Jump to content

New Guild Conflict Idea


  • Please log in to reply
6 replies to this topic

Poll: Yay or Nay (10 member(s) have cast votes)

Yay or Nay

  1. yay (5 votes [27.78%])

    Percentage of vote: 27.78%

  2. nay (3 votes [16.67%])

    Percentage of vote: 16.67%

  3. maybe, but it needs some more work (10 votes [55.56%])

    Percentage of vote: 55.56%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 fs_supmet

fs_supmet
  • Guests

Posted 15 November 2007 - 05:16

I was about to put this in the Official suggestion but then the thread was locked.. lol

After browsing this official forum and a few others, I think the main problems people have with the current system are:

-Guilds that like to level or hunt are dragged into unnecessary wars
-Players that may be new, on vacation, or really even offline(set up with leveling gear instead of PVP gear) are easily killed multiple times
-Guilds don't necessarily always have the same level range of players, and if a guild of 20 players whose highest player is 80, a guild of 5 level 85s would decimate them.

So, while it may seem drastic I'm proposing a revamped guild battle system.

-Attacking guild chooses team size and picks their team(can't be more than half of the defending guild size unless half is less than 1.) Attacking guild pays gold, FSP, and stamina(divided by the team)
-Defenders have 8-24 hours to form their team and prepare for battle at a set time.
-Best out of 10 guild team battles wins. I was thinking maybe a smaller version of relic control with a small bonus for defending team.(the bonus could possibly be based on the difference in the average level of top 1-7 players)
-Either the system just plays out all 10 battles, or the guilds can have 1-5 minute intervals between battles to switch gear, buffs, or whatever.
-If Attacker wins they gain GvG rating, guild XP, guild gold.(xp and gold from losing guild) Attacker also gains Reputation Boost points.
-If Defender wins they gain GvG rating.

Feel free to flame or agree. Everything was brainstormed and all the numbers were fudged :)

#2 fs_supmet

fs_supmet
  • Guests

Posted 15 November 2007 - 16:59

Noone has any thoughts?

#3 fs_supmet

fs_supmet
  • Guests

Posted 15 November 2007 - 22:02

bit drastic and paying gold/fsp would drain guilds and dissadvantage small ones


Then maybe we could have how much you have to pay to initiate an attack based on guild level, and the amount that can be stolen from the defending guild based on the defending guilds level, basically making it pointless for high level guilds to attack smaller guilds.

i.e. Guild level 200 has to pay 10,000 gold and 2 FSP to attack. If they attack a level 50 guild they can only win 5,000 gold, so it wouldnt be worth their time. If they attack another level 200 guild they could win 50,000.

#4 fs_godzwrath

fs_godzwrath
  • Guests

Posted 16 November 2007 - 00:43

Hey Spike, that was my idea:D

#5 fs_godzwrath

fs_godzwrath
  • Guests

Posted 16 November 2007 - 01:14

I liked my idea where 2 consenting guilds decided on a percent of exp/gold/pvp rating lost a fight. They could decide on 100% lost or 0%. Depends if they want fun or they want to kill each other. This would make everyone happy:)

#6 fs_b33rmast3r

fs_b33rmast3r
  • Guests

Posted 17 November 2007 - 00:18

Well, for an example - we can be owned by a guild with lots of lvl 20s, cause we have only one player in that level range... Silly if you ask me.
I do like this suggestion, although - what do you mean by 'best out of 10' ? The # of wins?
I'd say this would be more fair than the current system, which seems to be based on pure luck...

#7 fs_supmet

fs_supmet
  • Guests

Posted 27 November 2007 - 18:29

Bumpin now that people have had more time to suffer through the current system :)


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Font:
Arial | Calibri | Lucida Console | Verdana
 
Font Size:
9px | 10px | 11px | 12px | 10pt | 12pt
 
Color: