kyesmith wrote:You honestly think its good for the game to have one "super guild" owning all the outposts when they only make up lets say a 50% population?
I hate to say "I told ya so...."
No wait...I LOVE IT!
This is the very nature of PvP for land. The most powerful guild/faction/alliance/etc ends up owning just about everything. Aris has been remarkable in the cooperation and restraint that has been shown. But, in the end, this is the only way it could possibly play out.
Every PvP for land system I have ever heard of has turned out like this.
As to how to fix it...well...that would take development and changes and we all know *that* won't happen. The other servers have been owned by the kami for months (strangely, hardly anyone complains about the kami dominance of Cho). If it were going to be improved, it would have been by now.
But, let's say (because I enjoy the conversation) we had some magicall pot of money, and a company that cared about the game enough to fix it. Any idea that involves limiting fighting for the OP (of defending it from mauraders) to just the two guilds involved won't work. Why? Two reasons:
1. The largest Guild would end up owning everything (way worse than the largest alliance).
2. Guild leaders would be replaced by alts on the roster, and players would just shift guilds to help thier allies.
Any idea that invlovles limiting battles to a certain number of players on each side won't work, as it limits player involvement to the same people every time, and the side that can field the most armies can simply show up at multiple battles at the same time.
Any idea that tries to limit which OPs a guild can own based on race or geography can't work, because how would the game decide? Will it be 'where the GH is' or 'which race are the majority of the members' or 'to which civ have they declaired thier allegience?' All of those are pretty easy to change. 10 million for a new GH is less than the cost to challenge an outpost. A few alt characters can sway the racial make up of a guild. And a couple hour of quests, and all the sudden they are part of a new civ.
Some sort of controll on concurrent battles PLUS limiting the fight to the one guild PLUS limiting the numbers might make it more "balanced" (whatever that means this week). But it would limit the player actions to the point that almost no one would care.
riveit wrote:
I've always wanted more dynamism in the outpost system. A stagnant distribution of outposts is no fun and leads to big imbalances and belief in ownership of outposts. One of my favorite ideas is that once a week, a new outpost becomes available for drilling. The first one to notice it and declare can take it from marauders. A day later or so, an established drill dries up. Such a mechanism would allow outposts to move around somewhat without huge battles between alliances. Of course, the alliance battles would still occur.
This is the best idea so far.
"And you believe, despite knowing that the rest of the entire physical universe is nothing but a series of physical reactions, just pebbles bouncing down a board. The only object in fifteen billion light years in every direction that can choose rests inside the boney bowl atop your shoulders. Right?"
--David Wong
remove cats and mats from OPs (yap, no more PvP cause only ~5% of server population fight for fun and ~95% for cats). Everyone can have, lets say 5 stacks of cats every week, and some OP mats your choise too. They will appear in your apartment at beginning of every week