No more cross faction in PVP campaigns?

Stinkur · August 2015

Something I noticed last night on PTS I had a DC toon in pvp assigned to home campaign the only choice.
Then later was trying out a different class but had picked AD, when I tried to join pvp campaign it said I couldn't because I have another alliance opposing faction already homed...

Please for all that is holy with our lord and savior Molag Bal let this be so! People will have to pick their loyalties with 1 faction. Help reduce the spies.

sadownik · August 2015

Stinkur wrote: »

Something I noticed last night on PTS I had a DC toon in pvp assigned to home campaign the only choice.
Then later was trying out a different class but had picked AD, when I tried to join pvp campaign it said I couldn't because I have another alliance opposing faction already homed...

Please for all that is holy with our lord and savior Molag Bal let this be so! People will have to pick their loyalties with 1 faction. Help reduce the spies.

Hm, use travel to player?

Stinkur · August 2015

Unsure if travel to player would work. But if say by example my EP guild homes Azura, will travel to player work if I'm on my AD toon? Aren't they removing travel to a buddy or restricting it? For this very reason, so guilds don't have to worry about joining a campaign and worrying about someone spying, or ganking their fellow guildies on their opposing faction while they listen in on TS or the like.

sadownik · August 2015

Stinkur wrote: »

Unsure if travel to player would work. But if say by example my EP guild homes Azura, will travel to player work if I'm on my AD toon? Aren't they removing travel to a buddy or restricting it? For this very reason, so guilds don't have to worry about joining a campaign and worrying about someone spying, or ganking their fellow guildies on their opposing faction while they listen in on TS or the like.

Not if you are grouped. And honestly if someone wants to spy he/she will spy (easily) and there is nothing you can do about> Afair in DCUO you could have characters in one faction - that was working.

Stinkur · August 2015

Guess it depends on travel to group member mechanics when this goes live.

Way I'm seeing and way I hope it is, your EP toon can be in say Azura's Star because it is their home/guest, but none of your AD or DC toons are allowed into Azura's because it is a conflict of interest. They have to pick a different home and guest.

OGLezard · August 2015

Brian said they have/are removing travel to player

Thalmor-Nordmaster · August 2015

Spying is easy to do. two accounts is all that is needed.

RDMyers65b14_ESO · August 2015

There is only one campaign on the PTS which is why you are unable to join with another faction alt. Likely when it goes live, the multiple campaigns will be available again.

r.jan_emailb16_ESO · August 2015

It's been like this forever, you can't have the same campaign as home for chars from different factions.

Leandor · August 2015

OGLezard wrote: »

Brian said they have/are removing travel to player

Sadly, no. To quote myself:

Leandor wrote: »

Enodoc wrote: »

I don't disagree with that. Although I'm hoping the removal of /traveltoplayer will make this less likely to be as prevalent as it currently is.

I recently had to read that you can still do that. If you are grouped up before entering the campaign, all group members can travel into the group leaders home campaign by him using "Join as a Group" option, irrespective of being homed or even guested on that campaign. So in essence they do not change anything, it will still be the absolute same thing as before with the exception that guilds will require one player (or two if they want their 50-man train) to home on each campaign.

Raid lead is usually done by "follow the wedding dress" anyways. In essence, nothing will change. Probably not even the population limit bug that I am very sure of even though it is denied by almost everyone universally.

The only change is that randoms will not be able to do that anymore, but those have never been an issue anyways. Welcome to the world of pre-mades.

I have had a really good impression on their willingness to change their own beliefs in order to make the game a better one. They are not. Extreme disappointment.

Enodoc · August 2015

Stinkur wrote: »

Something I noticed last night on PTS I had a DC toon in pvp assigned to home campaign the only choice.
Then later was trying out a different class but had picked AD, when I tried to join pvp campaign it said I couldn't because I have another alliance opposing faction already homed...

This has always been the case. You cannot home into a campaign where a toon from another faction is homed. But you will still be able to get into that campaign, if you're in a group and the group leader is homed in that campaign, using the Group Queue.

Robbmrp · August 2015

Thalmor-Nordmaster wrote: »

Spying is easy to do. two accounts is all that is needed.

Yeah, skill less cheaters will always find a way....

OGLezard · August 2015

Leandor wrote: »

OGLezard wrote: »

Brian said they have/are removing travel to player

Sadly, no. To quote myself:

Leandor wrote: »

Enodoc wrote: »

I don't disagree with that. Although I'm hoping the removal of /traveltoplayer will make this less likely to be as prevalent as it currently is.

I recently had to read that you can still do that. If you are grouped up before entering the campaign, all group members can travel into the group leaders home campaign by him using "Join as a Group" option, irrespective of being homed or even guested on that campaign. So in essence they do not change anything, it will still be the absolute same thing as before with the exception that guilds will require one player (or two if they want their 50-man train) to home on each campaign.

Raid lead is usually done by "follow the wedding dress" anyways. In essence, nothing will change. Probably not even the population limit bug that I am very sure of even though it is denied by almost everyone universally.

The only change is that randoms will not be able to do that anymore, but those have never been an issue anyways. Welcome to the world of pre-mades.

I have had a really good impression on their willingness to change their own beliefs in order to make the game a better one. They are not. Extreme disappointment.

This is one thing pvp desperately needed and it is sad that @ZOS_BrianWheeler is going back on his word.....or so it seems. I really hope they implement this......God is it needed....faction and campaign loyalty is soooooo freaking needed

Takllin · August 2015

Leandor wrote: »

OGLezard wrote: »

Brian said they have/are removing travel to player

Sadly, no. To quote myself:

Leandor wrote: »

Enodoc wrote: »

I don't disagree with that. Although I'm hoping the removal of /traveltoplayer will make this less likely to be as prevalent as it currently is.

I recently had to read that you can still do that. If you are grouped up before entering the campaign, all group members can travel into the group leaders home campaign by him using "Join as a Group" option, irrespective of being homed or even guested on that campaign. So in essence they do not change anything, it will still be the absolute same thing as before with the exception that guilds will require one player (or two if they want their 50-man train) to home on each campaign.

Raid lead is usually done by "follow the wedding dress" anyways. In essence, nothing will change. Probably not even the population limit bug that I am very sure of even though it is denied by almost everyone universally.

The only change is that randoms will not be able to do that anymore, but those have never been an issue anyways. Welcome to the world of pre-mades.

I have had a really good impression on their willingness to change their own beliefs in order to make the game a better one. They are not. Extreme disappointment.

This is by design, and is a separate function from Travel to Player.

Robbmrp wrote: »

Thalmor-Nordmaster wrote: »

Spying is easy to do. two accounts is all that is needed.

Yeah, skill less cheaters will always find a way....

Spying is not cheating...You might not like it, but it isn't against any rules or the ToS.

Also people that play on multiple alliances are not inherently spies.

Leandor · August 2015

Takllin wrote: »

Leandor wrote: »

OGLezard wrote: »

Brian said they have/are removing travel to player

Sadly, no. To quote myself:

Leandor wrote: »

Enodoc wrote: »

I don't disagree with that. Although I'm hoping the removal of /traveltoplayer will make this less likely to be as prevalent as it currently is.

I recently had to read that you can still do that. If you are grouped up before entering the campaign, all group members can travel into the group leaders home campaign by him using "Join as a Group" option, irrespective of being homed or even guested on that campaign. So in essence they do not change anything, it will still be the absolute same thing as before with the exception that guilds will require one player (or two if they want their 50-man train) to home on each campaign.

Raid lead is usually done by "follow the wedding dress" anyways. In essence, nothing will change. Probably not even the population limit bug that I am very sure of even though it is denied by almost everyone universally.

The only change is that randoms will not be able to do that anymore, but those have never been an issue anyways. Welcome to the world of pre-mades.

I have had a really good impression on their willingness to change their own beliefs in order to make the game a better one. They are not. Extreme disappointment.

This is by design, and is a separate function from Travel to Player.

I don't care if it is "another function by design". It allows the same thing that travel to player does. It needs to be treated the same way.

Takllin · August 2015

Leandor wrote: »

Takllin wrote: »

Leandor wrote: »

OGLezard wrote: »

Brian said they have/are removing travel to player

Sadly, no. To quote myself:

Leandor wrote: »

Enodoc wrote: »

I don't disagree with that. Although I'm hoping the removal of /traveltoplayer will make this less likely to be as prevalent as it currently is.

I recently had to read that you can still do that. If you are grouped up before entering the campaign, all group members can travel into the group leaders home campaign by him using "Join as a Group" option, irrespective of being homed or even guested on that campaign. So in essence they do not change anything, it will still be the absolute same thing as before with the exception that guilds will require one player (or two if they want their 50-man train) to home on each campaign.

Raid lead is usually done by "follow the wedding dress" anyways. In essence, nothing will change. Probably not even the population limit bug that I am very sure of even though it is denied by almost everyone universally.

The only change is that randoms will not be able to do that anymore, but those have never been an issue anyways. Welcome to the world of pre-mades.

I have had a really good impression on their willingness to change their own beliefs in order to make the game a better one. They are not. Extreme disappointment.

This is by design, and is a separate function from Travel to Player.

I don't care if it is "another function by design". It allows the same thing that travel to player does. It needs to be treated the same way.

It allows people who play on multiple factions to group with their friends/guildies on other factions. You can't as easily swap between campaigns now with Travel to Player gone. They need to give those who are multi-faction a way to play their characters, this is how they chose to do it.

ZOS_BrianWheeler · August 2015

Campaigns since launch have never allowed opposite alliance characters assigned to them. Currently with only 1 campaign on PTS, you would need to delete all characters associated with the single campaign offered to switch alliances.

Entering any PVP space via travel to friend on PTS (and soon on live) is disabled for all PVP zones. You can still group queue to Home assigned Campaigns to play with friends, but you now can't just jump from one Campaign to another without either of you having a Home assignment to the target Campaign. This may get restricted further in a future patch so you can only ever go to your Home or Guest assignments regardless of group member's assignments. We have not done that full restriction yet, as Cyrodiil performance is still on many players' minds when playing in Campaigns.

After Imperial City launches, we believe performance will be better in Cyrodiil which will bring the discussion of full restriction to home\guest campaigns along with the ability to unsassign yourself, but first we're taking this step of disabling "jump to friend" tech in PVP zones as that was the most egregious loophole in getting around Home\Guest assignments.

pmn100b16_ESO · August 2015

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Campaigns since launch have never allowed opposite alliance characters assigned to them. Currently with only 1 campaign on PTS, you would need to delete all characters associated with the single campaign offered to switch alliances.

Entering any PVP space via travel to friend on PTS (and soon on live) is disabled for all PVP zones. You can still group queue to Home assigned Campaigns to play with friends, but you now can't just jump from one Campaign to another without either of you having a Home assignment to the target Campaign. This may get restricted further in a future patch so you can only ever go to your Home or Guest assignments regardless of group member's assignments. We have not done that full restriction yet, as Cyrodiil performance is still on many players' minds when playing in Campaigns.

After Imperial City launches, we believe performance will be better in Cyrodiil which will bring the discussion of full restriction to home\guest campaigns along with the ability to unsassign yourself, but first we're taking this step of disabling "jump to friend" tech in PVP zones as that was the most egregious loophole in getting around Home\Guest assignments.

If performance does indeed get better (and on pts, I haven't noticed any lag in IC but haven't really seen the big aoe groups around either), will you be raising the population caps back to where they were? Or even raising them further?

I'm expecting a large influx of players to cyrodiil, specifically IC, when the dlc launches, and although you can easily add new campaigns, I'm concerned the rest of Cyrodiil could feel pretty empty if say two thirds of the population are in IC.

Leandor · August 2015

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Campaigns since launch have never allowed opposite alliance characters assigned to them. Currently with only 1 campaign on PTS, you would need to delete all characters associated with the single campaign offered to switch alliances.

Entering any PVP space via travel to friend on PTS (and soon on live) is disabled for all PVP zones. You can still group queue to Home assigned Campaigns to play with friends, but you now can't just jump from one Campaign to another without either of you having a Home assignment to the target Campaign. This may get restricted further in a future patch so you can only ever go to your Home or Guest assignments regardless of group member's assignments. We have not done that full restriction yet, as Cyrodiil performance is still on many players' minds when playing in Campaigns.

After Imperial City launches, we believe performance will be better in Cyrodiil which will bring the discussion of full restriction to home\guest campaigns along with the ability to unsassign yourself, but first we're taking this step of disabling "jump to friend" tech in PVP zones as that was the most egregious loophole in getting around Home\Guest assignments.

Thanks for this clarification. While I still do not like this decision, I can at least follow the thought process behind it.

Here's to hoping that both, performance issues and jump-flooding campaigns to turn battles, are reduced in IC.

@Takllin I have heard that argument over and over. I don't care about that issue, since the fun of a few is never worth the upset of the majority. If you want to play all three alliances, do so on three different campaigns. Yes, that makes guest campaigns useless, but that is the consequence.

Travel to player has been abused in so many ways to destroy the fun (willingly or unwillingly) of others as well as to ensure buff campaigns that there is no substance at all to the reasoning you have brought up.

ZOS_BrianWheeler · August 2015

We have also discussed raising population caps, but we will see how Imperial City goes before making that call.

Lowenhigh · August 2015

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

We have also discussed raising population caps, but we will see how Imperial City goes before making that call.

I wonder what increases pop caps would do to (PC) Azura's Star when we need to take the last keep in prime time for emp... Careful -- you might break the internet.

Leandor · August 2015

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

We have also discussed raising population caps, but we will see how Imperial City goes before making that call.

I fully agree to that. Thanks for taking the careful approach in this.

Takllin · August 2015

Leandor wrote: »

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

Campaigns since launch have never allowed opposite alliance characters assigned to them. Currently with only 1 campaign on PTS, you would need to delete all characters associated with the single campaign offered to switch alliances.

Entering any PVP space via travel to friend on PTS (and soon on live) is disabled for all PVP zones. You can still group queue to Home assigned Campaigns to play with friends, but you now can't just jump from one Campaign to another without either of you having a Home assignment to the target Campaign. This may get restricted further in a future patch so you can only ever go to your Home or Guest assignments regardless of group member's assignments. We have not done that full restriction yet, as Cyrodiil performance is still on many players' minds when playing in Campaigns.

After Imperial City launches, we believe performance will be better in Cyrodiil which will bring the discussion of full restriction to home\guest campaigns along with the ability to unsassign yourself, but first we're taking this step of disabling "jump to friend" tech in PVP zones as that was the most egregious loophole in getting around Home\Guest assignments.

@Takllin I have heard that argument over and over. I don't care about that issue, since the fun of a few is never worth the upset of the majority. If you want to play all three alliances, do so on three different campaigns. Yes, that makes guest campaigns useless, but that is the consequence.

Travel to player has been abused in so many ways to destroy the fun (willingly or unwillingly) of others as well as to ensure buff campaigns that there is no substance at all to the reasoning you have brought up.

Yes, you don't care because it doesn't affect you. How do you know that this only affects a few? I know a lot of people who play on multiple factions in PvP.

If PvP population was healthy and there was more than 1 or 2 competitive campaigns, this wouldn't be an issue. Though since we only have 1 or 2 competitive campaigns, it is.

I am very familiar with Travel to Player abuse, but to dismiss my point because of that which is unrelated to what I've said is ridiculous and if you choose to keep that stance and be close minded, then I will not bother replying back.

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

We have also discussed raising population caps, but we will see how Imperial City goes before making that call.

Please do not increase the population caps. We need more competitive campaigns with less lag, not one or two competitive campaigns with tons of lag as we have now. I'd much rather see you open more campaigns if needed than increase population caps which would only lead to more lag, and could potentially reverse all of the work you've done to alleviate the lag.

Leandor · August 2015

Takllin wrote: »

Yes, you don't care because it doesn't affect you. How do you know that this only affects a few? I know a lot of people who play on multiple factions in PvP.

Why do you people always assume to know so much about me? While I have most of my chars in EP, I do have a V10 char in DC that only does PvP and a small char in AD that occupies BWB.