119 replies to this topic

[Maehdros]

If your battling for a relic back and forth and the war starts as you suggest, don't you think there would be a wee advantage for the guilds that thrive in pvp? Guilds that have non pvp'rs on them would leave the guild if they kept getting smashed in wars. PVP guilds would thrive as all it's members love a fight. Eventually, I would envision seeing all the PVP guilds sitting on multiple relics.

I see whoever has the strongest desire to retain *said relic* and those who have closer bonds to one another and a strong sense of teamwork, as having the advantage in ANY situation.

So that doesn't work now?

huh? I've already said why I posted this idea.

[yotwehc]

I see whoever has the strongest desire to retain *said relic* and those who have closer bonds to one another and a strong sense of teamwork, as having the advantage in ANY situation.

So that doesn't work now?

huh? I've already said why I posted this idea.

You said "whoever has the strongest desire"... The current system doesn't reward those with the strongest desire in your opinion?

[Maehdros]

You said "whoever has the strongest desire"... The current system doesn't reward those with the strongest desire in your opinion?

Lets get this straight.....You stated pvp guilds would have an advantage with this suggestion. while I stated any guild with desire, teamwork and strong bonds would have the advantage.


I never said it doesn't currently reward players/ guilds I'm trying to spice things up a bit. Which I've mentioned already.


Anymore questions?

[wil72]

Anymore questions?

Yeah, mine. Surely I'm not being ignored :wink:

Cheers.

wil72

[Maehdros]

Anymore questions?

Yeah, mine. Surely I'm not being ignored :wink:

Cheers.

wil72

considering a majority of relics are defended by high level Guilds and have about 30 inactive members, also high level, defending it how exactly is a small Guild or a new Guild meant to get a foot in the door to participate in Guild Wars?

Mate, I like your idea but I think making the trigger "relic capture" marginalises smaller Guilds

Sorry, got lost in the shuffle lol. Inactives do not count on relics. As for small guilds, the level range is expanded, so they can participate in wars as long as someone is in range ( similar to gvg) And if there is no one in range, well that doesnt mean they can;t still capture relics or find a relic with members in range ( if they are feisty)

[Kontiki]

I think this idea is more about letting PVP guilds own more relics.

If your battling for a relic back and forth and the war starts as you suggest, don't you think there would be a wee advantage for the guilds that thrive in pvp? Guilds that have non pvp'rs on them would leave the guild if they kept getting smashed in wars. PVP guilds would thrive as all it's members love a fight. Eventually, I would envision seeing all the PVP guilds sitting on multiple relics.

Do you honestly see this helping the game?

This doesnt make any sense.. Why would pvp guilds want to "own" more relics? You can max out on bonuses after two relics.. every relic after that will lower your defense overall.

The 24 hour "war" wont break out unless your guild is excessively and repeatedly attaking the other guild to take their relic over many many hours. And if you want to take a relic from a guild with members that will participate in PvP, you need to beat them at their own game.. There are lots of easier guilds to target out there if thats not what you want.. (and most of them are actually big guilds ) Seems fair to me.

[wil72]

Anymore questions?

Yeah, mine. Surely I'm not being ignored :wink:

Cheers.

wil72

considering a majority of relics are defended by high level Guilds and have about 30 inactive members, also high level, defending it how exactly is a small Guild or a new Guild meant to get a foot in the door to participate in Guild Wars?

Mate, I like your idea but I think making the trigger "relic capture" marginalises smaller Guilds

Sorry, got lost in the shuffle lol. Inactives do not count on relics. As for small guilds, the level range is expanded, so they can participate in wars as long as someone is in range ( similar to gvg) And if there is no one in range, well that doesnt mean they can;t still capture relics or find a relic with members in range ( if they are feisty)

No worries and I get what your saying especially about the " fiesty " bit

And I apologies as I didn't realise that inactives defending a relic don't count. Mate, I'm very much still a noob. However its not so much the actual " War " I'm concerned about but the actual capture of a relic. With these being controlled, in a great majority, by high level Guilds would it not be harder for lower level Guilds to capture relics and participate in " Guild Wars" ?

Cheers.

wil72

[yotwehc]

You said "whoever has the strongest desire"... The current system doesn't reward those with the strongest desire in your opinion?

Lets get this straight.....You stated pvp guilds would have an advantage with this suggestion. while I stated any guild with desire, teamwork and strong bonds would have the advantage.


I never said it doesn't currently reward players/ guilds I'm trying to spice things up a bit. Which I've mentioned already.


Anymore questions?

PVP guilds have an advantage because the members welcome conflict so would gladly engage in wars. None PVP guilds would get hurt because although they would love to keep the relic, the war would not be worth the damage to the guild. Yes... this is my opinion.

Just to confirm: Your stating that "any guild with desire, teamwork and strong bonds would have the advantage" makes no difference in current relic capturing and your suggestion. The only difference is your suggestion "spices" things up..

If that is the case, I agree... it would indeed spice things up... but it would also give pvp guilds an advantage. I don't see how you can deny non pvp guilds would be reluctant to engage in wars.

Thanks for your responses... normally I get ignored in these forums...

[yotwehc]

I think this idea is more about letting PVP guilds own more relics.

If your battling for a relic back and forth and the war starts as you suggest, don't you think there would be a wee advantage for the guilds that thrive in pvp? Guilds that have non pvp'rs on them would leave the guild if they kept getting smashed in wars. PVP guilds would thrive as all it's members love a fight. Eventually, I would envision seeing all the PVP guilds sitting on multiple relics.

Do you honestly see this helping the game?

This doesnt make any sense.. Why would pvp guilds want to "own" more relics? You can max out on bonuses after two relics.. every relic after that will lower your defense overall.

The 24 hour "war" wont break out unless your guild is excessively and repeatedly attaking the other guild to take their relic over many many hours. And if you want to take a relic from a guild with members that will participate in PvP, you need to beat them at their own game.. There are lots of easier guilds to target out there if thats not what you want.. (and most of them are actually big guilds ) Seems fair to me.

Your right... it doesn't make sense. pvp guilds would only want one or 2 relics at max. no more then that. that would be awful with the defense lost. :roll:

Yes... if you repeatedly try to take a relic, you must participate in PVP and beat them at their own game. Definitely sounds fair. No big advantage for PVP guilds.

[yotwehc]

I think this idea is more about letting PVP guilds own more relics.

If your battling for a relic back and forth and the war starts as you suggest, don't you think there would be a wee advantage for the guilds that thrive in pvp? Guilds that have non pvp'rs on them would leave the guild if they kept getting smashed in wars. PVP guilds would thrive as all it's members love a fight. Eventually, I would envision seeing all the PVP guilds sitting on multiple relics.

Do you honestly see this helping the game?

This doesnt make any sense.. Why would pvp guilds want to "own" more relics? You can max out on bonuses after two relics.. every relic after that will lower your defense overall.

The 24 hour "war" wont break out unless your guild is excessively and repeatedly attaking the other guild to take their relic over many many hours. And if you want to take a relic from a guild with members that will participate in PvP, you need to beat them at their own game.. There are lots of easier guilds to target out there if thats not what you want.. (and most of them are actually big guilds ) Seems fair to me.

Your right... it doesn't make sense. pvp guilds would only want one or 2 relics at max. no more then that. that would be awful with the defense lost. :roll:

Yes... if you repeatedly try to take a relic, you must participate in PVP and beat them at their own game. Definitely sounds fair. No big advantage for PVP guilds.

Sorry... the rolling of the eyeballs was uncalled for... evidently you focus on one relic and try to keep it... Ask Mae how many he wants and what motivated this thread. lol...

Anyway, although the current system for relics is skewed towards big guilds, there are still lots available for the taking.

Guild wars in itself is a good idea but don't tie it to a relic. oh wait... i guess its called gvg... I know not what I speak of...

[hbklives]

Since most, hell, almost all relics are held by high level Guilds how exactly are smaller Guilds meant to participate in " Guild Wars "? Wait, I know, small guilds are ignored....right?

Cheers.

wil72

I voted no for this exact reason. Along with PvP Guilds would have an advantage over guilds who mainly level.

[mimdala]

It's an interesting idea. Just a question though, sorry if it was addressed already; so if guild A wins for example, how long do they keep the relic for? Would there be something like a cooldown period before guild B can try to take it again (longer than the 1 hour period)?

[pinkdude]

I like the idea. But I'm not a big fan of the trigger. I do agree that small guilds would be ignored. I think a different avenue could be direct PvP. If Guild A receives X amount of PvP attack from Guild B, then a War would break out. I don't think that would neglect small guilds.

Thoughts? Again, just a suggestion. I would like to see something to increase PvP activity. I don't PvP but I see the need for PvPers. And sadly, PvP has been almost eradicated by new updates.

[Spitfire666123]

and All pvp hits would of course be bountyable.

why do you wish to keep this? makes no sense if you want this to be a true Guild VS Guild..

Had thought of that ( even asked a friend for their opinion on it) Also had a thought of making *war* bounties only acceptable via members of the opposing guilds ( like a different type of bounty or something). Anyways the convo came back to pvp and how ( currently) every hit is bountyable.


In some instances of a *war* ( with relation to this idea) some may not want to hit back, and would wish to post a bounty for deleveling.

In most cases, If a guild is at war, A bounty is posted and they're dropped 5 anyway... So whats the problem here?

Since most, hell, almost all relics are held by high level Guilds how exactly are smaller Guilds meant to participate in " Guild Wars "? Wait, I know, small guilds are ignored....right?

Cheers.

wil72

How are they being ignored?

Well considering a majority of relics are defended by high level Guilds and have about 30 inactive members, also high level, defending it how exactly is a small Guild or a new Guild meant to get a foot in the door to participate in Guild Wars?

Mate, I like your idea but I think making the trigger "relic capture" marginalises smaller Guilds.

Cheers.

wil72

Small guilds as it is have a hard time in the Relics department, adding in a "War" Feature wouldnt change anything.

This doesnt make any sense.. Why would pvp guilds want to "own" more relics? You can max out on bonuses after two relics.. every relic after that will lower your defense overall.

The 24 hour "war" wont break out unless your guild is excessively and repeatedly attaking the other guild to take their relic over many many hours. And if you want to take a relic from a guild with members that will participate in PvP, you need to beat them at their own game.. There are lots of easier guilds to target out there if thats not what you want.. (and most of them are actually big guilds ) Seems fair to me.

Your right... it doesn't make sense. pvp guilds would only want one or 2 relics at max. no more then that. that would be awful with the defense lost. :roll:

Yes... if you repeatedly try to take a relic, you must participate in PVP and beat them at their own game. Definitely sounds fair. No big advantage for PVP guilds.

Sorry... the rolling of the eyeballs was uncalled for... evidently you focus on one relic and try to keep it... Ask Mae how many he wants and what motivated this thread. lol...

Anyway, although the current system for relics is skewed towards big guilds, there are still lots available for the taking.

Guild wars in itself is a good idea but don't tie it to a relic. oh wait... i guess its called gvg... I know not what I speak of...

There is no penalty for GvG. This would be a more lively version of it. A true battle of supremacy. The most fun will be PvP Guild vs. PvP Guild

Here's a... messed up Idea. Winner loots the loser's guild gold. 10% Treasury is taken, and sinks 25% of that... To the victor go the spoils

[yotwehc]

There is no penalty for GvG. This would be a more lively version of it. A true battle of supremacy. The most fun will be PvP Guild vs. PvP Guild

Here's a... messed up Idea. Winner loots the loser's guild gold. 10% Treasury is taken, and sinks 25% of that... To the victor go the spoils

Goodness... so the point is to penalize others? oh my...

pvp vs pvp guild would be interesting but most pvp guilds are allied so that's not gonna happen. They don't want to "penalize" each other...

[Spitfire666123]

There is no penalty for GvG. This would be a more lively version of it. A true battle of supremacy. The most fun will be PvP Guild vs. PvP Guild

Here's a... messed up Idea. Winner loots the loser's guild gold. 10% Treasury is taken, and sinks 25% of that... To the victor go the spoils

Goodness... so the point is to penalize others? oh my...

pvp vs pvp guild would be interesting but most pvp guilds are allied so that's not gonna happen. They don't want to "penalize" each other...

Sure it will. They will want a challenge. PvPers arent bullies, the good ones arent anyway. Less Gold in guild = more gold being deposited instead of floating around = cheaper FSP/gear, etc

[insaner6]

if u want to GvG, there is a thing that is called GvG.
if u want to PvP, there is a thing that is called PvP.
if u want to capture a relic, u can form a group and capture a relic.
if u want to go into a guild war, u can start a guild war. it has happened in the past many times, it will in the future.

u can do all of those things already, and most important, on the same time.


i find this idea, pointless.

No.

[wil72]

[quote name="wil72"][quote name="Maehdros"][quote name="wil72"]


Since most, hell, almost all relics are held by high level Guilds how exactly are smaller Guilds meant to participate in " Guild Wars "? Wait, I know, small guilds are ignored....right?

Cheers.

wil72[/quote]


How are they being ignored?[/quote]

Well considering a majority of relics are defended by high level Guilds and have about 30 inactive members, also high level, defending it how exactly is a small Guild or a new Guild meant to get a foot in the door to participate in Guild Wars?

Mate, I like your idea but I think making the trigger "relic capture" marginalises smaller Guilds.

Cheers.

wil72[/quote]

Small guilds as it is have a hard time in the Relics department, adding in a "War" Feature wouldnt change anything.

Exactly, so what would your suggestion be to allow small/new Guilds to freely participate in " Guild Wars "? Is " number of times relic capture " the right trigger?

Here's a... messed up Idea. Winner loots the loser's guild gold. 10% Treasury is taken, and sinks 25% of that... To the victor go the spoils [/quote]

As Guild gold is donated by member players I don't think this should ever be under threat in a " Guild War ", gold gained from pvp attacks on indviduals between the warring Guilds would be sufficient in my opinion.

Cheers

wil72

[shindrak]

New aspects would be cool for game!... But

I think someone harassing you for taking relic over and over while they using pvp protection and you can't harass him well for taking relic back over and over too ..

This idea just to stop this random players completely from taking relic after they get punished with 100 stams from pvp guild even if they hit back (they will get bountied as your suggestion) and harass them even more to quit game.


Tweaks needed:
1.Hits unbountyable
2.keep the range +/-10 if you want more range bring more players to your guild to cover the range(its gvg more players should have better chance to win)
or make the hits not hourly.. its new aspect so current pvp system doesn't matter.

[tpau]

If a guild has to have players sitting on the relic to defend it, why can another guild attack it by using only 1 player (and a group who arent at the relic). This is really 1 player attacking a group. The attacking guild should have to be at the relic to attack it.