This is actually a great idea for server health. I am currently in the company that owns EF/WW and it has gotten pretty boring knowing we can’t really lose because we can send the same 50 to any war we want to. This will encourage more people to grind for gear to get into wars/play more in general since there will be many more players needed. Ya sure our company could have 100 members and field both wars, but neither roster would be the same members making it more fair on attacking companies.
The one change however I would add is to making the cooldown only activate if you are on the WINNING side of the war you were in. This would not punish newer companies for going out there and trying to improve/grow even if they lose, but would keep dominant companies in check alot more.
Love this idea, wish the deves were like you.
Each territory would have a meaning. Would be much more realistic too. Like if you send your troops to attack who’s gonna defend.
That is not what is taking place. We are not talking about city vs city, and if we are we need to start talking about removing multiple houses from the game and limiting each player to one (which i have been advocating for for a while). Setting up a house in a zone as a requirement to join a way would be an interesting idea, but i feel like we will experience lots of buy sell options, so such a thing would need a cooldown probably around a month to stop that from happening.
pay attention to this statement
The only thing that will happen from war fatigue is a lot of complaints, because players are efficient and always do the most efficient thing. Forcing a company to slot bad, inexperienced or undergeared players for a war, will result in the loss of their zones and subsequently they will become very toxic about who they slot for wars doing thorough checks and being overly protective who gets in and does what. The result of tha gameplay is not something healthy for the game, and will almost for sure destroy one of the greatest treasures this game has.
This is not a good idea. We don’t need more time gates in the game. There needs to be less. Doing this will just drive people away from the game because Wars are endgame and locking people out of wars is not a good idea. If you want to be in a war, then go push influence.
This is a great idea. As a newish player trying to get into wars my company is trying to get into a war were we can and slot me when we do. But i see the same concerns notted here. If my company was not structured to support up and coming players i would never get slotted in our own wars or anywhere else. So how would i get experience to become a better player to be chosen? Make it so there is no cool down for your own companies war but that you can only participate in one war every 24hrs outside of your company. It would force other companies to start using their less than perfect teammates and or bring in new blood who can actually start getting experience.
I lead 180 members 1 month into new world. Community based with a mixed of some hard core players.
We always fill up our roster with company member at the start but when things get a lil competitive and we start to face opponents with both all stars from 2 factions we start losing and people start to quit the game.
I do not have a choice and slot some geared players within our faction to be competitive or else we will keep losing. If only there was a war fatigue system i believe a lot more players will stay and enjoy the end game pvp with their friends. But the game forces you to play competitively with other top players and not with your friends that you want to play with. This ruins the MMORPG concept of the game.
This war system and the mutation system always prevents you from playing with your friends.
As a company that leads over 200+ members. I actually think the war fatigue would be a terrible idea. It would kill off the game and ensure your players who do like it are then content starved.
This is solving for the wrong problem, the main problem is you have people switching companies and pushing influence on other shell companies to get that war. Solve for that problem by either limiting people from joining another company for 6 hours or some time limit.
War fatigue would hurt smaller servers where they don’t even have enough players to cover multiple wars. The larger servers would just end the want for players to log on to the game.
the Game isn’t balanced enough too because you got to work out comp issues for wars and you don’t have enough players sometimes to cover those spots. There are too many weapons not in a good place and people losing because of these mechanics just makes people upset and they will stop logging on.
Honestly this is a wrong solve for a problem and supports casual play in which a way will destroy the player base.
Ok, what about the people who are getting starved at the moment because they can’t play wars since we have the same players playing 4+ wars a day? So they can starve and there is no problem with it?
Also, if you are on a server with a lower player base, why not interfere with the influence pushing? Today companies push influence undisturbed because the territory-owning companies know that if a war does happen, they’ll have the best of the roster always at their disposal.
Furthermore, defending wars is a joke right now, with all the buffs they the defending team has. I understand they will remove the point respawn, which is a great move already, but war fatigue would force the company to strategize better which players will play which wars, I honestly think that is quite fair.
Many players quit the game already because the current system fails to engage them into a major part of the end-game content that is wars and a war fatigue system would help in that regard.
Issue is not a fact that 1 player can play more than 1 war per day.
Issue is fact that small company can create shell companies to play multiple wars same day using same team. Just put 7-14 days CD on joining clan when you leave one. It will solve issue with shell companies.
Sure, if you put a timer on people joining shell companies then they wouldn’t have had the 4 siege day timers. Then you wouldn’t of had the same people pushing those areas. It would of been different companies and would allow more content to be spread unless people are starting to pay those people to be in those wars. If they are then its a resource drain.
As someone who has spent time and effort into building my account with correct gear and perks I don’t believe I should have to sit out of wars for arbitrary requirements just so others who have not put in the same work or have the same ability can “compete”. Everyone else is fully capable of improving their play and account to get to a point where they can get into wars. Every time I’ve left the game and came back to a new server with a lot of new people it hasn’t been an issue to quickly get back into the war community.
I believe the time is better spent on providing a more casual option for war to the casual players instead of imposing arbitrary requirements that further complexify the war roster building process. Perhaps a queueable skirmish mode.
Shell companies is a far bigger problem and if it were somehow solved you wouldn’t have big companies holding many territories with staggered times.
It would not allow companies to hold more than 1-2 provinces. Since if you get more you get pushed by multiple clans and end up with multiple wars in same time.
I think that while a lot of these things are annyoing to deal with, limiting the only gamemode a lot of players still play the game for would be very bad. At least limiting individuals is not the way to go about it imo.
It boils down to companies having different siege timers. I’d much rather have static siege times for zones so the devs can make them overlap and you won’t have that issue anymore. That way smaller groups that just jump into wars won’t get punished for the whole war timer shenanigans.
For example have everfall and windsward share a timer and have reekwater and ebonscale on another and so on. At this point it’s pretty easy to tell which zones are very profitable regardless so it should be easy to make these pairings fair in a sense.
