Page 3 of 3
Re: What kind of outposts would you prefer?
Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 8:01 am
by certago
prefer:
Allianz vs Alliance
allows non-pvp guilds to get and keep OPs through their ally-guilds
allows large scale battles
need:
alliance-system with
- extra alliance hall (like guild hall but a lot bigger) which can be accessed bei Guildleaders only
- alliance chat channel to make daily communication easier
- alliance pvp-flag similar to kami/karavan flag to allow inter-religious support within the alliance
Re: What kind of outposts would you prefer?
Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 9:50 am
by praha
How about leaving the OP's in game as they are now. Allowing the 2nd phase of OPs to be introduced in a GvG setting. Of course the way OP's are set up now are still (almost 1 yr later) in beta form. For any GvG setting Guilds themselves need to be tweaked. Leaving a guild should ban you from any guild invites for 2 weeks. What's currently stopping everyone zerging the attacking/defending guild?
So in a nutshell: Guilds still need tweaking. OP's still need tweaking. Articles of War don't seem to be working from what I've read on the last OP battle. So don't expect GvG anytime soon. It is a nice idea IMO.
Re: What kind of outposts would you prefer?
Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 11:14 am
by rundll32
where is the tickbox for just as it is now, which gives everyone the choice to play how they please.
Re: What kind of outposts would you prefer?
Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 11:25 am
by grimjim
rundll32 wrote:where is the tickbox for just as it is now, which gives everyone the choice to play how they please.
That would be FvF.
Its missing a 'non-PvP' option too

Re: What kind of outposts would you prefer?
Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 11:30 am
by johntf
grimjim wrote:
Its missing a 'non-PvP' option too
What we play Matisian Chess over the game ?
Queen Kizerak to Yubo 7, checkmate! And the op is mine....
Re: What kind of outposts would you prefer?
Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 11:45 am
by dakhound
johntf wrote:What we play Matisian Chess over the game ?
Queen Kizerak to Yubo 7, checkmate! And the op is mine....
nah yuboball!!!
I can imagine some non-PvP ways I must admit, however I would bore of them quickly and most of them are time sinks
not attacking you Jy (just so you dont misunderstand me) but how would it work in your opinion non PvP, PM me if you dont wanna post here and risk a full scale war again lol
also maybe one to half please everyone, you can declare how you want to attack, and the defending side could declare how they would like to defend. this keeps the alliances important but also means mechanics for GvG allowed
Re: What kind of outposts would you prefer?
Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 11:52 am
by xeraphim
Hmmm.
I would like both Alliance and GvG to be possible..
however .. if they insist on introducing spires maybe they could change the dynamic...
What if..
The OP battle itself was Guild versus Guild
But elsewhere in the region the spires could be used to aid the attackers or defenders by the rest of thier alliances. Such as slowing or increasing guard pops, buffs etc...
Sort of an AvA capture the flag that can influence the battle at the OP.
It *could* also give diggers and crafter an opprtunity to affect the battle - Perhaps working on building or dismantling a spire whilst warriors defend / attack it? or creating / disrupting supply lines to the battleing Guilds in some way..
Not at all sure on this (its only and idea) *IF* done correctly and balanced right i think it could be great fun.
remember just an "idea" thats popped into my head.
At the moment spires seem to have been put on the back burner / canned .. (good thing if you ask me.. the current idea behind them was a little worrying) so this is just me daydreaming really.
Re: What kind of outposts would you prefer?
Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 1:31 pm
by grimjim
dakhound wrote:not attacking you Jy (just so you dont misunderstand me) but how would it work in your opinion non PvP, PM me if you dont wanna post here and risk a full scale war again lol
Bah, can post 'em here.
Taking PvP to mean only combat and eliminating that option...
Harvester Vs Harvester - Impress the tribe/civ/faction with your mad digging skillz.
Crafter Vs Crafter - Impress the tribe/civ/faction with your mad crafting skillz.
Mission Vs Mission - Grind your fame with the tribe that holds the OP, whoever currently has the highest fame (it decays at an increasing rate the more you have) gets the output.
Taking PvP to mean ANY kind of conflict and eliminating that.
Civilisation OPs - New mini-towns centred around a drill spot (like goldmining towns in the old west) you earn crystals and other rewards on these 'mega spots' by doing missions or turning in materials/crafted items. The more you contribute the larger and better the town gets and the more rewards it gives for missions. A simpler version could be done with existing OPs.
Factions OPs - Mini towns in a Kami/Karavan stylee, otherwise as above but you earn honour points for missions instead which can be traded for different things depending how big the mini-town has grown. A simpler version could be done with existing OPs.
Tribe OPs - As above.
Re: What kind of outposts would you prefer?
Posted: Thu Oct 12, 2006 1:49 pm
by sprite
sehracii wrote:If we know which system would please the most players it will make it a lot easier to discuss the finer details.
Caveat: Most
forum users who haven't given up on everything OP-related
