Locking 0.1 % of PVP Players Out will make IT possible for another 5.0-10.0 % of PVP Players to actually Play this Content.
3 Likes
Setting several wars to the same time, will also allow more players (who maybe donât have a save spot) to participate.
I also believe that this suggested cooldown will improve server balance. But in the end hardcore companies will just work around that limit with multi-accounting.
If you want to participate in war its not hard. Just do it like everyone else. Create a company and run pvp quest then declare. What keep you or other players from doing it?
Takes a Lot of effort to lvl a New Account to 60 and equip it With BIS Gear, and that x50.
So i doubt every company could do that.
This is actually the exact opposite of balance. Youâre forcing a strong team that earned their place out of territories simply because they canât refield their members giving a weaker team a claim over something they donât deserve.
And what do you think would happen the next war? Theyâll just rip it right back from you. Lol
1 Like
Well, sure not every company. But these powerful companies holding several territories over weeks do have the resources to equip their core team. Keep in mind that these players do not need BiS gear to win a war, with 20k investment a player is totally competitive pvp wise. If a company spends 1 M gold, they can equip a whole 50-man team properly. These companies win war by war, just because of superior tactics, teamplay and experience. Some players already do create second accounts because they reached the gold cap.
I see the point of this whole discussion. On hand side these experienced teams rightfully earned their territories and on the other hand more people should have access to wars (even though it really isnât hard to âearnâ a spot). I just think that limiting players to one war everyday will create even more problems and frustration.
Sure. With 20k you can equip Players With decent Gear. But decent Gear for 20k and BIS 600 Gear is a Lot of a difference, Just because of perfect perks and 1 extra on 600.
Territorys still changing Owners from time to time though, but thats usually achieved With Superior tactics.
Lots of companys owning territorys ATM wouldnt hold them With 20k Gear, very few could probably hold them even With 10k Armor, they often Just have Them because they rushed for it and defending is super easy in this Game.
Also they pay for all possible Buffs for every member + BIS Gear, which is quite Challenging for attackers Not having Millions of Gold. Also they ofc need to study defenders tactics to defeat Them, so one Attack usually Isnt Leading anywhere, IT will Take few attempts which sums Up in Gold invested pretty quickly.
I think this is a good idea. A good step for balancing wars. I am unsure how well this will work on very high population servers, though.
Mhm fair point. Since perk pools are limited, the difference to 600 BiS gear is not that big though. The additional perk is 2.5% cooldown reduction at best. What really makes a difference is reaching overall 600 gs which enables 500 attribute points and another milestone attribute perk. Overall, this whole multi-accounting might not be as much of an issues as i am thinking.
Iâm mainly worried about all these players who invested their whole playtime in pvp (gear and also personal gameplay skills) getting robbed of their one and only meaningful pvp content.
One war per day for player is very bad idea. Non player should be punished for playing a content that he love. Imagine 1 dungeons per day or 1 outpost per day.
As I wrote in other topis the problem is not in that someone have the best 50s on server and playing in the same team all time. The true problem is in doing alt, fake guilds to hold many terries and avoid the risk having two or more war at the same time.
1 Like
I can add a bit of my own experience in our server. There is a company of roughly 50 members that are very geared and well organized. They are really difficult to conquer in defense of their territories and are using the split up to have 7-8 different companies with 5 or so members each to have 7-8 different war times. Those 50 players attend all the wars in those territories leaving the rest of their faction without war experience.
Their aim is to conquer all territories, have 11 companies with 11 different war times so that they can âownâ the server, raise taxes to the max and per their words âdestroy the economy in that serverâ.
Given the fact that wars are won by defense 80% of the time and those 50 players are way above the gear of the rest of the companies due to the amount of gold they get from the territories they control (they own WW and Everfall generating 4M a week each) you can guess that the server is in a standstill.
This âwar fatigueâ would render this strategy of creating 11 companies of 3-4 members just to own the server useless and it is most welcome if it ever happens.
This is certainly the crux, however the original suggestion is more than just a sledgehammer to crack this nut, it has other fringe benefits (summarised from above):
- Open up new layers of strategy & tactics regarding war planning - you wont get the current carbon copy war roster time after time.
- Expose the key component (âcompetitiveâ 50v50 war) of this game to more than just an elite few players.
- Promote open world pvp mission conflict between factions - no longer can you just let them run and then pubstomp them in a war if you hold more than 1 territory.
I wonder how many players actually manage to be in more than 1 war per day⌠Do the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few?
I feel this brings checks and balances to the super companies/alliances that currently dominate many servers. They would still be able to hold many territories if they have access to the players but it would be a real challenge to do so - Are they up to the job, or do they just want an easy life at the top ?
â EDIT
If this could not for some reason be implemented as a hard lockout, then I would reluctantly suggest that âWar fatigueâ could be alternatively a stacking debuff along the lines of, -33% damage and healing output(i.e. a severe penalty). Stacks per each war that you have already attended on that day and would be shown to the war leaders on the war roster screen so they can see which members are âwar fatiguedâ and to what level.
You sound like you hold WW and EF with your company and your irl income depends on it bro , chill . The no life zergs that control so many territories per server are mostly 3rd world companies that sell coin , period. Yet u live in imaginary world that these are somehow elite pvpers that control this " pvp game" that has no pvp left in it after 3 months in .
1 Like
3 months after launch and every server has 1 big company getting their pockets filled by the rest of the population who are running the treadmill. With each passing day, players start to realize they are hammsters in an RMT software that looks like a video game.
My company held WW up until about 2 weeks ago and only WW and I can assure you my income is more than sufficient and doesnât intertwine with this game. Why anyone would need to buy gold in this game is beyond me.
If a 3rd world company can control your territories then your server is dog water.
Players with 2-3 hours gametime that want to feel special.
DO NOT implement War Fatigue for your own Company wars.
War Fatigue implemented for fighting as a mercenary in another companyâs War would be the only sensible option.
Yes, yes and yes!
And, please add invasion fatigue and OPR fatigue. Might as well completely remove peopleâs motivation to PVP.
This is such a good idea that if it is implemented. I will quit the game. And, generally speaking, I do not participate in wars.
Wars already have a mechanic for this. Sign ins are first come first serve. And, you can only kick 10 people from the list. And, this will fix nothing. Folks, if they can still stand the game, will just get second accounts and level them up just to hold the territory.
Adding fatigue to the game is quite simply another bad idea on the growing list of bad ideas they are implementing in the game.
That kick system gets horrendously abused, all that happens is they kick, kick & keep kicking until their chosen team are actually in, some players are repeatedly kicked over & over so much they stop even bothering to sign up.
Maybe there should be a limitation to how many actual kicks may be performed.
Wars you can fill as you desire. The entire roster.
Invasions are that way, but if youâre not in the in-group youâll get kicked until they fill up with whomever they want.
If you arenât in the controlling power of your server, you literally donât stand a chance to play 2/3 big end game things. Sure, your company can push, but if youâre smaller, you wonât win vs. these guys if they come to defend. OR if can be like our server where the big companies buy/own/whatever other companies and theyâll kill everyone BUT their sister company to throw it into war, so they get the bid. Nothing you can do about it. My ability to play endgame content that isnât expeditions on my server is basically non-existent.
tldr; Other players are keeping me from being able to play some aspects of the game, which should never have been a thing. And itâs too easy to defend. The win rate on defense is ridiculous.
1 Like