What's the point of adding empty Cyrodiil campaigns during Mayhem?

Kaelthorn_Nightbloom · July 30

What is this?

Also you might want to check on Ashpit because there's a high probability that an AD guild is farming and/or selling Emperor in that campaign.

tincanman · July 30

So all those players that might be inclined to try out eso or pvp aren't faced with disincentivising lengthy queues which would cause them to go do something else less boring than watch a positional-countdown. Then there would be a single empty campaign instead of the number currently available for the event.

tincanman · July 30

I think in one past year there were three campaigns in total for each of the extra sub-campaigns which only lasted, unsurprisingly, for that event: within a day or so the three sub-campaigns had individually and spontaneously partitioned into one each of yellow, blue and red for both cyro and ic and remained consistently that way throughout. I believe the forum was quiet during that particular event, in contrast to previous event(s) when a lot of pve players were perturbed to find other players actually killing their characters, in addition to legitimate complaints about some alleged 'pvp-ers' parking siege behind quest doors and wiping them out before they had a chance to actually load in and attempt to defend themselves.

tincanman · July 30

Then, of course, with all these wonderful extra campaigns, dedicated ap farmers can abuse leverage the low-population bonus to maximise their gained ap, moving to other campaigns on other characters as required to sustain that massive ap influx.

And, quelle surprise:

SkaraMinoc wrote: »

... might want to check on Ashpit because there's a high probability that an AD guild is farming and/or selling Emperor in that campaign.

Aislinna · July 30

Better too many campaigns then not enough. Of course, there will be a complaint either way.

blktauna · July 30

They all used to be full in the before times.

Major_Mangle · July 30

Aislinna wrote: »

Better too many campaigns then not enough. Of course, there will be a complaint either way.

Actually no. It's a PvP event and therefore PvP should be prioritised above everything else. If I see that there are queues to get into certain campaigns that means there are people there to PvP with and against. Only people I see defending the state of empty temporary campaigns are those who don't want to PvP but still want the rewards of PvP. Imagine if you could just walk into a vet trial and get the trifecta without having to fight any of the NPC's, that's essentially what these campaigns are. If you want event tickets from a PvP event you should actually be forced to PvP.

I've said it in other threads, zos should remove campaigns throughout the event if they see that they're not being filled or closed to being locked. Empty PvDoor campaigns should not be a thing. I'd personally take it a step further and make it so these temporary campaigns have emperor disabled in order to prevent emp trading/selling.

Arrow312 · July 30

The problem is that people don't want PvP, they just want the rewards and tickets. Every year at MYM I was in the PvP area and I got killed even though I was only there to quest. That's unfair, I don't want PvP....That's not going to change. Just like every year the requests come for Cyro without PvP or IC without PvP.

On PC EU, for example, I know from a friend that an alliance logs in almost exclusively with PvE players in the morning or at night. They do everything they can to complete their quests, but there is zero interest in PvP. Conversely, the others in the alliance then complain if they only lose throughout the day because there are no players.

acastanza_ESO · July 30

tincanman wrote: »

Then, of course, with all these wonderful extra campaigns, dedicated ap farmers can abuse leverage the low-population bonus to maximise their gained ap, moving to other campaigns on other characters as required to sustain that massive ap influx.

And, quelle surprise:

SkaraMinoc wrote: »

... might want to check on Ashpit because there's a high probability that an AD guild is farming and/or selling Emperor in that campaign.

I mean, I think that low key that is ZOS's intent with the extra campaigns; give people who have no interest in actual PVP an opportunity to earn the game's AP locked rewards.

it doesn't bother me any, it's a limited window that maybe gives some people that wouldn't otherwise come in at all a low stakes way to dip their toes in the water and earn something during the event.

The people who actually want to PVP will come in the rest of the year.
We can farm you then :P

CameraBeardThePirate · July 31

Arrow312 wrote: »

The problem is that people don't want PvP, they just want the rewards and tickets. Every year at MYM I was in the PvP area and I got killed even though I was only there to quest. That's unfair, I don't want PvP....That's not going to change. Just like every year the requests come for Cyro without PvP or IC without PvP.

On PC EU, for example, I know from a friend that an alliance logs in almost exclusively with PvE players in the morning or at night. They do everything they can to complete their quests, but there is zero interest in PvP. Conversely, the others in the alliance then complain if they only lose throughout the day because there are no players.

Except it's not "unfair". You got killed in a PvP zone. It doesn't matter if you were only there to quest; other people are there to PvP and it's a zone made for PvPing, not questing. No one is forcing you to do the PvP event.

Xarc · July 31

Mayhem 2025 is truly a disaster

These campaigns were originally intended to allow players to participate in the event, back when it was still popular...

xFocused · August 1

Xarc wrote: »

Mayhem 2025 is truly a disaster

These campaigns were originally intended to allow players to participate in the event, back when it was still popular...

Agreed. This current event is terrible. PS NA GH has queues but you get in there and it's just....dead? There's hardly any fights, everyone is AFK or there's one alliance that is taking the entire map and the other two just kinda let it happen? I don't know if it's the subclassing update or what but I've been logging in when I could after work which is usually around primetime and it's been absolutely terrible. EP has been extra zergy lately and it doesn't help that DC/AD don't really make any kind of effort to take the map back, or if they do EP just night/day time caps, rinse and repeat, lol. It's just not fun. Midyear used to have all these big, epic battles and now it's just....nothing

Arrow312 · August 1

CameraBeardThePirate wrote: »

Arrow312 wrote: »

The problem is that people don't want PvP, they just want the rewards and tickets. Every year at MYM I was in the PvP area and I got killed even though I was only there to quest. That's unfair, I don't want PvP....That's not going to change. Just like every year the requests come for Cyro without PvP or IC without PvP.

On PC EU, for example, I know from a friend that an alliance logs in almost exclusively with PvE players in the morning or at night. They do everything they can to complete their quests, but there is zero interest in PvP. Conversely, the others in the alliance then complain if they only lose throughout the day because there are no players.

Except it's not "unfair". You got killed in a PvP zone. It doesn't matter if you were only there to quest; other people are there to PvP and it's a zone made for PvPing, not questing. No one is forcing you to do the PvP event.

That is my opinion to but if you look at the thread there are every MyM the same. Like i wrote in my last comment...." I just want to quest" blablabla.....That is what i meant with people dont want PvP. They want the rewards from PvP without pvp. It is like i want to complete sun spire HM without fighting mobs or bosses.

SeaGtGruff · August 1

ZOS really has no way to know ahead of time whether the campaigns will be pop-locked, barren, or somewhere in between, and I think it's better to have more campaigns than needed instead of not enough campaigns.

Also, it isn't just about how full each campaign is, but how the players choose to divvy them up between the three alliances. I don't know how it is this year, because I haven't played in any campaigns other than my home campaign, but in years past it was common for AD to dominate one campaign, DC to dominate another, and EP to dominate another, such that any non-PvP players who wanted to collect their tickets had at least one campaign they could go to where they could feel reasonably safe, meaning backed up by a large number of fellow players from their particular alliance and a minimum of enemy players.

But really, if there had been no extra campaigns added and the regular campaigns were all pop-locked and impossible to get into within any reasonable amount of queue times, that would have been the real disaster.

Major_Mangle · August 1

SeaGtGruff wrote: »

ZOS really has no way to know ahead of time whether the campaigns will be pop-locked, barren, or somewhere in between, and I think it's better to have more campaigns than needed instead of not enough campaigns.

Also, it isn't just about how full each campaign is, but how the players choose to divvy them up between the three alliances. I don't know how it is this year, because I haven't played in any campaigns other than my home campaign, but in years past it was common for AD to dominate one campaign, DC to dominate another, and EP to dominate another, such that any non-PvP players who wanted to collect their tickets had at least one campaign they could go to where they could feel reasonably safe, meaning backed up by a large number of fellow players from their particular alliance and a minimum of enemy players.

But really, if there had been no extra campaigns added and the regular campaigns were all pop-locked and impossible to get into within any reasonable amount of queue times, that would have been the real disaster.

No one objects to have extra campaigns during the event, that's to be expected, but it shouldn't be so many that you can PvDoor and do other non Pvp activities without any resistance or actual PvP. Hence why ZOS should monitor the campaign's and remove/add based on actual population.

xylena_lazarow · August 1

They used to fill up, but now that we've seen Vengeance, players aren't gonna put up with so much broken crap.

MincMincMinc · August 1

blktauna wrote: »

They all used to be full in the before times.

They used to be full and 4x the population too

Major_Mangle wrote: »

SeaGtGruff wrote: »

ZOS really has no way to know ahead of time whether the campaigns will be pop-locked, barren, or somewhere in between, and I think it's better to have more campaigns than needed instead of not enough campaigns.

Also, it isn't just about how full each campaign is, but how the players choose to divvy them up between the three alliances. I don't know how it is this year, because I haven't played in any campaigns other than my home campaign, but in years past it was common for AD to dominate one campaign, DC to dominate another, and EP to dominate another, such that any non-PvP players who wanted to collect their tickets had at least one campaign they could go to where they could feel reasonably safe, meaning backed up by a large number of fellow players from their particular alliance and a minimum of enemy players.

But really, if there had been no extra campaigns added and the regular campaigns were all pop-locked and impossible to get into within any reasonable amount of queue times, that would have been the real disaster.

No one objects to have extra campaigns during the event, that's to be expected, but it shouldn't be so many that you can PvDoor and do other non Pvp activities without any resistance or actual PvP. Hence why ZOS should monitor the campaign's and remove/add based on actual population.

Agreed

colossalvoids · August 2

Those campaigns are a remnant of a time where those were also full and had active PvP. Removing those would be kind of admission of failure and honestly a hassle as it's easier to just have them as always, less work and to hear less complaints about being ganked in Bruma or Cropsford repeatedly by "pvpers".

Islyn · August 2

tincanman wrote: »

So all those players that might be inclined to try out eso or pvp aren't faced with disincentivising lengthy queues which would cause them to go do something else less boring than watch a positional-countdown. Then there would be a single empty campaign instead of the number currently available for the event.

I change campaigns when annoying people are just moaning in the zone chat non stop - like bye. Have fun tryna get an empty building back.

SeaGtGruff · August 2

Major_Mangle wrote: »

No one objects to have extra campaigns during the event, that's to be expected, but it shouldn't be so many that you can PvDoor and do other non Pvp activities without any resistance or actual PvP. Hence why ZOS should monitor the campaign's and remove/add based on actual population.

I would agree, but unfortunately the population in a campaign can fluctuate a great deal depending on the time of day and the day of the week, so it's possible that ZOS might remove some extra campaigns only to find that they're needed again a couple of hours later.

I have no idea how quickly an extra campaign can be added or removed, but if ZOS needs to copy a lot of data to an available server in order to open up an extra campaign then it's probably best for them to add the extra campaigns before the start of the event and leave them up until after the end of the event.