A question and suggestion about the Locked Campaigns in Cyrodiil

CleymenZero

I don't know if that's been said but I watched the stream where they mentioned that, if you go into a Campaign for a certain alliance, you would be locked to that certain alliance and couldn't use the characters you have in other alliances for that Campaign.

If that is correct, that means I'll be able to go into Vivec with my Blues, Sotha Sil with my Reds but won't be able to farm transmutes on my yellow unless I farm once a week in Shor.

I would have a suggestion if that is to happen. Why not make it that ALL your characters are locked to a specific alliance therefore not making some characters unusable in a campaign?

Did I miss something?

therift

Your suggestion sounds simple, but I suspect that it would be difficult to execute.

I would wager that Alliance is not a database field that can be easily modified, which is what your suggestion would require.

If the Alliance datum could be overwritten without causing issues throughout all the various zone questlines, ZoS would have offered Alliance Change tokens in the Crown Store years ago and would have been raking in the coin ever since.

I agree that your suggestion would alleviate much of the angst that multi-alliance players are facing.

CleymenZero

To overcome this challenge, why not add an entire new metadata field and use it for Cyrodiil only? Your characters initially have no PvP alliance but keep their PvE alliance. Once you chose your alliance and campaign, your account get this alliances tag for the duration of the campaign.

That, I think would solve the problem. They're already changing how the Imperial City will work, why not make this change?

It's a suggestion but I don't always see all sides of a problem so thanks for your contribution.

CleymenZero

I would suggest they do the same for the imperial city. I've farmed tel vars to have a guys stand next to me and watch me. He then came back with 2 other dudes in another alliance... Good thing I bank tel vars every few 10k and good thing I was able to escape...

therift

The change to Imperial City is somewhat simple by comparison - it is being removed from all existing campaigns and placed in brand new campaigns in which the two spawn points after queue will be your Alliance sewer base rather than one of the Gate bases.

ZoS introduces new campaigns from time to time and retires old ones. Many of the retired campaigns had rulesets which have been discontinued. I have the impression that there is some sort of Cyrodiil Template with an array of blank ruleset fields that are populated with global conditions for the campaign. Since there have been two to three dozen campaigns in the past, I imagine the process is relatively routine.

Regarding an additional metadata field... that all depends on the game architecture, and ZoS says very little about that. Only the coders would know if such a thing is possible or just armchair hooey. It's certainly beyond my knowledge.

However, there is a hint from the twitch stream... one of the team said faction-lock is a 'global setting' that could be 'turned off' if necessary, which suggests to me that my fancied 'Cyrodiil Template' could be modified to accommodate your idea.

You'll need to get one of the head honchos drunk in bar and get her/him to spill the beans on feasibility.

CleymenZero

Or create threads and hope to get done attention in order to influence the game...

Yeah, I'm a fool!

Taleof2Cities

The 7-day campaign is not subject to faction lock ... so your characters are free to PvP there if they aren’t in your home Alliance.

CleymenZero

Taleof2Cities wrote: »

The 7-day campaign is not subject to faction lock ... so your characters are free to PvP there if they aren’t in your home Alliance.

Shor doesn't have the same end of campaign rewards and require you to grind tier 1 4 times a month.

MajBludd

I was for this, at first. But did they actually take into account the pvp population?

I play ep, and know a lot of players will jump to other factions when ep rolls the map. I don't see a problem in this. It keeps the camp moving, more action, etc.

The problem is when a guild jumps from faction to faction because of emp buffs or leader on the score boards.

How faction lock fixes pvp in the camps where it is implemented is still up in the air. I think you'll see more servers being controlled by large guilds. Guilds that will just move to the easiest server to dominate.

therift

MajBludd wrote: »

I was for this, at first. But did they actually take into account the pvp population?

I play ep, and know a lot of players will jump to other factions when ep rolls the map. I don't see a problem in this. It keeps the camp moving, more action, etc.

The problem is when a guild jumps from faction to faction because of emp buffs or leader on the score boards.

How faction lock fixes pvp in the camps where it is implemented is still up in the air. I think you'll see more servers being controlled by large guilds. Guilds that will just move to the easiest server to dominate.

I think this was one of the motivating factors when ZoS removed the original faction locks. I am a strong supporter of having a faction lock option, but we'll see how it plays out.

therift

CleymenZero wrote: »

Or create threads and hope to get done attention in order to influence the game...

Yeah, I'm a fool!

Reintroduction of faction lock is a direct result of lobbying by players via the Forum.