Taking own scroll to the enemy (Shor)

Konstant_Tel_Necris

Mark him as traitor, so you will able track him next time

https://www.esoui.com/downloads/info2001-DeathListKOS.html

Mr_Walker

When it comes to 20 man teams chasing a PvE quester halfway across the map, it's "oh it's war, and anything's fair", but when it comes to the "chaser" in this scenario possibly being negatively impacted, all that changes. QQ all the way.

Spies, infiltrators and traitors are a part of war, so it's all fair, right?

Ertosi wrote: »

This is yet another good reason campaigns should be locked to a single alliance for an entire account. It wouldn't prevent this but would greatly reduce it.

My chosen campaign's Sotha, and at my play time, it's dead. I often have to play with whomever I can find. Generally no more than 6 of us are doing anything at any one time. Maybe you'd like me to solo keeps.

Ill thought out idea.

heaven13

Jacozilla wrote: »

Ertosi wrote: »

Jacozilla wrote: »

Ertosi wrote: »

StormChaser3000 wrote: »

Ertosi wrote: »

bitels wrote: »

Haashhtaag wrote: »

bitels wrote: »

Alpheu5 wrote: »

FilteredRiddle wrote: »

There are certain people who do this all the time. They’ve been reported multiple times, including video and screenshots, and nothing ever comes of it.

Because it's not against any rules.

I almost feel like it should be bannable offenses. Not perma ban, but like 3 days slap on the wrist one

Why?

Because you destroy whole purpose of capturing scrolls. It is dirty tactic used by idiots to buff their own alliance, without going to trouble of capturing the keep and then taking scroll on long route to your alliance safe territory.
Just grab a scroll, take it half the map to your buddies, and there is nothing your whole alliance can do about it.

Imho for a purpose of ban it should be viewed as "toxic behavior" or "exploiting"

This is without a doubt against the spirit of the game and falls under exploiting.

This is yet another good reason campaigns should be locked to a single alliance for an entire account. It wouldn't prevent this but would greatly reduce it.

It also would not be hard to add a vector check (direction) to scroll holders to ensure their overall direction is towards their alliance's holdings and not away.

@Ertosi
But then what will happen with alts? If my main is high elf who already entered AD campaign, but then I want to play with my Nord who is EP... does it mean that when I port her to Cyro she will turn into AD?
This move will also kind of kill their crown store upgrade "any race, any alliance".

Or am I getting your idea wrong?

Alts of other alliances could still play in other campaigns, but a single campaign should be account locked to one alliance for its entire duration. Doing so is the only way to remove the conflict of interest of a single player being able to play multiple sides of the same campaign.

The best way of doing so would be a minor rework of the Alliance War menu so that you don't sign up via character but rather by Alliance. For example, for the duration of a campaign you could sign up as Pact for Vivec, Dominion for Sotha Sil, and DC for Shor, or any other combination.

People love being able to flip sides at will, as things are set up now, but it's apparent that's too much freedom and too many are taking advantage of it with issues like this "insiding" scrolls and changing alliances just to join the winning team.

So if you have more than 3 alts you are screwed? Sorry, no - incredibly bad idea.

Stated a perfectly working solution for all alts of all alliances, had you chosen to read what was said.

I did read it. You apparently don't see or are pretending like there is no massive downside.

The proposed solution either massively restricts my choice to which chars I play OR forces me to turn my AD, DC, and EP chars into some generic 'quasi-AD or EP or DC char'.

You don't seem to get the concept that I like the faction concept and consider my chars as separate entities with their own faction identity. The proposed solution would either have me just not play 2/3 of my char roster (5 DC, 5 EP, and 5 AD chars) or force me to represent my EP and AD chars as "DC" for purposes of registering them per OP's plan.

To repeat - ALL this, massive inconvenience and change due to whatever number of bad apples are doing these shenanigans the OP talked about. You want to fix that? Punish the transgressors if indeed it is an exploit - I'm not clear whether it is but not taking firm stance it isnt. What I AM strongly opposed to is taking away my freedom of choice on what and how I play my faction characters with this draconian campaign lock plan.

What? No. The solution is that all your DC characters would play in one campaign, all your AD in another, and all EP in a third. There are 3 above-50 campaigns so it works fine. This is actually how I regulate myself since I have characters in each alliance.

The only issue I can see with this is that the 3 campaigns are different with 2 being thirty day, one 7, and 2 being cp-enabled and one non-cp. So you'd have to decide which alliance gets which campaign.

Ertosi

Mr_Walker wrote: »

When it comes to 20 man teams chasing a PvE quester halfway across the map, it's "oh it's war, and anything's fair", but when it comes to the "chaser" in this scenario possibly being negatively impacted, all that changes. QQ all the way.

Spies, infiltrators and traitors are a part of war, so it's all fair, right?

Ertosi wrote: »

This is yet another good reason campaigns should be locked to a single alliance for an entire account. It wouldn't prevent this but would greatly reduce it.

Ill thought out idea.

And yet, as of this time, both of my comments on it have a total of 11 agrees and 1 insightful, compared to your zip. Just because an idea doesn't work out for your personal preferred way of playing doesn't mean it's ill thought out. This, frankly, is the only way to stop all of the problems related to alliance hopping that's causing so many troubles in Cyrodiil's PvP. No one has any business being on more than one side of any particular campaign and the ability to do so needs to be removed. Too many players have shown that the masses cannot be trusted to not take advantage of it.

Mr_Walker

Ertosi wrote: »

Mr_Walker wrote: »

When it comes to 20 man teams chasing a PvE quester halfway across the map, it's "oh it's war, and anything's fair", but when it comes to the "chaser" in this scenario possibly being negatively impacted, all that changes. QQ all the way.

Spies, infiltrators and traitors are a part of war, so it's all fair, right?

Ertosi wrote: »

This is yet another good reason campaigns should be locked to a single alliance for an entire account. It wouldn't prevent this but would greatly reduce it.

Ill thought out idea.

And yet, as of this time, both of my comments on it have a total of 11 agrees and 1 insightful, compared to your zip.

Argumentum Ad Populum. Look it up.

Ertosi wrote: »

Just because an idea doesn't work out for your personal preferred way of playing doesn't mean it's ill thought out. This, frankly, is the only way to stop all of the problems related to alliance hopping that's causing so many troubles in Cyrodiil's PvP. No one has any business being on more than one side of any particular campaign and the ability to do so needs to be removed. Too many players have shown that the masses cannot be trusted to not take advantage of it.

You're right, I'll just change my whole way of playing because you're having a whinge.

War's war. It's not fair. Deal with it.

Cryptical

The faction lock... People against it haven't thought it through.

To make it work, character creation would have to detach race and alliance. Unlock the 'any race any alliance' for everyone as a base game feature.
Say you have 8 characters. You can sign up on vivec as AD. Doesn't matter that 1 is a redguard born in the sands of alik'r - you chose AD for vivec so any character of yours that enters will be on AD team.

Keep the home and guest campaign system of you want. Your redguard that is AD in home campaign vivec could run with team red if you chose to be EP in guest campaign sotha.

MrGarlic

I can't see how it would be difficult to programme the game to prevent the same alliance from picking up a scroll that is already in their possession.

[IF] ADtoon = Pickupscroll [AND] ADscrollisAD [THEN] [NOT] (Or the ESO programming language equivalent.)

Get an intern to do it.

(EDIT: If, Nots and Maybes)