Revert Castles to constantly give points

    Diese Seite verwendet Cookies. Durch die Nutzung unserer Seite erklären Sie sich damit einverstanden, dass wir Cookies setzen. Weitere Informationen

    • Well when it was like this, the complains were that was annoying to keep watching/defending, and it actually sounds to check everytime someone hits the door. I personally think castles isnt completely bad. I will list the issues with castles and you can see why no one comes to them.

      - Castles has timer set, that basically trigger each at the same time; It would make sense, so basically in theory you would prevent, and/or create opportunity so the same person cant have all of them. But we can see that BA can defend all of it, even when POE was stealing the anglia ones, and SQUAD would manage to pull alts and defend them, meaning the timing for doing this mechanic is small or not working fully as intended.
      - The Timer would make sense if the GEOGRAPHY would help, but portals, alts and how map is created allows to defend it. So the World Map and how we travel on it enable the all castle holding.
      - Design of castles are a funnel, if you are defending, you have all advantages, you have vision, you have space. That doesnt mean is impossible to be on attacking position and win, but definitely harder than defending. I would blame the 2 sided castle design (2 big entrances and 2 small ones).

      I know that SBI already has plans on roadmap to change castles, but thats the issues with castles. For now only thing would be interesting to see is to unclaim all of castles 1hour before the rewards. In that way you prevent all castles being hold by same alliance or make them develop coordination to do so. We might see different alliances fighting for it, since the strong ones would be fighting for the important castles, but with that change, meaning you either holding 1-2 castles might not be rewardable enough since will need daily work for it, but if work is harder rewards needs to be good enough.
    • I honestly think castles that provide constant 24 hour content, are a much idea than limiting the content to once per day and to only a handful of guilds.

      SBI should never have:

      1. limited castles to small amount of guilds or alliance
      2. made the fights 2x per day
      3. constant fights will result in more open world action

      The only people that were complaining about castles were the people in mega alliances that were being forced to go and defend. I personally loved the old system. A system where 1 guild can control ALL of the castles in ALL continents is definitely not as good as a system that offers content for everyone.
    • Torthur schrieb:

      I honestly think castles that provide constant 24 hour content, are a much idea than limiting the content to once per day and to only a handful of guilds.

      SBI should never have:

      1. limited castles to small amount of guilds or alliance
      2. made the fights 2x per day
      3. constant fights will result in more open world action

      The only people that were complaining about castles were the people in mega alliances that were being forced to go and defend. I personally loved the old system. A system where 1 guild can control ALL of the castles in ALL continents is definitely not as good as a system that offers content for everyone.
      SBI didint change any of those topics you said, the only thing they changed was energy/points that it gives, the amount and the timer to get it. You honestly think if castles were giving points per hour would make alliances come for it? you will hit a single castle at random time, and then you will have SQUAD massing all their men to a specific place, it would be even worst than the actual system. The actual system might not be the best but prevents the same alliance to be in the same place to protect every single castle. Also castles is based on NA and EU timezone it might be a bad timer for each timezone but thats another talk/issue to fix in the actual system, but it does stabilish a timer for each timezone to group. Also castles being 2x a day isnt bad, the issue is when the castles are one of the few mechanics to generate OW fights. Of course constant fights will result in more open world action, but tell me which guild/alliance comeback after getting wiped? The only one i see is the one holding all the castles at the moment. The castles being 24h rewardable dont solve 10% of castle problems, it actually generate more than fix, if you think squad wont hold all castles because they are 24h you more than wrong.
    • Constant points won't solve the problem of Squad-BA locking down all castles.

      Only destroying the Caerleon world portal will, to prevent Squad from amassing anywhere in BZ at anytime. If Caerleon is removed or changed so that player stay locked to one continent for hours, or as others suggested, one lock to anglia, then travel to cumbria, then travel to mercia, then Squad wouldn't be able to lock them all down.

      From that point, after that change, more guilds/alliances could start taking castles, and make sure the reward is worthwhile.


      I do agree that constant points and more frequent rewards are better in general.
    • Caerleon doesnt hurt the game, but the Realm Gate does. In theory the system would prevent people from traveling faster through the world, but that doesnt happen because at this point everyone has 3 characters ready to fight, if one character is locked you will have 2 others to show for the other side of the world. So yes, Realm Gate is a system that kinda hurts the game at the moment, not only castles, but blackzones city plots value and usability. But changing only realm gate wont solve much from castles.

      Again about constant points and frequent rewards, it wont prevent Squad from holding it. If you think constant rewards will make smaller guilds go for it, it can happen, but you will still get squad to mass for the castle being hit, again 3 characters to show for it, and trust me BA will always adapt to the lock traveling system. So again, constant rewards dont change anything, you just have full time reward, that people might try to sneak castles to get rewarded, but SQUAD will still show for it, with a fight happening or not, but thats not what SBI should focus, and they need a system where either an single alliance cant hold everything at the same time, or at least force their mass to split numbers to hold numbers. So AGAIN, constant rewards dont change anything you just simple delaying the reward.
    • Protheus schrieb:

      Torthur schrieb:

      I honestly think castles that provide constant 24 hour content, are a much idea than limiting the content to once per day and to only a handful of guilds.

      SBI should never have:

      1. limited castles to small amount of guilds or alliance
      2. made the fights 2x per day
      3. constant fights will result in more open world action

      The only people that were complaining about castles were the people in mega alliances that were being forced to go and defend. I personally loved the old system. A system where 1 guild can control ALL of the castles in ALL continents is definitely not as good as a system that offers content for everyone.
      SBI didint change any of those topics you said, the only thing they changed was energy/points that it gives, the amount and the timer to get it. You honestly think if castles were giving points per hour would make alliances come for it? you will hit a single castle at random time, and then you will have SQUAD massing all their men to a specific place, it would be even worst than the actual system. The actual system might not be the best but prevents the same alliance to be in the same place to protect every single castle. Also castles is based on NA and EU timezone it might be a bad timer for each timezone but thats another talk/issue to fix in the actual system, but it does stabilish a timer for each timezone to group. Also castles being 2x a day isnt bad, the issue is when the castles are one of the few mechanics to generate OW fights. Of course constant fights will result in more open world action, but tell me which guild/alliance comeback after getting wiped? The only one i see is the one holding all the castles at the moment. The castles being 24h rewardable dont solve 10% of castle problems, it actually generate more than fix, if you think squad wont hold all castles because they are 24h you more than wrong.
      Obviously by your response, you did **not** play beta.

      They limited castles to a small amount of guilds and alliances by adding in the caerleon realm gate

      During beta, and up until idk 6+ months into release, castles gave constant points. You could 100% ninja castles in the off hours or win them with small numbers. Castles used to be taken off hours by small groups constantly. Since the change of making them occur at 2 times a day w/the realm gate NO ONE has successful done that. IE the old system provided more content for more players.

      Technically all guilds "go back" after being wiped, if they dont that essentially means they
    • Neu

      are you comparing beta to actual moment of game? on beta anything would give reason for people to fight, cause game was fresh, and people just fought for beef or to beat their enemy, now people only fight if is worth to do so. I didint play beta, but you clearly dont do castles, and you clearly has no knowledge what is caerleon function into the game. Realm gate doesnt kill castles, remember if you change realm gate people has alts, squad will be there for any castle. I will say again no matter how you change the rewards, thats not the main reason people is not going for castles,1 - squad will always be there, so sbi needs to change how is castle mechanics, either how you claim it or by timers, 2 - castle design inst the best, you benefit too much from defensive position (still dont mean is impossible to win as attacker but definitely better to be on defensive than on attacker, if the attacker has the best position, it make people go for it more, because the attackers are the ones generating the content on the actual system). Saying that on betas was more fights because was constant rewards is 100% wrong, beta was totally different game, totally different rewards, totally different situation. Changing rewards not gonna change anything for now, IF sbi does, and IF people comes squad will be there everytime, because castle and game allows it, and those alliances wont keep coming for it, not to generate fight, but to sneak to get rewarded, then we get same problem we have right now, squad sitting on castles getting free income, and even worst, the constant reward. Even if you balance to end of the day to get the same as right now in 1 time, you not changing anything, you only changing how reward is given, not how castle works. But yea lets change the rewards thinking it will generate fights, and instead get sneak castles, because thats what sbi wants, generate sneak castles instead of content, instead of fights, instead of trashing gear, played beta and still cant understand it...

      Dieser Beitrag wurde bereits 1 mal editiert, zuletzt von Protheus ()

    • Neu

      I would agree more constant castle activity would be a good thing to give the zerg wanting players something to do. To much of the intended small scale fights such as mage raiding and war tents turn into giant zergs because of bored players. Players wanting large scale fights need more content available to them so other players wanting small scale can also get intended small scale content.
    • Neu

      Torthur schrieb:

      I imagine defending castles 24 hours per day/7 days a week, with constant pinging it would be impossible for 1 guild to hold all castles for an entire season.
      I guess you never faced BA incastles right. It sound impossible to your guild, but when the main guild is holding/protecting those castles and is the most active guild in the game, making 24/7 wont change it at all. I know because ive seen this, BA has 30+ players at any time you pick, if you hit any castle they will have scouts there to check who is hitting, and how many. Even tho you STEAL a castle thats totally the opposite way castles should go, it should be a thing you fight for, it should generate content, fight. Changing rewards needs to come with a full rework on castles otherwise you will just change how rewards will be giving for SQUAD.
    • Neu

      Protheus schrieb:

      Torthur schrieb:

      I imagine defending castles 24 hours per day/7 days a week, with constant pinging it would be impossible for 1 guild to hold all castles for an entire season.
      I guess you never faced BA incastles right. It sound impossible to your guild, but when the main guild is holding/protecting those castles and is the most active guild in the game, making 24/7 wont change it at all. I know because ive seen this, BA has 30+ players at any time you pick, if you hit any castle they will have scouts there to check who is hitting, and how many.You tacitly agreed with Changing rewards needs to come with a full rework on castles otherwise you will just change how rewards will be giving for SQUAD.
      I regularly fight and shotcall against blue army.

      I am the leader of one of the 5 black zone alliances as well.

      People from Ironborn have alts in BA and people from BA have alts in Ironborn.

      Your in blue alts lol which is why I imagine you do not want to respond castle pings all day.

      I can see tacitly agreed with my statement "It would be near impossible for 1 alliance to hold all castles on all continents if they could be attacked 24hrs/day. If you make them constant rewards AND they can be attacked constantly it WILL create content". By your quote of "You tacitly agreed with" because logically IF you believe someone can 'steal the castle' that means 1 guild/alliance can't hold all castles all season long.

      Take from say 5 utc to 10 utc EGO has around 60+ ready to zvz, almost no one can contest us at that time because we have most of the players in that time zone.