Is this true?Alliance test cancelled?

  • This update doesn't solve anything that anyone I talk to cares about at all. It's a giant screw you. It's a RT guild solution to non-RT guild problems, and as such only addresses RT guild problems.

    And we have been patient for a long time. But, every time the developers come out of their hobbit hole because everyone is so angry, the RT guilds carefully corral them back into their hole and whisper to them that it will all be ok if they just listen to them.

    Stop letting 20% of the voters create solutions for the 80%.

    It's a non update. that the alliances already have plans to circumvent. That Squak is now 3 alliances instead of 1 gigantic one, doesn't change anything at all. It's just more book keeping, but not enough that they lose their power to blob down the entire game at no cost to themselves.

    No alliances would have been a new start to build off of. A show that the developers really did care. This update is not the developers caring about anything other than what the alliance leaders tell them to care about.

    It's day 3 of chat rooms all over the internet talking about how they don't want to play Albion Online today because they are so pissed off. But, heh. With this update, slightly smaller than mega alliance guilds may get a chance to carve a terri out for themselves? Bully for them.
    Discord: Piddle#7413
  • Midgard wrote:

    Saas wrote:

    A lack of courage from the developers, Again ...
    Actually I think the developers have shown a great amount of courage in changing direction from there original announcement.
    It’s never easy to admit you might have made a mistake. The first announcement was a bit premature in my opinion and after discussion (and believe me it was a discussion ... all this talk of the RT demanding the cap idea be reversed is utter bullshit, it was a dev team decision) they made a reassessment.

    That’s not an easy thing to do when you know a lot of your player base (a lot of whom are ill informed anyway) will react badly.
    HAHAHA LOOK AT HIM and understand why he is defending the devs
    Images
    • mmm.png

      153.85 kB, 364×606, viewed 46 times
  • AdamSmith wrote:

    Midgard wrote:

    Saas wrote:

    A lack of courage from the developers, Again ...
    Actually I think the developers have shown a great amount of courage in changing direction from there original announcement.It’s never easy to admit you might have made a mistake. The first announcement was a bit premature in my opinion and after discussion (and believe me it was a discussion ... all this talk of the RT demanding the cap idea be reversed is utter bullshit, it was a dev team decision) they made a reassessment.

    That’s not an easy thing to do when you know a lot of your player base (a lot of whom are ill informed anyway) will react badly.
    HAHAHA LOOK AT HIM and understand why he is defending the devs
    And yet again .. stop it. Your obsession with me is really creepy.
    Midgard
    T8 Fibre, Ore, Hide, Wood & Stone Gatherer
    T8 Gathering Gear Crafter
    T8 Bags & Capes Crafter
  • Eltharyon wrote:

    he probably doesn't care because its their choice lol. they just want to avoid blame/backlash,
    Actually we think it makes a huge difference why and how a player quits playing with an Alliance.

    If we simply restrict the number of players in an Alliance, we create a single "super group", which will consist of the most active, combat focused players. This group will then attempt to retain as much territory as possible, likely succeeding in holding large chunks of land. Everyone else who was previously in the Alliance will have no leadership and generally fewer active players around them, effectively losing their reason to play.

    On the other hand, if we offer strong incentives for an Alliance to split into multiple groups which each hold territory and need to maintain a fighting force, players can more freely choose which of these groups they want to continue to play with, based on their friendships and playstyle preferences.

    This is why we're convinced a soft cap on alliances is a much better approach than a hard cap. In neither case will you stop former Alliance members from co-operating with each other, but in the second case you break them down into multiple more healthy groups, instead of a few "super guilds" and a lot of dropped players.
    Funny how you only focus on one part of the picture and not the whole picture, let me tell you that most of the time these active, combat focused players do fuck all gathering and crafting, which guilds also need to feed them.

    It almost reads as a strawman, because I can tell you from experience that those combat focused players don't give a shit about other content, and those 300 man "super group" were already whining about having to do chore duties, and now you just removed this whole mechanics which would have bogged down said groups.

    But nooooo let's tunnel on one tiny aspect of an entire alliance internal mechanics and make a decision based on that. Let's ignore that those 300 people would have to put in work, not just combat, to maintain their territory, which would have led to them reducing their reach because they can't be fucked doing all that.

    smh

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

  • @Midgard have been playing at Albion since 2015 and we still have the same problem...

    @Korn You are creating a drama by yourself, If you do not want to change the balance of power with the 4 major alliances, JUST ASSUME IT. Explain to players that for HL content, you must go through this condition. It is the lies and these false communications that are ridiculous

    Queen, the most important update so that small alliances can set up in BZ ? EVERYONE understood in 20 minutes that ONLY THE BIG ALLIANCES will have a Hideout. No average guild can pay 6 hideouts at 150M each, you know that, huh? You balance the zerg with a 3% penalty for +100 people : Maybe try to play albion, it's F2P ;)

    Don't make us think you're stupid, you're not stupid : JUST ASSUME YOU DON'T WANT CHANGE THE GAME
    Just stop pretending to be problem solving, it's insulting to the players (the real ones, by the 4's) because we're not as silly as you think.

    I said above that the only solution to allow everyone to play the territories is to make level steps.
    The small alliances fight for the T4 map, the bigger ones for the T5, etc. And the most important ones are just fighting on the T8. Difficulty levels, like in video games ...
    Answer me on this point, why not?

    I can understand that you don't want to change the current elites, you just have to propose a solution parallel to the others, which is not complicated.
    But just stop pretending and making false promises, because you're going to lose more and more players.
    The greatest enemy will hide in the last place you would ever look
    Julius Caesar. 75 BC

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

  • the round table DOES exist. They planned before the queen update to split up the black zone and control it, yes this is true.i know this because i have seen it. day 1 if anyone had noticed it was obvious who the guilds are because guilds moved etc. but avoided each other to take control of certain areas and only left small remote spots for the guilds they wanted to control in the zones promising them a seat at the table its a pattern that can not be denied,end of story.
  • Don't forget the crystal exploits..

    It is going on since queen..

    Do you imagine how much headstart that gave the Megas..

    The best is, they still sit at RT

    And my favorite, the crystal exploit just got obvious cause one of the mega leader streamed it.. and viewers reported it..

    These people still sit at RT..

    Each person of the team gets one of that T8 chests at the end of any cgvg queued up from a T8 tower. The chest always contains 1k energy + 100k fame + chance of battlemount. The thing is: you get it from any tier of crystal, you get it even if you lose, you just need to queue up. Also you can queue infinite teams from the same tower, what makes it hella exploitable. Repeating the example used above: they could literally mass 100 people to make parties of 5, queue up at the tower and sit tent, and they'll make 1m energy from it BESIDES THE BATTLEMOUNTS (beetles\*, eagles, charriots t6-t7).

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

  • Saas wrote:

    No average guild can pay 6 hideouts at 150M each, you know that, huh?
    Why an average guild should be able to have maximum amount of fully upgraded hideouts?
    It has to be a rare case.


    Saas wrote:

    You balance the zerg with a 3% penalty for +100 people : Maybe try to play albion, it's F2P ;)
    Actually, zerg disarray works but to take advantage of it you should be fighting ingame not whining on forums.

    Saas wrote:

    The small alliances fight for the T4 map, the bigger ones for the T5, etc. And the most important ones are just fighting on the T8. Difficulty levels, like in video games ...
    Define small.
  • @Gerrit @Korn

    For example :

    Alliances with less than 300 members are T5 alliances, and they are the only ones that can take clusters on T5 maps.
    Alliances of 300 to 600 members are T6 and can only take clusters on T6 maps.
    Etc...


    just "levels" that allow everyone to develop and participate in territorial wars without breaking the big alliances.
    It's simple to set up, just "tag" alliances and maps (Of course, more a map is HL, more are gains)

    With this solution, many more people could play in BZ, which is good for everyone.
    You know, I lead an FR alliance with 300 people, and we would be happy to just be able to play the clusters, nothing more.
    The greatest enemy will hide in the last place you would ever look
    Julius Caesar. 75 BC
  • Hollywoodi wrote:

    Don't forget the crystal exploits..

    It is going on since queen..

    Do you imagine how much headstart that gave the Megas..

    The best is, they still sit at RT

    And my favorite, the crystal exploit just got obvious cause one of the mega leader streamed it.. and viewers reported it..

    These people still sit at RT..
    The RT isn't what you think it is. It sucks and isn't fair, but not in the ways you think and not because people are actively trying to make it that way. It was designed in a way that it is simply made up with mostly members who have similar or identical interests, and whose interests as players don't actually represent the interests of all the players they represent.

    This is why this mess is particularly concerning to me. If you read the RT about it, and then every other publicly accessible part of social media on the internet, you would think that they are both talking about completely different games and situations.

    It's not a place to share all the hottest economic news and exploits. It's the same as the regular forums with a few caveats. The member almost universally stick to posting things to the RT. An idea for a new feature. They put it on the RT. A complaint about the E ability on some item. They put it on the RT. More than half the posts on the RT have no business, in my opinion, being there. There are perfectly good sections of the public forums to discuss those things, but there is this perception that if the post is on the RT that it has more "pull" with the developers. It's just accepted that way. The other major part is the composition of the membership obviously.

    If there was something horribly unethical or inappropriate going on, you'd know about it. The RT leaks like a sieve and you are sitting in a thread based on that. Anytime anything upsets people more than a tiny bit, they immediately take it to the wider community to try and get a roll back. The leakiness of it is to the benefit of everyone because it means the RT can't actually be this imagined cabal full of AO power brokers, all working in concert to maintain their oppressive reign over the world.

    If there are secret boogeymen working to exploit the game and all its players, they don't operate out of the RT. It's just the same clown fiesta you know and love from the public forums, but with about 200% special little boy ego added to everyone involved.
    Discord: Piddle#7413
  • thatguy_over_there wrote:

    the round table DOES exist.
    Correct. Give yourself a pat on the back. Although this is no secret.

    thatguy_over_there wrote:

    They planned before the queen update to split up the black zone and control it, yes this is true.i know this because i have seen it
    Complete and utter bullshit. Youre talking out of your arse.
    Midgard
    T8 Fibre, Ore, Hide, Wood & Stone Gatherer
    T8 Gathering Gear Crafter
    T8 Bags & Capes Crafter
  • Midgard wrote:

    thatguy_over_there wrote:

    the round table DOES exist.
    Correct. Give yourself a pat on the back. Although this is no secret.

    thatguy_over_there wrote:

    They planned before the queen update to split up the black zone and control it, yes this is true.i know this because i have seen it
    Complete and utter bullshit. Youre talking out of your arse.
    So you are declaring that this is not true and hand holding in center of the map and high terries is not real? Then can you please explain how big alliances have time to crash all other guilds or alliances while they are fighting with each other? IF alliance and horde attacked eachother we wouldnt have all these problems , people could live in bz but i am not expecting from you to understand since you are part of them.


    .By the way did they put you in the line to gather cause you have too much time to spend on forums , or is it to safe to gather because no one else is in high tier zones?