final60 wrote:Yes but theres no reason why 20 of one side cant be just as good as 20 from another! Theres a far chance for both sides to beat each other. Having overwhelming numbers on one side, means there is nothing the other side can do, no amount of skill can beat that!
Maybe you should make more friends?
I am sub-par when it comes to lvls, my PvP skills are less than stellar, and a large portion of my gear is crafted from choice materials. However, I do have fun at the OP battles, and have sometimes actually managed to make an impact (however minor) on the outcome.
If OP battles were limited to X number of participants on either side, even on some complicated rotational basis, I can GUARANTEE you that I will never be asked to participate.
True, some OP battles are probably decided by sheer numbers, but this is not a problem with the mechanics of the system. It is important to remember that alliances are not built on game mechanics, and simply performing a faction rite does not guarantee you will be on the winning side. Factors like strategy, adapability, and persistance are also beyond the developers ability to control.
Capping participants would simply force an arbitrary limitation onto the system which doesn't make any more sense than it makes things more fair - Why not just implement some sort of faction affirmative action plan and just assign people faction alliance during character creation?
That said, I'm not entirely against some sort of battle configuration which involves limited numbers, but I don't think those battles should have as large an impact as having the OP change hands. Limited battles should reap limited rewards. Some sort of raid system, in which the winner might recieve an OP mat, a few stacks of crystals, or something of that scale might be interesting. Even then, I'd rather see development efforts spent elsewhere...