Final Plea

DrastrathDrastrath Member Posts: 47 Novice
The current PK events and combat mechanics in general punishes players for being on a less populated side. While timequakes sparked some fighting, I fear I see us going right back into the same rut as Lusternia has been in for over a year. I am not certain how far back this goes. As a player who used to participate in promotions and elite membership, I can say that the current state of the game makes me stay away from any substantial purchases. I have even cancelled my elite membership. 

It's funny how people think they are amazing at Lusternia PK only to fight with superior numbers. Numbers have always been an issue, and of course there will be those that say this isn't an issue or that's just the way it is. This mindset is terrible. The game will die to me without competitive PK, and there are a select few who will try their best to snuff out any real competition because it inflates their ego. It is sad that this will slowly destroy Lusternia as I believe Lusternia has the best geography, flavor, and history of any of the IREs. I have offered and encouraged ideas to curb this problem, but it seems to have been in vain. 

When there is no conflict, when there are no cities on the politics board aside from the one side, or when one side wins yet another TA, it won't be because they earn it. It won't be because the other side wasn't good. It will be solely because the game mechanics/player base rewards population and discourages healthy competition. 

Hopefully, something is changed to actually fix the problem and doesn't band-aid the solution. Until then, you will probably see me around, but not as much. Maybe, I can hop in those magical times with my side has enough numbers to even compete. 

It is sad when it feels a few whales have gotten to dictate the game to it's death, but that definitely seems to be the case. This may be my issue with what I expect from PK in a game, and while I haven't spent substantial money in some time the reason has been because I don't see a light at the end of the tunnel. I won't invest in a game just to be an ego inflation to a certain few.
«13

Comments

  • EstarraEstarra Administrator, Moderator Posts: 1,076 Creator
    I'm certainly open to any suggestions. I would point out that our focus now, with mages at least, is combat mechanics and balance. I believe Orael has in mind competitive PK strategies for each org. Other than working on combat balance, from the coding side, I'm curious what others suggest other than reducing number of orgs (which was strongly opposed the last time it came up).
    image
    image
  • DrastrathDrastrath Member Posts: 47 Novice
    The most important thing to understand is that no solution will be perfect. I will briefly discuss some of my top ideas with how to fix 10 v 4 combat situations. I will list a few ideas limited to Timequakes:


    1. Limiting size of groups in Timequakes and/or making multiple instances of timequakes. 
    Pros: Forces even groups for PK purposes, possible easy coding (Would verify with Orael), people could be harvesting in all instances of the timequake (each timequake would spawn its own anamolies and this could go to the overall tally of anomalies causing the TQ to end sooner than an hour or run out of anomalies)
    Cons: People would get left out of PK on the side with a majority, figuring out how to decide who is in the combat TQ. 

    2. Targeting Malus (Several Options)
    Pros: Gives a smaller group a fighting chance.
    Cons: Heavy coding and mechanics overhaul, preventing gaming of the Malus system. 

    3. Vitals/Resistances/Regen/Shrug buff for the lesser side based on the disparity in the TQ. Think the advantage being to the people behind in Mario Kart. 
    Pros: Minimal coding
    Cons: Gaming the system and having people enter or exit the TQ to fight in favorable odds. This would make weaker links feel even more like a burden, so big big con. 

    4. Forced movement on number of people in rooms within TQs. In other words. 5 people in a room gets 1 random person tossed into another room and possibly knocked off balance. 
    Pros: Removes fortress room meta
    Cons: Could be gamed to have people enter and exit to get a favorable ratios of allies to enemies.

    5. Slow down vitals kills to where you require some kind of actual strategy to kill by vitals even with 10 people whaling on a single person. (Vital kills should be much harder to pull off on your general combatant even without a million arties. A whale should be extremely hard to kill by vitals and should be dealt with by insta-kill methods and/or locks or healing hinder.)  These setup damage kill methods should be things like axelord chestcavity, bard dchord, Nihilist excurciate, astrology meteor not just 10 people going send("sm add kill "..target).

    6. Cooldowns of spammable skills (such as shieldstun). Certain skills would need to be exempt like kata perform or warrior strikes. 

    The first step to any solution will be to define alliances. Make sides tracked and have side switches only allowable via request and approval of a godmin. This will help with any option above because allies and enemies could be tracked by the game.

    There are other options and greater detail for each concept, but every option would be better than one person just getting slaughtered by a huge group of people.


    Yes, if Mag/Halli/Seren shows up we can certainly win and have, but you can't force people to play. Those that choose to play on the lower population side shouldn't be punished. There have also been times when Celest/Gaudi/Glom has been outnumbered where any of these solutions would have made it more even for them. 

    Yes, I cringe at a 10v1 Snald or Avurekhos with 25k vitals, crazy regen, etc. if option 3 was an actual option, but it's better than sitting and no combat happening at all. 
  • MakaiMakai Member Posts: 413 Adept
    I'd enjoy the option of timequakes being quicker, and always having eight spawn regardless of an anomaly being present. Would it be possible to look into this route of them spawning either faster and not being blocked by one another?

    Not sure how I feel about forced movement just because people are in the same room, much less the random balance knock. Nothing like being in the middle of something then poof, you're gone and off balance for no real reason. Imagine if it was the person releasing the anomaly that just got chucked?

    You say vitals kill, but that seems more like health damage kills. As we've discussed prior, there are a healthy portion of classes that need to use their weapon or 'damage' abilities to do anything, you touched on two but left out the Chemantics and Woods, or the non-melding mages/druids who really have no other offense. The issue at hand is that so many people focusing on a single target creates a point where even those not using their best damaging ability can still cause death via health damage. Besides the classes I've already said, people aren't actively focusing on health damage. I see more mana/ego kills, or specialty insta-kills than just raw health kills. If a solution can be found to still let all people participate who wish to, and it not seem overwhelming, then we may be onto something.

    Depending on the cooldown length, this could be acceptable. But as we also discussed prior, won't change much in larger groups by just adding a cooldown to a person using a skill. I believe we discussed adding in immunities like blackout/stun for the other major hindrances (see aeon).

    Making hardcoded alliances could be beneficial, but it should still be done by the players and not needing the permission of a higher being, otherwise you'll end up with the most static alliances ever, that you might as well just make two orgs.

    I honestly do know the feeling of just being targeted and murder bashed by a large group, it doesn't seem fun for anyone. However, we can't really fix that without addressing population and that population's willingness to engage in PK activities. I firmly understand some people just don't have an interest in it, I barely do in the execution of PK, but that is also a contributing factor in this discussion. If Org A has roughly 10 active people, 7 are strict RP only and 3 will go into combat, then you're really only being represented by those 3 and it seems like you're always outnumbered. As we discovered during the "Do we delete some orgs?" topic, apparently some of the 'low pop' places actually had a good chunk of players, just either hidden away or RP only, etc. Getting people motivated to go in and probably lose is hard, it is really really hard. We should try to find something that will make people want to give PK a shot and represent their home and go from there.
  • DrastrathDrastrath Member Posts: 47 Novice
    I listed 5 ways it could be done. Alliances hasn't shifted in over a year, so I don't see how putting a request to formally switch an org to be such a change. It would prevent any abuse.

    I don't only mean health kills because Mana kills can be just as quick if not quicker with very little effort. 

    Also, I mentioned classes that need setup to damage kill can either be hindered or avoided. If fighting an axelord then focus chest wounds healing, truehear and allheale against bards, astrology move and remove spheres, etc. If it is simply point and click then it shouldn't be strong. Chem/woods shouldn't hinder fixing what is broken. They should be reworked. 

    Straight damage kills happen much more than anything else. 

    Again, why try to force people to do what they don't want to do? Let's just fix the mechanics to allow differing numbers to be viable. 


  • NyanaNyana Member Posts: 138 Capable
    Makai said:
    If Org A has roughly 10 active people, 7 are strict RP only and 3 will go into combat, then you're really only being represented by those 3 and it seems like you're always outnumbered. As we discovered during the "Do we delete some orgs?" topic, apparently some of the 'low pop' places actually had a good chunk of players, just either hidden away or RP only, etc. Getting people motivated to go in and probably lose is hard, it is really really hard. We should try to find something that will make people want to give PK a shot and represent their home and go from there.
    This isn't really true anymore. I can think of very, very few "strict RP" people in any org. Every single person I can recall seeing online, ever, in Mag - excepting some recent newbies - have participated in timequakes at some point, even when there was a lot of fighting. I also see people from Serenwilde and Hallifax show up that I know aren't pkers, and they still come and try their best. 

    The hard part of getting people motivated to go in and probably lose is not because they don't want to try, but because they did try and lost last time, and the time before that, and the time before that, and so on. This comes down to the way the numbers work out, almost exclusively. Fix the mechanics, and allow people the perception that their showing up might make a difference again - that's all that's needed.
  • MakaiMakai Member Posts: 413 Adept
    Don't think you thoroughly read the post, so we'll try this again:

    I responded to bits and made sure it could be identified to which of your points it was commenting on. In such a comment, I pointed out that your comment seemed to focus on health damage kills, even with the code snippet for a mudlet alias. As someone who is around for the vast majority of timequakes, my entertainment is watching deathsights and seeing what happens most. Damage skills are still the minority, heck I've seen Feyr kill more with prophesy than I've seen damage kills.

    As for the classes, just saying they need to be reworked isn't going to solve anything, because that's lumping everything together and just saying, "Fix it." I specifically listed the chems and woods in ADDITION to your list, as well as the mages and druids that aren't the current melder. Once more, the problem isn't so much "How much damage each attack does?" the problem is "How many people are hitting the same target?" No matter what, there will always be a threshold to hit that guarantees a death because of focus, that is just simple math. Example: If 5 players have a bashing that does 900, then you're expecting 4500 damage each of their attacks. If 10 players have that same attack, you're expecting 9000. Because 900 is on the low-end for damage dealt by even just PK attacks, you can hopefully see where I'm going. I'm not arguing against you, just trying to point to the right problem to address.

    I never stated you should force them, I specifically stated "We should try to find something that will make people want to give PK a shot and represent their home and go from there." I could spend a day harvesting up all the names of people 'available' to be defined as: "Actively online, not AFK, and responsive." for each org and I already know that more people could show up, IF they wanted to. The problem here is the inclination to take part in the combat aspect of the game. Coding isn't really going to solve this problem, which is making people interested in showing up and giving it a try. The closest we got was the goloth bloodcoins. LOADS of people came out of the woodwork to just get the free spin, and as soon as that promo died, heck even during it, they stopped showing up because the 'reward' for playing wasn't worth it to them any longer.
  • NyanaNyana Member Posts: 138 Capable
    Makai said:

    I never stated you should force them, I specifically stated "We should try to find something that will make people want to give PK a shot and represent their home and go from there." I could spend a day harvesting up all the names of people 'available' to be defined as: "Actively online, not AFK, and responsive." for each org and I already know that more people could show up, IF they wanted to. The problem here is the inclination to take part in the combat aspect of the game. Coding isn't really going to solve this problem, which is making people interested in showing up and giving it a try. The closest we got was the goloth bloodcoins. LOADS of people came out of the woodwork to just get the free spin, and as soon as that promo died, heck even during it, they stopped showing up because the 'reward' for playing wasn't worth it to them any longer.
    Still not true. Yes, sometimes people are online, but can't/don't want to show up, for whatever reason. That's never going to not be true, and is not what you imply when you claim some people are strict rpers. The goloth coins were not that great of a promotion, and I'd be willing to bet I got close to the most number coins of anyone, if not the most. The numbers of people showing up has not dropped off that significantly, what's changed is that people are less likely to go in for suicide runs when they have no chance of winning. 

    Telling people to "try harder" is definitely not going to fix this problem - that's been done before. It was patronizing then, and nothing has changed. This problem could be fixed via clever mechanics.
  • MakaiMakai Member Posts: 413 Adept
    You are definitely reading that from a different angle than it is presented and typed. I'm not saying people are being lazy! I'm also not saying being logged in means you're always have the time for something, ITS WHY I DEFINED WHAT AVAILABLE MEANT!

    To the bloodcoins effect, I said it was the closest we got as a motivation tactic, not that it was successful overall. When the promo hit, Absolutely yes more people started showing up. I also 100% agree there is no point in suicide runs, because there is no motivation to make attempts.

    Please, tell me exactly where I said "try harder" and took that stupid approach to this? I would LOVE to see where I'm talking down to people about not being good enough. But please, do continue to extrapolate your own meanings from words with set definitions and make me out to be just another person saying "try harder".
  • DrastrathDrastrath Member Posts: 47 Novice
    edited July 2019
    Makai said:
    Don't think you thoroughly read the post, so we'll try this again:

    I responded to bits and made sure it could be identified to which of your points it was commenting on. In such a comment, I pointed out that your comment seemed to focus on health damage kills, even with the code snippet for a mudlet alias. As someone who is around for the vast majority of timequakes, my entertainment is watching deathsights and seeing what happens most. Damage skills are still the minority, heck I've seen Feyr kill more with prophesy than I've seen damage kills.

    As for the classes, just saying they need to be reworked isn't going to solve anything, because that's lumping everything together and just saying, "Fix it." I specifically listed the chems and woods in ADDITION to your list, as well as the mages and druids that aren't the current melder. Once more, the problem isn't so much "How much damage each attack does?" the problem is "How many people are hitting the same target?" No matter what, there will always be a threshold to hit that guarantees a death because of focus, that is just simple math. Example: If 5 players have a bashing that does 900, then you're expecting 4500 damage each of their attacks. If 10 players have that same attack, you're expecting 9000. Because 900 is on the low-end for damage dealt by even just PK attacks, you can hopefully see where I'm going. I'm not arguing against you, just trying to point to the right problem to address.

    I never stated you should force them, I specifically stated "We should try to find something that will make people want to give PK a shot and represent their home and go from there." I could spend a day harvesting up all the names of people 'available' to be defined as: "Actively online, not AFK, and responsive." for each org and I already know that more people could show up, IF they wanted to. The problem here is the inclination to take part in the combat aspect of the game. Coding isn't really going to solve this problem, which is making people interested in showing up and giving it a try. The closest we got was the goloth bloodcoins. LOADS of people came out of the woodwork to just get the free spin, and as soon as that promo died, heck even during it, they stopped showing up because the 'reward' for playing wasn't worth it to them any longer.
    Literally stop trying to derail this forum thread. Health is vitals, but vitals is not health. I clarified that your assumption that I meant health was incorrect. You have an issue with assumptions. 

    Your math is simple, but all math is not linear. Some math can be exponentiation.  Let me explain, a targeting malus can reduce the effectiveness of each attack exponentially. Meaning that the more people attacking the more reduced the attacks become. This would insure that 100 people attacking a single target would only come close to killing the target without actually killing the target. The concept is diminishing returns.   
  • EstarraEstarra Administrator, Moderator Posts: 1,076 Creator
    Okay, guys, I've deleted the last few posts. If we can't keep things civil, I'll close this thread. If anyone wants to make personal attacks or escalate insinuations, I'll remove you from the forums. Maybe it's best to take a forum break if you find yourself getting upset. I think this thread could be productive, so hopefully we can all respectfully and considerately share our opinions.
    image
    image
  • NyanaNyana Member Posts: 138 Capable
    Well, one possibility that might make timequakes more interesting and fights more fair is if there was a counter on how many people of any given org had already entered. And until there was six people total (one from each org), no one else from the same org could go in. Of course, people could still leave and different ones enter. Might lead to more strategizing with smaller/more equal teams and not make the odds feel so overwhelming for anyone. Downside is that not everyone could participate every time, but: 

    -Gives an incentive for people to play in different orgs and maybe even balance the numbers a little.
    -Would not require coding an alliance system of any sort. 
    -At worst under current alliances, you'd be at 3v1 odds. Barring losing members on your side(but only they/someone from the same org would be able to re-enter until it's balanced again)

    Downside, it's hard to keep a counter on an entire area for people logging out/losing connection, or dying.

    Other than that, I think timequakes are too frequent. 9-11 hours apart might reduce some of the burnout.
  • MakaiMakai Member Posts: 413 Adept
    I'd be fine with timequakes getting more spacing as well, but on the same notion, want either more anomalies spawning and without the one per rift limit to make up for it though. That is just my ideal situation.
  • DrastrathDrastrath Member Posts: 47 Novice
    edited July 2019
    Orael said:
    So - given this is a common complaint, I added some metrics a few weeks ago regarding player population during timequakes.

    What I'm capturing is the number of players, per org, active within the last 5 seconds when a timequake starts.  It's important to remember that metrics such as this (or any metric really) is just a tool and it has limitations. This one doesn't take into consideration people that show up mid-quake or people that maybe are hanging out idle until a timequake starts for instance.  It also doesn't take into consideration quality or ability, it's strictly a numbers thing.

    Since 6/25 - here's the average # of players per org at the start of a Timequake
    • Glomdoring - 4.21
    • Celest          - 2.61
    • Magnagora  - 2.51
    • Serenwilde  - 3.88
    • Gaudiguch   - 3.31
    • Hallifax       - 2.58

    •     Glom/Celest/Gaudi  - 10.125
    •     Mag/Seren/Halli       - 8.972
    •     12.1% difference

    In the last week - here are the numbers
    • Glomdoring - 3.85
    • Celest          - 2.73
    • Magnagora  - 2.00
    • Serenwilde  - 4.73
    • Gaudiguch   - 3.23
    • Hallifax       - 2.42

    •     Glom/Celest/Gaudi  - 9.808
    •     Mag/Seren/Halli       - 9.154
    •     6.9% difference

    While I have not been around the past two weeks or so, and can't really attest to any timequakes during that time but from my observations previous to that, these numbers fit. Yes, there are timequakes where one side dominates the other side. There are also timequakes that are pretty even.

    As the numbers show - on average, one side has one more person than the other. I think in general, it's agreed that one more person isn't really outnumbering or unfair odds. It also shows that for each time Glom/Celest/Gaudi outnumber Mag/Seren/Halli, there's a time the opposite is true. 

    Again, this seems to be a perception problem. I watched one side decide not to try for a timequake because they were outnumbered, but looking at the numbers, if the people discussing this had all grouped up, it would have been exactly even. 
    I think a more accurate number would be people actually getting their ticks in the Timequake. A lot of people aren't always willing to fight, and the raw data here has a lot of flaws to merely say several people on one side has a perception issue. 


    Edit: I do agree there are times when we could actually fight and some choose not to. Not sure how you fix that for the ones that want to fight though. 
  • OraelOrael Member, Administrator, Moderator, Gods Posts: 414 Creator
    Here's the numbers for the players on average from each org who received timequake credits the last week

    Glom/Celest/Gaudi - 9.27
    Mag/Seren/Halli - 7.59
    19.9 % difference

    Glom is at 4.2 people/quake, Seren is next at 3.5 people/quake. Mag/Halli are the lowest at 2.1/quake and the other 2 are ~2.5+- 0.2/quake

    To be honest, I thought this was going to be a bit more skewed. All this really shows is participation, it doesn't show if you had or did not have the numbers to compete with. I think if we're comparing this number to the other, you can see that there certainly is something stopping people from getting involved.

    As I've mentioned before, I think that's the area we need to focus on. Making people feel like they can compete and participate. That's driving why we're going the direction we are with melders. 




  • SynlSynl Member Posts: 199 Adept
    I would say that if you reduce the number of times they occur, you risk increasing burnout because each individual timequake becomes more important. The nice thing with the amount we get is no one cares if we lose one. Whatever, we'll get the next one. If anything, I'd increase them to be more often. Maybe reduce the amount they go for by 1/4-1/2. So more events spaced through the day, but less time to each one. Same way no one cares about losing Turbo as much as losing an hour+ game of regular Dota.
  • AlexandriaAlexandria Member Posts: 360 Fabled
    Speaking as somebody who is very familiar with melding (though I will never claim to have been GOOD at it), I'm a bit worried about how that's going to, though thankfully I've been slowly learning to bard (BADLY OKAY, I get that I'm not a good pvper) so when I start crying about learning something new, I have something else to fall back on.

    As far as frequency goes, I agree they might need to be reduced slightly. The running joke in Hallifax is that a timequake will interrupt literally everything anybody starts to do, ever. And despite my lack of efficiency, I still feel obligated to attend, even when I know the other side is literally going to jump on me and slaughter me in under a minute everytime - and we all know it's not because I'm a serious threat. I don't really like feeling obligated, but that's where we're at. 

    Generally speaking, though, I don't play the game for combat. This is the most involved I've ever been in combat on a regular basis, and while I don't mind it (aside from the rude but insignificant amounts of essence I'm losing Czixi unnecessarily on a daily basis), I'm never going to play this game for it. I have vote weight 10. I'm pulling 2-3 days played every week, despite my computer being off when I'm not home. I spend the majority of my time playing with people, RPing, with some hunting/aetherhunting and some shopkeeping.

    Give me a real incentive to be in combat and I just might care a little. Otherwise, right now my only incentive is "For the Collective!" which really pales in comparison to almost anything I have going on usually.

    Czixi, the Welkin murmurs, "Fight on, My Effervescent Sylph. I will be with you as you do."

    Aian Lerit'r, Lead Schematicist exclaims to you, "A *paperwork* emergency, Chairman!

  • MakaiMakai Member Posts: 413 Adept
    What would you consider an incentive to show up and take part in it?
  • AlexandriaAlexandria Member Posts: 360 Fabled
    I really don't know. Bloodcoins were a moderate incentive, even if the rewards were usually insignificant. My very first one got me a 500 credit artifact, so I knew they COULD be decent.

    All I'm really saying is, as someone who doesn't give two hoots about fighting usually, I need more than IC guilt as motivation.

    Czixi, the Welkin murmurs, "Fight on, My Effervescent Sylph. I will be with you as you do."

    Aian Lerit'r, Lead Schematicist exclaims to you, "A *paperwork* emergency, Chairman!

  • KistanKistan Member Posts: 417 Expert
    Do other cities offer incentives?

    In Gaudiguch, you get city credits for showing so you would get  3-5 credits (varying by type of event) from city coffers for showing up for a meaningful effort.

  • JolantheJolanthe Member Posts: 522 Fabled
    edited July 2019
    And despite my lack of efficiency, I still feel obligated to attend...
    Let's stop right there.

    This is something I can definitely relate to, as it's part of the core reasoning for my never participating in quakes ever. It's just something I would do. To myself.

    But at the same time, I also acknowledge - that's all on me.

    I agree that lessening the number of timequakes, and possibly making them more predictable/gameable to schedule around is bad. I also think that -will- make each feel even more important to do well in, and it's better to have chances to say "Yeah, we've all got other things we'd rather do and don't need to care this go around". Because lord knows Flares and Villages are always going to have way more impetus and drag us from other things as is.

    EDIT: That said, maybe divine order essence loss should be removed from quake deaths too if possible.
  • NyanaNyana Member Posts: 138 Capable
    edited July 2019
    Kistan said:
    Do other cities offer incentives?

    In Gaudiguch, you get city credits for showing so you would get  3-5 credits (varying by type of event) from city coffers for showing up for a meaningful effort.

    Yes, other cities offer credits for showing up. But getting a couple credits from something when I could have been doing literally anything else for daily credits, just to be outnumbered - again - is not really incentive. At this point, the only reason I go is for spite. 

    Alexandria may come reluctantly, but she still comes most of the time. That tells me that the problem is not a motivation issue. Timequake just now: Me and Veldrin were the only ones around from Mag, I don't think anyone from Hallifax or Serenwilde were around beyond Lilybell and Feyr. Numbers were even when I showed up to help... so two more people showed up from Celest/Glom. Explain how motivation is going to fix that? I can't force people to log in or wake up or stop working their real-life jobs.

    Edit: That's not directed at you, Kistan, just general, and it's the reason I don't want to keep logging in myself right now.
  • NyanaNyana Member Posts: 138 Capable
    At least, not a problem of motivating people to come when there is a reasonable chance of success. The problem is there's usually not - so why come?
  • ~Lilybell~~Lilybell~ Member Posts: 11 Inept
    daww, you can So force me to stop real lifing..oh wait *checks self for pulse* realtalk, Someone powerful make bardoons easier to pull off! 3; (please? ..*sniffle*)
  • DrastrathDrastrath Member Posts: 47 Novice
    edited July 2019
    Do we really want non-PK focused players feeling they are required to come do something they don't want to? It is great when they do, but I definitely don't want to force it. I will announce a TQ, and if people show then great. Otherwise, I don't expect to do something they don't want to simply because mechanics doesn't support uneven numbers. 

    Let's take WoW or LoL, in WoW Horde queue times for PK events were a lot of time 10-15 minutes where the Alliance queues were instant. This promoted the players to disperse more evenly. LoL queue times for a certain position (top/mid) were much longer then others such as support, so this pushes people to play the other roles. There are also incentives for the lower population to join in and fight. This isn't based on the people logged in doing other things, but it is based on those in the queue. 

    Lusternia has a playerbase of ~50 to max 150/200 which makes it a different beast all together as well as the schedule of events. I don't see a queue or incentive really working, so I again I go back to let's discuss mechanics that will make 4v10 feasible and possible that both sides have a chance. 
  • NyanaNyana Member Posts: 138 Capable
    Drastrath said:
    Do we really want non-PK focused players feeling they are required to come do something they don't want to? It is great when they do, but I definitely don't want to force it. I will announce a TQ, and if people show then great. Otherwise, I don't expect to do something they don't want to simply because mechanics doesn't support uneven numbers. 
    And really, I wish certain people would stop pretending that non-PK focused players are the problem here. I have no complaints about the number of "non-comms" who have been willing to try, and been impressed by some of the ones that are learning combat anyway, when I never would have expected them to.

    But yeah... the mechanics don't support it. Which is a shame, because it would be nice when people who are doing something they don't normally like/have much interest in could actually feel like they're doing well. There are ways to improve, but when the next TQ is going to be 10v4, what difference will the improvements even make?
  • LiefLief Member Posts: 453 Mythical
    As a newly returned player on the smaller numbers side, I thought I'd offer my perspective!

    At first for me, timequakes were really exciting. I love that you don't lose experience in them -- that is SO important and is that a feature across the game now? Because I would be so much more comfortable participating in PvP in general if it is. No exp loss is a really good thing.

    With how often the Seren-Halli-Mag side gets beaten down with inferior numbers (and talent - not universally but some people, especially me, for sure show up who currently don't know the first thing about what to do as our class), though, the shininess has worn off a bit. I'll still show up from time to time but I've definitely given myself permission to not attend every single one if it means I won't get to do something I would rather be doing. It feels a little bit OOC for me to have Lief do that but my enjoyment is more important than showing up to be ineffective for 5 seconds, then redeffing and running back in.

    I'm looking forward to the mage changes and hopefully some better synergy between classes in all the orgs. 
    Amazing beautiful stunning avatar by Gurashi!
    ~
    A gentle breeze ruffles your wings and whispers in your ears, as if for you alone, "Dragonfly's words shine... seeds, sown and tended, inspire... a forest harvest."
    ~
    Maylea reaches out, Her fingers poised in midair. "Now you are of Me, even more than you were before." Her golden and azure eyes glitter. "Walk well, Eldin. Shed glory in My name, and bring life to the lifeless."
  • NyanaNyana Member Posts: 138 Capable
    Lief said:
    As a newly returned player on the smaller numbers side, I thought I'd offer my perspective!

    At first for me, timequakes were really exciting. I love that you don't lose experience in them -- that is SO important and is that a feature across the game now? Because I would be so much more comfortable participating in PvP in general if it is. No exp loss is a really good thing.
    It's just in timequakes. 
  • SynlSynl Member Posts: 199 Adept
    It's really hard to convince me to switch sides when I've invested a significant chunk of money in my character. Full benefits retirement or tying artifacts to accounts instead of characters would go a long way to increasing alt-itude. So yea, that's a hard path to take.

    Anyways, Orael confirmed that statistically, at least, the numbers gap is fairly small. I'm not sure how you incentivise combat. I mean, to me, there's already incentive to show up - you get a handful of credits. But to others that's not enough. One thing I would argue for is to make ac complete. If people could log on and play from Nexus because ac actually cures everything well, manages defenses, I gotta figure more people would be excited by combat?
This discussion has been closed.