Ryzom

- Guilds are allowed to have at max 1 OP.
- Set a 1 month timer for all lvl 150 players. If you leave your guild you cannot join a next one untill timer is 0.
- Allow just one guild defending and one attacking in the OP war area.

All the rest of the system can stay in place as is.

Let's see what are the flaws in such a system.

arfindel wrote:- Guilds are allowed to have at max 1 OP.

agreed

arfindel wrote:- Set a 1 month timer for all lvl 150 players. If you leave your guild you cannot join a next one untill timer is 0.

I assume you mean 150+
15 days would be fairer as 1 month is quite restrictive, or simply make said person unable to op tag up for their guild in this period in attack only.

arfindel wrote:Allow just one guild defending and one attacking in the OP war area.

no, been discussed 1 billion times why outposts should NOT be GvG, you would remove all the politics and make alliances defunct.



to add to your post tho, I would like to see

outposts changed to a 1 round affair
declarer sets the time, defender then can change time by the amount of hours of the current TH (e.g TH8 = 8hrs)
3 days notice on all battles

and a personal favorite most would hate = DP @ battles (just for fun )

fine tunning could make it:
decide from lvl 150 to 200 to put a guild timer

and allow 1-3 attackers and 1-3 defenders no more.

The idea is avoid massive lag battles where skills don't matter, a lot of times gear doesn't matter either, and there is very little to none individual/guild responsability. Would also moderate the disbalance in area damage some of the ranged proffessions are bringing.

Avoid also - with minimum of implementation required - alliance/massive guilds monopole in controlling the OPs (on both sides), make OPs be held by active guilds. Give a chance to new guilds to win their own wars. Give back to guilds their individuality and pride. As it is now no guild can win/defend any OP.

Politics will stay in game, because a guild that's not sharing or doing bad things would be endlessly attacked by others untill they cannot defend anymore.

It would give pvp-ers a chance and you should be the first to know that. Best pvp guilds atm have no chance if they are not supported by one side in its enterty/ I mean even if political interest would make leaders of one side to support them they will still not win if the other people won't follow.

I am usually talking about neutrals not standing a chance in the game, but now if OPs are ment as a reward for pvp, let's face it: main pvp guilds never managed to win or defend their OPs in the last 1 year in Ryzom.

I would say make the max number of OPs a guild can hold 2-3. A large guild needs to be able to support their members and have a goal after they get the first OP.

I agree there should be a cool down time between guild hopping but this would also take some freedom out of the game.

I don't agree with the GvG OP only battles, this would just lead to mega guilds and I don't see that as a good thing.

Just my thoughts but I think it's good to talk about things like this, OPs could use a little work.

*Looks outside the box* Why couldn't "some" OP's be GvG? As it stands the current implementation of OP's is a bit stale imo. Having multiple methods by which to aquire them would be a nice way to add some much needed content. New guilds of fresh faces have little to no hope to aquire an OP without getting bowled over by Atysian politics and alliance BS. If I was scouting Ryzom to bring my guild from another game I'd say forget it I think some OPs should even be able to be aquired through non PvP means, like a "Dig-off". The trash talk for that in region would be truly humourous I would like to see Atys thrive once again and the current OP implementation as it stands most likely kills more subs then it creates, we need to remeber there are other flavors besides vanilla

Tut

I agree we should have some OPs with no PvP, OPs could be Tribe based where you do missions to keep the Tribe happy and fight off evil bandits.
Just need to add a way another guild could do more mission for the Tribe to take the Op.

i like tuts idea!

make 1 of the 200 and 1 of the 250 ops in each region GvG only.

since there are 2 of each in each land.

2 week cooldown after joining a guild before a player is elligable for any GvG OP battle.


Guilds can only own 1 "open out post" and 1 "GvG out post" total 2 Ops for a single guild

hows that?

perfect imo

In regards to "mega guilds", is two mega alliances any better? I agree it could be a problem but there must be ways to avoid this? Maybe battles of this nature could have debatable "terms" and such, for the number of players allowed to participate, length, ect. I think new players/guilds have to much of a feeling of being a "leaf in the wind" unable to affect anything with out getting close to half of atys to help.

Tut

Hello,

Hiding behind a n00b tag; this may already exist in some variation or another, but here goes anyway:

I think it would be would good to not have a "number" limit of OP's held by a guild, but rather use pre-reqs instead.

/sidenote

I now have an alt (new account), single peep, has a guild.
Compare to other mainstream games; EQ2, WoW - you need 5-6 peeps, lots of money, and in some cases, FAME.

/end sidenote


So lets stop the 1-3 peep OP's, forces the consolidation of guilds (anyone hear of the complaint about STORAGE hehe) and make different requirements to own 1x OP, 2x OP, 3x OP etc

without turning this post into the "owning a OP requirements list"; such examples could be - x number of accounts (not members, cause you could just create same account alts), and a rental fee of dappers AND a certain guild fame level.

As for GvG battles... if there 1 OP per guild was to happen... would OP holders really be motivated to attack another?
And even though you have more Guilds then OP's, outside of "true" guilds - the only ones left, are the 1-3 member storage guilds.... not going to be very productive or enjoyable for them trying to take over an OP owned by a 20-40 member guild eye?

Although if my first suggestion was implemented, then GvG for Outposts could be possible - with tweaks of course - maybe you have to PAY other guilds to help you hehe



And finally - the whole guild switching problem - definetly needs to be addressed; a time between leaving and rejoining guilds- and also a time between joining a guild and participating in PvP & OP.



anyway... definetly all good points/topics FAA, and look forward to seeing other peeps views


Cheers

forever wrote:I don't agree with the GvG OP only battles, this would just lead to mega guilds and I don't see that as a good thing.

But it could avoid almost incative guilds to continue owning the bests op, even if they are not able to defend it themselves against the original tribes.

Jackoba wrote:no, been discussed 1 billion times why outposts should NOT be GvG, you would remove all the politics and make alliances defunct.

create a guild, make it thrive without loosing members till you have a "mega guild" and you'll see that the needed work to make allies and keep them is peanuts. This is just the same work, but harder, the difference is you only have the same symbol over your head.