Alt Accounts and faction hopping on locked campaigns

Ranger209

Davadin wrote: »

Ranger209 wrote: »

When locked campaigns first opened I thought this would not be an overly prevalent thing, or maybe I was just happy that they were making an attempt at a faction locked campaign. Lately I have been more concerned with this. What are peoples thoughts on this. Is it an issue? Is it a growing concern? Does it happen more often at certain times of day? Is it something that happens across all platforms or more so on PC? Is it still being done to paint the map one color, swap accounts, and paint it another color by the same individuals?

The point of faction lock is so that individual players must commit to one faction for the duration of the campaign cycle on a locked campaign. If this is being worked around with alt accounts does ZOS need to go deeper with this lock to the ip level? Is that even possible? Should doing this be a bannable offence? Should there be warnings given to those partaking? Thoughts, comments, or concerns?

not an issue.

i LOVE faction locks and i will stay loyal as EP, and yes, it annoys me before that people faction-hop just so they can ride the winning faction.... (FOR THE PACT! and all....)


but if someone got out of their way, spent real hard cold cash to buy another account, JUST so they can... faction hop during an active campaign instead of waiting 30 days?

jeezus, let them. their impact to my gameplay is effectively non-existant. the number of people who faction-hop has been reduced probably by 90% when locks introduced, and then we got non-faction locked campaign and... nobody seems to care.


so yeah. it's completely fine. the outcome of each month has little to no dependencies on faction-hoppers (with or without alt-account). period.

What is your normal play time @Davadin just for point of reference? I tend to agree with you as I don't see it myself, but others tell me different, whether or not they are correct or not is what I am trying to discover.

Davadin

Ranger209 wrote: »

Davadin wrote: »

Ranger209 wrote: »

When locked campaigns first opened I thought this would not be an overly prevalent thing, or maybe I was just happy that they were making an attempt at a faction locked campaign. Lately I have been more concerned with this. What are peoples thoughts on this. Is it an issue? Is it a growing concern? Does it happen more often at certain times of day? Is it something that happens across all platforms or more so on PC? Is it still being done to paint the map one color, swap accounts, and paint it another color by the same individuals?

The point of faction lock is so that individual players must commit to one faction for the duration of the campaign cycle on a locked campaign. If this is being worked around with alt accounts does ZOS need to go deeper with this lock to the ip level? Is that even possible? Should doing this be a bannable offence? Should there be warnings given to those partaking? Thoughts, comments, or concerns?

not an issue.

i LOVE faction locks and i will stay loyal as EP, and yes, it annoys me before that people faction-hop just so they can ride the winning faction.... (FOR THE PACT! and all....)


but if someone got out of their way, spent real hard cold cash to buy another account, JUST so they can... faction hop during an active campaign instead of waiting 30 days?

jeezus, let them. their impact to my gameplay is effectively non-existant. the number of people who faction-hop has been reduced probably by 90% when locks introduced, and then we got non-faction locked campaign and... nobody seems to care.


so yeah. it's completely fine. the outcome of each month has little to no dependencies on faction-hoppers (with or without alt-account). period.

What is your normal play time @Davadin just for point of reference? I tend to agree with you as I don't see it myself, but others tell me different, whether or not they are correct or not is what I am trying to discover.

usually 3-4hr on weeknights, anytime between 10PM - 2AM EST.

ServerusEcru

Ranger209 wrote: »

When locked campaigns first opened I thought this would not be an overly prevalent thing, or maybe I was just happy that they were making an attempt at a faction locked campaign. Lately I have been more concerned with this. What are peoples thoughts on this. Is it an issue? Is it a growing concern? Does it happen more often at certain times of day? Is it something that happens across all platforms or more so on PC? Is it still being done to paint the map one color, swap accounts, and paint it another color by the same individuals?

The point of faction lock is so that individual players must commit to one faction for the duration of the campaign cycle on a locked campaign. If this is being worked around with alt accounts does ZOS need to go deeper with this lock to the ip level? Is that even possible? Should doing this be a bannable offence? Should there be warnings given to those partaking? Thoughts, comments, or concerns?

Its a great idea. I think it should be restricted to the IP to stop account faction hopping and low pop exploits. I also recommend they finally introduce CP Battleground arenas for those who just want to get fights. If they really want to get technical with it they should have a bot to detect macro and hack users. This will help clean up Cyrodiil making these advantages a bannable offense. There is a lot of work to do and I hope Zos is listening.

TheFM

Syrusthevirus187 wrote: »

@Ranger209 if you want to roleplay as one faction you can. Play however you want. Other players swapping alliance should not affect you. They can play how they want. Turn off name tags or something so you don't know who you're fighting and just chill out and enjoy yourself. Play your own game and don't stress about how others play theirs.

Yeah because zerg surfing, low pop abuse, harassment, scroll trolling, and poplock exploiting totally don't effect others.

Davadin

TheFM wrote: »

Syrusthevirus187 wrote: »

@Ranger209 if you want to roleplay as one faction you can. Play however you want. Other players swapping alliance should not affect you. They can play how they want. Turn off name tags or something so you don't know who you're fighting and just chill out and enjoy yourself. Play your own game and don't stress about how others play theirs.

Yeah because zerg surfing, low pop abuse, harassment, scroll trolling, and poplock exploiting totally don't effect others.

zerg surfing, population abuse and harassment isnt in the scope of the discussion. i get your point and i agree with you, but lets "keep it in topic".


@Syrusthevirus187 the 2 biggest POTENTIAL problems with swapping alliance is people jumping into the "winning faction" and collaborating across faction (scroll trolling is one, keep swapping another).

it exists in the game.

it is the main reason people want locked alliance.

now we got locked alliance, did it help with those issues? Thats OP's point.

My feedback is, it's greatly reduced. it's not completely gone but it's reduced.

now, back to @Ranger209 of course, manage your expectation too. it won't completely disappear. even hackers and code scripters will always exists, faction locked or not. just enjoy the game and stop worrying about this problem is my opinion. the current LIVE state and the future campaigns layout seems to satisfy the majority of players, anti-locked tribe or not. that should be enough.




let ZOS focus on the damn lag and server performance.

Davadin

Davadin wrote: »

Ranger209 wrote: »

Davadin wrote: »

Ranger209 wrote: »

When locked campaigns first opened I thought this would not be an overly prevalent thing, or maybe I was just happy that they were making an attempt at a faction locked campaign. Lately I have been more concerned with this. What are peoples thoughts on this. Is it an issue? Is it a growing concern? Does it happen more often at certain times of day? Is it something that happens across all platforms or more so on PC? Is it still being done to paint the map one color, swap accounts, and paint it another color by the same individuals?

The point of faction lock is so that individual players must commit to one faction for the duration of the campaign cycle on a locked campaign. If this is being worked around with alt accounts does ZOS need to go deeper with this lock to the ip level? Is that even possible? Should doing this be a bannable offence? Should there be warnings given to those partaking? Thoughts, comments, or concerns?

not an issue.

i LOVE faction locks and i will stay loyal as EP, and yes, it annoys me before that people faction-hop just so they can ride the winning faction.... (FOR THE PACT! and all....)


but if someone got out of their way, spent real hard cold cash to buy another account, JUST so they can... faction hop during an active campaign instead of waiting 30 days?

jeezus, let them. their impact to my gameplay is effectively non-existant. the number of people who faction-hop has been reduced probably by 90% when locks introduced, and then we got non-faction locked campaign and... nobody seems to care.


so yeah. it's completely fine. the outcome of each month has little to no dependencies on faction-hoppers (with or without alt-account). period.

What is your normal play time @Davadin just for point of reference? I tend to agree with you as I don't see it myself, but others tell me different, whether or not they are correct or not is what I am trying to discover.

usually 3-4hr on weeknights, anytime between 10PM - 2AM EST.

in addition to this, i was and am part of a few large PvP guilds. one is Asian/Oceania based. across all 3 factions. and i sometimes play "off hours" (8AM - 3PM EST) depending on workload.

but honestly, across the board and all my discord chat, it's a lot less in NA server.

i have zero clue on EU.

Jimmy_The_Fixer

Hilariously, these people still try to cling to the faction hopper boogeyman even though there are no more faction hoppers. Nobody is buying a whole new account and leveling it up just to play off-faction.
The reason you’re still encountering people who clearly don’t care about the faction war is that faction locks didn’t magically instill a sense of loyalty “for the war effort” and that, most likely, nothing will.

bloodstorms

It probably shouldn't be a bannable offense, unless you know a dev of course, in which case anything goes.

Squidgaurd

man delusional people sure do like to bend logic

Ishtharo

There is a lot of "most people", "a lot of people" and "some would say" happening in this thread, and surprise surprise, it's by those advocating for a faction lock. The "feeling" of the game when looking through biased glasses will always favor your opinion.

Factions locks are neither good nor bad. On one side you have those that advocate against faction locks. The main argument being to let people play the way they want. On the other, you have those advocating for a faction lock. The main argument here being a "what if" fallacy of boogeymen, non-factual statements, and feelings that cant be verified.

Do we see the issue? Release the faction lock, let people play the way they want to. Faction lock has failed. It has destroyed the Non CP campaign population. Those are hard facts that you can look at through the population bars in-game. I myself even quit, as I could not play with friends any longer across the three factions. I am back now that I hear faction lock is going away for the non CP campaign.

Rest assured, if population increases on the non CP campaign by releasing faction lock, you can expect faction lock on the CP campaign to fall quickly behind it.

Lastly to the OP:
Each argument you have made so far has not yet been in true response to an opinion, but simply a rhetoric statement with loaded questions designed to say "THis is my opinion, and it's the only correct one" while phrasing it as "this is my opinion, what is yours?" That works on some people, but makes your opinion very invalid to those who understand what you are saying. I suggest listening to understand versus listening to respond. Changing your opinion is the sign of maturity, and given the current facts regarding faction lock, a change of opinion could be in the cards.

Beardimus

Syrusthevirus187 wrote: »

@Ranger209 if you want to roleplay as one faction you can. Play however you want. Other players swapping alliance should not affect you. They can play how they want. Turn off name tags or something so you don't know who you're fighting and just chill out and enjoy yourself. Play your own game and don't stress about how others play theirs.

That's just it, folks cheating does impact others..

Anyone I love the denial in this thread, CP Locked is still the most popular, main campaign by far (Xbox anyway) it's hilarious all the folks saying that's not true. Proper denial

Regardless to OPs point, I doubt ZOS have plans as sopisticated as IP lock to stop this. It took long enough to get one locked campign. It does suck that people can still cheat, however it's not that prevalent from what I've seen. If it was I'd be banging the drum for sure.

idk

Soul_Demon wrote: »

xaraan wrote: »

I think you guys worry way too much about faction lock and think it's going to magically solve some imagined problem.

The ship long ago sailed on the majority of players caring about the factions in this game. At this point, especially once One Tamriel launched, the game was sold to people on the ability to play with their friends and pushing faction lock in PvP after the faction loyalty ship long ago sailed away only accomplishes making it harder to play with friends for players where their alliance previously didn't matter in that regard.

Faction lock is a failure and the people that thought it solved everything now think there are all kinds of extra max level accounts being created by a large enough portion of players that it matters, just so they can get around faction lock? And you think IP locking will change that? It's very easy to change your IP.

Out of curiosity- where do you get "The ship long ago sailed on the majority of players caring about the factions in this game." as many have noticed the small scale solo failures of Battlegrounds and huge ques on faction locked 30 day Kal seems to show a different realty than what you claim. Where are you getting the evidence of such a thing from exactly?

In reality they show nothing of the kind. You are reading much into thing that you cannot actually demonstrate the correlation.

First off nothing about BGs says anything about faction locks. Certainly nothing about "small scale solo failures" of BGs has anything to do with faction locks.

Second, From day one a large majority of players have flocked to the most active campaign. Performance and such were significantly irrelevant as they wanted to be where the action was. That was what was most important. So to suggest they are in a faction lock campaign because they support faction lock is a myth and you have nothing to back up such opinions.

So the real question is where do you get your evidence? I am pretty sure you are just guessing. Most players probably do not give a rats behind about petty issues like faction lock. They just want to PvP in an active PvP environment.

MrGhosty

This just sounds like boogeyman talk to me. As for CP enabled campaign with faction lock being the most popular probably has more to do with people wanting to play with their lovely points than anything else. I could be wrong though, either way the idea that someone is going to buy a second copy of the game, fully level up a new character plus cp points just to play on another faction in order to "cheat" is absurd. If those alt accounts do happen to play PvP they're playing by the same rule set that everyone has to follow. They're faction locked.

Beardimus

idk wrote: »

Soul_Demon wrote: »

xaraan wrote: »

I think you guys worry way too much about faction lock and think it's going to magically solve some imagined problem.

The ship long ago sailed on the majority of players caring about the factions in this game. At this point, especially once One Tamriel launched, the game was sold to people on the ability to play with their friends and pushing faction lock in PvP after the faction loyalty ship long ago sailed away only accomplishes making it harder to play with friends for players where their alliance previously didn't matter in that regard.

Faction lock is a failure and the people that thought it solved everything now think there are all kinds of extra max level accounts being created by a large enough portion of players that it matters, just so they can get around faction lock? And you think IP locking will change that? It's very easy to change your IP.

Out of curiosity- where do you get "The ship long ago sailed on the majority of players caring about the factions in this game." as many have noticed the small scale solo failures of Battlegrounds and huge ques on faction locked 30 day Kal seems to show a different realty than what you claim. Where are you getting the evidence of such a thing from exactly?

In reality they show nothing of the kind. You are reading much into thing that you cannot actually demonstrate the correlation.

First off nothing about BGs says anything about faction locks. Certainly nothing about "small scale solo failures" of BGs has anything to do with faction locks.

Second, From day one a large majority of players have flocked to the most active campaign. Performance and such were significantly irrelevant as they wanted to be where the action was. That was what was most important. So to suggest they are in a faction lock campaign because they support faction lock is a myth and you have nothing to back up such opinions.

So the real question is where do you get your evidence? I am pretty sure you are just guessing. Most players probably do not give a rats behind about petty issues like faction lock. They just want to PvP in an active PvP environment.

Sorry @idk you'll have to articulate that second point again. I know we differ on views on faction lock, and you've raised some great points about it in the past but that second point makes no sense. At all. Active and Popular/Prefered are pretty much interchangable words in this instance.

CP Lock is the most popular. Fact (Xbox) even with choice offered.

You say People don't care about faction lock, yet given a choice when all campaigns were reset and renamed CP LOCKED became the most active (popular/Prefered.)

Put simply, those after CP fights, locked is preferred (fact based on stats over 6+ months now)

Anti lock camp are now stretching to state it's the order campaigns are listed lol. Hilarious. And ZOS have adjusted, so let's see. I'm happy to eat my words back on this thread if the most 'active' switches due to alphabetical order lol, like all PvP players are just mindless clicking with no care to lock or no lock.

Folks don't like playing against cheaters. Fact.

idk

Beardimus wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Soul_Demon wrote: »

xaraan wrote: »

I think you guys worry way too much about faction lock and think it's going to magically solve some imagined problem.

The ship long ago sailed on the majority of players caring about the factions in this game. At this point, especially once One Tamriel launched, the game was sold to people on the ability to play with their friends and pushing faction lock in PvP after the faction loyalty ship long ago sailed away only accomplishes making it harder to play with friends for players where their alliance previously didn't matter in that regard.

Faction lock is a failure and the people that thought it solved everything now think there are all kinds of extra max level accounts being created by a large enough portion of players that it matters, just so they can get around faction lock? And you think IP locking will change that? It's very easy to change your IP.

Out of curiosity- where do you get "The ship long ago sailed on the majority of players caring about the factions in this game." as many have noticed the small scale solo failures of Battlegrounds and huge ques on faction locked 30 day Kal seems to show a different realty than what you claim. Where are you getting the evidence of such a thing from exactly?

In reality they show nothing of the kind. You are reading much into thing that you cannot actually demonstrate the correlation.

First off nothing about BGs says anything about faction locks. Certainly nothing about "small scale solo failures" of BGs has anything to do with faction locks.

Second, From day one a large majority of players have flocked to the most active campaign. Performance and such were significantly irrelevant as they wanted to be where the action was. That was what was most important. So to suggest they are in a faction lock campaign because they support faction lock is a myth and you have nothing to back up such opinions.

So the real question is where do you get your evidence? I am pretty sure you are just guessing. Most players probably do not give a rats behind about petty issues like faction lock. They just want to PvP in an active PvP environment.

Sorry @idk you'll have to articulate that second point again. I know we differ on views on faction lock, and you've raised some great points about it in the past but that second point makes no sense. At all. Active and Popular/Prefered are pretty much interchangable words in this instance.

CP Lock is the most popular. Fact (Xbox) even with choice offered.

You say People don't care about faction lock, yet given a choice when all campaigns were reset and renamed CP LOCKED became the most active (popular/Prefered.)

Put simply, those after CP fights, locked is preferred (fact based on stats over 6+ months now)

Anti lock camp are now stretching to state it's the order campaigns are listed lol. Hilarious. And ZOS have adjusted, so let's see. I'm happy to eat my words back on this thread if the most 'active' switches due to alphabetical order lol, like all PvP players are just mindless clicking with no care to lock or no lock.

Folks don't like playing against cheaters. Fact.

It is pretty simple. I am literally saying that the faction lock campaign being full says nothing about the view on faction locks those players have.

All it says, the faction lock campaign being the busiest, is that players prefer the busiest campaign as they always have. To suggest otherwise is pure speculation with nothing real to back it up. The only thing that can be derived from that campaign being full is players want to PvP in the busiest campaign.

We could take that a step further but I will leave it in a simple nature as to not complicate the discussion unnecessarily.

Edit: I have no idea why you are talking about CP campaigns. Maybe the wording is a little off.

Beardimus

idk wrote: »

Beardimus wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Soul_Demon wrote: »

xaraan wrote: »

I think you guys worry way too much about faction lock and think it's going to magically solve some imagined problem.

The ship long ago sailed on the majority of players caring about the factions in this game. At this point, especially once One Tamriel launched, the game was sold to people on the ability to play with their friends and pushing faction lock in PvP after the faction loyalty ship long ago sailed away only accomplishes making it harder to play with friends for players where their alliance previously didn't matter in that regard.

Faction lock is a failure and the people that thought it solved everything now think there are all kinds of extra max level accounts being created by a large enough portion of players that it matters, just so they can get around faction lock? And you think IP locking will change that? It's very easy to change your IP.

Out of curiosity- where do you get "The ship long ago sailed on the majority of players caring about the factions in this game." as many have noticed the small scale solo failures of Battlegrounds and huge ques on faction locked 30 day Kal seems to show a different realty than what you claim. Where are you getting the evidence of such a thing from exactly?

In reality they show nothing of the kind. You are reading much into thing that you cannot actually demonstrate the correlation.

First off nothing about BGs says anything about faction locks. Certainly nothing about "small scale solo failures" of BGs has anything to do with faction locks.

Second, From day one a large majority of players have flocked to the most active campaign. Performance and such were significantly irrelevant as they wanted to be where the action was. That was what was most important. So to suggest they are in a faction lock campaign because they support faction lock is a myth and you have nothing to back up such opinions.

So the real question is where do you get your evidence? I am pretty sure you are just guessing. Most players probably do not give a rats behind about petty issues like faction lock. They just want to PvP in an active PvP environment.

Sorry @idk you'll have to articulate that second point again. I know we differ on views on faction lock, and you've raised some great points about it in the past but that second point makes no sense. At all. Active and Popular/Prefered are pretty much interchangable words in this instance.

CP Lock is the most popular. Fact (Xbox) even with choice offered.

You say People don't care about faction lock, yet given a choice when all campaigns were reset and renamed CP LOCKED became the most active (popular/Prefered.)

Put simply, those after CP fights, locked is preferred (fact based on stats over 6+ months now)

Anti lock camp are now stretching to state it's the order campaigns are listed lol. Hilarious. And ZOS have adjusted, so let's see. I'm happy to eat my words back on this thread if the most 'active' switches due to alphabetical order lol, like all PvP players are just mindless clicking with no care to lock or no lock.

Folks don't like playing against cheaters. Fact.

It is pretty simple. I am literally saying that the faction lock campaign being full says nothing about the view on faction locks those players have.

All it says, the faction lock campaign being the busiest, is that players prefer the busiest campaign as they always have. To suggest otherwise is pure speculation with nothing real to back it up. The only thing that can be derived from that campaign being full is players want to PvP in the busiest campaign.

We could take that a step further but I will leave it in a simple nature as to not complicate the discussion unnecessarily.

Busiest / Active / Preferred / Popular.....

Understood your point, of course there are players playing in lock that don't prefer faction lock..I get that. Some groups tried to encourage others to go to unlock when it launched, and failed. Thus they come to the more popular campign..

But what's your suggestion then, for given a choice HOW lock became the busier / active campaign?

I get the fringe people follow pop, but given the choice population built up in CP lock. And remained through a name change and addition of unlock. No facts on morals sure, but you think a coincidence?

It's clear to me where the majority went. And if the majority liked unlock as some suggest, they would go and stay in unlocked a month and tip the balance.

However I'll caveat, many I know, will only play locked given a choice regardless of pop.

Listen we all want to play how we want. And find our cases to support our argument, I'm just lost on the denial when folks had choice what they chose..

.

idk

Beardimus wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Beardimus wrote: »

idk wrote: »

Soul_Demon wrote: »

xaraan wrote: »

I think you guys worry way too much about faction lock and think it's going to magically solve some imagined problem.

The ship long ago sailed on the majority of players caring about the factions in this game. At this point, especially once One Tamriel launched, the game was sold to people on the ability to play with their friends and pushing faction lock in PvP after the faction loyalty ship long ago sailed away only accomplishes making it harder to play with friends for players where their alliance previously didn't matter in that regard.

Faction lock is a failure and the people that thought it solved everything now think there are all kinds of extra max level accounts being created by a large enough portion of players that it matters, just so they can get around faction lock? And you think IP locking will change that? It's very easy to change your IP.

Out of curiosity- where do you get "The ship long ago sailed on the majority of players caring about the factions in this game." as many have noticed the small scale solo failures of Battlegrounds and huge ques on faction locked 30 day Kal seems to show a different realty than what you claim. Where are you getting the evidence of such a thing from exactly?

In reality they show nothing of the kind. You are reading much into thing that you cannot actually demonstrate the correlation.

First off nothing about BGs says anything about faction locks. Certainly nothing about "small scale solo failures" of BGs has anything to do with faction locks.

Second, From day one a large majority of players have flocked to the most active campaign. Performance and such were significantly irrelevant as they wanted to be where the action was. That was what was most important. So to suggest they are in a faction lock campaign because they support faction lock is a myth and you have nothing to back up such opinions.

So the real question is where do you get your evidence? I am pretty sure you are just guessing. Most players probably do not give a rats behind about petty issues like faction lock. They just want to PvP in an active PvP environment.

Sorry @idk you'll have to articulate that second point again. I know we differ on views on faction lock, and you've raised some great points about it in the past but that second point makes no sense. At all. Active and Popular/Prefered are pretty much interchangable words in this instance.

CP Lock is the most popular. Fact (Xbox) even with choice offered.

You say People don't care about faction lock, yet given a choice when all campaigns were reset and renamed CP LOCKED became the most active (popular/Prefered.)

Put simply, those after CP fights, locked is preferred (fact based on stats over 6+ months now)

Anti lock camp are now stretching to state it's the order campaigns are listed lol. Hilarious. And ZOS have adjusted, so let's see. I'm happy to eat my words back on this thread if the most 'active' switches due to alphabetical order lol, like all PvP players are just mindless clicking with no care to lock or no lock.

Folks don't like playing against cheaters. Fact.

It is pretty simple. I am literally saying that the faction lock campaign being full says nothing about the view on faction locks those players have.

All it says, the faction lock campaign being the busiest, is that players prefer the busiest campaign as they always have. To suggest otherwise is pure speculation with nothing real to back it up. The only thing that can be derived from that campaign being full is players want to PvP in the busiest campaign.

We could take that a step further but I will leave it in a simple nature as to not complicate the discussion unnecessarily.

It's clear to me where the majority went. And if the majority liked unlock as some suggest, they would go and stay in unlocked a month and tip the balance.

This is where I am saying you are wrong. Very wrong. You are making an assumption that most players even care about faction lock. As such the assumption you are making is baseless. It really is that simple because you know what they say when we assume.

OrdoHermetica

Beardimus wrote: »

I get the fringe people follow pop

.

...the fringe? Why on earth do you think that segment of the population is the fringe? Strikes me as far more likely that the majority of people follow the population, because population = more opportunities for AP and good fights. For the casual PvPer, population is THE determining factor. I know for sure that my social guild's PvP events moved to Kaal solely because that's where the population was. And we didn't move away from Kaal when unlocked campaigns returned because, well, that return happened in the middle of a campaign and people wanted their campaign rewards, and also it wasn't free to transfer. And so Kaal remained more popular. And so people stayed. Because population is what we cared about. I also 100% guarantee you we'd switch back to unlocked campaigns in an instant if that's where the population was.

idk

OrdoHermetica wrote: »

Beardimus wrote: »

I get the fringe people follow pop

.

...the fringe? Why on earth do you think that segment of the population is the fringe? Strikes me as far more likely that the majority of people follow the population, because population = more opportunities for AP and good fights. For the casual PvPer, population is THE determining factor. I know for sure that my social guild's PvP events moved to Kaal solely because that's where the population was. And we didn't move away from Kaal when unlocked campaigns returned because, well, that return happened in the middle of a campaign and people wanted their campaign rewards, and also it wasn't free to transfer. And so Kaal remained more popular. And so people stayed. Because population is what we cared about. I also 100% guarantee you we'd switch back to unlocked campaigns in an instant if that's where the population was.

For the most part this is what I am saying. For almost 6 years most of us have flocked to the busiest campaign, used to be multiple busy campaigns with larger populations but I digress.

Population has been the biggest determining factor for most of us when we choose a campaign. Granted, for some it has been choosing a lesser populated campaign but most of us want a lot of PvP action.

So when discussing this subject of why players chose Kaal over Laat we have no idea if faction lock was even a slight consideration for a majority of players. Our best guess would be based on historic aspects and that would be they chose the larger population campaign as they have for 6 years.

If someone could demonstrate actual knowledge showing a majority of Cyrodiil players even care about faction lock then we could have a very different conversation.

Ranger209

Ishtharo wrote: »

There is a lot of "most people", "a lot of people" and "some would say" happening in this thread, and surprise surprise, it's by those advocating for a faction lock. The "feeling" of the game when looking through biased glasses will always favor your opinion.

Factions locks are neither good nor bad. On one side you have those that advocate against faction locks. The main argument being to let people play the way they want. On the other, you have those advocating for a faction lock. The main argument here being a "what if" fallacy of boogeymen, non-factual statements, and feelings that cant be verified.

Do we see the issue? Release the faction lock, let people play the way they want to. Faction lock has failed. It has destroyed the Non CP campaign population. Those are hard facts that you can look at through the population bars in-game. I myself even quit, as I could not play with friends any longer across the three factions. I am back now that I hear faction lock is going away for the non CP campaign.

Rest assured, if population increases on the non CP campaign by releasing faction lock, you can expect faction lock on the CP campaign to fall quickly behind it.

Lastly to the OP:
Each argument you have made so far has not yet been in true response to an opinion, but simply a rhetoric statement with loaded questions designed to say "THis is my opinion, and it's the only correct one" while phrasing it as "this is my opinion, what is yours?" That works on some people, but makes your opinion very invalid to those who understand what you are saying. I suggest listening to understand versus listening to respond. Changing your opinion is the sign of maturity, and given the current facts regarding faction lock, a change of opinion could be in the cards.

Actually it's not my opinion. I think faction hopping is fairly contained. Other people have told me, and raised my concern, that is not the case, and I am curious if others from other platforms/servers/time frames agree with them or not. I don't see it but others have said it is happening. So I am looking for deeper feedback. I apologize for not making clear in the OP that recent conversations with others is what has been raising my concerns, not anything I have personally experienced.

Zorgon_The_Revenged

One of my most enjoyable times I've had in this game was when I used my alt account (bought the Imperial physical edition when I saw it on sale months after I bought the game). I had been enjoying the under 50 campaign on my main account and ran out of under 50's.
At the time, my main faction on my main campaign were being constantly pushed to their 3 home keeps. The faction had lost many good players and guilds to other mmos due to this games never ending performance problems, it was a serious low. Of the other two factions, one I enjoyed fighting against and one was just a huge zerg faction, so I decided to continue fighting the zerg on an alt account and enjoy the opposite half of the map.
The under 50's campaign at the time was still a CP enabled campaign and filled with full CP alts and my alt account had a huge zero CP and one level 10 character. I leveled up over the next few months through PvP and some PvE questing for skill points, I was having so much fun I did it again with another character when my first one hit vet1. The campaign had changed to non-CP in that time, which was fine, but then they started making some other changes which just killed the campaign for me.

Returning to my main account and nothing had changed, it was the same two dumb zergs fighting the same weakened faction. I learnt a lot from being in an opposing factions chat, there was a small number of players that didn't want to follow the mindless zerg and instead defend and fight the tactical fight. I'd like to think I did my bit at fighting the zerg of the remaining faction, rebelling against the mindless zerg of my new chosen faction and hopefully giving my main faction a bit of breathing space.(….and killing players with 50% more CP than me, I'm sure it annoyed some of them)

I guess I'm a dirty faction hopper. But honestly I saw more players complaining about it than doing it. To me the problems occur when prime time ends and numbers get lower, some players hop faction to zerg surf and farm the now lesser numbers. ZOS should try out an eight hour cooldown on swapping faction instead of the rigid no faction swapping.

Fur_like_snow

It’s a non issue. They paid for another account and they can do whatever they want with it bar breaking the TOS. Until Zeni updates the TOS and it becomes rule breaking you just gotta deal. Honestly some of you take PvP RP way to seriously.

Kadoin

This thread does not disappoint.

Soul_Demon

idk wrote: »

Soul_Demon wrote: »

xaraan wrote: »

I think you guys worry way too much about faction lock and think it's going to magically solve some imagined problem.

The ship long ago sailed on the majority of players caring about the factions in this game. At this point, especially once One Tamriel launched, the game was sold to people on the ability to play with their friends and pushing faction lock in PvP after the faction loyalty ship long ago sailed away only accomplishes making it harder to play with friends for players where their alliance previously didn't matter in that regard.

Faction lock is a failure and the people that thought it solved everything now think there are all kinds of extra max level accounts being created by a large enough portion of players that it matters, just so they can get around faction lock? And you think IP locking will change that? It's very easy to change your IP.

Out of curiosity- where do you get "The ship long ago sailed on the majority of players caring about the factions in this game." as many have noticed the small scale solo failures of Battlegrounds and huge ques on faction locked 30 day Kal seems to show a different realty than what you claim. Where are you getting the evidence of such a thing from exactly?

In reality they show nothing of the kind. You are reading much into thing that you cannot actually demonstrate the correlation.

First off nothing about BGs says anything about faction locks. Certainly nothing about "small scale solo failures" of BGs has anything to do with faction locks.

Second, From day one a large majority of players have flocked to the most active campaign. Performance and such were significantly irrelevant as they wanted to be where the action was. That was what was most important. So to suggest they are in a faction lock campaign because they support faction lock is a myth and you have nothing to back up such opinions.

So the real question is where do you get your evidence? I am pretty sure you are just guessing. Most players probably do not give a rats behind about petty issues like faction lock. They just want to PvP in an active PvP environment.

" In reality they show nothing of the kind. You are reading much into thing that you cannot actually demonstrate the correlation."

Read this several times and just dont understand what part of my post you were referring to nor can I ascertain what it is you are saying.

"First off nothing about BGs says anything about faction locks. Certainly nothing about "small scale solo failures" of BGs has anything to do with faction locks.

Second, From day one a large majority of players have flocked to the most active campaign. Performance and such were significantly irrelevant as they wanted to be where the action was. That was what was most important. So to suggest they are in a faction lock campaign because they support faction lock is a myth and you have nothing to back up such opinions."

I am not quite sure how to put this other than when something is more popular its evidence in and of itself that the 'majority' of players want to be there....saying its more populated and that is why people flock to is recognizing that the mechanics of the campaign are more or most attractive to the majority of players playing the game......and that is why its 'most populated' in the first place. BG's were created to satisfy those who 'wanted to play with friends looking for good fights and dont care about alliance war at all' .....and a large amount of resources did not get put into fixing bugs or balance of the game to create them for that very vocal group of players in the game. Matter of fact they posted about the demise of cyro before it was released- we all now can clearly see that is not the case and if anything that group of players want MORE adjustments to satisfy whatever whims in game they have now....but one thing is certain, they are NOT populating BG's the way the said they would before ZOS created them and back then they told us it was the 'majority' of players in cyro who wanted those kind of fights and that kind of freedom to play whatever faction you wanted. So- my point stands.

"So the real question is where do you get your evidence? I am pretty sure you are just guessing. Most players probably do not give a rats behind about petty issues like faction lock. They just want to PvP in an active PvP environment."

I guess you failed to notice you did not answer my question to Xaran- and it was where did he get the evidence for 'The ship long ago sailed on the majority of players caring about the factions in this game.' and instead ask me where I get evidence to the contrary? Since I did not put any claims in the original post but did in this one- guess I answered where I get the 'evidence' from- That is the game populations based on choices the players make. Pretty straight forward evidence when they had many choices they COULD have made they still went to the 30 day CP enabled faction locked campaign. If the majority of players wanted other mechanics it would not have been the most populated nor would it be the most consistently populated campaign in the game. They had many other choices and chose it.

biminirwb17_ESO

During the recent campaign Kaal had queues in the 150+ range for much of the day, with an hour plus wait to get in, the unlocked campaign appeared pop-locked but was instantly logged in to.

So if the unlocked campaign appeared full why did people spend an hour in a queue to get into the locked campaign?

ellahellabella

They paid for it, they leveled it, they're using it.

Next topic

Sephyr

Kadoin wrote: »

This thread does not disappoint.

I know, right? I always go to the 30 day CP campaign because it has CP/rewards. Not because it has stupid faction locks.

Joy_Division

Soul_Demon wrote: »

That is the game populations based on choices the players make. Pretty straight forward evidence when they had many choices they COULD have made they still went to the 30 day CP enabled faction locked campaign. If the majority of players wanted other mechanics it would not have been the most populated nor would it be the most consistently populated campaign in the game. They had many other choices and chose it.

It's like talking to a brick wall. Can every "diehard faction loyalist" please drop their preconceptions just for 5 minutes and let me explain it in plain English exactly why I, who does not give a rat's ass about faction locks, make my "choice."

Dead underpopulated campaigns are boring and they are frustrating to play. They always have been; I've been through it ever since Bloodthorn at Launch. *Yawn* nobody to fight, no swords on the map, look DC has the entire map. Hey, look there are three other souls on the map, let's take Kingscrest mine. 20 DC immediately respond to the burst and zerg, all of them dropping ultimates because they are just as bored as I am. No sorry, would not play this campaign if ZOS paid me with free hookers and beer. It's not fun. I don;t care about the stupid rules, restrictions, alliance pride, or even if my friends play in it. It sucks, it;s boring, and I have better things to do. Like clean my closet that I have been putting off. So it's as much of a "choice" that I do what 90% of the ESO PvP community has done since day 1 - play in the pop-locked zerg campaign - as getting a root canal: the alternative is much less pleasant.

When campaign locks were introduced, it did not take a Nostradamus to figure out that since some people take this seriously that they would flock there and that would become the pop-locked zerg campaign. Most of the guilds, 1vXers, and people who can;t stand pop-locks followed them there because that's where the fights and farming are; sort of like how predators on the African Serengeti follow the wildebeest herds during migration. It's not like they are willingly choosing to move.

Also not to be underestimated is that since I've played this game for 6 years, I just kind of got used to seeing certain people, ally and fremeny when I play. It's sort of like Norm walking into Cheers. They aren;t on my friend's list and I probably never even whispered them, but they are names I recognize, they seem like cool people, and maybe they just occasionally say funny stuff in zone chat. It's a hell of a lot more fun bumping into them than going to the stupid dead campaign.

And as far as "well, all the anti-faction lock people blah blah blah can organize and make it happen." LOL. Yeah, and the next time there is a strike or lockout in a professional sport, all the fans can rally together, cancel their season tickets, burn their $200 jerseys, and swear off ever playing fantasy again. Wake me up when that sort of collective mobilization for something as meaningless as leisure ever happens, because it will be the first time. Especially when we don;t care about the campaigns in the first place. There's no point. We just want fights and farms and that is already available on the pop-locked zerg campaign. I will put 0 effort, devote 0 seconds of my life to some hair-brained "let's get every together and play the unlocked campaigns" schemes because they are pointless, won;t work, I don;t care, and won't last. And I actually am a pretty motivated person. Imagine what the lazy people think.

People can stop telling me I made my "choice" to play in the faction lock campaign so that proves I like faction-locks any time now.

You want me to care about faction loyalty? When ZOS does, and shows this by putting some resources and effort into the AvAvA format, which they are *clearly* moving away from and are probably regretting since launch - have you seen how the PvE content the past 4 years makes zero mention of it and has Nords, Altmer, and Orcs living in happy communities - then I will too.

xWarbrain

Factions mattered to me until they implemented Faction Lock.

ellahellabella

Joy_Division wrote: »

Soul_Demon wrote: »

That is the game populations based on choices the players make. Pretty straight forward evidence when they had many choices they COULD have made they still went to the 30 day CP enabled faction locked campaign. If the majority of players wanted other mechanics it would not have been the most populated nor would it be the most consistently populated campaign in the game. They had many other choices and chose it.

It's like talking to a brick wall. Can every "diehard faction loyalist" please drop their preconceptions just for 5 minutes and let me explain it in plain English exactly why I, who does not give a rat's ass about faction locks, make my "choice."

Dead underpopulated campaigns are boring and they are frustrating to play. They always have been; I've been through it ever since Bloodthorn at Launch. *Yawn* nobody to fight, no swords on the map, look DC has the entire map. Hey, look there are three other souls on the map, let's take Kingscrest mine. 20 DC immediately respond to the burst and zerg, all of them dropping ultimates because they are just as bored as I am. No sorry, would not play this campaign if ZOS paid me with free hookers and beer. It's not fun. I don;t care about the stupid rules, restrictions, alliance pride, or even if my friends play in it. It sucks, it;s boring, and I have better things to do. Like clean my closet that I have been putting off. So it's as much of a "choice" that I do what 90% of the ESO PvP community has done since day 1 - play in the pop-locked zerg campaign - as getting a root canal: the alternative is much less pleasant.

When campaign locks were introduced, it did not take a Nostradamus to figure out that since some people take this seriously that they would flock there and that would become the pop-locked zerg campaign. Most of the guilds, 1vXers, and people who can;t stand pop-locks followed them there because that's where the fights and farming are; sort of like how predators on the African Serengeti follow the wildebeest herds during migration. It's not like they are willingly choosing to move.

Also not to be underestimated is that since I've played this game for 6 years, I just kind of got used to seeing certain people, ally and fremeny when I play. It's sort of like Norm walking into Cheers. They aren;t on my friend's list and I probably never even whispered them, but they are names I recognize, they seem like cool people, and maybe they just occasionally say funny stuff in zone chat. It's a hell of a lot more fun bumping into them than going to the stupid dead campaign.

And as far as "well, all the anti-faction lock people blah blah blah can organize and make it happen." LOL. Yeah, and the next time there is a strike or lockout in a professional sport, all the fans can rally together, cancel their season tickets, burn their $200 jerseys, and swear off ever playing fantasy again. Wake me up when that sort of collective mobilization for something as meaningless as leisure ever happens, because it will be the first time. Especially when we don;t care about the campaigns in the first place. There's no point. We just want fights and farms and that is already available on the pop-locked zerg campaign. I will put 0 effort, devote 0 seconds of my life to some hair-brained "let's get every together and play the unlocked campaigns" schemes because they are pointless, won;t work, I don;t care, and won't last. And I actually am a pretty motivated person. Imagine what the lazy people think.

People can stop telling me I made my "choice" to play in the faction lock campaign so that proves I like faction-locks any time now.

You want me to care about faction loyalty? When ZOS does, and shows this by putting some resources and effort into the AvAvA format, which they are *clearly* moving away from and are probably regretting since launch - have you seen how the PvE content the past 4 years makes zero mention of it and has Nords, Altmer, and Orcs living in happy communities - then I will too.

Stop using logic among sense and my reluctance to play eso since faction lock to make a compelling argument Joy! Jeez! It's like logic doesn't matter any more....