Alliances System

    Diese Seite verwendet Cookies. Durch die Nutzung unserer Seite erklären Sie sich damit einverstanden, dass wir Cookies setzen. Weitere Informationen

    • Alliances System

      The system of alliances breaks all competitiveness in the game for the open world, which is based on favoritism, common interests and dirty deals in exchange for money. It is causing the small clans and I refer clans without quarries because there are clans that as they have limit of people create secondary clans and then they join in alliances, then they all come together and that causes visible imbalances in the game.

      The alliances have a series of advantages that cause everyone to want to be part of a very large alliance and with conquered territories on the map, but personally when I bought the game and was in the beta phase I believed that the idea of the game It was that the guilds faced each other to have their place in the world of Albion, with time I realized that this is not the case, but that the alliances and not the guilds take over them and mainly do it for the amount of people. It is also true that you have to win the gvg, but being a full loot game 1000 people can always re-equip 5 with better quality and more times than a humble clan of 100 people or 200 that is not part of any alliance.

      Not to mention that the maximum size of a clan is 300 and the Gvg battles, which only participate teams of 5 and even so with a clan with its maximum capacity there could be problems in the people who want to participate in them, your solution to that problem was a queue 5v5 without value in the open world and this is when albion stopped interesting me because of obviously reasons.


      For: Sandbox Interactive



      Extended suggestion: Alliances System

      Dieser Beitrag wurde bereits 10 mal editiert, zuletzt von Nailys ()

    • most terrible thing about these big alliance coalitions is lack of competition as you said. like when you look at oops, you can tell that the only guild that has power is money guild, others is not powerful as money guild or crimson or blue army. like a month ago the poe alliance has so many powerful guilds and that create enough power to crush mg. its just nonsense. big guilds should not merge, they should fight with each other. that would be good for the game.
      dreaded for life moruw anlıomusun xddd

      ig: TayTuy
    • Neu

      I don't know whyy sandbox interactive its still blind with that because when i just buyed albion online cause i was thinking the game would be guild versus guild game with competitivines gameplay arround the map with piece of land for most of guild and no limited resources for a few unstopable alliances.

      To be honest there is no point to play albion long time ago.

      main problems are:

      unbalanced alliance system that means only the biggest alliance is dominating everything by snowball system

      lack of full tier black zone that was much better on beta state of the game. you made lots of mistakes at release.

      My suggestions are:

      No more alliance just clans with it owns cap of players i dont care if its 100 200 or 300 every number could be accepted.

      no more tiered black zones all the black zone should be at same tier like on beta i dont understand that kind of decission to make different tier of black zones to be honest.

      the last one is subject to the alliance system. so if every clan has same max players now you need more lands for all the rest new clans should be created after forced disband of million players on 1 alliance.

      finally as i was expecting of albion online a gvg pvpve competitive game on all kind of aspects.

      Dieser Beitrag wurde bereits 4 mal editiert, zuletzt von Nailys ()

    • Neu

      Nailys schrieb:

      the last one is subject to the alliance system. so if every clan has same max players now you need more lands for all the rest new clans should be created after forced disband of million players on 1 alliance.
      You do know royal continent is gear capped and that the war camps are hardly ever zerged? If these real small guilds wanted a territory they could attempt to get one.

      I agree that alliances are getting to big, but to say that by breaking up alliances smaller guilds would own territories is difficult to comprehend.

      I mentioned in another thread that adding more land is not a solution to a low pop pvp game. Potentially adding more territories to contested areas (such of those around raid maps) would probably increase the number of gvgs to control these territories as to control T8 resources.
    • Neu

      Wadefu schrieb:

      Nailys schrieb:

      the last one is subject to the alliance system. so if every clan has same max players now you need more lands for all the rest new clans should be created after forced disband of million players on 1 alliance.
      You do know royal continent is gear capped and that the war camps are hardly ever zerged? If these real small guilds wanted a territory they could attempt to get one.
      I agree that alliances are getting to big, but to say that by breaking up alliances smaller guilds would own territories is difficult to comprehend.

      I mentioned in another thread that adding more land is not a solution to a low pop pvp game. Potentially adding more territories to contested areas (such of those around raid maps) would probably increase the number of gvgs to control these territories as to control T8 resources.
      royal continent is for begginers. I played since beta 1 until release 4 5 months later so probably i know about albion more than you expect.

      In the past on beta the black zone was all at same tier from 5 to 8 not now which is a big mistake.

      Probably the population of Albion is getting down cause of things like this, unable to farm top tier or reach maximum tier to compete on gvg as equal, thousands of players behind 1gvg etc.

      Is not that hard to understand and ill try to explain that as many times as people need and devs to see that game is getting down and do not increasse his population by few factors:

      New ppl is abussed by open world pvp which is great but most of them canno't compete against them as i said thousands of players from another guild/alliance.

      Lots of advantage reached by map / territories as i said to the same big group

      I meet like 200 houndred ppl left the game for this unbalanced system and all of them i think they really would like to play albion if it was balanced game which means give to everyone group of players be part of the game to do this is needed to put a player cap for guild which is done but there are alliances which means there is no cap of players for guild.

      So imagine if you put a real cap of 100 200 300 players for each guild and full black zone at same tier as beta phases no more alliances and force to compete the map beetween guilds and not alliances thats all that albion needs to high increase his population.

      Because the pvp is great the pve too all the rest is good but sucks at this point which is not really competitive for everyone which want to play it so that make me say its not competitive game.

      As always you can add more pve raids more pvp minigames all what you want but if you need to group up more than 1 thousand of players to be "competive" lets go play moba games and enjoy with better or worst skill or lucky but atleast 1thousand times more competitive.

      thats my feeling and the reason which i left to play albion online long time ago and many many other ppl
    • Neu

      Even if you remove alliances completely, you will still have guilds like BA that have 300 members with very few alts that can bring 100+ players to zerg things (source: docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d…kX_FZo/edit#gid=612023309) and make it hard for small guilds to compete. If alliances were removed, the current large alliances would simply consolidate and you wouldn't change much other than reduce the QOL for players within those alliances by making them adjust and jump through unecessary hoops.

      The real solution is to dis-incentivize large alliances/guilds in the first place, through mechanics like point sharing among alliance guilds.
      [url='https://tinyurl.com/y7d4nfx5']AO Quick Reference Guide[/url]

      Referral Key: https://albiononline.com/?ref=R563G747A9

      Trial Keys: PM at [EB]Grimhawke#9254 on https://discord.gg/dcH32z
    • Neu

      Just delete alliances already. Could just make up some sorta rp reason as to why the relations disolved. Alliances in its current form are horrible for the game, mostly because of its small population. If its just guild on guild you have to be choosy with your 300 members. You dont just mass recruit people. This way there would be more drama, more fights. fighting everywhere in open world, zvz and gvg. You could still help each other but there would be more friendly fire, more back stabs. More red is dead. More competition for resources.
    • Neu

      Grimhawke-EB schrieb:

      Even if you remove alliances completely, you will still have guilds like BA that have 300 members with very few alts that can bring 100+ players to zerg things (source: docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d…kX_FZo/edit#gid=612023309) and make it hard for small guilds to compete. If alliances were removed, the current large alliances would simply consolidate and you wouldn't change much other than reduce the QOL for players within those alliances by making them adjust and jump through unecessary hoops.

      The real solution is to dis-incentivize large alliances/guilds in the first place, through mechanics like point sharing among alliance guilds.
      that's completly true but the devs have the tools to make it not us so they can do it in mutilple ways but the problem is i'm talking about that long time ago, so if they dont work on it, i can't do much more.
    • Neu

      Nailys schrieb:

      Grimhawke-EB schrieb:

      Even if you remove alliances completely, you will still have guilds like BA that have 300 members with very few alts that can bring 100+ players to zerg things (source: docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d…kX_FZo/edit#gid=612023309) and make it hard for small guilds to compete. If alliances were removed, the current large alliances would simply consolidate and you wouldn't change much other than reduce the QOL for players within those alliances by making them adjust and jump through unecessary hoops.

      The real solution is to dis-incentivize large alliances/guilds in the first place, through mechanics like point sharing among alliance guilds.
      that's completly true but the devs have the tools to make it not us so they can do it in mutilple ways but the problem is i'm talking about that long time ago, so if they dont work on it, i can't do much more.
      We just have to agree to disagree then. From my perspective it's a problem for the player community to deal with, as a sandbox game, and from your perspective, you feel it's something the dev team should deal with with (arbitrary) rule-sets.
      [url='https://tinyurl.com/y7d4nfx5']AO Quick Reference Guide[/url]

      Referral Key: https://albiononline.com/?ref=R563G747A9

      Trial Keys: PM at [EB]Grimhawke#9254 on https://discord.gg/dcH32z
    • Neu

      Grimhawke-EB schrieb:

      Nailys schrieb:

      Grimhawke-EB schrieb:

      Even if you remove alliances completely, you will still have guilds like BA that have 300 members with very few alts that can bring 100+ players to zerg things (source: docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d…kX_FZo/edit#gid=612023309) and make it hard for small guilds to compete. If alliances were removed, the current large alliances would simply consolidate and you wouldn't change much other than reduce the QOL for players within those alliances by making them adjust and jump through unecessary hoops.

      The real solution is to dis-incentivize large alliances/guilds in the first place, through mechanics like point sharing among alliance guilds.
      that's completly true but the devs have the tools to make it not us so they can do it in mutilple ways but the problem is i'm talking about that long time ago, so if they dont work on it, i can't do much more.
      We just have to agree to disagree then. From my perspective it's a problem for the player community to deal with, as a sandbox game, and from your perspective, you feel it's something the dev team should deal with with (arbitrary) rule-sets.
      this sounds like you would like to say no for a 1 billion Euros from lotery. Sadly but true.
    • Neu

      Every. single. season. This comes up. it’s like y’all have short term memory.

      it’s like everyone forgets that we’re in a sandbox. as season nears the end, as always, alliances engorge themselves to maintain their chance at victory/bragging rights. and after season? the majority disband or cut a ton of guilds because managing a massive alliance
      1. Is a fucking hassle
      2. more enemies is more content for your men who just slogged thru a season.

      that’s the way it’ll always be, even if you try to make alliances technical impossible, guilds will still be brokering No Attack Pacts.
    • Neu

      owensssss schrieb:

      Every. single. season. This comes up. it’s like y’all have short term memory.

      it’s like everyone forgets that we’re in a sandbox. as season nears the end, as always, alliances engorge themselves to maintain their chance at victory/bragging rights. and after season? the majority disband or cut a ton of guilds because managing a massive alliance
      1. Is a fucking hassle
      2. more enemies is more content for your men who just slogged thru a season.

      that’s the way it’ll always be, even if you try to make alliances technical impossible, guilds will still be brokering No Attack Pacts.
      why do you think you are right with it? no one talk about seasons here and i'm talking about that before seasons on albion what a.

      as you can see at top, the date of post and its not my first one.
    • Neu

      never said “I’m right” ever, so idk what you mean. I’m mentioning the reason why it happens a
      Nd it has nothing to do with SBI, it’s players who evolved that meta.

      ...and seasons have been around since before your OP... what the fuck are you even saying. Season 1 ended over a month before your OP... even then, talking about before seasons is worthless cause. Guess what? Season are here, arguing without considering seasons is moot

      Jesus

      so yes, they do factor in even if you’re not smart enough to consider it. Again, no idea what first, 2nd 3rd even 100th post had to do with this. Now I’m really questioning your mental ability when you think post history or OP timing has bearing on current discussion.

      Dieser Beitrag wurde bereits 2 mal editiert, zuletzt von owensssss ()

    • Neu

      owensssss schrieb:

      never said “I’m right” ever, so idk what you mean. I’m mentioning the reason why it happens a
      Nd it has nothing to do with SBI, it’s players who evolved that meta.

      ...and seasons have been around since before your OP... what the fuck are you even saying. Season 1 ended over a month before your OP... even then, talking about before seasons is worthless cause. Guess what? Season are here, arguing without considering seasons is moot

      Jesus

      so yes, they do factor in even if you’re not smart enough to consider it. Again, no idea what first, 2nd 3rd even 100th post had to do with this. Now I’m really questioning your mental ability when you think post history or OP timing has bearing on current discussion.
      :thumbup: your words talk for you much better than you can considere.

      did i mentioned its not first post? did you read anything above?

      anyways this discussion with you will end soon.

      Dieser Beitrag wurde bereits 1 mal editiert, zuletzt von Nailys ()

    • Neu

      owensssss schrieb:

      Seeing as you can barely articulate your words I’d say there was no chance at a discussion to begin with.
      If I can barely articulate words, why do you keep showing your stupidity in your comments instead of leaving here?

      Well, I know you will have to say the last word that is trying to make me speak again about you, I do not care what kind of child you are, that is focused on a personal comment instead of the main reason that is intended.


      Giving pleasure to yourself is something relevant to you, as I can see, maybe x website is better than a forum of a videogame for what you needed.
    • Neu

      I was always torn on the subject of removing alliances from the game but after watching season after season of massive alliance pacts it just does not seem to be something the player base is able to solve on their own. Obviously the majority prefers to coast on easy mode and then ironically complain about having no one to fight.

      At this point it seems clear alliances should either be drastically capped at a max player amount or removed. Sure guilds can still make "side" non aggression pacts but at least that would take work and coordination to maintain if they couldn't just simply be in a alliance.

      These changes should drive the big 3 to break apart and then maybe we would have 20-25 competitive guilds fighting over shit instead of 3 alliances just chilling.
    • Neu

      Grimhawke-EB schrieb:

      Even if you remove alliances completely, you will still have guilds like BA that have 300 members with very few alts that can bring 100+ players to zerg things (source: docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d…kX_FZo/edit#gid=612023309) and make it hard for small guilds to compete. If alliances were removed, the current large alliances would simply consolidate and you wouldn't change much other than reduce the QOL for players within those alliances by making them adjust and jump through unecessary hoops.

      The real solution is to dis-incentivize large alliances/guilds in the first place, through mechanics like point sharing among alliance guilds.
      Point sharing would definitely make alliances smaller and some sort of tax for guild above a certain number of members would also be beneficial to the game