Limiting Alliances to Guild size - Test starting February 26th

  • If I see the arguments of the big guys that run these alliance and they now try to be the saviour for the casual and claim living in slavery is way better than that what comes now

    I finally understand why there was so much stagnation in this

    If this argument chain happened as consulting at RT, holy ... Then I suddenly understand all these decisions I was completely lost trying understand..

    Haven sake this poll happened
  • Big alliances leaders start crying and believe it or not doesn't matter, regardless of what you say and all excuses you bring here small guilds and solo players will all enjoy watching you agonizing and crumble, I will open a champagne.
    And you small little gatherer you are alone now we will find you gathering safe all that t8 nodes is over. 26th

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

  • BalorXI wrote:

    Those talking about removing name tags and reducing guilds:

    That is where this movement is heading. Indeed, its already virtually a guarantee. What SBI means by a test is, SQUAK will most likely maintain the dominant world empire using a NAP structure. After they win a few big fights on the new no alliance map, the overflowing of tears from the carebears will be torrential.

    That's when you'll get the "remove ability to see name tags" addition. Look at what Final Order has accomplished within the 300 man cap. They fight all the big alliances and do pretty well. Blue Army, Take Care, other top ZvZ guilds. They're just too good. Its not fair. Its not right.

    The carebears want Squad players ganking Squad players along the road where we all moved islands and placed hideouts. Expectations were made. And when the carebears' attempt to force the alliance players (14,000 players represented among the Big 4) to play the "correct way" fails, that's when devs will have to cut those "mega guilds" down to size. Dozens of clans who have been together for many seasons even years, but who cares about any of that.

    Right now ARCH, POE, SQUAK, 1941, Final Order, they all fight each other in epic battles for tangible open world goals (season points and territories) every single day in a rolling ZvZ that covers the entire map. Indeed this is the very same system (cluster queue, disarray, ZvZ for territory) that SBI justimplemented and it works.

    You think its as simple as sending SBI a bunch of tears and literally begging them to dismantle SQUAK, POE, ARCH, and so on. By forming a mob of carebears you have already failed, and I guarantee you that SQUAK will win the first post-alliance invasion day.

    Well then just reduce guild size now. ( at least halve it )
    It still guarantees content for hardcore guilds because hardcore players can adapt to anything. and best guilds will dominate.

    However it does reduce the zvz fight sizes and change the way zvz happens. (small to mid fights are the most skill based)
    which is good because
    1.graphic optimization is shit, large fights means lag for alot of people, not alot of people like it cause of the lag.
    2.Way lower barrier of entry. People are easier to step up to learn to be a good shotcaller, and people are more willing to participate in smaller fights than follow a shotcaller in-training to die in big fights.
    3. dramas, dramas and more dramasss. More people will have the courage to build their own guild fame rather than kneeling out of survival (it feels way better losing a fight as a close knit guild than winning a big zvz as a slave to some NAP)


    This change is good for the sole reason there''s lower chance of going back to alliance era. This is just the first step towards another era ( even if this test fucked up, do you really think dev is going to revert the change ? lmaooo)

    The post was edited 4 times, last by Ryl ().

  • hypnoticshadow wrote:

    Big alliances leaders start crying and believe it or not doesn't matter, regardless of what you say and all excuses you bring here small guilds and solo players will all enjoy watching you agonizing and crumble, I will open a champagne.
    And you small little gatherer you are alone now we will find you gathering safe all that t8 nodes is over. 26th
    To be honest you just sound like an angry, bitter player with a grudge to bear, who has no real interest in the good of the game.
    Midgard
    T8 Fibre, Ore, Hide, Wood & Stone Gatherer
    T8 Gathering Gear Crafter
    T8 Bags & Capes Crafter
  • Roccandil wrote:

    That seems idealistic at best. This is some of what I see happening:


    Small guilds will be irrelevant in the Outlands, regardless of whether or not they ally. Three hundred players in a single guild will tend to be far more efficient and coordinated than X guilds in a 300 player alliance (and the more guilds in the alliance, the more inefficient and uncoordinated they'll tend to be).

    Zvz players will increasingly be attracted to zvz-first mega-guilds, and will ditch smaller guilds.

    Part-time zvz players will increasingly get pushed out of zvz guilds in favor of full-time zvz players.

    New zvz players will have a harder time finding experienced zvz players to play with and learn from.

    Big zvz guilds will tend to orient their players to narrower primetimes, to maximize their zerg potential (a half EU/NA guild will be clobbered by full-EU guilds in EU primetime and full-NA guilds in NA, assuming equal skill/gear); it wouldn't surprise me if we saw ARCH_EU_1 and ARCH_NA_1, etc.

    NAPs will be more likely to form along primetime boundaries.
    All that seems bad to me.
    All these points you made were true with 5v5 gvg too, with the exception that small guilds were irrelevant...
  • It looks like SBI is lacking a game designer who can tell (with at least 30% probability) what consequences and impacts can have the proposed changes.


    This one, is the dumbest idea ever in the world of Albion. It changes nothing but maintaining a list of "red allies" for the big alliances. They will still rule all the map. But who cares. Hard problems cannot be solved by easiest solutions.



    Great Game Designer of Albion wrote:

    Let's try it live guys and we'll see in a week or two. Then, we'll make another tweak now and then. Don't worry, nothing conceptual, just a random patches here and there.
    Author of kill-board.com
  • Losna wrote:

    It looks like SBI is lacking a game designer who can tell (with at least 30% probability) what consequences and impacts can have the proposed changes.


    This one, is the dumbest idea ever in the world of Albion. It changes nothing but maintaining a list of "red allies" for the big alliances. They will still rule all the map. But who cares. Hard problems cannot be solved by easiest solutions.
    Ok so what kind of solution do you think they could implement within 2 weeks?
  • Dear SBI,

    only 300 Players per alliance? SBI, this is your solution???
    This issue needs a much more complex solution than this nonsense! Let's start with purging of game designers SBI. Literally every really experienced player can give you more complex analysis and ideas!

    There will be much more diplomatic shit now. And I think this patch punishes only casual players because guilds will need to be effective now (casual players will be dead weight now).
    But what is important: Megaalliances will just split to more smaller alliances but they will still cooperate together...


    No comment, I am so upset, maybe your game designers should play the game on a daily basis on at least "semi-pro" level and they will maybe know what the game exactly needs!
    HankTheNoob | Battles in AO

  • Gugusteh wrote:

    Losna wrote:

    It looks like SBI is lacking a game designer who can tell (with at least 30% probability) what consequences and impacts can have the proposed changes.


    This one, is the dumbest idea ever in the world of Albion. It changes nothing but maintaining a list of "red allies" for the big alliances. They will still rule all the map. But who cares. Hard problems cannot be solved by easiest solutions.
    Ok so what kind of solution do you think they could implement within 2 weeks?
    I think they should think before Queen patch. It was obvious what will happen IMHO. :-/ Now its too late.
    HankTheNoob | Battles in AO

    The post was edited 1 time, last by H4nk ().

  • Gugusteh wrote:

    Losna wrote:

    It looks like SBI is lacking a game designer who can tell (with at least 30% probability) what consequences and impacts can have the proposed changes.


    This one, is the dumbest idea ever in the world of Albion. It changes nothing but maintaining a list of "red allies" for the big alliances. They will still rule all the map. But who cares. Hard problems cannot be solved by easiest solutions.
    Ok so what kind of solution do you think they could implement within 2 weeks?
    They don’t NEED to implement a solution in two weeks. 26th is their own arbitrary deadline.
    Midgard
    T8 Fibre, Ore, Hide, Wood & Stone Gatherer
    T8 Gathering Gear Crafter
    T8 Bags & Capes Crafter
  • H4nk wrote:

    I think they should think before Queen patch. It was obvious what will happen IMHO. :-/ Now its too late.
    What would you have done then?
    Because apparently every "experienced player" can give a better solution, yet this subject has been discussed for years and none of the solution is perfect.

    Midgard wrote:

    They don’t NEED to implement a solution in two weeks. 26th is their own arbitrary deadline.
    Because what do you believe will happen after 3 month of the current map situation?
    The cap is a bandaid, and it's necessary to put it asap until further solution are added.
  • I think majority of people on this thread are missing the forest and only looking at the trees.

    1: It's evident that mega-alliances will continue to operate essentially the same before and after the change. By capping alliances to 300, the only major factor it's played is changing the ability for territory and hideout safety for max 300 people at a time. But from a fighting standpoint, it's only introduced a potential friendly fire mechanism which, if you have good players, really won't be much of an issue.

    2: Smaller guilds/alliances may feel incredibly relieved at the moment, but in all reality you have wool being pulled over your eyes. These major alliances will have NAPs and you will now feel hunted down the same as before, every map you go you'll feel the joy of being hunted down by supposedly non-allied oranges and reds in the black zone.

    3 (most important, hang with me): The whole point of warfare is for SBI to profit. They have made the gathering/crafting economy suffer by making it more difficult and unrewarding to find t7/t8 and bring it back safely to the royal cities. They have made the PVE elements low reward with high risk particularly from an economic perspective by not compensating players with (and all humbly IMO) significant loot/silver for dungeons both solo or group. The increase in warfare/zvz/PVP combined with some potential increase rate of trashed items + low possibility of gathering/crafting + less loot/silver only accelerates player base loss of silver in game that requires grinding or spending IRL money for gold. The changes SBI have developed are brilliant because while you are all fighting over whether small or big alliances are better and/or should alliances even exist, more likely than not you've also had to spend money to continue to regear, pay for hideouts, etc.

    On that note, I hope SBI I might be able to say something about point 3. There's absolutely nothing wrong with getting paid. I completely applaud your entrepreneurship as a game-maker, risk-taker, and as a free-to-play player who joined after that period, I really have enjoyed your game. But I'd like to also make a point that any game requires people to enjoy playing to be sustainable. And I'm not talking about these alliance issues, but I'm trying to get back to the point of gathering/crafting/PVE/economic elements. While I love PVP, the Queen update to me has been massively confusing about the downtrend or damage some decisions have been made for gathering/crafting/PVE/economic elements from a pure gaming perspective (from an IRL economic perspective, I can imagine that SBI hopefully I'm sure is making actual money from people paying for gold, no joke). But I'm a believer that if you make a game where people love to play because the game is good, money will follow. I've always hated games which end poorly because the developers somehow lost the spirit of the game that united and brought together gamers from all walks of life, especially such a beautiful international crowd that Albion has drawn. When the game is good and finds that right "Goldilock's touch" where it's not too hard of a grind game, not too easy to be an elder game, but has all the fine tuned elements just right, people will flock to play. And when people play the game, they pay for the game. I hope that you, SBI, are able to have a longevity with Albion, not have it as a one-off game. I hope this game will be sustainable which only comes from a steady player base that grows, not a player base which is squeezed for money out of their pockets and then they quit because they feel the game is not worth the financial and time investment they put into it. Because you might get paid once or twice, but the real secret of longevity is being paid the 9th, 10th and 11th time, not just a few.

    Godspeed, thanks for your current and future forms of Albion, and I honestly hope and pray for your success because if you, SBI, succeed, then I get to keep playing a fucking awesome game for a long, long time.
  • I argued for moves against the mega alliances in one of the original threads about this but never thought it would come in mid season. I think this is a great change at the wrong time. Finish the season. Start a new season with everyone knowing in advance the way it will be run - 300 max alliances.

    So yeah timing is out but I totally admire the courage to confront the need for change.
  • Midgard wrote:

    Never before have so many uneducated and ill-informed replies been on a single thread. Anyone who thinks small guilds or newer players will benefit from any of this are deluded.

    Of course they will, outside of the season objectives we will see more spontanius small scale fights which are the best fights albion has to offer. People focus so much about territory control and forget that MAJORITY of the players dont even participate in that.

    Anyone who thinks newer players need to be a part of mega alliance is braindead, plenty of medium sized guilds that will teach you and replace your gear

    The post was edited 3 times, last by tabooshka ().

  • I made a post here before Queen update expressing my concerns with their lack of foresight.


    Eternalhaze wrote:

    Alliances are one of the longest running and ultimately damning issues facing the game. Throughout most of Albion's history since release, there's usually one to four different alliances that own approximately 90% of claimable land. Some of the reasons are tied to the gvg system, but much more is tied to how alliances work. With the click of a button, you can add thousands of would be enemies to your "can't attack" list, and there's a heap of positive reasons and very minimal downsides to doing so. What we started seeing was 3,000 person alliances with those numbers growing to 4,000 / 7,000 / 10,000 person alliances, and there's virtually no cap on what they can become from here. I find it unappealing to play in mega alliances myself as it makes the game too easy, but what's extremely unnerving to hear is that SBI still has no plans to put any sort of limits on this system - especially considering they want to re-vamp territory control to open world objectives.
  • Midgard wrote:

    hypnoticshadow wrote:

    Big alliances leaders start crying and believe it or not doesn't matter, regardless of what you say and all excuses you bring here small guilds and solo players will all enjoy watching you agonizing and crumble, I will open a champagne.
    And you small little gatherer you are alone now we will find you gathering safe all that t8 nodes is over. 26th
    To be honest you just sound like an angry, bitter player with a grudge to bear, who has no real interest in the good of the game.
    Until now all Dev decision was for huge zvz mindless enormous blobs and yeah I was disappointed watching a game that I like going in that direction. I say this for the good of the game and that is also what the facts speak ( watch the poll results again), you are the one speaking egoistically for you or for your friends who wants to keep the control of everything but after the decision of Sbi I am not angry anymore but happy to see people who speaks as you sink and crumble with all his alliance. I have already prepared popcorns for 26th

    The post was edited 3 times, last by hypnoticshadow ().

  • hypnoticshadow wrote:

    Midgard wrote:

    hypnoticshadow wrote:

    Big alliances leaders start crying and believe it or not doesn't matter, regardless of what you say and all excuses you bring here small guilds and solo players will all enjoy watching you agonizing and crumble, I will open a champagne.
    And you small little gatherer you are alone now we will find you gathering safe all that t8 nodes is over. 26th
    To be honest you just sound like an angry, bitter player with a grudge to bear, who has no real interest in the good of the game.
    Keep crying with all your big alliance friends I am very calm happy and satisfied by the SBI decision. Already prepared popcorns
    That’s because you don’t really understand the ramifications of it. Ignorance is bliss as they say.
    Midgard
    T8 Fibre, Ore, Hide, Wood & Stone Gatherer
    T8 Gathering Gear Crafter
    T8 Bags & Capes Crafter
  • Midgard wrote:

    hypnoticshadow wrote:

    Midgard wrote:

    hypnoticshadow wrote:

    Big alliances leaders start crying and believe it or not doesn't matter, regardless of what you say and all excuses you bring here small guilds and solo players will all enjoy watching you agonizing and crumble, I will open a champagne.
    And you small little gatherer you are alone now we will find you gathering safe all that t8 nodes is over. 26th
    To be honest you just sound like an angry, bitter player with a grudge to bear, who has no real interest in the good of the game.
    Keep crying with all your big alliance friends I am very calm happy and satisfied by the SBI decision. Already prepared popcorns
    That’s because you don’t really understand the ramifications of it. Ignorance is bliss as they say.
    just another big alliance guy who wake up i have 9 month of play in this game so guess i know so much more than you, keep stay here writing and climbing wall of mirrors. 80% of people think the same as me about what should be done to alliances so mine are facts your just words: SBI was very nice to just limit the alliances instead of flushing them away as the pool said

    The post was edited 3 times, last by hypnoticshadow ().