Greetings, glorious testers!
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest news on Alpha Two.
Check out general Announcements here to see the latest news on Ashes of Creation & Intrepid Studios.
To get the quickest updates regarding Alpha Two, connect your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Comments
They use their points to 'vote'.
The idea evolved along the topic and became: pvp score feeds the gladiator
There's tactics then there is strategy, a score is not going to show us who the general creating the strategy is nor is it going to tell us who is on the ground executing parts of the strategy.
And it's a military node, and also despite its name, it's just going to take more than an understanding of PvP to run that particular node.
This would just prioritize millennial basement dwellers mooching off their parents.
Actually I didn't see this, in this scenario the tournament idea is essentially pointless and would only be if the devs wanted a specific battle instance.
The official Intrepid's idea today is that along the month people will run quests and make their gladiator stronger, then in the election day people will fight in free-for-all matches using their gladiators. The upside is they will be all using of the same class, avoiding hard counters and meta builds. The downside is no one has any idea about what kinda quests there will be, almost always quests as dumb and boring, the second downside is that players may rig the outcomes (which is not bad), so you could end up fighting by yourself against multiple people just to take you out.
The arena thing is fun, having a standard gladiator instead of using the characters is fantastic!
But I truly question this structure of quests for upgrading the gladiator, if I ever get to choose I would opt for making people grow their numbers in the monthly PvP ranking and from this ranking sort out how strong your gladiator is.
If people have to do quests and dailies, then participating in a mayor election will be just pure grind and sad torment. My opinion is: people should have their fun across all PvP activities and just by playing the game, they will farm enough PvP points to help in the election of the military mayor.
I think the champion idea is a good one. I correctly understand that the node type is random? That is, let's say there is a large clan, and in this clan there is an excellent leader who can organize people, works well in the game, has good authority, and in general is a cool guy, but he is a bad pvp player. This clan enters the game, develops their node and they get a military node. And it turns out that a good leader will not be able to become a mayor, because he is bad at pvp?
Now the leader has 2 options
1) it will be a fake mayor from a clan that obeys the real leader
2) or if a player not from the clan becomes the mayor, then the leader collects his belongings and leaves the node. downgrade node.
The champion system will solve this problem, a smart leader will look for a champion of a strong player from the clan
The current system ensures that all archetypes have a fair shot at mayor, so that skill counts rather than simple archetype choice. If all players start with an equal footing, you'll get the better PvP'ers coming out on top regardless, and that's what this election type is about.
Not if
There are 4 types of nodes:
Eacho node type has it's own way of electing a mayor
In today's model, the mayor in military node is decided in the PvP arena, everybody will use a generic gladiator in the fight, this generic gladiator is called champion. This is really good.
WhatI am saying is that the way you would upgrade your champion is through PvP around the world, instead of running quests like how Intrepid announced.
And if it's not all about kills, then how do you determine the amount of points allocated to each activity? And can you be sure that you've accounted for each activity?
Giving everybody equal access to demonstrate their skills in the arena is the better option. Currently, they've chosen to do this via quests open to everybody. But, this will be tested to death in Alpha-2 to determine its effectiveness.
That's pretty much Steven's fault
Because in AoC the pvp score is not fed by damaged gear on the kill. If there was a PvP score based on how much gear damage you or your party dealt on that kill, shared by the party, then clerics would be fine.
Makes sense?
Let's say you are in a party as healer, it is a 4 people party, then your party delivers a killing blow on another player... so he dies and he gets gear damage. Since he is a level 50 using very expensive gear, it will cost him 20,000 gold to fix his gear.
So, 4 people party divided by 20,000 gold equals 5,000 gold in damages by player.
This could be measured and a score can easily be done based on this, so in PvP all support classes in the party would have their fair share of score and rewards when there's rewards on the table.
Makes sense?
If the community is in for this, we should start asking this early on when the game is still in alpha.
Nowadays support classes can score by running pvp objectives in the structured pvp with his party/guild, we don't know if the pvp ranking system will reward the rest of the party yet.
In a siege, if both the mayor and a proven combat leader are tussling for the role of leadership, literally everyone will follow the proven leader, regardless of if they have a position.
Likewise, if it comes down to listening to your mayor or guild leader, it will be your guild leader every time - your guild leader has the ability to remove you from your guild, the mayor does not have the ability to remove you from your node.
Being mayor is about bragging rights mostly.
What about if they also had something similar to the NCAA Basketball Tournament with random opponents in the first round, double elimination maybe?
1v1 balancing will be rps, but I'm sure that there'll be an archetype or two that have way higher chances against their supposed superiors, so I don't think that adding normal classes to the champion pool would work.
I did like the idea of investing points into your champion to have different builds, so the base abilities might be the same, but each person would have their own special build to utilize those abilities. Some will follow the meta and some will try to break it.
I rather a decent player, not necessarily the best but manages a node extremely well be a mayor.
If all military nodes end up failing - that's just part of the server's story.
All the mayor activities are nothing compared to preparing the node for sieges and wars, this is why a military mayor should be experienced in many kinds of pvp. Taxes, building stuff, policies for harvesting more wood... this is nothing!
Sieges will be meta for all mayors, because if the node falls then it will be completely destroyed
That's not really how running a city, node, or township works.
City defense is only one aspect of running a node.
Granted, we have fuck all knowledge of the purpose of a military node. But all nodes still need to run and meet their purpose.
..and nothing in this thread illuminates to us the player, of the mayors strategical and tactical acumen other than they can maybe win a duel or score some points.
The best PvPer doesn't always make the best tactician or best strategist.
Just like it doesn't mean they will be a good mayor.
Mayors will pretty much sit on their asses and they will only worry about stuff when there's a siege against them, other them that any "administrative skill" is irrelevant
No one cares if you are a "good administrator" if you have no idea how to set up a PvP defense and the node gets destroyed and ramsacked
All "administrativa" things come under PvP
If military node leadership is based on a Battle Royal, then teaming is going to be part of that battle. That's not necessarily a bad thing. The person with the best PvP support team will win. That implies the winning person will be part of a group with multiple good PvP'rs to help run things.
Politics will also play a role here, as a truly disliked person will have multiple factions gun for them "Whatever happens, don't let Snidely Backstabber win!". Also, someone who has been a bad mayor in the past can be taken out.
Champions will have to be the way they go, as much as I would rather play my own character. Otherwise you will get an ultra-tank with 5 pocket healers as the winner. Or a stealther just avoiding combat. Also, Bards would be at a serious disadvantage
Now, the compromise I think would work best is that come tournament day, the top XX highest people by monthly military score qualify to fight in the Battle Royale. This way slackers can't just jump in at the last minute. You have to work to qualify, as do the people you hope will be on your "team".
At the momment the idea is on: PvP score feeds the gladiator for the arena
Anyway, people will always be like "oh, but then people will just this or just that", it's always "just" no matter what is said
No one knows what the function of a mayor is, because it's never been explained into great depth. Not to mention the mayor of a military node.
And still, none of the suggestions I've seen really highlight or demonstrate tactical and strategic acumen.
There is no reason to inherently assume a mayor will lead a siege defense.
They absolutely might, without a doubt. However, it is only a "might", as opposed to something players should expect.
No one really cares if a mayor doesnt know how to set up a good defense, because someone else will probably be doing it anyway.