Pookies
Active Member
If you think its about castles then your wrong. Castles are not needed to play the game or keep your guild alive
Chickens.
- Thread starter ggggfv
- Start date
It’s about keeping game fresh and relevant. Saying this is happening cos imms lost a few castles does nothing but show a lack of knowledge and vast inexperience. The server has a long and interesting history to say the least with people being in all sorts of different camps.
I don’t think changing the ally system will work tbh.
get rid of teles, maybe but won’t change the world
get rid of recall wouldn’t work as door hitting is bad enough
my 2 cents
diversification I feel is the key to change.
Make sw ffa, dont know how that would work with points and multi guild but an interesting avenue to explore if it can be not exploited by you know who.
make arc OR trist a pve event style castle
make WW a new style of war - group contest only, bit like lms with a waiting room and then you go to war (one of each class of course) 30 min war - points based - winners get a gold and a special pot or something
Change BW so ONLY char ps under lvl 170 can enter for war!! Battle of the alts
I don’t think changing the ally system will work tbh.
get rid of teles, maybe but won’t change the world
get rid of recall wouldn’t work as door hitting is bad enough
my 2 cents
diversification I feel is the key to change.
Make sw ffa, dont know how that would work with points and multi guild but an interesting avenue to explore if it can be not exploited by you know who.
make arc OR trist a pve event style castle
make WW a new style of war - group contest only, bit like lms with a waiting room and then you go to war (one of each class of course) 30 min war - points based - winners get a gold and a special pot or something
Change BW so ONLY char ps under lvl 170 can enter for war!! Battle of the alts
zad48231
Leading Contributor
I love these ideas, allow me to flesh them out a bit further
SW - No declarations, SW is as it is now except all guilds level 30+ automatically declare every week
BW - Love your idea of only chars below 170, maybe make it a rolling limit so 20 or 25 below level cap for example, so it grows with cap updates
WW - Could literally just hook that into the existing LMS, whoever wins LMS that person's guild gets WW
Arcane - Relate this to total number of mobs killed by all members of that guild that week. Only count mobs that give full exp (no more than 10 levels below character level) - GM would need to add mob kill counters back in, which might be a bit of work, but worth it! Counters reset weekly so nobody gets upset about their counter missing out on kills they got before the update
PW - Keep this as arena champions, and give bigger rewards to encourage more people to get involved in arena
That leaves Tristam and Gi-Ryoong as "normal" wars, 2 castles to fight over is much more manageable
ggggfv
Active Member
all very progressive ideas, some im not a fan of as wars are one of my fav aspects of the game and removing the ability to war even more is not what i would personally want but i also dont want the system we have now where majority of the server flock together in allied guilds just to obtain a castle.... yes it does change every so often when guilds see other guilds getting stronger so then decide they will switch sides and the tables turn but its just so boring and mundane ive said it for about a year now, making another pve castle is a good idea and also al's idea regarding BW being for the lower levels is also a great idea, gives the players up and down the server a chance to enjoy whats on the table.
ggggfv
Active Member
regarding the lower lvl castles i know scorp and warda did try to implement something with only lower lvl guilds being able to obtain them.... however as daz would say and was correct they were exploited by the stronger guilds just keeping their guilds at a lower lvl to be able to war them.
zad48231
Leading Contributor
The key point I think you're making is that wars are very rarely even, they are usually a massive group vs whoever dares to challenge them, and most of that group are swing voters who just go along with whoever is winning, which leads to an avalanche effect, if thing end up about even it doesn't last long because whatever side gets a small advantage quickly turns into a huge advantage when all the glory hunters flock to that side. Discouraging that behaviour will make a big difference.
Maybe consider thinking outside the box a bit and go carrot rather than stick, instead of preventing people switching guilds, make it desirable to choose not to, introduce a loyalty bonus related to how long you have been in the same guild. +10% drop rate / exp rate if you've been in same guild for a month, +20% after 6 months, something like that. Not game changing, but enough to make people think twice about switching guilds just to win a war
Maybe consider thinking outside the box a bit and go carrot rather than stick, instead of preventing people switching guilds, make it desirable to choose not to, introduce a loyalty bonus related to how long you have been in the same guild. +10% drop rate / exp rate if you've been in same guild for a month, +20% after 6 months, something like that. Not game changing, but enough to make people think twice about switching guilds just to win a war
ggggfv
Active Member
Another great suggestion and thinking outside the box, but that would only work if the alliance function is fixed to ensure only the warring guilds are allowed to enter said castle.
You are correct in all of the above though
zad48231
Leading Contributor
It's been said plenty times already, nobody cares about who owns the castles, the rewards are nothing. People go to wars for the body drops, that's it. Whoever wins the castle is like 3rd or 4th priority.