Laughable anti-portal-gank measure as predicted

    • Laughable anti-portal-gank measure as predicted

      What I predicted 1-2 weeks ago was implemented by SBI:
      • You are protected going from a portal tile -> adjacent tile, but not from an adjacent tile -> portal tile
      • Right now I logged out as there was a gank squad of ~8 people sitting in front of the entry point from an adjacent tile to a portal tile


      Pathetic and laughable, as now everyone has the clear proof that SBI doesn't even play their own game.

      Additionally no one could've predicted that after update 7 the portal ganker will just move to the adjacent tiles and camp those entry points, right?

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

    • They won't make it impossible to gank, but the way it is, right now, it's way harder, cuz u don't have a one way entry point (portal spot), which can be scouted...just move around the map, or even get inside a damn dungeon near the entry point, just as simple as that...it's a full loot PvP game. I know, being ganked by 20x is not fun, but it's part of the game...being scouted, with no other option was dumb, and they fixed it...
    • Lofthild wrote:

      What I predicted 1-2 weeks ago was implemented by SBI:
      • You are protected going from a portal tile -> adjacent tile, but not from an adjacent tile -> portal tile
      • Right now I logged out as there was a gank squad of ~8 people sitting in front of the entry point from an adjacent tile to a portal tile


      Pathetic and laughable, as now everyone has the clear proof that SBI doesn't even play their own game.

      Additionally no one could've predicted that after update 7 the portal ganker will just move to the adjacent tiles and camp those entry points, right?
      And why is that a bad thing? do u want portal zones and all adjacent zones to be blue zones so ppl can caravan their stuff safely?

      It's a full loot game and the black zones are designed to be a dangerous place where ppl can kill eachother regardless of party size. If u always want a fair fight i'd highly recommend arena, crystals or the red zones.
    • Hollywoodi wrote:

      Well, somehow we said it all day long

      Don't touch the symptoms go for the root cause

      If u go for trash rate based on assist and exclude ZvZ u disencentive 90% of the 20:1, then risk vs reward changes, and people go back to alpha where u ganked with one more and it was skill based .

      Maybe next patch..
      I am one of them and created a thread about it : Suggestion : Scaling thrash rate and stackable item loss
    • Hollywoodi wrote:

      Well, somehow we said it all day long

      Don't touch the symptoms go for the root cause

      If u go for trash rate based on assist and exclude ZvZ u disencentive 90% of the 20:1, then risk vs reward changes, and people go back to alpha where u ganked with one more and it was skill based .

      Maybe next patch..
      You silly gooses. This is valuable content for albion players and SBI is afraid that they will all quit the game if they can't 10v1 people.

      If there are 10 of them and only one of you. That means they get 10 votes to your 1 vote. So this is all just democracy at work.
      Discord: Piddle#7413 "The purpose of existence is simple: everything is fuel for the magmaw." —Jaji, magmaw worshipper
    • @Piddle actually to be honest the numbers are probably reversed. But majority of casual and new players have not settled in yet. So instead of giving feedback, they simply leave.

      ”Make Albion Great again”
      ”Gankers first”

      This seems to be the ideology behind the core players. But what if there is not enough people to gank? Does that really make Albion great again? Or empty again?

      I would like to see more value added to the game so that the rest of us would care enough about the game to try to make it really a great game instead of the ”unique” (well, maybe Eve is similar, never played it) gankfest that it is.
      IGN/Discord : Ravenar#2076
      Join Albion
    • Theat wrote:

      Stupid change to a Stupid problem.


      What SBI should have done? Easy. Common sense. But this requires Common Sense.

      Simply add two more realm-gates per royal city, to a total of 5. This would have solved all problems and made everybody happy
      Yea, I was thinking the same thing when I tried the new portal system. It is bit over-engineered. Instead of having to invis travel to the gankspot just add more gankspots from the city. Same effect. But the invis stones are kinda fun, I guess.

      I just think it would be less frustrating to check 6-10 portals for gankers instead of invis running and then getting ganked without chance for easy retreat like it was before.

      And the 8 minute (?) lock to the different BZ portals ?( Why was that added? I think it was possible to just return to city and switch to different BZ portal before right away if one was crowded with gankers?
      IGN/Discord : Ravenar#2076
      Join Albion

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

    • Ravenar wrote:

      And the 8 minute (?) lock to the different BZ portals ?( Why was that added? I think it was possible to just return to city and switch to different BZ portal before right away if one was crowded with gankers?
      that mechanic has been in place for as long as i can remember (2+ yrs)

      if you zone back into the city before losing your bubble, there is no lock timer... otherwise gotta wait 10 mins before you can use another portal
      Fusionbomb - GM of Morbidly_Obese

      T8 Axe/Sickle/Pickaxe/Skinning/Stone
      T7 Fishing

      400 Holy Spec
    • Fusionbomb wrote:

      Ravenar wrote:

      And the 8 minute (?) lock to the different BZ portals ?( Why was that added? I think it was possible to just return to city and switch to different BZ portal before right away if one was crowded with gankers?
      that mechanic has been in place for as long as i can remember (2+ yrs)
      if you zone back into the city before losing your bubble, there is no lock timer... otherwise gotta wait 10 mins before you can use another portal
      Yea, I guess the first thing I did was to go and click the invis thingie andt that popped the bubble.
      IGN/Discord : Ravenar#2076
      Join Albion
    • Roccandil wrote:

      How would you solve the problem?
      Their touted scope was: "We don't want people getting ganked the minute the go into the black zone via portals and thus offer some sort of protection"
      What they implemented: you're only safe in the portal tile, but not going from adjacent tiles -> portal tile, which is a clear violation of the scope, because in effect they just moved the entry/exit point ganking 1 tile away and prohibited it in the portal tile.

      If already offered plenty of suggestions like way more portals, moving between tiles by just touching the edge of the current tile to eliminate the tile entry/exit choke-points which are more or less constantly being camped, some sort of ability to bind yourself to a tile of your choosing to teleport back and forth etc.

      I take the move of my thread into the rant section as as admission that it is an obviously glaring issue they don't want to have visible in the general discussion section, because why else would anyone move a thread based on facts?

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

    • Lofthild wrote:

      If already offered plenty of suggestions like way more portals, moving between tiles by just touching the edge of the current tile to eliminate the tile entry/exit choke-points which are more or less constantly being camped, some sort of ability to bind yourself to a tile of your choosing to teleport back and forth etc.

      Each portal represents power projection, so adding portals affects more than just ganking. Binding to a tile is basically a hideout.

      I very much like the idea of more ways to cross between maps, however; I think that would help a lot.
    • Midgard wrote:

      Lofthild wrote:

      I take the move of my thread into the rant section as as admission that it is an obviously glaring issue they don't want to have visible in the general discussion section,
      No, I suspect it was the non-constructive thread title that did it
      • Define "constructive" in a general applicable way that it isn't based on the observer's perception/bias
      • So you're telling me they didn't like my wording, even if my OP is based on facts everyone can verify?