I think we need mechanically enforced small scale PVP to escape the deathball monotony.
Idea 1: Domoths.
Domoths are boring. Most go unchallenged because it’s too easy to wait for your team to have overwhelming numbers before you initiate a claim or upgrade.
This idea requires a coded way for organizations to be allies/enemies, but essentially, when a domoth is challenged and pops onto a bubble, it spits out a random (let’s say 6 to 10) number of participants that can access the bubble.
So if 10 pops, then 5 people from one alliance can fight 5 people from the other alliance. This incentivizes people who want to participate in these specialized conflicts to “get good” and be chosen for their alliance to attend.
Timequakes, villages, wild nodes, etc. remain as the mass participation mechanics that everyone can jump in and (lol) enjoy.
Idea 2: Org vs. Org conflict events.
Have specific events that happen once or twice a game year that only Magnagora vs. Celest, Serenwilde vs. Glomdoring, Halifax vs. Gaudiguch can participate in. I don’t care if there’s a mechanical benefit, fluff and daily credits are good enough.
This way, even if you don’t have the numbers to engage in alliance-wide conflict, you can field a team of your orgmates and duke it out against your hated enemies for glory or whatever.
I think the benefit of systems like this, other than not getting instantly nuked by large enemy teams or not having enough people to participate all together, is that it gives people more of a chance to practice and occasionally get a win without being overwhelmed, builds skill and confidence for larger scale combat, and breaks up the monotony of current deathball mechanics for something a little more dynamic.
Is this something others would like to see? Any better ideas for how to make it happen?
"This incentivizes people who want to participate in these specialized conflicts to “get good” and be chosen for their alliance to attend."
Or it just creates another elitist class of PKers and makes people who aren't fully artied up feel excluded, similar to the situation some people feel about aetherhunts.
Organisations aren't balanced populations wise and are often split across time zones.
The mess with conflict isn't an issue that can be fixed by any admin decision.
2. Elitist PKers exist, regardless. In most cases, you stand a better chance in a 3v3 or 5v5 with no arties than you would getting smashed by 20... this is one avenue for something different, all other conflict mechanics could remain the same and everyone can still participate in their boring deathballs.
3. Populations are definitely out of whack, but there are frequently 20 people in a time quake and 3-5 waiting outside it knowing they don’t have enough to participate. If you’re locked into a 5v5, most orgs can at least field something to contest.
4. These are purposefully low stakes. The only small scale pvp happens in the arena now, and weirdly in the case of ascension war games) are basically the highest stakes ever. That being said, ascension war games are very fun.
Also, no one is excluded from aetherhunts unless they’re whining about not gunning.
(Also welcoming all thoughts/opinions, here!)
If it's a worthwhile reward then only the top people would ever go, if it's not a good reward then people just wouldn't show up or bother about it.
Like with the domoth locking, people don't really enjoy that. It's not fun and it doesn't even encourage the other side from contesting while enemies are down a whole organisation.
Deathballs are pretty much a design choice at this point as well. There are a bunch of ways to not have deathballs and none of those methods have been pursued.
1. A coded way to form a team of 3 members. This can be cross org, and your team lasts for the length of a season.
2. Time slots your team can sign up for to fight other teams. Failure to show up results in a loss. At the end of the season, you are required to have fought x number of other teams.
3. The benefits for winning a season only affect members of the team, ie. no org loyalty here.
Not fleshed out with all the deets, but the idea is essentially to have Wargames as a regular combat tournament. And the key is to make it cross-org, and benefit only the members of the team, so as to encourage the best players playing with and against each other. Then you get side-benefits like allowing fan posters, chants etc of the teams.
My big concern though is if we spent time coding this - would it get used or would it just languish there like combat rankings?
There's already a big issue with people not participating in something because they feel like it benefits the 'other' side so they'd rather not engage at all than do anything that could help them (This obviously ignores that by not participating, the other side reaps all the rewards anyway).
I feel this to be a very valid concern. To be honest, I see a lot of people not getting involved unless they feel they have very good odds at winning something / not "benefitting" the other side (kudos to everybody that does!). And while I get where they're coming from, it makes it a whole lot less engaging, especially as right now we are having somewhat of an imbalance. I think any such system may be prone from suffering a similar fate?
And forgive me for asking, but who was it that spoke the loudest against Ixion being given a "participation trophy" prize, Xenthos? Which commune had a collective tantrum about that whole situation? Why is it that you're in this situation right now?
I'm still not seeing any way in which things are lopsided, please explain?
So, you disagree with the prior action of giving out "participation prizes", but now you want them to give out participation prizes, which you see as the reason four people retired?
And you want them to do this again?
Is your hope that a number of IHC will retire like Shadowlight did?
Or is there something else you want to tell us?
A system that rewards those against the odds would be very welcomed, most of us just want everyone else to be happy, I'm just warning you now that you're not going to be happy if a system that rewards the underdog or those who try the hardest is implemented.
That's assuming your idea is more complex than just "Give Shadowlight specifically more rewards because we say we're so disadvantaged" and doesn't rely on actual mechanics or is in any way based in reality.
Given that I've been advocating for changes for a very long time now, I think I'll be just fine, but thank you for your concern! I've given plenty of mechanical suggestions to Orael - I'm more on the detail end of things personally, so reality-based is definitely where I tend to start. I do understand that isn't the same for everyone, though, and that's okay.
Though seriously, maybe if you did just try harder you'd have more success. Your tactics at the minute are:
Aeldra - Judge spam
Azula - Judge spam
Caliohaliowaligui - Decapitation Spam
Aevum - Break legs/Deathsong
Kreon - Break legs
Filliqilliwuwa - Echoes
Qilliwallirugwat - Aeonfield
Faragan - Deathsong
Xedrik - Deathsong
It's pretty lazy... Step it up and you'll win a bit.
I have noticed some hit-and-miss in this regard myself. Still, I think it's important to present options.
i believe an issue with combat rankings is that -losing- costs a good deal of family honour, thus making it not worth the risk.
Reward for winning/competing is great, so long as there's no real downside to losing. TQs for example see the most people willing to try against odds because even though you may not get the anomalies, the only thing you lose by dying is your defs, you don't even lose XP. Something that considers that would probably get used more. Maybe.
Again with the IC thing. There is absolutely nothing that is IC about that decision.
When some of IHC getting 1000+ credits (record rewards easily hit 300-500cr before the record was broken by an IHC group, and they did it a few times) that's huge. When there is -zero- chance at shadowlight even coming close to be able to get those credits and any try we just makes it higher, there is a problem with the system.
I don't know why you're pretending to be in this massively disadvantaged position. What real advantage/disadvantage is there?
You've been invited to IHC grimkeeps personally, so this complaint is especially confusing coming from you. What would your proposed solution be? Remove the rewards? Spite. Give your side rewards for not putting as much effort/achieving the same result as the other side? Ascension.
There's no problem here that isn't you just not putting any effort at all in, and there's no solution which isn't something you'd whine about and probably cut your thread over if it was given to the other side.
I'm fully in favour of most of these solutions that include more rewards, because I'm not spiteful, I'm just calling you a hypocrite.
I wouldn't want to be liked by most of Glomdoring when you act like this and have Remilia.
Yes, artifacts are a huge impact. Level 3 vitality, level 3 regeneration runes, damage buffs against mobs, damage resistances, wondersaddles, increase exp gains to give more perks that give more regen/dmg/resistances. To claim otherwise is ignorant. Why do you always poke the bear
What I'm saying is, this isn't an excuse for not trying/asking for things to just be made easier seemingly for just one side or harder for the other.
Apple Music: https://itunes.apple.com/ca/artist/arell-moors/1435015679
SoundCloud (Official Releases): https://soundcloud.com/arellmoors-music
SoundCloud (Non-Streaming Releases): https://soundcloud.com/arellmoors