Page 16 of 17

Re: A vision of Cho (Golden age)

Posted: Wed Oct 11, 2006 3:54 pm
by spoloh
Well we have spoken about the attack ratio (additional number of attackers per q of OP that has to be discussed in more detail)

And Yes I think the warriors of balance should help either attackers or defenders, depending on whos side (having the +attack ratio in mind) is underpowered.

If there are not enough balance warriors to help the outnumbered defenders at their 4am time, well we always have the DEFENCE phase of Op fight don't we :)

And yes there has to be a lot of them for this to work... in both timezones too...

Re: A vision of Cho (Golden age)

Posted: Wed Oct 11, 2006 3:55 pm
by vladww
aardnebb wrote: Of course its interesting how people on the winning side are so happy with the challenges of this "epic war", and see no need to balance things.
This is probably the most puzzling bit of all these OP threads:

Being part of the growing winning faction/alliance for months & months,
not seeing any challenges or sense of danger for more months ahead..
Well that would bore me of PvP for years ;)

Re: A vision of Cho (Golden age)

Posted: Wed Oct 11, 2006 3:56 pm
by sehracii
So what sto stop a small guild from competing with a large guild by taking advantage of the balance force?

Should a 10 person guild have as equal chance at taking a Q250 OP as a 30 person one?

Re: A vision of Cho (Golden age)

Posted: Wed Oct 11, 2006 3:59 pm
by spoloh
Nope of course not. The guild in attack should field AT LEAST AS MANY WARRIORS as the defending side to prove themselves worthy of this op...

imho that is :)

And the balance forces will also look at this and not agree to help a small guild trying to take advantage of them.

Re: A vision of Cho (Golden age)

Posted: Wed Oct 11, 2006 4:00 pm
by sehracii
vladww wrote:This is probably the most puzzling bit of all these OP threads:

Being part of the growing winning faction/alliance for months & months,
not seeing any challenges or sense of danger for more months ahead..
Well that would bore me of PvP for years ;)
That's because I don't consider outposts a PvP-only feature. It is a social feature for me, interacting with allies, trading, garnering support.

And there is still plenty of PvP challenge every time I participate in an attack. We haven't won one in months, how much more challenge do you want?

And there HAS been danger, recent attack in Void progressed to defense phase, it doesn't go much further without actually losing.

I think the overall problem is people just don't want to attack. Battles rarely happen at all, so of course few will be won and things will be stagnant.

Re: A vision of Cho (Golden age)

Posted: Wed Oct 11, 2006 4:09 pm
by sehracii
spoloh wrote:Nope of course not. The guild in attack should field AT LEAST AS MANY WARRIORS as the defending side to prove themselves worthy of this op...

imho that is :)

And the balance forces will also look at this and not agree to help a small guild trying to take advantage of them.
So reverse it. A large guild attacks a smaller guild, they should have an advantage, but they don't, as the Balance Force evens things out.

How exactly do you tell the size of a guild? Guild roster is pretty useless most of the time.

Re: A vision of Cho (Golden age)

Posted: Wed Oct 11, 2006 4:24 pm
by spoloh
Hmm what if a guild presents their ranks to a certain "balance warriors" officer at the convenient (for the guild) time just before the op fight? :)

Well it's just a suggestion :)

Re: A vision of Cho (Golden age)

Posted: Wed Oct 11, 2006 4:26 pm
by riveit
vladww wrote:This is probably the most puzzling bit of all these OP threads:

Being part of the growing winning faction/alliance for months & months,
not seeing any challenges or sense of danger for more months ahead..
Well that would bore me of PvP for years ;)
Since May 1st we have had:

16 outposts transfers: (I think 3 or 4 were conquests and the rest handoffs.)

27 failed attacks on outposts: (I would guess ~6 close and exciting battles here)

Personally, I have always wanted more dynamic outposts where the npc defender threshold would drop to zero and also marauders would attack at random times.

Re: A vision of Cho (Golden age)

Posted: Wed Oct 11, 2006 4:27 pm
by aardnebb
sehracii wrote:That's because I don't consider outposts a PvP-only feature. It is a social feature for me, interacting with allies, trading, garnering support.
Perhaps you can hang other stuff around it, but a dog in an evening gown is still a dog. Trading is great when your OP churns out valuable but cheap to pruduce items that sell for 400 q250 grind mats a stack, allies are wonderful when there are more of them than enemies.

But if your guild doesnt like being forced into PvP confrontations, then you cant really take part, can you?

Oh, unless you are like Guardians of Jena... hey where do I sign up for the "defend my 6 person guild's q200 OP cos I got a karavan name and affiliation" program.

Re: A vision of Cho (Golden age)

Posted: Wed Oct 11, 2006 4:38 pm
by spoloh
Mates please :)

That is all very nice information that you share here but it really has nothing to do with Cho and the initial post...

And keep the flames down aswell. Dogs and kara/kami scum belong in other thread not this one please ;)