Punishement for traitors?

redlink1979

I've seen these kind of traitors in action, becoming to be common scum on PvP. I don't see ZOS taking action against these so called players.

robo26

red_emu wrote: »

To be fair, this adds a bit of depth to the AvAvA war. Just like in real conflicts, there are spies, saboteurs, traitors. To me, it makes it more realistic. Yes, I get triggered immensely too when I see it happen but war is war


P.S. I would be more than happy to have alliance campaign locks for the duration but as you know, it is never going to happen...

I agree it sounds like a real war that way. However, in reality, other factions use it to group port an entire team in - possibly 40+ players, a leader is EP but rest of team is AD, ports in as a group, passes leadership then pops onto his AD character. This only needs to happen 2-3 times and we find this is happening every day. EP locked other factions on low pop (not during midyear mayhem - but it isn't normally locked), EP players who got in wonder where the rest of EP is as we get swarmed by 100+ from one of the other factions.

The only way to fix this, and go a long way to fixing Cyro, is to faction lock a player to the campaign.

GeneralSezme

RP hang them in the town square!

Minyassa

And lock people out who want to switch because their friends from a particular time zone just all logged in and they're in another faction? If people are going to screech about "MMO means social, be social or go play something else!!" then they are going to have to accept that being social sometimes means you do one thing until your buddies sign on and then you switch toons to go do something else with them. If you're all into PvP that's going to mean a faction change a lot of the time. And in no way would it ever be acceptable to put a game mechanic solely to prevent cheaters in the way of people actually using the MMO to do MMO things.

Veinblood1965

Isn't it supposed to be a war? In real life if I told all the newbies hey follow me to the front and I was a spy and they followed me and died I'm doing my job. At least in this game they can come back and learn from it and next time maybe once they see the leader log off they have some of their friends ready to log in and kick his butt. I haven't played pvp yet in this game but for me that would be the fun of it getting out smarted by someone.

Lylith

red_emu wrote: »

To be fair, this adds a bit of depth to the AvAvA war. Just like in real conflicts, there are spies, saboteurs, traitors. To me, it makes it more realistic. Yes, I get triggered immensely too when I see it happen but war is war


P.S. I would be more than happy to have alliance campaign locks for the duration but as you know, it is never going to happen...

irl, pieces of *** like that run the risk of being found out and killed, after being tortured and revealing everything they know, ofc.

hm, maybe permadeath SHOULD be an option for this sort.

Tryxus

kargen27

I vote that they keep one of the added campaigns up after the event ends. Make it an alliance locked campaign (if they have that capability) and see how popular the campaign is. If it is population locked most of the time then they will know that a lot of players want to play in campaigns that do not allow alliance swaps and can do something from there.

kargen27

Veinblood1965 wrote: »

Isn't it supposed to be a war? In real life if I told all the newbies hey follow me to the front and I was a spy and they followed me and died I'm doing my job. At least in this game they can come back and learn from it and next time maybe once they see the leader log off they have some of their friends ready to log in and kick his butt. I haven't played pvp yet in this game but for me that would be the fun of it getting out smarted by someone.

Real life doesn't apply. If it did then the next time you logged on the first character he would be summarily executed or otherwise dealt with so as to never be a problem again. In game there is zero risk in being a spy. A scenario that happens more often than above is to have a spy follow a group and report their location to the enemy. They also like to get in the middle of a stealthed group and start throwing out skills so the enemy knows where the hidden group is. If there were a risk in game for doing this I would be okay with that behavior. As there is no risk I find it to be abusive behavior as far as fair game play goes. A campaign that doesn't allow an account to switch factions wouldn't solve this problem but it would mean one player would have to dedicate the entire campaign to being a spy and wouldn't be able to switch over as another took his place to benefit.

SydneyGrey

That behavior is disgusting.

The problem with alliance-locking campaigns, though, is that when there's an event like Midyear Mayhem, people want to switch on and off from among all their characters so they can get Vigor/Warhorn/Caltrops on different characters. Alliance-locking campaigns will really screw that up. During this event, I was switching off between five characters just for that purpose, and they were different alliances.

Joy_Division

Because it worked so well the first time.

And it would totally get rid of spais. I mean it's impossible for an EP locked player to type in guild chat, whisper, or say in discord that her AD buddies should get to Sejanus because EP is heading there.

Kadoin

Joy_Division wrote: »

Because it worked so well the first time.

And it would totally get rid of spais. I mean it's impossible for an EP locked player to type in guild chat, whisper, or say in discord that her AD buddies should get to Sejanus because EP is heading there.

They probably weren't around in Cyro where you had "off-hours" and it was literally 3-5 people defending keep and scrolls vs entire factions...If they bring lock, the same thing will happen again except it might be worse this time around.

flubber77

PrinceDamien wrote: »

Lock the account to a single faction for the duration of the campaign.
That way there can't be any Spies or whatever.
And you will be able to make up plans with friends and guild on which faction to play as during the next Campaign.

Just my thought on how to fix it. I hear about it daily when visiting Cyro.
I'm no core PvP player. I just visit when really bored to slowly earn some AP.
But it sounds like it's a big "problem". And it happens to all factions.

2 account fix that problem. and many people use more than one account. log in with one just to see siege from thier own alliance then counter it with main account.

dtsharples

If people want to spy they will, regardless of how they need to go about it.
The best course of action would be to make a Go-Fund-Me account for them to pay for their much needed stint in Psyche.

Arthg

I wonder if how we play reveals who we are.
I'm just so completely estranged to the sort of satisfaction such behaviour might induce.
I know it's only a game etc., but I find that so low and wicked and dishonourable - and borderline weird in a creepy way.

I'm baffled.

eso_nya

ppl are jerks and care more for their own AP/h than for "their" faction.

Im somehow not surprised.

Maura_Neysa

What about instead of an Alliance Lock Out, just a Cool Down to campaign joining. If, say your account tracked which Alliance and campaign you where just on in Cyrodiil and then put an Hour long Cooldown on going back into the Same Campaign on a different Alliance?

As many have pointed out, you cant stop spies, and arguably we shouldn't. Its the exploiting which is the real problem. This is back by the bans that happened to the people that where just flipping flags in a Keep without fights or repairs. Just 2 zergs swapping places with no combat.

It seems like this would be short enough to not penalize people switching because friends just logged in. Or people who went in saw their Alliance was over populated and switched to find better fights. But still long enough to stop someone from personally benefiting from the spying. Sure you could still spy, you just wont get any AP for it.

Maybe an Hour is even too long. It just seems like Dungeon Finder and Deserter Penalties are effective enough (At least when it isn't actually ZoS stability issues that cause the problem instead)

lowlifer

I hear about this kinda stuff happening but have never seen it myself. If you have screen shots of him leading the group and being on another char on another alliance at the same time then I’m sure zos would do something...

... if not slate them on social media. Usually gets a response then.

Enkil

Most of us enjoy being able to play whatever we want, however we want, but there must be boundaries consistent with the design and premise of the game. A traitor system and being able to publicly hang and somehow mark as traitor/cross-faction troll would be interesting, but would also require dev team to do more work, invest more, and create more. That might be too much of an ask when we have postern walls glitched without a fix for so long already.

Solution: Open 1-2 faction locked campaigns.

The game started with all campaigns locked so the mechanisms already exist. Players and guilds that want to play in a tri-faction manner can continue doing so on a free-for-all (FFA) style campaign, which is really what all campaigns are currently.

It’s a win-win and we don’t have to debate ad nauseam.

Anazasi

I hate that I am even typing but....Since we have consensus that players play mainly for personal reasons on whatever faction they want for whatever reason why not just add really strong incentives. If you declare for a faction you are locked to that faction. You receive more gold, more rewards, more ap, and no matter what happens in the end of the campaign you get gold rewards just like the players in the top %. If ZOS wants to address the cross faction issues but not re-institute locks then the only other way is to offer incentives right. If you want to play all three factions that's fine you would just get what we currently get. If it's about choices which everyone chants it is, then make the choices better. Just remember, it has to be account wide to make an impact. If you decide you don't want to declare a faction and play on all three that'd ok too. But that choice comes with a negative effect.

A player who declares would earn double AP, double XP, double gold and guaranteed gold level rewards at the end of a campaign.

A player who does not declare earns standard level (current level) AP Gold and rewards and has to work to be in the top % for end of campaign rewards.

There is nothing anyone can do about multiple accounts. However, if you have linked your account than the loyalty choice would bleed over to the other.

Remember this is about making a choice. Once you make it you should be able to change it but you wouldn't be able to declare for another faction till the next campaign. Yes once you declare you cannot enter the declared campaign on another factional character; remember you made a choice. Will this stop anyone from playing as they like? No but it will at least give the players who want to be loyal to 1 faction a reason to suffer through the agony of the current PVP game.

In any regards like many others who have advocated for change like this, it would be the easiest way to make everyone happy without any major code re-right.

PapaWeeb

I say add a single 7 day campaign with faction lock, to see how it goes. No need for now) to change everything up and annoy people.

Those that are invested in the campaign itself can go there

IxSTALKERxI

I don't think there should be a punishment. There could be a reward for loyalty though.

EG. Players who participate in cyrodiil on the same faction for 72 consecutive hours start receiving a +20% AP buff.

Something like this might be possible.

Ragnarock41

Astrid_V wrote: »

player "N" relogged to his AD character and killed them all.

I'm really skeptical about ''N'' being able to kill someone , let alone killing multiple people .d

He is the type of player that gets 1vX'd on a regular basis.

I don't really think this requires punishment, if anything EP pugs deserve this fate for being used as PvDoor material.(they do morning cap literally every day.) If they don't think for themselves, then what can we do? Will they jump into slaughterfish if ''N'' tells them to do so?

Palidon

I agree totally with locking ones account to the faction they log in on at the start of a campaign.

Serjustin19

I been taking long break from forums. But decided to come back.

I'm a traitor, but am I really a traitor? Helping out AD with balance again, but I won't stay as long as I did in 2ND Scourge. (PS4 EU) I don't switch and kill other people like for example stated above. That above is unfair of what person did. I'm traitor because am doing what I think best for healthy campaign "balance" when my time draws to a close, then and only then I'll join back reds. My only punishment I receive. All the time I get teabag from reds. They know why I went back and I did warned before hand. I'll be going back ad in Summer set. In which I did. Reds know me. But feels like I'm blaming reds, but in reality I'm not. Sure I'm a traitor, yet am I really as my motto of my 2 eso Character names. One I still use, one was former character. I use them in my Stories here on forum. I end with this. "Princess Justine (AD) Am I A Traitor (EP)"

Sandman929

Somebody is going to be out of luck. Either the people who want to jump around onto different factions for whatever reasons or the people who don't want that kind of thing. I would love to see ZOS try a faction locked campaign. Like many have said, the population on most platforms really only supports 1-2 busy campaigns, and this way we could see what the playerbase favors. If the new campaign is empty, I guess people really didn't want faction locks.

Freddycruz89

The "I want to switch factions on a whim so I can play with my friends on another faction" argument may as well be a signed confession. Please *Scoffs* Why aren't you already with them to begin with if they are really your friends and you play with them regularly? No, the truth is some people want to continue exploiting the loopholes and post seemingly rational excuses on the forum for why they wouldn't want a campaign faction lock.

For those saying "Oh well it's normal to have traitors in a war, that happens in real life too." Yes, yes it does. The difference is in real life, there are justice systems in place to deal with them; not in game. Tea b*gging only lets the other person know you consider them a challenge, and in a way, is nothing more than a backhanded compliment.

Will there still be spies and external methods of passing information, yes, but as some have already mentioned, the problem is the exploitation of the situation, not the situation itself. One Tamriel sort of makes sense (Don't even get me started on that!) for PvE, but for PvP, no. Just...no. Pick an alliance and stick to it. Your friends are in another alliance? Oh, well, that's too bad. You should've thought about that before you locked yourself into a faction locked campaign, and you can join them for the next one once this one ends.

It's not as difficult as people are making it look. Soldiers in real life can't just leave the military, go join the enemy for a while and then come back home to fight again as if nothing happened. Treason is treason and a traitor is a traitor no matter what their motives are.

"Oh no no no....I just went to fight with the terrorists because my friend Haleem fights with them, but he blew himself up on our last mission so I am back to fight with you guys" -__- no.

Anazasi

IxSTALKERxI wrote: »

I don't think there should be a punishment. There could be a reward for loyalty though.

EG. Players who participate in cyrodiil on the same faction for 72 consecutive hours start receiving a +20% AP buff.

Something like this might be possible.

How is this any different than what they can get now. They log in and play till they hit tier 3 and then they log on a different faction and do the same. It would seem it's all about transmute stone or gold rewards or something else but 72 hours to get a buff is really nothing that can't already get. Needs to be more time committed and more incentives for players to be "loyal" to a single faction.

I should add that unless the account is linked on the website ZOS has no data on players logging on one account or logging in on several accounts. This really might not be even an issue unless someone can offer actual statistics.

I remember one time not too long ago, my raid rolled up on an EP keep didnt have any resistance on the doors as we barreled through them with the planned 3 min take. When we got inside there was an entire raid of EP asleep on the transit shrine. We knew they didn't port in cause no one even saw us coming and there was no one on the walls to call it out. The simply were just standing there. I often wondered if they were running a second account playing on the DC side till something happened and they could switch over and play on their EP toons. Needless to say both groups were surprised when we realized what was about to happen.

No idea if this little story is or was relevant but ZOS would never know if this was happening and neither will we. We can only assume and that always gets someone in trouble. Locking an account may only work for those that want to play that way who don't have seperate accounts set up. But then again no one knows what the actual numbers are of people who have something like this set up.

Frankly I can't imagine anyone wanting to give ZOS that much money to play this game, considering the shape PVP is in right now; but there is that free to play mentality.

idk

Aliyavana wrote: »

Faction loyalty campaigns

This is it. Zos can add one campaign where players are locked to one faction for the duration of the campaign.

Certainly no need to add more than one since that one campaign may not be very full.

Then this issue would be resolved and everyone is happy.

Rohamad_Ali

I say if you play one faction then log into another , it puts a Traitor Icon on your character so no one helps them and enemies Zerg those targets first .

Death to all spias

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=r4J0-ksvA1A