You are not logged in.

Applications: [GameMaster: OPEN] | [Volunteer Testers: OPEN]


This forum will be permanently shut down on Friday 13.07.2018
Please copy or save all important information from old forum before they will be deactivated
We have moved to new board. https://forum.runesofmagic.gameforge.com/Come join us.

21

Thursday, September 29th 2011, 11:33am

Quoted from "Jekk;468219"

Flawless suggestions are our goal. Its the flawed suggestions that need to be hashed out. My suggestion was flawed it had too many holes and when you try to plug those holes the idea becomes too complicated.

Somewhere out there, theres an idea that will fix the horrible match making of siege. That is also simple enough RW would considering implementing. Something revolving around a gear score like your original suggestion might be the way to go. The good thing about gear score is once implemented it can be used for all forms of organized pvp not just SW.


Oh I absolutely agree... was just looking for a GOOD reason to try suggesting it, and it's implications to balancing the siege battlegrounds seemed like a good place to start.

22

Thursday, September 29th 2011, 6:14pm

I like the gear score to a degree especially used for battlegrounds(which aren't played often enough)

I however think the only thing needing to change is if you add someone they recieve a 48hr debuff preventing them from joining 2 SWs.

TheMann64

Intermediate

Posts: 340

Occupation: I do accounting, when I'm not cruising the forums

  • Send private message

23

Thursday, September 29th 2011, 7:36pm

Quoted from "Jekk;468219"

Flawless suggestions are our goal. Its the flawed suggestions that need to be hashed out. My suggestion was flawed it had too many holes and when you try to plug those holes the idea becomes too complicated.

Somewhere out there, theres an idea that will fix the horrible match making of siege. That is also simple enough RW would considering implementing. Something revolving around a gear score like your original suggestion might be the way to go. The good thing about gear score is once implemented it can be used for all forms of organized pvp not just SW.


The problem is that the whole siege dynamic is too complicated for a simple solution.

The best solution I've seen so far is to not give siege rewards until somebody has been in the guild 48 hours. That'll incentivize people to stay in their guild. That being said, I've got a couple friends from other guilds; those other guilds, for one reason or another, don't siege every night, so we let them come siege with us whenever they want to. They're not "siege breaking" mercs (siege breaking merc = 150k HP DPS toon in a battlefield full of 30 - 50k HP toons), so I don't see a problem with them jumping in just for fun. However, limiting their siege rewards would just be unpleasant, and then they'd get limited again when they go back.

Bottom line is there are no easy fixes. Without trying to stop guild-hopping, I think the gear-rating matchup, as long as it isn't exploitable, is probably the fairest idea I've seen on the forums.
Govinda
Guild: Theblacknights
Babesmann - Dwarfmann

24

Sunday, October 2nd 2011, 7:51pm

I think one way of making guild siege better balanced is by making guild membership more important. Make it so people do not want to leave a guild and rejoin daily.

This can be done by a guild relationship buff. The longer you are in the guild, the stronger the buff or perhaps even in time add more buffs.

If you leave the guild you loose the buff. If you rejoin a guild you start all over from the beginning.

I am thinking maybe of buffs like those that increase drop rate.
In addition, every 30 days that you are in a guild you get a free gift like perhaps an Unbinder.

Something else I think that would help better balance guild siege is to reduce all gear to a max "plus" level like maybe 8 or 10.
It is nice to have the stronger characters for fighting bosses but it really makes some people gods in guild siege.
People having gear to plus 16 wouldn't be so bad if they stayed in their own guilds because they would be put up against guilds of similar points. But when they merc, they can just slaughter lesser state'd guilds.
It would be fun if guild siege was a bit less about gear and a bit more about strategy.

25

Monday, October 3rd 2011, 5:26pm

Quoted from "MorgothAzreal;467630"

Put a 1 day cooldown on Recent Guild inductees for witch they can't join Siege, let people join guild when ever they want but put that cool down in and you will see a lot less Mercenaries also

as a side note perhapes they should implement a system that stops siege grabbing alt guilds
if a guild drops siege 5 times in a row and there guild is only 5 members or less perhaps it needs cleaning out


This IS the solution! Plain and simple! Put a 24 hour lock-out timer on a person/s who leave a guild so they cannot join another to merc. Nothing is more irritating than having 1 guild with its regular members go up against another guild with 1 lvl 50ish (Guild Leader most likely) and 5-10 lvl 67's that 1-shot everything/everyone in sight.
Show some loyalty to the guild your in... so what if you miss siege 1 or 2 nights.

26

Monday, October 3rd 2011, 6:30pm

I completely support anything that will keep farming guilds under control. My guild has gone against several different guilds, that have had the same 10 or 15 OP people in them.

Even just preventing them from joining the next siege would go a long ways to fixing it.

27

Monday, October 3rd 2011, 8:25pm

Here is a quick and simple way to fix this , the moment you enter siege you have a siege debuff for 36 hours , making it so you can enter siege with guild A but if you leave guild A to join guild B you can not siege till debuff is gone. Merc make honest good guilds not want to play.

28

Monday, October 3rd 2011, 8:33pm

Quoted from "brogue;467584"

There is no honor, no sense of community on Artemis at end game.


I take offense to this statement! Due to I am a guild leader of an endgame guild on Artemis. I did read your entire post, as I have read the entire thread, I have also commented on this same topic a few times. I do not post much, but when I do, it is because of topics like this.

Honestly, if ALL guild leaders would step up and NOT accept mercs or allowing mercing this would NOT be an issue. I do NOT allow it at all in my guild.

My guild not only has honor, but has some of the best people in it.

So maybe this is a dare for all other guild leaders to do the same, and this will not be an issue. Siege is not going to be fixed by the makers, but the players can fix it very easily.

~Persmickety~
Guild Leader of Legionnaires

29

Tuesday, October 4th 2011, 1:46pm

Quoted from "0ct0ber;470121"

I take offense to this statement! Due to I am a guild leader of an endgame guild on Artemis. I did read your entire post, as I have read the entire thread, I have also commented on this same topic a few times. I do not post much, but when I do, it is because of topics like this.

Honestly, if ALL guild leaders would step up and NOT accept mercs or allowing mercing this would NOT be an issue. I do NOT allow it at all in my guild.

My guild not only has honor, but has some of the best people in it.

So maybe this is a dare for all other guild leaders to do the same, and this will not be an issue. Siege is not going to be fixed by the makers, but the players can fix it very easily.

~Persmickety~
Guild Leader of Legionnaires



Yeah, that's not gonna ever happen. That's like putting a sign on a big, bright red button that says, "Do Not Push Button or Chocolate Cake will be Awarded!"

Temptation to take the easy road to success is a genetic flaw in the majority of the human race. When it comes to trying to get what you want, most people will choose the fastest & easiest route they can successfully maneuver to reach their goal. Simply telling people to take the moral high ground when there's a faster and easier, as well as unpunished method available will only work on a very small minority.

The only way to stop someone from doing something that isn't desired is to take away their ability to do so. Punishing those who break the rules just doesn't cut it anymore.

30

Tuesday, October 4th 2011, 2:58pm

Quoted from "Abazor;469888"

I think one way of making guild siege better balanced is by making guild membership more important. Make it so people do not want to leave a guild and rejoin daily.

This can be done by a guild relationship buff. The longer you are in the guild, the stronger the buff or perhaps even in time add more buffs.

If you leave the guild you loose the buff. If you rejoin a guild you start all over from the beginning.



This is a very good idea. A stacking buff where you get 1 point every time you siege with your guild. At 10 you get a mediocre reward, at 20 something better, 30, 40, 50 and so on. If you siege with another guild it resets.

The rewards dont have to be great they just have to be good enough to off set the benefits of guild jumping.

Quoted from "TheMann64;468396"

That being said, I've got a couple friends from other guilds; those other guilds, for one reason or another, don't siege every night, so we let them come siege with us whenever they want to. They're not "siege breaking" mercs (siege breaking merc = 150k HP DPS toon in a battlefield full of 30 - 50k HP toons), so I don't see a problem with them jumping in just for fun. However, limiting their siege rewards would just be unpleasant, and then they'd get limited again when they go back.

Bottom line is there are no easy fixes. Without trying to stop guild-hopping, I think the gear-rating matchup, as long as it isn't exploitable, is probably the fairest idea I've seen on the forums.


Taking away their rewards both ways isnt that great, but just limiting them from getting extra rewards if they want to siege with your guild should be ok with everyone.

LonerMan

Trainee

Posts: 120

Location: St. John`s, NL

  • Send private message

31

Tuesday, October 4th 2011, 3:09pm

Does not matter about the rewards. Unless it is something that can not be bought or something special than the OP will not care. Some OP people may spend a million or more gold in potions every siege. I have spent up to 2-3 million playing siege.

32

Tuesday, October 4th 2011, 3:59pm

Quoted from "LonerMan;470506"

Does not matter about the rewards. Unless it is something that can not be bought or something special than the OP will not care. Some OP people may spend a million or more gold in potions every siege. I have spent up to 2-3 million playing siege.


Are you a guild hopper? If the motivation of a guild hopper is to just make newbs cry than rewards probably wont fix anything unless like you said the rewards are really good, but Im sure a majority of guild hoppers do it for the rewards/gold.

33

Wednesday, October 5th 2011, 12:16am

Quoted from "Jekk;470532"

Are you a guild hopper? If the motivation of a guild hopper is to just make newbs cry than rewards probably wont fix anything unless like you said the rewards are really good, but Im sure a majority of guild hoppers do it for the rewards/gold.


Why does it have to be either or? Why can't it be both? Perhaps these people get their kicks off of flexing their epeen to those who are nowhere near their level, and they get bonus goodies for doing it after it's all over... that's like having your cake and eating it to.

Posts: 779

Location: USA

Occupation: Student

  • Send private message

34

Thursday, October 6th 2011, 1:07pm

On topic;
Yes, since the break up of what was once consider the dream-team type of guild (now overshadowed by Valkyrie's siege score (kudos)) Artemis has gone extremely down hill. The same 2 groups of end game people hop between 3-4 guilds each, while a very limited amount stay in the same group at end game.

GarySandstorm

Professional

Posts: 656

Location: Cape Town: South Africa

Occupation: Engineering Technician

  • Send private message

35

Thursday, October 6th 2011, 3:29pm

Personally, i would say if anyone enters a guild they should get a buff that stops them from entering siege for atleast 2 days.

if that is too much for you, then if someone leaves a guild only let them join a new guild 24hours later. that way they miss any siege for the same day.

even better use both those ideas.

For any decently serious player, being out of a guild and not taking part of siege for a few days should be no problem. Heck alot of the time most guild dont even get into siege registration.

and why should you be guild hoping? its frowned upon!

/signed, sealed, deliver to runewaker.

Kalvan

Super Gamemaster

Posts: 2,053

Location: Lurking Amongst the Forums

  • Send private message

36

Thursday, October 6th 2011, 9:09pm

Ahem. Thou shalt not accuse other players or guilds of hacking in Guild Siege.

Kindly stay on topic here or this thread heads for Endsville.
[ New Sig Coming. Watch This Space! ]


brogue

Intermediate

Posts: 482

Location: NYC

Occupation: Program Director

  • Send private message

37

Thursday, October 6th 2011, 9:43pm

We at Ragnarok have faced Collusion's guild quite a bit over the past few weeks and they have been fun and clean siege's. I am sorry that I killed you so much last siege Collusion :(, but alas you are not end game stated anymore and most of our guild is.

regentego

Professional

Posts: 1,686

Location: AZ

Occupation: Manager

  • Send private message

38

Thursday, October 6th 2011, 11:28pm

Quoted from "GarySandstorm;471956"

Personally, i would say if anyone enters a guild they should get a buff that stops them from entering siege for atleast 2 days.

if that is too much for you, then if someone leaves a guild only let them join a new guild 24hours later. that way they miss any siege for the same day.

even better use both those ideas.

For any decently serious player, being out of a guild and not taking part of siege for a few days should be no problem. Heck alot of the time most guild dont even get into siege registration.

and why should you be guild hoping? its frowned upon!

/signed, sealed, deliver to runewaker.



OMG what would the OP's of Artemis and OSHA do if they could not guild farm!!! Siege may actually get a little hard for them.

I like the cooldown idea, but even 24 hours would be enough to stop the nonsense.

Ebilone

39

Friday, October 7th 2011, 12:42am

People mercing was a problem before, i never saw why.

People creating lower level guilds to farm siege rewards... Well i also don't really see much of a problem with this.

Both of these on the sole purpose that EVERYONE can do it.

This is a video game

The concept of "honor" is a moot point in video games

Although i don't condone people creating shadow guilds, i'm surprised it's as big a topic for debate as it is.

If it were up to me, i'd just shut off Siege war, and if people keep Q.Qing about this stuff, it may very well happen.

Just my two cents.

40

Friday, October 7th 2011, 2:51am

Quoted from "AngelIsrafel;472195"

People mercing was a problem before, i never saw why.

People creating lower level guilds to farm siege rewards... Well i also don't really see much of a problem with this.

Both of these on the sole purpose that EVERYONE can do it.


Well that's just it... not everyone CAN do it. Not everyone can afford to blow hundreds on hundreds of dollars on a video game to become these super-powered god-mode enabled players... but they're still being pitted against them in a no-win situation because of merc'ing & shadow guilds. What that's doing is pushing away the community base that enjoys playing casually, and paying gradually for things they like. If situations like these keep occuring, where the casual players are constantly reminded that they will never overcome these excessive buyers... they're just gonna walk away to another game.

On top of that, as I said earlier, the use of shadow guilds populates several spaces in the limited queue window, taking away the opportunity for real guilds who wish to participate because 10 or 15 guilds out there are queuing up 3 or 4 shadow guilds apiece. So not only is it morally degrading, but it's also stopping people from effectively playing parts of the game.

However, judging by how your comment was worded, I assume that you may have taken part in some of these "actions" and thus feel you should defend them. To that I say, why would you be afraid of fighting people of your own power level? Why is it necessary to claim the easy win all the time? Doesn't that take away from the entertainment of the game, to achieve victory against no competition? By implementing the original idea posted in this thread, it doesn't stop people from playing how they want to play, it just brings a balance to siege instead of allowing you to be put in a situation similar to that of a 67 farming beetles in Logar.