Adjustment to the Alliance Cap Test on February 26th

    • Sinatra.SUN wrote:

      All we got with the world remake was making it easier for the middle zergs to come to all of outlands with their mains to overrun all other guilds fights in search of "content".

      The old map at least seperated this to a larger degree, and the new map does the opposite of what was intended.
      Players don't seem to realize the new divisions in terms of Rich (mega-alliance) versus Poor (non-mega-alliance). The ignorance is all over the place now. Some of it is warranted, as Competitive players (CTA 24-7 or gkick) deserve positions and safety-nets in deep BZ. However much of it is unwarranted (bitching about being ganked in realm-gates as newer players). There are many things SBI can and should do, beginning with...

      Increasing the incentives for deep-black zone to the Mega-alliances, deincentivizing "end game content" near the realm gates or low-tier black zones. The incentives for small guilds and alliances, "Casual" players, should be increased in low-tier black zones.

      However SBI doesn't really seem to care, so many of these problems will only get worse for the foreseeable future.
    • you can be sure that they care but that the problem is a tricky one.

      For example if territories spawned a chest with the combined siphoned energy and potentially season points, and it spawn at territory livetimer, then you would need to defend your zones to get the territory value, or risk losing it by going out to take other guilds territory value.

      Right now you can get the territory value by passive gameplay enabling you to roam around taking down all the weaker guilds for "content".

      I dont think you should be able to do both. Either you roam, getting content and raid the enemies getting value from that OR you defend your terri claiming your own territory value. Right now you can do both, which is why it doesnt work.
    • Theat wrote:

      Increasing the incentives for deep-black zone to the Mega-alliances, deincentivizing "end game content" near the realm gates or low-tier black zones. The incentives for small guilds and alliances, "Casual" players, should be increased in low-tier black zones.
      The saddest part about this statement of yours is that i 100% agree about this, as the game should promote pvp in the bz more polarized across the whole continent instead of specifically in the portal zones.

      But you're too boomer to see further than somebody that disagree about you in something in specific and goes full emotional.

      Sad.

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

    • Agreed Sinatra that is always been my biggest issue with the current design. Using Darkbough Snag is a great example (BA's main home T8 plot). This zone is actually dead the vast majority of the time because they are out ZvZing elsewhere. Makes no sense to have the highest earning zones be ones with little to no activity. It should be hard to defend and maintain high level zones which in turn would keep the competitive guilds out in those zones.
    • Tabor wrote:

      Agreed Sinatra that is always been my biggest issue with the current design. Using Darkbough Snag is a great example (BA's main home T8 plot). This zone is actually dead the vast majority of the time because they are out ZvZing elsewhere. Makes no sense to have the highest earning zones be ones with little to no activity. It should be hard to defend and maintain high level zones which in turn would keep the competitive guilds out in those zones.
      here is the root cause


      Good catch

      They just log once a day to ZvZ and still they control it

      They don't live there, they do nothing there ..but it is enough to log in case and steamroll..
    • So its time to remind idea of adding some points by living in such terrain.

      For example:
      1. Every activity (gathering, PvE, PvE in dungeons) in each terrain giving Activity Points (AP) to guild pool in these terrains.
      2. In prime time of each terrain AP are deducted from owner pool in amount depended of map/tower level/length of owning terrain by the same alliance.
      3. If there is not enough AP in pool, terrain is under riot and during next prime time can be claimed by everyone in standard procedure(by killing main Mage)

      More valuable terrains should have higher AP upkeep.

      LETS big alliances have a choice to play active in their land or roaming on all map looking for enemy.

      LETS everybody have oportunity to claim RIOT terrains

      LETS small guilds live near their hideouts making local content.

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

    • God, the developers of this game are some of the worst I have ever seen and I've played a lot of games. They have a few friends running these massive alliances so they backpedal on the fix that everyone wants but those friends. And then they implement these godawful stupid and completely arbitrary restrictions. I was so looking forward to coming back but unfortunately, I fear these guys will never learn as long. They don't care about the the health of the game and the 80% of the population that wants legitimate change. You could have solved this one with simple rule instead of 20 arbitrary ones that solve nothing.
    • ggmp wrote:

      God, the developers of this game are some of the worst I have ever seen and I've played a lot of games. They have a few friends running these massive alliances so they backpedal on the fix that everyone wants but those friends. And then they implement these godawful stupid and completely arbitrary restrictions. I was so looking forward to coming back but unfortunately, I fear these guys will never learn as long. They don't care about the the health of the game and the 80% of the population that wants legitimate change. You could have solved this one with simple rule instead of 20 arbitrary ones that solve nothing.
      blabla you havent said anything substantive except whining and your opinion without arguments.

      which simple rule?
    • Idk what people are arguing right now about this topic, but I will let my point here.

      For me feels like the biggest alliances like POE and SURF, for example, are the ones the get most privilege about it. Zerg Disarray isnt doing much to help smaller zergs and bigger guilds found a easy way to bend this limitation by creating some bomber guild and spliting their alliances in different alliances as well. You can see their presence in all the maps, inner and outer circle, but the devs keep nerfing weapons, increasing desarray and changing AoE escalation and maximum buffs.

      What if we have an fair terry fight like old times but with zvz power? Like, imagine some guild is attacking territory X. Both guild go to the map at the timer and fight 1v1 for the territory. When I mean fight 1v1 I mean the map get closed and only 100 people from each guild would be allowed to zone in. Without debuff, the real 1v1 in the entire map without being flanked by their mega alliances.

      For me this sounds like a way better solution than this shit ass debuff and would make guild to actually fight for an objetive. Also, would be WAY more harder for a guild to maintain multiple territories since the guild needs to be in that map (locked for the GvG) and you could take off that crap alliance system.
    • Pdwan wrote:

      Idk what people are arguing right now about this topic, but I will let my point here.

      For me feels like the biggest alliances like POE and SURF, for example, are the ones the get most privilege about it. Zerg Disarray isnt doing much to help smaller zergs and bigger guilds found a easy way to bend this limitation by creating some bomber guild and spliting their alliances in different alliances as well. You can see their presence in all the maps, inner and outer circle, but the devs keep nerfing weapons, increasing desarray and changing AoE escalation and maximum buffs.

      What if we have an fair terry fight like old times but with zvz power? Like, imagine some guild is attacking territory X. Both guild go to the map at the timer and fight 1v1 for the territory. When I mean fight 1v1 I mean the map get closed and only 100 people from each guild would be allowed to zone in. Without debuff, the real 1v1 in the entire map without being flanked by their mega alliances.

      For me this sounds like a way better solution than this shit ass debuff and would make guild to actually fight for an objetive. Also, would be WAY more harder for a guild to maintain multiple territories since the guild needs to be in that map (locked for the GvG) and you could take off that crap alliance system.
      what stops those 100man guilds to hold hands?to declare on each other to not have to fight? what is even fair ? is it fair to fight a 400 in t8 as someone with 60 spec in t4.1 cause its 1v1? XD

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

    • LoganSilkCheeks wrote:

      Pdwan wrote:

      Idk what people are arguing right now about this topic, but I will let my point here.

      For me feels like the biggest alliances like POE and SURF, for example, are the ones the get most privilege about it. Zerg Disarray isnt doing much to help smaller zergs and bigger guilds found a easy way to bend this limitation by creating some bomber guild and spliting their alliances in different alliances as well. You can see their presence in all the maps, inner and outer circle, but the devs keep nerfing weapons, increasing desarray and changing AoE escalation and maximum buffs.

      What if we have an fair terry fight like old times but with zvz power? Like, imagine some guild is attacking territory X. Both guild go to the map at the timer and fight 1v1 for the territory. When I mean fight 1v1 I mean the map get closed and only 100 people from each guild would be allowed to zone in. Without debuff, the real 1v1 in the entire map without being flanked by their mega alliances.

      For me this sounds like a way better solution than this shit ass debuff and would make guild to actually fight for an objetive. Also, would be WAY more harder for a guild to maintain multiple territories since the guild needs to be in that map (locked for the GvG) and you could take off that crap alliance system.
      what stops those 100man guilds to hold hands?to declare on each other to not have to fight? what is even fair ? is it fair to fight a 400 in t8 as someone with 60 spec in t4.1 cause its 1v1? XD
      Well, if they do that, they will at least lock one map, but not the other and this is only the idea concept. I didnt thought too much about it.