Cyrodiil REALLY needs a faction balancer.

Indigogo

Joy_Division wrote: »

Indigogo wrote: »

GoodFella146 wrote: »

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

Currently, what is happening is that players migrate to what faction is winning (over and over again), and we have one faction that is winning over & over again. There are also players who are loyal to their alliance, so they gave up, since they have no chance and realize that fighting for the objectives / map is pointless, and they simply quit & don't care about PvP...

I used to love playing Cyrodiil (PS4 NA) but the factions are so imbalanced that there's no point. Blue wins every campaign and both red and yellow won't focus blue because it's easier to fight each other as the fights are more balanced. Since zos won't do anything the only option has been to quit playing.

Red can't focus blue because AD is too busy messing with arrius rather than ungating themselves.
Believe me, Ep would love nothing more than to play a campaign where you all attack the person in 1st place/has scrolls/emp, but tell that to the bananas. Literally destroying every campaign due to their blind hatred of red.

Dc just gets to capitalize.

Many of us have no idea when a campaign starts, when it ends, who is in first, if we even have emperor (though that eventually gets figured out because of the health increase), what's the score, who won last campaign, etc., all the sorts of questions campaign related. I know that I don;t I know the the lead of our group doesn't. So every single decision that out group makes is 100% based on what the map looks like at the moment and where the best fight can be had. If we "Bananas" show up at Arrius, that is why. It's not because we hate red. If anything, we spend more time in our comms commenting on Blues.

Yeah. Nah. I couldn't imagine being gated yet travelling to the other side of the map to mess with people already being pushed by the dominant faction.
Surely you'd get the best fight with the larger pop faction, if that's really the driving motivation?

Wolfpaw

I still want the Goblin solution.

ks888

The faction balancing used to be us tri-faction players, but faction locks...

Soraka

I stopped playing when the aoe cooldown tests started (quit to play a different game with someone, not due to tests). I've recently come back and the faction balance during my playtime is very different and a little discouraging. I mostly play a "support" type so there's not a whole lot for me to do feels like when DC can split giant groups to take multiple keeps and I can only find a handful of EP to support.

DrSlaughtr

Best thing they could do is add a new locked campaign or make BR locked to even out the populations. GH is too full nearly 24/7 and BR gets dominated by rainbows and boosters who manipulate the low population.

Best thing that would happen is give people a reason to go to BR and even out it's population with GH. Lag would significantly get better in GH, as well as queue, while BR would get some much needed balance and less cheesing.

master_vanargand

Need a bonus system to target the 1st place alliance.
The current Cyrodiil is the worst, as the 1st and 2nd place alliance bullying the 3rd place.

LarsS

I made these suggestions in a thread a few days ago.

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en-gb/discussion/574023/campaign-system-revision

Present status.
1. An alliance gets buffs for owning keeps and the emperor.
2. Volendrung spawns more often to the underdogs in the campaign.
3. Campaign points are the same regardless of population except for the underpopulation bonus that kicks in if an alliance have less people for a while compared to one of the other alliances.
This system is unable to create balanced campaigns, in fact it increases the imbalances.

Problems.
The core problem is that the campaigns have low populations for parts of the time perhaps, especially on the EU servers. Thus, when the instances are nearly empty it’s easy for a small group (less than 10) to cap the map and get all the scrolls. There are groups who have done this consistently for years. When, people in the other alliances come online they have a clear disadvantage since the alliance that caped the map has all the battle buffs. Thus, the battle buffs create severe imbalances, it would be more natural to buff the weaker alliances. Volendrung has a similar effect it tends to land in the hands of the alliance with the highest population. I addition an alliance that have caped the map during low pop get a huge amount of campaign points. The low population bonus is unable to balance this while all alliances at these times are on low population, so it does not activate. One can also observe that the campaign points received by the alliances when the population increases is balanced over time so the caping at low population mostly decides who wins the campaign. I think most of us feels it’s an unfair system.

Thus, I suggest introducing a more balanced system.
1. Remove all battle buffs and replace them with ap bonuses.
2. Weight the campaign points by the population. The low population bonus is no longer needed and should be removed.
Both these changes will reduce the effect of map caping when the instances are on low pop and create a better balance. I addition one could test to lock the scrolls in the home temples if the population on the server is below a certain level. One could also lock out the alliance, which is leading a campaign from using Volendrung, to improve balance.