There was a reason why faction lock was removed in the past

And there is a reason why they implemented it again.

I think it's a troll though.

He's quite right about something, changing faction is a broken mechanic.
you have to unassign your previous characters from the campaign but when you log on them you get instalocked on the campaign.
So you basically can't change

You have to unassign and leave cyrodiil before the campaign is over, forfeiting any rewards you might have earned at the end. I don't think it's a bug but a cleverly-designed system. If you wish to switch factions why be rewarded for doing so?

LuxLunae wrote: »

Just logged in today, it's broken...I was forced back into a loser faction that won't win next campaign or the campaign after that... or the campaign after that... I need to switch to a faction that zergs night and day...Has the strongest of races overall...and can use their zergballs to exploit the game and dump off another faction, make stun abilities happen back to back, and when their RED wave that extends up into the sky appears in the game to let us know we are going to get DCed pretty soon...

There was a reason why faction lock was removed in the past...yes some concepts should stay true to the original devs ideas.. but this is NOT one of them...

You can kick me out of cyrodiil for everything under the sun...but not when I log in for the first time after a patch. WOOWOWWOWOWOW

I am also getting sick and tired of being in a keep and then just before the tick is about to be handed I get DCed and MISS it...

We already know it's an exploit...ok? we know these EP zergballs are using the fact that YOU DON'T CHECK/LOCK a status from being accessed. Which allows them to stay alive, kick people off the server, stop input because the server thinks we are dead, causing double stuns within the cooldown phase... We know you didn't put that check in for speed sake... However at this point...I gotta say it... we need combat overhaul...

I know you guys have been slowly doing it....changing skills etc to make them simpler... less bogged down... easy to calculate...

will eso be featured on stadia? Just wondering...Didn't Bethesda also announce something that will lower latency or something at E3...

Subject line is confusing, sounds like lock is not broken but functioning perfectly. No?

Beardimus wrote: »

Subject line is confusing, sounds like lock is not broken but functioning perfectly. No?

The 30 day campaigns just turned over on PC. I think a lot of people expected that they'd be able to change their choice of alliance for a particular campaign at this point, not be automatically reassigned to the same choice they made last campaign.

JadonSky wrote: »

Yeah i'v always been DC and never understood the need to change other then you can't take it when you lose. Which is pretty sad but I guess this is what happens when the current generation gets participation trophies for everything.

Fell out of my chair laughing !

Truth is Funnier that Fiction

LuxLunae wrote: »

Just logged in today, it's broken...I was forced back into a loser faction that won't win next campaign or the campaign after that... or the campaign after that... I need to switch to a faction that zergs night and day...Has the strongest of races overall...and can use their zergballs to exploit the game and dump off another faction, make stun abilities happen back to back, and when their RED wave that extends up into the sky appears in the game to let us know we are going to get DCed pretty soon...

There was a reason why faction lock was removed in the past...yes some concepts should stay true to the original devs ideas.. but this is NOT one of them...

You can kick me out of cyrodiil for everything under the sun...but not when I log in for the first time after a patch. WOOWOWWOWOWOW

I am also getting sick and tired of being in a keep and then just before the tick is about to be handed I get DCed and MISS it...

We already know it's an exploit...ok? we know these EP zergballs are using the fact that YOU DON'T CHECK/LOCK a status from being accessed. Which allows them to stay alive, kick people off the server, stop input because the server thinks we are dead, causing double stuns within the cooldown phase... We know you didn't put that check in for speed sake... However at this point...I gotta say it... we need combat overhaul...

I know you guys have been slowly doing it....changing skills etc to make them simpler... less bogged down... easy to calculate...

will eso be featured on stadia? Just wondering...Didn't Bethesda also announce something that will lower latency or something at E3...

I srsly thought this a poem until halfway in .

jdamuso wrote: »

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

We understand there are some frustrations currently when logging into a character that was previously in a 30-day faction locked campaign, and automatically being re-locked into the same Alliance. In the future, we will be adding some protections against this scenario. Until we’re able to implement that, you should double check your character’s last saved location on the character select panel to help prevent accidental Alliance locking to a Campaign when you want to switch to another Alliance. We appreciate your patience in this matter.

Im sorry that's really un-acceptable. you need to fix this.. if you would like people to gladly give their 100 and 100s of dollars a year to guild wars 2 instead of eso. this response is a great way to make that happen. This is not a player error. this is a game dev error.

@jdamuso, this is no way to address a game dev. on the matter however, i agree on many things here, but verbally abusing ZOS staff gets us nowhere. have you ever thought of the faction lock as a cleaver way to get people to focus more on imperial city? i have. while i disagree with this tactic if this is why the locks are in place, faction locks will just take some getting used too if they are to be a long term adjustment. compose yourselves and address your devs with reason, not anger.
@ ZOS_BrianWheeler i personally can accept this change, however i do enjoy open world in more of a small scale/ solo manor. from my understanding you and your team's vision for cyrodiil is majorly in favor large scale combat and faction locking furthers this agenda. as one of the many members of the pvp community who enjoys more of a solo pvp experience, if we are to keep this lock, would you and your team be willing to consider 1v1 or 2v2 arena dueling with a leader-board? I think this would be a great way to separate solo vs large scale pvp and at the same time keep many people happy. i myself have asked myself many times over the last few months why i level new pvp toons when my style of pvp is seemingly dying, and while over-world dueling is great, but there is little reward and it is hard to find those who seek the same when we are scattered around an entire world. yes, there is stormhaven NA, or other small 1v1 hubs, but its always a long shot.

Fr4ctalz wrote: »

jdamuso wrote: »

ZOS_BrianWheeler wrote: »

We understand there are some frustrations currently when logging into a character that was previously in a 30-day faction locked campaign, and automatically being re-locked into the same Alliance. In the future, we will be adding some protections against this scenario. Until we’re able to implement that, you should double check your character’s last saved location on the character select panel to help prevent accidental Alliance locking to a Campaign when you want to switch to another Alliance. We appreciate your patience in this matter.

Im sorry that's really un-acceptable. you need to fix this.. if you would like people to gladly give their 100 and 100s of dollars a year to guild wars 2 instead of eso. this response is a great way to make that happen. This is not a player error. this is a game dev error.

@jdamuso, this is no way to address a game dev. on the matter however, i agree on many things here, but verbally abusing ZOS staff gets us nowhere. have you ever thought of the faction lock as a cleaver way to get people to focus more on imperial city? i have. while i disagree with this tactic if this is why the locks are in place, faction locks will just take some getting used too if they are to be a long term adjustment. compose yourselves and address your devs with reason, not anger.
@ ZOS_BrianWheeler i personally can accept this change, however i do enjoy open world in more of a small scale/ solo manor. from my understanding you and your team's vision for cyrodiil is majorly in favor large scale combat and faction locking furthers this agenda. as one of the many members of the pvp community who enjoys more of a solo pvp experience, if we are to keep this lock, would you and your team be willing to consider 1v1 or 2v2 arena dueling with a leader-board? I think this would be a great way to separate solo vs large scale pvp and at the same time keep many people happy. i myself have asked myself many times over the last few months why i level new pvp toons when my style of pvp is seemingly dying, and while over-world dueling is great, but there is little reward and it is hard to find those who seek the same when we are scattered around an entire world. yes, there is stormhaven NA, or other small 1v1 hubs, but its always a long shot.

I pay for a service.. how is this not an appropriate way to address a service provider that has failed to provide service. I havent said bad words, or called them names... i have stated my displeasure at an apparent brush of, whilst i pay alot of money for this game. It is exactly how you address such a thing... im not accosting.. im pointing fingers... gimme a break.

OP clearly is a good example on one of the reasons why locks happened - the people who switch to the winning side.

He wanted to switch to EP since they won and he estimates easy win there next too. And by doing so, making the problem of imbalance worse. Before locks people did this daily, when saw one alliance steamrolling (read: zerging) they switched to that alliance to make easy AP and made that zerg even bigger.

This is the thing i keep trying to tell to those few who honestly switch to the underdog to fight the zerging alliance, sadly most "casuals" actually switch to the zerging one. Here you see it again, human nature.

Yes, now some might say: "well, now they just join the winner after 1 month so zerglings move still lololo".

Yeah some do yes, but atleast they have to gamble with their choice and be done with it.

So, can happen some groups left that winner to join other alliance if they felt the need for new challenges if their alliance was a bit too dominant, then making the other alliance win with their effort.. thus making the lock work as it should: work for your wins to be 100% sure about it and not just hop in and out of alliances to the one where it is easiest to leech AP/rewards.

Now it all works as it should. Well, does work when can actually switch campaign when it resets. Personally would switch to the clearly underdog on population in my playing hours, if was not already on it. What comes to big score differences at some campaigns.. "nightcapping" is still efficient what comes to points. Making a dynamic score based on populations would make it less beneficial. Then things would be nice what comes to scoring.

Moonsorrow wrote: »

OP clearly is a good example on one of the reasons why locks happened - the people who switch to the winning side.

He wanted to switch to EP since they won and he estimates easy win there next too. And by doing so, making the problem of imbalance worse. Before locks people did this daily, when saw one alliance steamrolling (read: zerging) they switched to that alliance to make easy AP and made that zerg even bigger.

This is the thing i keep trying to tell to those few who honestly switch to the underdog to fight the zerging alliance, sadly most "casuals" actually switch to the zerging one. Here you see it again, human nature.

Yes, now some might say: "well, now they just join the winner after 1 month so zerglings move still lololo".

Yeah some do yes, but atleast they have to gamble with their choice and be done with it.

So, can happen some groups left that winner to join other alliance if they felt the need for new challenges if their alliance was a bit too dominant, then making the other alliance win with their effort.. thus making the lock work as it should: work for your wins to be 100% sure about it and not just hop in and out of alliances to the one where it is easiest to leech AP/rewards.

Now it all works as it should. Well, does work when can actually switch campaign when it resets. Personally would switch to the clearly underdog on population in my playing hours, if was not already on it. What comes to big score differences at some campaigns.. "nightcapping" is still efficient what comes to points. Making a dynamic score based on populations would make it less beneficial. Then things would be nice what comes to scoring.

doesnt really matter why the OP wants to change factions. fact of the matter is that we are supposed to be able to change factions at the end of the campaign and we cannot. and that is a lapse in service. i have multiple toons in each faction, and i payed to play them, and i should get to play them in the big boys campaign..


again the zerging and one sidedness is ALSO a dev error and not a player error, and since i am saying so i will go ahead and present possible solutions.

if everyone is zerging to one side, there simply must be incentive to not join said zerg. if there is no incentive it does not matter how distasteful you find it that one would want to be on a winning team.. its a logical choice.. and so incentives:

something like an outnumbered bonus. while a side is outnumbered by a large amount there is a bonus to alliance point gain.
therefore encouraging strong players to play the underdog for personal gain making the few, the strong.

PVE bonus to encourage players that do not normally play pvp by making a, oh say a gold gain bonus by 5% to the winning faction while NOT in cyro. Therefore players would want to get that for thier faction and be more willing to fight for it.

A population HP balance on destructible objects, meaning that if your team is vastly outnumbered the HP would be greater on the doors and walls giving a fighting chance.

NOT putting into play a zergo-rofl-hammer at the same time as introducing a new controversial mechanic like faction lock, would have been advised, and not allowing it to break a door in under 5 seconds would have also been recommended, but since its there, and we are talking about incentive, maybe the outnumbered team should have a bonus chance to get said zergo-rofl-hammer.. not that they can keep it anyway. (right im of subject with the hammer.)

And these are just some suggestions, and i am in no way one of the super-nerds that we appreciate so much for making the game in the first place, if common joe-shmoe me can think of some ways to balance and create incentive for fair play. Im sure the creative genuis' that dreamt up elder scrolls universe in the first place can come up with some ideas.


so yea,, if we wanna go join the great red zerg horde from hell, we should be allowed to whether you appreciate it or not, its not really our fault, we dont have the buttons to change the rules.