The Gold Road Chapter – which includes the Scribing system – and Update 42 is now available to test on the PTS! You can read the latest patch notes here: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/656454/
Maintenance for the week of April 15:
• [COMPLETE] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – April 16, 8:00AM EDT (12:00 UTC) - 6:00PM EDT (22:00 UTC)
• [COMPLETE] ESO Store and Account System for maintenance – April 16, 8:00AM EDT (12:00 UTC) - 6:00PM EDT (22:00 UTC)
Alliance Lock Ruining PvP for Many
-
Mr_Walker✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭You obviously don't play off peak. Max 1 bar in Vivec, every other campaign is dead. 0 bars. PvDoor.
Cute picture though.1 -
sho_nuff✭✭✭I’m not a fan of the faction lock. Playing on NA Vivec PS4, it wasn’t any different than a month ago.
Then a week later, I tried an alt.... I tried playing on the 7 day campaign. No one was there. It wasn’t fun.3 -
Vietfox✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭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.Edited by Vietfox on June 17, 2019 7:05AM9 -
Mayrael✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭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.Say no to Toxic Casuals!
I am doing my best, but I am not a native speaker, sorry.
"Difficulty scaling is desperately needed. 9 years. 6 paid expansions. 24 DLCs. 40 game changing updates including A Realm Reborn-tier overhaul of the game including a permanent CP160 gear cap and ridiculous power creep thereafter. I'm sick and tired of hearing about Cadwell Silver&Gold as a "you think you do but you don't"-tier deflection to any criticism regarding the lack of overland difficulty in the game." - @AlexanderDeLarge9 -
Qbiken✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭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.4 -
Mayrael✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭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.
Mhm but through almost whole campaign the rest of us don't have to deal with you (nothing personal, just an example) and the things I mentioned which ruined experience for far more people than the ones that are against the lock, and you won't get any meaningful rewards. Look at the forums, look in the game, more people is happy with the lock.Say no to Toxic Casuals!
I am doing my best, but I am not a native speaker, sorry.
"Difficulty scaling is desperately needed. 9 years. 6 paid expansions. 24 DLCs. 40 game changing updates including A Realm Reborn-tier overhaul of the game including a permanent CP160 gear cap and ridiculous power creep thereafter. I'm sick and tired of hearing about Cadwell Silver&Gold as a "you think you do but you don't"-tier deflection to any criticism regarding the lack of overland difficulty in the game." - @AlexanderDeLarge12 -
Mr_Walker✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭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.
This has to be a joke. The grand total of all the players in all campaigns in off peak is 1 bar tops (and even zero bars). That's it! Tell us, at 1 bar pop, how many people do you think are active? Whatever your first guess, it will be less than that.
Your suggestion to off peak players who want to find good PvP is to PvDoor....
2 -
Vietfox✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭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. 😂Edited by Vietfox on June 17, 2019 8:21AM7 -
Mr_Walker✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭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.2 -
Vietfox✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭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.4 -
Mr_Walker✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭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.0 -
Vietfox✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭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?5 -
sho_nuff✭✭✭I’d be fine with the faction lock if once yOh were locked into an Alliance, all toons would be playable for that alliance for the duration of the campaign.
It addresses some of the issues: preventing faction-hopping shenanigans mid-campaign. It creates some new ones, like making getting skyshards easier.
But it prevents characters from being unplayable. Playing in an unlocked campaign on the PS4 at least is essentially PVE.2 -
TequilaFire✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭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.Edited by TequilaFire on June 17, 2019 1:07PM10 -
xxthir13enxx✭✭✭✭✭
✭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...0 -
jaws343✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭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.4 -
TequilaFire✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭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.
So now you can play on the alliance you want and get away from the zergs that are always complained about.
Edited by TequilaFire on June 17, 2019 1:36PM3 -
jaws343✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭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.3 -
TequilaFire✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭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.
Working just fine on PS4 NA, I play my EP on faction lock and my DC on non locked, always plenty of action.
Different platforms and regions will have different populations.
Not to mention till Elsweyr dies down and certain bug/performance issues iron out you can't even begin to judge PvP population.3 -
SidraWillowsky✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭Adding numbers to aid in our walk-through.
1.You obviously don't play off peak. Max 1 bar in Vivec, every other campaign is dead. 0 bars. PvDoor.
Cute picture though.
OK, your point here is valid. But earlier you seemed to be arguing that only Shor was dead:
2.How many times do you guys need to be told. On XNA outside of a few hours a day, Shor is dead.
This pertains to Shor. Got it. Next sentence directly following [2]:
3.In off peak there's not really enough pop to support one server.
Does this sentence [3] pertain to the entirety of the Xbox PvP population across all servers?
If so, what you're saying is that Shor is dead almost all the time, and at off-peak hours there aren't enough players to fill even one server across all servers (Shor, Sotha, Vivec)?
I know this seems silly and like we're arguing semantics, but I think we're talking about different things and that both sides are feeling like the other is being purposefully obtuse.
It sounds like the issue you're describing is a different one entirely where you literally can't play characters not part of your locked faction during some hours because campaigns are almost completely dead.
Edited by SidraWillowsky on June 17, 2019 3:26PM3 -
WoppaBoem✭✭✭✭✭The lock is good. Reds very much in front this campaign Xbox EU. Yellows still the strongest during peak. Many reds already said they will go to the blues next campaign and make this decision knowingly they commit to it. This is good for the blues and good for the game as people in the campaigns are dedicated. The atmosphere is really nice currently. Even if we get ripped by volungdrun.Xbox EU & NA - PVP Only5 -
Mr_Walker✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭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?
A campaign can be both empty and have all the keeps flipped....
The more you know!0 -
Mr_Walker✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭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.
No, the truth is there's not enough people to populate a single campaign in off peak XNA, let alone 2. Your "suggestion" is the same as your friend above... go do PvDoor. It's a suggestion that displays a clear ignorance of the problem.1 -
Mr_Walker✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭SidraWillowsky wrote: »
Does this sentence [3] pertain to the entirety of the Xbox PvP population across all servers?
Yes! Last night around 8pm AEST on XNA the grand total of the population on all servers was one bar red. That was the sum total across every campaign.
Now do you see why I get p'd off at people suggesting I go pvp in 7cp?1 -
xeNNNNN✭✭✭✭✭
✭Darkenarlol wrote: »faction jumpers have ruined PvP for way more people
False
On what grounds?
"hey guys lets take the whole map then switch and farm emperor on multiple characters"
"lets ruin peoples desire to win for our own selfish gain"
Granted Campaign rewards are meager very meager but they're still more if you win and if you become emperor and if you loose its a little pat on the back with some crappy legendary loot which is only good for maybe a 50k gold which is peanuts in this game. Also some people play to win. Having the same guilds constantly jump faction to suit their own ends just ruins that as a whole.Edited by xeNNNNN on June 18, 2019 2:29AMAh, e-communities - the "pinnacle" of the internet............yeah, right.1 -
Kadoin✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭If you don't like it, don't play. Works for me! Last I checked one faction had 10K points more than the other and I think my brother said it has 20K more points
I've found books to be more fun than the game anyway after being nerfed, nerfed, nerfed, nerfed, nerfed, nerfed...Plus I'm making money. Can't get any better than that!0
This discussion has been closed.