New zones for Old Alliances and why this expansion FAILED

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • New zones for Old Alliances and why this expansion FAILED

      So im just going to write down some key points:

      - New Expansion zones allowing Big alliances to capture the town plots that dont reset next season stopping NEW guilds getting a foothold in the Blackzones.
      - Allowing 5-10k Memeber alliances to exist in the game.

      This expansion was meant to be for NEW clans to establish a presence in the blackzone.

      THIS DID NOT HELP NEW PLAYERS!!!!

      Below are 2 images from the NEW expansion zones. They speak for themselves and can clearly show that not a single NEW clan or ALLIANCE got a foothold out there.



      So i ask SBI, what was the point in giving these already pre existing HUGE ALLIANCES more territories to own including Town Plots in the Blackzone that dont reset on GvG Seasons when you said it was for the NEW guilds and alliances??????

      @Elsa @PrintsKaspian
    • We have been asking for months, many months for some type of cap in the alliances or in their absence some mechanism that penalizes these lammers players ... But bueh, anyway arch is a set of cancer / lammer players in addition to many f2p players , under that aspect the purpose of the area has been fulfilled, since it is being occupied by noobies / newbiesEgo has too many players and also many of them are f2p, probably 30-40% of ego are f2p, so the truth, the objective is being fulfilled, has its serious flaws, but it is not all bad.
    • Everyone told SBI what was going to happen. They dint listened.

      This is proof that the devs need to listen to the comunity instead of doing something just because they think its gonna be good.

      Now the mega alliances are even more powerfull than ever because they have more territories for them.

      An alliance cap needs to happen. And soon, or this will hurt the game permanently.
    • It doesn't really help developed players either:

      1. New Players progress to BZ level farming/HG/Dungeons.
      2. Veteran players/guilds already established in all of the BZ just feast on all the 4.1 and gathering gear that's spilling in via said New Players.
      3. Newer Players have less interest in the BZ and then quickly realise there's no other way to progress and just leave.
      4. Veteran players sit as kings in their boundless territories, stretching as far as the eye can see, but they're as barren as a desert.


      Definitely not good for the game on the long term imho.
    • Something I've talked with others for quite some time is the basic flaw of the guild/alliance system. There's simply too many players in a single guild/alliance to create a natural dynamic flow between new and older players. If there was some kind of cap on the amount of players in a guild, say 100 people, guilds couldn't just mass invite tons of new players and locking them in a toxic environment.

      My largest issue though, is still the alliance system since, similar to the guilds, there's no cap on members which means they can absorb pretty much every single guild in the game if they wished and thus making the game world feel stale because every territory is owned by the same few alliances. If alliances could only have a maximum of 3-5 guilds (with a cap of 100 players each) it would open up the world more and allow alliances to actually matter. Another solution besides a cap would be to simply remove the alliance system as a whole. This should make guilds either go completely solo in order to compete with every single guild out there or communicate with other guilds in order to form flimsy alliances which could vastly improve the guild to guild spying aspects of the game as well.
    • Why don't we just limit the number of territories an alliance can have to 3 or something like that?

      This would create a lot of room for smaller guilds to exist in the world, as one single huge alliance would not be able to hold all the territories.
      It would also cause alliances and guilds to choose their territories more carefully instead of just capturing everything they can.

      If the territory cap was 3, then once an alliance or guild capture its 4th territory, the guild or alliance would have to give up one if its other territories to end up with 3. And that territory would become neutral and available for capture on the next day.

      A very simple solution that disencourages huge alliances and gives room for smaller guilds to exist out there.
    • well what i think that they need to add a system of combat through which territories can be claimed which would be like the defenders and attackers should have item power balance and number of players should be limited. removing alliance system or reducing guild members would create more chaos and making bigger guilds angry. they should add a combat system unique for territories in which players would win using tactics and strategies like a real battle. it should be like if 10 players are facing 20 players, they can still win by using smarter tactics or something.

      Falk_ wrote:

      Why don't we just limit the number of territories an alliance can have to 3 or something like that?

      This would create a lot of room for smaller guilds to exist in the world, as one single huge alliance would not be able to hold all the territories.
      It would also cause alliances and guilds to choose their territories more carefully instead of just capturing everything they can.

      If the territory cap was 3, then once an alliance or guild capture its 4th territory, the guild or alliance would have to give up one if its other territories to end up with 3. And that territory would become neutral and available for capture on the next day.

      A very simple solution that disencourages huge alliances and gives room for smaller guilds to exist out there.
      reducing the number of claimed territories would not prove good and make the game boring and not fun. People have worked hard to build strong guilds and have claimed their territories by fair means. if others want to have them then they should work for it. they could add a system of temporary treaty between alliances where they can join up to defeat other alliance or make peace to defend themselves.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Karthanok ().