There is a MASSIVE issue right now where there are a select few gigantic companies that control 90%-100% of the map and smaller/newer companies have no shot. I do NOT think removing those companies abilities to do so is the right way.
Taking and holding windsward/brimstone/everfall requires at least 50 really good players which on most servers earn 7 digits gold per week. Whereas reekwater, weavers fen, restless shore, mourningdale, first light, cutlass keys only earn a few hundred thousand yet still require at least 10 really good players to be able to hold the territory.
Why? I understand that the 50 person roster has been a thing since the game released, but now with all the changes to mercenary limits and war cooldowns it just makes taking and holding a territory impossible if you’re not the top 2/3 companies on the server.
Idea: change the roster limits to below
Brimstone/Windsward/Everfall: 50 man rosters (25 ATK mercs, 10 DEF mercs)
Brightwood/Monarchs/Ebonscale: 40 man rosters (20 ATK mercs, 10 DEF mercs)
RW/FL/CK/RS/MD/WF: 30 man rosters (10 ATK mercs, 5 DEF mercs)
This would allow smaller PVP companies to consolidate rosters easier and compete for the worse territories, slowly building themselves up to be able to compete with higher tiered territories. This would NOT remove the ability for strong companies to own multiple territories as many people want to suggest (which is a horrible idea). This would allow competition to be dynamic on each server and while there might be a company with a strong 50 man roster, that doesn’t mean they can just walk over a company with a strong 30 man roster.
Anyone who wants to say “just get better” or “just join a big company then” completely missed the point. I’ve met countless players who are really good at pvp yet are completely turned off by the idea of being in a 100 man company.
I always thought that the territories are poorly made, poorly delimited.
I mean they are all roughly the same size.
Each of the territories of the initial cities should be divided into at least 4 small territories, and these should only be disputed by clans with less than 20 members.
Likewise, these territories should not generate income and only be intended for some small companies to have their own place.
In addition, the CLAN HALL must also exist, it is inadmissible that they do not exist in the NW.
Perhaps it’s time to change wars from being a 50 v 50 to 25v 25, or less? It’s easier to manage and easier for new players to get into them then. War as it is now, is a failed game mode that stopped being fun after the first month when people realised that cannons were worthless and instead it was better to use all war horns.
Personally, I think we should remove territory control completely and have wars as a cross-server, ranked game mode that can be queued any time of the day or night while using leaderboard wins to determine payouts - that being said I doubt we will see that till next year. In the meantime lowering the players needed for both sides would encourage smaller companies to participate in the game mode, increase the number of companies available to war against each other and make it a lot more accessible by most players.
I would also suggest buffing cannons and limiting the number of war horns to two.
I honestly don’t think that’s the play. There are two problems that are addressed in your post that I think can be solved in better ways.
1.) Wars being exclusive and the gap between established and developing companies is too great.
Solution: Practice Wars where companies can challenge each other to Wars on a predetermined zone of combat and time, with all the same rules and restrictions, without having to own a territory or push a territory and no territory changes ownership. Its completely simulated. Bonus would be to have free consumables. This would allow for companies to practice, improve, and engage in the large scale combat without all of the problems without having to push the strongest companies in the server.
2.) Companies that prefer to remain small have no meaningful group PvP content.
Solution: Enable Custom OPRs where one company can challenge another company to OPR matches. Each side would be able to completely control their 20 man roster, assign roles, and implement a strategy. This would allow for a similar level of skill and organizational possibilities as War but include smaller companies and even players that aren’t 100% PvPers if a company wants, since there are PvE related tasks involved.
Neither of these ideas require fundamental changes to the game. Its the same War game and the same OPR game just put in the hands of the players.
Divide the territories into the three teirs you suggested, I believe that’s by value?
A company can only attack at their teir or higher. Can not Dec down.
Once a company takes a higher teir territory, they cannot defend the lower teir territories any more. They basically give it up. Alternatively, ags could have them forfeit the lower teir territories and companies can buy them like at start of servers… this would be a huge gold sink. But would give companies with no chance in hell right a chance to own a territory. Maybe a percent of the money goes to the company vacating?
You could own all theee top teir but can no longer Dec on the lower teirs.
I know a lot of people would hate not being able to Dec or have any offensive wars if they owned all three teir s territory, but this would give companies space to grow and get better.
My only concern is this would codify the skill gaps between the teirs of companies… but think of the statement for a teir a company to break into the s teir… could be really cool.
This is so sad. I feel like there are a lot of good ideas here but the dev team is incapable of enacting a single one of them. Instead they will add another world boss ad nauseam.
Reducing the size has a lot of benefits, but comes at the cost of being massive. You are talking about reducing it by 50%, which moves it into less than opr level of battle size.
I suggested “war rolling”, a concept where companies can maintain multiple wars against people at the same time and have different reasons to war, from taking a zone, to just hunting and killing each other with an optional third “surrender” fee.
I know this is a hot take, but I think wars should be a random collection of players from each faction. It would be more inclusive and landowning companies would not have such an extreme advantage. If your faction wins, the entire faction gets rewards as long as they logged on during a certain period of time before/during the war. It would make people excited when their faction wins.
For competitive players, I would introduce cross-server company versus company wars. I’d add a ranking system and seasonal tournaments (like march madness brackets) for rewards (mostly cosmetics).
I think there should still be a massive advantage to owning territories, there should just be ways for smaller companies to compete without having to merge with other companies playing with people they normally wouldnt play with
It will always just snowball (wealth → better gear → holding zone - >more wealth). These people basically need to stop playing before someone new can take their spot.
As i said, a “Reforge” system would fix this. It would only need to meet a few key requirements.
Only cost azoth to reforge a perk on an item
Should allow full perk changes
Should probably require some profession based system of “learning” a perk to unlock it for reforging, so its not just day one everyone has the perks they want. consuming gear or the original craft mod with any perk relative would be good.
should not have any cd to reforge the perks itself.
The system should be designed in a way that allows people to freely experiment and express themselves.
The above system would correct the gear/power differential, but we still have the nasty politics behind getting on a war roster.
War needs to be redesigned from the ground up. Company control of territories is a complete failure. It needs to be readjusted to faction control not company. And two revolving hourly OPR/war style 50v50 pvp fights in randomized territories to gain influence. 200players an hour can participate with 4800 daily players can join said activity. It removes the exclusivity and tedious war rostering. Let the queue be decided by gear alone. X light builds, X medium builds, X heavy builds, X healing builds.
At the end of each week the faction with the most territory gains the control and thus the perks. The town buffs should be randomized excluding crafting buffs. Which need to be removed altogether or shifted to a PVE activity for yet another buff to get people to 590-600 craft score.
Wars involve too many people.
50 vs 50 is a game mode that is meant to make people drive away.
We are talking about that there are servers with player peaks of 400, in a war 25% of the server would be participating, it is nonsense.
1- The monetary benefit that gives ownership of the territories by companies must cease to exist. (The rewards should only be cosmetic, momentary mounts, titles…)
2- The territories must be smaller, at least they must be divided into 4 each territory.
3- Wars must be less people 25 vs 25
4- CLAN HALL must exist and that these can only be disputed by small companies.
5- The number of members of the clan must define if they can dispute a territory or a Clan hall.
6- The factions must cease to exist. And give way only to the clans.
Maybe, but you know that I also thought that in a big company it’s wrong that it’s always the same players attacking and defending.
I would add a:
7- In the same company, only 5 players from the last war can be repeated, the rest must be other members of the clan (unless it is clear that it is in defense of the conquered territory).