Game Feedback: Idea to solve Faction Balance

Hello there,

so far I have played on two servers and the Factions are not really balanced out. Most of the time the Syndicate Faction was dominating the Server. After a little research I read that this is the case on most servers with different factions dominating. This brought me to the Idea on how it would be possible to balance this out and give the opposing faction winning some territories back.

The Faction controlling the Territory should, like the recurring Housing-Tax, have a ‘Taxing’ Debuff that decreases the Health and Damage of the holding Faction and on the same time increase on opposing Faction inside Wars only. For Example:

The holding Faction will in the first 7 Days have 100% of its Health and Damage inside Wars.
On Day 8 - 12: Holding Faction: 99% Health and Damage / Attacking Faction: 101% Health and Damage.
On Day 13 - 18: Holding Faction: 98% Health and Damage / Attacking Faction: 102% Health and Damage.

Every 5 Days after the initial 7 Days this will help opposing Factions get a Chance of getting a hold on a territory. This will have a maximum Cap of 85% decrease and 115% Increase.

If this will not solve the balancing problem you can increase a bit the Debuff for example from a 1% drop/increase to a 2% and so on.

After a territory will change hands, the timer resets.

I hope you like this idea and feel free to give me your feedback on this.

Best regards
Kissare (Abaton EU)

as nice of an idea as that is because im on a syn dominated server, that could lead to a lot of bugs and other problems, and itd be really hard to put in with no way to properly test it either before hand, unless we can get the devs to have wars on a server lol

Thank you for your reply/feedback on my idea.

A solution could be a PTR-Server or for starters a handful of live servers of their choosing for the testing of this method.
But like all new things, this must be programmed and Bugs will be inevitable in the beginning.

actually having another server wouldnt be a bad idea and have pvp oriented player test it out. I know a lot of players would definitely be up for that, but they would have to make every player character lvl 60 for it to be an effective test with weapons and armour to match

1 Like

I really hope one of the developers will see this or take an interest in the approach.

Honestly, I think the dev team should yeet into exsitence a rule that simply limits people from transfering or rolling on a over-populated faction. Its something we wished we did in wow, but never did.

This rule you mentioned cant solve the current problem thou and is limiting peoples choice to play any faction on any server.
I think with the feedback I gave above there is no restriction for the players choosing.

I dont really see that as an issue for the most part. I would set it up so that there is a 10% variance, so even if one faction has 3% more, people can roll there until they out number the other factions by 10% or more.

The issue with your solution is now it just becomes the debuff is getting too strong let’s give up the territory and win it back to reset the debuff. That’s neither fun nor useful.

If anything it should be based on the number of territories your faction controls. so 5% damage/health increase per an extra territory during wars to whichever faction controls the least territory. Syndicate controls 6 territories and Marauders 1, Marauders get 25% additional damage/health during wars.

1 Like

That’s a good idea too. I could live with that.

My first concern with your suggestion is for servers which have two factions dominating. On my server territories are evenly distributed between Marauders and Syndicate with Covenant only owning two territories. The goal on my server would be Covenant owning more territories but your suggestion would give two of the three factions an advantage, rather than only Covenant. If Marauders held a territory for 11 days, both Syndicate and Covenant would gain an advantage. The change does nothing to help Covenant specifically.

My second concern is your change punishes the dominating faction(s) just for being better at the game. If Syndicate owns nearly all of the territories because they are better than the other two factions, don’t punish them. If Syndicate owns nearly all of the territories because no one wants to play Marauder or Convenant, you need to give all players an incentive to play them, even Syndicate players.

My only personal experience with a three faction system was ArcheAge. You had the Nuia Alliance, Haranya Alliance, and Pirates. Pirates were exiles of a previous faction and a limited number of players could exile themselves at a given time. They gained a number of advantages for being the underdog so to speak including a damage buff but at a cost. This is very different than the New World faction dynamic but the takeaway is to give incentives for players to join the “underdog” faction. I wouldn’t make it a damage buff because again, don’t punish a faction just for being better at the game. What I wouldn’t want is to own a territory by successfully defending it numerous times (fairly, no weapon bugs or other issues with the wars) only to lose it because after X amount of time Covenant players have a 3,000% damage buff and once they lose it we just retake the territory at the next war because we’re better at the game. What I would want is for Covenant to gain an XP buff, luck buff, extra coin, etc. to incentivize any player to swap factions. The hope in that being some of the better players switch and you get a more even player skill distribution between the factions.

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.