Sabuk War Cap (Input needed)

[Samuel]

So, it has been mentioned on the forums and has been a hot topic of discussion for me, but, I really wanted to grab the players thoughts on this...

The new system reinforces the aspect of two main teams, those defending and those attacking, and as it stands the attacking/defending allies can also join in the war and take the palace for their corresponding ally... This introduces a subtle cap anyway, as those who are allied to both guilds or those who are not allied at all will not be able to take part in the war.

One of the issues all servers (including Euro and even official Wemade/Shanda) is SW rewards... How can you reward the winning guild when it can be a completely biased/unfair game, the short answer being you can't, which can be frustrating both for a player who has taken part in the war and a developer who is trying to make the system more desirable.

So, what is the main contributing aspect of making a war "unfair"? I have always thought it came down to numbers, a guild with 20 players isn't going to be able to stand against a guild with 60 players fairly, and we can't exactly reward a guild with 3x the amount of players for beating a guild with a significantly lower amount of players.

The aspect of potentially limiting the amount of players that can participant in a war has been a hot topic of conversation for me for a while, and I really am in two minds about it... I believe that limiting the amount of players would allow us to provide better rewards for the winners (as it would be a fairer system, and would require some organization on the leaders behalf to ensure he has the best available team at his disposal), and make the overall experience far more intense, however, on the flip side, I feel like the "casual" player could get burned by this, as he will have a lesser kit/lower level, so he/she wouldn't be the immediate first choice to be picked for a war.

The current "concept" would be to say limit the war to 20v20 (quiet a large number anyway) and the "Attackers" would have the option to submit a second relic to potentially increase the number of players involved to say 30v30 or 40v40.

I really do want to gather your reactions/feelings toward a potential change like this, what do you think the pro's and con's would be etc.

Cheers,
Sam

 

[ILovePie:D]

Sounds fair to me

 

[CrazyBear...]

Another excuse people can't throw around when they get beat, even numbers is fair.

 

[DeeKayDee]

Personally, I think it would depend if body drops will be on or off

As an attacking player, I would not care if I was outnumbered, so long as there was risk of reward in the way of body drops.

Tactics and coordination come more into play than aimlessly running around and not caring if one was to die.


If insisted no body drops, and I had to choose .. I'd go with capped.

 

[muffinpie]

Here lies the problem, i dont know about forsaken but i know in team we dont have any allies but i'd say both guilds have an equal player base, i think a minimum cap of 30 would be better than 20.

 

[Nizzles]

All sounds like fun to me. Anything is better than one guild walling up behind a door

 

[Jamole]

If it's capped, how is that fair against the guilds who do have alliances and need that functionality in order to have a chance to win? This applies to both attack and defence. I remember on occasions in euro where this was truly vital in winning a war, I know Chronicles doesn't necessarily have the numbers for this but I think it's an important feature - By capping SW I think you will be making it more like a battleground, which is fine, but maybe it's better to have this as a separate addition.

Capped

Pros:
Possibly reduced lag
Fairer fight in number of players per team, better for guilds with lower numbers

Cons:
Unfair for those guilds who have alliances
How are the teams selected? what if a player has to log during war? (may not be a 'con' if dev team have a workaround)
People may feel left out, why shouldn't everyone be able to take part?
If a guild has 40+ active members then why should they be 'punished' by not being allowed to take part? After all, it's guild vs guild, not a WoW based battleground
Could become more about players vs players (certain individuals) bragging rights rather than Guild bragging rights


Not Capped

Pros:
All members of guild can take part
No one is left out
More fun - ?
Better for the casual player


Cons:
Possibly increased lag
One team possibly outnumbered (to me this isn't a con but have listed anyway)


All I can think of at the moment, at work so slightly rushed.

With regards rewards, I still feel there should be some sort of economy involved and financial gain in holding SW - % of money spent in shops and so forth - you touched on making a fair reward system (hence the cap) but to me you could probably only achieve this through a battleground/arena system similar to WOW.

Just my thoughts.

 

[Xx69xX]

capped... But no allys allowed in that case... Then the truly best on the night will hold the wall the next morning.

 

[CantTouchThis]

I like the idea of a cap as i do think it will even the playing field. Walling in the palace and just throwing sheer numbers/mass recruiting were imo two of the biggest flaws with the old sw. Also, theres nothing more frustrating than losing a fight just because the enemy has a bigger army - imo the most skilled/best coordinated team should prevail, and the only true way to facilitate this is to cap the number of players from each side.

I dont think allowing the attacking guild to increase the cap by submitting more relics is a good idea as it will effectively negate any attempts to put a cap in place.

 

[Martyn]

yeah because the guild with 60 people is no way going to have better gear/rarer skills then the people with 20..

GG -.-

 

[Turrican]

yeah because the guild with 60 people is no way going to have better gear/rarer skills then the people with 20..

GG -.-

Obviously levels / items / spells are the next contributing factor to fairness as well as connection but lets be realistic, numbers play a massive part in fairness.

You could make everyone same level.... only able to wear same kit.... but where do you stop the homogenization? make them all the same class because one class is better than the other?

 

[peterpan]

No cap
its all about numbers and allies. The allies will not benefit from joining in.
Cap
its up to the guild leader to pick the best fighters.
Body Drops
make everything more intense more serious
No body drops
make it a bit of a pretend fight, doesnt matter if you die really.
Dead reviving instantly
makes the no cap even more unfair to smaller guilds, means it doesnt really matter if you die.
dead not getting up straight away or 3 deaths and yr out
means its a bit less of a pretend fight.



Why do you have to have a reward? Having SW has never had much of a reward. Its all about kudos. I havent seen a reward that made sense on any server ever. Giving any kind of benefit to the winners just makes then even stronger and disadvantages the losers. Let it stay as it is.
Changing the system is enough for now. Once it is seen to be working well then you can start thinking about rewarsd which I dont think are even necessary.

 

[GimmeAKitKat]

I don't get it.... the whole reason Sabuk used to be immence was having 200 people participating in a mass chaotic scramble, with pockets or organised peeps doing what was needed.

The alliances changing sides half way through on occasion added to it, as did the neutrals just there to cause more chaos.

Basicly though Sam, you have just asked whether it should be done with team having the advantage or not. Just gonna cause issues. Everybody knows team's gear + speed cant be competed with directly, and while they continue to dominate the server with the only recall set, there's little chance of anybody catching up to their top geared people anytime soon.

Just make it open to all, I thought the idea was to get more people involved, not just provide a boss fight without the boss at the end.

 

[Haytham]

why not do an event tonight or tomoz and actual test it with the different numbers rather than just guess and get it wrong?

 

[Woodiex3]

For starters Sabuk wall fight should be about faction v faction not a get rich quick scheme by ganking people.

also the cap shouldnt be 20 v 20 or any other amount.
it should be level baised points system (alot a work to implement)
1,000 points v 1,000 points therefor it could be 30-40 lower levels plus allies v 15 high levels.
this will even out things a little.

but tbh this needs testing and tweeking over a long period of time to make it fun for both sides (even if you lose). we want them to continue.

 

[muffinpie]

I don't get it.... the whole reason Sabuk used to be immence was having 200 people participating in a mass chaotic scramble, with pockets or organised peeps doing what was needed.

The alliances changing sides half way through on occasion added to it, as did the neutrals just there to cause more chaos.

Basicly though Sam, you have just asked whether it should be done with team having the advantage or not. Just gonna cause issues. Everybody knows team's gear + speed cant be competed with directly, and while they continue to dominate the server with the only recall set, there's little chance of anybody catching up to their top geared people anytime soon.

Just make it open to all, I thought the idea was to get more people involved, not just provide a boss fight without the boss at the end.

DD have just as good gear if not better. Not to mention none of our wizzies have met.

 

[Koriban]

An interesting topic.

I think what most people want is a fair fight, but one that everyone can participate in.

You can't solve both of those issues at the same time, so I propose something different.

Have the war capped at 20v20 as per your initial suggestion when the attackers submit the relic

(A global shout needs to happen when a relic is submitted to notify the holding guild of an upcoming war!)

This allows people to plan 2days ahead, gather the numbers and have a fair fight.

Then, say, every Sunday evening - allow SabukWall to be a complete free for all. Allow anyone and everyone to participate however ALL allies are cancelled (this means if you want the wall you have to take it by your lonesome and force people to go into Guild mode)

This free-for-all every week allows those who wouldn't usually be picked for the Relic-submition Wars to participate in a war and have fun.

It will also provide a good challenge for the defending guild to keep hold of it during that time - even if they were to lose it, they can just immediately resubmit and take the wall back fairly.

These two options are the only way you'll please everybody, but trying to please everyone with just one war system won't work.

I do look forward to these wars and I'll be recording all the ones I participate in and putting them on here for all to see! (Yes, even my embarrassing deaths lol)

Let the games begin.

 

[Setzer]

I don't know how easy this would be to implement but how about a dynamic cap. Have it start at say 20v20 then once both teams have reached that amount then the cap automatically goes up a predefined amount(i was thinking 1 or 5 might be good. might need some tweeking) this would then keep it fair for the smaller guilds and then if two big guild(or alliances) go off together, it would make a great battle. Possible put in a hard cap so to limit lag.

 

[CantTouchThis]

I don't get it.... the whole reason Sabuk used to be immence was having 200 people participating in a mass chaotic scramble, with pockets or organised peeps doing what was needed.

The alliances changing sides half way through on occasion added to it, as did the neutrals just there to cause more chaos.

Basicly though Sam, you have just asked whether it should be done with team having the advantage or not. Just gonna cause issues. Everybody knows team's gear + speed cant be competed with directly, and while they continue to dominate the server with the only recall set, there's little chance of anybody catching up to their top geared people anytime soon.

Just make it open to all, I thought the idea was to get more people involved, not just provide a boss fight without the boss at the end.

I'm sorry, but you're wrong on so many points here.

SW on this server has very, very rarely been about a chaotic scramble/mass brawl. As demonstrated at the last couple of SWs it's been about one guild walling up inside the palace for an hour. Also, I don't think there are enough big guilds to form reliable alliances on this server.

On the subject of gear, are you serious? Your guild have some of the best kits going thanks to the Qataris. In regards to speed, there's a select few who are particularly nippy in team, but really it's about time forsaken stopped using this as an excuse...team has the greater proportion of competent fighters which is what makes the difference.

About the recall set - team were a strong guild long before they got one of these, and you can't surely be saying that before this they were struggling at bosses?

It would be good if this thread doesn't turn into the usual foreskin/team willy-waving contest, but there's no basis to any of the points you've made. Sam's offering the fairest system to date for SW and you're basically asking him not to implement it, even though realistically I'd say with even numbers it would be a very, very interesting fight.

 

[kickey]

Great idea.

You could add an option that lets the attacking guild decide how many numbers they would like at the war. 10v10 20v20 30v30 40v40

maybe also the option of a 1 life only war would be another good addition, so that the higher lvls with better gear cant just come back and clear up after they die.

meaning if a group got there tactic's right they could beat any1.