Please read the following carefully, I believe is very useful for you.
Zerging is strong. There is no denying it. This is not a problem in itself. The bigger guilds should have an advantage over smaller guilds.
The problem is that is it nearly impossible for smaller guilds to be able to conquer territory. If they do get to initiate GvG’s, they have a fair shot. The current mechanics makes it nearly impossible for smaller guilds to actually initiate any GvG if they don’t already have territory.
The current suggested changes to the GvG mechanics are all nice and interesting. They don’t suggest anything to balance the fundamental dilemma of “zerg vs small”, however.
I would like to suggest that there are two categories of GvG initiation:
A) The current developer suggestion where zergs can siege up anywhere to initiate a 5v5 GvG. The initiation of very zerg friendly. The resulting 5v5 is balanced and is what we want more of. Let us for the sake of this thread call the territories with these mechanics Plains Territories.
B) “Something else”, which allows for smaller guilds to initiate the actual GvG. This “something else” is what we need to come up with. Let us call the territories with these “other” initiation mechanics Mountain Territories.
Plains Territories
In general, these territories use the current and proposed mechanics:
Initiation
All Zerg friendly stuff. Castles, warcamps and the siege mechanics all fall into this category. If a guild shows up with overwhelming numbers, the defending side has a low chance of preventing the initiation (and in the case of castles, of not losing the territory).
GvG
Currently the dominant type of GvG is the 5v5. I would like plains territories to have bigger fights due to their nature. 10v10 or more would fit the “plains” category better.
Mountain Territories
The mechanics for these territories don’t exist. So this is what we need to come up with.
Initiation
The way I see this working out is with something I’d like to call mercenary warbands. A mercenary warband is basically just a different and more small guild friendly way of launching an attack.
A mercenary warband will offer their services to a guild every 24 hours. They will do this in either the cities or in smaller camps out on the map.
Only one guild can use the mercenary warband per cycle.
In order for a guild to win access to the mercenary band, players will have to participate in a tournament. Each guild can sign up one 5v5 team to participate in the tournament every hour. Once every hour, the competing teams are then matched against each other, so that the current “best” team will be matched against the current 2nd team. Teams 3 and 4 will fight against each other and so forth. The 5v5 takes place on an instanced map.
The winner of the match gets 1 point. The loser gets -1 point.
When the 24 hour cycle runs out, the guild with the most points will be declared the winner.
The winning guild has access to the mercenary warband and has to launch an attack within 12 hours. When this attack is launched, a new tournament starts for a new mercenary warband.
Mercenargy warbands can only launch attacks on mountain territories within a certain range. This is to prevent small guilds from being able to capture large swaths of lands by only using the mercenaries. If you want to hold large swaths of land, you have to have a map presence. Mountain territories are for small elitist guilds. For this reason, only a low number of territories are mountain territories. I’d say one in every 9 territories could be a mountain territory.
GvG
The GvG in mountain territories is the standard 5v5 type.
If the enemy used the proposed siege mechanics to initiate the GvG, then the defender gets +40 defender bonus.
If the enemy used my proposed mercenary warband mechanic to initiate the GvG, then the defender only gets +20 defender bonus.
Map Design
The map needs to be designed intelligently in accordance with this.
Most of the map is “plains”. Plains have 90% plains territories and only 10% mountain territories. In plains areas, maps have 4 exits most of the time, and generally there are fewer choke points.
Some smaller areas of the map could be mountainous. Mountainous areas are bigger areas of mountain territories with only a few plains scattered in between them. In mountain areas, maps have only 2 or 3 exits. And the map design provides numerous choke points.
Conclusion
I feel like adding mountain territories to the game would balance the entire “zerg vs small” dilemma. I would allow for zerg guilds to hold big swaths of land, while the smaller guilds can potentially hold a territory or two within that same area. If the map is designed in accordance, it can create an interesting game flow.
The mercenary warband mechanic can be revised. I feel, however, that adding this arena type of PvP to the game and making it very accessible will allow for a much broader audience to actually do GvG’s. As it is right now, I think that only a very small percentage of the player base will ever be able to experience a 5v5.
Let me know what you think. And more guides in UPAlbion.com.
Zerging is strong. There is no denying it. This is not a problem in itself. The bigger guilds should have an advantage over smaller guilds.
The problem is that is it nearly impossible for smaller guilds to be able to conquer territory. If they do get to initiate GvG’s, they have a fair shot. The current mechanics makes it nearly impossible for smaller guilds to actually initiate any GvG if they don’t already have territory.
The current suggested changes to the GvG mechanics are all nice and interesting. They don’t suggest anything to balance the fundamental dilemma of “zerg vs small”, however.
I would like to suggest that there are two categories of GvG initiation:
A) The current developer suggestion where zergs can siege up anywhere to initiate a 5v5 GvG. The initiation of very zerg friendly. The resulting 5v5 is balanced and is what we want more of. Let us for the sake of this thread call the territories with these mechanics Plains Territories.
B) “Something else”, which allows for smaller guilds to initiate the actual GvG. This “something else” is what we need to come up with. Let us call the territories with these “other” initiation mechanics Mountain Territories.
Plains Territories
In general, these territories use the current and proposed mechanics:
Initiation
All Zerg friendly stuff. Castles, warcamps and the siege mechanics all fall into this category. If a guild shows up with overwhelming numbers, the defending side has a low chance of preventing the initiation (and in the case of castles, of not losing the territory).
GvG
Currently the dominant type of GvG is the 5v5. I would like plains territories to have bigger fights due to their nature. 10v10 or more would fit the “plains” category better.
Mountain Territories
The mechanics for these territories don’t exist. So this is what we need to come up with.
Initiation
The way I see this working out is with something I’d like to call mercenary warbands. A mercenary warband is basically just a different and more small guild friendly way of launching an attack.
A mercenary warband will offer their services to a guild every 24 hours. They will do this in either the cities or in smaller camps out on the map.
Only one guild can use the mercenary warband per cycle.
In order for a guild to win access to the mercenary band, players will have to participate in a tournament. Each guild can sign up one 5v5 team to participate in the tournament every hour. Once every hour, the competing teams are then matched against each other, so that the current “best” team will be matched against the current 2nd team. Teams 3 and 4 will fight against each other and so forth. The 5v5 takes place on an instanced map.
The winner of the match gets 1 point. The loser gets -1 point.
When the 24 hour cycle runs out, the guild with the most points will be declared the winner.
The winning guild has access to the mercenary warband and has to launch an attack within 12 hours. When this attack is launched, a new tournament starts for a new mercenary warband.
Mercenargy warbands can only launch attacks on mountain territories within a certain range. This is to prevent small guilds from being able to capture large swaths of lands by only using the mercenaries. If you want to hold large swaths of land, you have to have a map presence. Mountain territories are for small elitist guilds. For this reason, only a low number of territories are mountain territories. I’d say one in every 9 territories could be a mountain territory.
GvG
The GvG in mountain territories is the standard 5v5 type.
If the enemy used the proposed siege mechanics to initiate the GvG, then the defender gets +40 defender bonus.
If the enemy used my proposed mercenary warband mechanic to initiate the GvG, then the defender only gets +20 defender bonus.
Map Design
The map needs to be designed intelligently in accordance with this.
Most of the map is “plains”. Plains have 90% plains territories and only 10% mountain territories. In plains areas, maps have 4 exits most of the time, and generally there are fewer choke points.
Some smaller areas of the map could be mountainous. Mountainous areas are bigger areas of mountain territories with only a few plains scattered in between them. In mountain areas, maps have only 2 or 3 exits. And the map design provides numerous choke points.
Conclusion
I feel like adding mountain territories to the game would balance the entire “zerg vs small” dilemma. I would allow for zerg guilds to hold big swaths of land, while the smaller guilds can potentially hold a territory or two within that same area. If the map is designed in accordance, it can create an interesting game flow.
The mercenary warband mechanic can be revised. I feel, however, that adding this arena type of PvP to the game and making it very accessible will allow for a much broader audience to actually do GvG’s. As it is right now, I think that only a very small percentage of the player base will ever be able to experience a 5v5.
Let me know what you think. And more guides in UPAlbion.com.
