Faction lock is not fair

amir412

Some of us grinded characters to play with our friends on the opposite factions,
or simply just got fed up with the behavior of our faction, morning cap, etc...

After faction lock made it to live, i literally do not login to my recent grinded char - Because simply most of my chars are AD,
So putting a home campaign on non-AD char is unreasonable.

Give us alliance change token, so our time of grinding wont go to waste.

idk

Zos is aware of the issues their choices have caused. However, they have made it clear earlier this year they are not concerned about the impact that has on your game and they will not be offering alliance change tokens. A clear sign of poor management style if we can even call it that.

Turelus

From conversations I had with them they were not planning any kind of alliance change tokens or unbinding alliances from character creation. However with the constant feedback about how alliance change has impacted their "play with friends" I do wonder if they will change on that.

I could imagine the quick solution would be to just add a 30 day non-locked campaign.

Alienoutlaw

oh joy another thread on Faction lock..........at least it wasnt a poll i guess

idk

Turelus wrote: »

From conversations I had with them they were not planning any kind of alliance change tokens or unbinding alliances from character creation. However with the constant feedback about how alliance change has impacted their "play with friends" I do wonder if they will change on that.

I could imagine the quick solution would be to just add a 30 day non-locked campaign.

I would agree the 30 day unlocked campaign would be the easiest solution. However, one way or another Zos has a choice. Do something to rectify this or show complete disdain for players impacted by Zos' reversal.

Turelus

idk wrote: »

Turelus wrote: »

From conversations I had with them they were not planning any kind of alliance change tokens or unbinding alliances from character creation. However with the constant feedback about how alliance change has impacted their "play with friends" I do wonder if they will change on that.

I could imagine the quick solution would be to just add a 30 day non-locked campaign.

I would agree the 30 day unlocked campaign would be the easiest solution. However, one way or another Zos has a choice. Do something to rectify this or show complete disdain for players impacted by Zos' reversal.

The thing is when it wasn't locked we had a forum full of "bring back lock" threads, then when it was we started getting the "remove lock threads"

It's the same with what happened with Battlegrounds and CP/No-CP. ZOS either has to find a way to appease everyone (which I am not sure there is enough PvP population to do with offering all options) or make a choice, and stick to it. Which isn't ever going to be popular with the people it burns, but at least holds consistent.

LarsS

I like the faction lock people do care more about the Campaign. The argument about not beeing able with friends is stupid, its easy to create a new char.

idk

Turelus wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Turelus wrote: »

From conversations I had with them they were not planning any kind of alliance change tokens or unbinding alliances from character creation. However with the constant feedback about how alliance change has impacted their "play with friends" I do wonder if they will change on that.

I could imagine the quick solution would be to just add a 30 day non-locked campaign.

I would agree the 30 day unlocked campaign would be the easiest solution. However, one way or another Zos has a choice. Do something to rectify this or show complete disdain for players impacted by Zos' reversal.

The thing is when it wasn't locked we had a forum full of "bring back lock" threads, then when it was we started getting the "remove lock threads"

It's the same with what happened with Battlegrounds and CP/No-CP. ZOS either has to find a way to appease everyone (which I am not sure there is enough PvP population to do with offering all options) or make a choice, and stick to it. Which isn't ever going to be popular with the people it burns, but at least holds consistent.

I understand that. So much of the forums if full of threads from players wanting something different than it is and some topics are much more frequent than the most. That is not going to change now that Zos has made it clear they head the squeaky wheel.

However, my point about the effect of Zos' choices and decisions is Zos chose to remove faction locks. Some players have created characters in different factions as a result and many, if not most, did this for purely innocent reasons. Zos has harmed them.

So Zos really has two options. Two 30 day campaigns with one locked and one not or bite the bullet and overcome the technical hurdles and offer a limited time faction change. Otherwise they show clear contempt for those they have harmed. I do not see another way around that.

Turelus

idk wrote: »

So Zos really has two options. Two 30 day campaigns with one locked and one not or bite the bullet and overcome the technical hurdles and offer a limited time faction change. Otherwise they show clear contempt for those they have harmed. I do not see another way around that.

Agreed. I can't even predict their outcome on this one, sometimes they make appeasements (and would add a campaign) other times they just leave it as a "this is how it is now" and people have to suck it up.

I honestly don't understand why there wasn't a locked and unlocked 30 day campaign. I guess the issues though is how many various types of PvP they need to appease now. Locked/Unlocked and CP/No CP

Vietfox

Turelus wrote: »

I could imagine the quick solution would be to just add a 30 day non-locked campaign.

Why don't you guys move to the 7 days one already? That would be the quickest and easiest solution.
- Assuming they added an unlocked 30 days campaign you would need to move anyway.
- Since you care only about fights and not the alliance doesn't matter if the campaign resets every 7 or 30 days.
- If you want greater rewards then make up your mind and choose an alliance.

Faction lock is great and should had been always like this.

amir412

Vietfox wrote: »

Turelus wrote: »

I could imagine the quick solution would be to just add a 30 day non-locked campaign.

Why don't you guys move to the 7 days one already? That would be the quickest and easiest solution.
- Assuming they added an unlocked 30 days campaign you would need to move anyway.
- Since you care only about fights and not the alliance doesn't matter if the campaign resets every 7 or 30 days.
- If you want greater rewards then make up your mind and choose an alliance.

Faction lock is great and should had been always like this.

Cuz its dead, thats why no1 want to move there.
Either way, its still not a solution, why do i need to wait x amount of days to play a char i made, specifically for pvp, when the pvp on my main faction is unpleasant,

Sanct16

LarsS wrote: »

I like the faction lock people do care more about the Campaign. The argument about not beeing able with friends is stupid, its easy to create a new char.

@LarsS

People can't play with their friends because of faction locks. How would creating a new character help with that? A lot of players who started back at launch have modt of their chars

Also EP is winning on PC-EU-30d-CP by a lot due to constant night cap. Players will stop caring soon again as they realise they have absolutely no impact on campaign scoring if they don't play during the night/morning.

Vietfox wrote: »

Turelus wrote: »

I could imagine the quick solution would be to just add a 30 day non-locked campaign.

Why don't you guys move to the 7 days one already? That would be the quickest and easiest solution.
- Assuming they added an unlocked 30 days campaign you would need to move anyway.
- Since you care only about fights and not the alliance doesn't matter if the campaign resets every 7 or 30 days.
- If you want greater rewards then make up your mind and choose an alliance.

Faction lock is great and should had been always like this.

The problem is that the population is so small that only 1-2 campaigns are populated.

Against what some forumers might believe the majority of players doesn't care about faction-locks and just joined the 30day CP campaign as it's the new Vive or the 30day No-CP campaign as it's the new Sotha. So both "main" campaigns are faction-locked and the 7-day campaign continues to be as dead as ever.

If the 7 day campaign would be faction-locked and the 30 day campaign faction-free we would see the same thing: Everyone playing on 30 day campaigns and almost noone on the 7 day campaign.

Nermy

I think faction lock may have changed the dynamics in Cyro a bit but it's hard to see how. If it is that EP win a campaign after 30 years (seems like it) of AD morning caps by night capping, I'm all for it

frostz417

Here’s a simple solution. Faction lock the 7 day and keep the 30 day unlocked. Then you can really see if faction lock is so popular or not. Because locking the 30 day just screws most people due to the fact that most casuals will just dog pile into the 30 regardless if it has a lock or not.

Vietfox

Sanct16 wrote: »

Vietfox wrote: »

Turelus wrote: »

I could imagine the quick solution would be to just add a 30 day non-locked campaign.

Why don't you guys move to the 7 days one already? That would be the quickest and easiest solution.
- Assuming they added an unlocked 30 days campaign you would need to move anyway.
- Since you care only about fights and not the alliance doesn't matter if the campaign resets every 7 or 30 days.
- If you want greater rewards then make up your mind and choose an alliance.

Faction lock is great and should had been always like this.

The problem is that the population is so small that only 1-2 campaigns are populated.

Against what some forumers might believe the majority of players doesn't care about faction-locks and just joined the 30day CP campaign as it's the new Vive or the 30day No-CP campaign as it's the new Sotha. So both "main" campaigns are faction-locked and the 7-day campaign continues to be as dead as ever.

If the 7 day campaign would be faction-locked and the 30 day campaign faction-free we would see the same thing: Everyone playing on 30 day campaigns and almost noone on the 7 day campaign.

If the majority of players don't care about faction locks then it's fine as it is since seems to be ok for them.
If people really want unlocked campaigns they can go to shor, even if unpopulated, so they can fill the bar and show to others that Shor is not dead anymore.
The 7 days campaign should never be the faction locked one. People who stick to an alliance despite of wining or losing should get greater rewards than those who keep switching.

Nermy

Will people just leave the 30 day CP campaign alone! Even the unpronounceable name...

Oh and OP, life's not fair.

LarsS

@Sanct16

1. You say you cant play with friends, strange just join the locked campaing on the same faction. If you dont have char on all factions agree on a faction on which all can play, or create a new char for the agreed faction. I cant see the problem. What I think you really arguing for, is the alliance jumping.
2. We both agree on nightcapping and have asked ZOS to adapt the campaign points to the population level, without any success yet. I think it is time to renew that effort.

Finally I dont think we have seen the final result of faction lock yet, it will take some time before we can juge the result. Personally I would prefer 7 day campaings, I see no extra advantage of the 30 day version.

Sanct16

Vietfox wrote: »

Sanct16 wrote: »

Vietfox wrote: »

Turelus wrote: »

I could imagine the quick solution would be to just add a 30 day non-locked campaign.

Why don't you guys move to the 7 days one already? That would be the quickest and easiest solution.
- Assuming they added an unlocked 30 days campaign you would need to move anyway.
- Since you care only about fights and not the alliance doesn't matter if the campaign resets every 7 or 30 days.
- If you want greater rewards then make up your mind and choose an alliance.

Faction lock is great and should had been always like this.

The problem is that the population is so small that only 1-2 campaigns are populated.

Against what some forumers might believe the majority of players doesn't care about faction-locks and just joined the 30day CP campaign as it's the new Vive or the 30day No-CP campaign as it's the new Sotha. So both "main" campaigns are faction-locked and the 7-day campaign continues to be as dead as ever.

If the 7 day campaign would be faction-locked and the 30 day campaign faction-free we would see the same thing: Everyone playing on 30 day campaigns and almost noone on the 7 day campaign.

If the majority of players don't care about faction locks then it's fine as it is since seems to be ok for them.
If people really want unlocked campaigns they can go to shor, even if unpopulated, so they can fill the bar and show to others that Shor is not dead anymore.
The 7 days campaign should never be the faction locked one. People who stick to an alliance despite of wining or losing should get greater rewards than those who keep switching.

You could make exactly the same argument to argue for removing faction locks.

Vietfox

Sanct16 wrote: »

Vietfox wrote: »

Sanct16 wrote: »

Vietfox wrote: »

Turelus wrote: »

I could imagine the quick solution would be to just add a 30 day non-locked campaign.

Why don't you guys move to the 7 days one already? That would be the quickest and easiest solution.
- Assuming they added an unlocked 30 days campaign you would need to move anyway.
- Since you care only about fights and not the alliance doesn't matter if the campaign resets every 7 or 30 days.
- If you want greater rewards then make up your mind and choose an alliance.

Faction lock is great and should had been always like this.

The problem is that the population is so small that only 1-2 campaigns are populated.

Against what some forumers might believe the majority of players doesn't care about faction-locks and just joined the 30day CP campaign as it's the new Vive or the 30day No-CP campaign as it's the new Sotha. So both "main" campaigns are faction-locked and the 7-day campaign continues to be as dead as ever.

If the 7 day campaign would be faction-locked and the 30 day campaign faction-free we would see the same thing: Everyone playing on 30 day campaigns and almost noone on the 7 day campaign.

If the majority of players don't care about faction locks then it's fine as it is since seems to be ok for them.
If people really want unlocked campaigns they can go to shor, even if unpopulated, so they can fill the bar and show to others that Shor is not dead anymore.
The 7 days campaign should never be the faction locked one. People who stick to an alliance despite of wining or losing should get greater rewards than those who keep switching.

You could make exactly the same argument to argue for removing faction locks.

Except the last point.

Cathexis

I've suggested an idea around this a number of times .. because I knew this would be an issue with just faction locking.

They should have implemented a contract system where your end of campaign reward scales proportionally to

-When you join a faction. (Day 1 vs Day 30).
-A factions overall population. (Most players vs least players)
-A factions active population. (More active players vs less active players).
-A factions current point score (Higher vs lower, and by what margin).

As the campaign progresses rewards would deminish, proportional these factors. That way it promotes you making a definitive commitment at the beginning of a campaign, but allows players to change their commitment at a relative penalty (so for example, if all of the last three variables are all downgrades, no penalties are applied, ranging up to all three of the latter being upgrades, resulting in the largest penalty, which would scale up to maximum at day 30).

This way, players could change factions, but are incentivized not to, and to plan their commitment ahead of time.

amir412

LarsS wrote: »

@Sanct16

1. You say you cant play with friends, strange just join the locked campaing on the same faction. If you dont have char on all factions agree on a faction on which all can play, or create a new char for the agreed faction. I cant see the problem. What I think you really arguing for, is the alliance jumping.

And back to it again, why should he grind a char, again, cuz poorly implanted system?
Some of us does not have the time as we used to have 4 years ago.
This solution is non-sense, grinding a new char is a torture, for me at least.

Zer0oo

One of the most stupid things they have done. They completely ignored willingly the consequences of locking players with a lot of chars out of pvping on 2/3 of their chars.

It was even asked during a Q&A and the answer was more or less: bad luck for you

Rianai

Vietfox wrote: »

Sanct16 wrote: »

Vietfox wrote: »

Sanct16 wrote: »

Vietfox wrote: »

Turelus wrote: »

I could imagine the quick solution would be to just add a 30 day non-locked campaign.

Why don't you guys move to the 7 days one already? That would be the quickest and easiest solution.
- Assuming they added an unlocked 30 days campaign you would need to move anyway.
- Since you care only about fights and not the alliance doesn't matter if the campaign resets every 7 or 30 days.
- If you want greater rewards then make up your mind and choose an alliance.

Faction lock is great and should had been always like this.

The problem is that the population is so small that only 1-2 campaigns are populated.

Against what some forumers might believe the majority of players doesn't care about faction-locks and just joined the 30day CP campaign as it's the new Vive or the 30day No-CP campaign as it's the new Sotha. So both "main" campaigns are faction-locked and the 7-day campaign continues to be as dead as ever.

If the 7 day campaign would be faction-locked and the 30 day campaign faction-free we would see the same thing: Everyone playing on 30 day campaigns and almost noone on the 7 day campaign.

If the majority of players don't care about faction locks then it's fine as it is since seems to be ok for them.
If people really want unlocked campaigns they can go to shor, even if unpopulated, so they can fill the bar and show to others that Shor is not dead anymore.
The 7 days campaign should never be the faction locked one. People who stick to an alliance despite of wining or losing should get greater rewards than those who keep switching.

You could make exactly the same argument to argue for removing faction locks.

Except the last point.

Faction locks don't make players "stick with their alliance despite of winning or losing". There are still plenty of players that only play when their faction is dominating/PvDooring and log off as soon they face some serious resistance. There are still plenty of players who just go to whichever campaign has their faction in the best position. Faction locks don't stop players from joining the winning side and going the way of the least resistance. It just reduces the possibilities to counter this behaviour.

And @ those saying players should just go to the unlocked 7-day campaign if they don't like faction lock, and it would automatically become populated.
Players who don't like faction locks aren't an organized grp of players. The majority doesn't even know each other. So in reality it goes more like "Grp A goes to 7-day campaign, gets bored and leaves, Player B and C go there, get bored and leave, zerg C goes there, flips the entire map, gets bored and leaves ... So even if there might be enough players to populate the campaign, it is just not realistic to happen.
And there is no unlocked noCP campaign. And no, adding more campaigns isn't going to solve any issues, because there aren''t enough players to fill all of those and empty campaigns usually end up as emp farm/PvDoor/single-colour map campaigns, regardless of locks or not.

Sanct16

@LarsS
There are people who played on different factions before the change and now can only play with some of their friends while they can't play with others.

I personally only play with my guild 3-4 times a week and dont log in the rest of the time so it doesnt matter to me.

@Vietfox
I would not be opposed to change the reward system so people who were loyal receive additional end-of-campaign rewards. In fact I suggested exactly this in another thread.
So the last point doesn't require faction locks.

Sandman929

I don't think ZOS sees it as giving you no choice or that you can't play with your friends. They have unlocked campaigns (except for the non-CP folks) and the choice is available(as far as they're concerned).
A lot of faction lock advocates are saying the same thing.

I play one faction only. I didn't particularly care if there were ever faction locks for everyone else, and the faction locked campaign is still unplayable during the hours that I normally play due to poor server performance...so I guess I really don't have a dog in the race, but I don't think the "I can't play all my characters or with my friends" thing is getting much traction because people absolutely can, but choose not to. ZOS could even say that the absence of an unlocked non-CP campaign still isn't limiting, because players can go to the unlocked CP campaign, so the option exists even if players choose not to take it.

VaranisArano

frostz417 wrote: »

Here’s a simple solution. Faction lock the 7 day and keep the 30 day unlocked. Then you can really see if faction lock is so popular or not. Because locking the 30 day just screws most people due to the fact that most casuals will just dog pile into the 30 regardless if it has a lock or not.

Why?

The 30-day campaign is the one where is actually takes fighting together as a faction over a long period of time to pull off the campaign win. Its the campaign best suited for faction loyalty because its the one where faction choice and faction-wide effort make the most difference.

It seems to me like the 7 day, where the score resets pretty quickly whether you care about it or not, is ideal for the players who like to play all sides of the conflict. They can play with whoever they like, play or ignore the objectives as they see fit, and they aren't making problems for their alliances in the long term. And if more players really prioritized playing with their friends, we'd see a bigger population in the 7-day as peopls moved to play there.

ellahellabella

Sanct16 wrote: »

Also EP is winning on PC-EU-30d-CP by a lot due to constant night cap. Players will stop caring soon again as they realise they have absolutely no impact on campaign scoring if they don't play during the night/morning.

Kaal NA: EP 14k ahead.

Master_Kas

amir412 wrote: »

Some of us grinded characters to play with our friends on the opposite factions,
or simply just got fed up with the behavior of our faction, morning cap, etc...

After faction lock made it to live, i literally do not login to my recent grinded char - Because simply most of my chars are AD,
So putting a home campaign on non-AD char is unreasonable.

Give us alliance change token, so our time of grinding wont go to waste.

I wanted to make a necro on EP this time round. Thought the locks just mean if you swap faction you lose your leaderboard AP which would be fine.

Then I was forced to make a EP dk to pvp with as I cannot play on my yellow one.

Feelsbadman

Atleast I powerleveled that character with a bunch of alchemy master writs, so it didn't take long..

amir412

Master_Kas wrote: »

amir412 wrote: »

Some of us grinded characters to play with our friends on the opposite factions,
or simply just got fed up with the behavior of our faction, morning cap, etc...

After faction lock made it to live, i literally do not login to my recent grinded char - Because simply most of my chars are AD,
So putting a home campaign on non-AD char is unreasonable.

Give us alliance change token, so our time of grinding wont go to waste.

I wanted to make a necro on EP this time round. Thought the locks just mean if you swap faction you lose your leaderboard AP which would be fine.

Then I was forced to make a EP dk to pvp with as I cannot play on my yellow one.

Feelsbadman

Imagine that u already made that "mistake", and you have no work around now, but to grind it again.

Sandman929 wrote: »

I don't think ZOS sees it as giving you no choice or that you can't play with your friends. They have unlocked campaigns (except for the non-CP folks) and the choice is available(as far as they're concerned).
A lot of faction lock advocates are saying the same thing.

I play one faction only. I didn't particularly care if there were ever faction locks for everyone else, and the faction locked campaign is still unplayable during the hours that I normally play due to poor server performance...so I guess I really don't have a dog in the race, but I don't think the "I can't play all my characters or with my friends" thing is getting much traction because people absolutely can, but choose not to. ZOS could even say that the absence of an unlocked non-CP campaign still isn't limiting, because players can go to the unlocked CP campaign, so the option exists even if players choose not to take it.

Ofc we can play with our friends on horse simulator, or pvdoor, we have PVE for that.

Sandman929

amir412 wrote: »

Ofc we can play with our friends on horse simulator, or pvdoor, we have PVE for that.

That's your take on it, and I get that, I just don't think ZOS does. The campaign is there, so the option is there.

TriangularChicken

frostz417 wrote: »

Here’s a simple solution. Faction lock the 7 day and keep the 30 day unlocked. Then you can really see if faction lock is so popular or not. Because locking the 30 day just screws most people due to the fact that most casuals will just dog pile into the 30 regardless if it has a lock or not.

Exactly, locking the 7 day campaign would have been an interesting experiment. The faction loyal zerglings don't want to fight (without sieges..you know..skills - the symbols that you find on your action bars next to snipe) anyway - 7 day PvDoor for the queen/king is exactly what they need.