Rohamad_Ali wrote: »Jokes aside I'm fine with how things are now . Vivec NA PC had one of the closest three way score at campaign end in history . All because a couple of guilds were able to switch faction an help AD who had not won in a long time . It's really up to great guilds and players like NI and TKG on NA PC to help keep things fun and balanced . Rules don't always lead to balance . I understand the frustration but this is the truth . When we had faction campaign locks people just found ways to exploit arose it or made multiple accounts . There was no way for ZoS to enforce campaign loyalty .
The only way to encourage campaign loyalty is with special worth while rewards for spending time with one that could not be accomplished with two or more . Somethings rare and exciting to win . Not the usual rewards at all in the usual way . That is the truth to me .
Rohamad_Ali wrote: »Jokes aside I'm fine with how things are now . Vivec NA PC had one of the closest three way score at campaign end in history . All because a couple of guilds were able to switch faction an help AD who had not won in a long time . It's really up to great guilds and players like NI and TKG on NA PC to help keep things fun and balanced . Rules don't always lead to balance . I understand the frustration but this is the truth . When we had faction campaign locks people just found ways to exploit arose it or made multiple accounts . There was no way for ZoS to enforce campaign loyalty .
The only way to encourage campaign loyalty is with special worth while rewards for spending time with one that could not be accomplished with two or more . Somethings rare and exciting to win . Not the usual rewards at all in the usual way . That is the truth to me .
Although it might seem like helping, all that does is make the campaign totally artificial. The score was close because a few guilds chose to make it that way.
greenmachine wrote: »I'm no hardcore PvPer. I'm not singlehandedly changing the course of any battles. I started playing this game to play with friends and we all have multiple toons on all factions. If I log on and see them on Cyrodiil on DC characters, I think I should be able to join them, even if I was playing on AD the day before. That might not be a popular opinion among hardcore PvPers or faction loyalists, but locking the campaign for a month would essentially just make me want to PvP less or not at all. I doubt I'm alone in thinking that.
Would a short cooldown on changing factions be a sufficient compromise? It seems like faction switching to give away faction strategies or positions would be a real problem, but if there was a four-hour cooldown on switching factions, that information would be useless.
Rohamad_Ali wrote: »Jokes aside I'm fine with how things are now . Vivec NA PC had one of the closest three way score at campaign end in history . All because a couple of guilds were able to switch faction an help AD who had not won in a long time . It's really up to great guilds and players like NI and TKG on NA PC to help keep things fun and balanced . Rules don't always lead to balance . I understand the frustration but this is the truth . When we had faction campaign locks people just found ways to exploit arose it or made multiple accounts . There was no way for ZoS to enforce campaign loyalty .
The only way to encourage campaign loyalty is with special worth while rewards for spending time with one that could not be accomplished with two or more . Somethings rare and exciting to win . Not the usual rewards at all in the usual way . That is the truth to me .
Although it might seem like helping, all that does is make the campaign totally artificial. The score was close because a few guilds chose to make it that way.
SwampRaider wrote: »Rohamad_Ali wrote: »Jokes aside I'm fine with how things are now . Vivec NA PC had one of the closest three way score at campaign end in history . All because a couple of guilds were able to switch faction an help AD who had not won in a long time . It's really up to great guilds and players like NI and TKG on NA PC to help keep things fun and balanced . Rules don't always lead to balance . I understand the frustration but this is the truth . When we had faction campaign locks people just found ways to exploit arose it or made multiple accounts . There was no way for ZoS to enforce campaign loyalty .
The only way to encourage campaign loyalty is with special worth while rewards for spending time with one that could not be accomplished with two or more . Somethings rare and exciting to win . Not the usual rewards at all in the usual way . That is the truth to me .
Although it might seem like helping, all that does is make the campaign totally artificial. The score was close because a few guilds chose to make it that way.
Agreed. Alliances should be able to fix themselves, or it is totally artificial. A few guilds switching, to turn tide of a campaign is what we are trying to avoid. Choosing sides before a campaign and sticking with those sides, makes it fair and balanced.
DuskMarine wrote: »SwampRaider wrote: »Rohamad_Ali wrote: »Jokes aside I'm fine with how things are now . Vivec NA PC had one of the closest three way score at campaign end in history . All because a couple of guilds were able to switch faction an help AD who had not won in a long time . It's really up to great guilds and players like NI and TKG on NA PC to help keep things fun and balanced . Rules don't always lead to balance . I understand the frustration but this is the truth . When we had faction campaign locks people just found ways to exploit arose it or made multiple accounts . There was no way for ZoS to enforce campaign loyalty .
The only way to encourage campaign loyalty is with special worth while rewards for spending time with one that could not be accomplished with two or more . Somethings rare and exciting to win . Not the usual rewards at all in the usual way . That is the truth to me .
Although it might seem like helping, all that does is make the campaign totally artificial. The score was close because a few guilds chose to make it that way.
Agreed. Alliances should be able to fix themselves, or it is totally artificial. A few guilds switching, to turn tide of a campaign is what we are trying to avoid. Choosing sides before a campaign and sticking with those sides, makes it fair and balanced.
it does but it also screws over those who want a more fluid pvp(like when a side goes full potato to where they just stop attacking wheres the fun in that)
TequilaFire wrote: »DuskMarine wrote: »SwampRaider wrote: »Rohamad_Ali wrote: »Jokes aside I'm fine with how things are now . Vivec NA PC had one of the closest three way score at campaign end in history . All because a couple of guilds were able to switch faction an help AD who had not won in a long time . It's really up to great guilds and players like NI and TKG on NA PC to help keep things fun and balanced . Rules don't always lead to balance . I understand the frustration but this is the truth . When we had faction campaign locks people just found ways to exploit arose it or made multiple accounts . There was no way for ZoS to enforce campaign loyalty .
The only way to encourage campaign loyalty is with special worth while rewards for spending time with one that could not be accomplished with two or more . Somethings rare and exciting to win . Not the usual rewards at all in the usual way . That is the truth to me .
Although it might seem like helping, all that does is make the campaign totally artificial. The score was close because a few guilds chose to make it that way.
Agreed. Alliances should be able to fix themselves, or it is totally artificial. A few guilds switching, to turn tide of a campaign is what we are trying to avoid. Choosing sides before a campaign and sticking with those sides, makes it fair and balanced.
it does but it also screws over those who want a more fluid pvp(like when a side goes full potato to where they just stop attacking wheres the fun in that)
Step up and lead and rally the troops, most of the time they are just waiting for some one to lead a group.
Back when IC launched I used the city bosses to solo my way to emperor status. I pleaded for help in zone to take the last two keeps, but had to do it myself. I took too long because I didn't have a guild, and the Aussie AD players got on and retook the map. I logged off feeling completely defeated.
The next day I found out no one would help me because the guild that was on the night before was trying to get the player in 2nd place, their guildie, to emperor instead of me. I still remember his name.
So, from the very essence of my being and without any insult meant to the zerglings of ESO, fetch your sodding alliance loyalty.
I care about good fights and fun moments. The campaign score means nothing to me now. When I see a single AD getting stomped by a tbagging ep group, I desperately want to turncoat and help, but by the time I get on my yellow dk it's too late.
It should be said that the players I see championing this thread idea are usually the ones I see hardcore PvDooring.
TequilaFire wrote: »DuskMarine wrote: »SwampRaider wrote: »Rohamad_Ali wrote: »Jokes aside I'm fine with how things are now . Vivec NA PC had one of the closest three way score at campaign end in history . All because a couple of guilds were able to switch faction an help AD who had not won in a long time . It's really up to great guilds and players like NI and TKG on NA PC to help keep things fun and balanced . Rules don't always lead to balance . I understand the frustration but this is the truth . When we had faction campaign locks people just found ways to exploit arose it or made multiple accounts . There was no way for ZoS to enforce campaign loyalty .
The only way to encourage campaign loyalty is with special worth while rewards for spending time with one that could not be accomplished with two or more . Somethings rare and exciting to win . Not the usual rewards at all in the usual way . That is the truth to me .
Although it might seem like helping, all that does is make the campaign totally artificial. The score was close because a few guilds chose to make it that way.
Agreed. Alliances should be able to fix themselves, or it is totally artificial. A few guilds switching, to turn tide of a campaign is what we are trying to avoid. Choosing sides before a campaign and sticking with those sides, makes it fair and balanced.
it does but it also screws over those who want a more fluid pvp(like when a side goes full potato to where they just stop attacking wheres the fun in that)
Step up and lead and rally the troops, most of the time they are just waiting for some one to lead a group.
usmguy1234 wrote: »Yes because changing sides during a war is so rare... I'm looking at you 1943 Italy.
DuskMarine wrote: »TequilaFire wrote: »DuskMarine wrote: »SwampRaider wrote: »Rohamad_Ali wrote: »Jokes aside I'm fine with how things are now . Vivec NA PC had one of the closest three way score at campaign end in history . All because a couple of guilds were able to switch faction an help AD who had not won in a long time . It's really up to great guilds and players like NI and TKG on NA PC to help keep things fun and balanced . Rules don't always lead to balance . I understand the frustration but this is the truth . When we had faction campaign locks people just found ways to exploit arose it or made multiple accounts . There was no way for ZoS to enforce campaign loyalty .
The only way to encourage campaign loyalty is with special worth while rewards for spending time with one that could not be accomplished with two or more . Somethings rare and exciting to win . Not the usual rewards at all in the usual way . That is the truth to me .
Although it might seem like helping, all that does is make the campaign totally artificial. The score was close because a few guilds chose to make it that way.
Agreed. Alliances should be able to fix themselves, or it is totally artificial. A few guilds switching, to turn tide of a campaign is what we are trying to avoid. Choosing sides before a campaign and sticking with those sides, makes it fair and balanced.
it does but it also screws over those who want a more fluid pvp(like when a side goes full potato to where they just stop attacking wheres the fun in that)
Step up and lead and rally the troops, most of the time they are just waiting for some one to lead a group.
thats not my issue. i dont think youve ever played on vivec early in the morning in dc they tend to go into potato mode really bad to where they listen to nobody. if you want pvp youve gotta wait till prime time otherwise your just dealing with bricks.
craftycarper73 wrote: »So i see it this way, even though i am a day 1 DC player (ps4) and have 7 DC toons, i will and have created an AD toon.
Guess what, its my money that bought the game, its my money thats subs to the game and its also my time that plays the game, so i will play it how i want, when i want and on which alliance i want.
Dont like it? Its called tough.
TequilaFire wrote: »craftycarper73 wrote: »So i see it this way, even though i am a day 1 DC player (ps4) and have 7 DC toons, i will and have created an AD toon.
Guess what, its my money that bought the game, its my money thats subs to the game and its also my time that plays the game, so i will play it how i want, when i want and on which alliance i want.
Dont like it? Its called tough.
Games have rules and objectives that shouldn't be bypassed just because you bought the game.
TequilaFire wrote: »DuskMarine wrote: »TequilaFire wrote: »DuskMarine wrote: »SwampRaider wrote: »Rohamad_Ali wrote: »Jokes aside I'm fine with how things are now . Vivec NA PC had one of the closest three way score at campaign end in history . All because a couple of guilds were able to switch faction an help AD who had not won in a long time . It's really up to great guilds and players like NI and TKG on NA PC to help keep things fun and balanced . Rules don't always lead to balance . I understand the frustration but this is the truth . When we had faction campaign locks people just found ways to exploit arose it or made multiple accounts . There was no way for ZoS to enforce campaign loyalty .
The only way to encourage campaign loyalty is with special worth while rewards for spending time with one that could not be accomplished with two or more . Somethings rare and exciting to win . Not the usual rewards at all in the usual way . That is the truth to me .
Although it might seem like helping, all that does is make the campaign totally artificial. The score was close because a few guilds chose to make it that way.
Agreed. Alliances should be able to fix themselves, or it is totally artificial. A few guilds switching, to turn tide of a campaign is what we are trying to avoid. Choosing sides before a campaign and sticking with those sides, makes it fair and balanced.
it does but it also screws over those who want a more fluid pvp(like when a side goes full potato to where they just stop attacking wheres the fun in that)
Step up and lead and rally the troops, most of the time they are just waiting for some one to lead a group.
thats not my issue. i dont think youve ever played on vivec early in the morning in dc they tend to go into potato mode really bad to where they listen to nobody. if you want pvp youve gotta wait till prime time otherwise your just dealing with bricks.
Most games are like that though, why they call it prime time.
I play on PS4 NA Vivec on EP and most of the time DC or AD has taken the map overnight and as EP we take the rest of the day taking the map back. I am lucky though I am retired, most have to work or go to school during the day.
On PC I notice that the PvP population is smaller than on PS4 overall.
usmguy1234 wrote: »Yes because changing sides during a war is so rare... I'm looking at you 1943 Italy.
ha ha only after they had surrendered to the allied forces. I'm sure that being occupied by the allied forces and the death of Mussolini had nothing to do with it.
TequilaFire wrote: »We can argue all day but ultimately the devs will make some change to stop the abuse that is going on now.
If you don't see the abuse you probably don't PvP every day or are not plugged in politically with the PvP guilds.
The game needs to go back to the greatness it had, not this AP farming COD sandbox it has become.