Maintenance for the week of December 15:
· [COMPLETE] PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – December 15, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – December 15, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – December 15, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] PC/Mac: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – December 15, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] Xbox: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – December 15, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
· [COMPLETE] PlayStation®: NA and EU megaservers for maintenance – December 15, 4:00AM EST (9:00 UTC) - 12:00PM EST (17:00 UTC)
Whats the reason behind Alliance Lock?
Artorias24
✭✭✭✭✭
✭
✭
I dont see why they put it.
Prevent trolling? Or easy AP farm? Faction "Hopper"?
Is there an official Statement from ZOS why they put faction lock? Why its only on one CP campaign now?
Prevent trolling? Or easy AP farm? Faction "Hopper"?
Is there an official Statement from ZOS why they put faction lock? Why its only on one CP campaign now?
0
-
RPGplayer13579✭✭✭✭So that all players are not able to switch over to the winning Alliance in that campaign. Just a guess.My Characters.
Mike Snow - Imperial - Templar - One-Handed and Shield - Tank - Daggerfall Covenant - Commander.
Catelyn Rivers - Breton - Sorcerer - Destruction Staff - Daggerfall Covenant - Telvanni Magister.
Ashara Sand - Redguard - Warden - Two-Handed/One-Handed and Shield - Daggerfall Covenant - Heroic.
Tormund gro-Largash - Orsimer - Dragonknight - Two-Handed - Daggerfall Covenant - Furious.
Lysa Rivers - Breton - Nightblade - Bow/One-Handed and Shield - Vampire - Daggerfall Covenant - Brassy Assassin.
Jon Karstark - Nord - Dragonknight - Two-Handed - Ebonheart Pact - Drunk.
Arya Sand - Dunmer - Dragonknight - Dual Wield - Ebonheart Pact - Assassin.
Sansa Snow - Impeial - Warden - Destruction Staff/One-Handed and Shield - Ebonheart Pect - Swashbuckler.
Jojen Reed-Walker - Argonian - Templar - Restoration Staff - Healer - Ebonheart Pact - Melancholy.
Alys Karstark - Nord - Nightblade - Bow/Dual Wield - Ebonheart Pact - Minstrel.
Nymeria Woods - Bosmer - Nightblade - Bow - Aldmeri Dominion - Thief.
Brandon Wings - Altmer - Templar - Restoration Staff - Healer - Aldmeri Dominion - Scholar.
Lyanna Flowers - Altmer - Sorcerer - Sword/Destruction Staff - Aldmeri Dominion - Duchess.
Marvolo-jo Riddle - Khajiit - Necromancer - Destruction Staff - Aldmeri Dominion - Deadlands Firewalker.
Obara Woods - Bosmer - Templar - Bow - Werewolf - Aldmeri Dominion - Cheerful.16 -
notvenousdrake✭✭✭Because people moaned loud enough about something that doesn’t affect their gameplay so now it’s here.11
-
FierceSam✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Artorias24 wrote: »
So players can choose.
Alliance locked makes campaigns ‘serious’, so you can’t just flip sides whenever you feel like it, you as a player have to commit. No lock campaigns allow you to play on multiple characters irrespective of those characters’ alliances, so you can play with all of your friends (but you accept the fact that alliance hopping will likely be present).
Personally, I have far less interest in the eventual outcome of a campaign and far more interest in playing with my friends or on a variety of characters, so I usually go into non-locked. But I suspect if I did take it seriously enough to care, I’d want to have a locked campaign.
Why only one Alliance locked campaign? Probably because the numbers aren’t great enough to justify more than one.15 -
Artorias24✭✭✭✭✭
✭Artorias24 wrote: »
So players can choose.
Alliance locked makes campaigns ‘serious’, so you can’t just flip sides whenever you feel like it, you as a player have to commit. No lock campaigns allow you to play on multiple characters irrespective of those characters’ alliances, so you can play with all of your friends (but you accept the fact that alliance hopping will likely be present).
Personally, I have far less interest in the eventual outcome of a campaign and far more interest in playing with my friends or on a variety of characters, so I usually go into non-locked. But I suspect if I did take it seriously enough to care, I’d want to have a locked campaign.
Why only one Alliance locked campaign? Probably because the numbers aren’t great enough to justify more than one.
Same for me. I rather play with all my friends and chracters that are split over the alliances due to not having this "all factions all races" dlc or how its called. Thats what i enjoy about an MMO. Playing with friends and how i like it. Even when i want to roleplay as a spy
Anyway sometimes its hard when i want to help a friend on red side push for emp when i am locked to DC.
I dont really understand those faction tryhards. How can you Take a game so serious about a color in a video game. Just let everyone enjoy the game how they want and are used to. What does it even give as a reward for winning the campaign? Some golden juwelry that isnt worth much.... Just chill and enjoy fighting with friends.
6 -
FierceSam✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Artorias24 wrote: »Artorias24 wrote: »
So players can choose.
Alliance locked makes campaigns ‘serious’, so you can’t just flip sides whenever you feel like it, you as a player have to commit. No lock campaigns allow you to play on multiple characters irrespective of those characters’ alliances, so you can play with all of your friends (but you accept the fact that alliance hopping will likely be present).
Personally, I have far less interest in the eventual outcome of a campaign and far more interest in playing with my friends or on a variety of characters, so I usually go into non-locked. But I suspect if I did take it seriously enough to care, I’d want to have a locked campaign.
Why only one Alliance locked campaign? Probably because the numbers aren’t great enough to justify more than one.
Same for me. I rather play with all my friends and chracters that are split over the alliances due to not having this "all factions all races" dlc or how its called. Thats what i enjoy about an MMO. Playing with friends and how i like it. Even when i want to roleplay as a spy Anyway sometimes its hard when i want to help a friend on red side push for emp when i am locked to DC.
I dont really understand those faction tryhards. How can you Take a game so serious about a color in a video game. Just let everyone enjoy the game how they want and are used to. What does it even give as a reward for winning the campaign? Some golden juwelry that isnt worth much.... Just chill and enjoy fighting with friends.
I totally get players who want to commit to an alliance and play for it, it adds a whole extra dimension to the campaign when you commit to a side. And I get that once you have committed, you really don’t want your campaign to be messed up by players who might not be as bothered and are happy to switch sides. And in many cases you are fighting with your friends and that friendship can be even greater because you’ve all committed to a particular side.
It’s like any social team sport, for the duration of the game I want to win, leave all my energy on the pitch and play hard and fair. After the game we’re all friends again whichever side we were on.
I’m not there with PvP yet, I’m still in the messing about in the playground phase.12 -
Grianasteri✭✭✭✭✭
✭Artorias24 wrote: »I dont see why they put it.
Prevent trolling? Or easy AP farm? Faction "Hopper"?
Is there an official Statement from ZOS why they put faction lock? Why its only on one CP campaign now?
So that people cannot simply swap alliance any time they feel like it, depending on how a campaign is going for their alliance.
Also to make spying more difficult so that people cannot hop into a campaign for one alliance and report back to a different one.8 -
Van_Winkle✭✭✭✭Artorias24 wrote: »I dont see why they put it.
Prevent trolling? Or easy AP farm? Faction "Hopper"?
Is there an official Statement from ZOS why they put faction lock? Why its only on one CP campaign now?
Faction Lock was from very beginning cause TESO was a game with 3 factions. And it still a game with 3 factions. Once they remove faction lock and that was a bad idea.10 -
robpr✭✭✭✭✭
✭People moaned that some small groups were able to swipe the map in one color then relog to other alliance and flip the map again overnight getting millions of AP. Probably.1 -
FierceSam✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Artorias24 wrote: »
But on those campaigns players have more freedom to play with multiple characters from different alliances and with their friends who may have characters on multiple alliances. So it’s swings and roundabouts.
No one loses out because ZOS offers players the option of playing in both locked and unlocked campaigns. They can even play in both. The key here is that players get to choose, which is a good thing.5 -
Rowjoh✭✭✭✭✭
✭@FierceSam has explained it unequivocally.
Players who faction hopped during the main 30 day campaign were able to unfairly affect it, influence emperor pushes, spy, spam zone chat with toxicity or just be generally disruptive whenever they felt like it, which although not illegal was effectively exploitive bordering on cheating, which often made many key PVP objectives pointless.
Edited by Rowjoh on March 6, 2020 7:25PM7 -
VaranisArano✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Artorias24 wrote: »
Which ZOS only gradually reenabled for CP because players begged for it, and then those campaigns didn't get filled up. So it certainly reduced it, though not eliminated it.
It started out as a dead 7-day unlocked campaign. Then players complained "its not populated because its a 7 day".
So ZOS gave them a 30-day. Still dead. "Well, that's because you messed up how they were introduced!" (To be fair, ZOS totally did.)
So ZOS started all the campaigns over, brand new. Alliance locked is still the most populated. "That's because its listed first and most PVPers are too dumb to scroll through the list and pick the unlocked one they really should want to play on!"
As for ZOS' reasoning, here's the best explanation I've heard, from a Class Rep in a position to know: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/5935829#Comment_5935829Joy_Division wrote: »I was at ZOS and heard from the devs why they are doing this.
It wasnt about transmute stones, it wasn;t about lag, it wasn;t about spreading population out, it wasn't about any of those ancillary reasons. It was about precisely what the people who have argued from locks form the past year have said: to stop people from abusing AP gains by switching factions.
Now, you may personally think the devs don't know what's going on, they are wrong, this is dumb, etc., but the reason they feel this way is because the overwhelming amount of feedback they have gotten has communicated that view. If they ignored these requests, they would be - correctly - accused of ignoring the community.
One thing I have become more cognizant of as a Rep is that ZOS does take a while to make changes. Part of it is because they debate with each other whether to do it. Part of it is because for each patch they have a theme they want to cater to. Part of it is because it takes a legit long time to make changes. but mostly because they are backlogged with so many things they want to do. It was probably a year a ago when Wheeler first intimated ZOS was thinking of doing something about faction locks. People who like this got all excited and then nothing. For months. Many thought they forgotten or ZOS put this on the backburner. Both those who wanted it never stopped making threads, never stopped arguing why it would be a good idea, which only fortified a decision ZOS was leaning a long time ago.5 -
mague✭✭✭✭✭Artorias24 wrote: »
Abuse of players and the wish of many to have an original campaign. Means, at least on the paper the locked campaign is FvFvF.2 -
Artorias24✭✭✭✭✭
✭VaranisArano wrote: »Artorias24 wrote: »
Which ZOS only gradually reenabled for CP because players begged for it, and then those campaigns didn't get filled up. So it certainly reduced it, though not eliminated it.
It started out as a dead 7-day unlocked campaign. Then players complained "its not populated because its a 7 day".
So ZOS gave them a 30-day. Still dead. "Well, that's because you messed up how they were introduced!" (To be fair, ZOS totally did.)
So ZOS started all the campaigns over, brand new. Alliance locked is still the most populated. "That's because its listed first and most PVPers are too dumb to scroll through the list and pick the unlocked one they really should want to play on!"
As for ZOS' reasoning, here's the best explanation I've heard, from a Class Rep in a position to know: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/5935829#Comment_5935829Joy_Division wrote: »I was at ZOS and heard from the devs why they are doing this.
It wasnt about transmute stones, it wasn;t about lag, it wasn;t about spreading population out, it wasn't about any of those ancillary reasons. It was about precisely what the people who have argued from locks form the past year have said: to stop people from abusing AP gains by switching factions.
Now, you may personally think the devs don't know what's going on, they are wrong, this is dumb, etc., but the reason they feel this way is because the overwhelming amount of feedback they have gotten has communicated that view. If they ignored these requests, they would be - correctly - accused of ignoring the community.
One thing I have become more cognizant of as a Rep is that ZOS does take a while to make changes. Part of it is because they debate with each other whether to do it. Part of it is because for each patch they have a theme they want to cater to. Part of it is because it takes a legit long time to make changes. but mostly because they are backlogged with so many things they want to do. It was probably a year a ago when Wheeler first intimated ZOS was thinking of doing something about faction locks. People who like this got all excited and then nothing. For months. Many thought they forgotten or ZOS put this on the backburner. Both those who wanted it never stopped making threads, never stopped arguing why it would be a good idea, which only fortified a decision ZOS was leaning a long time ago.
And this reason just gets countered by other 30 days Campaign that are unlocked and free to farm AP. Even more likely to be farmed due to their low population and you can flip the map blue and red without many players resisting. This would be much harder on a full campaign.0 -
xxthir13enxx✭✭✭✭✭
✭Locked Camp= Focus on the Campaign Scoreboard a 3 way Soccer game if you will... You’re on a Team and You’re putting points on the Board at Evals
Unlocked Camp= More Focus on AP and just general PVP. Take Keeps n Fight.5 -
dazee✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Some people were deliberately switching to the winning alliance. Which led to the ugly, and un fun situation known as faction lock.Playing your character the way your character should play is all that matters. Play as well as you can but never betray the character. Doing so would make playing an mmoRPG pointless.5 -
VaranisArano✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Artorias24 wrote: »VaranisArano wrote: »Artorias24 wrote: »
Which ZOS only gradually reenabled for CP because players begged for it, and then those campaigns didn't get filled up. So it certainly reduced it, though not eliminated it.
It started out as a dead 7-day unlocked campaign. Then players complained "its not populated because its a 7 day".
So ZOS gave them a 30-day. Still dead. "Well, that's because you messed up how they were introduced!" (To be fair, ZOS totally did.)
So ZOS started all the campaigns over, brand new. Alliance locked is still the most populated. "That's because its listed first and most PVPers are too dumb to scroll through the list and pick the unlocked one they really should want to play on!"
As for ZOS' reasoning, here's the best explanation I've heard, from a Class Rep in a position to know: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/5935829#Comment_5935829Joy_Division wrote: »I was at ZOS and heard from the devs why they are doing this.
It wasnt about transmute stones, it wasn;t about lag, it wasn;t about spreading population out, it wasn't about any of those ancillary reasons. It was about precisely what the people who have argued from locks form the past year have said: to stop people from abusing AP gains by switching factions.
Now, you may personally think the devs don't know what's going on, they are wrong, this is dumb, etc., but the reason they feel this way is because the overwhelming amount of feedback they have gotten has communicated that view. If they ignored these requests, they would be - correctly - accused of ignoring the community.
One thing I have become more cognizant of as a Rep is that ZOS does take a while to make changes. Part of it is because they debate with each other whether to do it. Part of it is because for each patch they have a theme they want to cater to. Part of it is because it takes a legit long time to make changes. but mostly because they are backlogged with so many things they want to do. It was probably a year a ago when Wheeler first intimated ZOS was thinking of doing something about faction locks. People who like this got all excited and then nothing. For months. Many thought they forgotten or ZOS put this on the backburner. Both those who wanted it never stopped making threads, never stopped arguing why it would be a good idea, which only fortified a decision ZOS was leaning a long time ago.
And this reason just gets countered by other 30 days Campaign that are unlocked and free to farm AP. Even more likely to be farmed due to their low population and you can flip the map blue and red without many players resisting. This would be much harder on a full campaign.
You do realize the solution to your point is simply to lock ALL the campaigns and screw player choice, right? That's exactly what ZOS ought to do if curbing AP farming is their be-all, end-all goal. Which its not - they'd like to have their cake and eat it too by reducing the farm and keeping players mostly happy.
At this point?
ZOS is stuck between their desire to curb the farming and still giving players what they want. Some players ardently want faction lock. Some players want unlocked campaigns. Most players want competitive populated campaigns and working PVP. So why not give them the option and see what happens? (Same thing is happening with BGs right now.)
At the moment, its the alliance-locked campaign that's the most popular of the CP campaigns despite ZOS starting all the campaigns over. Most players are playing there, whether they like it or not.
I'll be blunt. I'm getting some major deja vu from this thread because you aren't posting anything that didn't get pointed out when ZOS introduced the faction lock. They know they left an unlocked CP 7-day campaign available for players to PvDoor if they want to, and they went ahead with the faction lock anyway. While the inconsistency is there, its not one that bothered ZOS enough to lock ALL the campaigns in the service of logical consistency.
Personally, unless you seriously intend to argue that ZOS should screw player choice and lock ALL the campaigns, I think the hodgepodge of locked and unlocked CP campaigns we have is the best result. Players have options and the unlocked fans had a fair shot at making theirs the preferred campaign when ZOS started the new campaigns.3 -
Rikumaru✭✭✭✭✭
✭The lock was reintroduced because some players didn't like getting farmed and killed by small groups / solo players which almost always tend to be multi-faction players.Edited by Rikumaru on March 6, 2020 12:52PMOverload rework. Power Overload now does physical damage and grants you the power of a tornado: You throw a brick at the target with a light attack, and you hammer your head into that brick with every heavy attack. We have decreased its Ultimate cost, but increased the chance that you get stuck in the animation.1 -
xxthir13enxx✭✭✭✭✭
✭Artorias24 wrote: »I dont see why they put it.
Prevent trolling? Or easy AP farm? Faction "Hopper"?
Is there an official Statement from ZOS why they put faction lock? Why its only on one CP campaign now?
Also, should be noted Camp Lock was the ORIGINAL design for Cyrodiil, but was removed later on.
Now there’s a choice5 -
VaranisArano✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭In looking back at some of the old threads from when ZOS announced the changes and debate over them in the forums, ZOS may have explained their reasoning when they announced it at PAX East during their panels. I don't have links or anything, just that reference if anyone cares to go looking for it.0 -
Rex-Umbra✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Xbox had huge problems with other factions hoping on blue toons to troll us in chat handing scrolls to the enemy telling ep and ad exactly where we were and going broke the campaign and every one was paranoid of spys.Xbox GT: Rex Umbrah
GM of IMPERIUM since 2015.5 -
Taleof2Cities✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭Artorias24 wrote: »VaranisArano wrote: »Artorias24 wrote: »
Which ZOS only gradually reenabled for CP because players begged for it, and then those campaigns didn't get filled up. So it certainly reduced it, though not eliminated it.
It started out as a dead 7-day unlocked campaign. Then players complained "its not populated because its a 7 day".
So ZOS gave them a 30-day. Still dead. "Well, that's because you messed up how they were introduced!" (To be fair, ZOS totally did.)
So ZOS started all the campaigns over, brand new. Alliance locked is still the most populated. "That's because its listed first and most PVPers are too dumb to scroll through the list and pick the unlocked one they really should want to play on!"
As for ZOS' reasoning, here's the best explanation I've heard, from a Class Rep in a position to know: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/5935829#Comment_5935829Joy_Division wrote: »I was at ZOS and heard from the devs why they are doing this.
It wasnt about transmute stones, it wasn;t about lag, it wasn;t about spreading population out, it wasn't about any of those ancillary reasons. It was about precisely what the people who have argued from locks form the past year have said: to stop people from abusing AP gains by switching factions.
Now, you may personally think the devs don't know what's going on, they are wrong, this is dumb, etc., but the reason they feel this way is because the overwhelming amount of feedback they have gotten has communicated that view. If they ignored these requests, they would be - correctly - accused of ignoring the community.
One thing I have become more cognizant of as a Rep is that ZOS does take a while to make changes. Part of it is because they debate with each other whether to do it. Part of it is because for each patch they have a theme they want to cater to. Part of it is because it takes a legit long time to make changes. but mostly because they are backlogged with so many things they want to do. It was probably a year a ago when Wheeler first intimated ZOS was thinking of doing something about faction locks. People who like this got all excited and then nothing. For months. Many thought they forgotten or ZOS put this on the backburner. Both those who wanted it never stopped making threads, never stopped arguing why it would be a good idea, which only fortified a decision ZOS was leaning a long time ago.
And this reason just gets countered by other 30 days Campaign that are unlocked and free to farm AP. Even more likely to be farmed due to their low population and you can flip the map blue and red without many players resisting. This would be much harder on a full campaign.
Which is fine, @Artorias24, because players have the choice of Alliance locked or non-Alliance locked.
If farming AP is your thing then (by all means) play the campaign that suits your playstyle.
The line is drawn where non-Alliance locked players try to force their playstyle on the players that enjoy a campaign without the spying, AP farming, and faction-swapping.5 -
Rikumaru✭✭✭✭✭
✭Taleof2Cities wrote: »Artorias24 wrote: »VaranisArano wrote: »Artorias24 wrote: »
Which ZOS only gradually reenabled for CP because players begged for it, and then those campaigns didn't get filled up. So it certainly reduced it, though not eliminated it.
It started out as a dead 7-day unlocked campaign. Then players complained "its not populated because its a 7 day".
So ZOS gave them a 30-day. Still dead. "Well, that's because you messed up how they were introduced!" (To be fair, ZOS totally did.)
So ZOS started all the campaigns over, brand new. Alliance locked is still the most populated. "That's because its listed first and most PVPers are too dumb to scroll through the list and pick the unlocked one they really should want to play on!"
As for ZOS' reasoning, here's the best explanation I've heard, from a Class Rep in a position to know: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/5935829#Comment_5935829Joy_Division wrote: »I was at ZOS and heard from the devs why they are doing this.
It wasnt about transmute stones, it wasn;t about lag, it wasn;t about spreading population out, it wasn't about any of those ancillary reasons. It was about precisely what the people who have argued from locks form the past year have said: to stop people from abusing AP gains by switching factions.
Now, you may personally think the devs don't know what's going on, they are wrong, this is dumb, etc., but the reason they feel this way is because the overwhelming amount of feedback they have gotten has communicated that view. If they ignored these requests, they would be - correctly - accused of ignoring the community.
One thing I have become more cognizant of as a Rep is that ZOS does take a while to make changes. Part of it is because they debate with each other whether to do it. Part of it is because for each patch they have a theme they want to cater to. Part of it is because it takes a legit long time to make changes. but mostly because they are backlogged with so many things they want to do. It was probably a year a ago when Wheeler first intimated ZOS was thinking of doing something about faction locks. People who like this got all excited and then nothing. For months. Many thought they forgotten or ZOS put this on the backburner. Both those who wanted it never stopped making threads, never stopped arguing why it would be a good idea, which only fortified a decision ZOS was leaning a long time ago.
And this reason just gets countered by other 30 days Campaign that are unlocked and free to farm AP. Even more likely to be farmed due to their low population and you can flip the map blue and red without many players resisting. This would be much harder on a full campaign.
Which is fine, @Artorias24, because players have the choice of Alliance locked or non-Alliance locked.
If farming AP is your thing then (by all means) play the campaign that suits your playstyle.
The line is drawn where non-Alliance locked players try to force their playstyle on the players that enjoy a campaign without the spying, AP farming, and faction-swapping.
Ironic.Overload rework. Power Overload now does physical damage and grants you the power of a tornado: You throw a brick at the target with a light attack, and you hammer your head into that brick with every heavy attack. We have decreased its Ultimate cost, but increased the chance that you get stuck in the animation.2 -
indigorune✭✭✭Artorias24 wrote: »
I dont really understand those faction tryhards. How can you Take a game so serious about a color in a video game. Just let everyone enjoy the game how they want and are used to. What does it even give as a reward for winning the campaign? Some golden juwelry that isnt worth much.... Just chill and enjoy fighting with friends.
You say this while bashing the play style that others enjoy and are used to....
PC-NA | EP
PvE main --> K'hira - Khajiiti stamblade
Trade Guild: Free Marketers10 -
barney2525✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭I can answer your question
The reason for the Alliance Lock is that they wanted the Alliances to be Locked.
3 -
FierceSam✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭Artorias24 wrote: »VaranisArano wrote: »Artorias24 wrote: »
Which ZOS only gradually reenabled for CP because players begged for it, and then those campaigns didn't get filled up. So it certainly reduced it, though not eliminated it.
It started out as a dead 7-day unlocked campaign. Then players complained "its not populated because its a 7 day".
So ZOS gave them a 30-day. Still dead. "Well, that's because you messed up how they were introduced!" (To be fair, ZOS totally did.)
So ZOS started all the campaigns over, brand new. Alliance locked is still the most populated. "That's because its listed first and most PVPers are too dumb to scroll through the list and pick the unlocked one they really should want to play on!"
As for ZOS' reasoning, here's the best explanation I've heard, from a Class Rep in a position to know: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/comment/5935829#Comment_5935829Joy_Division wrote: »I was at ZOS and heard from the devs why they are doing this.
It wasnt about transmute stones, it wasn;t about lag, it wasn;t about spreading population out, it wasn't about any of those ancillary reasons. It was about precisely what the people who have argued from locks form the past year have said: to stop people from abusing AP gains by switching factions.
Now, you may personally think the devs don't know what's going on, they are wrong, this is dumb, etc., but the reason they feel this way is because the overwhelming amount of feedback they have gotten has communicated that view. If they ignored these requests, they would be - correctly - accused of ignoring the community.
One thing I have become more cognizant of as a Rep is that ZOS does take a while to make changes. Part of it is because they debate with each other whether to do it. Part of it is because for each patch they have a theme they want to cater to. Part of it is because it takes a legit long time to make changes. but mostly because they are backlogged with so many things they want to do. It was probably a year a ago when Wheeler first intimated ZOS was thinking of doing something about faction locks. People who like this got all excited and then nothing. For months. Many thought they forgotten or ZOS put this on the backburner. Both those who wanted it never stopped making threads, never stopped arguing why it would be a good idea, which only fortified a decision ZOS was leaning a long time ago.
And this reason just gets countered by other 30 days Campaign that are unlocked and free to farm AP. Even more likely to be farmed due to their low population and you can flip the map blue and red without many players resisting. This would be much harder on a full campaign.
There is a very valid case for having unlocked campaigns, namely that they give players the flexibility to play on characters from more than one alliance.
It presents drawbacks for exactly the same reasons. Hence the locked campaigns.
Players get to choose and it appears that serious Cyrodiil players much prefer the locked campaign.
I suspect that if ZOS believed that they had enough PvP players, they would have 3 locked campaigns.2
