Alliance switching to boost AP and take Emp - discuss!

Aisle9

Beardimus wrote: »

Ok Aisle9 so you are putting specific conditions on your counting, then you will always get a Different answer. Pretty pedantic. You brought up maths, and the math is 3 alliances 3 Vet campaigns.

And just think if people picked a campaign per alliance then the perhaps the quieter campaigns might get pop.

Regardless back on topic, folks cheat with the current system, it's bad for all of us. How we gunna fix it

I made 3 replies, in each one of them I clearly stated that Shor is a dead campaign.

As for Kyne, that's under 50, why are we still talking about it ?

There will never be a solution if the population is not healthy. Right a large number of exploits exists to counter other issues.

ZoS was pushing the "get a group as large as possible and roll with that" policy, which clearly failed, so they are trying something else.

Right now the main issue is the populations.

How do you solve the nightcaps ?
How do you solve gatecamping the base ?
How do you solve emp sales ?

If you want to solve a problem, you first need to find what causes it.

But if you guys want to stay in your little echo chamber where everyone agrees, I guess there's no point in arguing.

I presented a number of arguments explaining a different point of view.

You're arguing I got the number of campaigns wrong.

Was any of the other points wrong ?

What am I supposed to do if my base is getting camped by a 24men raid "protecting noobs while they take the shards" and my alliance doesn't even have 24 people online ?

What am I supposed to do if 12men raids are flipping resources blocking teleport while a 60men emp zerg is flipping keeps ?

And then you complain if I switch alliance ?

Where's the honor in that ?

Beardimus

@Aisle9 you made it about maths by being condescending.... I just followed your line. Calm down a little, and let's be productive.

As for your other arguements I don't see any that stack up to the down sides of Alliance switching to boost / cheat, examples above are very tenuous. Honestly.

And regardless what's your solution to stopping AP boosting by alliance switching?

This isn't about nightcaps (I don't care about them to be honest, annoying but it's a global game), gate camping should be a war crime when it runs into weeks, these are points for a new thread however.

This is about using alliance switching to boost AP, and fliping keeps that you can flip back..not tenuous - meddling with the highest target / accolade in the PvP game.

And PS I concur if you ignore one of.the 3 Vet campaigns there are 2. However fact is there are 3, we can agree to differ. You say Shor is dead in some platforms / regions its not. But we can leave this one here.

Dojohoda

Meh, just because a few do this doesn't mean everyone does it. Don't lock the campaign to one alliance because of a few creeps. Those of us who play on different alliances for ordinary reasons would be locked out.

jaye63

Qbiken wrote: »

#2: One alliance/campaign is the solution. I´m against one alliance/account because you make new friends all the time who play on different alliances and campaigns, and being able to play with them should be possible.

ABSOLUTELY agree with this. Mostly due to the Zerg factor. Losing? No problem, get on another toon and join the winning side. The swarms that happen as a result of this and the bogusness of the situation the OP described makes the PvP a laugh at best. There should be team loyalty. I have an AD toon I go to Cyrodil with. Not to PvP but to quest and skyshard farm. Oh and fish. If I get attacked while doing so I will defend myself(usually horribly) but I dont seek PvP because most of my toons are EP.

SO tired of the mentality of *win even if you have to cheat.* that I dont PvP much.

wsmith97ub17_ESO

It should be stopped, players from all sides do this. Its why i rarely group anymore and just roam into and out small gangs. Since i dont know who i am really helping, i dont.

Mazbt

In principle I agree there should be some kind of a restriction on faction swapping but shouldn't be too extreme. I think 24 or 48 hour lock out or something would be reasonable. Would prevent people going back and forth within a day to run to a heavily defended keep for a fat d-tick or something

Aisle9

Aisle9 wrote: »

[..]

I'm not contending your point, just saying the issue is a little bit more nuanced than that.

Let me start with that, I'm not sure it was clear.

Beardimus wrote: »

Aisle9 you made it about maths by being condescending.... I just followed your line. Calm down a little, and let's be productive.

Sure, you're right, I'm wrong, let's leave it at that, seriously, it's the least important bit in this discussion.

Beardimus wrote: »

As for your other arguements I don't see any that stack up to the down sides of Alliance switching to boost / cheat, examples above are very tenuous. Honestly.

In how many platforms do you play ? I'm going on a limb here and assume one, same as any sane player. Do we agree different platforms have different situations ?

Beardimus wrote: »

And regardless what's your solution to stopping AP boosting by alliance switching?

I don't have one. All I'm saying is that alliance lock is not the solution, and since we need to contemplate a solution that can be applied to all platforms, we need to consider other platforms' situations.

I'm not saying a solution devised here (if any) would be applied, but we know devs check the forums, so if we're doing it, let's do it right.

Do we agree ?

Beardimus wrote: »

This isn't about nightcaps (I don't care about them to be honest, annoying but it's a global game), gate camping should be a war crime when it runs into weeks, these are points for a new thread however.

Eeeeh, it kind of is. Why do people exploit ? Because they can't achieve the same thing honestly. Therefore if odds are stacked on one side, the losing side has the temptation to cheat.

Again, we agree it's detrimental to the game's health, in the long run.

Beardimus wrote: »

This is about using alliance switching to boost AP, and fliping keeps that you can flip back..not tenuous - meddling with the highest target / accolade in the PvP game.

That's my other issue, it kind of is.

If you want to find a solution to a problem, you need to identify the problem first.

Alliance switching to boost AP is not the problem, it's a consequence.

If the alliance with the lowest pop can lose the underdog buff (AP boost) to the alliance with the highest pop, there's something very very wrong, but it also mean that some people will be mighty tempted to swap to the one with the buff AND the numeric advantage.

If the alliance that nightcapped can consistently keep high enough numbers, while the other simply doesn't have them, out of prime time, they can keep everything of the same color, then people leave the campaign, and behavior like the one you pointed is allowed to take place, because the alliance with the high pop has the means to play some, and make some AP, while the exploiter have some hollow victory, that doesn't account for much in the end, while players that actually want to play the objectives are penalized.

It may be professional bias, but I can see a whole lot of issue that may lead to this point.

They all start with population. If the campaign's population is not healthy, the campaign is destined to die or fall victim to this kind of exploitation.

I was talking about Sotha Sil, BTW.

But, hey, that's just my opinion

TheValar85

Aisle9 wrote: »

Beardimus wrote: »

Ok Aisle9 so you are putting specific conditions on your counting, then you will always get a Different answer. Pretty pedantic. You brought up maths, and the math is 3 alliances 3 Vet campaigns.

And just think if people picked a campaign per alliance then the perhaps the quieter campaigns might get pop.

Regardless back on topic, folks cheat with the current system, it's bad for all of us. How we gunna fix it

I made 3 replies, in each one of them I clearly stated that Shor is a dead campaign.

As for Kyne, that's under 50, why are we still talking about it ?

There will never be a solution if the population is not healthy. Right a large number of exploits exists to counter other issues.

ZoS was pushing the "get a group as large as possible and roll with that" policy, which clearly failed, so they are trying something else.

Right now the main issue is the populations.

How do you solve the nightcaps ?
How do you solve gatecamping the base ?
How do you solve emp sales ?

If you want to solve a problem, you first need to find what causes it.

But if you guys want to stay in your little echo chamber where everyone agrees, I guess there's no point in arguing.

I presented a number of arguments explaining a different point of view.

You're arguing I got the number of campaigns wrong.

Was any of the other points wrong ?

What am I supposed to do if my base is getting camped by a 24men raid "protecting noobs while they take the shards" and my alliance doesn't even have 24 people online ?

What am I supposed to do if 12men raids are flipping resources blocking teleport while a 60men emp zerg is flipping keeps ?

And then you complain if I switch alliance ?

Where's the honor in that ?

In pc eu shor is not a dead camping it is just Emperor laboring going on between the blues and teh reds. and thats a known fact.AD bearly even play in there. My boyfriend tried to get empship there in legit ways, it took him away 3 day constant playing nonstop wiouth sleep, i must say this is realy bad, i know empship supose to be hard to get, i know cos i have too. but in this way, i promised that was my last playing in Cyrodiil.

it is unhealthy, and aslo very dangerous. Not to mention becasue realy money and in game currency is involved in Shor from teh side of the reds and blues, they makiing now imposible to have at least one emperor, in a week camping. It is disgusting. and if i were ZOs i would close down Cyrodiil till the developers find a way to fix these issues once and for all. And if the pvp community began to outragesly cry up let me tell you something, you brought this on yourself. Because obviusly this is cannot stands anymore. all i see how many cryes are on the forum, how unbalanced pvp, how unfair some skills, and tehy cry for nerfs and ruining pve gameplay with those.

But interstingly, thats not a problem, when some one exploits the game? cheating dosetn matter? emp sellers dosen't matter? swiching keeps dosen't matter? hell no cos they are earning benificals, and advantages over other legit players, that dosen't matter? just the how tehy cry omg this is spell is so powerfull nerf it, this class is so powerfull nerf it. It is utterly disgusting, while Cyrodiil lies in ruins thax to these sheet fest what i have mentioned above. And those who say thsi is clear BS those are definetly into this shadie sheet fests.

And tehy rather afraid to loose advanatges over others then playing fairly, and in legit way, to earn something in the rightful way, While ZOS is facepalming and can't foind out how to deal with these issues witouth recting the whole pvp system. But the truth is, they already messed up, and now players taking advantages from it, reguardless, how manytimes have been told from ZOs thats a an exploit. People simply dosen't give s heet about what ZOs says.

And thats a huge problem. I say every player who used exploits shoudl be banned from teh game forever. with no mercy. the aspect of the pvp is already in their dreadful state, and to clean up this mess, ZOS have to find out something very qucikly, including fixing pvp and separate pvp from pve completly or this qq about nerf this and nefr that will also effects on the pve side of the game. and who says that not true those lie to them self. I have already made my thread about this ongoing issues, and ZOs cant do anything right now who knows why. Oh the best parth is the pvp players come here to the forum crying about give some love and care for the pvp players, you know whatnone of you deservs that. (at least the non legit players for sure)

Ch4mpTW

The things that you mention have been plaguing PvP on PS4-NA for years now. It’s exceptionally bad now, however. And has reached a point where a lot of guilds don’t even want to be bothered with PvP anymore, outside of battlegrounds and duels. And I don’t blame them. Who in their right mind wants to put up with corruption and politics, in something that is already riddled with: Exploits, lag, and numerous other issues?

Aisle9

TheValar85 wrote: »

Aisle9 wrote: »

Beardimus wrote: »

Ok Aisle9 so you are putting specific conditions on your counting, then you will always get a Different answer. Pretty pedantic. You brought up maths, and the math is 3 alliances 3 Vet campaigns.

And just think if people picked a campaign per alliance then the perhaps the quieter campaigns might get pop.

Regardless back on topic, folks cheat with the current system, it's bad for all of us. How we gunna fix it

I made 3 replies, in each one of them I clearly stated that Shor is a dead campaign.

As for Kyne, that's under 50, why are we still talking about it ?

There will never be a solution if the population is not healthy. Right a large number of exploits exists to counter other issues.

ZoS was pushing the "get a group as large as possible and roll with that" policy, which clearly failed, so they are trying something else.

Right now the main issue is the populations.

How do you solve the nightcaps ?
How do you solve gatecamping the base ?
How do you solve emp sales ?

If you want to solve a problem, you first need to find what causes it.

But if you guys want to stay in your little echo chamber where everyone agrees, I guess there's no point in arguing.

I presented a number of arguments explaining a different point of view.

You're arguing I got the number of campaigns wrong.

Was any of the other points wrong ?

What am I supposed to do if my base is getting camped by a 24men raid "protecting noobs while they take the shards" and my alliance doesn't even have 24 people online ?

What am I supposed to do if 12men raids are flipping resources blocking teleport while a 60men emp zerg is flipping keeps ?

And then you complain if I switch alliance ?

Where's the honor in that ?

In pc eu shor is not a dead camping it is just Emperor laboring going on between the blues and teh reds. and thats a known fact.AD bearly even play in there. My boyfriend tried to get empship there in legit ways, it took him away 3 day constant playing nonstop wiouth sleep, i must say this is realy bad, i know empship supose to be hard to get, i know cos i have too. but in this way, i promised that was my last playing in Cyrodiil. it is unhealthy, and aslo very dangerous. Not to mention becasue realy money and in game currency is involved in Shor from teh side of the reds and blues, they makiing now imposible to have at least one emperor, in a week camping. It is disgusting. and if i were ZOs i would close down Cyrodiil till the developers find a way to fix these issues once and for all. And if the pvp community began to outragesly cry up let me tell you something, you brought this on yourself. Because obviusly this is cannot stands anymore. all i see how many cryes are on the forum, how unbalanced pvp, how unfair some skills, and tehy cry for nerfs and ruining pve gameplay with those. But interstingly, thats not a problem, when some one exploits the game? cheating dosetn matter? emp sellers dosen't matter? swiching keeps dosen't matter? hell no cos they are earning benificals, and advantages over other legit players, that dosen't matter? just the how tehy cry omg this is spell is so powerfull nerf it, this class is so powerfull nerf it. It is utterly disgusting, while Cyrodiil lies in ruins thax to these sheet fest what i have mentioned above. And those who say thsi is clear BS those are definetly into this shadie sheet fests. And tehy rather afraid to loose advanatges over others then playing fairly, and in legit way, to earn something in the rightful way, While ZOS is facepalming and can't foind out how to deal with these issues witouth recting the whole pvp system. But the truth is, they already messed up, and now players taking advantages from it, reguardless, how manytimes have been told from ZOs thats a an exploit. People simply dosen't give s heet about what ZOs says. And thats a huge problem. I say every player who used exploits shoudl be banned from teh game forever. with no mercy. the aspect of the pvp is already in their dreadful state, and to clean up this mess, ZOS have to find out something very qucikly, including fixing pvp and separate pvp from pve completly or this qq about nerf this and nefr that will also effects on the pve side of the game. and who says that not true those lie to them self. I have already made my thread about this ongoing issues, and ZOs cant do anything right now who knows why.

I'm begging you... paragraphs.

I can't read that, like, physically. My brain is refusing to process that Wot.

jaws343

Mazbt wrote: »

In principle I agree there should be some kind of a restriction on faction swapping but shouldn't be too extreme. I think 24 or 48 hour lock out or something would be reasonable. Would prevent people going back and forth within a day to run to a heavily defended keep for a fat d-tick or something

Even a 24 or 48 hour lock is a bit extreme.

So I play on my AD character on Friday night with a social guild in Vivec. Let's say I play for 3 hours and then sign off and go to sleep. But now, in order to play my other 9 EP characters in Vivec, I have to wait until Sunday or Monday to queue them in, essentially locking my out of PVP for an entire weekend unless I want to play a No-CP or underpopulated campaign. That is a ridiculous solution.

TheValar85

Aisle9 wrote: »

TheValar85 wrote: »

Aisle9 wrote: »

Beardimus wrote: »

Ok Aisle9 so you are putting specific conditions on your counting, then you will always get a Different answer. Pretty pedantic. You brought up maths, and the math is 3 alliances 3 Vet campaigns.

And just think if people picked a campaign per alliance then the perhaps the quieter campaigns might get pop.

Regardless back on topic, folks cheat with the current system, it's bad for all of us. How we gunna fix it

I made 3 replies, in each one of them I clearly stated that Shor is a dead campaign.

As for Kyne, that's under 50, why are we still talking about it ?

There will never be a solution if the population is not healthy. Right a large number of exploits exists to counter other issues.

ZoS was pushing the "get a group as large as possible and roll with that" policy, which clearly failed, so they are trying something else.

Right now the main issue is the populations.

How do you solve the nightcaps ?
How do you solve gatecamping the base ?
How do you solve emp sales ?

If you want to solve a problem, you first need to find what causes it.

But if you guys want to stay in your little echo chamber where everyone agrees, I guess there's no point in arguing.

I presented a number of arguments explaining a different point of view.

You're arguing I got the number of campaigns wrong.

Was any of the other points wrong ?

What am I supposed to do if my base is getting camped by a 24men raid "protecting noobs while they take the shards" and my alliance doesn't even have 24 people online ?

What am I supposed to do if 12men raids are flipping resources blocking teleport while a 60men emp zerg is flipping keeps ?

And then you complain if I switch alliance ?

Where's the honor in that ?

In pc eu shor is not a dead camping it is just Emperor laboring going on between the blues and teh reds. and thats a known fact.AD bearly even play in there. My boyfriend tried to get empship there in legit ways, it took him away 3 day constant playing nonstop wiouth sleep, i must say this is realy bad, i know empship supose to be hard to get, i know cos i have too. but in this way, i promised that was my last playing in Cyrodiil. it is unhealthy, and aslo very dangerous. Not to mention becasue realy money and in game currency is involved in Shor from teh side of the reds and blues, they makiing now imposible to have at least one emperor, in a week camping. It is disgusting. and if i were ZOs i would close down Cyrodiil till the developers find a way to fix these issues once and for all. And if the pvp community began to outragesly cry up let me tell you something, you brought this on yourself. Because obviusly this is cannot stands anymore. all i see how many cryes are on the forum, how unbalanced pvp, how unfair some skills, and tehy cry for nerfs and ruining pve gameplay with those. But interstingly, thats not a problem, when some one exploits the game? cheating dosetn matter? emp sellers dosen't matter? swiching keeps dosen't matter? hell no cos they are earning benificals, and advantages over other legit players, that dosen't matter? just the how tehy cry omg this is spell is so powerfull nerf it, this class is so powerfull nerf it. It is utterly disgusting, while Cyrodiil lies in ruins thax to these sheet fest what i have mentioned above. And those who say thsi is clear BS those are definetly into this shadie sheet fests. And tehy rather afraid to loose advanatges over others then playing fairly, and in legit way, to earn something in the rightful way, While ZOS is facepalming and can't foind out how to deal with these issues witouth recting the whole pvp system. But the truth is, they already messed up, and now players taking advantages from it, reguardless, how manytimes have been told from ZOs thats a an exploit. People simply dosen't give s heet about what ZOs says. And thats a huge problem. I say every player who used exploits shoudl be banned from teh game forever. with no mercy. the aspect of the pvp is already in their dreadful state, and to clean up this mess, ZOS have to find out something very qucikly, including fixing pvp and separate pvp from pve completly or this qq about nerf this and nefr that will also effects on the pve side of the game. and who says that not true those lie to them self. I have already made my thread about this ongoing issues, and ZOs cant do anything right now who knows why.

I'm begging you... paragraphs.

I can't read that, like, physically. My brain is refusing to process that Wot.

Done. sorry about spelling and grammar.

Iccotak

Then what are other solutions?
Faction hopping is seriously detrimental to PvP. It has to go, Period.

The way I see it; it's pretty clear that the lack of faction loyalty is a big problem.

So what are the other solutions if 'locking' doesn't work?

Wreuntzylla

The Emp system is #3 on my list of most impactful mistakes made by ZoS. It does, and has always, rewarded bad behavior and exclusionary politics.

If the Emp was randomly chosen from everyone attacking the final keep, as uninspired as that is, it would still be a better system.

jaws343

Wreuntzylla wrote: »

The Emp system is #3 on my list of most impactful mistakes made by ZoS. It does, and has always, rewarded bad behavior and exclusionary politics.

If the Emp was randomly chosen from everyone attacking the final keep, as uninspired as that is, it would still be a better system.

The fights on the final emp keep that type of Emp promotion would promote would be epic.

D0PAMINE

Maybe having a single seperate cp and non cp campaign thats faction locked so everyone can choose where to go themselves

Ranger209

Aisle9 wrote: »

Beardimus wrote: »

@Aisle9 there are four campaigns.

Kyne 1-50

Sotha, Vivec and shor. One for each alliance....first grade maybe indeed

Kyne is under lvl 50 -> all my toons are higher than lvl 50 -> no meaningful PvP to be found there.

Shor is dead, as in empty, as in no players -> no meaningful PvP to be found there.

4 - 2 = 2.

I rest my case

Maybe if there were faction locking and enough people wanted to play all 3 factions Shor would no longer be dead? Just a thought.

WakeYourGhost

Paying your way to the top, using a group of friends and allies to carry you, manipulating the system and bending the rules of morality and good taste to the breaking point - That actually does sound like something an "Emperor" would do.

That all aside, each campaign would be well suited by an Alliance-Lock.
Of course, an account-wide "cooldown" on becoming emperor would also be nice to see.

The one thing we can say, the current state of PvP is much more Political than it is about personal accomplishment. Maybe that suits the theme of the Interregnum and the Three-Banners War?

DreadKnight

I'm in favour of locking a character per Alliance per campaign.

We had a ridiculous situation a few weeks ago on xbox NA where the red Emp candidate was playing on blue. EP got Emp and the player is still playing on blue.

In my opinion, he should also loose his position on the EP leaderboard so that the 2nd place can rake his place and we could actually have an active Emp.

imredneckson

Qbiken wrote: »

Same thing happening on Shor (PC/EU), basically a guild (DC based) that has claimed the campaign for their own to sell emperorship.

#1: I absolutely hate it and it´s not legitimate at all. Calling in friends from your guilds or in asking a friend to call in reinforcements from PvE zones is legit. Heck, even whisper people from opposing faction not to interfere is more legit.

#2: One alliance/campaign is the solution. I´m against one alliance/account because you make new friends all the time who play on different alliances and campaigns, and being able to play with them should be possible.

#3: I´ve never heard any comments from ZOS about this kind of behaviour, but I doubt it´s punishable by any means. However, flipping keeps back and forth to AP-farm is against the "rules" and people have been banned for it in the past.

#1 I agree hands down
#2 I agree somewhat, I like being able to switch to fight with buddies on another faction on the same campaign. I fight on all faction with buddies.
#3 ZOS has stated that this type on AP gain is legal and is classified as a valid tactic but to try and cut down on it ZOS made it so you can only a keep/resource I think a max of 2 or 3 time in a certain amount of time.

rustic_potato

As long as there is an way to efficiently do stuff people will do it. All this talk about honor is stupid.

MakoFore

kromegas wrote: »

Any gamer tag that switches alliances and plays on another character within the same 24 hours should get a scarlet letter next to their character name when targeting them on pvp. This can help other players knowing they are possibly a spy.

After one switch you should be banned from earning AP for that 24 hour period, unable to pick up a scroll and cannot become emeperor. This way you are identified, and can still play with your friends.

hey thats a good idea
ive only ever played one alliance, though at times when DC has the entire map and its dead- ive wished i had other toons- in particular EP- theyve got some awesome terrrain to fight over- and the bridges, etc.
but yeah its a cynical and unsporting behavior that has taken over pvp now. people not really playing for the campaign-but for AP , ranks and to emp costume it.( last week in shor i htink we had like 8 emps! )
its unfortuante but now the etiquette has become to get emp, enjoy it for a little bit- then get the *** off so someone else can get the outfit. which is fair and fine in its own logic set-but takes away from base value of the game i reckon.

Slick_007

Feanor wrote: »

Switching chars for AP boosting is exploiting and ZOS repeatedly has said so. The consequences alas are not so clear. It’s hard to prove and even if bans were to be issued it’s questionable for how long they would be upheld.

Edit: Reread the OP more closely. Yes, sadly nothing that can be done about it save locking accounts to campaigns.

if you are playing for the faction you are currently on, how is this an exploit? I would agree if someone swapped factions to do something to throw those players off or help an enemy faction. But if you are EP and playing for EP, or AD and playing for AD, thats not exploiting anything.

Last time i swapped toons was because someone was going to open up a home skyshard, but by the time i got there they'd failed

Beardimus

Slick_007 wrote: »

Feanor wrote: »

Switching chars for AP boosting is exploiting and ZOS repeatedly has said so. The consequences alas are not so clear. It’s hard to prove and even if bans were to be issued it’s questionable for how long they would be upheld.

Edit: Reread the OP more closely. Yes, sadly nothing that can be done about it save locking accounts to campaigns.

if you are playing for the faction you are currently on, how is this an exploit? I would agree if someone swapped factions to do something to throw those players off or help an enemy faction. But if you are EP and playing for EP, or AD and playing for AD, thats not exploiting anything.

Last time i swapped toons was because someone was going to open up a home skyshard, but by the time i got there they'd failed

I see what you are saying @Slick_007 but I don't agree. Farming AP on one alliance, taking a keep, switching to your other alliance to take it back without needing to repair walls etc, then switching back. Surely that sounds a tad suspect?

Or getting near top of your leaderboard with a group, switching to other alliance to take your own keeps, then all switching back and taking them again to flip Emp.

Beardimus

The group in question continued yesterday. DC Emp was sat in keep watching them as EP take it, I got abuse in zone chat for attacking him as he was their mate.

They eventually took the DC Emp keeps with no resistance (in fact Emp was trying to take us down at a Mine and got rekt repeatedly while ignoring his EP mates taking Emp keeps - but we got tasty AP wiping his group)

EP Emp (their mate) dethroned at last second to tick it off for the guy in second, then they all switch to DC and start taking it back that colour to get the next in line. All the time griefing us in zone chat / xbox msg

Fine if people think that's ok behavior as they are playing for 'their' alliance in the moment - but surely it makes a mockery of the game, and campaign, to just allow guilds to rotate Emp through their players by switching back and forth.

How about we just alliance lock the quiet campaigns, as these types would stand no chance on a busy server?

FloppyTouch

Emp is rigged to begin with same damn people every time yellow works with red red works with blue blue works with yellow. All to trade emp with other friends, guilds will drop out of a campaign just so the map will flip to get the next guy emp.

It’s all a bunch of crapshoot at this point. It’s stupud and takes away any chance of the normal pvp player of getting it in a fair way. With in just one week guys are in the 7mil range it’s crazy the amount of boosting that goes on.

I gave up on tryin to get emp the fair way I’ll just go to a dead campaign get some AP then call in pvp guild to flip the circle just so I can get the damn achievement.

Beardimus

I hear you mate, to be honest though your last paragraph I would say IS a fair way I wouldnt play it down.

You do the leg work, and have mates on your alliance to take the keeps, that's fair enough. Clearly if there is defence, in particular the outgoing Emp - I'd say that's as fair as any way a non-no-lifer / non-cheater is going to get it.

Aisle9

TheValar85 wrote: »

Aisle9 wrote: »

TheValar85 wrote: »

Aisle9 wrote: »

Beardimus wrote: »

Ok Aisle9 so you are putting specific conditions on your counting, then you will always get a Different answer. Pretty pedantic. You brought up maths, and the math is 3 alliances 3 Vet campaigns.

And just think if people picked a campaign per alliance then the perhaps the quieter campaigns might get pop.

Regardless back on topic, folks cheat with the current system, it's bad for all of us. How we gunna fix it

I made 3 replies, in each one of them I clearly stated that Shor is a dead campaign.

As for Kyne, that's under 50, why are we still talking about it ?

There will never be a solution if the population is not healthy. Right a large number of exploits exists to counter other issues.

ZoS was pushing the "get a group as large as possible and roll with that" policy, which clearly failed, so they are trying something else.

Right now the main issue is the populations.

How do you solve the nightcaps ?
How do you solve gatecamping the base ?
How do you solve emp sales ?

If you want to solve a problem, you first need to find what causes it.

But if you guys want to stay in your little echo chamber where everyone agrees, I guess there's no point in arguing.

I presented a number of arguments explaining a different point of view.

You're arguing I got the number of campaigns wrong.

Was any of the other points wrong ?

What am I supposed to do if my base is getting camped by a 24men raid "protecting noobs while they take the shards" and my alliance doesn't even have 24 people online ?

What am I supposed to do if 12men raids are flipping resources blocking teleport while a 60men emp zerg is flipping keeps ?

And then you complain if I switch alliance ?

Where's the honor in that ?

In pc eu shor is not a dead camping it is just Emperor laboring going on between the blues and teh reds. and thats a known fact.AD bearly even play in there. My boyfriend tried to get empship there in legit ways, it took him away 3 day constant playing nonstop wiouth sleep, i must say this is realy bad, i know empship supose to be hard to get, i know cos i have too. but in this way, i promised that was my last playing in Cyrodiil. it is unhealthy, and aslo very dangerous. Not to mention becasue realy money and in game currency is involved in Shor from teh side of the reds and blues, they makiing now imposible to have at least one emperor, in a week camping. It is disgusting. and if i were ZOs i would close down Cyrodiil till the developers find a way to fix these issues once and for all. And if the pvp community began to outragesly cry up let me tell you something, you brought this on yourself. Because obviusly this is cannot stands anymore. all i see how many cryes are on the forum, how unbalanced pvp, how unfair some skills, and tehy cry for nerfs and ruining pve gameplay with those. But interstingly, thats not a problem, when some one exploits the game? cheating dosetn matter? emp sellers dosen't matter? swiching keeps dosen't matter? hell no cos they are earning benificals, and advantages over other legit players, that dosen't matter? just the how tehy cry omg this is spell is so powerfull nerf it, this class is so powerfull nerf it. It is utterly disgusting, while Cyrodiil lies in ruins thax to these sheet fest what i have mentioned above. And those who say thsi is clear BS those are definetly into this shadie sheet fests. And tehy rather afraid to loose advanatges over others then playing fairly, and in legit way, to earn something in the rightful way, While ZOS is facepalming and can't foind out how to deal with these issues witouth recting the whole pvp system. But the truth is, they already messed up, and now players taking advantages from it, reguardless, how manytimes have been told from ZOs thats a an exploit. People simply dosen't give s heet about what ZOs says. And thats a huge problem. I say every player who used exploits shoudl be banned from teh game forever. with no mercy. the aspect of the pvp is already in their dreadful state, and to clean up this mess, ZOS have to find out something very qucikly, including fixing pvp and separate pvp from pve completly or this qq about nerf this and nefr that will also effects on the pve side of the game. and who says that not true those lie to them self. I have already made my thread about this ongoing issues, and ZOs cant do anything right now who knows why.

I'm begging you... paragraphs.

I can't read that, like, physically. My brain is refusing to process that Wot.

Done. sorry about spelling and grammar.

Cheers, you get an awesome.

Also, agree on pretty much everything you said, even though, from my point of view, dead campaign and one that is taken hostage by a guild or two is pretty much the same. I can't play in it, same end result.

Ranger209 wrote: »

Aisle9 wrote: »

Beardimus wrote: »

Aisle9 there are four campaigns.

Kyne 1-50

Sotha, Vivec and shor. One for each alliance....first grade maybe indeed

Kyne is under lvl 50 -> all my toons are higher than lvl 50 -> no meaningful PvP to be found there.

Shor is dead, as in empty, as in no players -> no meaningful PvP to be found there.

4 - 2 = 2.

I rest my case

Maybe if there were faction locking and enough people wanted to play all 3 factions Shor would no longer be dead? Just a thought.

No, for different reasons.

Shor is 7 days, as opposed to Sotha Sil and Vivec that are 30.

Sotha Sil is noCP, as opposed to Shor and Vivec.

If there were 3 different CP camp, 3 different noCP camp and 3 different 7 days camp, then, only then, I would agree.

There aren't, therefore the solution is impractical for people (like me) that don't play in CP campaigns.

Beardimus wrote: »

Slick_007 wrote: »

Feanor wrote: »

Switching chars for AP boosting is exploiting and ZOS repeatedly has said so. The consequences alas are not so clear. It’s hard to prove and even if bans were to be issued it’s questionable for how long they would be upheld.

Edit: Reread the OP more closely. Yes, sadly nothing that can be done about it save locking accounts to campaigns.

if you are playing for the faction you are currently on, how is this an exploit? I would agree if someone swapped factions to do something to throw those players off or help an enemy faction. But if you are EP and playing for EP, or AD and playing for AD, thats not exploiting anything.

Last time i swapped toons was because someone was going to open up a home skyshard, but by the time i got there they'd failed

I see what you are saying Slick_007 but I don't agree. Farming AP on one alliance, taking a keep, switching to your other alliance to take it back without needing to repair walls etc, then switching back. Surely that sounds a tad suspect?

Or getting near top of your leaderboard with a group, switching to other alliance to take your own keeps, then all switching back and taking them again to flip Emp.

That's the point I'm trying to make.

There are people, as you observed, who exploit the system, but there are also people that legitimately play the alliance they are in at that moment.

There are people that only queue solo, don't have that much faction pride to begin with, and don't care enough to tag someone from the opposite team as an enemy IRL, therefore they truly play the alliance they are in.

Faction locking would effectively prevent them from playing unless they are in a guild. They would check the map, see it's monochromatic, decide to do something else instead.

Fun fact, do you know that, there are, like, 2 guilds, iirc, that play specifically Sotha Sil in PC-EU on the DC side, while there are countless EP guilds ? I have no numbers for AD but at any time there's a ballgroup tower camping, so I'm guessing there are some.

That means that at any time there's an EP guild in a semi-organized state, managing the map, and the only action happens during prime time, when the Vivec guilds hop in Sotha to flip the map.

Every time I log in DC side, EP is anywhere between max and poplock, while AD and DC are between low and medium.

Faction lock means that people playing in different factions legitimately will be forced to decide one side, and I'm guessing most of them will go for the faction with the highest pop, making the map unplayable for the camp duration.

That will not stop flipping, will only mean that guilds selling emp will decide who's playing where for that month, they will keep doing it, it will just be much more subtle.


@Beardimus
I'd like to end with this: history tells us that prohibition doesn't work, but if there's an advantage in doing something else it will work.

How about re-thinking the failing underdog buff to something that would actually benefit the lowest pop ?

If there's an advantage in playing an underdog faction, more people will, and the population's health will effectively prevent the exploit from happen. In the long run the problem would solve itself. If there's a larger number of people playing the map legitimately, exploiter won't have the numbers to do it. This kind of exploitation can only happen if the campaign is unhealthy (low populations/population imbalance).

That is on top of having a healthy population to play with.

That sounds like a win-win to me.

ArcVelarian

One of the ways that I've heard we could address this problem is to change the Campaign Reward Levels from just 3 to 12. Players are given gold for each level earned, and gear is rewarded for every four levels earned. The idea is to keep people playing on the same characters, and incidentally the same faction, for much longer.

Aisle9

ArcVelarian wrote: »

One of the ways that I've heard we could address this problem is to change the Campaign Reward Levels from just 3 to 12. Players are given gold for each level earned, and gear is rewarded for every four levels earned. The idea is to keep people playing on the same characters, and incidentally the same faction, for much longer.

I like it, but I've got one better:

30 rewards tiers.

You can only increase the reward tier once a day, and only with the AP you gain that day. If you don't gain a reward tier that day, half the AP you got will be counted for the next day, then half of that the next day, and so on.

If you hop alliance for the same campaign you lose a reward tier or all the AP stored for the next tier.

Gold weapons (BoE, not BoP) or extra transmute crystals from tier 26 to tier 30.

10k AP to increase your reward tier from 0 to 10.
50k AP to increase from 10 to 20.
100k AP to increase from 20 to 25.
500k AP to increase from 25 to 30.

That way faction hopping will still be possible, but you will have to consider losing a reward tier, especially towards the end of the campaign.