Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'General Gameplay' started by TeRRoRibleOne, Jan 18, 2018.
pls, whatever youre smoking, never share it
Wow cry more please your tears feed the guilds that are looking for fights lol get out of the ****ing corner and do something stop trying to change the game because you all are unwilling to stand up to bigger guilds.
Please cry more get out there and do something about it. This is a ****ing pvp game and you wont pvp but you will all complain all day wtf.
I belong to such a guild that moves into a nodewar guild... we do 2 days a week of nodewars.. 1 sometimes mandatory and 1 for free...
idk how that could be an issue at all?
Very often: Snipe forts no fight at all
Often: We face 2-3 other siege guilds that team up on as
Sometimes: 1 out of 10 we get a fight.
Since i see always snipe forts at t3 sometimes 4-5 at one i doubt there is an issue at all with siege guilds droping guild for some "nodewars".
I'm happy to stay in the guild if the community would be able to deliver fights. I think its low to cry about it if u had the possibility of fixing the issue yourself. But that takes effort and time and i know its easier to cry and hope for changes. But even if they would change what ppl here suggest they dont get the actual problem nor would it fix your problem at all... i dont explain why and how that changes would not have any impact to that but whatever... be sure that we would be able to still do our nodewars if we like to do them
I honestly think you should stop crying and do something against that. If i would be in your positon and had such a problem with it.. it would already be fixed IG by the players, or i would at least try it.
Why is it that people want more restrictions when the underlying issue is goddamn restrictions. Restriction to not to Node War and with the New World came restriction of not being able to build on another region while holding one aswell made certain that players in top most guilds will grow bored and go out of their way to find pvp, ANY pvp.
Node tiers however are good enough way to hold restrictions, just simply change mechanics to consider owning a region as owning extra T3 node and remove restriction of not being able to Node War while holding a region AND also remove restriction of not being able to build and Siege other territory while holding one and it would stimulate the high end pvp to point where T1-2s would be left to new comers and casual guilds.
Another design fault lies within incentive. They incentify stagnation with the dumb tax system that gives you more the longer you hold a territory. This should be reverted so that you get 100% and then each week 10% less.. and so much so that at week 10 your gain from a castle would be 0.
That would ofcourse give rise to alliances swapping the castle but they could change the tax system so that it adds that 10% tax to possible payout to every guild built on the region and each week you dont built or hold the region you get 10% back. This way any alliance can't hog any one region all the time and if they really hate alliances then they could add even more taxes for building with same guilds on consecutive weeks.
So first option to use should be carrot, more laissez-faire ideology instead of more regulations. And second would be to use the taxation stick with actual goal being more change and activity instead of stagnation and passivity. But by all means keep asking that 7 day lockout, let's stagnate to point where the top most guilds never will lose their positions and soon after will follow the siege guild secondary account guilds who will wreck your node wars since gear is only 1/3th of the equation that makes a pvp guild succesful. Have a critical thought before being like sheep and crying for longer lockout/other restriction. Stop following butthurt people who happened to face ManUp or Sov in a Node War and got so scared they jump down a tier (or give up o_O) rather than face any challenge again... and foremost stop making PvPers look like even bigger carebears than PvErs taking part in karmabombing discussion please!
Opposite round: Those players merc for sieges and rejoin T1 guilds afterwards, so that they can do bosses without all the perma wars of a siege guild.
Then I guess that they have to choose between being a merc for a siege guild every other week, or to permanently join the siege guild. If they are a member of a siege guild that owns a territory, which usually means they are one of the top players, why on earth are they scared of PvP, even at bosses? If they are a member of a siege guild, they should not be running from the minor inconveniences of being in a siege guild. The pay they get should MORE than make up for it. My guild always has 6 decs up at all time and usually has 10+ decced against us. We do world bosses just fine.
If you want the benefits of owning a territory, you must also deal with the inconveniences. Simple as that.
Yea they become so bored they want some equal pvp going to rbf with parfume + 4 elixirs (+all other available buffs).
Just disband and spread to weaker guilds so you'll get nicer fights (edit: permanently. Not mercs)
I agree this is a problem. These guilds are making massive silver and gear gains while sitting on their castle, they are already ahead in gear and will stay that way.
They claim they drop and go for T1-T3 for pvp... because they like pvp. But I dont understand how those wins are fun at all with the knowledge that they probably outgear most of those guilds by 100 gs.
I think some of the solutions should be that after a week or two you automatically lose the region and if you want it back you need to build and fight for it again. Part of the issue of removing a top geared guild is that they have a very clear advantage in defending a castle, throw their gs on top of that. Well you can see why they are uncontested. But kick them out of the castle so that all have even footing so to speak. After all they go for lower tiers for pvp right? so this shouldn't be a problem they get weekly pvp now.
Now from the flip side I imagine they would be upset, they earned the castle. Its not their fault no one can take it from them!
That in my opinion is just an excuse to take advantage of a poorly designed siege system where they are the only ones that benefit from it while also acting like they are the victims.
First person from ManUp I recognize on the forums. The problem is you are going to nodes with another guild every time so no matter what it's a 2v1, seems fair doesn't it. Then if other guilds decide to have 3 siege guilds to try to stop this practice people like Huntler cry, you can watch his VODs after wars when this happens. You do this to pay guilds like Illuminati to build on Saturday in Valencia so you don't have to fight the militia. Illuminati can't win a T2 node by themselves as is. But you guys keep paying these other guilds by giving them nodes. This is the problem. You don't want fights, you want to ensure you get to keep your allies first and foremost and maybe get a fight.Snakes does the exact same thing and it's ruining nodewars now. If you guys really want fights, how about actually starting a GvG like the old days? But that doesn't happen because a vast majority of both Snakes and ManUp afk process and play other games (you are not one of these people, I would like to point this out).
Another issue is the lack of ManUp and Snakes wanting to take each other out of regions. Snakes is the most recent example as they were kicked out of Mediah for weeks by the other guilds. Did they attempt to go to Valencia? No, they just brought more and more guilds till some of them got bored of it. This no attack on castles agreement needs to stop. Same thing has to happen with Cho and ManUp because we know Lyralei and the GM of Cho are friends IRL and that is why Cho has not even attempted to go there ONCE.
Edit: And while I was in a T1 nodewar guild for a month, I noticed more and more of the T2 guilds doing T1 nodes because of the dropping down. I also had to start doing unawakened and bringing my lvl 55 mystic to them because of the huge gear gap. The only time it would even be a fight is if we were completely outnumbered or if we ran into other ex-siege memeber guilds like Severity or Lifestyle. It's noticable from that level on what is going on. The guild I was in before it disbanded wanted to try to do T2's but when they saw the likes of ManUp or Cho Nation or Vertex doing them it disheartened them from trying.
Make that 3 times.
It's not about payouts. It ruins the node war experience for everyone.
You got the top two siege guilds who already owns a castle going after t3 nodes on their alt guilds. That's forcing other guilds to drop down to T2. Then the T2 guilds are coming to T1s.
t3 is the highest tier so i don't see the problem?
we lose t3s most of the time anyway when other siege guilds ally up on us (as they should) so i don't know what you're complaining about, these siege guilds don't go to t2 and a region owning guild dropping to do nodewars doesn't seem to change anything
as I said maybe its different in NA but in europe i don't see any problem with the way it is
it's a problem because they already have a castle for 10+ weeks and still claiming t3 nodes on alt guilds. there's a reason why nobody fights them unless multiple guilds do massive zergs. It also has made Balenos castle holders go after t2s with their alt guilds. Chillskool right now and when Spicy held it, they would do on their alt guilds.
Guilds that usually go after t3 have degraded to t2 because they want at least a node for some guild income. Like Venari right now with one t2, Resilience with t2, Addicted with two t2s, Spicy with two t2s. These are the supposed top 10 guilds occupying t2 nodes.
most of the t1 nw have 4-8 enemies and some guilds bringing as much as 50-60ppl even in occupied nodes. guilds that used to regularly do t2 are seen occupying t1s even though their members have increased.
It's very different in NA.
Keep in mind that the person you are replying to is EU, not NA. Their node wars are vastly different from ours.
oldskool and spicy not going t3 doesn't have anything to do with encore/sanguine doing nodewars lmao, they are small scale guilds and are nothing like the other castle guilds
t3s are for guilds like venari, zealot resilience VoS etc, I don't see why encore/sanguine wouldn't fit with castle siege guilds, any of them can be killed 1v2 (2 guilds isn't a "massive zerg")
what's wrong with guilds bringing 60ppl to t1s if they are mostly new/bad pvp players? going to do a nodewar with something like 10 casual pvp players is just dumb to begin with, bdo is supposed to be somewhat competitive even in the lower tiers especially now that the game has been released for almost 2 years
if you want to have fun with a small group of casuals go play a coop rpg or something but bdo clearly isn't designed for you
So I agree WITH this sentiment mostly. While I do not condemn ManUp, Cho, or Snake and all of their allies for participating in politics, as that is very interesting and fun to play; it's a shame that the strongest guilds have shamelessly settled into essentially running a farm of the siege system. Siege is no longer PvP for them, it's just another PvE mechanic to ensure the strongest players maintain the highest form of income in the game possible.
Is it their responsibility to ensure that we maintain a sense of fairness and excitement? Certainly not, but it would be nice if they had the integrity to be honorable players, knowing the advantage and strength they already posses and influence the map in a positive way.
But this isn't about them, they players aren't at fault here, you give them something to abuse you should expect them to abuse it that is human nature. The developers need to be looking at each region in specific and not make unilateral decisions that predict all regions behave the same. As evidenced EU and NA siege scene are entirely different, they care more for the fights, those rivalries are quite a bit more heated and thus the atmosphere is different. Whereas NA has settled for quite some time . This is all due to the fact different people and personalities drive the content in siege, it's ultimately player interaction which dictates what happens next. Not your skill or your gear, but who is willing to fight alongside you or against you.
There are too many strong players on the same side not really willing to fight for their own reasons poor convictions, so for the health of the scene, the new players who have no ties, affiliation prehistory otherwise with these existing entities, Kakao needs to take it upon itself to forcibly end this nonsensical ceasefire and give more power to those willing to fight.
This can happen many ways and it doesn't even have to be a direct infusion of strength to weaker guilds. Allowing multiple territories to be contested once again would be interesting. Perhaps allowing guilds to take a large percentage of the earnings of guilds who have sat in a castle for several weeks (with that increasing) as a bonus for conquering the castle, to then later be split up between all participants not owninging it is somethijng else that can happen
Money speaks louder than anything usually. If there was an update next week saying if ManUp were to be taken out that any participating guild would receive 60% of their total earnings collected thus far, split between all of them, everyone would drop on them.
These are the types of things that need to happen on a consistent basis, changes made by the developers who watch our region closely. What we do between each other is only but a consequence and a story of the rules set before us. Before guilds could own multiple regions, and at one point some of these strong guilds did. I dont care if these guys wanna afk and play some other game or not even be near the computer all day. If I can take a peice of thier pie, it woukd be something worth discussing. After all we taking castles is a game of overthrowing the strongest powers is it Not? Spoils of war should be a thing.
you clearly misunderstood that post because I said this is encouraging even Balenos castle owners to do the same tactic (drop main guild when castle owned, join alt guild and go to nw). In their case, they'd go for an easy t2 node.
that's only if both of those guilds bring massive numbers for a node war otherwise it'll end in a draw with enemy/sov holding for the entire 2 hours. the point of this thread is those guilds shouldn't have to be facing castle holders. right now 3/10 t3 nodes for mon-fri are being owned by castle holders. it'd probably been 4/10 but looks like sov with low numbers build it on the same node as enemy this week.
the reason they have to bring 60s is because there's usually gonna be a small-mid size group of hardcore/geared guilds who previously used to do t2 coming to t1 and facerolling other guilds like nothing. Because of that t1 guilds are bringing more members to do zergs with low geared/new members and even that isn't enough. bdo competitive? good one mate
dw i'm having fun in bdo. this is just suggestion (change guild leave 24 hours to 72 hours) that's probably never gonna happen. no need to get all defensive and butthurt about it. you obviously don't see a problem or choose to ignore it because you belong in those guilds and enjoy taking that advantage.
Source? I'll wait.