Alts On Opposing Factions, Same @#%$! Campaign

jkirchner71ub17_ESO2 · November 2014

I have no doubt this loophole will be removed soon enough as zone chat was busy with players saying they are submitting feedback when it became evident a group of players from a guild were flip flopping non-stop. It was kind of pathetic as one moment you are fighting right beside them, healing them and buffing them and the next minute you are killing them. In the end it really didn't matter to be honest but it was most certainly in poor taste but this is a video game and we are all just avatars :P. Honestly this is the first MMO I have played that didn't at least have a lockout timer to prevent insta-swapping to an opposing faction.

While I do see some benefit to the travel to player option, I used it to go burn trolls camps before FCs were removed, and I know some of our most experienced players use it to play in TB on multiple factions purely to have fun and fight but you can chalk up any change to this as one guild of players ruining it for those who use this option to run in different alliances for a change-of-pace.

MiyaTheUnbroken · November 2014

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

Grim13 wrote: »

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

Grim13 wrote: »

Ras_Alghul wrote: »

So some of DiE rerolled red, who cares? Stop whining and roll them up. I personally think it is fun to face people you have fought beside before. Plus, whatever beef you may have against them, they are a good guild. This makes for a fun challenge.

lol I worry for people like you, and your ability to make your way through the world, when your comprehension is this low.

No one cares that DiE left. Honestly, good riddance! There are few guilds in the game who can match DiE's level of psychotic hubris and megalomania...

What has pissed everyone off, and I'll repeat it again in the hopes I can sneak it past your disability, was the fact that they were flip-flopping back and forth between characters in an attempt to assure EP's victory in the last campaign by abusing their ties with AD.

That, and being *** about the move in AD's zone chat.

Hell, they still occasionally pop back in to try and rile people up over it, lol. Classy stuff.

Anyway, what's done is done. We've moved on.

Out of an abundance of curiosity, how in the world did they 'attempt to assure EP's victory'?

sigh

read the thread

So, let me get this straight.

Playing for 2nd place is assuring EP's victory?

Telling AD to hit DC isn't helping EP. It is telling AD what they needed to do to not be third place. As someone who was doing the calculations of what spreads were needed every hour to change the standings on the leaderboard (as an EP guild leader it was very, very important to me to help assure our victory, so I knew how much leeway I had to be risky with giving away points), I am fairly familiar with how the standings looked on the final day.

As the day went on, the points that needed to be gained per hour to pass EP by the time the campaign ended kept increasing. At the beginning of Saturday, DC had to outscore EP by only about 30 per hour for the rest of the 24 hour period to win. As they kept failing to do so, that number per hour needed kept increasing. From 30, to 40, to 90 near the end of the day. It just wasn't happening.

AD's gap they needed to exceed our score by to close the gap was exponentially higher. At one point I calculated it at being 317 points more than either faction earned per hour to pull a win by the end. (FYI: If you need more than 399 points per hour, you're mathematically eliminated. It's impossible to win).

But.

They could've beaten DC's score. Going into the final day, if AD couldn't flip the entire map yellow and hold it all day, they weren't going to get first. Since that didn't happen, AD needed to "settle" and shoot for second place. That's good play and a good plan to get yourself in better position and get better quality rewards for yourself and your faction mates.

If AD had spent all day pounding the ever loving crap out of DC. Pushed them to their gates, take their scrolls and then camp their gates preventing them from getting so much as a resource, then DC ends up in 3rd place, AD 2nd, and EP in 1st.

As it was, AD played for third place. They decided to be spoilers and tried to prevent EP from winning instead of playing for better rewards themselves.

That's AD's choice, but playing for 2nd isn't assuring EP's victory. It's smart play and the sign of someone who is thinking about benefiting the group more than being a spoiler.

I only spent a few days on Thorn during the last campaign, but from what I saw the problem wasn't necessarily that they were pushing us towards DC rather than EP. It was more that they were pushing us to the wrong objective. For instance once I saw them pushing everyone to fight DC at Brindle and Roe, but EP was advancing on Fare and Blood. They lied about the importance of Brindle and Roe in order to confuse players who haven't learned the strategies yet.

Again, this is just one instance I saw, I wasn't there often enough to know the whole story, but if this behavior was repeated then it's clearly not "playing for 2nd" it's being a jerk.

But I could be wrong about their intentions. Like I said, I wasn't there much.

Cody · November 2014

Joy_Division wrote: »

michaelb14a_ESO2 wrote: »

Spent exactly two minutes finding this direct quote from ZOS:

It is by design that characters of differing alliances cannot join the same campaign. This prevents cross-faction information from reaching large groups with the use of "spy" characters.
-ZOS_GaryA

Next time you want to develop an opinion on something and try calling someone out, get the facts... or be damn sure they dont. I mean, now you just look like a moron.

coolthanksbye

Thank You. I can appreciate getting called out when someone provides actual documentation. It helps spur discussion. You did provide what I was asking. I will grant you that was Zenimax's original intention.

But:

- We are now nearly six months from launch and Zenimax has altered much of their original design due to how the customer-base has played their game. The scrapping of the Vet system is the most obvious example. PvP campaigns have also changed radically. At launch when there were upwards of 10 campaigns, 3 or 4 of them with consistent action, the cry of "play a different campaign" was plausible for people with cross-faction alts. That is no longer a practical option.

- Zenimax allows the "exploits" to allow people to jump-to-que because they believe, and I agree with them, that the ability to play with friends/guildmates is more important that instituting and adhering to strict measures when entering Cyrodiil. Whether or not you agree, this is Zenimax's philosophy and it is policy. I quote:

From Brian Wheeler: "Being that ESO is an MMO, adding limits to when/where I can play with friends is a key issue we’re aware. That’s why the Jump-to-Player option is currently allowed to enter Cyrodiil. It’s our belief that allowing players to group up and play together is one of the most important aspects of an MMO, and removing the capability to jump to your friends or use a guest pass would be detrimental."

- Because the game and PvP campaigns have not developed in the manner Zenimax originally envisioned, they have had to adjust and do the best they can to accommodate their player base. That is why these inconsistencies exist that would seem to contradict their original design philosophy. Zenimax understands right now that the reality of Cyrodiil is that one campaign has all the action and because of that they have implemented measures to ensure people who have months invested in their characters have access to that campaign. That is the reason the quote you provided is not on any of the Allaince WAr FAQs.

- You and several other posters in this thread obviously have a big problem with people who play on opposing factions who want to have meaningful PvP experiences. That's fine, you are entitled to your perspective. What you are not providing, however, is a fair solution to the problem that Zenimax faces: how can they orient their campaigns to ensure there are multiple meaningful campaigns and convince people to commit to one.

- I don't know the answer either. I do know that there are enough people who have spent months nurturing characters in different alliances for various reasons and the sort of strict Cyrodiil lock you would like to see implemented would effectively prevent these characters from meaningful PvP experiences. Even if you could guarantee that there were 3 campaigns with consistent PvP action, there is still the problem of being blocked from playing with friends/guildmates which Zenimax has indicated is a high priority.

when the travel to player function directly effects the game in a negative way, its time to remove it

Joy_Division · November 2014

Cody wrote: »

Joy_Division wrote: »

michaelb14a_ESO2 wrote: »

Spent exactly two minutes finding this direct quote from ZOS:

It is by design that characters of differing alliances cannot join the same campaign. This prevents cross-faction information from reaching large groups with the use of "spy" characters.
-ZOS_GaryA

Next time you want to develop an opinion on something and try calling someone out, get the facts... or be damn sure they dont. I mean, now you just look like a moron.

coolthanksbye

Thank You. I can appreciate getting called out when someone provides actual documentation. It helps spur discussion. You did provide what I was asking. I will grant you that was Zenimax's original intention.

But:

- We are now nearly six months from launch and Zenimax has altered much of their original design due to how the customer-base has played their game. The scrapping of the Vet system is the most obvious example. PvP campaigns have also changed radically. At launch when there were upwards of 10 campaigns, 3 or 4 of them with consistent action, the cry of "play a different campaign" was plausible for people with cross-faction alts. That is no longer a practical option.

- Zenimax allows the "exploits" to allow people to jump-to-que because they believe, and I agree with them, that the ability to play with friends/guildmates is more important that instituting and adhering to strict measures when entering Cyrodiil. Whether or not you agree, this is Zenimax's philosophy and it is policy. I quote:

From Brian Wheeler: "Being that ESO is an MMO, adding limits to when/where I can play with friends is a key issue we’re aware. That’s why the Jump-to-Player option is currently allowed to enter Cyrodiil. It’s our belief that allowing players to group up and play together is one of the most important aspects of an MMO, and removing the capability to jump to your friends or use a guest pass would be detrimental."

- Because the game and PvP campaigns have not developed in the manner Zenimax originally envisioned, they have had to adjust and do the best they can to accommodate their player base. That is why these inconsistencies exist that would seem to contradict their original design philosophy. Zenimax understands right now that the reality of Cyrodiil is that one campaign has all the action and because of that they have implemented measures to ensure people who have months invested in their characters have access to that campaign. That is the reason the quote you provided is not on any of the Allaince WAr FAQs.

- You and several other posters in this thread obviously have a big problem with people who play on opposing factions who want to have meaningful PvP experiences. That's fine, you are entitled to your perspective. What you are not providing, however, is a fair solution to the problem that Zenimax faces: how can they orient their campaigns to ensure there are multiple meaningful campaigns and convince people to commit to one.

- I don't know the answer either. I do know that there are enough people who have spent months nurturing characters in different alliances for various reasons and the sort of strict Cyrodiil lock you would like to see implemented would effectively prevent these characters from meaningful PvP experiences. Even if you could guarantee that there were 3 campaigns with consistent PvP action, there is still the problem of being blocked from playing with friends/guildmates which Zenimax has indicated is a high priority.

when the travel to player function directly effects the game in a negative way, its time to remove it

As I pointed out, removing that option creates problems and effects the game in a negative way as well.

Subtomik · November 2014

It was pretty funny watching half of them on AD and half of them on EP pushing our scrolls without so much as a small engagement on any other part of the map.

Being double teamed happens, no big deal it happens to everyone.

But going from ni-mohk to alma ruma and seeing members of the same guild on AD and EP leading the charge against us was a bit lulzy. Oh well first night of pvp and the team Jakob lulz were fun

Rylana · November 2014

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

Grim13 wrote: »

Agrippa_Invisus wrote: »

Grim13 wrote: »

Ras_Alghul wrote: »

So some of DiE rerolled red, who cares? Stop whining and roll them up. I personally think it is fun to face people you have fought beside before. Plus, whatever beef you may have against them, they are a good guild. This makes for a fun challenge.

lol I worry for people like you, and your ability to make your way through the world, when your comprehension is this low.

No one cares that DiE left. Honestly, good riddance! There are few guilds in the game who can match DiE's level of psychotic hubris and megalomania...

What has pissed everyone off, and I'll repeat it again in the hopes I can sneak it past your disability, was the fact that they were flip-flopping back and forth between characters in an attempt to assure EP's victory in the last campaign by abusing their ties with AD.

That, and being *** about the move in AD's zone chat.

Hell, they still occasionally pop back in to try and rile people up over it, lol. Classy stuff.

Anyway, what's done is done. We've moved on.

Out of an abundance of curiosity, how in the world did they 'attempt to assure EP's victory'?

sigh

read the thread

So, let me get this straight.

Playing for 2nd place is assuring EP's victory?

Telling AD to hit DC isn't helping EP. It is telling AD what they needed to do to not be third place. As someone who was doing the calculations of what spreads were needed every hour to change the standings on the leaderboard (as an EP guild leader it was very, very important to me to help assure our victory, so I knew how much leeway I had to be risky with giving away points), I am fairly familiar with how the standings looked on the final day.

As the day went on, the points that needed to be gained per hour to pass EP by the time the campaign ended kept increasing. At the beginning of Saturday, DC had to outscore EP by only about 30 per hour for the rest of the 24 hour period to win. As they kept failing to do so, that number per hour needed kept increasing. From 30, to 40, to 90 near the end of the day. It just wasn't happening.

AD's gap they needed to exceed our score by to close the gap was exponentially higher. At one point I calculated it at being 317 points more than either faction earned per hour to pull a win by the end. (FYI: If you need more than 399 points per hour, you're mathematically eliminated. It's impossible to win).

But.

They could've beaten DC's score. Going into the final day, if AD couldn't flip the entire map yellow and hold it all day, they weren't going to get first. Since that didn't happen, AD needed to "settle" and shoot for second place. That's good play and a good plan to get yourself in better position and get better quality rewards for yourself and your faction mates.

If AD had spent all day pounding the ever loving crap out of DC. Pushed them to their gates, take their scrolls and then camp their gates preventing them from getting so much as a resource, then DC ends up in 3rd place, AD 2nd, and EP in 1st.

As it was, AD played for third place. They decided to be spoilers and tried to prevent EP from winning instead of playing for better rewards themselves.

That's AD's choice, but playing for 2nd isn't assuring EP's victory. It's smart play and the sign of someone who is thinking about benefiting the group more than being a spoiler.

AD was technically still in the running until approximately 6 hours before flip, but i digress as at the 6 hour mark they reached that magic 400+ number needed per hour.

The campaign as a whole was decided on less than a 5% lead. The full point spread was closer than most presidential elections in the last 30 years.