The time shouldnt be more than 30 minute
The time shouldnt be more than 30 minute
Timers as well as team members should be variable. Ideally we would be able to set them to whatever we want within a certain range (ex: 4-10 players, 15 min - 4 hours). If this would be to make applicable then perhaps give us a few options for each. (Ex: 30 min. 1 hr, 2 hr, 3v3, 6v6, 9v9).
I personally think the gm and officers should choose who is allowed in from the guild, aswell as being able to accept a challenge(by putting up their own gold if they are not the gm). If they can kick people, y not accept a challenge?
However I am against platinum being used for wagers. Seeing as how the current plan is for only the gm to be able to accept challenges, this could become a significant plat burden upon the gm. Especially if a guild participates in multiple challenges per day. While i realize many of the latest updates to the game have $ incentives through plat spending (housing, pet animacy), pvp has always been free to enter and should remain so. Paying platinum just to accept a challenge from a guild is not something I will ever find myself doing.
As for the challenges themselves, someone has mentioned the ability to counter propose a challenge with regards to the gold reward, player number and time. I think this would be a great feature should it be implemented. I also think there needs to be a limit on how much 1 guild can challenge another to avoid spam, maybe only 1 active challenge at a time regardless if its accepted and ongoing or sitting idle.
Personally I would love to see a 1v1 option for the guild challenges. Put up your best individual fighters against an entire enemy guild to see if any of them can beat you. Also swap players between your own team to make it a guild oriented battle.
Thats all I've got for now
Click My Signature to Check Out My YouTube Channel.
Warning: Any Beggars Will Be Put On Ignore List
Click My Signature to Check Out My YouTube Channel.
Warning: Any Beggars Will Be Put On Ignore List
On the topic of large guild wars (up to 10 vs 10 and above), a problem that should be pointed out is visual effects of: pet passive attacks, pet arcane abilities and player skills; which all obstruct player identification.
With such a large amount of players present, I don't think the red and blue circles at the foot of players currently present in PvP for team identification will be a good idea.
Alongside the circles, allowing a red and blue version of the vanity that was awarded for khalizzas (I think this was their name) PvE contest or heraldic set to be automatically equipped to players when they enter the zone should solve this.
The vanity should be automatically removed upon exiting the zone.
Last edited by Breakingbadxx; 08-05-2016 at 11:15 AM.
I would support something like this, a very reasonable compromise.
Personally im against class restrictions because as a twink, we just don't have the problems endgamers have, and class restrictions to solve their problems, at the dispense of twinks by creating new problems for us is not a satisfactory solution for the community as a whole to the imbalance endgamers currently face imo.
Rogues before the arc weapons were the strongest class in twinks, after the arc weapons, i havent done much testing, but I have no doubt they will be on par with tanks, if not better, while mages while likely be getting the short end of the stick. My friends and I have beaten 3 tank lineups in tdm using 3-4 rogues. In fact we tend to have more rogue heavy lineups than most due to our rogues being better. Mages are the least common class in twinks, and our guilds are smaller as is, so a class restriction would make it harder for us to fill up teams.
Its impossible to say im just trying to preserve tank/rogue stacks because they are far from optimal. It just happens to be the case that tanks/rogues are more common than mages.
But +1 for store bought "betting kits" or whatever they would be called as a subsitute for having to spend plat to wager on a guild battleground
Length of Skirmishes
Players should be allowed to select how long each skirmish will last. Provide a list, say 15 minutes, 30 minutes, 45 minutes, and 60 minutes.
Number of Players
Skirmishes should be a minimum of 3v3 up to a maximum of 10v10. Less than three doesn't provide enough impetus for a skirmish. More than 10 would feel a little pointless and a lot chaotic.
Caveats:
- Each side is required to have the the minimum number players to begin the skirmish.
- Once the skirmish begins, the maximum number of players on each side cannot exceed the original number the skirmish began with.
- Players can be swapped during skirmishes.
The 3v3 option will let smaller guilds participate in the new system as well! I think it's important to be as inclusive as possible.
War Format
Multiple skirmishes that are part of a larger war would be the the best option, in my opinion. Guild Masters set up the maximum number of skirmishes in advance, which should always an odd number. Allow GMs to select from a list, say 3, 5, 9, 15, and 25. Whichever guild wins half +0.5 of the number of set skirmishes, that guild wins the war and gets the prize.
For example, <Fluffy> and <Scraggly> go to war with one another. The GMs decide to set the maximum number of skirmishes to 3. The guilds fight and each wins one skirmish. On the 3rd and final skirmish, <Fluffy> prevails and wins the war.
<Skraggly>'s honor is impugned, so they challenge <Fluffy> to another war, this time the max skirmishes are set to 25. They are evenly matched, and after a grueling battle, <Skraggly> rejoices when it narrowly achieves 13 skirmish victories over <Fluffy>.
This way, the war goes on for as long as it takes for all the necessary skirmishes to be fought.
Player Selection
The GM or officers should be granted the ability to invite players from their guild, similar to the party system. GM's have to set up the war, but officers should also be allowed to set up a skirmish.
Stacking Issue
With the option of having up to 10 players on the same side, the risk of a stacking stalemate is extremely high. As with current clashes in CTF, the team that stacks the most and the best will win every time. A stack of 10 warriors or 10 mages (or 5 warriors AND 5 mages) would destroy the fun and wreck the game. I posted a suggestion to fix this very issue, implementing a rule of Diminishing Returns, which could help to discourage stacking as a strategy.
Last edited by Niixed; 08-06-2016 at 03:43 PM.
Member Arlorian Realtors Association
Good idea Garry! :-)
10v10?
That will make player farm 1by1 in spawn
Hope simple map pvp like a duels map for guild bettleground
Btw when your planning this system update ?
Thanks.
If we could integrate storyline to why theres guild war it would be great! Like, Arlorians allied themselves in guilds and helped each other to succeed, and strive for the better future. But the mysterious dark force that pushed the evil in Arlor made its move again. Earlier it affected Jarl, opened gates of hells for Mardom, made Captain Redtide haunt the seas, unleashed Inan'hesh, Tarlok, Ursoth, and other malevelent beings upon the land of Arlor! And now its affecting the heroes of the Arlor to fight each other in a cataclysmic clash of power to rule the the land forever.........
....will the Arlor be smited into oblivion? Or a guild of heroes will rise and unify the divide nation as one and spread peace once again.....
I just felt the RPG should never left the storyline behind, because its RPG...
Last edited by kinzmet; 08-07-2016 at 11:53 AM.
Love the idea of a guild battle been waiting for this for a long time but I don't agree on paying plat to wager a small gold fee im a guild master so I can understand but what if u dont buy plat or the free plat offers dont work for u? What if u had no plat could u pay extra gold instead of the plat fee? I buy plat maybe once a month and I use all if it to merch items or deeds
9v9, 12v12, & 15v15 is good. And instead of or maybe in addition to class restrictions, you could include a maximum # of a certain class. Limiting skirmishes to 2 or 3 warriors per team would be good. A map full of lava spouts from 10 warriors with glintstone set isn't fun for anyone.
Also, I would like my guild kdr tracked of course ^_^
Click My Signature to Check Out My YouTube Channel.
Warning: Any Beggars Will Be Put On Ignore List
We need a room to spectate/spectating mode
I was thinking that how a clash without rogue, i think its took alot of time. In my brackets nearly all clash always use 1-2 rogue instead of mage, in my brackets mage only a supporter as they should do.
In my opinion if they stack mage at same time they got unlimited mana, but try to counter it using 2 war 1 rog 1 mage squad, its much better than 1 war 3 mage, me myself only use 3 mage 1 war if clash againts 4 warr, since there was alot of heal in them rogue aim wont hurt so much so i think wwe need stun
I usually run with 2 mage(i was one of them) and 2 rog since it was the fastest way to kill an enemy in clash without war
Click My Signature to Check Out My YouTube Channel.
Warning: Any Beggars Will Be Put On Ignore List
So lets say its 10 v 10. One guild gets 11 kills on an uneven battlefield eg 7 v 4. The rest join. Its 10 vs 10 and the winning team all 10 of them die and stay dead for the rest of the duration. What now?
Bookmarks