VaranisArano wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

pieratsos wrote: »

Vastly outnumbered factions having buffs is how the system is supposed to be working in the first place. But at the same time you give buffs to the dominant faction just for the sake of having the delusion of getting rewarded which makes no sense since the reward already exists in terms or stacking points that will help you win the campaign which is how every competitive match works anyway. You do good, you win you get rewarded. You dont see football matches where the team that is leading is allowed to put more players in the game just because they are leading. Thats stupid. If you want some extra rewards for doing good look at a different way of getting them like rewards of the worthy. Not at buffs that shift the scales even more.

Since when?

Since when are the buffs awarded to a faction for holding all of the home keeps, capturing enemy keeps, holding defensive and offensive scrolls, and the emperorship supposed to be given to the faction that is losing?

ZOS already buff the outnumbered population . Its called the low population bonus. I've got no problem with this. If you want to argue that it should be improved, argue away.
http://en.uesp.net/wiki/Online:Campaigns
"At certain times, one of the alliances may qualify for an "underdog bonus" during a particular campaign. These are applied when an alliance has a consistently low population of players entering that campaign, or if an alliance has a significantly lower score than the others. Underdog bonuses are re-evaluated every 30 minutes, and grant a 20% increase to Alliance Point gain for the duration. The population and scoring bonus takes all the samples its collected over a period of time, and then on each evaluation period, measures the current score against the average of the prior samples, then applies bonuses as needed. An alliance that is currently benefiting from an underdog bonus will display one of the following icons on the scoreboard:

Population Underdog — Scoring bonus ×4, AP bonus 20%
Score Underdog — Scoring bonus ×3, AP bonus 20%"

But those aren't the buffs you are complaining about. No, you are complaining about the other buffs. The ones awarded for capturing enemy keeps and scrolls;
Enemy Keeps Increases experience, alliance points, and gold gained from kills by 7%. Increase Weapon Critical and Spell Critical by 2%.- 8%(8% with all keeps)
Or the Scrolls bonuses for armor rating by 5%, and Increases weapon power and spell power by 5% if you have plenty of enemy scrolls.

So. Since when were those buffs supposed to be awarded to the outnumbered and losing faction instead of the faction that accomplished those objectives? Since when?

Since you just literally said that the outnumbered faction is already getting buffed. So the system is supposed to be helping the outnumbered faction to make the campaign more competitive. But its also buffing the dominant faction which makes no sense cause its the exact opposite of what its intentions are. (buff the underdogs to make the campaign competitive).

You see, i understand your point. You want to see the dominant faction rewarded etc. I get that. I dont disagree with that. The problem is that those buffs are not a reward. Seriously man they are not. No one cares about them. No one plays for the objectives just to get more crit. You are knocking on the wrong doors. And at the same time by defending those buffs for no reason at all since they are not really rewards, you also harm the campaign in terms of making it one sided. So again, you want to be rewarded for doing good. Ok i get that. But harming the campaign just to get the delusion of being rewarded is not the solution.

The Low Population Bonus is buffing their score, not the players. The function of that is to make sure the score doesn't become completely one-sided, aka so players don't completely give up because they are too deep in the hole.

The bonuses for objectives are there for completing objectives. Capturing keeps, resources, scrolls, emperorship. The function of that is to encourage and reward players for focusing on campaign objectives, aka playing the Cyrodiil AvAvA how it was designed. While the bonuses are relatively minor, on competitive campaigns, you will see people talk about getting the home keep bonuses, or the scroll buffs. They are good, short term and relatively low impact bonuses for focusing on campaign objectives, at least in competitive campaigns.

They are not the same buffs. They do not serve the same function. You want the second set of buffs to function like the first, I think they are fine as they are on competitive campaigns. We disagree.

I know they are not the same buffs. And i am talking about that specific purpose. Not making campaigns one-sided. Which is what those buffs help do. No one likes campaigns painted in one colour. No one. Not just on score but in general. Which is why vastly outnumbered factions pushed back all the way to their gates should have those buffs. To help them.

I understand that you want more rewards for doing good (apart from the obvious rewards like points and AP) but those buffs are not rewards. You are talking about incentives for completing objectives and playing for ur alliance. No one looks at them as rewards or incentives. As it is now the system just doesnt work.

No one? I do. The PVP guild I'm in does. On competitive campaigns, those bonuses for objectives are seen as rewards, though minor rewards because, again, they are balanced on competitive campaigns and relatively minor increases. You aren't talking about competitive campaigns where we actually see Cyrodiil functioning as designed.

On non-competitive campaigns, they don't work like that, sure. But why should ZOS change the way Cyrodiil works in order to fix a non-competitive campaign where the problems are caused by a fundamental lack of population? They close non-competitive campaigns instead. So which campaign are we closing?

Or in other words, argue for a specific campaign's ruleset to be changed, and I'll go with that. We can try it out, see whether your method works to revive a non-competitive campaign. But your solution is not needed and would hurt objective-based gameplay (how Cyrodiil is designed to be played) on Competitive Campaigns.

Nightcaps and maps painted in one colour exist on competitive campaigns too you know. The campaigns are open all day. Not just on prime time where its pop locked.

Again, they are not rewards. There is really no other way to put it. The only relevant reward in cyro is AP and thats not really a debate. Half of the people dont give a crap about playing for their alliance. Even those that do play for the objectives do it for the AP.

So getting buffed for getting scrolls, home keeps, enemy keeps, and emperorship isn't a reward now? Really now.

A competitive campaign has semi-organized PVP going on at all hours of the day. I play on PC/NA Vivec and every morning for a while now, there's a AD ball group that decides to push EP. Is that somehow non-competitive? No. EP has enough players, we just don't always organize properly to deal with it. That's our problem as a faction, not an unbalanced or noncompetitive campaign.