Season point problems

    • Lets think about this for a minute. BA is contenting Elevate and Co outposts/castles mages and territories in bridgewatch. While also owning castles and territories in thetford and fortsterling. Why is no one in thetford or fortsterling contesting BA? they have nap(non-aggression pact) with the majority of the major guilds in those regions. Should Elevate run across the entire black zone to contest BA castles/outpost to fight for rank 1. Probably but the same people who are letting BA have castles for free contest them if they start to get ratted often.

      So right now the biggest coalition chooses who wins the season and have for many of the past seasons. There is no problem with this. Thats how the game mechanics work right now but SBI claims that they want the best guild not coalition to win and are not making adjustment to make this happen. SBI should change what they are saying or try to make a season more guild focused than coalition focused.
      Always :)
    • thorsarmy wrote:

      Sounds like a lot of complaining on NDA and forums and not enough hard work flipping outposts in game. Why don't you go flip some castles or outposts? Even if you cry to the point they nerf castles, you'll see us living in your terries killing your mages on Cooldown.

      You claim to be unbiased but your guild literally spams reddit with crap propaganda for past 2 years I'm sure Retroman and Co are tired of seeing it. TBH you shouldn't even be on NDA ( you're completely self centred and biased) . The time you've spent on this forum complaining could've been spent flipping outposts early. Guess you're not that committed to the game and rather have things changed to benefit you, clearly you don't want to work as hard as everyone else.
      Froggy said hi : )
    • Looks like a guild decided to start doing Forum CTA's on top of Reddit CTA's and TT CTA's.

      BA taking castles/outposts through whatever methods and not being contested through whatever methods, simply means that BA is a much better guild then the Forum CTA guild whose only claim to any fame is spamming 5v5's from royals.

      Then again it's not surprising to see them crying for a Developer intervention into the sandbox, because the same Forum CTA guild spent 2-3 Round Table calls crying their eyes out to the Devs because how unfair it was that BA was running 20 zones every day, and demanded "something to be done".

      Now the concept of running 20 zones to Thetford every day to contest objectives is very problematic and "something has to be done". Players are playing together in a massively multiplayer game - guess what? "Something has to be done".

      In general, every time Forum CTA guild runs into a situation where someone isn't playing how they want them to play, "something has to be done".

      But lets be honest guys, after losing with 3 massive coalitions and well on their way to losing with the 4th, what else is left besides crying for the Devs to stop people from playing together in a massively multiplayer game and taking strategic objectives? SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE am i right? :D
    • Syndic wrote:

      Looks like a guild decided to start doing Forum CTA's on top of Reddit CTA's and TT CTA's.

      BA taking castles/outposts through whatever methods and not being contested through whatever methods, simply means that BA is a much better guild then the Forum CTA guild whose only claim to any fame is spamming 5v5's from royals.

      Then again it's not surprising to see them crying for a Developer intervention into the sandbox, because the same Forum CTA guild spent 2-3 Round Table calls crying their eyes out to the Devs because how unfair it was that BA was running 20 zones every day, and demanded "something to be done".

      Now the concept of running 20 zones to Thetford every day to contest objectives is very problematic and "something has to be done". Players are playing together in a massively multiplayer game - guess what? "Something has to be done".

      In general, every time Forum CTA guild runs into a situation where someone isn't playing how they want them to play, "something has to be done".

      But lets be honest guys, after losing with 3 massive coalitions and well on their way to losing with the 4th, what else is left besides crying for the Devs to stop people from playing together in a massively multiplayer game and taking strategic objectives? SOMETHING HAS TO BE DONE am i right? :D
      Let's also highlight the part where these scumbags also "HANDHOLD" while hating on diplomacy.

      Just think about it for a second, their guild ALSO does diplomacy and cry about it when another guild does it 10x better?

    • I'm going to be the voice of reason here and point out the obvious.
      The strongest guild has never won a season. The strongest coalition wins the season. Always has been that way.
      Always will be that way.

      Now since we have alot of people here already, let me share my opinion on how to 'fix' the issue at hand.
      Now first of all there is literally no way of prohibiting guilds from doing politics to secure objectives. What im suggesting will however drastically limit the impact of that.
      Well here goes nothing.

      In the system i envision, season points arent earned directly through any activity. Instead they are awarded weekly(or less/more frequent) depending on scoreboards and how well you did compared to other guilds. For example :
      Holding a castle during scoring will net you
      500 siphoned energy and 500 "castle control points". Then at the end of the above mentioned period, each guild that scored any amount of castle control points will earn season points based on how well they performed compared to any other guild.
      And heres the beauty of this system :
      (1) SBI can decide how much impact each type of content has depending on how well it represents a guilds success during a season.
      (2) SBI can add any amount of metrivs rather easily(hellgate infamy, pvp fame, gathering fame, pve fame....) depending on what they think shows a guilds success.

      The result would be a world in which active guilds cant just pay/do politics for objectives but also play actively.

      Also @zerfaxx being good at politics is an important skill that you guys lack sadly. But im sure theres individuals that will gladly teach you if thr price is right.
    • First of all, congratz to BA for winning the season, u'd probably win this one no matter what mechanics were implemented. streamable.com/e6qt7d

      Secondly, I love how @Syndic went from calling Mojo a dog, b*tch, etc. to being his best friend now. Its a shame that someone like you is a big part of the game development through NDA. No need to add anything else but this screen:


      Thirdly, this thread is pointless, nothing will be done. SBI promised us castle changes before, all we got is 2 stairs in the lord room that are meaningless. Castle's design was fine for Beta 2/Release times when there were 60v60 fights for those, not 200v200. Nowadays castles are points' grinding machine - even saturday's chests arent worth it while u can go kill Old White and drop up to 3 mammies worth 450kk each few days instead of camping those castles.

      Also, nothing can be done to handholding on this scale, once they've seen how fun it is to grind money from such playstyle, they'll never stop doing that. We give them "content" they want, if it starts being dangerous, they are just bringing more and thats it, they keep going. Albion will never be in a state like it was in early Beta phases, deal with it as I did :D

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

    • What would be needed to make people compete for castles and outposts, if points on a ranking list isn't enough?

      Just plainly adding more rewards seems underwhelming with the danger of a problematic snowballing potential.
      How would a season play out if you increase castle/outpost rewards to a crazy amount?

      I'm worried at this point the amount of serious answers to this question might be limited, but - thinking outside of the box - what would make other Alliances actually, realistically want to (or force to) fight for these?

      And for fun, lets include a full range of Alliances from #2 to like ARCH.
    • Bogul wrote:

      What would be needed to make people compete for castles and outposts, if points on a ranking list isn't enough?

      Just plainly adding more rewards seems underwhelming with the danger of a problematic snowballing potential.
      How would a season play out if you increase castle/outpost rewards to a crazy amount?

      I'm worried at this point the amount of serious answers to this question might be limited, but - thinking outside of the box - what would make other Alliances actually, realistically want to (or force to) fight for these?

      And for fun, lets include a full range of Alliances from #2 to like ARCH.
      Im not sure if you are acting stupid or it really is the case but you are literally vet in this game and should know that poe/squad are more than 50% of the blackzone. You simply cannot contest all of these castles even if you wanted to. People are literally talking in this thread about castle nerf or cap but you suggest adding more castle/outpost rewards? Please stick to city roleplay and never comment about blackzone ever again.
    • zerfaxx wrote:

      Starman wrote:

      There are a lot of points in your post that do not make any sense.You flat out say it is a developer issue, not a player issue. You believe the devs only do updates to the game that benefit one particular guild (Blue Army). One would think they have all players in mind, not just one guild. I can’t imagine they get up each day asking themselves if KingMojo is going to be pleased with said update.

      You complain that the scoring system via acquiring castles and outposts is not competitive. How do you link that to being a developer issue? If you want to own them yourself you can ride over to Thetford/Fort Sterling and try to grab them. However you probably have not tried at all since the season started and I doubt you are going to at all this season.

      The next thing to address is “the best overall guild”. Isn’t the best guild the one that encompasses a mix of all the things you listed. Good at zvz,both large and small scale. Willing to raid mages/do crystals and hold objectives? Diplomacy is a major part of making a strong guild.No one finds success working solo by themselves.

      The dissarry change is there to help smaller forces have a better chance against larger forces. It isn’t purely for bomb squads.

      You do mention some potential ways you believe would help the castle system, but most of it boils down to a simple fact. If you don’t like someone owning said castles – go fight for it. It’s not a developer issue, it is players and how said players are choosing to play the game within the current system. If it has been your objective since the season started to contest those objectives then you’re saying you have done a poor job at trying to take them because its next to impossible to hold that many if you were actually making any effort at all to contest them.

      The points are limited to how many castles you are willing to fight for at different timers. SBI removed entrances to castle zones so that its harder to reach castles. They added more outposts to offer more content to fight over. More points and more money for those willing to fight for it.

      Its not the devs fault that you chose to pursue different objectives. The only thing you can pin on them is that the vulnerability timer of hideouts and territories coincide with the castle/outpost timers, but there is nothing they can do there and it ultimately forces guilds to choose which they care more about (power projection versus season points).
      1. It is a developer issue. SBI has capped all the other major season point sources in the game besides castles. They have left them untouched for absolutely no reasonable purpose. You don't have to point fingers at BA for abusing diplomacy, I don't blame them for doing the proper thing to win. That is why I say this is a developer issue.

      2. The scoring is not competitive because they use diplomacy to ensure nobody touches their castles. And if somebody does touch their castles, their renters and slaves are there to retake them ASAP. Running a force over to take all their castles is not a very feasible thing to do daily. That would mean a large group running 30 minutes across the black zone when we could just limit the amount of castles one guild can have and force people to value quality over quantity such as leveled up hideouts. Come to think of it, it would be a really cool mechanic if we could level up castles also. These things just make sense in Albion because the game really can't handle the 2000v2000 fights that well. It's annoying to sit in cluster queue, it's annoying to play laggy fights, it's annoying having to face an endless zombie horde daily and get "squaded" on.

      3. The disarray change was absolutely meant to limit the strength of bomb squads. If you think otherwise you just didn't play ZvZ pre buff. It does nothing to help smaller guilds. In fact it promotes bringing mass numbers out of alliance.

      4. The statement "go fight for it" is possibly the most naive statement in your whole paragraph. I've explained multiple times how ridiculous it is to make people run 30+ minutes daily MULTIPLE TIMES to counter the handholder's castle claimers. We could save people from this absolute waste of time and just promote more quality PvP battles. I can't really believe you are honest when you say nobody is contesting them. I can peek at my guilds season point grind channel and just see all the activity in there myself. It's endless.

      5. This argument doesn't really mean anything. More castles does not mean more willing to fight for at different timers. All it means is how many random noob guilds you can find to throw their bodies at castles across the map and claim them with an in guild member waiting to last hit the lord. The ability to reach a castle for claiming it in this way is completely irrelevant when you can just log out in the zone and wait.

      6. This is absolutely a developer issue. They have capped all the other major season point sources besides castles. Castles and hideout renting are the two largest reasons why handholding exists. All the devs have to do is cap castle points. I mean FFS how much more data do they need to realize castles have driven every season win? Just. Cap. Castles.
      Starting from my original thread and scrolling down - as far as I am aware the next update IS about Castles and the Open World. The dev talk for it should be coming out next week.