanjaygrobbelaarb16_ESO

with this much population pve buff players have to actually pvp in the pvp zone, unlike before when almost all the servers were buff campaigns with little pvp.
adding campaigns is the worst idea, why, buff players will just move to less busy servers and kill any actuall pvp, while at the same time reducing the population in the other servers.
this games pvp desperately needed more than one highly competitive campaign and now that we finally have that, id be worried more campaigns would end that right quick.
until they change or take out the pve buff system I personally dont want the amount of campaigns to increase, ive seen enough blue,yellow and red pvp deserts and am fine seeing no more.

kevlarto_ESO

Until thornblade is turned back to a normal campaign and not a buff server still lots of room, Haderus same thing, until we see pop locks in all servers and I doubt we are going to see any new campaigns, I do think we could use one now, but what would you like to see another 30 day 14 day 7 day 21 day. Even Azure's star was pop locked and that server did nothing since it was introduced.

olemanwinter

Some of guys are hilarious. Because you want Zerg V Zerg pvp, you think you can FORCE other players to participate by giving them no other options, thereby growing the zergs. It's a joke.

We just won't pvp.

Every campaign DOES have pop-locks. Perhaps not every alliance in every campaign.

Tonight at one point Haderus was pop locked for both AD and DC, Thornblade was pop locked for both AD and EP. I didn't check the others.

I want nothing to do with the cheating. I want nothing to do with the exploiting. I want nothing to do with the lag spikes. I want nothing to do with the zerg mentality.

So, players like myself need other options....(like we had with low pop campaigns)...or we will leave PvP. And with no new PvE end game content....very possibly leave the game too.