Search Results

Search results 1-20 of 164.

  • Quote from blappo: “Quote from Guilefulwolf: “I dont like the idea of punishing people just because of being part of a big alliance since being big is not the real problem ” what? yes it is. Reguardless of territories and season points big is the problem. Territories and points are just Points of Interest nothing more. they create tension = fights The problem is size. because there is no cap the way to win is N+1 having more people means you win. No Dissarray buff will stop that either, because …

  • I dont like the idea of punishing people just because of being part of a big alliance since being big is not the real problem but the hyper expansion ability. I will put ARCH alliance as an example to explain this. Regardless of what many people may think about them, they r the perfect example of a huge alliance without a big expansion power. The last time i checked alliances´ amount of territories, ARCH had 40-45 and even if it could look as a lot u can notice it really is not that much since t…

  • One thing u must understand is Albion world is not big enough for every single guild to control at least one territory. Even if each full 300 players guild were limited to only one cluster, there would be a lot more guilds without access to any cluster because simply there r too many more guilds than available territories. Thus it will always feel like not everyone have the posibility of getting a part of the pie.

  • I agree with the increase of attack declarations costs depending on how many cluster the alliance controls but WTF with the retard idea of increasing repairing and market costs? The size of the alliances is not the problem in itself but the hyper expansion ability and the huge zergs being able to overwhelm so hard to the smaller ones. Devs r looking for a way to deal with these issues not to punish people just for being part of a big alliance.

  • @Gugusteh The main reason why SBI decided to move from 5v5 to ZvZ conquering system was to avoid a single guild/alliance being able to get so many territories by having a relatively small group of 20-25 good 5v5 players. The same is now possible to happen with good ZvZ guilds, the ability to hyper expand undisputedly. The problem is not being too good at ZvZ or too big in numbers but the ability to conquer so much without brake. This is happening because bigger alliances can mass up more players…

  • Lets wait and see what happens. I personally think it wont make a big change for current small guilds/alliances. Yes former alliated guilds will gank, dive, kill each other in small scale encounters and clusters controls will probably be fought by themselve without back up of other guilds but GMs will also sit and talk about land distribution and say "Okay, these are mine and those are yours. We dont raid your mages, outposts or castles and you dont raid ours". At the end, most clusters will be …

  • Since devs seem to not wanting to implement an IP debuff system like it should be to affect everything and stick to only damage dealt and received, here is another simple idea for debuffing that could fit what they look for. Just make the debuff % bonus equal to the amount of players zergs have over 20 men. Starting at 1% for a 21 players zerg and growing 1% more per every additional player. I.E. an 80 men zerg would get a 60% debuff bonus. This would set the optimal zergs size somewhere around …

  • Quote from Roccandil: “Quote from Guilefulwolf: “@Roccandil That would take the zvz skill away of the game and would become a matter of having more active players along the day. Basically that idea sounds like a paradise for an alliance like ARCH that even not being good at big scale fights they could have a bounch of people 24/7 to do quick hit and run attacks over and over again. Instead of this, why not change the conquering mecanic and make every cluster claimable every day at its prime time…

  • @Roccandil That would take the zvz skill away of the game and would become a matter of having more active players along the day. Basically that idea sounds like a paradise for an alliance like ARCH that even not being good at big scale fights they could have a bounch of people 24/7 to do quick hit and run attacks over and over again. Instead of this, why not change the conquering mecanic and make every cluster claimable every day at its prime time without any previus attack declaration required,…

  • Quote from UNFM: “Quote from Guilefulwolf: “Quote from Fred_the_Barbarian: “Dumb idea for a disarray buff: As your zerg size increases you start to deal friendly fire at an increasing amount of damage to allies. Bring 50 people and your siegebow is going to annoy your tank. Bring 300 and it'll deal full damage to him. Numbers are tweakable. ” That idea was already given. ” That's why my proposal was debuff of numbers in alliances1k - 10% debuff 2k - 20% debuff Debuff will be for dmg deal,cc dura…

  • Quote from Fred_the_Barbarian: “Ok, didn't see it. ” It wasnt in this thread but in the zerg debuff one. I actually think it wouldnt be a bad idea for discouraging big numbers. Something like a % of friendly fire received depending on our zergs zise.

  • Quote from Fred_the_Barbarian: “Dumb idea for a disarray buff: As your zerg size increases you start to deal friendly fire at an increasing amount of damage to allies. Bring 50 people and your siegebow is going to annoy your tank. Bring 300 and it'll deal full damage to him. Numbers are tweakable. ” That idea was already given.

  • Quote from Neef: “Quote from Guilefulwolf: “Perhaps a simpler solution would be to change the regions´ population cap from 300 to 200 or 150 players max. Regions could also have different caps depending on their tier. Like 150 max. for T5, 200 max. for T6, 250 max. for T7 and 300 max. for T8. This way smaller tier regions would be disputed by smaller forces. ” I don't think an overall cap it the way to go, If anything the cap should be alliance caps for zones, Like only 150 from the same allianc…

  • Perhaps a simpler solution for the whole problem could be to change the regions´ population cap from 300 to 200 or 150 players max. Regions could also have different caps depending on their tier. Like 150 max. for T5, 200 max. for T6, 250 max. for T7 and 300 max. for T8. This way smaller tier regions would be disputed by smaller forces.

  • Quote from tabooshka: “no access to terris for people other than the guild owning it and ez. ” WTF Im not sure if i get what this guy propposes but it could be the dumbest idea here if it is what i understood.

  • Im not against nor in favor of eliminatting the alliance feature because i think eliminating them will not change the situation for current small guilds/alliances since without in game alliances the guilds´ GMs will still be alliates and will still work together in order to get mutual benefit which just cant be stopped. Alliances being big is not the real problem in itself but two major issues: 1. the ability to mass up 200+ men zergs to overwhelm smaller ones and 2. the ability to hyper expand …

  • Eliminating the alliances feature could look like a solution but i think it wouldnt make a big difference to solve the current situation for small guilds/alliances because GMs will still work together to help each other in battles and divide the clusters with NAPs. It would make it a bit harder because of the friendly fire but then it would also give the advantages of not being affected so strongly by the zerg debuff and the smart queue. I see two major issues that need to be handled: 1. The zer…

  • I wonder, if alliances get removed would the zerg debuff still be necessary? I mean, if guilds will have no more back up but the amount of players they can mass up at a certain time then it would be fair to win if u can mass up more players of ur guild than the others. Therefore zerg debuff could be removed along with the alliances feature. This if the guild´s players cap stays at 300. If it is raised up then it is fine to keep and inprove the zerg debuff to successfully discourage zergs of 100+…

  • LOL. Solo DGs divers which wear optimal 1v1 PvP gear looking for lonely people in the mid of a pull of mobs at 70% health and wearing PvE gear clain that it is unfair when they find more than one?

  • Quote from UNFM: “debuff it at % of numbers in alliances 1k - 10% 2k - 20% 3k- 30% 4k - 40% 5k - 50% 6k - 60% etc.. every % debuff - dmg deal, heal, cc duration. are you abale to bring 100 dps ? so also you will be able to bring 110 dps and 10 more heals. Are you join to big alliances be ready your HG,RD,GVG,CGVG and other content will be much harded, not in zvz, you won of numbers, ofc we need balance.. not snow ball effect, content < numbers. Decide what you want to do, ZERGING ? join big ally…