You obviously don't play off peak. Max 1 bar in Vivec, every other campaign is dead. 0 bars. PvDoor.
Cute picture though.
Much less scroll scams, much less toxicity in chat, much less pug locking in useless fights, much less spying, much more balanced populations (because now most people can't hop on campaign where they are winning to ez play, they need to deal with what they find). In general I'm really happy with the lock.
Much less scroll scams, much less toxicity in chat, much less pug locking in useless fights, much less spying, much more balanced populations (because now most people can't hop on campaign where they are winning to ez play, they need to deal with what they find). In general I'm really happy with the lock.
Nothing really prevents people from joining the winning faction. All I´ve to do is wait until the last few days right before the campaign is about to end, ask someone who plays on that specific campaign who´s winning, and assign all my characters of that faction to that campaign. And it´s even easier than before, since with faction locks implemented, the difference in score between the different factions are much bigger than pre-Elsweyr.
You obviously don't play off peak. Max 1 bar in Vivec, every other campaign is dead. 0 bars. PvDoor.
Cute picture though.
Dude, you are either doing this on purpose or simply don't get it.
What people is trying to tell you is that if Shor is STILL "dead" that means that there aren't as many people as you say who dislike the new faction locks. That or they simply made their choice and remained at the locked campaigns.
The changes are good, those who don't care about the alliance can go to the baby campaigns and leave the 30 days ones to people who are really commited to a specific alliance.
You obviously don't play off peak. Max 1 bar in Vivec, every other campaign is dead. 0 bars. PvDoor.
Cute picture though.
Dude, you are either doing this on purpose or simply don't get it.
What people is trying to tell you is that if Shor is STILL "dead" that means that there aren't as many people as you say who dislike the new faction locks. That or they simply made their choice and remained at the locked campaigns.
The changes are good, those who don't care about the alliance can go to the baby campaigns and leave the 30 days ones to people who are really commited to a specific alliance.
The grand total of all the players in all campaigns in off peak is 1 bar tops (and even zero bars). That's it!
You obviously don't play off peak. Max 1 bar in Vivec, every other campaign is dead. 0 bars. PvDoor.
Cute picture though.
Dude, you are either doing this on purpose or simply don't get it.
What people is trying to tell you is that if Shor is STILL "dead" that means that there aren't as many people as you say who dislike the new faction locks. That or they simply made their choice and remained at the locked campaigns.
The changes are good, those who don't care about the alliance can go to the baby campaigns and leave the 30 days ones to people who are really commited to a specific alliance.
The grand total of all the players in all campaigns in off peak is 1 bar tops (and even zero bars). That's it!
If that's the case then you would have the same problem even if campaigns were unlocked. 😂
You obviously don't play off peak. Max 1 bar in Vivec, every other campaign is dead. 0 bars. PvDoor.
Cute picture though.
Dude, you are either doing this on purpose or simply don't get it.
What people is trying to tell you is that if Shor is STILL "dead" that means that there aren't as many people as you say who dislike the new faction locks. That or they simply made their choice and remained at the locked campaigns.
The changes are good, those who don't care about the alliance can go to the baby campaigns and leave the 30 days ones to people who are really commited to a specific alliance.
The grand total of all the players in all campaigns in off peak is 1 bar tops (and even zero bars). That's it!
If that's the case then you would have the same problem even if campaigns were unlocked. 😂
Except then we could jump to the faction getting pushed and get some good fights, no matter which character it is, rather than just zergstomping them, which is happening right now in Cyro on XNA. Now though....
And heaven forbid you want to main a red in NoCP on XNA. Last I looked DC had gated everyone, had 35K points on the board, AD had 30 odd K, and red.... 11K.
You obviously don't play off peak. Max 1 bar in Vivec, every other campaign is dead. 0 bars. PvDoor.
Cute picture though.
Dude, you are either doing this on purpose or simply don't get it.
What people is trying to tell you is that if Shor is STILL "dead" that means that there aren't as many people as you say who dislike the new faction locks. That or they simply made their choice and remained at the locked campaigns.
The changes are good, those who don't care about the alliance can go to the baby campaigns and leave the 30 days ones to people who are really commited to a specific alliance.
The grand total of all the players in all campaigns in off peak is 1 bar tops (and even zero bars). That's it!
If that's the case then you would have the same problem even if campaigns were unlocked. 😂
Except then we could jump to the faction getting pushed and get some good fights, no matter which character it is, rather than just zergstomping them, which is happening right now in Cyro on XNA. Now though....
And heaven forbid you want to main a red in NoCP on XNA. Last I looked DC had gated everyone, had 35K points on the board, AD had 30 odd K, and red.... 11K.
Join reds next campaign and you'll have plenty of good fights, problem solved.
You obviously don't play off peak. Max 1 bar in Vivec, every other campaign is dead. 0 bars. PvDoor.
Cute picture though.
Dude, you are either doing this on purpose or simply don't get it.
What people is trying to tell you is that if Shor is STILL "dead" that means that there aren't as many people as you say who dislike the new faction locks. That or they simply made their choice and remained at the locked campaigns.
The changes are good, those who don't care about the alliance can go to the baby campaigns and leave the 30 days ones to people who are really commited to a specific alliance.
The grand total of all the players in all campaigns in off peak is 1 bar tops (and even zero bars). That's it!
If that's the case then you would have the same problem even if campaigns were unlocked. 😂
Except then we could jump to the faction getting pushed and get some good fights, no matter which character it is, rather than just zergstomping them, which is happening right now in Cyro on XNA. Now though....
And heaven forbid you want to main a red in NoCP on XNA. Last I looked DC had gated everyone, had 35K points on the board, AD had 30 odd K, and red.... 11K.
Join reds next campaign and you'll have plenty of good fights, problem solved.
You just don't read so well, do you. 0 bars pop.
You obviously don't play off peak. Max 1 bar in Vivec, every other campaign is dead. 0 bars. PvDoor.
Cute picture though.
Dude, you are either doing this on purpose or simply don't get it.
What people is trying to tell you is that if Shor is STILL "dead" that means that there aren't as many people as you say who dislike the new faction locks. That or they simply made their choice and remained at the locked campaigns.
The changes are good, those who don't care about the alliance can go to the baby campaigns and leave the 30 days ones to people who are really commited to a specific alliance.
The grand total of all the players in all campaigns in off peak is 1 bar tops (and even zero bars). That's it!
If that's the case then you would have the same problem even if campaigns were unlocked. 😂
Last I looked DC had gated everyone, had 35K points on the board, AD had 30 odd K, and red.... 11K.
It would also be another thing if Shor actually had any population to act as an alternative, but its 0 bars 90% of the day. Some compromise would be nice, hopefully the RPers can see past their fantasies and just let people play the game the way its been played for years.
Basically let the cheats keep cheating? No thanks. The change has made a positive differnrce already and all the 'sky is falling' nonsense from the anti lock camp hasn't happened.
The only downside is folls with tri-toons need to get organised with their mates. It's not that hard. Adapt and overcome. Move along the change curve.
The cheats? Imagine thinking that people actually hop factions to sneak "intel". No one does that, and even if some random did, it never makes a difference. The map flips from groups, not the 100 man zergs that get wiped from an organized 12 man, and fast at that.
You can't just change such a crucial part of the game after so many years and expect people to just go with it for the sake of faction pride. Most people have played at least two factions and invested thousands of hours between different characters, and you're just gonna come out of no where and say I can't play that character essentially for a month? Does that not seem radical to any of you? Like I've said 5x now, why not be reasonable and implement a solution that pleases both sides rather than doing such a radical change?
1) Faction lock did not 'come out of nowhere' ZoS warned a year ago that reintroduction was being considered. Granted, the discussions leading to ZoS's decision are found in the Alliance War subforum, so it'easily missed, but the warning was in the release notes for the previous chapter.
ZoS stated they would monitor Alliance loyalty. This was a result of extensive reports of behaviors made possible by 'faction-hopping' that defeated/bypassed fundamental PvP/Cyrodiil game design. In fact, ZoS requested reports of two of those behaviors. Apprantly, after two years of reports and a year of ZoS 'monitoring', faction lock reintroduction is necessary.
2) The issue is not 'gathering intel'.
Cool, but that's not my point. It doesn't matter how much notice they give, they're screwing over anyone who doesn't play just one faction. Like what Bagon said, you're alienating that entire audience because everyone is so paranoid about faction hoppers. At least think on the solution that I came up with, because as many as these RPers are happy, there are just as many who are disappointed.
I don't disagree with you.
Several players have stated that when faction lock was removed previously, ZoS encouraged creation of characters of differing Alliances to 'play with your friends', and they did so.
These players are rightfully aggrieved, and being compelled to switch to a different campaign format may be unsatisfactory.
Yeah, its a shame other people can't at the very least empathize with our viewpoint and think about it reasonably. I'm not sure what platform you're on, but on Xbox Vivec Is the only campaign with any population. These people saying "Oh, just go play a different campaign don't realize that Shor is 0 bars most of the day. It's hilarious seeing people make that argument, knowing its impossible.
Don't you see the irony with that statement? If as you say there are hordes of people that hate faction lock, couldn't that horde of people head to Shor? Wouldn't that make Shor the most popular server and make the 30 day server die, since everyone hates faction lock?
How many times do you guys need to be told. On XNA outside of a few hours a day, Shor is dead. In off peak there's not really enough pop to support one server.
Quit trolling with this "suggestion".
xxthir13enxx wrote: »Siohwenoeht wrote: »It's a nice thought, but they'd need to figure out a lot of things. If your toon has partially completed the main quest for instance, how does it work? The alliance quests are the same way.
I've suggested adding it as a reward for cadwell's gold, that way you eliminate both the harbourage issue and alliance quest issue since it would all be completed by then.
If it's tokens, one time per character only, but zos has stated it's not very easy at a technical level to do.
Easy just allow people to pick a faction besides their birth to support instead of your alliance in cydrolli. It would be simple as changing the spawn area.
Ya this is the thought I just had actually that made me look this up...lol
Change Cyrodiils Alliances away from the characters Quest line Alliance and make it function the same way BGs work...
Except you select your Alliance for each Campaign...no longer need an Alliance Change token...just select Which team you want to fight for...
TequilaFire wrote: »It would also be another thing if Shor actually had any population to act as an alternative, but its 0 bars 90% of the day. Some compromise would be nice, hopefully the RPers can see past their fantasies and just let people play the game the way its been played for years.
Basically let the cheats keep cheating? No thanks. The change has made a positive differnrce already and all the 'sky is falling' nonsense from the anti lock camp hasn't happened.
The only downside is folls with tri-toons need to get organised with their mates. It's not that hard. Adapt and overcome. Move along the change curve.
The cheats? Imagine thinking that people actually hop factions to sneak "intel". No one does that, and even if some random did, it never makes a difference. The map flips from groups, not the 100 man zergs that get wiped from an organized 12 man, and fast at that.
You can't just change such a crucial part of the game after so many years and expect people to just go with it for the sake of faction pride. Most people have played at least two factions and invested thousands of hours between different characters, and you're just gonna come out of no where and say I can't play that character essentially for a month? Does that not seem radical to any of you? Like I've said 5x now, why not be reasonable and implement a solution that pleases both sides rather than doing such a radical change?
1) Faction lock did not 'come out of nowhere' ZoS warned a year ago that reintroduction was being considered. Granted, the discussions leading to ZoS's decision are found in the Alliance War subforum, so it'easily missed, but the warning was in the release notes for the previous chapter.
ZoS stated they would monitor Alliance loyalty. This was a result of extensive reports of behaviors made possible by 'faction-hopping' that defeated/bypassed fundamental PvP/Cyrodiil game design. In fact, ZoS requested reports of two of those behaviors. Apprantly, after two years of reports and a year of ZoS 'monitoring', faction lock reintroduction is necessary.
2) The issue is not 'gathering intel'.
Cool, but that's not my point. It doesn't matter how much notice they give, they're screwing over anyone who doesn't play just one faction. Like what Bagon said, you're alienating that entire audience because everyone is so paranoid about faction hoppers. At least think on the solution that I came up with, because as many as these RPers are happy, there are just as many who are disappointed.
I don't disagree with you.
Several players have stated that when faction lock was removed previously, ZoS encouraged creation of characters of differing Alliances to 'play with your friends', and they did so.
These players are rightfully aggrieved, and being compelled to switch to a different campaign format may be unsatisfactory.
Yeah, its a shame other people can't at the very least empathize with our viewpoint and think about it reasonably. I'm not sure what platform you're on, but on Xbox Vivec Is the only campaign with any population. These people saying "Oh, just go play a different campaign don't realize that Shor is 0 bars most of the day. It's hilarious seeing people make that argument, knowing its impossible.
Don't you see the irony with that statement? If as you say there are hordes of people that hate faction lock, couldn't that horde of people head to Shor? Wouldn't that make Shor the most popular server and make the 30 day server die, since everyone hates faction lock?
How many times do you guys need to be told. On XNA outside of a few hours a day, Shor is dead. In off peak there's not really enough pop to support one server.
Quit trolling with this "suggestion".
And you must be trolling to see that if those that don't like faction lock went there it would not be dead.
Doesn't matter how many are in PvP, there would just be less in the 30 day.
So the truth is there is not enough to support non faction locked.
TequilaFire wrote: »It would also be another thing if Shor actually had any population to act as an alternative, but its 0 bars 90% of the day. Some compromise would be nice, hopefully the RPers can see past their fantasies and just let people play the game the way its been played for years.
Basically let the cheats keep cheating? No thanks. The change has made a positive differnrce already and all the 'sky is falling' nonsense from the anti lock camp hasn't happened.
The only downside is folls with tri-toons need to get organised with their mates. It's not that hard. Adapt and overcome. Move along the change curve.
The cheats? Imagine thinking that people actually hop factions to sneak "intel". No one does that, and even if some random did, it never makes a difference. The map flips from groups, not the 100 man zergs that get wiped from an organized 12 man, and fast at that.
You can't just change such a crucial part of the game after so many years and expect people to just go with it for the sake of faction pride. Most people have played at least two factions and invested thousands of hours between different characters, and you're just gonna come out of no where and say I can't play that character essentially for a month? Does that not seem radical to any of you? Like I've said 5x now, why not be reasonable and implement a solution that pleases both sides rather than doing such a radical change?
1) Faction lock did not 'come out of nowhere' ZoS warned a year ago that reintroduction was being considered. Granted, the discussions leading to ZoS's decision are found in the Alliance War subforum, so it'easily missed, but the warning was in the release notes for the previous chapter.
ZoS stated they would monitor Alliance loyalty. This was a result of extensive reports of behaviors made possible by 'faction-hopping' that defeated/bypassed fundamental PvP/Cyrodiil game design. In fact, ZoS requested reports of two of those behaviors. Apprantly, after two years of reports and a year of ZoS 'monitoring', faction lock reintroduction is necessary.
2) The issue is not 'gathering intel'.
Cool, but that's not my point. It doesn't matter how much notice they give, they're screwing over anyone who doesn't play just one faction. Like what Bagon said, you're alienating that entire audience because everyone is so paranoid about faction hoppers. At least think on the solution that I came up with, because as many as these RPers are happy, there are just as many who are disappointed.
I don't disagree with you.
Several players have stated that when faction lock was removed previously, ZoS encouraged creation of characters of differing Alliances to 'play with your friends', and they did so.
These players are rightfully aggrieved, and being compelled to switch to a different campaign format may be unsatisfactory.
Yeah, its a shame other people can't at the very least empathize with our viewpoint and think about it reasonably. I'm not sure what platform you're on, but on Xbox Vivec Is the only campaign with any population. These people saying "Oh, just go play a different campaign don't realize that Shor is 0 bars most of the day. It's hilarious seeing people make that argument, knowing its impossible.
Don't you see the irony with that statement? If as you say there are hordes of people that hate faction lock, couldn't that horde of people head to Shor? Wouldn't that make Shor the most popular server and make the 30 day server die, since everyone hates faction lock?
How many times do you guys need to be told. On XNA outside of a few hours a day, Shor is dead. In off peak there's not really enough pop to support one server.
Quit trolling with this "suggestion".
And you must be trolling to see that if those that don't like faction lock went there it would not be dead.
Doesn't matter how many are in PvP, there would just be less in the 30 day.
So the truth is there is not enough to support non faction locked.
Actually, it is more likely that the number of players who are for and against faction lock are minuscule compared to the number of players who don't care and just play the campaign that is listed first. If 50 players from each camp are on during a time and 200 players who don't care are on, the 50 players who oppose faction lock aren't going to be able to populate a campaign and the 50 players who are pro lock aren't going to be able to populate a campaign. There are not enough players in PVP period, at any given time, to support more than 1 campaign. All faction locking is doing is making it impossible to actually pvp during non-peak hours and killing off any campaigns that aren't the first at the top of the list.
TequilaFire wrote: »TequilaFire wrote: »It would also be another thing if Shor actually had any population to act as an alternative, but its 0 bars 90% of the day. Some compromise would be nice, hopefully the RPers can see past their fantasies and just let people play the game the way its been played for years.
Basically let the cheats keep cheating? No thanks. The change has made a positive differnrce already and all the 'sky is falling' nonsense from the anti lock camp hasn't happened.
The only downside is folls with tri-toons need to get organised with their mates. It's not that hard. Adapt and overcome. Move along the change curve.
The cheats? Imagine thinking that people actually hop factions to sneak "intel". No one does that, and even if some random did, it never makes a difference. The map flips from groups, not the 100 man zergs that get wiped from an organized 12 man, and fast at that.
You can't just change such a crucial part of the game after so many years and expect people to just go with it for the sake of faction pride. Most people have played at least two factions and invested thousands of hours between different characters, and you're just gonna come out of no where and say I can't play that character essentially for a month? Does that not seem radical to any of you? Like I've said 5x now, why not be reasonable and implement a solution that pleases both sides rather than doing such a radical change?
1) Faction lock did not 'come out of nowhere' ZoS warned a year ago that reintroduction was being considered. Granted, the discussions leading to ZoS's decision are found in the Alliance War subforum, so it'easily missed, but the warning was in the release notes for the previous chapter.
ZoS stated they would monitor Alliance loyalty. This was a result of extensive reports of behaviors made possible by 'faction-hopping' that defeated/bypassed fundamental PvP/Cyrodiil game design. In fact, ZoS requested reports of two of those behaviors. Apprantly, after two years of reports and a year of ZoS 'monitoring', faction lock reintroduction is necessary.
2) The issue is not 'gathering intel'.
Cool, but that's not my point. It doesn't matter how much notice they give, they're screwing over anyone who doesn't play just one faction. Like what Bagon said, you're alienating that entire audience because everyone is so paranoid about faction hoppers. At least think on the solution that I came up with, because as many as these RPers are happy, there are just as many who are disappointed.
I don't disagree with you.
Several players have stated that when faction lock was removed previously, ZoS encouraged creation of characters of differing Alliances to 'play with your friends', and they did so.
These players are rightfully aggrieved, and being compelled to switch to a different campaign format may be unsatisfactory.
Yeah, its a shame other people can't at the very least empathize with our viewpoint and think about it reasonably. I'm not sure what platform you're on, but on Xbox Vivec Is the only campaign with any population. These people saying "Oh, just go play a different campaign don't realize that Shor is 0 bars most of the day. It's hilarious seeing people make that argument, knowing its impossible.
Don't you see the irony with that statement? If as you say there are hordes of people that hate faction lock, couldn't that horde of people head to Shor? Wouldn't that make Shor the most popular server and make the 30 day server die, since everyone hates faction lock?
How many times do you guys need to be told. On XNA outside of a few hours a day, Shor is dead. In off peak there's not really enough pop to support one server.
Quit trolling with this "suggestion".
And you must be trolling to see that if those that don't like faction lock went there it would not be dead.
Doesn't matter how many are in PvP, there would just be less in the 30 day.
So the truth is there is not enough to support non faction locked.
Actually, it is more likely that the number of players who are for and against faction lock are minuscule compared to the number of players who don't care and just play the campaign that is listed first. If 50 players from each camp are on during a time and 200 players who don't care are on, the 50 players who oppose faction lock aren't going to be able to populate a campaign and the 50 players who are pro lock aren't going to be able to populate a campaign. There are not enough players in PVP period, at any given time, to support more than 1 campaign. All faction locking is doing is making it impossible to actually pvp during non-peak hours and killing off any campaigns that aren't the first at the top of the list.
You don't need a full locked campaign to PvP though.
Small scale should be much better except for those that just want to potato farm.
TequilaFire wrote: »TequilaFire wrote: »It would also be another thing if Shor actually had any population to act as an alternative, but its 0 bars 90% of the day. Some compromise would be nice, hopefully the RPers can see past their fantasies and just let people play the game the way its been played for years.
Basically let the cheats keep cheating? No thanks. The change has made a positive differnrce already and all the 'sky is falling' nonsense from the anti lock camp hasn't happened.
The only downside is folls with tri-toons need to get organised with their mates. It's not that hard. Adapt and overcome. Move along the change curve.
The cheats? Imagine thinking that people actually hop factions to sneak "intel". No one does that, and even if some random did, it never makes a difference. The map flips from groups, not the 100 man zergs that get wiped from an organized 12 man, and fast at that.
You can't just change such a crucial part of the game after so many years and expect people to just go with it for the sake of faction pride. Most people have played at least two factions and invested thousands of hours between different characters, and you're just gonna come out of no where and say I can't play that character essentially for a month? Does that not seem radical to any of you? Like I've said 5x now, why not be reasonable and implement a solution that pleases both sides rather than doing such a radical change?
1) Faction lock did not 'come out of nowhere' ZoS warned a year ago that reintroduction was being considered. Granted, the discussions leading to ZoS's decision are found in the Alliance War subforum, so it'easily missed, but the warning was in the release notes for the previous chapter.
ZoS stated they would monitor Alliance loyalty. This was a result of extensive reports of behaviors made possible by 'faction-hopping' that defeated/bypassed fundamental PvP/Cyrodiil game design. In fact, ZoS requested reports of two of those behaviors. Apprantly, after two years of reports and a year of ZoS 'monitoring', faction lock reintroduction is necessary.
2) The issue is not 'gathering intel'.
Cool, but that's not my point. It doesn't matter how much notice they give, they're screwing over anyone who doesn't play just one faction. Like what Bagon said, you're alienating that entire audience because everyone is so paranoid about faction hoppers. At least think on the solution that I came up with, because as many as these RPers are happy, there are just as many who are disappointed.
I don't disagree with you.
Several players have stated that when faction lock was removed previously, ZoS encouraged creation of characters of differing Alliances to 'play with your friends', and they did so.
These players are rightfully aggrieved, and being compelled to switch to a different campaign format may be unsatisfactory.
Yeah, its a shame other people can't at the very least empathize with our viewpoint and think about it reasonably. I'm not sure what platform you're on, but on Xbox Vivec Is the only campaign with any population. These people saying "Oh, just go play a different campaign don't realize that Shor is 0 bars most of the day. It's hilarious seeing people make that argument, knowing its impossible.
Don't you see the irony with that statement? If as you say there are hordes of people that hate faction lock, couldn't that horde of people head to Shor? Wouldn't that make Shor the most popular server and make the 30 day server die, since everyone hates faction lock?
How many times do you guys need to be told. On XNA outside of a few hours a day, Shor is dead. In off peak there's not really enough pop to support one server.
Quit trolling with this "suggestion".
And you must be trolling to see that if those that don't like faction lock went there it would not be dead.
Doesn't matter how many are in PvP, there would just be less in the 30 day.
So the truth is there is not enough to support non faction locked.
Actually, it is more likely that the number of players who are for and against faction lock are minuscule compared to the number of players who don't care and just play the campaign that is listed first. If 50 players from each camp are on during a time and 200 players who don't care are on, the 50 players who oppose faction lock aren't going to be able to populate a campaign and the 50 players who are pro lock aren't going to be able to populate a campaign. There are not enough players in PVP period, at any given time, to support more than 1 campaign. All faction locking is doing is making it impossible to actually pvp during non-peak hours and killing off any campaigns that aren't the first at the top of the list.
You don't need a full locked campaign to PvP though.
Small scale should be much better except for those that just want to potato farm.
But you need more than 50 players. And you need to hope that those players aren't all in the same campaign at that time. You can't seriously tell me if the faction locked players were forced to move campaigns, and when 40 EP and 5 DC and 5 AD ended up on at the same time, that that would be balanced gameplay. The 40 EP would steamroll the map and barely do any pvping. And even if it were 25 v 25, you are still stuck fighting the same group over and over again. It's not feasible.
You obviously don't play off peak. Max 1 bar in Vivec, every other campaign is dead. 0 bars. PvDoor.
Cute picture though.
How many times do you guys need to be told. On XNA outside of a few hours a day, Shor is dead.
In off peak there's not really enough pop to support one server.
You obviously don't play off peak. Max 1 bar in Vivec, every other campaign is dead. 0 bars. PvDoor.
Cute picture though.
Dude, you are either doing this on purpose or simply don't get it.
What people is trying to tell you is that if Shor is STILL "dead" that means that there aren't as many people as you say who dislike the new faction locks. That or they simply made their choice and remained at the locked campaigns.
The changes are good, those who don't care about the alliance can go to the baby campaigns and leave the 30 days ones to people who are really commited to a specific alliance.
The grand total of all the players in all campaigns in off peak is 1 bar tops (and even zero bars). That's it!
If that's the case then you would have the same problem even if campaigns were unlocked. 😂
Except then we could jump to the faction getting pushed and get some good fights, no matter which character it is, rather than just zergstomping them, which is happening right now in Cyro on XNA. Now though....
And heaven forbid you want to main a red in NoCP on XNA. Last I looked DC had gated everyone, had 35K points on the board, AD had 30 odd K, and red.... 11K.
Join reds next campaign and you'll have plenty of good fights, problem solved.
You just don't read so well, do you. 0 bars pop.
Then explain this quote of yours:You obviously don't play off peak. Max 1 bar in Vivec, every other campaign is dead. 0 bars. PvDoor.
Cute picture though.
Dude, you are either doing this on purpose or simply don't get it.
What people is trying to tell you is that if Shor is STILL "dead" that means that there aren't as many people as you say who dislike the new faction locks. That or they simply made their choice and remained at the locked campaigns.
The changes are good, those who don't care about the alliance can go to the baby campaigns and leave the 30 days ones to people who are really commited to a specific alliance.
The grand total of all the players in all campaigns in off peak is 1 bar tops (and even zero bars). That's it!
If that's the case then you would have the same problem even if campaigns were unlocked. 😂
Last I looked DC had gated everyone, had 35K points on the board, AD had 30 odd K, and red.... 11K.
You just don't read what you write so well, do you?
TequilaFire wrote: »It would also be another thing if Shor actually had any population to act as an alternative, but its 0 bars 90% of the day. Some compromise would be nice, hopefully the RPers can see past their fantasies and just let people play the game the way its been played for years.
Basically let the cheats keep cheating? No thanks. The change has made a positive differnrce already and all the 'sky is falling' nonsense from the anti lock camp hasn't happened.
The only downside is folls with tri-toons need to get organised with their mates. It's not that hard. Adapt and overcome. Move along the change curve.
The cheats? Imagine thinking that people actually hop factions to sneak "intel". No one does that, and even if some random did, it never makes a difference. The map flips from groups, not the 100 man zergs that get wiped from an organized 12 man, and fast at that.
You can't just change such a crucial part of the game after so many years and expect people to just go with it for the sake of faction pride. Most people have played at least two factions and invested thousands of hours between different characters, and you're just gonna come out of no where and say I can't play that character essentially for a month? Does that not seem radical to any of you? Like I've said 5x now, why not be reasonable and implement a solution that pleases both sides rather than doing such a radical change?
1) Faction lock did not 'come out of nowhere' ZoS warned a year ago that reintroduction was being considered. Granted, the discussions leading to ZoS's decision are found in the Alliance War subforum, so it'easily missed, but the warning was in the release notes for the previous chapter.
ZoS stated they would monitor Alliance loyalty. This was a result of extensive reports of behaviors made possible by 'faction-hopping' that defeated/bypassed fundamental PvP/Cyrodiil game design. In fact, ZoS requested reports of two of those behaviors. Apprantly, after two years of reports and a year of ZoS 'monitoring', faction lock reintroduction is necessary.
2) The issue is not 'gathering intel'.
Cool, but that's not my point. It doesn't matter how much notice they give, they're screwing over anyone who doesn't play just one faction. Like what Bagon said, you're alienating that entire audience because everyone is so paranoid about faction hoppers. At least think on the solution that I came up with, because as many as these RPers are happy, there are just as many who are disappointed.
I don't disagree with you.
Several players have stated that when faction lock was removed previously, ZoS encouraged creation of characters of differing Alliances to 'play with your friends', and they did so.
These players are rightfully aggrieved, and being compelled to switch to a different campaign format may be unsatisfactory.
Yeah, its a shame other people can't at the very least empathize with our viewpoint and think about it reasonably. I'm not sure what platform you're on, but on Xbox Vivec Is the only campaign with any population. These people saying "Oh, just go play a different campaign don't realize that Shor is 0 bars most of the day. It's hilarious seeing people make that argument, knowing its impossible.
Don't you see the irony with that statement? If as you say there are hordes of people that hate faction lock, couldn't that horde of people head to Shor? Wouldn't that make Shor the most popular server and make the 30 day server die, since everyone hates faction lock?
How many times do you guys need to be told. On XNA outside of a few hours a day, Shor is dead. In off peak there's not really enough pop to support one server.
Quit trolling with this "suggestion".
And you must be trolling to see that if those that don't like faction lock went there it would not be dead.
Doesn't matter how many are in PvP, there would just be less in the 30 day.
So the truth is there is not enough to support non faction locked.
SidraWillowsky wrote: »
Does this sentence [3] pertain to the entirety of the Xbox PvP population across all servers?
Darkenarlol wrote: »faction jumpers have ruined PvP for way more people
False