Zergion Online is a Fun game

    • Last time i saw ganking parties with 6+ ppl and TWO random scouts standing near the exits (iam sure it was scouts, cause one of them got nearly the same name as one of the gankers)
      I would even not call this zone camping "ganking".
      Its just camping and with enough people, cain cc and insta killing people.

      Yes you can do something against them, not a big deal with a solid group.
      But with scouts, and escape gear, instant spreading into all directions you get 2 maybe 3. And 10 minutes after that they are back on duty, or just few zones further.
      If you dont want to camp on your own there to get rid of them (what i really boring to me), they will come again and again if they overall outcome means profit for them.

      We are often traveling out into the bz as a small scale party of 4, max 5 people, with no special setup or something, not even diving group dungeons, and most of the time we ride for half an hour just to find nobody.
      But, if we just circle ride the portal zones or near underways we encounter this ganking groups, and they nealry always run away.

      So, when i see how much profit the gankers i know make with that playstyle, i ask me more and more why i should not join them. Just sitting at zone entrance, chatting, waiting for some people traveling some (with real effort aquired) stuff, to donate it into my pockets.

      I dont mind the ganking itself, its the camping part that dont fit in my opinion. Especially if they start to scout the surroundings with addionational account full of naked scouts.
      And the same people are complaining about scouts of fame farming groups in dungeons. Just crazy.

      Edit: As addition to this, the red flag ganking (downing) faction players in yellow zone counts also to this playstyle. Few days ago we were (faction flagged) hunting two red flagged guys doing this in their shiny 8.2-8.3 ganking gear followed by a t4 faction flaged friend in yellow zone. After 15 minutes of cat and mouse the called for more red flagged friends.

      Yep, i know, its a sandbox game, its possible, so people do it.
      But, i dont believe SBI wants their game to favor such playstyle or behaviour.

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

    • hFly wrote:

      The solution is kinda simple:1st - Add Town Port Scrolls based on the map you are. (T5 scrolls you can TP back home from T5 maps, etc). As for the costs should be around 100k per tier starting from T5. (T5 = 100k, T6 = 200k, etc...).
      They could be dropped from places like Crystal League, that is not from the BZ, forcing players that want to drop this portals to be more safe in the BZ to have to buy them or go enjoy more from the game other than bz. Or even Hellgates.
      This would remove the high end portal ganking and the only ones that are caught are the ones with low profit, this world not ban the portal ganking but lower the profit from then, that would discourage then to continue like this, and these pts would roam the map to gank.
      Portal gankers could even buy lots of them to inflate the market and make TP not worth.
      The Problem is not just about enter the portal cluster, but about the entire cluster itself.
      When you have only 3 clusters per city that allow access to the other 280 clusters and when these 3 clusters are easily controlled that's a problem. What will "probably" be introduced will make the control of these 3 clusters "useless", spreading the "problem" to the remaining clusters.

      If the change is sufficient, I don't know, because we went from 3 to 5 clusters, but that represents a change of 7 exits where the gank exists to 11 exits, one cluster deeper in the map. The change is not significant, but it is something!


      In Lymhurst the numbers as different and superior better.

      The post was edited 2 times, last by LordSilva ().

    • Sinatra.SUN wrote:

      The rampant portal camping is idiotic, and quite incredible that SBI doesnt adress it.

      just make 3 entrances into the portal zones instead of 1. Creating a choke where everyone has to go when going back to town is pretty weird design.
      TBH making map design with 'gateways' between zones was a bad idea in the first place. I mean I do realize why it has advantages from a technical perspective (i.e. isolating server nodes), but from a game play perspective for a fantasy setting open world game it just feels so inappropriate :(
      In Eve. due to solar system based map and space setting it feels ok (besides there are various player generated portals, as well as capital class ships with ability to jump between systems), but in AO it does not really.
    • Theat wrote:

      Owlsane wrote:

      Ikcen wrote:

      So, go play Path of Exile, which in fact is not a MMO, but a FOA game. You are not a victim, you are a noob. Learn to play the game.
      You're cute.
      He's right though.
      You're a victim

      Crying? No, I'm not crying. I'm not the one who tries to change the entire game because I died 1v15. That's you. My counter-arguments is to prevent Albion Online going the Trammel UO route.

      You, LordSilva, CaptainRussia, are the little pricks trying to nerf the game and turn black zone into blue zone.


      To repeat my conclusion, if you can't survive black zone, you don't deserve to be there. LEARN 2 PLAY
      • You surely are "crying" a lot considering the sheer amount of posts you feel compelled to write while offering almost 0 counter-arguments which withstand any kind of scrutiny

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

    • Zumzat wrote:

      Sinatra.SUN wrote:

      The rampant portal camping is idiotic, and quite incredible that SBI doesnt adress it.

      just make 3 entrances into the portal zones instead of 1. Creating a choke where everyone has to go when going back to town is pretty weird design.
      TBH making map design with 'gateways' between zones was a bad idea in the first place. I mean I do realize why it has advantages from a technical perspective (i.e. isolating server nodes), but from a game play perspective for a fantasy setting open world game it just feels so inappropriate :( In Eve. due to solar system based map and space setting it feels ok (besides there are various player generated portals, as well as capital class ships with ability to jump between systems), but in AO it does not really.
      • It already is a bad idea on paper:
        • Scope is a PvP-centric game
        • You opt for a tile-map design with limited entry/exit points to the adjacent zones, thereby promoting camping said points - and you really don't have to be a genius to spot that glaring issue or rather exploitation potential
        • You opt for full-loot PvP in the majority of zones while doing a tile-map design with limited entry/exit points

    • LordSilva wrote:

      hFly wrote:

      The solution is kinda simple:1st - Add Town Port Scrolls based on the map you are. (T5 scrolls you can TP back home from T5 maps, etc). As for the costs should be around 100k per tier starting from T5. (T5 = 100k, T6 = 200k, etc...).
      They could be dropped from places like Crystal League, that is not from the BZ, forcing players that want to drop this portals to be more safe in the BZ to have to buy them or go enjoy more from the game other than bz. Or even Hellgates.
      This would remove the high end portal ganking and the only ones that are caught are the ones with low profit, this world not ban the portal ganking but lower the profit from then, that would discourage then to continue like this, and these pts would roam the map to gank.
      Portal gankers could even buy lots of them to inflate the market and make TP not worth.
      The Problem is not just about enter the portal cluster, but about the entire cluster itself.When you have only 3 clusters per city that allow access to the other 280 clusters and when these 3 clusters are easily controlled that's a problem. What will "probably" be introduced will make the control of these 3 clusters "useless", spreading the "problem" to the remaining clusters.

      If the change is sufficient, I don't know, because we went from 3 to 5 clusters, but that represents a change of 7 exits where the gank exists to 11 exits, one cluster deeper in the map. The change is not significant, but it is something!


      In Lymhurst the numbers as different and superior better.


      Well, I dont think you are incorrect. I think a better map design could help a lot.
      I just think it is as u were saying. You need to fix the root of the problem.
      If you fix the issue by "moving 1 tile away", if the BZs start getting more people the issue will remain. If you make every1 could return to royal from anywere. Or just add lots of exit-only portals around the BZ, u mitigate the damage from static ganking portal parties.
    • hFly wrote:

      LordSilva wrote:

      hFly wrote:

      The solution is kinda simple:1st - Add Town Port Scrolls based on the map you are. (T5 scrolls you can TP back home from T5 maps, etc). As for the costs should be around 100k per tier starting from T5. (T5 = 100k, T6 = 200k, etc...).
      They could be dropped from places like Crystal League, that is not from the BZ, forcing players that want to drop this portals to be more safe in the BZ to have to buy them or go enjoy more from the game other than bz. Or even Hellgates.
      This would remove the high end portal ganking and the only ones that are caught are the ones with low profit, this world not ban the portal ganking but lower the profit from then, that would discourage then to continue like this, and these pts would roam the map to gank.
      Portal gankers could even buy lots of them to inflate the market and make TP not worth.
      The Problem is not just about enter the portal cluster, but about the entire cluster itself.When you have only 3 clusters per city that allow access to the other 280 clusters and when these 3 clusters are easily controlled that's a problem. What will "probably" be introduced will make the control of these 3 clusters "useless", spreading the "problem" to the remaining clusters.
      If the change is sufficient, I don't know, because we went from 3 to 5 clusters, but that represents a change of 7 exits where the gank exists to 11 exits, one cluster deeper in the map. The change is not significant, but it is something!


      In Lymhurst the numbers as different and superior better.
      Well, I dont think you are incorrect. I think a better map design could help a lot.
      I just think it is as u were saying. You need to fix the root of the problem.
      If you fix the issue by "moving 1 tile away", if the BZs start getting more people the issue will remain. If you make every1 could return to royal from anywere. Or just add lots of exit-only portals around the BZ, u mitigate the damage from static ganking portal parties.
      There are so many ways to fix the root causes:
      • A continuous world map and once you touch the end/a side of the current tile you're automatically loading into the adjacent tile, thereby eliminating entry/exit points
      • Way more portals to Outland
      • An item/an ability to bind you to specific tiles in the Outland like some sort of waypoint, and you can go back and forth between the Outland tile and your current home city
      • Some sort of fast travel to the few neutral cities in Outlands
      • etc.
    • Benin wrote:

      could SBI remove portals between tiles and make a continuous world map??


      Would it be hard to do?

      Could we request that?
      of course they could, but the game would need to suffer a drastical change and for the time needed to invested to it is not very likely it would happen.

      A more plausable thing is to add more exists to the maps, like amap having 8 exits towards 3 or 4 maps. Thats a thing that requires less time and could be done
    • Lofthild wrote:

      There are so many ways to fix the root causes:
      • A continuous world map and once you touch the end/a side of the current tile you're automatically loading into the adjacent tile, thereby eliminating entry/exit points
      • Way more portals to Outland
      • An item/an ability to bind you to specific tiles in the Outland like some sort of waypoint, and you can go back and forth between the Outland tile and your current home city
      • Some sort of fast travel to the few neutral cities in Outlands
      • etc.


      Yes i agree :)
    • Benin wrote:

      could SBI remove portals between tiles and make a continuous world map??


      Would it be hard to do?

      Could we request that?
      That would be excellent. Not a single map of course but the ability to port to the next map by traversing any edge of a zone. Certain parts could be blocked off by ridges, mountains, impenetrable Forest, water etc but it would mean they could create more exits and wider ones. It would give the map a more organic feel rather than the funnelling that we now have.
      Midgard
      T8 Fibre, Ore, Hide, Wood & Stone Gatherer
      T8 Gathering Gear Crafter
      T8 Bags & Capes Crafter

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

    • The two player mini max game of portal ganking has definitely changed. I feel like there is a combination of factors that made the value equation shift towards the gankers with Queen. Portal numbers, war camp chests, distance between portals, and a lack of other content where the gankers would spread out for.

      Anyone that spent anytime in Mercia knows the portals were camped hard(I.e. Flintslice to Mudpool) but this feels much different.
      T8 Quarrier | T8 Miner | T8 Lumberjack | T8 Fisherman | T8 Skinner | T8 Cropper
    • Constructor wrote:

      The two player mini max game of portal ganking has definitely changed. I feel like there is a combination of factors that made the value equation shift towards the gankers with Queen. Portal numbers, war camp chests, distance between portals, and a lack of other content where the gankers would spread out for.

      Anyone that spent anytime in Mercia knows the portals were camped hard(I.e. Flintslice to Mudpool) but this feels much different.
      Wrong.

      Hideouts, Terries, Castle Outposts, basically make it so mega-alliances only die to other mega-alliances in ZVZ.

      Now that nobody can be ganked, and it's not worth venturing into BZ (except as mega-alliance), all the solo, small groups, small guilds, and small alliances are forced to retreat to the realm-portals.


      Most of this thread is based on ignorance and delusions.
    • hFly wrote:

      so it's not patch 6 (the next one) but 7 instead? So like 15 days from now?
      That being the case, isn't there a palliative measure in the mean time?
      The temporary measure is for new and bad players to die repeatedly, failing to learn how to play, failing to join parties and work as groups, more whining and crying on the forum.

      Also be sure to 'thank' and 'like' the carebear posters, Owlsane, LordSilva, CaptainRussia, etc who are ruining this game.
    • Midgard wrote:

      Benin wrote:

      could SBI remove portals between tiles and make a continuous world map??


      Would it be hard to do?

      Could we request that?
      That would be excellent. Not a single map of course but the ability to port to the next map by traversing any edge of a zone. Certain parts could be blocked off by ridges, mountains, impenetrable Forest, water etc but it would mean they could create more exits and wider ones. It would give the map a more organic feel rather than the funnelling that we now have.
      I know!!!

      Let's give 1 hour immunities for entering black zone!!!

      Brilliant!
    • Theat if the current portal gank groups roll out their same groups to the T8 zones you would be able to get plenty of kills. It is not like the amount of HOs are out of control to be honest they are not even placed as much as I thought they would. The difference here is the gankers would also have to take on some risk which is how it should work. Any group of 5+ should still be able to lock down/kill a player well before he makes it to hideout.