Season point problems

    • Biggest problem is you need to hold like 10 maps from the inner ring to have access to the terries and castles that give most points (example: from razorrock chasm to glacierfall fissure is 9-10 maps). ten maps are big for one or two guilds ofc, but in current state of the game where all guilds have alliances/coalitions that work with them to secure their objectives, you basically win the season by holding around ten maps near inner castle and people defending it for you.
      a simple fix would be to make it so inner ring castles and terries give less points than outer ones, so that those who value resources get inner zones and those who value seasons and season points try to get outer zones, this would give guilds who dont live in maps rich with resources (outer zones) a chance to get top3 or at least get crystal.
      No one liked when you could win the season without leaving the city through cGvGs, but this system of getting dropped inner terries and castles also sucks.
    • keeperofnature wrote:

      @Bogul
      I thought about it and what do you think about my sugggestion?

      Another idea i had is to rank guilds not my total points but how well they perform in relation to everyone else. For example:
      Top 5 guilds get crystsl
      Top 25 gold
      Top 100 silver
      Rest gets only portrait
      How would that comparison work? Would it still be point-based? How could they factor stuff in besides the current terris/catles/gvg system we have now? Should everything give points?
    • @Cessari
      My 2 suggestions dont havr to be added together.
      The thing you quoted would just limit the amount of guilds being able to earn battlemount ranks thus making it more competetive even on the lower end.

      As to what content should give points that would be up for the devs to decide.

      I personally believe the metrics in place should be :
      Territory ownership
      Castle ownership
      Pvp fame
      Pve fame
      Crafting fame
      Gathering fame/resource value
      Hellgates
      20v20 cgvg points
      5v5 cgvg points
    • bishDEFORMED wrote:

      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.
      Wow man. U so mean bro. I think forums should be a friendly place for discussion.

      Since you don't want to be friendly you should stick to discord trashtalk and never comment on the forums ever again.
    • Thanks for the feedback and inputs everyone.

      Crystal GvG Season Points were capped because you were able to create almost infinite season points by adding more crystal teams.

      Territories and Castles on the other hand are limited through game design and therefore have a hard cap there.

      There are currently no plans to limit point gains from other activities than Crystal GvGs.

      - Hellements
    • Hellements wrote:

      Thanks for the feedback and inputs everyone.

      Crystal GvG Season Points were capped because you were able to create almost infinite season points by adding more crystal teams.

      Territories and Castles on the other hand are limited through game design and therefore have a hard cap there.

      There are currently no plans to limit point gains from other activities than Crystal GvGs.

      - Hellements
      Well there was also a cap on cgvg points, it was just higher(300 people/guild).
    • Hellements wrote:

      Thanks for the feedback and inputs everyone.

      Crystal GvG Season Points were capped because you were able to create almost infinite season points by adding more crystal teams.
      the main point was how one aspect (cgvg) could win you the season, which is the point here. if this wasn't the reason why SBI changed it then you guys should reevaluate what you want your game to be like. you only win with castles now. No you cant have infinite amount of season points by adding cgvg teams because you are capped by guild members number and cgvg timers.
      why not change it to "SEASON RANKING FOR GUILDS THAT CAPTURED MOST OUTPOSTS AND TERRIES"? maybe even change last seasons rankings to "GUILD WITH MOST CGVG TEAMS".
    • keeperofnature wrote:

      Hellements wrote:

      Thanks for the feedback and inputs everyone.

      Crystal GvG Season Points were capped because you were able to create almost infinite season points by adding more crystal teams.

      Territories and Castles on the other hand are limited through game design and therefore have a hard cap there.

      There are currently no plans to limit point gains from other activities than Crystal GvGs.

      - Hellements
      Well there was also a cap on cgvg points, it was just higher(300 people/guild).
      Could you elaborate on what the game design hard-caps are?
    • If BA´s castles are not being contested by the players how is this a developers´ issue?

      Diplomacy and geopolitic is actually expected to happen in a game like Albion online.

      If you want you can try taking one of those castles but if you and so many others dont dare to do it dont be so shameless and come to ask the game developers to "fix" something that is not broken.

      This thread looks like those asking for a complete removal of gankers in the game.
    • Bogul wrote:

      keeperofnature wrote:

      Hellements wrote:

      Thanks for the feedback and inputs everyone.

      Crystal GvG Season Points were capped because you were able to create almost infinite season points by adding more crystal teams.

      Territories and Castles on the other hand are limited through game design and therefore have a hard cap there.

      There are currently no plans to limit point gains from other activities than Crystal GvGs.

      - Hellements
      Well there was also a cap on cgvg points, it was just higher(300 people/guild).
      Could you elaborate on what the game design hard-caps are?
      it's really simple, the cap 300 members per guild = 60 5v5 teams (will you really make a guild with no core to win the season and hire 60 cgvg teams?) and there was cgvg timers cap. its not INFINITE as it's implied. :D :D
    • Hellements wrote:

      Thanks for the feedback and inputs everyone.

      Crystal GvG Season Points were capped because you were able to create almost infinite season points by adding more crystal teams.

      Territories and Castles on the other hand are limited through game design and therefore have a hard cap there.

      There are currently no plans to limit point gains from other activities than Crystal GvGs.

      - Hellements
      There you have it , problem solved.

      Lol , yakes , the only way they can solve this issue is to do what EVE did with some success, make the BZ harder to transverse and to have real difficulty to go point A to Point B, How they would do it here ?

      More BZ is the only way i see , in eve they stopped the JB chaining form one end to another and the clones limitation, and even then bigger alliances managed to go and do campaigns in the other end of the map.
    • Guilefulwolf wrote:

      If BA´s castles are not being contested by the players how is this a developers´ issue?
      It totally is and the devs have come out and said that it is a developer issue.

      Guilefulwolf wrote:

      Diplomacy and geopolitic is actually expected to happen in a game like Albion online.
      Yes. But thats not an argument.

      Guilefulwolf wrote:

      If you want you can try taking one of those castles but if you and so many others dont dare to do it dont be so shameless and come to ask the game developers to "fix" something that is not broken.
      If one entitiy is too strong and people don't "dare" it actually is broken.

      Guilefulwolf wrote:

      This thread looks like those asking for a complete removal of gankers in the game.
      You're just beeing silly now.
    • I think the in deep problem isnt the season points or the castles, every guild that want to exist in blackzone have to choose a big alliance where u are or aly/slave/renter. so we have the problem that here all those "slave" guilds are massing to defend castles being afk on them and defending them cuz if u dont do it u get kicked from the maps where u live in bz and ur hideout get destroyed. so yeah is a problem of politics but if the designers leave the game like this will happen what happened with eve online, there are coalitions so bigs and so strong that the game is dead cuz nobody even want to fight cuz everyone have their own part of the territory and they just potato farm everyday.
    • Bogul wrote:

      Guilefulwolf wrote:

      If BA´s castles are not being contested by the players how is this a developers´ issue?
      It totally is and the devs have come out and said that it is a developer issue.
      How could it be a game design issue? the mechanic was made fair and free for all to try to take them and those being stronger to be able to conquer and hold them. If other guilds dont dare to dispute them because of being scared of the huge force a coalition of other guilds have made or because they have decided to surrender and acept not to attack them through diplomatic agreements that is totally following the stated mechanic. So yes diplomacy to reach this kind of success is not only an argument but the heaviest one.

      Im part of the opposite side of BA´s coalition and im totally fine at this because i understand that those castles are not being given to BA by mere sympathy but because they have become so strong and influential to get them in one way or another.

      If you want to discourage guilds of taking so many castles you could just cap the amount of season points earned through them every day but i dont like that kind of artificial limitations just like you did with the penalties when controlling more than a certain amount of clusters to force the split of alliances which actually did nothing but making the map show different flafs while everyone knows those zones didnt change diplomatically at all.


      BTW i can bear witness of BA putting effort on this campaign. The other day my guild catched and killed Mojo with a 10 men party when taking an outpost very far away from their zone.
    • Hellements wrote:

      Thanks for the feedback and inputs everyone.

      Crystal GvG Season Points were capped because you were able to create almost infinite season points by adding more crystal teams.

      Territories and Castles on the other hand are limited through game design and therefore have a hard cap there.

      There are currently no plans to limit point gains from other activities than Crystal GvGs.

      - Hellements
      Thank you for responding Hellements. I have to disagree with you though.

      Everyone will agree. Crystal gvgs were too powerful. You nerfed them appropriately by adding a daily cap. But you were absolutely never able to create "infinite season points" via crystals. You were clearly capped by many factors. One being a guild paying more mercenary money than another guild, another being the very very very small pool of good 5v5 and 20v20 players available in the game, there being only 3 total gvg timers a day, and finally the total guild cap of 300 blocking you from an infinite number.

      So this was the correct move on SBI's part. But the problem is you stopped there. You favored one activity over the other. There is absolutely no reason why everything else in the game should have a cap but one singular activity, which generates by far the most points out of anything else in the game, is completely uncapped. The difference between castles and crystal gvgs was you could actually create "infinite" season points with castles. By leaving one character (in the designated season winner's guild) logged out near the castle to capture it, you just need your slave guild clear it for you.

      The problem then lies in the fact that the map is so massive now, that allying with way over half the black zone (diplomacy), means your enemies need to match your numbers (an impossible feat) and scatter and match across the entire black zone to deny these castles (running 30+ minutes away, daily, from your usual active zones).

      Finally. There is no "hard cap" on castles. There is a hard cap on territories, since you added that system into the game. Castles currently have absolutely no cap for no reason at all.

      I hope you will ignore the trash talk in this thread and read the thoughtful comments people are leaving on new system ideas and reconsider your stance. Thank you

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