Alliance Change Tokens

VaranisArano

Aisle9 wrote: »

I'm not saying your issue has no merit, just that is irrelevant in the context of the point I'm making.

Hope this clarifies.
Have a nice day.

Yeah, I understand. Thanks for clarifying!

I'm aware that my reason is not usual one for which people ask for alliance change tokens. I just bring it up because its an interesting reason to compare to the usual "I just want to play with my friends (but I don't want to make an alt)" reasons, to which yours is a very good response.

VaranisArano

efster wrote: »

Yeah this should be a thing. If we can change our characters' race, it's really not preposterous to let us change their allegiance in the Cyrodiil war.

The whole "you must be this race to play for this alliance" thing is so outdated already, especially with One Tamriel. So it's high time to add something like a quest scroll like the housing brochure that you do have to pay crowns for, that lets you do a quest to defect from your current alliance and into your desired one.

However, it should only be allowable once per character. That way there is zero room for abuse and you have to be really sure before you do it.

Just so you know, you can only change your race outside of the original alliances if you have the Any Race, Any Alliance upgrade.

That's right. If you want to change your DC Breton's race but you don't have the Any Race, Any Alliance upgrade, you'll only be able to change to Orc or Redguard (or Imperial if you have that upgrade)because those are the other Daggerfall Covenant races. If you want to change your Breton to an Altmer, you need the Any Race, Any Alliance upgrade.

Every so often we have very irritated people come and complain on the forums about false advertising with the race change token because they thought that a race change token allowed you to bypass the alliance/race restrictions. Unless you have the Any Race, Any Alliance pack, you can't change race to one outside of your alliance. For the sake of those people, I wanted to clarify how the tokens worked.

Apache_Kid

Aisle9 wrote: »

Apache_Kid wrote: »

These tokens should be in the game and they would make ZoS a lot of $$$$. You always have some weirdo though who has to speak-up and go on about how others players choices should matter even though it doesn't affect them in the slightest.

Look at me, I have an opinion, and everybody else's opinion is stupid!

There are a vast amount of issues with faction change, and exploits related to it.

That is the reason the argument is polarizing.

But, hey, everyone is entitled to their opinion, right ?

Have a nice day.

I've had this argument in countless other threads and utterly destroyed every single possible counter-argument as to why these tokens would be a problem. If you to go look at those threads you can find them and see that there are no exploitation issues with this. No one is going to spend upwards of 3000 crowns to change to a winning faction just for like 10k gold. If someone wants to switch to a winning faction they can easily just enroll an alt who is in that alliance in that specific campaign. No one is going to be abusing or exploiting the tokens because the cost of them will be too high if we look at the cost of something like the race change token which an alliance change token would probably be priced around.

VaranisArano

Apache_Kid wrote: »

Aisle9 wrote: »

Apache_Kid wrote: »

These tokens should be in the game and they would make ZoS a lot of $$$$. You always have some weirdo though who has to speak-up and go on about how others players choices should matter even though it doesn't affect them in the slightest.

Look at me, I have an opinion, and everybody else's opinion is stupid!

There are a vast amount of issues with faction change, and exploits related to it.

That is the reason the argument is polarizing.

But, hey, everyone is entitled to their opinion, right ?

Have a nice day.

I've had this argument in countless other threads and utterly destroyed every single possible counter-argument as to why these tokens would be a problem. If you to go look at those threads you can find them and see that there are no exploitation issues with this. No one is going to spend upwards of 3000 crowns to change to a winning faction just for like 10k gold. If someone wants to switch to a winning faction they can easily just enroll an alt who is in that alliance in that specific campaign. No one is going to be abusing or exploiting the tokens because the cost of them will be too high if we look at the cost of something like the race change token which an alliance change token would probably be priced around.

As long as its hypothetical, its always going to be polarizing.

The problems are hypothetical because we don't know how ZOS would implement them. However, we do know of the perfidious nature of our fellow PVPers and the evidence of history that suggests that if there is an exploit to find, someone will find it and exploit it. So people point out the problems, wisely, to make sure that the problems are known and thus can be fixed or avoided. If the problems seem too many and the risks too great, they argue that we should not risk it. Besdies, there are easier alternatives. No faction change tokens.

The solutions to those hypothetical problems are, of course, equally hypothetical because we don't know how ZOS would implement the tokens. We know that surely ZOS, introducing a new element like an alliance change token would surely be paying attention to possible problems and make sure than all loopholes are covered. If nothing else, we can surely trust ZOS' greed to make sure that like race changes, people are paying through the nose in order to swap factions. We can surely trust ZOS to get it right. Besides, the alternatives don't address my needs. So, faction change tokens.

Everyone is right in their own way.

Some people look at the risks and think "Do you really think ZOS will get faction change tokens right? Nope."
Some people look at the risks and think "Of course, ZOS'll get it right. It'll be fine."

Both are completely hypothetical. Neither side can actually address the issues of the other side with hard facts, only specualtion. Thus its polarizing.

Apache_Kid

VaranisArano wrote: »

Apache_Kid wrote: »

Aisle9 wrote: »

Apache_Kid wrote: »

These tokens should be in the game and they would make ZoS a lot of $$$$. You always have some weirdo though who has to speak-up and go on about how others players choices should matter even though it doesn't affect them in the slightest.

Look at me, I have an opinion, and everybody else's opinion is stupid!

There are a vast amount of issues with faction change, and exploits related to it.

That is the reason the argument is polarizing.

But, hey, everyone is entitled to their opinion, right ?

Have a nice day.

I've had this argument in countless other threads and utterly destroyed every single possible counter-argument as to why these tokens would be a problem. If you to go look at those threads you can find them and see that there are no exploitation issues with this. No one is going to spend upwards of 3000 crowns to change to a winning faction just for like 10k gold. If someone wants to switch to a winning faction they can easily just enroll an alt who is in that alliance in that specific campaign. No one is going to be abusing or exploiting the tokens because the cost of them will be too high if we look at the cost of something like the race change token which an alliance change token would probably be priced around.

As long as its hypothetical, its always going to be polarizing.

The problems are hypothetical because we don't know how ZOS would implement them. However, we do know of the perfidious nature of our fellow PVPers and the evidence of history that suggests that if there is an exploit to find, someone will find it and exploit it. So people point out the problems, wisely, to make sure that the problems are known and thus can be fixed or avoided. If the problems seem too many and the risks too great, they argue that we should not risk it. Besdies, there are easier alternatives. No faction change tokens.

The solutions to those hypothetical problems are, of course, equally hypothetical because we don't know how ZOS would implement the tokens. We know that surely ZOS, introducing a new element like an alliance change token would surely be paying attention to possible problems and make sure than all loopholes are covered. If nothing else, we can surely trust ZOS' greed to make sure that like race changes, people are paying through the nose in order to swap factions. We can surely trust ZOS to get it right. Besides, the alternatives don't address my needs. So, faction change tokens.

Everyone is right in their own way.

Some people look at the risks and think "Do you really think ZOS will get faction change tokens right? Nope."
Some people look at the risks and think "Of course, ZOS'll get it right. It'll be fine."

Both are completely hypothetical. Neither side can actually address the issues of the other side with hard facts, only specualtion. Thus its polarizing.

But there are no problems that can arise. Players can already switch factions at anytime by simply entering a campaign on a different character. The reward for simply being on the winning side in a campaign is so low and miniscule that there is absolutely no way you can argue that players will be spending real money every time a campaign ends simply to get what would be the equivalent of a few dollars worth of gold.

As long as you don't keep your leaderbaord score in the current campaign when you switch alliances where is the potential for these hypothetical problems or abuses? I just don't see it. At all.

Nemesis7884

do people actually use the search function? Not like the topic wouldnt come up biweekly

Leogon

White wabbit wrote: »

Subject has been brought up many a time and ends up dividing the forums I guess because it takes no time to level up a toon that ZOS are in no rush to consider this

It takes no time to level up a toon to level 50, not to get everything else you need like Undaunted 9, MG 10, shards, etc. and the more alts you make the more tedious it becomes. Anyway, alliance change tokens would be nice but only if it's like 1 change per character and then that character is permanently locked to that alliance.

Marginis

VaranisArano wrote: »

Some people look at the risks and think "Do you really think ZOS will get faction change tokens right? Nope."
Some people look at the risks and think "Of course, ZOS'll get it right. It'll be fine."

Both are completely hypothetical. Neither side can actually address the issues of the other side with hard facts, only specualtion. Thus its polarizing.

Since we are dealing purely with hypotheticals, we can imagine different scenarios: scenarios that are likely, that would be best, that would be worst, that we personally would prefer, that would be similar to a historical scenario, etc. The idea is, however, since we are dealing with hypotheticals, to figure out and try and understand if we can have a "good" scenario. Whether ZOS implements it properly is another thing entirely, since we are considering the best way to implement in the first place.

So, can alliance change tokens be implemented in a "good" way. I would say yes.

Aisle9

Apache_Kid wrote: »

Aisle9 wrote: »

Apache_Kid wrote: »

These tokens should be in the game and they would make ZoS a lot of $$$$. You always have some weirdo though who has to speak-up and go on about how others players choices should matter even though it doesn't affect them in the slightest.

Look at me, I have an opinion, and everybody else's opinion is stupid!

There are a vast amount of issues with faction change, and exploits related to it.

That is the reason the argument is polarizing.

But, hey, everyone is entitled to their opinion, right ?

Have a nice day.

I've had this argument in countless other threads and utterly destroyed every single possible counter-argument as to why these tokens would be a problem. If you to go look at those threads you can find them and see that there are no exploitation issues with this. No one is going to spend upwards of 3000 crowns to change to a winning faction just for like 10k gold. If someone wants to switch to a winning faction they can easily just enroll an alt who is in that alliance in that specific campaign. No one is going to be abusing or exploiting the tokens because the cost of them will be too high if we look at the cost of something like the race change token which an alliance change token would probably be priced around.

ESO+ subs have plenty of bonus points to spend, and not everyone sink them in crown crates.

Just saying

Marginis wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Some people look at the risks and think "Do you really think ZOS will get faction change tokens right? Nope."
Some people look at the risks and think "Of course, ZOS'll get it right. It'll be fine."

Both are completely hypothetical. Neither side can actually address the issues of the other side with hard facts, only specualtion. Thus its polarizing.

Since we are dealing purely with hypotheticals, we can imagine different scenarios: scenarios that are likely, that would be best, that would be worst, that we personally would prefer, that would be similar to a historical scenario, etc. The idea is, however, since we are dealing with hypotheticals, to figure out and try and understand if we can have a "good" scenario. Whether ZOS implements it properly is another thing entirely, since we are considering the best way to implement in the first place.

So, can alliance change tokens be implemented in a "good" way. I would say yes.

Historical data tells us that ZoS will not implement it in a "good" way. They would implement it in a way they think it will work, then try to fix it as exploits comes out.

Oh, btw, https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/393779/alliance-switching-to-boost-ap-and-take-emp-discuss/p1

This is still going.

What do you know, it's not as hypothetical as people say...

Safe travels.

Apache_Kid

Aisle9 wrote: »

Apache_Kid wrote: »

Aisle9 wrote: »

Apache_Kid wrote: »

These tokens should be in the game and they would make ZoS a lot of $$$$. You always have some weirdo though who has to speak-up and go on about how others players choices should matter even though it doesn't affect them in the slightest.

Look at me, I have an opinion, and everybody else's opinion is stupid!

There are a vast amount of issues with faction change, and exploits related to it.

That is the reason the argument is polarizing.

But, hey, everyone is entitled to their opinion, right ?

Have a nice day.

I've had this argument in countless other threads and utterly destroyed every single possible counter-argument as to why these tokens would be a problem. If you to go look at those threads you can find them and see that there are no exploitation issues with this. No one is going to spend upwards of 3000 crowns to change to a winning faction just for like 10k gold. If someone wants to switch to a winning faction they can easily just enroll an alt who is in that alliance in that specific campaign. No one is going to be abusing or exploiting the tokens because the cost of them will be too high if we look at the cost of something like the race change token which an alliance change token would probably be priced around.

ESO+ subs have plenty of bonus points to spend, and not everyone sink them in crown crates.

Just saying

Marginis wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Some people look at the risks and think "Do you really think ZOS will get faction change tokens right? Nope."
Some people look at the risks and think "Of course, ZOS'll get it right. It'll be fine."

Both are completely hypothetical. Neither side can actually address the issues of the other side with hard facts, only specualtion. Thus its polarizing.

Since we are dealing purely with hypotheticals, we can imagine different scenarios: scenarios that are likely, that would be best, that would be worst, that we personally would prefer, that would be similar to a historical scenario, etc. The idea is, however, since we are dealing with hypotheticals, to figure out and try and understand if we can have a "good" scenario. Whether ZOS implements it properly is another thing entirely, since we are considering the best way to implement in the first place.

So, can alliance change tokens be implemented in a "good" way. I would say yes.

Historical data tells us that ZoS will not implement it in a "good" way. They would implement it in a way they think it will work, then try to fix it as exploits comes out.

Oh, btw, https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/393779/alliance-switching-to-boost-ap-and-take-emp-discuss/p1

This is still going.

What do you know, it's not as hypothetical as people say...

Safe travels.

Ok but why would they spend the crowns to get such a paltry amount of gold by switching to the winning since when they can just do what everyone is doing know which is make an alt for the winning alliance and enrolling then in the campaign. There would be near-zero incentive to abuse the alliance change token in such a way. And either way, if someone were to do that, would be the big deal? The rewards for switching are so minimal and doesn't affect any other player. And as stated the cost would outweigh the benefit by so much that there is no way it would be used in such a way by any rational player.

Taleof2Cities

KhajiitHasSkooma wrote: »

Yes, it is a very narrow, niche and compulsive wish. But I don't see the issue if ZOS eliminate the ability to use this as an exploit. Again, once a year per account seems fair.

ZOS doesn’t have much precedent for catering to narrow, niche, and compulsive ideas ... especially when the idea is indistinguishable from the other hundreds of Alliance change token threads.

Aisle9

Apache_Kid wrote: »

Aisle9 wrote: »

Apache_Kid wrote: »

Aisle9 wrote: »

Apache_Kid wrote: »

These tokens should be in the game and they would make ZoS a lot of $$$$. You always have some weirdo though who has to speak-up and go on about how others players choices should matter even though it doesn't affect them in the slightest.

Look at me, I have an opinion, and everybody else's opinion is stupid!

There are a vast amount of issues with faction change, and exploits related to it.

That is the reason the argument is polarizing.

But, hey, everyone is entitled to their opinion, right ?

Have a nice day.

I've had this argument in countless other threads and utterly destroyed every single possible counter-argument as to why these tokens would be a problem. If you to go look at those threads you can find them and see that there are no exploitation issues with this. No one is going to spend upwards of 3000 crowns to change to a winning faction just for like 10k gold. If someone wants to switch to a winning faction they can easily just enroll an alt who is in that alliance in that specific campaign. No one is going to be abusing or exploiting the tokens because the cost of them will be too high if we look at the cost of something like the race change token which an alliance change token would probably be priced around.

ESO+ subs have plenty of bonus points to spend, and not everyone sink them in crown crates.

Just saying

Marginis wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Some people look at the risks and think "Do you really think ZOS will get faction change tokens right? Nope."
Some people look at the risks and think "Of course, ZOS'll get it right. It'll be fine."

Both are completely hypothetical. Neither side can actually address the issues of the other side with hard facts, only specualtion. Thus its polarizing.

Since we are dealing purely with hypotheticals, we can imagine different scenarios: scenarios that are likely, that would be best, that would be worst, that we personally would prefer, that would be similar to a historical scenario, etc. The idea is, however, since we are dealing with hypotheticals, to figure out and try and understand if we can have a "good" scenario. Whether ZOS implements it properly is another thing entirely, since we are considering the best way to implement in the first place.

So, can alliance change tokens be implemented in a "good" way. I would say yes.

Historical data tells us that ZoS will not implement it in a "good" way. They would implement it in a way they think it will work, then try to fix it as exploits comes out.

Oh, btw, https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/393779/alliance-switching-to-boost-ap-and-take-emp-discuss/p1

This is still going.

What do you know, it's not as hypothetical as people say...

Safe travels.

Ok but why would they spend the crowns to get such a paltry amount of gold by switching to the winning since when they can just do what everyone is doing know which is make an alt for the winning alliance and enrolling then in the campaign. There would be near-zero incentive to abuse the alliance change token in such a way. And either way, if someone were to do that, would be the big deal? The rewards for switching are so minimal and doesn't affect any other player. And as stated the cost would outweigh the benefit by so much that there is no way it would be used in such a way by any rational player.

"Paltry amount of gold" ? What are we talking about, the end of campaign reward ?

LOL, there are people selling emperorships for actual money, mate.

VaranisArano

Aisle9 wrote: »

Apache_Kid wrote: »

Aisle9 wrote: »

Apache_Kid wrote: »

Aisle9 wrote: »

Apache_Kid wrote: »

These tokens should be in the game and they would make ZoS a lot of $$$$. You always have some weirdo though who has to speak-up and go on about how others players choices should matter even though it doesn't affect them in the slightest.

Look at me, I have an opinion, and everybody else's opinion is stupid!

There are a vast amount of issues with faction change, and exploits related to it.

That is the reason the argument is polarizing.

But, hey, everyone is entitled to their opinion, right ?

Have a nice day.

I've had this argument in countless other threads and utterly destroyed every single possible counter-argument as to why these tokens would be a problem. If you to go look at those threads you can find them and see that there are no exploitation issues with this. No one is going to spend upwards of 3000 crowns to change to a winning faction just for like 10k gold. If someone wants to switch to a winning faction they can easily just enroll an alt who is in that alliance in that specific campaign. No one is going to be abusing or exploiting the tokens because the cost of them will be too high if we look at the cost of something like the race change token which an alliance change token would probably be priced around.

ESO+ subs have plenty of bonus points to spend, and not everyone sink them in crown crates.

Just saying

Marginis wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Some people look at the risks and think "Do you really think ZOS will get faction change tokens right? Nope."
Some people look at the risks and think "Of course, ZOS'll get it right. It'll be fine."

Both are completely hypothetical. Neither side can actually address the issues of the other side with hard facts, only specualtion. Thus its polarizing.

Since we are dealing purely with hypotheticals, we can imagine different scenarios: scenarios that are likely, that would be best, that would be worst, that we personally would prefer, that would be similar to a historical scenario, etc. The idea is, however, since we are dealing with hypotheticals, to figure out and try and understand if we can have a "good" scenario. Whether ZOS implements it properly is another thing entirely, since we are considering the best way to implement in the first place.

So, can alliance change tokens be implemented in a "good" way. I would say yes.

Historical data tells us that ZoS will not implement it in a "good" way. They would implement it in a way they think it will work, then try to fix it as exploits comes out.

Oh, btw, https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/393779/alliance-switching-to-boost-ap-and-take-emp-discuss/p1

This is still going.

What do you know, it's not as hypothetical as people say...

Safe travels.

Ok but why would they spend the crowns to get such a paltry amount of gold by switching to the winning since when they can just do what everyone is doing know which is make an alt for the winning alliance and enrolling then in the campaign. There would be near-zero incentive to abuse the alliance change token in such a way. And either way, if someone were to do that, would be the big deal? The rewards for switching are so minimal and doesn't affect any other player. And as stated the cost would outweigh the benefit by so much that there is no way it would be used in such a way by any rational player.

"Paltry amount of gold" ? What are we talking about, the end of campaign reward ?

LOL, there are people selling emperorships for actual money, mate.

While that's true, I'm not quite sure what selling an emperorship has to do with faction change tokens. i'm pretty sure you can find people all all factions willing to push someone for emperor.

Apache_Kid

Aisle9 wrote: »

Apache_Kid wrote: »

Aisle9 wrote: »

Apache_Kid wrote: »

Aisle9 wrote: »

Apache_Kid wrote: »

These tokens should be in the game and they would make ZoS a lot of $$$$. You always have some weirdo though who has to speak-up and go on about how others players choices should matter even though it doesn't affect them in the slightest.

Look at me, I have an opinion, and everybody else's opinion is stupid!

There are a vast amount of issues with faction change, and exploits related to it.

That is the reason the argument is polarizing.

But, hey, everyone is entitled to their opinion, right ?

Have a nice day.

I've had this argument in countless other threads and utterly destroyed every single possible counter-argument as to why these tokens would be a problem. If you to go look at those threads you can find them and see that there are no exploitation issues with this. No one is going to spend upwards of 3000 crowns to change to a winning faction just for like 10k gold. If someone wants to switch to a winning faction they can easily just enroll an alt who is in that alliance in that specific campaign. No one is going to be abusing or exploiting the tokens because the cost of them will be too high if we look at the cost of something like the race change token which an alliance change token would probably be priced around.

ESO+ subs have plenty of bonus points to spend, and not everyone sink them in crown crates.

Just saying

Marginis wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Some people look at the risks and think "Do you really think ZOS will get faction change tokens right? Nope."
Some people look at the risks and think "Of course, ZOS'll get it right. It'll be fine."

Both are completely hypothetical. Neither side can actually address the issues of the other side with hard facts, only specualtion. Thus its polarizing.

Since we are dealing purely with hypotheticals, we can imagine different scenarios: scenarios that are likely, that would be best, that would be worst, that we personally would prefer, that would be similar to a historical scenario, etc. The idea is, however, since we are dealing with hypotheticals, to figure out and try and understand if we can have a "good" scenario. Whether ZOS implements it properly is another thing entirely, since we are considering the best way to implement in the first place.

So, can alliance change tokens be implemented in a "good" way. I would say yes.

Historical data tells us that ZoS will not implement it in a "good" way. They would implement it in a way they think it will work, then try to fix it as exploits comes out.

Oh, btw, https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/393779/alliance-switching-to-boost-ap-and-take-emp-discuss/p1

This is still going.

What do you know, it's not as hypothetical as people say...

Safe travels.

Ok but why would they spend the crowns to get such a paltry amount of gold by switching to the winning since when they can just do what everyone is doing know which is make an alt for the winning alliance and enrolling then in the campaign. There would be near-zero incentive to abuse the alliance change token in such a way. And either way, if someone were to do that, would be the big deal? The rewards for switching are so minimal and doesn't affect any other player. And as stated the cost would outweigh the benefit by so much that there is no way it would be used in such a way by any rational player.

"Paltry amount of gold" ? What are we talking about, the end of campaign reward ?

LOL, there are people selling emperorships for actual money, mate.

So how would alliance change tokens affect that? Or are you just going to bring up a really vague and broad point and not elaborate?

Marginis

Aisle9 wrote: »

Marginis wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Some people look at the risks and think "Do you really think ZOS will get faction change tokens right? Nope."
Some people look at the risks and think "Of course, ZOS'll get it right. It'll be fine."

Both are completely hypothetical. Neither side can actually address the issues of the other side with hard facts, only specualtion. Thus its polarizing.

Since we are dealing purely with hypotheticals, we can imagine different scenarios: scenarios that are likely, that would be best, that would be worst, that we personally would prefer, that would be similar to a historical scenario, etc. The idea is, however, since we are dealing with hypotheticals, to figure out and try and understand if we can have a "good" scenario. Whether ZOS implements it properly is another thing entirely, since we are considering the best way to implement in the first place.

So, can alliance change tokens be implemented in a "good" way. I would say yes.

Historical data tells us that ZoS will not implement it in a "good" way. They would implement it in a way they think it will work, then try to fix it as exploits comes out.

Oh, btw, https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/393779/alliance-switching-to-boost-ap-and-take-emp-discuss/p1

This is still going.

What do you know, it's not as hypothetical as people say...

Safe travels.

We can take how ZOS might implement an alliance change system into account, however, as of yet, there is nothing in place, so we are still dealing with hypotheticals. It's like the difference between "may" and "might". What we're discussing is alliance change tokens, not ZOS's implementation of them (because they have not implemented them). They could implement them amazingly, if that is within the realm of possibility, and they could turn the game into a complete mess (if that is within the realm of possibility). So what we're talking about it whether it could be implemented certain ways, and we're suggesting certain ways. There's nothing non-hypothetical to discuss since we don't know what ZOS is working on right now regarding this - at least I don't.

A_G_G_R_O

EQII ‘s betrayal quest line wasn’t perfect for this.

kargen27

First if this were done locking it into being crown store exclusive is pure evil. I don't mind it being offered in the crown store but it should also be attainable in the game. The way I would prefer would be make it a one time per character quest. The quest could include a donation of gold and/or AP to bribe officers into dismissing your past crimes against the faction you are about to join.
A faction change should include loss of rank and loss of title/achievement if that character were ever emperor.

Minalan

kargen27 wrote: »

A faction change should include loss of rank and loss of title/achievement if that character were ever emperor.

Id be okay with this, and I’m a prefect or something. I just want to play banana for awhile because they’re usually fighting ridiculous odds most nights. And that’s fun to me. Raiding behind enemy lines to corral a Zerg, fighting impossible odds, etc.

I’d start a new toon, but I really don’t want to unlock mage guild skills with books, or level undaunted again. Just... no. No idea how most of you guys did it more than once. It’s not fun.

craigr02

Zos,
Lets make this happen! Need to switch a couple toons colors!

ol_BANK_lo

KhajiitHasSkooma wrote: »

Some of us have mistakes we've made in past and, with an account full of maxed out characters, can't undo. I'd love to be able to PVP with my friends but sadly, my toon that initially completed all the quests is the wrong faction. I'd love for there to be an alliance change token. Obviously, it would need to be done in a manner that won't allow for exploitation in PVP. Make it so you can only change a character once per year. If not alliance change token, then make it so when choosing a home campaign, we also choose a faction and are locked into it for the duration of the campaign.

Yeah, I agree. I don't think I would use it as all my toons are EP, and all my friends are EP. But I get. Obviously to not exploit, it would have to be one time per character, or some other long time gap. But, I have spent years on my main, and months on many others gaining all I need on them. Not always easy to "just make a new character" so you can play on another faction. I don't understand their hesitation. It may come some day.

anadandy

Just so you know, you can only change your race outside of the original alliances if you have the Any Race, Any Alliance upgrade.

Yep and only on a new character, not an existing one. I clarified this with CS - any race, any alliance only works on new characters. So even with race change token, you can only change to one of the other two races in your current alliance.

Yolokin_Swagonborn

We've talked about this before and most have agreed its fine provided there were some pretty hefty restrictions to prevent alliance hopping.

Here's what I would like to see.

Loyalty package: Turns ALL of your characters to the alliance of your choice. 1 time per account. Choose wisely. This option should come with a Title you could display on your toon.

Daggerfall Loyalist
Ebonheart Loyalist
Dirty Elf Aldmeri Loyalist

That way everyone could see your realm pride.

If people made a mistake early on, and have now settled on an alliance, this would fix the issue but also prevent people flipping back and fourth, helping enemy alliances via scroll runs, or spying.

In concert with this, there needs to be a PvP campaign lockout for using other alliance toons in the same campaign.
So for 30 days for vivec, or for 7 days, you could only enter that campaign with one alliance. That would prevent a lot of the multi-faction cheese we have today.

KhajiitHasSkooma

Yolokin_Swagonborn wrote: »

We've talked about this before and most have agreed its fine provided there were some pretty hefty restrictions to prevent alliance hopping.

Here's what I would like to see.

Loyalty package: Turns ALL of your characters to the alliance of your choice. 1 time per account. Choose wisely. This option should come with a Title you could display on your toon.

Daggerfall Loyalist
Ebonheart Loyalist
Dirty Elf Aldmeri Loyalist

That way everyone could see your realm pride.

If people made a mistake early on, and have now settled on an alliance, this would fix the issue but also prevent people flipping back and fourth, helping enemy alliances via scroll runs, or spying.

In concert with this, there needs to be a PvP campaign lockout for using other alliance toons in the same campaign.
So for 30 days for vivec, or for 7 days, you could only enter that campaign with one alliance. That would prevent a lot of the multi-faction cheese we have today.

Love the loyalty package idea! That would great. But yeah the big thing would be to stop people from doing that dirty alliance hoping trash.

Juju_beans

When I started playing last May I specifically created one of each faction to play that side of the story and to experience pvp on that faction.

One of each class and one of each faction. After that it's up in the air for what else I play.

EvilAutoTech

I would say make it only available for real money. Not gold, not crowns, not through eso plus. Buy it separately, for at least $50 US and you can have as many as you want. However, the change does not take place until the campaigns you are in end. Whichever happens last. And abandoning the campaign will not speed this up.

They might not sell many but they might sell a ton. They sold a lot of copies of Morrowind

MCBIZZLE300

White wabbit wrote: »

Subject has been brought up many a time and ends up dividing the forums I guess because it takes no time to level up a toon that ZOS are in no rush to consider this

Yeh no time at all, just to level 50 then mages guild, undaunted, pvp skill line, alchemy and maxing out skills.............. DOT DOT DOT

SerasWhip

Please make this happen

gepe87

I'm thinking about alliance quests and alliance achievements. Itncoukd break quests like cadwell silver and gold. Because of this, an alliance token shoukd be used only after complete Cadwell Gold.

jssriot

Seriously, just give us this already. Just take away that toon's alliance rank and make them re-earn it, and have them not earn any more skill points from alliance ranks until they do, And make it once per toon. And Caldwell's Gold? They can make it so you can keep your faction in PVE but are in a different faction in Cyro. it would not be that hard.

xeNNNNN

feel like we've been down this road before.

Alliance change tokens are a very bad idea. PvP pops are not balanced at all and a lot of people would switch immediately to whomever wins the campaigns the most....we'd be better off removing the factions entirely at that point unless we'd want too see one or two factions with virtually no pop vs a fully locked pop 24/7.