Do you support faction locks?

macsmooth

They should have created three cp and three nocp campaigns and then only allow an alliance that is not locked to one of those three campaigns to lock in to another one that way all three alliances characters could have their own 30 day campaign but which campaign your alliance picks for 30 days is up to you

SKYICE01

I quite this trash game because of it.

SippingPotions

I'll resubscribe to plus and buy the new chapter if/when they do away with faction locks or let us faction change characters we already have. Until then I'm actually happy spending that money on new steam games/APEX/League since I'm not giving ZOS any more money until they decide to let me PVP with all my friends on all my toons again.

Tsuriel

Yeah, unsubbed as well until faction lock is removed.

SneaK

Feels like the point of it all is to make a campaign matter to you. So one 30 day CP campaign means you have to pick a side to fight for, which makes sense to me. A campaign can’t matter to you if you play every side.

Playing with friends is really the only valid argument against the locks. And for that reason I can understand the resentment. But one thing that baffles me is “solo players” complaining about it.

Sanct16

SneaK wrote: »

Feels like the point of it all is to make a campaign matter to you. So one 30 day CP campaign means you have to pick a side to fight for, which makes sense to me. A campaign can’t matter to you if you play every side.

Playing with friends is really the only valid argument against the locks. And for that reason I can understand the resentment. But one thing that baffles me is “solo players” complaining about it.

Campaigns don't matter as long as nightcapping determines who wins.

Dutchessx

SneaK wrote: »

Feels like the point of it all is to make a campaign matter to you. So one 30 day CP campaign means you have to pick a side to fight for, which makes sense to me. A campaign can’t matter to you if you play every side.

Playing with friends is really the only valid argument against the locks. And for that reason I can understand the resentment. But one thing that baffles me is “solo players” complaining about it.

Actually in No CP on PC NA there were a lot of people who would swap between factions who would fight against those people who were night capping or would swap to the under represented side to help balance the populations out. Now that you can’t swap there are many times that the map is almost unplayable due to one faction or another having an overwhelming population, to the point of no pvp taking place.

Nitribit

All that crying about faction lock, is that you can't pick the strongest side in the morning and change to the stronger alliance in the evening anymore. And you don't get the rewards for all 3 alliances anymore.

Master_Kas

Nitribit wrote: »

All that crying about faction lock, is that you can't pick the strongest side in the morning and change to the stronger alliance in the evening anymore. And you don't get the rewards for all 3 alliances anymore.

No just that we can not use all our characters on a campaign which is populated.

Some people prefer 30day nocp, some prefer 30day cp. Telling them "just play nocp/cp campaign with your other characters then" is no solution.

7days is a barren wasteland.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

Earthewen wrote: »

I don't know why we have to even have this … You have a choice. If you don't like the faction locks, go play on a server that doesn't have them. If you like them, play on a server that does. It's that simple.

Not everyone that is either for or against this thing spends time on the forums. There are great many people that are the silent majority and think these forums are too trolllish to even bother with using them. Gee … given the screaming from the same people in every thread having to do with this, I'd say they were right.

Dear ZOS, please don't let a minority of loud mouthed complainers ruin this game for everyone else. We've already lost enough people to other games because of all the trolling and complaining.

I'm sorry this argument simply doesn't work. It is not a fair comparison to say "you have a choice" when one of those choices is not vaiable.

It's like your parents saying "you can have a pet" and the choice is between a snail or a dead parrot. You just want a dog but they go "well you have a choice, if you don't want a pet np"

Nitribit

Master_Kas wrote: »

Nitribit wrote: »

All that crying about faction lock, is that you can't pick the strongest side in the morning and change to the stronger alliance in the evening anymore. And you don't get the rewards for all 3 alliances anymore.

No just that we can not use all our characters on a campaign which is populated.

Some people prefer 30day nocp, some prefer 30day cp. Telling them "just play nocp/cp campaign with your other characters then" is no solution.

7days is a barren wasteland.

And why you have to use all your chars on one campaign? Just curious.

Sanguinor2

Nitribit wrote: »

And why you have to use all your chars on one campaign? Just curious.

I recommend reading what you quoted. He might prefer no CP, no 2nd no CP Campaign to be found anywhere, or he might prefer CP and doesnt want to Play no CP but the only other CP enabled Campaign is About as dead as a magwarden dps in PvE.

Nitribit

Sanguinor2 wrote: »

Nitribit wrote: »

And why you have to use all your chars on one campaign? Just curious.

I recommend reading what you quoted. He might prefer no CP, no 2nd no CP Campaign to be found anywhere, or he might prefer CP and doesnt want to Play no CP but the only other CP enabled Campaign is About as dead as a magwarden dps in PvE.

Then he should play what he prefers. When I prefer to go in a club which is empty, I have the choice to stay or look for another club, which is crowded. I might prefer flying mounts, which are not in the game. Maybe I should complain now.
Deal with the situation. If you don't like it, just leave the game.

Royalthought

Nitribit wrote: »

Sanguinor2 wrote: »

Nitribit wrote: »

And why you have to use all your chars on one campaign? Just curious.

I recommend reading what you quoted. He might prefer no CP, no 2nd no CP Campaign to be found anywhere, or he might prefer CP and doesnt want to Play no CP but the only other CP enabled Campaign is About as dead as a magwarden dps in PvE.

Then he should play what he prefers. When I prefer to go in a club which is empty, I have the choice to stay or look for another club, which is crowded. I might prefer flying mounts, which are not in the game. Maybe I should complain now.
Deal with the situation. If you don't like it, just leave the game.

That reading thing can be tricky.

His issue is not being able to get in.

Nitribit

Royalthought wrote: »

Nitribit wrote: »

Sanguinor2 wrote: »

Nitribit wrote: »

And why you have to use all your chars on one campaign? Just curious.

I recommend reading what you quoted. He might prefer no CP, no 2nd no CP Campaign to be found anywhere, or he might prefer CP and doesnt want to Play no CP but the only other CP enabled Campaign is About as dead as a magwarden dps in PvE.

Then he should play what he prefers. When I prefer to go in a club which is empty, I have the choice to stay or look for another club, which is crowded. I might prefer flying mounts, which are not in the game. Maybe I should complain now.
Deal with the situation. If you don't like it, just leave the game.

That reading thing can be tricky.

His issue is not being able to get in.

All I read is, all I could do before, I can't do anymore because of faction lock.
As I said, you don't like it, leave the game. Or deal with the sitiuation.
It's simple

SneaK

Sanct16 wrote: »

SneaK wrote: »

Feels like the point of it all is to make a campaign matter to you. So one 30 day CP campaign means you have to pick a side to fight for, which makes sense to me. A campaign can’t matter to you if you play every side.

Playing with friends is really the only valid argument against the locks. And for that reason I can understand the resentment. But one thing that baffles me is “solo players” complaining about it.

Campaigns don't matter as long as nightcapping determines who wins.

I can really only speak about Xbox where the main (locked) campaign’s pops dwindle but are somewhat equal come late night.

Dutchessx wrote: »

SneaK wrote: »

Feels like the point of it all is to make a campaign matter to you. So one 30 day CP campaign means you have to pick a side to fight for, which makes sense to me. A campaign can’t matter to you if you play every side.

Playing with friends is really the only valid argument against the locks. And for that reason I can understand the resentment. But one thing that baffles me is “solo players” complaining about it.

Actually in No CP on PC NA there were a lot of people who would swap between factions who would fight against those people who were night capping or would swap to the under represented side to help balance the populations out. Now that you can’t swap there are many times that the map is almost unplayable due to one faction or another having an overwhelming population, to the point of no pvp taking place.

Well that’s not something I’ve experienced being on console. I sorta understand the logic, but at the same time if it was my friend on emp then so be it, defend and cap the map. I mean prime time comes everyday no matter what.

Royalthought

Nitribit wrote: »

Royalthought wrote: »

Nitribit wrote: »

Sanguinor2 wrote: »

Nitribit wrote: »

And why you have to use all your chars on one campaign? Just curious.

I recommend reading what you quoted. He might prefer no CP, no 2nd no CP Campaign to be found anywhere, or he might prefer CP and doesnt want to Play no CP but the only other CP enabled Campaign is About as dead as a magwarden dps in PvE.

Then he should play what he prefers. When I prefer to go in a club which is empty, I have the choice to stay or look for another club, which is crowded. I might prefer flying mounts, which are not in the game. Maybe I should complain now.
Deal with the situation. If you don't like it, just leave the game.

That reading thing can be tricky.

His issue is not being able to get in.

All I read is, all I could do before, I can't do anymore because of faction lock.
As I said, you don't like it, leave the game. Or deal with the sitiuation.
It's simple

He is "dealing with it." By posting his issue as a player on the forums provided by the devs to receive feedback..... from players.

Why you have an issue with him utilizing the forums for their intended purpose is beyond me. Now, If you dont like it....

Anyway, it seems some are so out of touch. Perhaps if they locked, not only factions from alts, but also locked it to one character per campaign theyd finally understand.

And when they came to the forums to express how stupid that is, they would have to deal with the people with only 1 character saying "character locks are great." lol

Master_Kas

Nitribit wrote: »

Sanguinor2 wrote: »

Nitribit wrote: »

And why you have to use all your chars on one campaign? Just curious.

I recommend reading what you quoted. He might prefer no CP, no 2nd no CP Campaign to be found anywhere, or he might prefer CP and doesnt want to Play no CP but the only other CP enabled Campaign is About as dead as a magwarden dps in PvE.

Then he should play what he prefers. When I prefer to go in a club which is empty, I have the choice to stay or look for another club, which is crowded. I might prefer flying mounts, which are not in the game. Maybe I should complain now.
Deal with the situation. If you don't like it, just leave the game.

Why should I leave the game when I otherwise enjoy it?

If enough people complain ZOS might change the locks. That is how you got the locks in the first place, by complaining on the forums.

Edit: I play only CP cyrodiil, I have no option to use most of my other chars. Playing only one character gets boring quickly for me. I'm a altoholic.

Hashtag_

Since these changes Sotha on PCNA is a joke

josh.lackey_ESO

WoW got rid of faction locks way back in 2009. It never had faction locks on PvE servers.

SneaK wrote: »

Feels like the point of it all is to make a campaign matter to you. So one 30 day CP campaign means you have to pick a side to fight for, which makes sense to me. A campaign can’t matter to you if you play every side.

Playing with friends is really the only valid argument against the locks. And for that reason I can understand the resentment. But one thing that baffles me is “solo players” complaining about it.

Actually, there is quite a different feel on the different factions. It's a different experience.

Enkil

I support locking 7-day campaign(s).

I DO NOT support locking 30-day campaigns.

(we were all mostly arguing to lock one 7-day campaign.. Dev's decided to lock 30-day without giving reason, and simultaneously disappointed those wanting a locked campaign and those that didn't.. ?!?!?!)

Earthewen

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Earthewen wrote: »

I don't know why we have to even have this … You have a choice. If you don't like the faction locks, go play on a server that doesn't have them. If you like them, play on a server that does. It's that simple.

Not everyone that is either for or against this thing spends time on the forums. There are great many people that are the silent majority and think these forums are too trolllish to even bother with using them. Gee … given the screaming from the same people in every thread having to do with this, I'd say they were right.

Dear ZOS, please don't let a minority of loud mouthed complainers ruin this game for everyone else. We've already lost enough people to other games because of all the trolling and complaining.

I'm sorry this argument simply doesn't work. It is not a fair comparison to say "you have a choice" when one of those choices is not vaiable.

It's like your parents saying "you can have a pet" and the choice is between a snail or a dead parrot. You just want a dog but they go "well you have a choice, if you don't want a pet np"

Who determines what is viable? I happen to like the fact that people must choose a side and not be wishy washy about it. I would concede that perhaps a 30 day unlocked campaign could be good so that people who like to flip flop can do so on their own campaign. However, there are a lot of people who don't frequent the forums that like the 30-day locked. So why not do that? Some guilds actually like being loyal to only one faction and want to fight their opponents that way.

I'm wondering though if part of the problem is that the gankers and small mans realize that it is the larger groups that actually provide the fights by being interested in taking objectives for scoring purposes. By hitting objectives with a larger group, larger and larger groups of opponents must gather to repel it, thus making the bigger fights possible and the bigger ticks of AP. Without objective incentives, people could just sit around inside keep or in stealth for hours until some unsuspecting noobie player rides by! 'GET 'EM GUYS!!!!!"

Sephyr

In my experience, faction locks only encouraged toxic shenanigans faction cheer-leading.

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO

Earthewen wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Earthewen wrote: »

I don't know why we have to even have this … You have a choice. If you don't like the faction locks, go play on a server that doesn't have them. If you like them, play on a server that does. It's that simple.

Not everyone that is either for or against this thing spends time on the forums. There are great many people that are the silent majority and think these forums are too trolllish to even bother with using them. Gee … given the screaming from the same people in every thread having to do with this, I'd say they were right.

Dear ZOS, please don't let a minority of loud mouthed complainers ruin this game for everyone else. We've already lost enough people to other games because of all the trolling and complaining.

I'm sorry this argument simply doesn't work. It is not a fair comparison to say "you have a choice" when one of those choices is not vaiable.

It's like your parents saying "you can have a pet" and the choice is between a snail or a dead parrot. You just want a dog but they go "well you have a choice, if you don't want a pet np"

Who determines what is viable? I happen to like the fact that people must choose a side and not be wishy washy about it. I would concede that perhaps a 30 day unlocked campaign could be good so that people who like to flip flop can do so on their own campaign. However, there are a lot of people who don't frequent the forums that like the 30-day locked. So why not do that? Some guilds actually like being loyal to only one faction and want to fight their opponents that way.

I'm wondering though if part of the problem is that the gankers and small mans realize that it is the larger groups that actually provide the fights by being interested in taking objectives for scoring purposes. By hitting objectives with a larger group, larger and larger groups of opponents must gather to repel it, thus making the bigger fights possible and the bigger ticks of AP. Without objective incentives, people could just sit around inside keep or in stealth for hours until some unsuspecting noobie player rides by! 'GET 'EM GUYS!!!!!"

From what I have seen of your groups you had a full group before faction locks and still have a full group after it. So how does the the lock benefit you or is it more that others having less fun is a positive? What difference does it make to your group currently?

Master_Kas

Earthewen wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Earthewen wrote: »

I don't know why we have to even have this … You have a choice. If you don't like the faction locks, go play on a server that doesn't have them. If you like them, play on a server that does. It's that simple.

Not everyone that is either for or against this thing spends time on the forums. There are great many people that are the silent majority and think these forums are too trolllish to even bother with using them. Gee … given the screaming from the same people in every thread having to do with this, I'd say they were right.

Dear ZOS, please don't let a minority of loud mouthed complainers ruin this game for everyone else. We've already lost enough people to other games because of all the trolling and complaining.

I'm sorry this argument simply doesn't work. It is not a fair comparison to say "you have a choice" when one of those choices is not vaiable.

It's like your parents saying "you can have a pet" and the choice is between a snail or a dead parrot. You just want a dog but they go "well you have a choice, if you don't want a pet np"

Who determines what is viable? I happen to like the fact that people must choose a side and not be wishy washy about it. I would concede that perhaps a 30 day unlocked campaign could be good so that people who like to flip flop can do so on their own campaign. However, there are a lot of people who don't frequent the forums that like the 30-day locked. So why not do that? Some guilds actually like being loyal to only one faction and want to fight their opponents that way.

I'm wondering though if part of the problem is that the gankers and small mans realize that it is the larger groups that actually provide the fights by being interested in taking objectives for scoring purposes. By hitting objectives with a larger group, larger and larger groups of opponents must gather to repel it, thus making the bigger fights possible and the bigger ticks of AP. Without objective incentives, people could just sit around inside keep or in stealth for hours until some unsuspecting noobie player rides by! 'GET 'EM GUYS!!!!!"

And by "realize that it is the larger groups that actually provide the fights by being interested in taking objectives for scoring purposes" you mean taking empty or almost empty keeps and undefended scrolls at off peak hours?

Because that what's winning campaigns for a long time on PC EU

technohic

Undecided. So long as I get a decent map and good fights, could care less who gets what AP or rewards and how. Suppose the argument then depends on which delivers that.

Earthewen

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Earthewen wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Earthewen wrote: »

I don't know why we have to even have this … You have a choice. If you don't like the faction locks, go play on a server that doesn't have them. If you like them, play on a server that does. It's that simple.

Not everyone that is either for or against this thing spends time on the forums. There are great many people that are the silent majority and think these forums are too trolllish to even bother with using them. Gee … given the screaming from the same people in every thread having to do with this, I'd say they were right.

Dear ZOS, please don't let a minority of loud mouthed complainers ruin this game for everyone else. We've already lost enough people to other games because of all the trolling and complaining.

I'm sorry this argument simply doesn't work. It is not a fair comparison to say "you have a choice" when one of those choices is not vaiable.

It's like your parents saying "you can have a pet" and the choice is between a snail or a dead parrot. You just want a dog but they go "well you have a choice, if you don't want a pet np"

Who determines what is viable? I happen to like the fact that people must choose a side and not be wishy washy about it. I would concede that perhaps a 30 day unlocked campaign could be good so that people who like to flip flop can do so on their own campaign. However, there are a lot of people who don't frequent the forums that like the 30-day locked. So why not do that? Some guilds actually like being loyal to only one faction and want to fight their opponents that way.

I'm wondering though if part of the problem is that the gankers and small mans realize that it is the larger groups that actually provide the fights by being interested in taking objectives for scoring purposes. By hitting objectives with a larger group, larger and larger groups of opponents must gather to repel it, thus making the bigger fights possible and the bigger ticks of AP. Without objective incentives, people could just sit around inside keep or in stealth for hours until some unsuspecting noobie player rides by! 'GET 'EM GUYS!!!!!"

From what I have seen of your groups you had a full group before faction locks and still have a full group after it. So how does the the lock benefit you or is it more that others having less fun is a positive? What difference does it make to your group currently?

Actually, we were not running a full group before faction locks. But if you will read what I wrote, I am talking about a preferred way of playing. We prefer faction locks. I am making the point that some guilds do, too. That the opinions expressed here does not reflect the opinions of ALL people in PvP as many do not frequent the forums due to unnecessary trolling that takes place here.

We do find it beneficial as the amount of faction hoppers has lessened which appears to encourage people to play their hardest for the side they are currently on. Another difference is that trolls cannot pop over into our zone chat any time they please to just come over and troll, stir up crap, etc. How can that ever be a bad thing?

Earthewen

Master_Kas wrote: »

Earthewen wrote: »

Izanagi.Xiiib16_ESO wrote: »

Earthewen wrote: »

I don't know why we have to even have this … You have a choice. If you don't like the faction locks, go play on a server that doesn't have them. If you like them, play on a server that does. It's that simple.

Not everyone that is either for or against this thing spends time on the forums. There are great many people that are the silent majority and think these forums are too trolllish to even bother with using them. Gee … given the screaming from the same people in every thread having to do with this, I'd say they were right.

Dear ZOS, please don't let a minority of loud mouthed complainers ruin this game for everyone else. We've already lost enough people to other games because of all the trolling and complaining.

I'm sorry this argument simply doesn't work. It is not a fair comparison to say "you have a choice" when one of those choices is not viable.

It's like your parents saying "you can have a pet" and the choice is between a snail or a dead parrot. You just want a dog but they go "well you have a choice, if you don't want a pet np"

Who determines what is viable? I happen to like the fact that people must choose a side and not be wishy washy about it. I would concede that perhaps a 30 day unlocked campaign could be good so that people who like to flip flop can do so on their own campaign. However, there are a lot of people who don't frequent the forums that like the 30-day locked. So why not do that? Some guilds actually like being loyal to only one faction and want to fight their opponents that way.

I'm wondering though if part of the problem is that the gankers and small mans realize that it is the larger groups that actually provide the fights by being interested in taking objectives for scoring purposes. By hitting objectives with a larger group, larger and larger groups of opponents must gather to repel it, thus making the bigger fights possible and the bigger ticks of AP. Without objective incentives, people could just sit around inside keep or in stealth for hours until some unsuspecting noobie player rides by! 'GET 'EM GUYS!!!!!"

And by "realize that it is the larger groups that actually provide the fights by being interested in taking objectives for scoring purposes" you mean taking empty or almost empty keeps and undefended scrolls at off peak hours?

Because that what's winning campaigns for a long time on PC EU

Actually, I'm talking about primetime to be honest. However, since you do bring it up, this last campaign I have noticed AD doing that very thing over on PC US. Why is it that specific groups choose to play on a server where the primetime for that server is NOT their primetime? Could it be they prefer pvdooring?

Another thing I've noticed is that the yes votes never seem to climb up until the no votes do. Why is that?

Sarousse

Yes. Faction lock is the love.

NBrookus

Can we finally put a stake in the heart of this notion that Cyrodiil has room for two remotely viable 30 day CP campaigns? Both 30 no CP and the 7 day are largely already empty and there isn't a queue to get into Kaal in prime time. (Well maybe EP has one.)

Or that people should go to 7 day as a solution? If the shoe were on the other foot and 7 day were locked, the pro lock people would be the ones complaining that the 7 day is too empty to be a viable campaign.

7 day is where you go to GvG and that's about it.