I don't know will I lose anything when killed by enemy players during guild war or siege, if I won't lose anything I like the idea, but I can take that if I'm farming or gathering for supplying my guild or city to win the war I can and should take the risk that I will lose X-100% what I farmed or gathered in past X minutes/hours.
But consider that some players are not so combative and able to enjoy pvp 24/7, I will say at least give some options for them like to flag themselves or leave war zone to have a small window to take a break or guild leaders and majors can set a break time for those players.
I believe this only means objective events during prime-time, the PvP outside of the objectives likely allows for resource looting.
Guild wars is mentioned its not just prime time stuff, unsure what prime time would mean in AoC. It makes no sense for open guild wars and xp loss and why something like that is included.
"objective-based-events" are only active during prime time established on the server. They are part of the guild war, and the main goal. However, up until that event happens there is 24/7 PvP between the guilds, but they arent an objective. So the penalties may apply there.
I very highly doubt you will have penalties during guild war at any point, and you are overly trying to separate it because of the wording used in that comment. That goes against the reward vrs risk as it removes the risk, causes a insane amount of xp lost and allowed griefing as you can just keep a dec up. Any pve player would leave the game.
I don't know will I lose anything when killed by enemy players during guild war or siege, if I won't lose anything I like the idea, but I can take that if I'm farming or gathering for supplying my guild or city to win the war I can and should take the risk that I will lose X-100% what I farmed or gathered in past X minutes/hours.
But consider that some players are not so combative and able to enjoy pvp 24/7, I will say at least give some options for them like to flag themselves or leave war zone to have a small window to take a break or guild leaders and majors can set a break time for those players.
I believe this only means objective events during prime-time, the PvP outside of the objectives likely allows for resource looting.
Guild wars is mentioned its not just prime time stuff, unsure what prime time would mean in AoC. It makes no sense for open guild wars and xp loss and why something like that is included.
"objective-based-events" are only active during prime time established on the server. They are part of the guild war, and the main goal. However, up until that event happens there is 24/7 PvP between the guilds, but they arent an objective. So the penalties may apply there.
I very highly doubt you will have penalties during guild war at any point, and you are overly trying to separate it because of the wording used in that comment. That goes against the reward vrs risk as it removes the risk, causes a insane amount of xp lost and allowed griefing as you can just keep a dec up. Any pve player would leave the game.
I am purely basing what I am saying off of what is on the wiki and the wording that is given. I am not saying "It is." I am simply saying "It may be"
@NiKr Now I ask you....how should a guilds power level be determined? Simply being a max level guild likely wouldnt accurately reflect the guilds true power
NiKr, Now I ask you....how should a guilds power level be determined? Simply being a max level guild likely wouldnt accurately reflect the guilds true power
That's up to Intrepid to decide. I saw it as a collection of several metrics like gear scores of members, levels of members, amount of members, previous achievements, social org positions of members. Shit like that. And combination of all of those things would indicate how much "score" a guild has, cause all those things combined show how much time the guild as a whole has put into the game.
NiKr, Now I ask you....how should a guilds power level be determined? Simply being a max level guild likely wouldnt accurately reflect the guilds true power
That's up to Intrepid to decide. I saw it as a collection of several metrics like gear scores of members, levels of members, amount of members, previous achievements, social org positions of members. Shit like that. And combination of all of those things would indicate how much "score" a guild has, cause all those things combined show how much time the guild as a whole has put into the game.
I can agree with that, but I also think the gear score should reflect the highest gear score a character has attained, that way they cant just all equip terrible gear before declaration for a discount
I can agree with that, but I also think the gear score should reflect the highest gear score a character has attained, that way they cant just all equip terrible gear before declaration for a discount
Yeah, I saw it as a "score is tracked at a peak and stays there for, say, a week".
I can agree with that, but I also think the gear score should reflect the highest gear score a character has attained, that way they cant just all equip terrible gear before declaration for a discount
Yeah, I saw it as a "score is tracked at a peak and stays there for, say, a week".
I say make it permanent. Getting around that is as easy as playing alts for a week while the guilds mains sit with junk gear. Allowing not only for resource gathering on an alt, but also a discount on the declaration when the time comes. Have to consider even the extreme loopholes.
How would a fully vertically leveled 30-50 member guild compete against a 300 member horizontally developed guild?
Oh, quite easily. Especially if they have the skill for it. I've seen small super strong guilds in L2 clear fucking hundreds of people. So it's definitely possible. But it will all depend on how Intrepid design their classes and anti-zerg mechanics and gear scaling and a ton of other details.
How would a fully vertically leveled 30-50 member guild compete against a 300 member horizontally developed guild?
No AoE cap helps when destroying zergs, also as someone who played in a hardcore zerging busting guild in GW2, its entirely possible with the proper game mechanics. Not to mention large max level guilds having less perks than small max level guilds seeing as they need to spend their guild perks on allowing for more members. hopefully they balance it out well so mega guilds are able to be dealt with and just having more numbers doesnt allow for the easy win
@NiKr Now I ask you....how should a guilds power level be determined? Simply being a max level guild likely wouldnt accurately reflect the guilds true power
There already is way to measure the strength of a guild. Just use that.
You win Guild Wars -> you climb in the ladder.
And it's the shittiest way to measure any guild's "power". Your current guild is in the trash stat-wise? Literally disband, make a new one with the same people and you'll have a clean slate. Works the same for the other side, if they want to bring their dec costs down.
There already is way to measure the strength of a guild. Just use that.
You win Guild Wars -> you climb in the ladder.
And it's the shittiest way to measure any guild's "power". Your current guild is in the trash stat-wise? Literally disband, make a new one with the same people and you'll have a clean slate. Works the same for the other side, if they want to bring their dec costs down.
@NiKr intrepid already confirmed that there will be a long progression path for guilds.
Disband and reform should preferably set them back months of progress.
Then there is the all the other things you lose: patronage over a node, castles, possible investments in guild halls/fortresses/guild perks/
NiKr intrepid already confirmed that there will be a long progression path for guilds.
Disband and reform should preferably set them back months of progress.
Yes, that's true, but that depends on their goals and the difficulty of reacquiring some of the benefits. If some guild are just mercs that only need their guild perks and a low "score" so that it's easier for them to dec someone, they might disband every so often to keep that score low. And if it's a huge guild that's all about their reputation on the server and their accolades speaking for them - obviously they wouldn't disband at all, but then I'd assume they wouldn't really care about the price of decs, because they'd only dec when its truly required or just get decced by other guilds who're trying to bring them down.
So by determining a guild's power just through their past deeds, you're giving more power to those who'd want to abuse such a system, while not really influencing anyone else, which, to me, creates an imbalance. Either way, all of this will be tested and we'll see how Intrepid design it further.
How would a fully vertically leveled 30-50 member guild compete against a 300 member horizontally developed guild?
If you are getting zerged you are getting zerged at the end of the day sometimes its not something you can win even if you get some additional perks. That is why its important and fun to have friends around and you bring some guilds together and beat back the zerg and it will feel hype.
@NiKr the duration it takes to progress through the guild path is unknown but it feels to me that it is rather certain that it will take a long time considering that ALL the other progression systems are designed to take weeks-months. (See Nodes, Leveling, Gear Progression, Artisan professions, Social Orgs).
This being a short lived progression would go directly against the long-term design they are using for all the other core aspects.
With this being said, i do see your point but ladder might just be one factor that is used.
@Mag7spy
I'd like to see a system where the guild that received the war declaration is the guild, that selects a victory condition. With a select few being very zerk unfriendly /favoring smaller guilds.
Seems like that would mitigate it to some degree and would add to the risk factor of declaring a war
@NiKr the duration it takes to progress through the guild path is unknown but it feels to me that it is rather certain that it will take a long time considering that ALL the other progression systems are designed to take weeks-months. (See Nodes, Leveling, Gear Progression, Artisan professions, Social Orgs).
This being a short lived progression would go directly against the long-term design they are using for all the other core aspects.
With this being said, i do see your point but ladder might just be one factor that is used.
@Mag7spy
I'd like to see a system where the guild that received the war declaration is the guild, that selects a victory condition. With a select few being very zerk unfriendly /favoring smaller guilds.
Seems like that would mitigate it to some degree and would add to the risk factor of declaring a war
Can't say much on victory condition stuff, unsure what they plan to do for that kind of stuff. I'd have to see their plans or a rough idea before I'd know what is right and such.
If you are a smaller guild you already get some advantages for buffs to begin with.
In my opinion this is awesome. The more recreational PvP I can participate in the better. This should also help to placate the fears some people have about others going corrupt to gank them. Someone like me who PvPs mostly for fun is going to do this way more often than they flag on greens. Any time spent killing other guilds in a war is time not spent killing greens for resources.
I say killing greens for resources is one of the most productive things a player can do. Won't be long until a large amount of those greens getting resources will be gold farmers and bots.
It'd be a bit of a ballache to have to keep declaring War every couple of days on your archenemy guild. I think Guild Wars should carry on until the guild leaders agree the end of it.
I wonder it's possible to declare was on a player specifically.
That way if a leader steps down and switches guild or just creates a new guild, you can still be at war with them.
I'll never forget the day he sieged my node.
0
Options
DygzMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
LMAO
No. You cannot declare war on a player character specifically. 1v1 is not a war.
Closest you can get to that is a Mayor making a player character an enemy of the Node.
3
Options
akabearMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Missed the memo on objective based guild wars.. I thought wars were just wars.
It'd be a bit of a ballache to have to keep declaring War every couple of days on your archenemy guild. I think Guild Wars should carry on until the guild leaders agree the end of it.
Except that's literally how Intrepid want their GWs. They don't want an endless war, which is why they decided to have a goal-based version of this feature.
As appealing as eternal war sounds, I can understand making these things finite and in a way be a resource sink. You can make your own sort of eternal war if you wish, as long as you have the materials to afford that luxury.
@NiKr Now I ask you....how should a guilds power level be determined? Simply being a max level guild likely wouldnt accurately reflect the guilds true power
Guild ladder
An inter-guild ladder will rank guilds based on their performance within competitive activities:[14][15]
Guild wars.[14][15]
Castle sieges.[14][15]
World bosses.[14]
There already is way to measure the strength of a guild. Just use that.
You win Guild Wars -> you climb in the ladder.
Declaring on a lower ranked guild should
cost more
punish you more if you lose
reward less if you win (potentially less than the declaration costs were in the first place, if there is a large enough margin)
That way, declaring on weak guilds just to fuck with them should be reduced by a large amount.
Don't really like the concept of this, guild wars should be socially driven with politics and such, not based on some kind of ranked leaderboard. All I see is a way to gain protection to and benefits to harass other guilds. Simply make a new guild and use that to your advantage to gain benefits.
It's very nice that the important events will only take place during prime time, but I believe we already knew that.
I like the Guild Wars free PKing (outside of prime time objectives if there even are any), but I dislike the Node war free PKing (outside of the prime time siege/objectives).
I'm not sure how Node Wars/Sieges will work, but I think it's worrisome if tryhard zerg Node X can declare a war on a not as tryhard zergless Node Y at 6 AM and have 10 to 1 players camping each gate of Node Y for 5 days straight making it even harder for them to defend their Node.
Of course that's realistic if you think about how real city sieges worked a thousand years ago, armies would simply lock down cities until they ran out of supplies. However, I'm not sure if that's such a good idea for a video game.
Hopefully Alpha 2 will be enough to test all of these things.
Comments
I very highly doubt you will have penalties during guild war at any point, and you are overly trying to separate it because of the wording used in that comment. That goes against the reward vrs risk as it removes the risk, causes a insane amount of xp lost and allowed griefing as you can just keep a dec up. Any pve player would leave the game.
I am purely basing what I am saying off of what is on the wiki and the wording that is given. I am not saying "It is." I am simply saying "It may be"
I can agree with that, but I also think the gear score should reflect the highest gear score a character has attained, that way they cant just all equip terrible gear before declaration for a discount
I say make it permanent. Getting around that is as easy as playing alts for a week while the guilds mains sit with junk gear. Allowing not only for resource gathering on an alt, but also a discount on the declaration when the time comes. Have to consider even the extreme loopholes.
No AoE cap helps when destroying zergs, also as someone who played in a hardcore zerging busting guild in GW2, its entirely possible with the proper game mechanics. Not to mention large max level guilds having less perks than small max level guilds seeing as they need to spend their guild perks on allowing for more members. hopefully they balance it out well so mega guilds are able to be dealt with and just having more numbers doesnt allow for the easy win
There already is way to measure the strength of a guild. Just use that.
You win Guild Wars -> you climb in the ladder.
Declaring on a lower ranked guild should
That way, declaring on weak guilds just to fuck with them should be reduced by a large amount.
@NiKr intrepid already confirmed that there will be a long progression path for guilds.
Disband and reform should preferably set them back months of progress.
Then there is the all the other things you lose: patronage over a node, castles, possible investments in guild halls/fortresses/guild perks/
So by determining a guild's power just through their past deeds, you're giving more power to those who'd want to abuse such a system, while not really influencing anyone else, which, to me, creates an imbalance. Either way, all of this will be tested and we'll see how Intrepid design it further.
If you are getting zerged you are getting zerged at the end of the day sometimes its not something you can win even if you get some additional perks. That is why its important and fun to have friends around and you bring some guilds together and beat back the zerg and it will feel hype.
This being a short lived progression would go directly against the long-term design they are using for all the other core aspects.
With this being said, i do see your point but ladder might just be one factor that is used.
@Mag7spy
I'd like to see a system where the guild that received the war declaration is the guild, that selects a victory condition. With a select few being very zerk unfriendly /favoring smaller guilds.
Seems like that would mitigate it to some degree and would add to the risk factor of declaring a war
Can't say much on victory condition stuff, unsure what they plan to do for that kind of stuff. I'd have to see their plans or a rough idea before I'd know what is right and such.
If you are a smaller guild you already get some advantages for buffs to begin with.
I say killing greens for resources is one of the most productive things a player can do. Won't be long until a large amount of those greens getting resources will be gold farmers and bots.
That way if a leader steps down and switches guild or just creates a new guild, you can still be at war with them.
I'll never forget the day he sieged my node.
No. You cannot declare war on a player character specifically. 1v1 is not a war.
Closest you can get to that is a Mayor making a player character an enemy of the Node.
I look forward to seeing the kind of objectives we have and how we achieve them.
2:58PM Hold
2:59PM HOOOOOOLLLLD
3:00PM RAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!
Don't really like the concept of this, guild wars should be socially driven with politics and such, not based on some kind of ranked leaderboard. All I see is a way to gain protection to and benefits to harass other guilds. Simply make a new guild and use that to your advantage to gain benefits.
I like the Guild Wars free PKing (outside of prime time objectives if there even are any), but I dislike the Node war free PKing (outside of the prime time siege/objectives).
I'm not sure how Node Wars/Sieges will work, but I think it's worrisome if tryhard zerg Node X can declare a war on a not as tryhard zergless Node Y at 6 AM and have 10 to 1 players camping each gate of Node Y for 5 days straight making it even harder for them to defend their Node.
Of course that's realistic if you think about how real city sieges worked a thousand years ago, armies would simply lock down cities until they ran out of supplies. However, I'm not sure if that's such a good idea for a video game.
Hopefully Alpha 2 will be enough to test all of these things.