Search Results

Search results 1-20 of 1,000. There are more results available, please enhance your search parameters.

  • Hey there, please continue the discussion here: Adjustment to the Alliance Cap Test on February 26th

  • Another option: 4. Treat "red flagged" as a pseudo-faction. This means that "reds" can kill faction flagged players and be killed by them, also in blue and yellow zones. The key difference is though that reds can of course still attack reds, and that reds would be subject to the reputation system.

  • Hey there, in some posts above, users have rightfully pointed out that large hardcore alliances can avoid the negative effects of the modified test by splitting up into separate alliances. In the same way, you can of course avoid the much harsher disarray - at the expense of being red to each other, including friendly fire. However, if hardcore alliances split up in order to do so, the net effect on them is the same as if we had forced a split up through a hard cap. A key difference here though …

  • Quote from felipe128: “Not sure you understand how mathematics and statistics work, but 80% is 80% no matter what, 1 billion votes or 10. 80% is 80%. So yeah, 80% of the players who voted, still 80%. ” We did the vote to double check if there would be adequate support to try out the 300 people cap test. What do you think the outcome would have been if we had made the following poll? Question: Should we nerf hardcore alliances through a silver/fame debuff and expoential territory upkeeps? A) Yes …

  • Hey there, I'd like to add one key point to the discussion: Some of you doubt the the announced measures will be effective. It's our view that the siphoned energy upkeep (which becomes very high very fast) and the silver and fame debuff for those who own more than 10 territories is going to be effective, and once the test goes live, we'll see a significant change to the Outland power distribution. That's the goal. We would have impacted the top 4 power blocks without causing an unintentional mem…

  • Hey there, we are aware of this issues and are looking at various ways this could be fixed. There are different ways in principle to tackle this. Here are a few possibilities - all with pros and cons: 1. Change the system such that red flagged players can be executed in yellow zones. That would fix the issue. The downside is that it would prevent the open world knockdown PvP between reds that can in theory happen in yellow zones. Does anybody here have a good feeling for how popular this actuall…

  • Quote from Novan: “what about the people that went in and got rewarded with extremely expensive stuff as battlemounts? i've seen more than one player bragging how they got 3 batllemounts ” Our usual exploit policy applies here. Surplus rewards will be clawed back. Anybody trying to dodge a clawback will be sanctioned accordingly.

  • Quote from tabooshka: “well looks like this game will always cater to zergs first and foremost ” The modified test includes a set of elements that exclusively target the hardcore mega alliances. They are specifically designed to make them less powerful. - Very strong "soft" cap on territories held via exponentially increasing upkeep costs for territories held - A significant silver and fame reduction for *all* members of a mega alliance if they hold more than a certain number of territories. For…

  • Quote from Neef: “Then why the fuck did you go and post about making a limit before thinking about what it would do to the more casual players? ” That was indeed a very clear mistake that we made for which we can only apologize. We simply underestimated the downside potential of a cap and only realized how bad it could be after the announcement had already been made and we saw purges happening already. In an ideal world, we would have communicated the modified test from the get go, without first…

  • Suggestion to RD loot

    Korn - - Feedback & Suggestions

    Post

    Quote from Sinatra.SUN: “@Korn I heard you on last nights stream on Jonhah's The problem with your system is that the player will expect loot based on the chest. So when you find a legendary chest you expect loot. The gamelogic if ofc a bigger chance for loot, but thats not how its perceived. What you should do is to make the loot roll before giving the chest color. There should be a roll for treasure, and then the chest color should represent the amount of treasure inside. So a non green chest …

  • Quote from Forneus: “ If your new change doesn't work though, you need to react swiftly. Having data from the remaining half of this season should be enough. Don't drag it out over several seasons like you've done previously with broken battlemounts etc. You've opened pandoras box with the hard cap annoucement, something many of us have been wanting for ages. ” We are 100% committed to addressing the power block issue as Queen on it's own did not properly solve it. We know that in the gaming ind…

  • Quote from Equart: “@Korn At least tell us for how long you will test this change.” The same logic applies here. We'd see an immediate impact on reset day already. How will territories be distributed after reset day? What's the game play in the 1-2 weeks after it? We'll do a structured email survey for the players (more accurate than a forum poll) and ask them for their views. We'll then share our findings with the community and take it from there.

  • Quote from Equart: “Quote from Handsome: “Robin is pretty much depressed because he expect anonther scenario.... ” @Eltharyon Robin, if it is true - i feel sorry. We all want to make Albion better , we got same aim ,and i sincerely wish you and your team good luck and prosper. But this reaction - it is what it is, we all learn from mistakes. ” I think you mention a very critical point here, one that it's often poorly understood. And it's this: We really do share the same goal here. We do conside…

  • Quote from Akise: “Let's assume that this proposal will go through. What would stop alliance A from having alliance b, c, d, e, and f exclusively for terry holding, having a hideout in every important terry open for all alliances and all the main forces in alliance A. Alliance A would be able to hold 60 terries without any repurcussions, having safe zones in all the zones via hideouts. The only downside would be the loss of season points. But trading this some season points in turn for massive s…

  • Quote from Throatcutter: “Quote from Korn: “Quote from Dadice: “Actually changes nothing. They will breat up into 3-4 alliance and still achieve the same thing. Nothings going to change with this. As they already have the workaround in their problem/solution. ” If they break up though, the net effect is the same as forcefully breaking them up via a hard cap. The key difference is that it would only be the power block who'd break up, the casual guilds and alliances can keep playing as they have b…

  • Quote from Dadice: “Actually changes nothing. They will breat up into 3-4 alliance and still achieve the same thing. Nothings going to change with this. As they already have the workaround in their problem/solution. ” If they break up though, the net effect is the same as forcefully breaking them up via a hard cap. The key difference is that it would only be the power block who'd break up, the casual guilds and alliances can keep playing as they have been playing before.

  • Quote from Brobacca: “I just dont get it casual players are not even in the mega alliances..... so how does it hurt them? Also going back on an official post? When your previous poll shows 80% of players do not want the mega alliances in the game. Why run a poll if it isn't going to be listened to. ” There are a lot of casual alliances with more than 300 members. The problem is that if we do a higher cap, say, 1000, the impact on the power blocks would have been close to 0. With 1.000 slots, we …

  • Hey there, no final decision has been made on the matter. We are 100% committed to address the issue of the large power blocks. It will be fixed. The core issue we see with the original test plan is that it's almost certainly going to cause a massive "purge" of casual players from their guilds and alliances. We have gotten a lot of reports of this already happening - despite the fact that the test had not even started. Such a purge, once it has happened, is not easily reversible and could do mas…

  • Quote from Headquake: “they can put 100 % silver debuff all serious player will not give a fuck anyway . We make money from crafting , ganking , loot in dungeon etc.. 20 % fame debuff . Run one avalonian dungeon all 7 day pouf its 10 % wich is a fucking joke in exchange of owning all the t8 -t7 farming zone of the map. This round table is ridiculous , they probably ask the same player that are disgusting all small aliance rolling 400 vs 100 everyday . ” Here is a breakdown of the current territo…

  • Quote from haraj: “Why are you testing stuff in the middle of a season? ” Waiting until the end of the season carries the risk of the alliance issue getting worse. It would also become more ingrained, meaning that a shake up could have more side effects than it has if we carry on the test while things are still fresh. We aim to get conclusive test results quickly. How? 1. We'll see how the invasion day goes under the new conditions. 2. We'll closely watch what happens after the invasion day 3. W…