Cluster Queue

    • @Korn you and your team make one little mistake.

      We have 3 portals from each town into the blackzone. They are very close to eachother.

      So - what do you think will happend if hundreds and hundreds of player enter the blackzone through this little door?

      Yes - they build Mega Allys and they are forced to build giant armys to attack/defend one terry.

      too many players, too little space for all these players, not enough ressources, too much gankers around the portals

      Thousends players are concentrated in a radius of 5 terry around the portals.

      1 portal with a radius of 3-5 terrys is ok - but 3? - That's the homemade problem

      To split the Mega allys in small ones, you need 5 portals spread over 1/3 of the map - and you will see - the big armies have to split between the portals

      Maybe sometimes there is a huge fight around a T8 terry, now we need cluster queue, but not every fight

      i hope my basic idea is clear

      We need 5 portals min 3 terrys away from eachother and 1/3 more terrys (Portal lock is your problem :--)))

      At the moment i'm not happy to fight in a huge blob with a 66% zerg debuff and losing the half of my group porting out.
    • LordFischi wrote:

      @Korn you and your team make one little mistake.

      We have 3 portals from each town into the blackzone. They are very close to eachother.

      So - what do you think will happend if hundreds and hundreds of player enter the blackzone through this little door?

      Yes - they build Mega Allys and they are forced to build giant armys to attack/defend one terry.

      too many players, too little space for all these players, not enough ressources, too much gankers around the portals

      Thousends players are concentrated in a radius of 5 terry around the portals.

      1 portal with a radius of 3-5 terrys is ok - but 3? - That's the homemade problem

      To split the Mega allys in small ones, you need 5 portals spread over 1/3 of the map - and you will see - the big armies have to split between the portals

      Maybe sometimes there is a huge fight around a T8 terry, now we need cluster queue, but not every fight

      i hope my basic idea is clear

      We need 5 portals min 3 terrys away from eachother and 1/3 more terrys (Portal lock is your problem :--)))

      At the moment i'm not happy to fight in a huge blob with a 66% zerg debuff and losing the half of my group porting out.
      so let me understand that..

      You think mega exist, because the town portal are too close to each other??

      Hmm I can grant u that I agree to disagree completely with you .
    • Have you ever considered disbanding guilds and alliances that are abusing fair play mechanics?


      Why don't you consider alliance leaders promoting the mechanic abuse as bad for the health of the game and just ban them accordingly. We should all be equal (obviously, we are not there are people you are lenient towards and you are in a way responsible for this situation and systematical abuse by not treating all players the same).
      Im więcej ludzi na ZvZ tym Surfy i Poe będą mniej hajsu chcieli za nie wyjebanie waszej ziemianki. Wojna Polsko Polska AO. Wesołe Ziemniaczki.
    • The real issue is that alliances are split, but still working together. You should not have coded the queue to work per alliance if you also created incentives which caused alliances to splinter, the break up of alliances have counteracted the cluster queue and now the queue is attempting to place all these "alliances" into the same zone and is not working as originally intended. For example, now when a guild tries to fight an alliance like POE, they not only have a disadvantage because of the queue, but also the debuff. POE in past seasons was a massive alliance. But now with the alliance changes, it has splintered into many alliances such as POE, POETR, POEST, etc. Now when you try to fight them, these "alliances" are all read by the code as individual alliances, rather than allies. So the queue will try to make room for as many "alliances" as possible, and create an even larger advantage for the groups working together due to debuff. If 4 groups of 40 are fighting together against 1 group of 50, that group of 50 should NOT have a larger debuff than those united against them.

      In regards to the Cluster Queue abuse, not only is this happening regularly but members such as "Durateen" of the guild Crimson Imperium Reborn can be seen intentionally abusing the mechanics to queue people out of the map to gank them. (clip here streamable.com/ocilck). GVG launch abuse was bannable, so why isn't this? For full transparency, here is the entire VOD from today. twitch.tv/videos/637762179?t=0h26m40s

      I just want to ask the devs if my guild pulls more numbers than any of the other guilds but their alliance is split into separate alliances with sometimes as much as 3x or 4x my numbers, why is my guild the one to suffer the most from debuff/queue?

      The post was edited 5 times, last by BigRichard ().

    • @Korn @Retroman in zones with attacks launched on terris/hideouts :

      Attacker alliance gets 40% cluster queue priority
      Defending alliance gets 40% cluster queue priority
      20% no priority

      priority begins 1-2 hours before zone prime time

      -promotes groups keeping in same alliance to reserve slots
      -limits 3rd partying without locking ppl from zone
      -prevents zone capping, as the defending/attacking alliance would zone in and cluster que out non-priority people in zone until they hit their 40% priority
      -discourages alliance splitting to cheese the debuff

      feel free to keep the latest changes, with queue alliance members contributing to debuff, and current system with 90 sec queue adjustment would work with this as well

      if defender/attacker have less than 40% in the zone or queue then unused slots are open to non-priority players, however if reinforcements came then they would get priority in the queue until the 40% is hit and queue out non-priority players

      attackers/defenders numbering over 40% of zone cap get standard queue priority once the 40% player count in zone is reached


      Scenarios (assuming 300 zone cap for sake of examples):
      1) defending alliance has 120 members in zone, attackers have 4x 120man groups in separate alliances(one of these groups is the attacker) attempting to zone in. = defender cant be queued out of zone, attacker alliance gets into zone, remaining 3 attacker groups fight over non-priority slots, most dont get into fight, and have no fun = problem solved


      2) defender has 100 in zone + 200 friendly but out of alliance defenders, attacker has 200 in one alliance group attempting to enter zone. = defender keeps their 100 in zone, attackers zoning in get 120 priority slots and zone within one 90 sec queue cycle, remaining 80 attackers and 200 out of alliance defenders enter stander que for the remaining 80 slots = problem solved


      3) attacker has 300 alliance members in zone attempting to zone lock, defender has 120 attempting to enter zone = all 120 attackers enter zone within one 90 sec cluster queue cycle, 180 attackers remain in zone based on their queue priority/IP/other standard metrics. = problem solved

      The post was edited 6 times, last by Grievance ().

    • The smallest group shouldnt be cut in half It should have most of its force left in the zone. You should also increase the priority zone in role numbers to like 100 not 20 per guild. 100 people shouldnt turn into 50 or less because many allied alliances try to zone in and out. The disarray encourages bringing more players. Let alone the cluster queue. The players defending a zone should be allowed a chance to defend it. It comes down to just how many alliances you try to zone in over skill at the largest scale. This problem gets much much worse if there is a coalition of large alliances that are filled with small alliances. You end up with a handful of players with no party composition left. Giving defending players a fighting chance sounds like a more fun game to me. Defending players of 100 or 150 shouldnt really be forced out to let even more of the enemy side in. The defending players will almost always have everyone in the zone before the fight even starts. So anyone else coming in which is 250+ before the cluster queue even kicks in. The attacking huge force should have to send in the next wave after their first group losses some. Same thing for when attacking an almost full zone. you should get about half. Somehow the alliances that all dropped alliance and made their own alliance should be counted together. So it ends up being a decent fight. The disarry atm also forces guilds to break up its members where they cant see alliance chat, they cant read guild chat. Since they need to be in a small bomb squad guild to do any damage. While the rest of the forces do very little damage. So its just who can smother the smaller force or flank it from multiple sides better. Whoever makes the small force blow cooldowns then forcing them to have to engage on another enemy alliance at a different angle. Eventually killing them from more cooldowns. But because of disarray the small force cant delete clumps even close to where you did before disarray. Before you could make room by killing and kiting. Now that is very very hard. Thats why people go out of guild so they can actually kill the hordes that are swarming you. If they didnt you just lose having 10 beetles, specter jackets and clappers running around in your backline as a horde of tanks slowly cc you down, while people get picked off. Old disarray made it so you wanted to take less people. This disarray makes it so you want to mass recruit so you get a bigger piece of the ratio in a zone. It comes down to massing numbers more then any other meta in the past.

      Also hard capping terris at around 10 each alliance makes it pretty stale to where guilds dont care to push into enemy territory much anymore. You are punished for growth. So all these factors make for a pretty stale map. But Also there is the same problem as the old map. Where the NA and the EU terris are clustered too much. Its hardly ever been where a timezone is split in half between two warring sides. Its always. This alliance is weaker NA so they just hold the EU. If it was more mixed up there would be fighting between the zones and the world could be a bit more split.

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

    • @Korn

      Why not do instance fight for terry, not as the same than before (5v5), but more people like 30/50 or more again ? Or maybe the attacker can choose the number of people in the zvz.
      Imagine guild A tag a territory and choose the number of player into the GvG with a limit of 100 people. Everyone will have content, can choose a fair playstyle in fonction of their guild. And with this type of solution, this will permit to stop Handhold coz the attack and defense of territory will be lock for attacker and defender !
      With this, little guild can still play and try something to do because they can tag for a zvz of 20/30 people, big guild can make fight of 100 people. So much things can be do with that
    • Ookaminu wrote:

      @Korn

      Why not do instance fight for terry, not as the same than before (5v5), but more people like 30/50 or more again ? Or maybe the attacker can choose the number of people in the zvz.
      Imagine guild A tag a territory and choose the number of player into the GvG with a limit of 100 people. Everyone will have content, can choose a fair playstyle in fonction of their guild. And with this type of solution, this will permit to stop Handhold coz the attack and defense of territory will be lock for attacker and defender !
      With this, little guild can still play and try something to do because they can tag for a zvz of 20/30 people, big guild can make fight of 100 people. So much things can be do with that
      He already answered about instanced fights.
    • Ya que responden activamente por aquí..quisiera saber porque CARAJOS ya voy mas de 2 días tratando de descargar el ultimo parche de Albion ... que llega a la mitad con una velocidad de descarga de 280 kbytes / seg. se reinicia la descarga o se congela totalmente sin opción a recuperar los datos ya descargados...osea...me manda a descargar el juego desde cero...UN ASCO TOTAL..AMO ALBION PERO COSAS COMO ESTAS JODEN LAS EXPECTATIVAS DE UN JUGADOR CONSTANTE. ESPERO PRONTA RESPUESTA A ESTO O AMENOS UNA CAPACITACIÓN DE CÓMO HACER PARA LA DESCARGA.
    • This seems to be a classic black&white dilemma. Terri fights switched from black (5v5) to white (full open world). Most suggestions are some shades of grey: instanced but with bigger numbers. But the anxiety is, that every shade of grey would be another black with all it's downsides. The answer of Korn reflects exactly this anxiety. But I'm sure: the best solution *would* be some shade of grey.


      PS: In addition to the suggestions made so far - if you go back to instanced fights, like 20v20, 50v50, etc ... make them with IP soft cap, at least for the outer terris.
    • Just make it so that territories can be captured at any time during prime time. Instead of giving the guilds/alliances holding each others' hands the chance to form up at a scheduled time to dominate and lock down a zone and its entrances/exits. If a territory was able to be captured at any time during prime time, it would keep the defending guild on its toes during that time. If captured by the attacking guild/alliance, then set a cool down period before it can be captured back or by another guild, for example 24 hrs to 72 hrs. That way it gives the attacking guild a chance to get a foot hold within that zone and other surrounding zones.

      Or, another idea is to get rid of prime time entirely and allow the territories to be attacked at any given time then a set cool down after it has been captured. Kind of like how Faction Outposts work.

      Otherwise, the only real viable option is instanced fights as they were meant more for being on a schedule rather than how open world sandbox should be.

      Also, hideouts need to be completely reworked. They might have been intended for smaller guilds/alliances but they have only given the ability to have even more of a bigger presence for the already bigger and more established guilds in the black zone. As a smaller scale player myself, I'd prefer if hide outs didn't exist at all. They provide me with zero benefit. They, also, hurt my chance to get any kills as those players with hide outs in a zone can simply click and disappear with no counter-play whatsoever.

      Maybe, give some love to the black zone rest areas and allow crafting stations to be placed there or something. Would give more of a reason to base out of for smaller scale players who could actually stimulate the economy within the black zone without having to be a part of any mega alliance. Also, more opportunity for the economy to expand in the game as many more players have joined (assuming they keep playing). I have zero interests in using the new banks placed around the black zone. I don't even use war camps, because guess what, I still have to go back out there just to return with the items to the royal continent. Zero point for me.