There needs to be some Faction Stacking balance done

Joshlenoir

WaltherCarraway wrote: »

King_Thelon wrote: »

WaltherCarraway wrote: »

I thought only good players play cross faction.

Good players who cross-faction do so to find outnumbered fights as members of the outnumbered alliance.

Bad players who cross-faction do so to run around in the biggeest, mindless, skill-free blob they can find.

What type of gameplay can we expect from you?

Both.

Maura_Neysa

Make Battle Spirit scale with faction populations. Full bars is current Battle Spirit (100%) , no Bars is 0% Battle Spirit, as in you hit and heal like it was PvE.

Prince_of_all_Pugs

all these suggestions sound terrible. all they need to do is give bonus ap to the undermanned faction. EXAMPLE: DC is outnumbered 3-1 by EP on a server, DC should make 200 Percent more AP. this will make players actually want to play as the underdog faction more because its lucrative.

frozywozy

Joshlenoir wrote: »

Why do you guys think you deserve to dictate whether people are able to switch factions or not?
This was already implemented in the game and it was removed because nobody really takes cyrodill seriously anymore. Campaign score does not matter.
I have an EP and a AD that I like to play on, I will play the opposite faction when one has the entire map because it gets boring and I end up having nobody to fight. Not everybody takes the map as seriously as yourself and locking players out with methods like this will make the map more dead than it already is.

Maybe it does not matter for you but it does matter for most of us. I understand that the incentives to focus on faction scores are pretty bad and are not encouraging people to do so, but in the end, some people like to have something to fight for, not simply fighting. I always compare for example Call of Duty to Battlefield. TTK is much higher in Battlefield because there is much more than simply killing your opponent and it makes it more appealing for people like me.

Sandman929

For most things, ZOS seems to feel that each character is already faction loyal. Banked AP is something we asked for and eventually got, but every character fights for their faction and the player controlling those characters isn't part of the equation.

MalagenR

Strong guilds make a strong faction, period. Strong guilds will beat zergy numbers every time.

Joshlenoir

frozywozy wrote: »

Joshlenoir wrote: »

Why do you guys think you deserve to dictate whether people are able to switch factions or not?
This was already implemented in the game and it was removed because nobody really takes cyrodill seriously anymore. Campaign score does not matter.
I have an EP and a AD that I like to play on, I will play the opposite faction when one has the entire map because it gets boring and I end up having nobody to fight. Not everybody takes the map as seriously as yourself and locking players out with methods like this will make the map more dead than it already is.

Maybe it does not matter for you but it does matter for most of us. I understand that the incentives to focus on faction scores are pretty bad and are not encouraging people to do so, but in the end, some people like to have something to fight for, not simply fighting. I always compare for example Call of Duty to Battlefield. TTK is much higher in Battlefield because there is much more than simply killing your opponent and it makes it more appealing for people like me.

Yawn.

Joshlenoir

MalagenR wrote: »

Strong guilds make a strong faction, period. Strong guilds will beat zergy numbers every time.

Shhhh don't speak the truth

We just need more numbers.....

idk

Xsorus wrote: »

They need to go back to one faction per server. Once they allowed Cross Realming a whole lot of bads swapped to the winning side every time.

This does not seem to be the case. A lot of overly generalization with what seems to be a heavy dose of assumptions occurs in these threads.

Take this comment for example. A side is wining so players jump to the winning side. The winning side apparently was winning while having a lower population to begin with. How does hopping on a character for that faction and working to get my rewards change things? That alliance was already winning.

Last week in Vivek all three factions were pop locked to begin with. Changing factions to the faction in the lead would have had zero affect during those final days of the campaign.

p00tx

idk wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

They need to go back to one faction per server. Once they allowed Cross Realming a whole lot of bads swapped to the winning side every time.

This does not seem to be the case. A lot of overly generalization with what seems to be a heavy dose of assumptions occurs in these threads.

Take this comment for example. A side is wining so players jump to the winning side. The winning side apparently was winning while having a lower population to begin with. How does hopping on a character for that faction and working to get my rewards change things? That alliance was already winning.

Last week in Vivek all three factions were pop locked to begin with. Changing factions to the faction in the lead would have had zero affect during those final days of the campaign.

It's the level of "win" that is affected. When a campaign restarts, there is a level playing field where everyone has an equal opportunity to gain the lead. Now, using Xbox NA Vivec for an example, you add EP and their weird and sudden dominance/recruitment push on that server, so they pull a bit ahead in the scoring. Those who are currently playing on DC or AD who also have red toons see this lead and think "by golly, I'd love to be on the winning team and I do love me some gold Eagle Eye rings and transmute crystals. I'm going to go log onto my red and be part of that team". Now red, which was already heavy to begin with, but manageable, is stacked with players during all hours, giving them a massive advantage. The map stays pretty red for a majority of the campaign now, and even during off/slow times there are enough of them on to be able to massively zerg three large keeps and prevent any attempts at an effective dethrone. Their lead becomes insurmountable and DC and AD become disheartened by never being able to do anything without being overrun, and the game becomes unbalanced and boring.

Added to that, we have a notable faction hopper who has been camping the top position on the DC leaderboards by a large margin, but never mounting an actual offensive emp push, which prevents anyone else from being able to mount an effective emp offensive. It's a scenario that promotes opportunism and detracts from the quality of gameplay by decreasing server performance (especially with the issues we've been having) and by rewarding disloyalty.

Xsorus

p00tx wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Xsorus wrote: »

They need to go back to one faction per server. Once they allowed Cross Realming a whole lot of bads swapped to the winning side every time.

This does not seem to be the case. A lot of overly generalization with what seems to be a heavy dose of assumptions occurs in these threads.

Take this comment for example. A side is wining so players jump to the winning side. The winning side apparently was winning while having a lower population to begin with. How does hopping on a character for that faction and working to get my rewards change things? That alliance was already winning.

Last week in Vivek all three factions were pop locked to begin with. Changing factions to the faction in the lead would have had zero affect during those final days of the campaign.

It's the level of "win" that is affected. When a campaign restarts, there is a level playing field where everyone has an equal opportunity to gain the lead. Now, using Xbox NA Vivec for an example, you add EP and their weird and sudden dominance/recruitment push on that server, so they pull a bit ahead in the scoring. Those who are currently playing on DC or AD who also have red toons see this lead and think "by golly, I'd love to be on the winning team and I do love me some gold Eagle Eye rings and transmute crystals. I'm going to go log onto my red and be part of that team". Now red, which was already heavy to begin with, but manageable, is stacked with players during all hours, giving them a massive advantage. The map stays pretty red for a majority of the campaign now, and even during off/slow times there are enough of them on to be able to massively zerg three large keeps and prevent any attempts at an effective dethrone. Their lead becomes insurmountable and DC and AD become disheartened by never being able to do anything without being overrun, and the game becomes unbalanced and boring.

Added to that, we have a notable faction hopper who has been camping the top position on the DC leaderboards by a large margin, but never mounting an actual offensive emp push, which prevents anyone else from being able to mount an effective emp offensive. It's a scenario that promotes opportunism and detracts from the quality of gameplay by decreasing server performance (especially with the issues we've been having) and by rewarding disloyalty.

Yeap, think of it this way

At the start when choosing your faction on a Campaign you don't know who's going to be winning it.

What happens is after a week usually you can tell who's going to win and everyone just hops over on that side and plays it all the time.

WaltherCarraway

King_Thelon wrote: »

WaltherCarraway wrote: »

I thought only good players play cross faction.

Good players who cross-faction do so to find outnumbered fights as members of the outnumbered alliance.

Bad players who cross-faction do so to run around in the biggeest, mindless, skill-free blob they can find.

What type of gameplay can we expect from you?

Yep, you described AD zerg & ball well, don't tell me AD was outnumbered before that mass unemployed DC guild rolled AD.

annnnd, you've just denied all those former DC guilds including ball group guilds and small scalers that rolled AD.

Good to see someone slap his own face using his own garbage argument.

Maura_Neysa

Prince_of_all_Pugs wrote: »

all these suggestions sound terrible. all they need to do is give bonus ap to the undermanned faction. EXAMPLE: DC is outnumbered 3-1 by EP on a server, DC should make 200 Percent more AP. this will make players actually want to play as the underdog faction more because its lucrative.

Just make it scale with the ratio, 3-1 is 300%, 2-1 is 200% However don't think that will work anyway. Because the reason faction stacking is so bad is because of Potatos. No kills, no AP whether thats bonus AP or not.

tinythinker

Not gonna dig up the relevant thread(s) and comments right now, but there plenty of things to do to discourage band-wagoning while still giving players freedom of choice when they are bored or want to join a friend in another faction.

Here is an example, with different steps that can be added (or not) to those before:

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1. Add more reward tiers + make higher tiers hard to reach + add/improve rewards

Set the number of reward Tiers to 5, and make each one progressively harder to get/more expensive, so that you can't just get the reward in a day or two if you play a lot. Add little rewards for each of the bottom tiers and bigger prizes for top tiers. Spending time on alternate faction alts reduces the chance of getting the bigger prizes.

2. Add a special tier bonus that is faction-locked

"As a reward for your effort, a boon is available to use in this campaign. Do you wish to claim this boon? It will be unavailable to be claimed by any of your characters in another alliance for the duration of this campaign. You must be in [campaign name goes here] to use this boon."

That message or one like it is what pops up when you hit Tier I. An AP bonus, a siege damage, bonus, a siege damage reduction or mounted speed boost or whatever.

I always use phony numbers to illustrate concepts so (for those who read) I am *not* advocating these particular values:

Tier 1: "Congratulations, you've been granted a war boon! Your mount speed is now boosted by 4%"

Tier 2: "Congratulations, you've been granted a war boon! Your siege weapons now do 3% more damage. Mount speed is now boosted by 6%"

Tier 3: "Congratulations, you've been granted a war boon! You now take 2% less damage from siege. Siege damage done is now boosted by 5%. Mount speed is now boosted by 8%"

Tier 4: "Congratulations, you've been granted a war boon! You now gain 3% more AP. Damage from siege is now reduced 4%. Siege damage done is now boosted by 7%. Mount speed is now boosted by 10%"

Tier 5: "Congratulations, you've been granted a war boon! AP bonus is now 6%. Damage from siege is now reduced by 6%."

On screen each sentence would appear sequentially and fade as the next one appeared. In this case by getting to Tier 5 you would travel 10% faster when mounted, do 7% more damage with siege engines, take 6% less damage from siege engines, and boost your AP gain by 6%. Not bad.

Plus you'd start getting rewards right away at Tier 1.

But if you switched on the same campaign to a toon with another faction, it would be ineligible for any special tier bonuses, it would just get the usual end of campaign rewards.

3. Make the war boon bonuses account wide

It still wouldn't work on toons from a different faction than the one that unlocked the boon, but, it would be granted to your other toons in the same faction. They would still only get the end of campaign rewards tied to their own tier level, though.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

This not only rewards sticking with one faction for the duration of a campaign, it gives something dynamic to work for during the campaign that directly affects the experience in Cyrodiil.

Altercator

Increase AP gains for being underpop.

DisgracefulMind

I get the rage people have against EP, I can get the SAME rage against Oceanic AD and DC. Hell, even midday. Each alliance is always acting like they're hurting soo badly. But, in reality, they're seeing primetime (give or take an hour) and judging off of that.

But, as a long-term EP player, I haven't seen any "bandwagoners" still to this day. There are the same guilds running, same people running around and talking in zone chat for the past almost 3 years, and so on. Who's hopping over? Because I don't really see it l:

Joy_Division

DisgracefulMind wrote: »

I get the rage people have against EP, I can get the SAME rage against Oceanic AD and DC. Hell, even midday. Each alliance is always acting like they're hurting soo badly. But, in reality, they're seeing primetime (give or take an hour) and judging off of that.

But, as a long-term EP player, I haven't seen any "bandwagoners" still to this day. There are the same guilds running, same people running around and talking in zone chat for the past almost 3 years, and so on. Who's hopping over? Because I don't really see it l:

All those 5 stars who play every night like are obviously disgruntled AD who showed up six months ago.

IxSTALKERxI

DisgracefulMind wrote: »

Who's hopping over? Because I don't really see it l:

I blame Sansa. She's the only reason you're winning.