Dissaray "Feature" Dosent Work as itended

    • Dissaray "Feature" Dosent Work as itended

      Well, IMO, this dissaray update after Patch 7, had a good intention but alot of guilds / alliances exploit this "new feature" i will use for example:

      Before Patch 7 [POE] had about 4.000 members, they did mass purge and reduced their numbers for (right now, 03/25/20) :

      xPOE - 728
      POEST - 320
      POEBL - 257
      POE - 484
      POEbr - 253
      OrdemDosAssassinos - 260

      TOTAL = 2302 members


      If you see these numbers, they have divided an alliance into 4 other alliances and a solo guild, which have a "non-aggression pact" and share all the Hideouts to all members in this coalision.

      Right now, after Patch 8, if [BEE] my alliance gets a contingent of 60 players (I'm being optimistic here) and faces an POE attack, and they came with :

      xPOE - 20
      POEST - 20
      POEBL - 20
      POE - 20
      POEbr - 20
      OrdemDosAssassinos - 20

      Look, if they want, they can easily bring much more than that, but there is no need.

      Lets face the facts here,

      BEE VS POE COALISION

      60 Vs 120

      All Bee Members will be outnumbered by 2 per 1 and will be debuffed by: 30%

      ALL POE COALISION members will not be affected by any kind of Dissaray, only for healing sickness.

      I know guys, they need to have a very high level of organization, to coordinate this type of attack and they have already proved that this is possible, but think with me, a territory has more than two access entrances, facilitating this organization.I don't want to take their credit, but let's face it, the current situation is that they just don't dominate everything just because they don't want to. The game is simply out of competition, at least in Lymhurst's Lock. so much so that other guilds, from other portals, often come here seeking for content with the POE, because apparently there must be something similar happening there.

      I would like to hear your opinions about, and what could be done to alleviate this situation, any tactics of war or update in the game, is welcome.
    • Hey there,

      with a mechanic such as disarray, alliances / guilds always have the choice betweeen

      a) suffering the drawback of the debuff

      b) doing a work-around and suffering the drawbacks of the workaround. (coordination, friendly fire, healing, etc)

      One of the goals of today's disarray chance was to reduce the incentives for workarounds somewhat, while still making sure that disarray overall is effective.

      We'll keep monitoring the disarray "workaround meta" going forward. We consider the balance to be in a good place if the strength of disarray is such that most of the time, a workaround is not worth it. If workarounds become too common, we'd conclude that disarray is too strong, if they never get done - no matter the group size - we'd consider disarray to be too weak.
    • I understand dev concerns about dissaray and "workaround meta" but right know the feelling im facing is "If you can't beat them, join them".

      Alot of players would like to play in an environment with realistic winning conditions, no matter which portal you are in, something similar will always happen, as it is more advantageous to face the drawbacks of workaround, than to play by the rules.

      I believe that the fact that ZvZ today is much more balanced than 6 months ago is unanimous, but this last patch ends up favoring the dominant side, further reducing the chances of victory for the oppressed side.

      But I would like to note that I try to be impartial and expose the reality that small guilds face daily.
    • Fubah wrote:

      I understand dev concerns about dissaray and "workaround meta" but right know the feelling im facing is "If you can't beat them, join them".

      Alot of players would like to play in an environment with realistic winning conditions, no matter which portal you are in, something similar will always happen, as it is more advantageous to face the drawbacks of workaround, than to play by the rules.

      I believe that the fact that ZvZ today is much more balanced than 6 months ago is unanimous, but this last patch ends up favoring the dominant side, further reducing the chances of victory for the oppressed side.

      But I would like to note that I try to be impartial and expose the reality that small guilds face daily.
      I can't disagree, but people "work" hard to win already.
    • Korn wrote:

      Hey there,

      with a mechanic such as disarray, alliances / guilds always have the choice betweeen

      a) suffering the drawback of the debuff

      b) doing a work-around and suffering the drawbacks of the workaround. (coordination, friendly fire, healing, etc)

      One of the goals of today's disarray chance was to reduce the incentives for workarounds somewhat, while still making sure that disarray overall is effective.

      We'll keep monitoring the disarray "workaround meta" going forward. We consider the balance to be in a good place if the strength of disarray is such that most of the time, a workaround is not worth it. If workarounds become too common, we'd conclude that disarray is too strong, if they never get done - no matter the group size - we'd consider disarray to be too weak.
      well to be honest, those who dont want to will never try the debuff route, they already split over the course of many changes,

      1 Season point sharing caused a split
      2 announcing the alliance removal
      3 with proper debuffs.

      At this point they have already split

      The options you have is to let them game the system

      Or remove guild name tags from being visible, to see who a person belongs to you would need to inspect them. In battle this wouldnt happen. the chaos would make NAP nearly impossible.
    • GluttonySDS wrote:

      Remove debuff... It doesn't work anymore and just rewards those who can abuse it best (while also letting them bypass the 10 Terri for Alliance limit).
      How is the alternative any better? At least NAPs take coordination and politics, instead of everyone just joining the same alliance out of convenience.

      Debuff does what its suppose to do IMO. It makes fights with more than ~40 players much less effective, and much more complicated if you're playing with allied reds. Small guilds have less of a chance of getting run over by the big guilds, the one shot meta is "gone" unless you commit unguilded bomb squads to it.

      Lots of not-traditional ways around it too. If you have a 100 man mass, send 40 into another zone to kill returners, or attack multiple objectives simultaneously. But people are playing the game the same way they were last night when the entire point of the patch was to cause a meta shift.
    • Norgannon wrote:

      Hello there,

      I am the GM of a guild that can bring more than 100 men to ZvZ and all well equipped with a ZvZ composition. Today I can confirm you that this new Disarray is almost perfect no more one shots, it forces you to work more prudently when it comes to ZvZ not only carrying numbers and nothing else. Have a good composition and instead of carrying 100 men, you can carry 40 or 50 and the rest can be placed in different maps to kill the enemy reinforcements. Without the Disarray Albion with the new conquest system from Queen would be a dead product because of the N+1 problem in ZvZ. Be grateful that at least they implemented a mechanism to make the small guilds relevant and have opportunities. ^^
    • @Fubah

      Do you have a better suggestion that would actually work ?.
      Often when i see these posts, its more about frustration - because im not sure you would find a 60 v 60 fight against CIR or blue army to be a fair fight either.
      And generally with frustration, then we likely dont see suggestions that would actually make things better. As you see you want something you cant define, while others like glutt would just like to go back to the megaalliance days that this whole thing is meant to cripple.

      If we roll back before disaray and the alliance debuffs, it would be even worse for you right?.
      right now you have a 1000 man alliance, which means there will be 250 man alliances who would like to fight you for the 7 territories you actually have. what would your suggestion be to those 250 ppl, that would enable them to fight you on even grounds ?.

      would you consider 60-60 against poe an even fight?, if so then why dont you do the 20v20 in the cities?.

      I think the new disaray is better than the latter, and i think it will be really interesting to follow.
      The reason is that until now, coordinating unallied forces was somewhat easy because it was about getting single push oneshot combos off.
      With the new disaray debuff, fights will be longer, which means they will be more messy and friendly fire will happen even more.

      All friendly fire causes alliance issues, and a lot of time is spend after each fight to sort things out.

      I still think its a problem that territories provide passive income, but im pretty sure that this version of disaray is a lot better than the last.

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

    • Welp, there was so much that was obvious and coming

      That's why a ton of people have proposed that guild and nametag get removed in ZvZ

      Wasn't done, fine, here we go

      That's why proposal was, a hideout is either public or guild only

      Wasn't done, fine, here we go

      Result: Mega Alliance still exist and have a network of mega safe zone aka the Hideouts that are there "terries" all over bz..

      On Top, by introduce "rent" it is their source of income..
    • hollywoodi, if you think that renting is the source of income of large alliances, then you simply dont know much about alliance or guild economy.

      Guilds typically write me asking to pay anywhere between 500k to 1 million a day for having a hideout. 1 million is the highest i have seen.
      1 million a day compared to the cost of a army, or a fight is absolutely nothing in large scale economy.

      I have said no to everyone so far, because having other people in your zones for so little money is simply bad business.

      Resource donations, siphon energy and taxes are the main sources of income, and in general i believe that renting out lands isnt really worth the effort.
    • Fubah wrote:

      Well, IMO, this dissaray update after Patch 7, had a good intention but alot of guilds / alliances exploit this "new feature" i will use for example:

      Before Patch 7 [POE] had about 4.000 members, they did mass purge and reduced their numbers for (right now, 03/25/20) :

      xPOE - 728
      POEST - 320
      POEBL - 257
      POE - 484
      POEbr - 253
      OrdemDosAssassinos - 260

      TOTAL = 2302 members


      If you see these numbers, they have divided an alliance into 4 other alliances and a solo guild, which have a "non-aggression pact" and share all the Hideouts to all members in this coalision.

      Right now, after Patch 8, if [BEE] my alliance gets a contingent of 60 players (I'm being optimistic here) and faces an POE attack, and they came with :

      xPOE - 20
      POEST - 20
      POEBL - 20
      POE - 20
      POEbr - 20
      OrdemDosAssassinos - 20

      Look, if they want, they can easily bring much more than that, but there is no need.

      Lets face the facts here,

      BEE VS POE COALISION

      60 Vs 120

      All Bee Members will be outnumbered by 2 per 1 and will be debuffed by: 30%

      ALL POE COALISION members will not be affected by any kind of Dissaray, only for healing sickness.

      I know guys, they need to have a very high level of organization, to coordinate this type of attack and they have already proved that this is possible, but think with me, a territory has more than two access entrances, facilitating this organization.I don't want to take their credit, but let's face it, the current situation is that they just don't dominate everything just because they don't want to. The game is simply out of competition, at least in Lymhurst's Lock. so much so that other guilds, from other portals, often come here seeking for content with the POE, because apparently there must be something similar happening there.

      I would like to hear your opinions about, and what could be done to alleviate this situation, any tactics of war or update in the game, is welcome.
      why not just hand hold with rang, ez life, its not like u get to fight conflict, ba and other fun alliances
    • Tabor wrote:

      Fixing HOs to be only 1 placement allowed per guild AND only guild/alliance can access HO would greatly hamper the zerg work arounds currently in place without hampering the rest of the population much at all.
      Sounds great except you will have people crying asking why they can't have access to 10 different zones and easy safety whenever they need it.

      In my opinion the debuff towards owning multiple Terris right now isn't strong enough. The debuff should start after 1 Terri. Do you really need multiple sources of siphoned energy and season points? Then you should be willing to pay the price.
    • OceanSpirit wrote:

      In my opinion the debuff towards owning multiple Terris right now isn't strong enough. The debuff should start after 1 Terri.

      Why even have territories? Just remove them at this point, this game stopped having conquest option quite a while ago.

      OceanSpirit wrote:

      Do you really need multiple sources of siphoned energy and season points

      Do you even know the amount of income single territory provides?

      hint: You can't gear up one person with it

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

    • reddit.com/r/albiononline/comm…roid_app&utm_source=share

      I dd that post in reddit.

      The problem with zerg debuff atm is that you have 2 beat the stronger numbers first and later you fight equal numbers and debuff, if you win first scenario.

      My suggestion is to add a timers to your debuff (10-20mins). This way if you choice to start fighting with big numbers you will have to finish the fight with same debuff, even if you have equal numbers midfights.

      Ps: removing the debuff when zone map won't work, because guilds will abuse that to renew the debuff.
    • Tabor wrote:

      Fixing HOs to be only 1 placement allowed per guild AND only guild/alliance can access HO would greatly hamper the zerg work arounds currently in place without hampering the rest of the population much at all.

      I think 3 for guild and don't let them allow other guilds to join would be good already!

      1. This would increase blsckzone cities market.

      2..it would remove guilds abusing of alt guilds to have 30 HOs (black order, for example)

      Edit: other solution would be include HO in territory owned debuff. This way guilds must choice mass lands or multiples ho

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

    • Fubah wrote:

      Well, IMO, this dissaray update after Patch 7, had a good intention but alot of guilds / alliances exploit this "new feature" i will use for example:

      Before Patch 7 [POE] had about 4.000 members, they did mass purge and reduced their numbers for (right now, 03/25/20) :

      xPOE - 728
      POEST - 320
      POEBL - 257
      POE - 484
      POEbr - 253
      OrdemDosAssassinos - 260

      TOTAL = 2302 members


      If you see these numbers, they have divided an alliance into 4 other alliances and a solo guild, which have a "non-aggression pact" and share all the Hideouts to all members in this coalision.

      Right now, after Patch 8, if [BEE] my alliance gets a contingent of 60 players (I'm being optimistic here) and faces an POE attack, and they came with :



      I would like to hear your opinions about, and what could be done to alleviate this situation, any tactics of war or update in the game, is welcome.
      also w/e bs u introduce ull just introduce different ways of abusing and other guilds doing the same; i mean squak was an alliance of what the first top 10 guilds in the game?
    • SevitomTheOgre wrote:

      GluttonySDS wrote:

      Remove debuff... It doesn't work anymore and just rewards those who can abuse it best (while also letting them bypass the 10 Terri for Alliance limit).
      How is the alternative any better? At least NAPs take coordination and politics, instead of everyone just joining the same alliance out of convenience.
      Debuff does what its suppose to do IMO. It makes fights with more than ~40 players much less effective, and much more complicated if you're playing with allied reds. Small guilds have less of a chance of getting run over by the big guilds, the one shot meta is "gone" unless you commit unguilded bomb squads to it.

      Lots of not-traditional ways around it too. If you have a 100 man mass, send 40 into another zone to kill returners, or attack multiple objectives simultaneously. But people are playing the game the same way they were last night when the entire point of the patch was to cause a meta shift.
      If everyone is in one alliance -- that alliance is limited to 10 territories. As it is now, Squad/POE/1941 etc still have 30,40,50+ territories.

      The choice should be:

      a.) Have all your forces in one group letting you fight easier group fights BUT limiting the amount of territories you can own (will POE and SQUAD be happy with 10 terris total? doubt it)

      OR

      b.) Have your forces in NAP'd un-allied groups letting you own as many territories as you want for your guilds to make $/exert influence BUT you have a more difficult time in ZVZ with friendly fire
    • @'Sinatra.SUN

      Sinatra.SUN wrote:

      @Fubah

      Do you have a better suggestion that would actually work ?.
      Often when i see these posts, its more about frustration - because im not sure you would find a 60 v 60 fight against CIR or blue army to be a fair fight either.
      And generally with frustration, then we likely dont see suggestions that would actually make things better. As you see you want something you cant define, while others like glutt would just like to go back to the megaalliance days that this whole thing is meant to cripple.

      If we roll back before disaray and the alliance debuffs, it would be even worse for you right?.
      right now you have a 1000 man alliance, which means there will be 250 man alliances who would like to fight you for the 7 territories you actually have. what would your suggestion be to those 250 ppl, that would enable them to fight you on even grounds ?.

      would you consider 60-60 against poe an even fight?, if so then why dont you do the 20v20 in the cities?.

      I think the new disaray is better than the latter, and i think it will be really interesting to follow.
      The reason is that until now, coordinating unallied forces was somewhat easy because it was about getting single push oneshot combos off.
      With the new disaray debuff, fights will be longer, which means they will be more messy and friendly fire will happen even more.

      All friendly fire causes alliance issues, and a lot of time is spend after each fight to sort things out.

      I still think its a problem that territories provide passive income, but im pretty sure that this version of disaray is a lot better than the last.
      Yeah i have something that could work.

      Right now, dissaray changes dificult medium / high groups to fight because of the drawback debuff, and i agree with you, TODAY its better then old days like GluttonySDS sugested.

      About doing 20x20, we can arrange that, if your guild help, we can practice and see if we are able to.

      Im not looking for fair fight, i play this game for too long to understand and know such thing does not exist.

      In parts you are right, there is a frustration about the current situation, it is not because of our incapacity, but because of the lack of opportunities, currently the real contingent of our alliance is somewhere around 60 to 80 being optimistic, and even though we managed to fight a 60x60 and we won, the other day POE comes back with 3x more, and if we can hold it, the next day 6x more, because they are like that.


      I just didn't say anything before about sugestions, to observe what other members of the forum have to say, so as not to induce the topic.

      Give me your impartial opinion about it :

      1: Reduce the maximum number of members in the guild.
      in this point, its possible to create Guild Levels, like:

      Lv1 = 30 members
      Lv2 = 35 members
      Lv3 = 40 members
      Lv4 = 50 members
      .....

      Other benefits could be implemented according to the guild level And place certain weekly or monthly requirements that must be met in order not to reduce the current level (I won't go into details, but I can show you something later.)

      2: Reduce the maximum numbers of guilds in ally.

      3. Hideouts settings = If you want to give access to other guilds, only option displayed must be - PUBLIC ACCESS.

      4. Reinforce even more this dissaray debuff.