Please don't shut down Blackreach

robertlabrie · April 20

Shut down RW and IR keep GH and BR. Easy. Veng is awful

Turtle_Bot · April 20

Kartalin wrote: »

It'd be great to have GH be non alliance locked, especially if it becomes the only non-vengeance campaign. But we can still compromise if necessary and change the lock from 30 days to something like 20 hours. I think that alleviates many (not all) of the issues that lock fans are concerned with and helps out the multi-faction enjoyers.

This would be my preferred solution as well (and something I suggested a while ago).

Whether it's 20, 24 or 48 hours, it doesn't matter, but not being able to play with friends for a month is just crazy. I do see the logic behind wanting locks, that's why (imo) a 24 hour lock would be the sweet spot, since it's too late to do anything relevant (spying/trolling/etc.) 24 hours later (and players already get around it with alt accounts anyway), but it's still short enough that players could swap to play with friends the next day instead of having to wait a full month.

daemondamian · April 20

I have 14 characters on all three alliances & swap between them not to spy & troll but because sometimes the map (Blackreach) is dominated by one alliance & I can't do much to earn AP (aside from town quests) in terms of repairing keep walls & doors.

Though sometimes the map is dominated by one alliance & there's nothing to repair lol

Why keep the alliance locked server & not one of the others?

aya_eso · April 20

If BR shut down, people who have been playing on BR will have to queue for GH.
Will the queue time for GH be four hours on the weekend? That’s a bad joke

robertlabrie · April 20

GH is going to have even longer queues than it does now and casual players looking to do quests will not have a place. ESO is just going to lose more PVP players because of this. Keep BR for the casuals.

xylena · April 20

Can I have an entire Cyro server just for me and my 4 friends too?

Orbital78 · April 20

robertlabrie wrote: »

GH is going to have even longer queues than it does now and casual players looking to do quests will not have a place. ESO is just going to lose more PVP players because of this. Keep BR for the casuals.

Wouldn't the vengeance campaign be the best place for a casual player to do their quests?

Reginald_leBlem · April 20

Some of us have friends and guildmates that play on multiple alliances, and enjoy being able to play together. Plus, the queue for GH can be hours long by the time everyone can get online.
Blackreach has a place, and it should stay.

Artisian0001 · April 20

CameraBeardThePirate wrote: »

Agreed. Grey Host should be changed to non-alliance locked. They're effectively removing the ability to play with friends for those that don't enjoy Vengeance.

Alliance lock was and always will be a mistake.

robertlabrie · April 20

Orbital78 wrote: »

Wouldn't the vengeance campaign be the best place for a casual player to do their quests?

Nope. The Champions builds are hopelessly nerfed makes it nearly impossible to solo a resource or town. Too slow for a scouting mission. Too weak for most of the in-zone PvE content (delves, quests, etc, if that stuff is even turned on). Kill 150 unachievable unless you're in a gigantic group chasing a smaller group.

DoofusMax · April 20

As a non-PvP'er, I'm a Blackreach player when I'm in Cyrodiil, which admittedly isn't often. The alliance-lock doesn't generally bother me as much as the queue time to get in does. Since I have characters in all three alliances, I don't particularly care whether only one alliance's toons are allowed in for the month. I come in, do my business, and leave, and that business seldom involves doing much of anything with the campaign as much as it involves needing to do something which can only be done in Cyrodiil. Were that stuff offloaded to a different zone, then I'm absolutely content to let the GH PvP'ers beat on each other to their hearts' content. But until that happens, there needs to be one campaign for the non-PvP'ers to be able to do their business.

Attorneyatlawl · April 21

React wrote: »

Attorneyatlawl wrote: »

ItsNotLiving wrote: »

Why do people even want an alliance locked campaign?

I don't get why people want an unlocked one. I made all of my toons the same faction at launch with pvp in mind. Why would you want to play multiple sides of the same war? Doing so used to be considered cheating in older mmorpgs and was heavily looked down upon.

That all said, greyhost queues are a good reason for there to he a second normal campaign that isn't vengeance.

For some people, PVP is about PVP combat. Not faction or alliance related roleplay.

The best way to find fights is to play the underdog faction, which tends to change a few times a year. Even further, it is very refreshing to swap to another faction and fight players from your previous faction who you'd never had an opportunity to fight before.

It isn't about rp at all. It's about staying on the same team the whole match and not bandwagoning based on map control on a given night. I rolled DC because it was the underdog in beta and launch

alongside my guild which wanted the same. I think the best option is to keep a second campaign too. I just don't see the need to change nightly otherwise.