Night Capping is Making PvP Pointless - Please do Something ZOS

Kartalin

Instead of calling it night capping, the real issue is population imbalances. This doesn't mean having a certain quantity will equal quality, but at least there will be more of a fighting chance.

I pvp with my EP guilds on Blackreach PC/NA usually 2-3 days a week lately. Sometimes the map is balanced when we show up and other times it isn't, same for population. We definitely have all the fights we can manage -- usually to the extent that we're eventually outnumbered at least 2:1 or 3:1 at each encounter. This means we can claim short term victories but never actually win a fight without kiting away from the objective far enough to stop people coming back out after us. It's a bit disappointing, but it beats joining the zerg to completely overrun one or both opposing factions. That is not fun to me at all.

Low pop bonuses and/or low score bonuses are either too rare or too insufficient to lure players to the weaker sides. It's clear we can't really count on a significant portion of the playerbase to do any kind of population balancing on their own so perhaps the onus should be on ZOS to better incentivize making the choice to play for the underdog. But of course we realize how unlikely that is to occur.

adirondack

Nope pvp players are a small portion of overall game population and thus ZOS makes more money from non-pvp players. I dunno why you think this is incorrect but you are entitled to your opinion.

Your second statement about pvp players spending more per person than PVE players is equally confusing but again you do you.

I hope however you are 100% correct. Since ZOS does not release the player type versus percentage of money spent over time then I suppose we are both just speculating- if you have actual data to share I would love to be proven wrong - would make me feel much better about the state of the game.

Tommy_The_Gun

Problem is not night capping or morning capping or time zones. Problem is that Potential Points awarded for capturing objective are always the same, regardless of the population of attackers vs defenders. If for example EP will capture enemy objective when they had 1 bar population and EP has 2 or 3 or full, they will get 1 potential point. It is a fixed value. They will also get 1 point if the capture Alessia or Aleswell even if it will take like 2h of fighting and all population will be locked.

This is an anomaly. The game literally scales rewards with difficulty of the content. If you capture enemy keep with defenders, you get more AP vs if the keep was empty. If 20 players will defend a keep vs 2 players, then they will get close to no AP as a reward. If you will kill a player solo you will get more AP vs if there was some allies helping you. If you will do Hard mode arena you get perfected weapon vs normal weapon on normal difficulty. There are multiple examples of that.

So why Potential Points do not scale with the difficulty ? You get one point regardless of how hard or how easy it was. If you PvDoor empty map - you get 1 per objective. If you "paint" most objectives red/yellow/blue at full population during prime time you also get 1 point per objective.

This is the real issue. Not the night or morning cap. You can not "remove" night capping. And it is not night capping that destroyed Cyro. It is the fact that you can not recover from something like this. In ESO, PvP Campaign is won literally by doing PvE. Obviously, it should not be like this. It is a huge design exploit, that needs to be fixed.

reazea

adirondack wrote: »

Nope pvp players are a small portion of overall game population and thus ZOS makes more money from non-pvp players. I dunno why you think this is incorrect but you are entitled to your opinion.

Your second statement about pvp players spending more per person than PVE players is equally confusing but again you do you.

I hope however you are 100% correct. Since ZOS does not release the player type versus percentage of money spent over time then I suppose we are both just speculating- if you have actual data to share I would love to be proven wrong - would make me feel much better about the state of the game.

When people try to claim that PvP players are a small portion of the game population it just shows how isolated their gaming experience in ESO is. It's just plain not factual that PvP players don't spend tons of money on ESO. PvP is all PvE plus PvP. Per capita PvP players spend more on ESO than any other subset of the player population. We have to or we don't remain competitive with the latest/best gear and now scribing perks too.

adirondack

I think you are confused.

My statement is that most players in this game do not do a lot of PvP. Your statement is that PVP players spend a lot of money.

These two are not the same. And I do not agree pvp players spend more than PVE players but you are entitled to any opinion you wish.

I’m done arguing this with you as it seems both not central to the OP point nor adding value to the overall conversation.

Blackrim

adirondack wrote: »

AngryPenguin wrote: »

ZOS could bring back the greatness that Cyrodiil was if they wanted to. They just have to want to.

Well they would need to want to pay for it. But since PvP represents a small portion of the overall game population and thus they make limited or no money from it - do they really have a good reason to spend money to increase performance?

They are running a business. Choices are made based on what nets the greater profit. Like it or not, pvp isn’t where the whales are.

I know many who would pay good money to have a good Cyrodiil map. Zenmiax needs to recognize that the current Cyrodiil game mode is so unique and prosperous that others that attempt to recreate the idea fail utterly repeatedly, look at New World which started out in Alpha as something similar to Cyrodiil.

darvaria

What exactly is a "good" Cyrodiil map?
Maps at 2 am est
Pop BR 2/1/1 Pop GH 2/2/2
Could the 1 faction tip the scales and come play GH? Yes, but they don't want to. They prefer to stay on BR while they are in last place on GH. It's a very small window of time when the winning faction, EP, has a red map. And it's not at night. You just have to accept that some players just want the AP and don't care if they have PVP. They don't even care if they win. Most ball groups don't care who wins. Most small man groups could care less who wins. I've researched this quite a bit. And with 3 factions and no equal population que there is no "fix". As I said, just wait, all factions have their winning season and night cappers. And when the pop favors EP a bit, do you think they are going to run right over to BR and get stomped? No. I'm beginning to agree with Adam .... it's only a problem because EP is winning. I can remember when DC won for several years ... and it was every campaign and it was a strong Aussie guild that ran the map blue every night. A 30 day campaign is too long. You might see more even populations in 7 day campaigns. But if you want balanced PVP it needs to be somewhere between 25 v 25 or 50 v 50 (I really think 100 players is about all the server can handle with no lag). With a time limit. WHO wants to play for days on end? We need an event that lasts 2 hours. WOW has always had events that ran every 3 hours and lasted a certain amount of time ... NOT 30 days. With the current Cyrodiil, this is what you are going to get.





Stop thinking about winning and focus on the PVP. It doesn't matter if you win.

Coo_PnT

I would very much like ZOS to answer this question.
are these Forum discussions communicated from the community manager to the director and PvP designers?
What is the means by which this is done, and how many times a week? If nothing is being communicated, then it is all for nothing.

Aurielle

darvaria wrote: »

What exactly is a "good" Cyrodiil map?
Maps at 2 am est
Pop BR 2/1/1 Pop GH 2/2/2
Could the 1 faction tip the scales and come play GH? Yes, but they don't want to. They prefer to stay on BR while they are in last place on GH. It's a very small window of time when the winning faction, EP, has a red map. And it's not at night. You just have to accept that some players just want the AP and don't care if they have PVP. They don't even care if they win. Most ball groups don't care who wins. Most small man groups could care less who wins. I've researched this quite a bit. And with 3 factions and no equal population que there is no "fix". As I said, just wait, all factions have their winning season and night cappers. And when the pop favors EP a bit, do you think they are going to run right over to BR and get stomped? No. I'm beginning to agree with Adam .... it's only a problem because EP is winning. I can remember when DC won for several years ... and it was every campaign and it was a strong Aussie guild that ran the map blue every night. A 30 day campaign is too long. You might see more even populations in 7 day campaigns. But if you want balanced PVP it needs to be somewhere between 25 v 25 or 50 v 50 (I really think 100 players is about all the server can handle with no lag). With a time limit. WHO wants to play for days on end? We need an event that lasts 2 hours. WOW has always had events that ran every 3 hours and lasted a certain amount of time ... NOT 30 days. With the current Cyrodiil, this is what you are going to get.





Stop thinking about winning and focus on the PVP. It doesn't matter if you win.

Well-stated. I also agree that a 30 day campaign is too long; if there is any sort of consistent imbalance in AvAvA population, the month long duration of the campaign gives way too long for the scores to go way out of whack. Week-long campaigns would naturally result in closer scores that give players who DO care about the score more hope that they can actually do something to eventually win or at least come in second place. Look at the score on BR right now… Completely demoralizing for EP.

And yes, some people just care about the AP. The amount of PVD that goes on in all campaigns is pretty sad, but it’s not changing anytime soon — not unless some pretty significant adjustments are made to the way AP gets awarded with objective captures.

adirondack

Campaigns used to be 90 days. Of course we had 3x as many people able to be in the campaign then also.

PvP used to be such a draw to this game - and for some percentage of the pop I’m sure it still is. But focus has changed and that’s ok. Based on the large number of dev responses to this and other threads concerning PvP questions </sarcasm> one can safely conclude this is not the devs #1 concern.

slasb16_ESO

I've played off and on since literally beta. (I got into beta because I had played DAoC (Dark Age of Camelot), which is the game Matt Firor worked on before this. And Cyrodiil is based on the RvR in DAoC.

Cyrodiil has always been 24 hour. Sometimes I'll log in early and invariably there are many Aussies playing, so the argument about night capping is really nonsense.

I believe the reason EP wins so much goes back to DAoC and the reality that the red faction, Midgard, won the most of those 'campaigns'. AD has never had the right class balance for sieging. They have more Sorcs and NBs, which dimishes their ability to siege as well as EP and DC. Its been that way since Year 1. DC is like DAoC's Albion, the blue faction. They are more RP and PVE oriented. But EP is straight PvP. The PvE zones are ugly, the classes are ugly but no one cares. They just want to PvP. So EP tends to have more PvP commitment, i.e 24 hour.

It's just the way it is, and it has been that way since the game launched.

TechMaybeHic

slasb16_ESO wrote: »

I've played off and on since literally beta. (I got into beta because I had played DAoC (Dark Age of Camelot), which is the game Matt Firor worked on before this. And Cyrodiil is based on the RvR in DAoC.

Cyrodiil has always been 24 hour. Sometimes I'll log in early and invariably there are many Aussies playing, so the argument about night capping is really nonsense.

I believe the reason EP wins so much goes back to DAoC and the reality that the red faction, Midgard, won the most of those 'campaigns'. AD has never had the right class balance for sieging. They have more Sorcs and NBs, which dimishes their ability to siege as well as EP and DC. Its been that way since Year 1. DC is like DAoC's Albion, the blue faction. They are more RP and PVE oriented. But EP is straight PvP. The PvE zones are ugly, the classes are ugly but no one cares. They just want to PvP. So EP tends to have more PvP commitment, i.e 24 hour.

It's just the way it is, and it has been that way since the game launched.

That is not the way it is at all. Or has it ever been. EP has always been the RP here because of Skyrim. They run over the map the most when nobody else is on. Same way DC had before that
Campaigns have largely been decided by eho out-popped the other factions That's the way it is

FlopsyPrince

All I know is that my AD mains (PC/PS5 - NA/EU) rarely have a capped zone to take advantage of. And I mostly just want to run the quests.

Aurielle

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

All I know is that my AD mains (PC/PS5 - NA/EU) rarely have a capped zone to take advantage of. And I mostly just want to run the quests.

Go to Blackreach, PC NA. We’ve posted multiple screen shots in this thread of completely yellow maps. Literally every single keep, town, resource yellow.

darvaria

Aurielle wrote: »

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

All I know is that my AD mains (PC/PS5 - NA/EU) rarely have a capped zone to take advantage of. And I mostly just want to run the quests.

Go to Blackreach, PC NA. We’ve posted multiple screen shots in this thread of completely yellow maps. Literally every single keep, town, resource yellow.

^ Is it ever NOT yellow?

Aurielle

darvaria wrote: »

Aurielle wrote: »

FlopsyPrince wrote: »

All I know is that my AD mains (PC/PS5 - NA/EU) rarely have a capped zone to take advantage of. And I mostly just want to run the quests.

Go to Blackreach, PC NA. We’ve posted multiple screen shots in this thread of completely yellow maps. Literally every single keep, town, resource yellow.

^ Is it ever NOT yellow?

There are times when significant portions of the map turn blue (usually when DC have their low pop bonus active — funny, that!), and then once DC logs off, AD logs on again to keep the AP flowing. EP in the evenings/prime time can usually take back home keeps, then when they log off, it’s back to yellow.

Edit: Thanks for the Insightful. Enjoy the AP!

Kamchuk

I would like to provide a slightly different perspective. I usually log on in the mornings (EDT) to collect my daily rewards. I will check the score in PC NA GH and note that EP (my one and only faction since I have only one toon), has painted the map red. I don’t participate in the their conquest because at this point it is worthless. However, I also check the population of each faction. It is almost always: DC – 1 bar, EP – 2 bars, AD – 1 bar. After a few hours, EP will get up to 3 bars but one of the other factions will grow to 2 bars. Now since ZOS has lowered the POP caps, I am guessing, (and correct me if I’m wrong), that the CAP is 60 players per faction. If that is true then we are talking about 1 bar = 0-15 players, 2 bars = 16-30 players, 3 bars = 31-45 players and POP lock = 46-60 players. So, in the mornings EDT, EP is running the map with at most 30 players. Where is everyone else? In all of Oceania, there are 30 EP and less than 15 players representing each of the other factions playing ESO PVP? Why? Why are there at most 60 players total doing PC NA GH? When you guys talk about some EP players moving to AD or DC, are you saying that 10 players should migrate to either DC or AD?

Now I almost always log on in the afternoon EDT because at that time DC and AD have already formed team Green in order to try to compensate for the morning “nightcap”, and probably vent their frustrations against EP. Rightfully so. They SHOULD Green Team EP. We are in first place with 7K points buffer. And as a result, it is the best time for some really amazing fights at Arrius where EP has turtled. But the problem remains that in the Morning EDT, there are very few people playing and at this point in time, 30 people are painting the map red. 30 people who want to play ESO PVP together. How do we fix that?

ZOS must have a return on investment (ROI) to make any changes to PVP. They will not do it for so small of a PVP population.

slasb16_ESO

TechMaybeHic wrote: »

slasb16_ESO wrote: »

I've played off and on since literally beta. (I got into beta because I had played DAoC (Dark Age of Camelot), which is the game Matt Firor worked on before this. And Cyrodiil is based on the RvR in DAoC.

Cyrodiil has always been 24 hour. Sometimes I'll log in early and invariably there are many Aussies playing, so the argument about night capping is really nonsense.

I believe the reason EP wins so much goes back to DAoC and the reality that the red faction, Midgard, won the most of those 'campaigns'. AD has never had the right class balance for sieging. They have more Sorcs and NBs, which dimishes their ability to siege as well as EP and DC. Its been that way since Year 1. DC is like DAoC's Albion, the blue faction. They are more RP and PVE oriented. But EP is straight PvP. The PvE zones are ugly, the classes are ugly but no one cares. They just want to PvP. So EP tends to have more PvP commitment, i.e 24 hour.

It's just the way it is, and it has been that way since the game launched.

That is not the way it is at all. Or has it ever been. EP has always been the RP here because of Skyrim. They run over the map the most when nobody else is on. Same way DC had before that
Campaigns have largely been decided by eho out-popped the other factions That's the way it is

Again, that's just nonsense. It's a 24 hour game and almost never do I log in and see the map painted one colour like Ravenwatch or Blackreach. I'd say 75% of the time the map is close to equal.

AD has lost most of the campaigns since launch, honestly, and it's the same reason over and over: they can't siege like the other factions. Cyrodiil, like DAoC, is a siege game.

As far as Skyrim is concerned, that's not an MMO and it's not where a lot of pvp players came from.

Dyngrin

A proper population handicap system is needed to replace the current Low Population Bonus which has many problems (worthy of its own thread). There are many possible alternatives, but I suggest the following which is inversely proportional to a faction's online population:

1. If a faction is 4 bars (full/capped), it earns only 1/4 the points currently for keeps, outposts, and resources.
2. If a faction is 3 bars, it earns only 1/3 the points.
3. If a faction is 2 bars, it earns only 1/2 the points.
4. If a faction is 1 bar, it earns 1/1 the points (the current numbers).

If the above is implemented, any faction which is night/off-prime capping would earn significantly less points (handicapped) for owning all or most of the map. Also, if all 3 factions have the same bars, then all 3 would earn the same points.

Ideally, the percent of points would be the inverse of the exact population of each faction not just bars, but even this wouldn't represent the population of active PvP players. If a faction's active PvP players are at some later time tracked, then this count could replace the population bars in the handicap calculation to be even more accurate.

--Dyn

Blackrim

darvaria wrote: »

What exactly is a "good" Cyrodiil map?
Maps at 2 am est
Pop BR 2/1/1 Pop GH 2/2/2
Could the 1 faction tip the scales and come play GH? Yes, but they don't want to. They prefer to stay on BR while they are in last place on GH. It's a very small window of time when the winning faction, EP, has a red map. And it's not at night. You just have to accept that some players just want the AP and don't care if they have PVP. They don't even care if they win. Most ball groups don't care who wins. Most small man groups could care less who wins. I've researched this quite a bit. And with 3 factions and no equal population que there is no "fix". As I said, just wait, all factions have their winning season and night cappers. And when the pop favors EP a bit, do you think they are going to run right over to BR and get stomped? No. I'm beginning to agree with Adam .... it's only a problem because EP is winning. I can remember when DC won for several years ... and it was every campaign and it was a strong Aussie guild that ran the map blue every night. A 30 day campaign is too long. You might see more even populations in 7 day campaigns. But if you want balanced PVP it needs to be somewhere between 25 v 25 or 50 v 50 (I really think 100 players is about all the server can handle with no lag). With a time limit. WHO wants to play for days on end? We need an event that lasts 2 hours. WOW has always had events that ran every 3 hours and lasted a certain amount of time ... NOT 30 days. With the current Cyrodiil, this is what you are going to get.





Stop thinking about winning and focus on the PVP. It doesn't matter if you win.

While players may focus on AP and not always winning, the current Cyrodiil scoring system can create significant imbalances, leading to frustration and demoralization among players in less favored factions. This imbalance detracts from the competitive spirit of the campaigns and risks reducing overall engagement as players may feel their efforts are pointless. Addressing these scoring anomalies is crucial to maintaining a fair and enjoyable experience for all factions. Ensuring that each faction feels their participation matters and contributes to balanced competition is essential for keeping Cyrodiil engaging and vibrant for everyone.

Blackrim

Dyngrin wrote: »

A proper population handicap system is needed to replace the current Low Population Bonus which has many problems (worthy of its own thread). There are many possible alternatives, but I suggest the following which is inversely proportional to a faction's online population:

1. If a faction is 4 bars (full/capped), it earns only 1/4 the points currently for keeps, outposts, and resources.
2. If a faction is 3 bars, it earns only 1/3 the points.
3. If a faction is 2 bars, it earns only 1/2 the points.
4. If a faction is 1 bar, it earns 1/1 the points (the current numbers).

If the above is implemented, any faction which is night/off-prime capping would earn significantly less points (handicapped) for owning all or most of the map. Also, if all 3 factions have the same bars, then all 3 would earn the same points.

Ideally, the percent of points would be the inverse of the exact population of each faction not just bars, but even this wouldn't represent the population of active PvP players. If a faction's active PvP players are at some later time tracked, then this count could replace the population bars in the handicap calculation to be even more accurate.

--Dyn

Great contribution and post!

Coo_PnT

Dyngrin wrote: »

A proper population handicap system is needed to replace the current Low Population Bonus which has many problems (worthy of its own thread). There are many possible alternatives, but I suggest the following which is inversely proportional to a faction's online population:

1. If a faction is 4 bars (full/capped), it earns only 1/4 the points currently for keeps, outposts, and resources.
2. If a faction is 3 bars, it earns only 1/3 the points.
3. If a faction is 2 bars, it earns only 1/2 the points.
4. If a faction is 1 bar, it earns 1/1 the points (the current numbers).

If the above is implemented, any faction which is night/off-prime capping would earn significantly less points (handicapped) for owning all or most of the map. Also, if all 3 factions have the same bars, then all 3 would earn the same points.

Ideally, the percent of points would be the inverse of the exact population of each faction not just bars, but even this wouldn't represent the population of active PvP players. If a faction's active PvP players are at some later time tracked, then this count could replace the population bars in the handicap calculation to be even more accurate.

--Dyn

I agree with this opinion. Furthermore, in my personal opinion, it would be interesting to change the multiplier depending on the points you have earned, so that every day you can reverse from third to first place and from first to last place. That way you could have two factions of counters against the team in first place every day, , or you could have a betrayal.

Also, to lower the bar for PvP, in Cyrodiil it's CP 3600 and all the equipment is top quality and you can choose as much as you want. It might be interesting if everyone is on a Meta build, and there will be counter-builds, and a sense of fairness. If everyone gets the same build, ZOS will have to deal with it.

I am not very good at English and I use a translation website to translate before posting. I apologise if there are any difficulties in reading.

Vizir

Well the idea was that factions would theoretically balance themselves out because it would get boring for the winning team to constantly be having nothing to do. But players tend not to strive for balance and instead just jump on the bandwagon.

When EP dominated the camp during the New World release and the faction balance was reminiscent of the old days of buff campaigns, did any ep faction swap? I did and I was surprised that almost nobody else did camp after camp. The EP ball group strived for the 12v2 and was thrilled to do so month after month. Even now eyars later when off peak it's the same thing they are still rocking it.

I don't think the faction score matters and I don't think anybody else cares. It's the simple fact that being able to play an hour of pvp and not once have your health drop to 50% as the zerg healers can keep you up while you easily zerg down other players and keeps is fun. Pvping as AD or DC during off peak is literally just the Captain Sparrow running away from the zerg of cannibals. It's not that fun and so people leave. EP wiping the map over and over has less and less resistance and they love it.

Coo_PnT

It is natural for humans to lean towards the winning faction.
MMO PvP, which has been around since Mythic Entertainment's DAoC, cannot exist without people, and unlike WoW, it is a three-way PvP game.
If there are not enough people, it is natural to go for the winning faction.
So what are we going to do now, ZOS? Just sit back and die?

Coo_PnT

Vizir wrote: »

Well the idea was that factions would theoretically balance themselves out because it would get boring for the winning team to constantly be having nothing to do. But players tend not to strive for balance and instead just jump on the bandwagon.

When EP dominated the camp during the New World release and the faction balance was reminiscent of the old days of buff campaigns, did any ep faction swap? I did and I was surprised that almost nobody else did camp after camp. The EP ball group strived for the 12v2 and was thrilled to do so month after month. Even now eyars later when off peak it's the same thing they are still rocking it.

I don't think the faction score matters and I don't think anybody else cares. It's the simple fact that being able to play an hour of pvp and not once have your health drop to 50% as the zerg healers can keep you up while you easily zerg down other players and keeps is fun. Pvping as AD or DC during off peak is literally just the Captain Sparrow running away from the zerg of cannibals. It's not that fun and so people leave. EP wiping the map over and over has less and less resistance and they love it.

On what theory do you think the factions will be balanced? Do you also believe that someone will lead the way? Do you? Will you move an entire guild or even your friends to another faction to try to balance a losing faction? For example, right now it costs a lot of money for my Nord EP character to try to move his campaign to DC.If that's the case I would buy the Rimworld DLC or the Cookie Clicker soundtrack.

Dracosin369

Quit and find another game that is fun to play (I just log in for dailies). Cyro is boring when its not Midyear Mayhem and its pop locked all day.

Muizer

Tommy_The_Gun wrote: »

In ESO, PvP Campaign is won literally by doing PvE. Obviously, it should not be like this. It is a huge design exploit, that needs to be fixed.

Actually, implemented correctly, a PvEvP Cyrodiil might actually be more fun.

Suppose ZOS would be able to make NPC effectively defend keeps (without resorting to ridiculous "I Win" mechanics!)

Suppose the NPC defense would get weaker the farther away the keep is from the home base.

Suppose the NPC defense would be inversely proportionate to the number of players for a given faction.

Suppose keeps resources etc would have a timer causing them to rebel back to their 'native' faction after a while.

I think that could actually be fun and perhaps even persuade more PvE players to participate.

Holycannoli

Adamus wrote: »

Why are 'night cappers' an issue only when EP is winning the campaign? The players during that time zone switch campaigns and factions all the time, often being the deciding factor if a faction wins or not. Whataboutism the day cappers who are playing when I'm at work? Because when EP isn't winning, all I hear is "who still cares about the score".

The score is useful and fun to play, it helps guide me who to attack and tactics to use. But if EP loses the camp, we lose, end of story, onto the next campaign. There are mechanics in the game for Low Pop and even some for low score, I remember a camp where a faction won by their low pop bonus. To be frank, I think they should get rid of the low pop bonus altogether (except for the bonus AP from the bonus, like that part).

Camps are won and lost, groups hope factions and ballgroups peak only to burn out. This isn't the first time this has happened either, those who think double teaming EP during primetime is going to change anything... it's not. Almost no one that plays during primetime is part of the NA night time crews... b/c those players are on the other side of the world, playing during their primetime hours. All the EP that play during primetime have to work in the morning and most of us are past the 'all nighter' stages of our lives.

As for lessons being taught, there are only two EP is really learning, it takes 2 factions united to beat us, and the level of poor sportsmanship there is in gaming.

Sorry your side is losing, camp's not over yet. A 5-10k lead is easily lost, especially with over half a month to go. The pendulum will swing back eventually. When it does, will you be back on the forums complaining about winning a campaign because there are people on the other side the world, who like the same game you do, and are playing it when you can't?

Note that my forum level is a golf score.

Low pop bonus means nothing when the majority of server is asleep because it's 3 AM.

When it's overnight hours for the server (as dictated by the server location) the faction with highest pop should get reduced points earned.

I know people constantly bring up time zones but the NA server should have NA times, same as EU having EU times. Does the EU server have a bunch of NA players logging on to PvDoor the entire map every night? EU overnight hours are basically NA prime time hours. It can easily happen and would not be acceptable.

The game desperately needs an Oceanic server so these overnight PvDoor campaign champions don't have to keep tipping the scales. Until then ZOS needs to nerf points earned from overnight PvDooring by the highest pop alliance.

Aurielle

Holycannoli wrote: »

Adamus wrote: »

Why are 'night cappers' an issue only when EP is winning the campaign? The players during that time zone switch campaigns and factions all the time, often being the deciding factor if a faction wins or not. Whataboutism the day cappers who are playing when I'm at work? Because when EP isn't winning, all I hear is "who still cares about the score".

The score is useful and fun to play, it helps guide me who to attack and tactics to use. But if EP loses the camp, we lose, end of story, onto the next campaign. There are mechanics in the game for Low Pop and even some for low score, I remember a camp where a faction won by their low pop bonus. To be frank, I think they should get rid of the low pop bonus altogether (except for the bonus AP from the bonus, like that part).

Camps are won and lost, groups hope factions and ballgroups peak only to burn out. This isn't the first time this has happened either, those who think double teaming EP during primetime is going to change anything... it's not. Almost no one that plays during primetime is part of the NA night time crews... b/c those players are on the other side of the world, playing during their primetime hours. All the EP that play during primetime have to work in the morning and most of us are past the 'all nighter' stages of our lives.

As for lessons being taught, there are only two EP is really learning, it takes 2 factions united to beat us, and the level of poor sportsmanship there is in gaming.

Sorry your side is losing, camp's not over yet. A 5-10k lead is easily lost, especially with over half a month to go. The pendulum will swing back eventually. When it does, will you be back on the forums complaining about winning a campaign because there are people on the other side the world, who like the same game you do, and are playing it when you can't?

Note that my forum level is a golf score.

Low pop bonus means nothing when the majority of server is asleep because it's 3 AM.

When it's overnight hours for the server (as dictated by the server location) the faction with highest pop should get reduced points earned.

I know people constantly bring up time zones but the NA server should have NA times, same as EU having EU times. Does the EU server have a bunch of NA players logging on to PvDoor the entire map every night? EU overnight hours are basically NA prime time hours. It can easily happen and would not be acceptable.

The game desperately needs an Oceanic server so these overnight PvDoor campaign champions don't have to keep tipping the scales. Until then ZOS needs to nerf points earned from overnight PvDooring by the highest pop alliance.

But, I mean… even North America has people sleeping when other people in North America are awake and playing. When it’s 10pm in Vancouver, it’s 2am in Halifax. It’s impossible to dictate when “overnight” hours begin and end in a game even in the context of North America, because there are multiple time zones in NA. Then take into account that some North American players’ primary time when they’re able to play is in the morning/daytime, some might be night owls or shift workers who are awake all night anyway, etc…

I’d be all for an Oceanic server (mainly so they can have better pings and a better experience overall), but getting upset that some people are playing a game when some other players are sleeping will be a constant source of irritation to you until you accept that people have always played this game at different times of the day and always will.

darvaria

It is a matter of a faction preferring to PV Door ... the other maps as opposed to consolidating on the campaign of your choice. Here's a shot of RH when at the same time DC was 1 bar on GH.

So, these players obviously prefer to PV Door the map, thus driving EP to GH. At this same time AD had run BR completely yellow.