New attack timers: Is Albion territory pvp supposed to only be truly accessible to the unemployed?

  • marksteele wrote:

    Swordlord wrote:


    Under your view of how the game should be, then only extremely large alliances would stand any chance at owning territory. Out of those hundreds of people, only the 5 most dedicated h4dc0r3 gamers would be able to experience GvG combat. What else is everyone else going to do? Do quests to save up 190 skeleton boners to buy a new reputation cloak?

    Instead of having a few behemoth alliances duke it out for world domination, a system where smaller guilds and alliance can thrive will generate more organic conflicts and battles between neighbors. There will be more 5v5 teams contributing to more overall fights.


    Again, how does this help smaller guilds? The same outcome will result (I doubt a smaller guild could match the gear tier of a larger one) it will just take 3 days rather than 2.

    The advantage that bigger guilds have over smaller ones is not the result of attack notification notices. Its a fundamental part of the game, they progress faster, have more silver, more food, and more people.


    It doesn't solve the problem.
    Shortening attack timers makes it much worse though.
  • Swordlord wrote:

    marksteele wrote:

    Swordlord wrote:


    Under your view of how the game should be, then only extremely large alliances would stand any chance at owning territory. Out of those hundreds of people, only the 5 most dedicated h4dc0r3 gamers would be able to experience GvG combat. What else is everyone else going to do? Do quests to save up 190 skeleton boners to buy a new reputation cloak?

    Instead of having a few behemoth alliances duke it out for world domination, a system where smaller guilds and alliance can thrive will generate more organic conflicts and battles between neighbors. There will be more 5v5 teams contributing to more overall fights.


    Again, how does this help smaller guilds? The same outcome will result (I doubt a smaller guild could match the gear tier of a larger one) it will just take 3 days rather than 2.

    The advantage that bigger guilds have over smaller ones is not the result of attack notification notices. Its a fundamental part of the game, they progress faster, have more silver, more food, and more people.


    It doesn't solve the problem.
    Shortening attack timers makes it much worse though.


    I think it just makes it clear that you need to rethink your guild strategy, perhaps you SHOULD find an alliance to join.

    Suzera wrote:

    Only a few people already get to do 5v5s. Making things even harder on small guilds is not going to help that problem. The longer timers help smaller guilds by letting them get their people online better. Big guilds already always have enough people online.


    I'll be blunt. If your top players are only logging in once a day they don't stand a chance vs a larger guild regardless of notification times. This isn't because of their lack of skill but because of their lack of high tiered gear
  • Even if they have the gear from farming it for 12 hous per day for a week, if they happen to not be on at the right time it's going to be less than a 5v5 against the small guild's favor. A big guild will just always have 5 of their pvp ready people on.

    It's sounds like you're in favor of the current pyramid scheme meta though, so if you're happy with that it is no surprise that you're in favor of things that relatively disadvantages small guilds and makes it easier for large guilds to prevent all but the most hardcore from partaking in the games core conceit.
  • marksteele wrote:

    Albion was literally built from the perspective of a PvP endgame.

    Look back at the post history all the way to the first alpha and you will understand
    edit: To quote korn "One of the core design goals for Albion Online is to provide exciting, full loot PvP and GvG on a constant basis. This will largely happen in the unrestricted red zones of the game."Relationship between safe zones and PvP zones

    PvP endgame does not mean to get hardcore into the game. I'm never gonna hardcore in this game, are you telling me it's pointless for me to play?

    The timer issue is really just an organizational issue which can be adjusted. The actual PvP content that is being organized however requires certain amount of prep. This prep time should scale based on the importance of the event, which also would mean the timer's /minimum viable time/ would also increase.
    Display Spoiler
    Timer = (MVT) + Buffer
    Buffer = whatever extra you feel should be added on top of the MVT
    Minimum Viable Time (MVT) = the average time needed to prepare. Basically the easiest/guesswork way to test it is grind up 1 whole set of gear for 1 PvPer, then multiply that by 5-6.
    If there are metrics on how much people gather and how much they craft, as well as how much it takes to earn currency to buy it, that would all be put into this value until you have a good average. The quick guilds meet the average and the slower guilds won't, but most guilds will.



    If PvP is too grind reliant then in my opinion, there should be more side objectives to 5v5 PvP arenas if that's the main focus.
    There are plenty of 5v5 MOBA games that have side objectives and are extremely popular. Adding a "warfare" element to these arenas would make them more interesting and make it rely less on gear if a third neutral objective // minor allied NPCs can turn the tide with positioning.A variety of PvP content with different metagames for equipment and strategy would reduce burnout as well as focus the grind on certain aspects.

    There could be even more skill based PvP content, like 3 teams of 3 leading 7-12 NPCs for larger scale battles makes it so it's "large scale" but still small scale for player participation and relies more on the commander skills of each team VS straight grind-advantage.But that's just my perspective on PvP being stagnated to one kind of out of battle tactic (Grind mats, Get gear, own people)

    =====

    I believe the solution isn't to only adjust how grind reliant the current methods of PvP are, but also to improve the player experience with a viable variety of content type.

    What's the point of doing grindy PvP if it's not personally engaging and fun?
    Should we just cater to the most hardcore of fecal depositors? (TBH Solid business tactic for short-term or compulsive style of games, but it's overall fun quota is low)

    While it may be difficult to do so, every step should have a minimal level of engagement from the pubbie who farms to the supplier who crafts and the trader that moves, to the guild that organizes and alliance that defends and advances.
    Making one step of that process into an intolerable/unattainable grind for all but the most hardcore is alienation of anyone who is interested in any of the subsystems that makes the game work rather than the direct fighting itself.

    Competitive 5v5 is a lot better in that aspect as if gives the guild crafters a target to focus on without needing to grind equipment for their whole guild, but their involvement is way too one sided VS what the PvP players actually do.

    The post was edited 5 times, last by ThndrShk2k ().

  • I think adjusting the gear power and cost curves are the right levers to pull for changing the grindiness for getting minimally pvp-ready. Minimum delay between war declaration and the attack happening is about making sure people are around to fight their battles. If a small guild can't gear up to compete (even if it's at a disadvantage) or keep in good enough gear to defend one attack per day or whatever we're calling the maximum expected attacks per day, then the right levers to pull are gear power curve and gear cost curve so they can fight more often (once a day at least or whatever). Extending the delay timer if gearing is the problem would be suboptimal for encouraging many good pvp fights.
  • Kimsemus wrote:


    @Empa I have a massive amount of respect for what you do and the time you take theorycrafting and making sure design choices have a sound philosophy, but I don't feel like you should create content by destabilizing regions that people spend dozens or hundreds of man hours to take and develop.

    I understand the need for a 3 hour timer on resource plots, but those plots are often the first (in the case of cities) only line of defense against attacks on core holdings, and people still (in the case of farms) spend an enormous amount of time and effort developing them.

    Respectfully, if you want to create more dynamic content, new systems should be made to do so, not damaging the current core mechanics for alliance function and holdings. We can create new ways to make emergent content -- this isn't a good one, IMO.

    If you want to create a lot of emotional attachment, support, and vested interest, Territories of all types should be hard to take, hard to develop, take a lot of effort, but reap enormous benefits. playing merry-go-round on resource plots seems rather vapid and meaningless, don't you think?

    Thinks like forests, mines, silver farms, you can make a case for. But actual farms? Especially with existing city mechanics with nary a defender bonus? (This relates to often the only way to hold NPC cities is to hold the plots that lattice to them as a buffer). There has to be a better way, sir.

    Let's create MORE ways to create MORE content and foster MORE engagement, not destabilize territory systems, which is going to create less attachment, and less care.


    Hey there.

    This is the third time I re-write this, since chrome was being a huge bully to me tonight.

    I would like to argue that I have made defense easier for you guys.

    Let me play through a hypothetical scenario.
    • Day 1
      • You lose your resource territory in a surprise attack
        • They instantly declare a conquer attempt to your base, however since of the minimum 12 hour gap It should realistically not be until the next day.
      • You declare 2 counter attacks
        • Since timeslots allows windows of 4 hours you can schedule 2 attacks per territory per day with the new minimum timer (Here's where the short timer on resource territories helps you)
    • Day 2
      • ​Their attack starts
        • You lose despite having a 40% defender bonus
          • Your base now got 2 defender points
      • Your first counter attack
        • They have to win or they are cut out
      • Your second counter attack
        • they have to win, or their out
    • Day 3
      • Their attack starts
        • They win, despite your now reduced defender buff (30% I believe, can't look up the exact numbers atm)
          • You now got 1 defender points left
      • Your first counter attack
        • They have to win
      • ​Your second attack
        • Guess who has to win
    • Day 4[b][/b]
      • ​Their attack starts
        • They win and you lost your base now.

    So with these changes. Your attacker has to win 8 GvG fights spanning over 4 days. And any loss they encounter will set them back, especially if you win a counter attack.

    With the old values they would have to win 4 GvG fights over 4 days.

    And all of this completely disregards any form of meta gaming that I assume will happen, (Mercenaries, Spies, Forming alliances to counter, Block food shipments etc)


    But I can see the argument that resource territories may have a higher importance to player then we may have expected, especially for farms as they do require somewhat of an investment.
  • Sorry about your chrome issues. :(

    I see where you're coming from on the 3 hour thing being better for defense now. But the large guild gets the same defensive benefit, and the small guild still has to contend with forcing people to be online for a 4-5 hour segment every day far more than a large guild. So it's still biased in favor of larger guilds who may be able to score a relatively "free" victory on all the smaller guilds' resource territories by not suffering any equipment loss due to defenders not getting a good chance for notification to show up to actually defend it properly. Plus the counter attacks use up your defender bonus (right?), which a smaller guild will likely need to help offset the probable gear gap and keep attrition in favor of the defender.

    Also, if the attacking guild can game out the small guild of their territory once with a 3h short notice attack, they can probably do it again.

    This also assumes that the small guild under siege is able to muster adequate gear fast enough for these 3 fights every day. You've already said you're working on that, so I'll give this to you for now, but it's something to keep in mind as the game is well off the mark in this regard currently.

    If you want the defender double counter-attack, maybe a better idea would be letting base territories attack twice as long as there is defense bonus left, and have the 12 hour resource territory timer so people have a good chance at showing up for their fights without a lot of monitoring and/or batphoning in a smaller guild? Each attack uses up defense bonus which seems a lot more precious than silver right now, so it's not like it's free.

    The post was edited 7 times, last by Suzera ().

  • If you can have 3 attacks (1 defense/2 counters) a day for a few days, wouldn't there be a problem with materials/resources for the smaller guild?

    If so then a balance point would be to make it viable that the Lowest Viable Equipment(LVE) for a battle be something that can be prepared in 6-9 hours. In a fight between a High Tier Equipment(HTE) group and the LVE equipped group the HTE group should not come out unscathed.

    Sure HTE should allow for more likely success, it shouldn't be a complete stomp in terms of power as long as the LVE group has proper teamwork. (That is unless it's some Uber GodTier(UGT), but then thats UGT vs potential HTE as UGT vs HTE should be as balanced as HTE vs LVE, but no one expects UGT vs LVE to be balanced at all)

    While the battle could be quick, the reciprocal damage inflicted by the defending team should be a way to deter just shoving through.

    Each battlefield also dictates what kind of equipment they should use. Small resource skirmishes should deter from using HTE because of the risk/reward. Taking the territory may not be profitable if they keep using and repairing their HTE and risking it breaking. In these skirmishes, the LVE should be the average one can at least do damage to the enemy team with. This would give the poor guild an economic advantage over arrogant/impatient guilds.
    (This doesn't mean they should just use LVE to attack resources, just deter higher tier HTE as lower tier HTE are still better than LVE and costs less than the higher tier if they damage/break it)

    For base skirmishes, due to the defender bonus it should be more viable to use HTE, while the smaller guild can't afford that and still use LVE.
    The defense points should boost the capabilities of the defenders to a certain HTE equivalent level. The attackers may have higher tier weapons than what the bonus gives, but it gives the poor defenders an economically viable way to defend.


    ----

    Basically in the end, any equipment brought to a fight should have an economic level of risk vs reward as wars cost money, and without an appropriate cost countriesGuilds will wage war frivolously. Heck, in real life many wars are fought economically and I believe this games focus is on the ownership aspects (Control/war) of the pillars of the economy as well as the interaction of strife(Cost byproduct of war) within that economy.

    The post was edited 6 times, last by ThndrShk2k ().

  • Let me play through an actual unfolding scenario. I'm not attempting to troll in any way and used your bullet points because its neat and easy to read. This is a serious issue and I am baffled that you or others have not found these underlying issues, or even commented on how it would even be possible..
    • Day 1
      • You lose your resource territory to a attacker in 5.4 gear
        • They instantly declare a conquer attempt to your base, however since of the minimum 12 hour gap It should realistically not be until the next day.
        • You lose 120 pieces of equipment across 5 players (each brings 4 sets of gear and died horribly)
      • You declare 2 counter attacks
        • Since timeslots allows windows of 4 hours you can schedule 2 attacks per territory per day with the new minimum timer (Here's where the short timer on resource territories helps you)
        • You lose both battles to people who had higher level gear or you were unlucky and got outplayed because you couldn't practice a 5vs5.
        • You lose 240 pieces of equipment in two losses across 5 players (each brings 4 sets of gear and died 4 times during the battle, not a unimaginable number)[i][/i]
      • Day 1 losses at 360 pieces of gear across your 5 man team.
    • Day 2
      • Their attack starts
        • You lose despite having a 40% defender bonus
          • Your base now got 2 defender points[b][/b]
          • You lose another 120 pieces of gear.
      • Your first counter attack You go cry in the corner because you have run out of gear. Nothing else at this point matters.
        • They have to win or they are cut out
      • Your second counter attack
        • they have to win, or their out
    • Day 3
      • Their attack starts
        • They win, despite your now reduced defender buff (30% I believe, can't look up the exact numbers atm)
          • You now got 1 defender points left
      • Your first counter attack
        • They have to win
      • Your second attack
        • Guess who has to win
    • Day 4[b][/b]
      • Their attack starts
        • They win and you lost your base now.

    So with these changes. Your attacker has to win 8 GvG fights spanning over 4 days. And any loss they encounter will set them back, especially if you win a counter attack.

    With the old values they would have to win 4 GvG fights over 4 days.



    None of this matters because most guilds won't be able to front 480 pieces of gear over 2 days.. or even 4 days for that matter if they have jobs. Remember when we run out of gear we can't just turn off the attacks. So at that point every attack is fatal no matter what system you have or how many hours it takes. Guilds must be able to farm and craft a unreasonable amount of gear in a insanely short period of time. Which is of course fitting for the thread to have this title because its about the only people who can do this. I don't expect some magic wand to wave and fix this issue. I don't expect it to be fixed in alpha.. But I do expect the devs to understand that it's more than just a timer issue.

    Actual attacks over the last three days
    • Sleetisle Treasure Cove Attack (Lost) - People bugged into the fences/walls
    • Serpent Lake Farm Defend (Lost) 12 minute warning
    • Sleetisle Forest Defend (Lost)
    • Sleetisle Forest Defend (Lost) - Multiple people attacked back to back, 2 games in 1 hour (we ran out of gear here)
    • Sleetisle Town Defend (Lost) - no gear
    • Sleetisle Town Defend (Lost) - no gear
    • Sleetisle Town Defend (Lost) - no gear
    • Brinkwold City Defend (Lost) - no gear
    • Sleetisle Town Defend (Lost) - Just unclaimed there was no point
    • Sleetisle Town Defend (Expired due to the above)

    The perception of what GvG is to most of the uninformed who don't own yellow/red and are not sitting in 6.2+


    The reality of the guilds who were behind the curve and what GvG actually is:
    Just a Goon nobody..
  • Everything Forge said is 100% correct. The most frustrating part of all this is that the 5v5 battles were put in (I assume) as a way for smaller guilds to be able to compete with larger, more powerful, when the reality is, if the smaller guild wins, it's a completely MINOR and insignificant to the larger guilds power base, but you wipe a smaller guild 2 times, and they are blown out of the water.
  • Back to the Topic.

    With smaller Timers every Guild has the chance to get a Territory over Time with sneaky Attacks, right timings etc. Less Timers more fights more Dynamic... at the current State the biggest Guilds are holding the Map and they just fighting each other. No way to adept for Underdog guilds but if we change the timers there a maybe a big fight is going on vs two guilds and a small Underdog use the opportunity and force an attack also on a Ressource....
    I Understand why People whining about the Timers, they see Territory like prestige as Land that is only hard to loose... but the truth is nothing should be safe in this game and holding more than 2 Terriotrys need strong planing, organisation so that rly only the Best Organized Guilds should holding 4+ Territorys
  • Suzera wrote:

    Why is batman in that avenger's pic? This overrides my concern with the rest of your post.


    I was to busy in the cotton and leather sweatshop to spend more time getting a better representative picture. It does have TOP 5 though so that is worth at least a few points!

    shuwa wrote:

    If u see u dont have any chance u have to leave the territory and come back if u get stronger ... where the problem.. its stupid to run into the grp again and again to loose the gear...


    So what you are saying is if we are behind the curve and don't have 5.4+ gear we should not own territory? Got it. So when we do get 5.4 gear but the other mega guild rolling everyone has 6.3 gear we should not attack because we can't win. So thus we should wait more? So then we get 6.3 gear but they have 7.5 gear so we should wait again more? Got it. I think I understand how this game works now. Thank you for clearing this up. We were clearly not ready to hold territory.

    shuwa wrote:

    Back to the Topic. organisation so that rly only the Best Organized Guilds should holding 4+ Territorys


    So lets took at the board. Only the best should be able to hold 4+ territories as you put it.

    Finstack 23
    Hammer and Sickle 18
    Scoiatael 15

    Lets play fill in the blank. They were able to beat all those other guilds because of _______ and _________.

    Just a Goon nobody..
  • @Forge There's also a thing called tactical retreat. If you see you are getting stomped, you don't have to keep punching the nail. After your 5man team wipes once or twice, you just stay back and let the timer go off. You lose the fight, but you keep some equipment for the next one.

    The way you describe things (worst case scenario for all of the fights) while being quite realistic, can be avoided. And even if it cannot, what chance would you have against a guild that could stomp you like that in the first place, that you don't have now?

    New changes might not benefit you (although they can, the way @Empa described), but at least they are not making things harder for you.
    Grow a beard, they said. Become a man, they said. Don't burn my family and pillage my village, they said.
  • Hopefully the power curve changes for beta will make the grind difference much more tolerable so I don't feel like I'm constantly playing Wildstar Raid Attunement if I'm not fed by 5+ other people's effort for nothing in return but getting to watch me pvp. I'd much rather see the grind effect reduced than to see timers go up above 24 hours.

    E: There was an error in this post. It has been corrected.

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

  • Pain wrote:

    @Forge There's also a thing called tactical retreat. If you see you are getting stomped, you don't have to keep punching the nail. After your 5man team wipes once or twice, you just stay back and let the timer go off. You lose the fight, but you keep some equipment for the next one.

    The way you describe things (worst case scenario for all of the fights) while being quite realistic, can be avoided. And even if it cannot, what chance would you have against a guild that could stomp you like that in the first place, that you don't have now?

    New changes might not benefit you (although they can, the way @Empa described), but at least they are not making things harder for you.


    I feel that it is my job to educate some of the masses on how this really works. Being in Forsaken I know you understand this all to well. I still have high hopes for beta and the power change will occur if the differences in tiers get squished. I think one of the issues however is there is really no difference in attacks in a yellow/red zones or the timers. I think goons are fine with living on cots or under a tree. We don't need to hold territory to do what we do best. But any guild would run into these issues that doesn't have 100+ members. Maybe that's really what the PvP zones are meant for and I've just been wasting everyone's time. Though with yellow being pvp light I would like to see holding territory there also be pvp light. So for instance no losing gear in yellow GvG since you don't lose gear in yellow zones to start with? Has this not been brought up before. Then any guild who can't farm hundreds of pieces of gear can live in yellow and not have this issue. There are simple fixes to problems sometimes, then sometimes it's a ball of yarn.
    Just a Goon nobody..
  • The gear needs to be lost of attrition and economic reasons. If the devs want to add a practice arena where you don't even have repair costs, I think that would be a good idea though.

    This is straying from the topic of the attack timers though, and I'd like to keep this thread more focused on that since this is currently the only place it's really being discussed that I have found.

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

  • I think that normal territories fights should only be activated in the weekends, you know?
    Like WoE's in Ragnarok Online.
    There's a time schedule where all the other guilds are able to attack the other guilds turfs and take it, meanwhile the owners have the duty to defend it with their teeths.

    For instance:
    On Thursdays and Saturdays from 22h to 00h the guild territory will be vulnerable to attacks from other guilds. Therefore, the whole guild will know when they have to defend their turf and at what time.

    Maybe two times per week are a good option for normal territories and 6h for resources territories?

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