I think albion have big problem with gvg and distribution of territories. I mean that 80% of the territory is distributed between 3 alliances. And 1 team capture all of them. I see that the best gvg teams have 3-4 alts, so they can do 4 GVG per day. Its imposible to win them. Even if you have 4 bad team, they will come and win. I think its bad, when only 5 ppls can win all your gvg packs. This leads to the fact that the middle and lower teams are not needed, and they dissolve. Bc alliances have 1 team with 5 alts. I think will be great if you can do only 1 gvg per men in 1 day. Other teams will be in demand.
That makes no sense. You know that bigger guilds/aliances have more players, right? If you make harder for a few teams protect/conquer territories, this will make huge alliances/guilds even more needed. If big guilds/aliances don't let more players fight in gvg that's a huge future problem for then, not for the game, you can always demand it from the guild/alliance or just leave.
That's why 80% of the territory is distributed between 3 alliances, people just group up to have something from stronger guilds but it reduce the number of enemies. So we have almost only 3 groups fighting over cumbria and mercia. They even sell gvg services because there is few gvgs daily to do(they have time for it). Think about it, how they can fight 4 gvg per day and keep 50-80+ territories?
The problem with gvg and territories are the money to sustain all gvg to keep the territories. SBI is reducing more and more the "snowballing" from guilds that have territories in better places.
If you want better conditions you could demand something like this:
1- Alliances can't fight for each other in gvg, only guilds can defend their own territory
2- You have to wait 2 days or more to participate on a gvg after you joined a guild
3- You have to wait 1 week to join an alliance after you send an invite
This make alliances more about a non agression pact and make it hard for people join guilds or alliances just to make gvgs/zvzs. I could say more things about it like:
4- 1 day period to effective leave an alliance after being banned or leaving (so people could just remove items from territory and will increase the hate when people will just thief resources without fighting guards LOL)
5- Alliance should have the 50% buff from gathering inside territory.
6- Season points from castle should be split in alliance guilds equaly or alliance leader could manage % in some sort of alliance management (SBI could increase the points earned from castle for this, like 2x or 3x)
7- If there is no future gvg, territories can just be given to another guild from alliance
8- Should have some sort of bonus in faming farm when an alliance/guild has a territory in that place, like 10-20%
9- Could have some mark in market for people know if that item is from some guild or alliance member.
10- Should have 3 types of ping in minimap, 1 for guild, 1 for group and 1 for alliance.
11- Could improve statistics from guild at least in the website, to add new data PVE and PVP without GvG twhile comparing. (gvg teams do toons of pvp fame, so from a statistic perspective this become just useless. Try to compare the top 3 guilds you can't get any conclusion about it, just from a gvg perspective so you can't see if a new guild is growing or if the old ones are shrinking.)
I believe it has been brought up couple of times how to fix current GvG issues where same people GvG with bunch of ALT characters at their disposal. And the magical cure for this plague is none other than give GvG timers same treatment as Warcamps -> 1 EU time and 1 NA time depending where the map is, like now its EU and NA time zoned.
SBI has done a lot to try to battle this but so far all the artificial barriers are beaten with simple trick which is MAKE MORE ALTS. This doesn't really matter much if you don't steam roll against others, but if you do, it makes small snowball look like an avalanche. Since the only thing smart albion online players can't trick is TIME, and with only one time zone slot to attack with you can't be in two/three places at once. This would encourage guilds/alliances to create more GvG team which would create more even fight, since now its pretty much same top teams wiping the floor with the not so good teams. This is all fine and good, but this should be counterable but it is not.
If 1 attack a day is too harsh it could be shorten to 2 EU and 2 NA, but that leaves the ALT issue back in business.
Just my take on this. And I cant remember who first suggested this GvG timer fix, but the credit goes to him/her.
I don't think any of the big alliances actually prevent people from GVGing because that would be counter-productive. At least in POE, we encourage everyone to try it out in the royal continent or in Anglia. The reality is most people aren't willing or able to put in the time and effort required to successfully GVG, or in some cases simply don't have the reaction time necessary to compete. Some people are crippled by their ping, since all EU players are playing with 130-200 ping, all AU players are playing with 300+ ping, while NA players are enjoying a comfortable ~50 ping.
Albion already has 4 vectors per continent (anglia is basically 2 continents mashed together) where 4 territories of the most valuable territories are at the same exact time, with 4 adjacent territories being +1 or -1 hour.
The real question is, should players be able to engage in ZvZ once per day per character too?
IMO the bigger challenge with lack of GvGs is the small amount of access points. It allows alliances to spread without any concern of the territories being touched left in their wake. If all resource territories were up for attack daily instead of the handful of warcamps you would probably see more action.
are you serious? It’s almost like Tabor doesn’t play.
you need to split forces to defend multiple warcamps while the enemy can full force 1 wc leading to easy outnumbered WC takes. Just like T side of counterstrike. the enemy decides where they attack while the defender has to spread to react, and with 2 min to spare they aren’t showing with reinforcements. Advantage to attacker when WCs are 30 seconds ride from a Caerleon portal.
no shit, if every Terri comes up everyday you will see way more action. Smh
Yeah that is the point more opportunity for fights....of course zergs like it as it is where they can only worry about piling people to a few war camps at exactly known times to avoid multiple GvGs. I cannot imagine the intended design was to only have 5% of all available plots having GvGs due to the ease of pacifying a handful of camps.
lmfao you don’t even know how to read you just read the last sentance plus you don’t seem to understand how warcamps work if you think that multiple camps at the same time is easy to pacify.
It’s 180 From what you’re saying: it’s incredibly easy for attackers to send WC attacks. They get to chose where to attack and with how many, defenders are left guessing where the enemy will hit, which could be too far away to respond to. if I have 100 attackers and you have 100 defenders and 4 camps to defend you gotta split 25/25/25/25 where as the attacker can bring all 100 to fight your 25.
In the end of the day, it doesn't matter if you launch an attack or not if you keep facing the same players with their MAIN or ALT teams. Having one attack in EU and one in NA would make it so that you would have to priority when to attack and when to defend. Just like @owensssss sayed the defenders are left guessing when to attack and when to defend since you can't be in two place at a time.
make the gvgs have 20v20 or 5v5 option at warcamp settings.
Just all GVG to one time. 2 prime zones EU and NA, like War Camps. MB after 1-2 hours after WC (GVG for the next day).
5 GVG? = 5 GVG teams. or some options if counterattack.
So you dont need to bind chars to GVG's territory.
It give much tactical and strategical optoins. As if you have many attacks on one territory, then GVG at different times, this can be played.
all GVG to one time
The post was edited 3 times, last by KOBbI4 ().